Chapters 1 - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Introduction diversity, and environmental health of the NWRS. This policy provides a refuge manager with an evaluation process to analyze his/her refuge and recommend the best management direction to prevent further degradation of environmental conditions; and where appropriate, and in concert with refuge purposes and the NWRS mission, to restore lost or severely degraded resource components. Within section 3[3.7B] of the policy, the relationships among biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health; the NWRS mission; and refuge purposes are explained as follows, “…each refuge will be managed to fulfill refuge purpose(s) as well as to help fulfill the System mission, and we will accomplish these purposes(s) and our mission by ensuring that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of each refuge are maintained and where appropriate, restored.” When evaluating the appropriate management direction for refuges, refuge managers will use sound professional judgment to determine their refuge’s contribution to biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health at multiple landscape scales. Sound professional judgment incorporates field experience, an understanding of the refuge’s role within an ecosystem, and the knowledge of refuge resources, applicable laws, and best available science, including consultation with resource experts both inside and outside of the Service. The priority public uses of the NWRS are not in conflict with this policy when they have been determined to be compatible. The directives of this policy do not envision or necessitate the exclusion of visitors or the elimination of visitor use structures from refuges; however, maintenance and/or restoration of biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health may require spatial or temporal zoning of visitor use programs and associated infrastructures. General success in maintaining or restoring biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health will produce higher quality opportunities for wildlife-dependent recreational uses. Wilderness Stewardship Policy The Wilderness Stewardship Policy, described in Part 610 FW 1 – 5 of the Fish and Wildlife Service Manual, provides an overview and foundation for implementing the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended, and the Wilderness Act of 1964. In the Wilderness Act, Congress called for the establishment of a National Wilderness Preservation System to secure an ‘‘enduring resource of wilderness’’ for the American public. Wilderness, as defined in Section 2(c) of the Wilderness Act, is an area that “. . . generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature with the imprint of man’s work sustainably unnoticeable . . . has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation . . . [and] has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition…” The Wilderness Stewardship Policy provides refuge managers with guidance on conducting wilderness reviews on Refuge System lands to determine if these lands should be recommended for wilderness designation. It also establishes policy for managing wilderness study areas and recommended and proposed wilderness. The Policy also prescribes how refuge managers will preserve the character and qualities of designated wilderness while managing for refuge establishing purpose(s). Part 610 FW 4 of the Service Manual describes the wilderness review process, a process that must be followed when identifying and recommending for congressional designation Refuge System lands and waters that merit inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. Wilderness reviews are to be conducted as part of a scheduled CCP or CCP revision, but can also be conducted at any time if significant new information becomes available, ecological conditions change (including the restoration of significant acreage to natural conditions so that Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan/Environmental Assessment 1-9
