EUFAULA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE DRAFT COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION

Existing Use: Hunting

Refuge Name: Eufaula National Wildlife Refuge

Established: October 6, 1964

Establishing and Acquisition Authority: Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (40 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 USC §661 et seq.)

Refuge Purposes:

"… shall be administered by him [Secretary of the Interior]… in accordance with such rules and regulations for the conservation, maintenance, and management of wildlife, resources thereof, and its habitat thereon…" (16 USC §664)

"… each refuge shall be managed to fulfill the mission of the [National Wildlife Refuge] System, as well as the specific purposes for which that refuge was established…" (National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act (NWRSAA) of 1966 as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act (NWRSIA) of 1997; 16 USC §§668dd-668ee)

National Wildlife Refuge System Mission: The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS), as defined by the NWRSIA of 1997, is:

...to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management, and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.

Description of Use:

What is the use? The use is public hunting of dove, duck/geese/merganser, rabbit, eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) on Eufaula National Wildlife Refuge (NWR, refuge) in Georgia and Alabama. Hunting of these species was previously analyzed in the associated Environmental Assessment (EA; USFWS 2008a) and previously outlined and approved in the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP), hunting compatibility determination, and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) (USFWS 2008b). Hunting is one of the six priority public uses of the NWRS, under the NWRSIA. Eufaula NWR is currently open to the hunting of dove, duck/geese/merganser, rabbit/gray squirrel, and white-tailed deer. Eufaula NWR would continue to allow the take of nuisance and/or invasive species [i.e., feral hogs (Sus scrofa)] only incidentally to white-tailed deer hunting. Alabama considers feral hog a game animal, while the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and Georgia consider it an invasive species. It is neither the goal nor the intent of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) to manage feral hogs as huntable game. Hogs are an invasive species that damages native habitats and preys on native wildlife. The objective of allowing take of feral hogs is to eliminate them from Eufaula NWR.

1

Where is the use conducted? Dove: Hunting will be allowed on those portions of Eufaula NWR lying within Alabama, except for no hunting zones and closed areas. These areas will be identified by signs and/or brochures.

Duck/goose/merganser: Hunting will be allowed in the Bradley and Kennedy units.

Rabbit/eastern gray squirrel: Hunting will be allowed on those portions of Eufaula NWR lying within Alabama, except for no hunting zones and closed areas. These areas will be identified by signs and/or brochures.

White-tailed deer: Hunting will be allowed on the majority of Eufaula NWR, except for no hunting zones and closed areas. These areas will be identified by signs and/or brochures.

Feral hog: Take will be allowed on the majority of Eufaula NWR, except for no hunting zones and closed areas. These areas will be identified by signs and/or brochures.

When is the use conducted? Dove: Hunting will be allowed on Wednesdays and Saturdays during the Alabama season in September and October.

Duck/goose/merganser: Hunting will be allowed either Wednesday or Saturday each week during the state seasons. Each state will hunt a different day. Which day to be hunted (Wednesday or Saturday) will alternate each year. Hunting hours will be from legal shooting time until noon local time, except on the last refuge general (non-youth) hunt day. On the last refuge general hunt day, hunting will be allowed until sunset.

Rabbit/eastern gray squirrel: Hunting will be allowed during the Alabama season during the month of February.

White-tailed deer: Hunting will be allowed on the majority of the refuge during the state seasons, except that 1) the Bradley Unit will not open before November 1 and 2) all entry into the Kennedy or Bradley unit will be prohibited during waterfowl hunts. A limited number of youth gun hunts will be offered in October on the Bradley Unit.

Feral hog: Take will be allowed on the majority of the refuge during the refuge seasons for white-tailed deer, except that 1) the Bradley Unit will not open before November 1 and 2) all entry into the Kennedy or Bradley unit will be prohibited during waterfowl hunts.

How is the use conducted? Hunting will be allowed subject to all federal (including refuge-specific), state, and local laws and regulations. Additional stipulations are provided below or identified by signs and/or brochures.

Dove: Hunters will be required to use non-toxic shot.

