Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 101 / Thursday, May 28, 2009 / Notices 25577 

Information About CCPs 

During the CCP planning process, we 

will consider many elements of refuge 

management, including wildlife, 

habitat, and visitor services 

management. Public input during the 

planning process is essential. The CCP 

will describe the refuge purposes and 

desired conditions for the refuge and the 

long-term conservation goals, objectives 

and strategies for fulfilling refuge 

purposes and achieving desired 

conditions. 

Refuge Overview 

Columbia Refuge was established ‘‘as 

a refuge and breeding ground for 

migratory birds and other wildlife,’’ and 

‘‘for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for 

any other management purpose, for 

migratory birds.’’ It fills an important 

role in the management of mallard, 

northern pintail, and lesser Canada 

goose populations during migration and 

wintering periods, and is the primary 

migratory stopover area for the Pacific 

Coast population of the lesser sandhill 

crane. The refuge covers almost 30,000 

acres in the arid Columbia Basin of 

south-central Washington State 

straddling Crab Creek, between Potholes 

Reservoir and the Columbia River in 

both Grant and Adams Counties. The 

refuge is divided into six management 

units primarily arranged according to 

land type. Most of the refuge is within 

the Drumheller Channels National 

Natural Landmark. It is also located 

along the Pacific Flyway and has 

become a particularly important stopover and wintering ground for migratory 

birds and waterfowl. In addition, 

cackling geese, sandhill cranes, and 

neotropical birds consume the refuge’s 

grain crops. Birds of prey, such as redtailed hawks, hunt for rodents and other 

small mammals living in the refuge’s 

agricultural fields. 

Various visitor services and activities 

take place on the refuge, including 

hiking, boating, fishing, hunting, 

wildlife observation and photography, 

nature and cultural resources 

interpretation, and environmental 

education. 

Preliminary Issues and Concerns 

We have identified the following 

preliminary issues, concerns, and 

opportunities that we may address in 

the CCP. We may identify additional 

issues during public scoping. 

• How can we best protect and restore 

populations of priority species on the 

refuge? 

• How can we best achieve optimal 

habitat conditions on the refuge for 

priority species? 

• How can we protect refuge habitats 

from invasive species, wildfire risks, 

over-grazing, vandalism, and other 

disturbances and threats, and restore 

habitat values? 

• Which compatible wildlifedependent recreation opportunities on 

the refuge should be expanded, 

developed, or modified? 

• What are the refuge’s land 

acquisition priorities within its 

approved boundary, and should 

boundary expansion be considered? 

• How can we meet refuge staffing 

needs? 

Public Open House Meeting 

A public open house meeting will be 

held on June 16, 2009, from 5:30 p.m. 

to 8 p.m. in the City of Othello’s 

Municipal Building (City Hall), City 

Council Chambers, 500 East Main 

Street, Othello, WA 99344, to provide 

information on the CCP and receive 

public comments. Opportunities for 

public input will be announced 

throughout the CCP planning process. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

All comments and materials we 

receive from individuals on our NEPA 

documents become part of the official 

public record. We will handle requests 

for such comments in accordance with 

the Freedom of Information Act, NEPA, 

and Department of the Interior and 

Service policies and procedures. 

Dated: May 19, 2009. 

Don Weathers, 

Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Portland, 

Oregon. 

[FR Doc. E9–12390 Filed 5–27–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R4–R–2009–N0075; 40136–1265– 

0000–S3] 

Mandalay National Wildlife Refuge, 

Terrebonne Parish, LA 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability: draft 

comprehensive conservation plan and 

environmental assessment; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

availability of a draft comprehensive 

conservation plan and environmental 

assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for 

Mandalay National Wildlife Refuge 

(NWR) for public review and comment. 

In this Draft CCP/EA, we describe the 

alternative we propose to use to manage 

this refuge for the 15 years following 

approval of the final CCP. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, we 

must receive your written comments by 

June 29, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments, questions, 

and requests for information to: Mr. 

Paul Yakupzack, Refuge Manager, 

Mandalay NWR, 3599 Bayou Black 

Drive, Houma, LA 70360. The Draft 

CCP/EA is available on compact disk or 

in hard copy. The Draft CCP/EA may 

also be accessed and downloaded from 

the Service’s Internet Site: http:// 

southeast.fws.gov/planning/. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Paul Yakupzack; telephone: 985/853– 

1078; fax: 985/853–1079; e-mail: 

paul_yakupzack@fws.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

With this notice, we continue the CCP 

process for Mandalay NWR. We started 

this process through a notice in the 

Federal Register on March 19, 2007 (72 

FR 12811). 

Background 

The National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 

668dd–668ee) (Improvement Act), 

which amended the National Wildlife 

Refuge System Administration Act of 

1966, requires us to develop a CCP for 

each national wildlife refuge. The 

purpose for developing a CCP is to 

provide refuge managers with a 15-year 

strategy for achieving refuge purposes 

and contributing toward the mission of 

the National Wildlife Refuge System, 

consistent with sound principles of fish 

and wildlife management, conservation, 

legal mandates, and our policies. In 

addition to outlining broad management 

direction on conserving wildlife and 

their habitats, CCPs identify wildlifedependent recreational opportunities 

available to the public, including 

opportunities for hunting, fishing, 

wildlife observation, wildlife 

photography, and environmental 

education and interpretation. We will 

review and update the CCP at least 

25578 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 101 / Thursday, May 28, 2009 / Notices 

every 15 years in accordance with the 

Improvement Act. 