Chapter 1 area now meets the definition of wilderness), or major refuge expansion occurs. The process must include interagency and tribal coordination, public involvement, and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance. The wilderness review conducted for the Seal Beach NWR as part of the CCP process is described in Chapter 6, Implementation. 1.4.2 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 As the basic national charter for the protection of the environment, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires Federal agencies to consider the environmental effects of all actions (i.e., policies, plans, programs, or projects that are implemented, funded, permitted, or controlled by a Federal agency or agencies) they undertake. Agencies must also consider the environmental effects of all reasonable and feasible alternatives to a proposed action, and must make public the environmental effects of the proposed action and possible alternatives. If adverse environmental effects cannot be entirely avoided, NEPA requires an agency to show evidence of its efforts to reduce these adverse effects and to restore and enhance environmental quality as much as possible. The contents of an environmental assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) document that an agency has addressed all of these issues. Each CCP process must comply with the provisions of NEPA through the concurrent preparation of an EA or EIS that can accompany or be integrated into the draft CCP. The Seal Beach NWR CCP has been prepared consistent with the requirements of NEPA, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA regulations (40 CFR §1500 et seq.), and the Department of Interior’s NEPA procedures (Department Manual, Part 516). To comply with CEQ NEPA regulations and ensure the NEPA process to be integrated into the CCP process at the earliest possible time, an EA has been integrated directly into the draft CCP document for the Seal Beach NWR. In this document, the primary components of the EA (Section 1508.9 of the CEQ NEPA regulations) include Chapter 1, which addresses the purpose and need for the proposed action; Chapter 3 which presents the proposed action and the alternatives to the proposed action; Chapter 4, which describes the affected environment; Chapter 5, which presents the environmental consequences of the proposed action and the alternatives; and Appendix B, which lists the agencies and persons consulted. 1.5 Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge 1.5.1 Location The 965-acre Seal Beach NWR, which is included entirely within NWSSB, is located in the northwest corner of Orange County between the City of Seal Beach to the northwest and the City of Huntington Beach to the southeast (refer to Figures 1-1 and 1-2). The Refuge is situated in an area that is generally bordered to the southwest by Pacific Coast Highway, to the west by Seal Beach Boulevard, to the north by Westminster Avenue, and to the east and southeast by the Bolsa Chica flood control channel. The habitats within the Refuge are buffered from surrounding urban development on the north, east, and west by NWSSB, while the boating and residential development associated with Sunset Harbour Marina and the community of Huntington Harbour occur immediately to the south of the Refuge’s coastal salt marsh habitat (refer to Figure 1-2). 1.5.2 Physical Setting Located along the coast of southern California, Seal Beach NWR protects a remnant of what was once a vast wetland complex extending inland along the southern California bight from the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers to the Santa Ana River. Marine and terrestrial wildlife thrived in the San Pedro, Los Alamitos, Anaheim, Bolsa, and Newport Bay estuaries. The Refuge protects all of what remains of Anaheim Bay’s historical intertidal salt marsh complex (approximately 750 1-10 Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge
Page 1 and 2: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Seal