Duck/goose/merganser: Waterfowl hunting opportunities will be awarded by lottery prior to the beginning of the waterfowl season. Guidance for entering the lottery will be provided in refuge brochures and via other media (e.g., personal contact, email, news release, and social media).

Rabbit/eastern gray squirrel: Hunters will be required to use non-toxic shot.

2

White-tailed deer: Hunting will be allowed using archery equipment following the regulations for the state in which the hunting occurs. Hunting by youth with firearms will be allowed on select days in the Bradley Unit. These youth hunt opportunities will be awarded by lottery prior to the hunt days.

Feral hog: Take will be allowed incidental to white-tailed deer hunting using equipment approved for the particular white-tailed deer hunt. There will be no limit on the size or number of feral hogs that may be taken.

Why is the use being proposed? Hunting is one of the priority public uses identified by Executive Order 12996 (1996), the NWRSAA, and the NWRSIA. Hunting as summarized by this document allows the public to experience natural resources without materially interfering with the purposes of the refuge or mission of the NWRS. By allowing this use, hunters can participate in a traditional, wildlife- oriented recreational activity; use a sustainable and renewable natural resource; and gain a better understanding of the importance of the refuge and the NWRS in protecting wildlife and wild lands. Recently, the Service coordinated with the states of Alabama and Georgia to better align Eufaula NWR hunts with those of Alabama and Georgia, resulting in this proposed updated compatibility determination. The changes from the past hunting compatibility determination would include: extending the waterfowl hunt daily deadline from noon to sunset in both Alabama and Georgia on the last day of the refuge hunt within the states’ seasons, expanding dove hunting from the Houston Unit to all other Alabama refuge units, providing dove hunting in Alabama after the start of deer archery season within the month of October, and aligning dove hunt hours with those set by the State of Alabama.

Availability of Resources: Annual costs for provided hunting opportunities as summarized by this document include staff time from the Refuge Manager, Administrative Officer, Federal Wildlife Officer, Engineering Equipment Operator, and Hunt Administrator; facilities operation and maintenance; and supplies (Table 1). These costs are partially offset by revenue generated from fee collection. The Federal Wildlife Officer position is currently vacant; a small portion of the services provided by this position is currently provided by state officers and the Zone Federal Wildlife Officer. Adequate resources are available to manage hunting as identified in this document.

Table 1: Summary of costs associated with the Eufaula National Wildlife Refuge hunt program.

Category Item Cost ($) Staff Refuge Manager 23,000 Administrative Officer 10,000 Federal Wildlife Officer 23,000 Engineering Equipment Operator 10,000 Hunt Administrator 12,000 Facilities Check stations (2) 3,000 Operation and Roads/trails 2,000 Maintenance Blinds 3,000 Signs 1,000 Utilities 2,000

3

Category Item Cost ($) Supplies Brochures/Permits 1,500 Mailings 300 Portable restrooms 1,500

Revenue -12,000

Total 80,300

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: Hunting as outlined in this document has the potential to affect refuge habitat, wildlife, public use, and culturally important sites; however, these impacts would not be considered significant. Hunting of these species was previously analyzed in the associated Environmental Assessment (EA; USFWS 2008a) and previously outlined and approved in the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP), hunting compatibility determination, and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) (USFWS 2008b). The current proposal would expand what was previously approved in the CCP’s FONSI (USFWS 2008b). These proposed changes would be considered minor changes to the existing hunting use with negligible to minor associated impacts anticipated for the human environment. For waterfowl hunting, the proposed changes would represent less than a 10% increase in the waterfowl hunting visitation. Currently, dove hunting visitation is less than one percent of total hunting visitation; this would not change under the proposed action. Eufaula NWR does not have high quality dove habitat and it is not a popular dove hunting destination. Some of the more common and/or notable impacts are summarized below.