Mandalay NWR, approximately 5 

miles west of Houma, Louisiana, was 

established on May 2, 1996, with the 

purchase of 4,416 acres under the 

authority of the Migratory Bird 

Conservation Act of 1929 and the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973. The 

refuge, predominantly freshwater marsh 

and cypress-tupelo swamp, provides 

excellent habitat for waterfowl, wading 

birds, and neotropical songbirds. Access 

is by boat, except for the headquarters 

building on Highway 182 (Bayou Black 

Drive) and a nearby nature trail. 

Mandalay NWR is administered as one 

of eight refuges of the Southeast 

Louisiana NWR Complex, 

headquartered in Lacombe, Louisiana. 

CCP Alternatives, Including Our 

Proposed Alternative 

We developed three alternatives for 

managing the refuge and chose 

Alternative B as the proposed 

alternative. A full description is in the 

Draft CCP/EA. We summarize each 

alternative below. 

Alternative A—No Action Alternative 

Under this alternative, no new actions 

would be taken to improve or enhance 

the refuge’s current habitat, wildlife, 

and public use management programs. 

Species of Federal responsibility, such 

as threatened and endangered species 

and migratory birds, would continue to 

be monitored at present levels. 

Additional species monitoring would 

occur through the use of volunteers as 

they become available. Current 

programs of marsh management would 

be maintained. No progressive wetland 

restoration projects would be 

implemented. All public use programs 

of fishing, hunting, wildlife observation, 

wildlife photography, and 

environmental education and 

interpretation would continue at present 

levels and with current facilities. 

Acquisition of lands into the refuge 

would occur when funding is 

appropriated and willing sellers offer 

land that is quality waterfowl habitat. 

Staff would consist of a manager and a 

biologist for both Mandalay NWR and 

Bayou Teche NWR, along with 

supplementary support from the 

Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex staff 

when needed. The refuge headquarters 

would serve as an administrative office, 

with no enhancement of the grounds for 

public use. 

Alternative B—Natural Resource 

Management (Proposed Alternative) 

Alternative B would emphasize 

management of the natural resources of 

Mandalay NWR based on maintaining 

and improving wetland habitats, 

monitoring targeted flora and fauna 

representative of the Terrebonne Basin, 

and providing quality public use 

programs and wildlife-dependent 

recreational activities. All species 

occurring on the refuge would be 

considered and certain targeted species 

would be managed and monitored, in 

addition to species of Federal 

responsibility. These species would be 

chosen based on the criteria that they 

would be indicators of the health of 

important habitat or species of concern. 

Wetland loss would be documented 

and, whenever possible, the lost 

wetlands would be restored. Public use 

programs would be improved by 

offering more facilities and wildlife 

observation areas. Public use facilities 

would undergo annual reviews for 

maintenance needs and safety concerns. 

Overall public use would be monitored 

to determine if any uses would 

negatively impact refuge resources. 

Education programs would be reviewed 

and improved to complement current 

refuge management and staffing. 

Archaeological resources would be 

surveyed. 

Land acquisition within the approved 

acquisition boundary would be based on 

importance of the habitat for target 

management species. The refuge 

headquarters would house a small 

administrative office. The staff would 

offer interpretation of refuge wildlife 

and habitats, as well as demonstrate 

habitat improvements for individual 

landowners. The main interpretive 

facilities would be housed at the 

Southeast Louisiana NWR Complex 

Headquarters in Lacombe, Louisiana. 

In general, under Alternative B, 

management decisions and actions 

would support wildlife species and 

habitats occurring on the refuge based 

on well-planned strategies and sound 

scientific judgment. Quality wildlifedependent recreational uses and 

environmental education and 

interpretation programs would be 

offered to support and explain the 

natural resources of the refuge. 

Alternative C—Maximized Public Use 

Alternative C would emphasize 

managing the natural resources of 

Mandalay NWR for maximized public 

use activities. The majority of staff time 

and efforts would support hunting, 

fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife 

photography, and environmental 

education and interpretation. Federal 

trust species and archaeological 

resources would be monitored as 

mandated. 

All refuge programs for conservation 

of wildlife and habitats, such as 

monitoring, surveying, and managing 

marsh, would support species and 

resources of importance for public use. 

More emphasis would be placed on 

interpreting and demonstrating these 

programs. Access, through means such 

as trails for walking and dredged areas 

for boat access, would be maximized, 

and we would provide public use 

facilities throughout the refuge. 

Land acquisition within the approved 

acquisition boundary would be based on 

importance of the habitat for public use. 

The refuge headquarters would provide 

a small administrative office and a 

visitor center, which would be 

developed for public use activities. 

In general, Alternative C would focus 

on expanding public use activities to the 

fullest extent possible and conducting 

only mandated resource protection. 

Next Step 

After the comment period ends, we 

will analyze the comments and address 

them. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment, including your 

personal identifying information, may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

Authority: This notice is published under 

the authority of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System Improvement Act of 1997, Public 

Law 105–57. 

Dated: April 21, 2009. 

Jacquelyn B. Parrish, 

Acting Regional Director. 

[FR Doc. E9–12389 Filed 5–27–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[CO–921–05–1320–EL; COC–70615] 

Notice of Public Meeting, To Receive 

for Comments on an Environmental 

Analysis, Finding of No Significant 

Impact, Maximum Economic Recovery 

Report, and Fair Market Value for Coal 

Lease Application COC–70615 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.