Page 3 and 4: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Seal B
Page 5 and 6: Abstract The issues addressed in t
Page 7 and 8: Reader’s Guide Appendix A, Compa
Page 9 and 10: Table of Contents 2.8 Alternative
Page 11 and 12: Table of Contents 4.3.4.1 Birds ..
Page 13 and 14: Table of Contents 5.4.2 Alternativ
Page 15 and 16: Table of Contents ─────
Page 17 and 18: Table of Contents ─────
Page 19 and 20: Ventura County Hopper Mt. NWR P a c
Page 21 and 22: Chapter 1 The development of this
Page 23 and 24: Chapter 1 document, or administrat
Page 25: Chapter 1 e) The use is consistent
Page 29 and 30: Chapter 1 Additional ecosystem pla
Page 31 and 32: Chapter 1 Goal 2: Protect, manage,
Page 33 and 34: Figure 1-3. Artist’s Rendition of
Page 35 and 36: Chapter 2 recovery, and wildlife-d
Page 37 and 38: Chapter 2 2.5 Management Concerns/
Page 39 and 40: Chapter 2 Refuge Access The Refuge
Page 41 and 42: Chapter 2 approved CCP will be imp
Page 43 and 44: San Gabriel River California Nevada
Page 45 and 46: Chapter 3 implementation of the fo
Page 47 and 48: Chapter 3 activities at NWSSB are
Page 49 and 50: Chapter 3 Alternative C a larger p
Page 51 and 52: Chapter 3 3.4.2.2 Features Common
Page 53 and 54: Pacific Co ast H wy A n a h e i m B
Page 55 and 56: Chapter 3 For the California least
Page 57 and 58: Chapter 3 requires that all pestic
Page 59 and 60: Chapter 3 species habitat; the sea
Page 61 and 62: Chapter 3 Wildlife Photography. Ca
Page 63 and 64: l Bolsa Ave. Seal Beach National Wi
Page 65 and 66: Pacific Co ast H wy A n a h e i m B
Page 67 and 68: Chapter 3 BMPs that further define
Page 69 and 70: Chapter 3 greater than three miles
Page 71 and 72: Chapter 3 6. Increase Efforts to I
Page 73 and 74: Chapter 3 The upland areas to the
Page 75 and 76: Chapter 3 Native American subsiste
Page 77 and 78:
Chapter 3 One proposal that would
Page 79 and 80:
Chapter 3 clean sand suitable for
Page 81 and 82:
Chapter 3 Improve Public Access on
Page 83 and 84:
Issue Raised During Scoping Habitat
Page 85 and 86:
Figure 4-1. Seal Beach NWR - Site P
Page 87 and 88:
Figure 4-2. Historical (1894) Coast
Page 89 and 90:
Figure 4-4. Aerial View of Anaheim
Page 91 and 92:
Chapter 4 With the exception of th
Page 93 and 94:
im Bay California Nevada Seal Beach
Page 95 and 96:
Pacific Co ast H wy A n a h e i m B
Page 97 and 98:
Chapter 4 The results of studies c
Page 99 and 100:
Figure 4-10. Anaheim Bay-Huntington
Page 101 and 102:
Figure 4-11. Tidal and Freshwater C
Page 103 and 104:
Chapter 4 lead to a breach in the
Page 105 and 106:
Chapter 4 salinity, and alternatel
Page 107 and 108:
Chapter 4 “beneficial uses.” T
Page 109 and 110:
Chapter 4 Station Location East of
Page 111 and 112:
Chapter 4 address issues related t
Page 113 and 114:
Chapter 4 The CALFED Independent S
Page 115 and 116:
Chapter 4 Within the South Coast A
Page 117 and 118:
Chapter 4 while also preparing a s
Page 119 and 120:
Chapter 4 Site Number Table 4-4 Su
Page 121 and 122:
Chapter 4 At present, there are ap
Page 123 and 124:
Chapter 4 The Shorebird Plan ident
Page 125 and 126:
Chapter 4 acres within the Refuge
Page 127 and 128:
Chapter 4 roots and rhizomes of th
Page 129 and 130:
Chapter 4 following a period of si
Page 131 and 132:
Chapter 4 A variety of foraging ha
Page 133 and 134:
Chapter 4 Harbor seals (Phoca vitu
Page 135 and 136:
Chapter 4 Wandering Skipper. A but
Page 137 and 138:
Chapter 4 artificial containers, a
Page 139 and 140:
Chapter 4 Mollusk communities in s
Page 141 and 142:
Chapter 4 The data collected durin
Page 143 and 144:
Chapter 4 sand, in which one to fo
Page 145 and 146:
Chapter 4 experienced late rain sh
Page 147 and 148:
Chapter 4 stems is pulled over and
Page 149 and 150:
Chapter 4 condition that could be
Page 151 and 152:
Chapter 4 individuals are also obs
Page 153 and 154:
Chapter 4 north as Alaska (Southwe
Page 155 and 156:
Chapter 4 The 2008 report encompas
Page 157 and 158:
Chapter 4 Presented in Table 4-12
Page 159 and 160:
Chapter 4 Protection Plan for Nava
Page 161 and 162:
Chapter 4 mobile early occupants.