(a) What are the effects of hunting on wildlife? The proposed changes would be minor and would be anticipated to have negligible impacts to wildlife populations. Wildlife management most often operates at a population scale with the fate of individual animals regarded as inconsequential. While hunting certainly effects individual animals, when properly conducted, it does not threaten the future health of a population. Although appropriately managed hunting does not negatively affect wildlife population size from year to year, it can affect age structure and short-term abundance and distribution of hunted and associated species (e.g., prey and predators) and/or divert resources from wildlife management activities. These effects are well documented, monitored by federal and state agencies, and considered when establishing hunting regulations. The refuge's hunting program for the lands within each state largely conforms to the regulations of that state, except where the refuge's distinctive and broader mission necessitates special consideration. Collectively, these regulations ensure that hunting does not cause significant negative effects to wildlife populations. The changes proposed for the hunting program would have negligible impacts to populations of target species and non-target species. Feral hogs are an invasive species that adversely impact wildlife and habitat. Take of feral hogs would help minimize the adverse impacts of feral hogs on wildlife and habitat.

(b) What are the effects of hunting on habitat? The proposed changes would be minor and would be anticipated to have negligible impacts to habitat. Hunting can physically reduce the quality of wildlife habitat (e.g., through soil compaction, destruction of vegetation, littering, and disturbance). The refuge and NWRS have established specific regulations and management actions (e.g., restrictions on off-highway vehicles and airboats, vegetation removal, and littering; signage and brochures; and establishment of sanctuary areas) aimed at mitigating these impacts.

4

Managing a hunt program requires investment of staff and fiscal resources. While these resources could be used to better manage refuge habitats directly, allowing hunting or other wildlife-oriented public use enhances the refuge and NWRS missions. Providing opportunities for visitors to experience wildlife and wild lands increases their appreciation and support for refuge management.

White-tailed deer are one of the few wildlife species that in high numbers can have long-term, negative effects to habitat. Thus, some removal of deer is necessary to prevent habitat degradation. In the past, the refuge has relied on archery hunting to accomplish this removal. Harvest records and monitoring efforts indicate hunting as identified by this document is sufficient for ensuring the deer population size does not reach levels that will adversely impact habitat, while still providing quality opportunities for other wildlife-oriented recreation. Feral hogs are an invasive species that adversely impact wildlife and habitat. Take of feral hogs would help minimize the adverse impacts of feral hogs.

(c) What are the effects of hunting on other public uses? The proposed changes would be minor and would be anticipated to have negligible impacts on other public use activities. The NWRSIA identified six priority public uses for the NWRS: hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and environmental education and interpretation. These six uses are given deference and enhanced consideration in planning and management over non-wildlife-oriented uses, but they have equivalent priorities. Hunting can negatively impact other wildlife-oriented recreation. The refuge and NWRS have established management actions (e.g., establishment of no hunting zones near nature trails, restricting hunting to certain days, and not hunting species popular with other users) aimed at mitigating these effects and allowing for sharing of refuge resources to minimize conflicts between uses and to minimize any adverse impacts from hunting on other approved uses.

Hunting also can negatively affect recreation that is not wildlife-oriented. As these types of uses are not a priority, hunting's effect on them is given consideration only when public safety or well- being is compromised. However, the minor changes proposed for the hunt program would be anticipated to have negligible impacts to recreational activities that are not wildlife-oriented.

(d) What are other effects of hunting? Generally, hunting at appropriate and compatible quantities and qualities has minor beneficial impacts on the refuge and NWRS mission. Proving opportunities for individuals to experience wildlife and wildlands increases their understanding and appreciation for these resources and ultimately facilitates refuge management and the NWRS missions.

Areas and specific sites on Eufaula NWR have cultural significance. The refuge has established regulations and management actions to protect these cultural resources from significant human disturbance, including from hunting activities. The proposed changes would be anticipated to have no impacts to cultural resources.

The refuge has established regulations and taken actions to ensure that no public uses, including hunting, present significant short- or long-term, direct or indirect, individual or cumulative threats to the health of refuge wildlife and wild land resources, visitor services programs, or culturally significant areas. These policies and decisions are contained in the refuge's CCP, public use brochures, and in Title 50 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

Short-Term and Long-Term Impacts: Short-term and long-term impacts of hunting on Eufaula NWR were previously analyzed in the CCP’s EA (USFWS 2008a). In summary, no significant beneficial or adverse short-term and 5

long-term impacts would be anticipated from this use, including the proposed expansion of the use; short-term and long-term impacts associated with the proposed changes would be anticipated to be negligible or minor.