Page 163 and 164:
Chapter 4 German immigrants from S
Page 165 and 166:
Chapter 4 date for sites located t
Page 167 and 168:
Chapter 4 ability for the public t
Page 169 and 170:
Figure 4-16. Land Use in the Vicini
Page 171 and 172:
Chapter 4 City of Seal Beach excee
Page 173 and 174:
Chapter 4 Table 4-15 Economic/Empl
Page 175 and 176:
Chapter 4 household income in 1999
Page 177 and 178:
Chapter 5 Hydrology - An adverse
Page 179 and 180:
Chapter 5 liquefaction, settlement
Page 181 and 182:
Chapter 5 Surflan AS, with the act
Page 183 and 184:
Chapter 5 sea level rise in the ge
Page 185 and 186:
Chapter 5 per week. The sum of the
Page 187 and 188:
Chapter 5 contaminants related to
Page 189 and 190:
Chapter 5 erosion at the project s
Page 191 and 192:
Chapter 5 would ensure that no sig
Page 193 and 194:
Chapter 5 Spray applications will
Page 195 and 196:
Chapter 5 The USEPA (2008b) descri
Page 197 and 198:
Chapter 5 Measures shall be imple
Page 199 and 200:
Chapter 5 Equipment will be calib
Page 201 and 202:
Chapter 5 Refuge. Removal of concr
Page 203 and 204:
Chapter 5 Public Use Expanding the
Page 205 and 206:
Chapter 5 GHG emissions. Therefore
Page 207 and 208:
Chapter 5 restoration/creation usi
Page 209 and 210:
Chapter 5 Replacement of the exist
Page 211 and 212:
Chapter 5 5.3.3 Alternative C (Pro
Page 213 and 214:
Chapter 5 An action would result
Page 215 and 216:
Chapter 5 conducted once a month,
Page 217 and 218:
Chapter 5 Methoprene applied at le
Page 219 and 220:
Chapter 5 in mammals, methoprene i
Page 221 and 222:
Chapter 5 associated with the appl
Page 223 and 224:
Chapter 5 moderately toxic to fish
Page 225 and 226:
Chapter 5 impacts on nontarget spe
Page 227 and 228:
Chapter 5 alternative as described
Page 229 and 230:
Chapter 5 The removal of the drop
Page 231 and 232:
Chapter 5 established on NASA Isla
Page 233 and 234:
Chapter 5 Pest Management Herbicid
Page 235 and 236:
Chapter 5 Pest Management Implemen
Page 237 and 238:
Chapter 5 Public Use No adverse or
Page 239 and 240:
Chapter 5 Proposals to better unde
Page 241 and 242:
Chapter 5 Pest Management The anal
Page 243 and 244:
Chapter 5 Section 800.5(1) Criteri
Page 245 and 246:
Chapter 5 An archaeological monito
Page 247 and 248:
Chapter 5 included in this section
Page 249 and 250:
Chapter 5 that extends along Bolsa
Page 251 and 252:
Chapter 5 Table 5-4 Economic Impac
Page 253 and 254:
Chapter 5 residents and visitors.
Page 255 and 256:
Chapter 5 5.7.3.5 Effects Related
Page 257 and 258:
Chapter 5 Harmony Cove Residential
Page 259 and 260:
Chapter 5 desalination facility ut
Page 261 and 262:
Chapter 5 abundance of mosquitoes
Page 263 and 264:
Chapter 5 Table 5-5 Summary of Pot
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Chapter 6 6.2 Refuge Goals, Object
Page 271 and 272:
Chapter 6 Objective 1.1 - Californ
Page 273 and 274:
Chapter 6 affecting reestablishmen
Page 275 and 276:
Chapter 6 Objective 1.6 - Protect
Page 277 and 278:
Chapter 6 Objective 2.3 - Control
Page 279 and 280:
Chapter 6 Objective 2.6 - Restore
Page 281 and 282:
Chapter 6 for migratory birds thro
Page 283 and 284:
Chapter 6 Alternative A B C
Page 285 and 286:
Chapter 6 Goal 4: Further strength
Page 287 and 288:
Chapter 6 public outreach at on- a
Page 289 and 290:
Chapter 6 describes when and how m
Page 291 and 292:
Chapter 6 Native American Graves P
Page 293 and 294:
Chapter 6 (The Service lands and w
Page 295 and 296:
Chapter 6 Water Quality Conservati
Page 297 and 298:
Chapter 6 CCP, additional staff wi
Page 299 and 300:
Chapter 6 Table 6-3 (continued) Pr
Page 301 and 302:
7 References Cited Anderson, J., F.
Page 303 and 304:
References Cited California State W
Page 305 and 306:
References Cited Extension Toxicolo
Page 307 and 308:
References Cited Kus, B.E. 1990. St
Page 309 and 310:
References Cited National Marine Fi
Page 311 and 312:
References Cited Robinson, W.W. 197
Page 313 and 314:
References Cited Underwood, J. and
Page 315 and 316:
References Cited U.S. Fish and Wild
Page 317:
Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge
show all

Chapters 1 - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?