Direct effects of hunting can include mortality, wounding, and disturbance of target and non- target species (De Long 2002). Hunting can alter behavior (e.g., foraging time), population structure, general health (e.g., weight loss), and distribution patterns of all wildlife within the hunt area (Owens 1977, Raveling 1979, White-Robinson 1982, Thomas 1983, Bartelt 1987, Madsen 1995, Cole and Knight 1990).

The level of disturbance associated with hunting can be high due to the loud noises produced by guns and the rapid movements of hunters within the hunt area. This disturbance, especially when repeated over a period of time, compels waterfowl and other species to change foraging habits (e.g., foraging at night) or abandon areas of disturbance (Madsen 1995, Wolder 1993). In fact, studies indicate that prolonged and extensive disturbances can cause large numbers of waterfowl to leave disturbed areas and migrate elsewhere (Madsen 1995, Paulus 1984). Various studies indicate an inverse relationship between the numbers of birds using an area and hunting intensity (DeLong 2002).

Impacts to waterfowl and other species can be reduced by providing adjacent sanctuary areas where hunting does not occur and where birds can feed and rest relatively undisturbed. Sanctuaries or non-hunt areas have been identified as the most common solution to disturbance problems caused from hunting (Havera et. al 1992). Non-hunt areas are very important to waterfowl populations subject to hunting as they ensure the continued presence of the affected species within the general vicinity of the hunt area.

Intermittent hunting can also be a means of minimizing disturbance, especially if rest periods in between hunting events are weeks rather than days (Fox and Madsen 1997). It is common for refuges to manage hunt programs with non-hunt days.

Hunting would not expected to adversely affect migratory game bird populations that occur on the refuge. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service works closely with state and provincial governments, as well as with the public, in a joint effort to establish annual hunting regulations for migratory birds. The Service's Division of Migratory Birds establishes regulation frameworks to manage all migratory bird hunting in the United States. These regulations establish limitations by which states can then create season lengths, bag limits and areas of migratory bird hunting. Regulations on migratory bird hunting are determined through the assessment of annual surveys, waterfowl banding data, and hunter harvest data. Survey data is obtained through aerial surveys of the North American flyways, which count birds, ponds and nests, and provide information for analyzing population and habitat conditions. Hunter surveys and questionnaires determine the number of hunters participating yearly and the impacts they have on waterfowl. Recommendations from the Flyway Council are considered when original rules are created. Rules are presented to the public through the Federal Register and followed by a series of public meetings for any recommendations. The final regulations are assessed based on a collective analysis of all factual information as well as council and public recommendations. States annually review hunting seasons and bag limits and modify them to avoid any long-term population declines.

Cumulative Impacts: Cumulative impacts of hunting on Eufaula NWR were previously analyzed in the CCP’s EA (USFWS 2008a). In summary, no significant beneficial or adverse cumulative impacts would be anticipated from this use, including the proposed expansion of the use; cumulative impacts 6

associated with the proposed changes would be anticipated to be negligible.

Public Review and Comment: The Service made the draft compatibility determination available for public review and comment for 15 days in early 2020 through document availability and notices posted at the refuge’s visitor contact station at the Eufaula NWR Headquarters building and on the refuge’s website (https://www.fws.gov/refuge/Eufaula/). Further, the Service sent a press release announcing the public review and comment period on the draft compatibility determination to a local newspaper.

Summary of Comments Received: The Service will review all comments submitted in developing a final decision.

Determination:

___ Use is Not Compatible

X Use is Compatible with Following Stipulations

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: Hunting will be allowed subject to all federal (including refuge-specific), state, and local laws and regulations. Additional stipulations are provided below or identified by signs and/or brochures.

Dove: • Hunting will be allowed on those portions of Eufaula NWR lying within Alabama, except for no hunting zones and closed areas. These areas will be identified by signs and/or brochures. • Hunting will be allowed on Wednesdays and Saturdays during the Alabama season in September and October. • Hunters will be required to use non-toxic shot.

Duck/Goose/Merganser: • Hunting will be allowed in the Bradley and Kennedy units. • Hunting will be allowed either Wednesday or Saturday each week during the state seasons. Each state will hunt a different day. The day to be hunted (Wednesday or Saturday) will alternate each year. Hunting hours will be from legal shooting time until noon local time, except on the last refuge general (non-youth) hunt day. On the last refuge general hunt day, hunting will be allowed until sunset. • Waterfowl hunting opportunities will be awarded by lottery prior to the beginning of the waterfowl season. Guidance for entering the lottery will be provided in refuge brochures and via other media (e.g., personal contact, email, news release, and social media).

Rabbit/Eastern Gray Squirrel: • Hunting will be allowed on those portions of Eufaula NWR lying within Alabama, except for no hunting zones and closed areas. These areas will be identified by signs and/or brochures. • Hunting will be allowed during the Alabama season during the month of February. • Hunters will be required to use non-toxic shot.

7

White-tailed Deer: • Hunting will be allowed on the majority of Eufaula NWR, except for no hunting zones and closed areas. These areas will be identified by signs and/or brochures. • Hunting will be allowed on the majority of the refuge during the state seasons, except that 1) the Bradley Unit will not open before November 1 and 2) all entry into the Kennedy or Bradley unit will be prohibited during waterfowl hunts. A limited number of youth gun hunts will be offered in October on the Bradley Unit. • Hunting will be allowed using archery equipment following the regulations for the state in which the hunting occurs. Hunting by youth with firearms will be allowed on select days in the Bradley Unit. These youth hunt opportunities will be awarded by lottery prior to the hunt days.

Feral Hog: • Take will be allowed on the majority of Eufaula NWR, except for no hunting zones and closed areas. These areas will be identified by signs and/or brochures. • Take will be allowed on the majority of the refuge during the refuge seasons for white- tailed deer, except that 1) the Bradley Unit will not open before November 1 and 2) all entry into the Kennedy or Bradley unit will be prohibited during waterfowl hunts. • Take will be allowed incidental to white-tailed deer hunting using equipment approved for the particular white-tailed deer hunt. There will be no limit on the size or number of feral hogs that may be taken.

Justification: The Service's policy is to provide opportunities for wildlife-oriented recreation when compatible and consistent with refuge purposes and the NWRS mission. The NWRSIA provides a mission for the NWRS and clear standards for its management, use, planning, and growth. The NWRSIA recognizes six priority wildlife-dependent recreational uses on the NWRS: hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and environmental education and interpretation. These six priority wildlife-dependent recreational uses, known as the Big 6, are the priority general public uses of the NWRS and shall receive priority consideration in planning and management over other uses. The stipulations outlined above will help ensure that hunting continues to be compatible at Eufaula NWR. Hunting, as outlined in this compatibility determination, does not conflict with the national policy to maintain the biological diversity, integrity, and environmental health of the refuge. Based on available science and best professional judgement, the Service has determined that hunting at Eufaula NWR, in accordance with the stipulations provided here, will not materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of the NWRS mission or the purposes of the refuge. Rather, appropriate and compatible hunting is a use of Eufaula NWR through which the public can develop an appreciation for wildlife and wild lands.

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Description:

___ Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement

X Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement

___ Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

___ Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision

8

The existing hunt program and hunting compatibility determination were updated, analyzed, and approved during development of the CCP for the refuge (USFWS 2008a, 2008b). Environmental conditions and hunting have not changed substantially since that analysis. The proposed compatibility determination would replace the 2008 hunting compatibility determination. The proposed additional waterfowl hunting hours and expansion of dove hunting would represent minor changes to the existing compatibility determination. The additional waterfowl hunting hours would represent an increase of less than six percent in the time that the refuge would be open to waterfowl hunting. The expansion of the dove hunt would represent a less than one percent change in total hunting use on the refuge. These minor changes would represent negligible to minor impacts to the human environment.

Since the proposed action is a minor change to the existing hunt program, approved Comprehensive Conservation Plan (USFWS 2008a, 2008b), and existing hunting compatibility determination (USFWS 2008b) and since the proposed changes represent minor impacts, the updated compatibility determination and hunt program changes can be categorically excluded from further National Environmental Policy Act analysis and documentation consistent with 40 CFR §1508.4, 43 CFR §46.205, 43 CFR §46.210, 43 CFR §46.215, and 516 DM 8. The proposed action has been determined to be a class of action that does not, individually or cumulatively, have a significant impact on the human environment. The specific categorical exclusions for this action are listed.

• 516 DM 8.5(A)(1) Changes or amendments to an approved action when such changes have no or minor potential environmental impact. • 516 DM 8.5(B)(7) Minor changes in the amounts or types of public use or Service or State-managed lands, in accordance with existing regulations, management plans, and procedures. • 516 DM 8.5(B)(9) Minor changes in existing master plans, comprehensive conservation plans, or operations, when no or minor effects are anticipated. Examples could include minor changes in the type and location of compatible public use activities and land management practices.

Further, the actions do not trigger an extraordinary circumstance as outlined under 43 CFR §46.215. The hunting use is consistent with the 2008 draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) and Environmental Assessment (USFWS 2008a) and final CCP and Finding of No Significant Impact (USFWS 2008b).

Literature Cited:

Bartelt, G. A. 1987. Effects of disturbance and hunting on the behavior of Canada goose family groups in east central Wisconsin. Journal of Wildlife Management 51:517-522.

Cole, D. N. and R. L. Knight. 1990. Impacts of recreation on biodiversity in wilderness. Utah State University.

DeLong, A. K. 2002. Managing visitor use and disturbance of waterbirds - literature review of impacts and mitigation measures - prepared for Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge. Appendix L. In Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge Complex final environmental impact statement for the comprehensive conservation plan and boundary revision (Vol. II). Portland, Oregon: Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1.

9

Fox, A. D. and J. Madsen. 1997. Behavioral and distributional effects of hunting disturbance on waterbirds in Europe: implications for refuge design. Journal of Applied Ecology 34:1-13.

Havera, S. P., L. R. Boens, M. M. Georgi, and R. T. Shealy. 1992. Human disturbance of waterfowl on Keokuk Pool, Mississippi River. Wildlife Society Bulletin 20:290-298.

Madsen, J. 1995. Impacts of disturbance on migratory waterfowl. Ibis 137:S67-S74.

Owens, N. W. 1977. Responses of wintering brant geese to human disturbance. Wildfowl 28:5- 14.

Paulus, S. L. 1984. Activity budgets of nonbreeding gadwalls in Louisiana. Journal of Wildlife Management 48:371-380.

Raveling, D. G. 1979. The annual cycle of body composition of Canada geese with special reference to control of reproduction. Auk 96:234-252.

Thomas, V. G. 1983. Spring migration: the prelude to goose reproduction and a review of its implication. In Fourth Western Hemisphere Waterfowl and Waterbird Symposium, edited by H. Boyd. Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Wildlife Service.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008a. Eufaula National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment. June 2008. Atlanta, GA. 251 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008b. Eufaula National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan. October 2008. Atlanta, GA. 210 pp.

White-Robinson, R. 1982. Inland and salt marsh feeding of wintering brant geese in Essex. Wildfowl 33:113-118.

Wolder, M. 1993. Disturbance of wintering northern pintails at Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge, California. Master's thesis, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California.

10

Approval of Compatibility Determination

Refuge Manager/Project Leader ______Eufaula NWR Signature Date

Refuge Supervisor ______Area III, Southeast Region Signature Date

Regional Compatibility ______Coordinator, Southeast Region Signature Date

David Viker, ______Regional Refuge Chief Signature Date National Wildlife Refuge System Southeast Region

Mandatory 15-year Reevaluation Date: ______

11