Sport Hunting

Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge Draft Hunt Plan

August 2017

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge 2045 Mud Lake Road DeLeon Springs, FL 32130

Submitted by: Layne Hamilton, Project Leader, Merritt Island NWR Complex: Signature Date

Concurrence: Kathleen Burchett, Refuge Supervisor, Area II, Southeast Region: Signature Date

Approved: David Viker, Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System, Southeast Region: Signature Date

TABLE OF CONTENTS: I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

II. CONFORMANCE WITH STATUTORY AUTHORITY ...... 5

III. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES ...... 8

IV. ASSESSMENT ...... 8 A. Are wildlife populations present in numbers sufficient to sustain optimum population levels for priority refuge objectives other than hunting? ...... 8 B. Is there competition for habitat between target species and other wildlife? ...... 11 C. Are there unacceptable levels of predation by target species on other wildlife? ...... 11

V. DESCRIPTION OF HUNTING PROGRAM ...... 11 A. Areas of the refuge that support populations of the target species ...... 12 B. Areas to be opened to hunting ...... 12 C. Species to be taken, hunting periods, and hunting access ...... 13 D. Justification for the permit, if one is required ...... 15 E. Consultation and Coordination with the State ...... 15 F. Law Enforcement ...... 15 G. Funding and Staffing Requirements ...... 15

VI. MEASURES TAKEN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH OTHER MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES 16 A. Biological Conflicts ...... 16 B. Public Use Conflicts ...... 16 C. Administrative Conflicts ...... 16

VII. CONDUCT OF THE HUNTING PROGRAM ...... 16 A. Refuge-Specific Hunting Regulations ...... 16 B. Anticipated Public Reaction to the Hunting Program ...... 18 C. Hunter Application and Registration Procedures ...... 18 D. Description of Hunter Selection Process ...... 19 E. Media Selection for Announcing and Publicizing the Hunting Program ...... 19 F. General Requirements ...... 19 G. Hunter Requirements ...... 19

VIII. DRAFT COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION...... 20

REFERENCES ...... 31

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Location of Lake Woodruff NWR ...... 2 Figure 2. Wilderness Areas and Research Natural Area of Lake Woodruff NWR ...... 4 Figure 3. Hunt Areas on Lake Woodruff NWR ...... 7

APPENDICES Appendix 1. 2017 Hunt Brochure ...... 32 Appendix 2. Environmental Assessment for Lake Woodruff NWR Hunt Plan 2017 ...... 34

I. INTRODUCTION Located in central Florida north of Orlando and west of Daytona Beach, Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge (NWR, refuge) consists of 21,574 acres along the St. Johns River, Florida’s largest river (Figure 1). The majority of the refuge is within Volusia County, with only a small portion in Lake County. Managed as part of the Merritt Island NWR Complex, the refuge headquarters office is located in DeLeon Springs, Florida, which is 7 miles north of DeLand. The refuge derives its name from Lake Woodruff, a 2,200-acre waterbody of State-owned waters that the refuge encircles. The surrounding landscape includes a mosaic of public lands in north-central Florida. The St. Johns River forms much of the western boundary between the refuge and the 400,000-acre Ocala National Forest. Lake George State Forest is adjacent to the refuge to the north. The eastern boundary of the refuge is the community of DeLeon Springs. The resulting differences in elevation present on the refuge create a variety of habitats, including freshwater marshes, hardwood swamps, and a variety of upland habitats.

The refuge is part of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service’s) National Wildlife Refuge System. The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System, as defined by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act 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”.

Recognizing the high migratory bird benefits served by the lands and waters of the refuge, the Service administratively designated Lake Woodruff NWR in 1963 under the Migratory Bird Conservation Act, outlining a primary purpose of these lands and waters:

• "...for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds." 16 U.S.C. §715d (Migratory Bird Conservation Act)

Figure 1. Location of Lake Woodruff NWR

The refuge has several additional purposes, as listed:

• “…suitable for (1) incidental fish and wildlife-oriented recreation development, (2) the protection of natural resources, (3) the conservation of endangered species or threatened species…” 16 U.S.C. §460k-1 (Refuge Recreation Act) • “…the Secretary…may accept and use…real…property. Such acceptance may be accomplished under the terms and conditions of restrictive covenants imposed by donors…” 16 U.S.C. §460k-2 (Refuge Recreation Act) • “…wilderness areas…shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness…” 16 U.S.C. §1131 (Wilderness Act) • “…for the development, advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and wildlife resources…” 16 U.S.C. §742f(a)(4) (Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956) • “…for the benefit of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in performing its activities and services. Such acceptance may be subject to the terms of any restrictive or affirmative covenant or condition of servitude…” 16 U.S.C. §742f(b)(1) (Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956) • “…conservation, management, and restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans…” 16 U.S.C. §668dd(a)(2) (National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act) • “…to conserve (A) fish or wildlife which are listed as endangered species or threatened species…or (B) plants…” 16 U.S.C. §1534 (Endangered Species Act)

Lake Woodruff NWR has an estimated 1,066.41 acres of designated Wilderness Area, including Audubon and Bird islands, Dexter Island, and St. Francis Island; the adjacent 7,985-acre Alexander Springs Wilderness Area and the nearby 3,120-acre Billies Bay Wilderness Area are part of Ocala National Forest. The refuge also has 1,140 acres of designated Research Natural Area. Figure 2 identifies the Wilderness Areas and the Research Natural Area. The St. Johns River that flows along the western edge of the refuge is designated as an American Heritage River.

Figure 2. Wilderness Areas and Research Natural Area of Lake Woodruff NWR

Deer hunting occurred in this area prior to the establishment of the refuge in 1963. Hunting has been conducted on Lake Woodruff NWR since 1972 and currently occurs under the refuge’s 1994 Hunt Plan. The refuge is open to hunting of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and feral hog (Sus scrofa). The refuge was not previously open to turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) hunting prior to development of this Hunt Plan (2017) and completion of the official opening process to add youth turkey hunting to the refuge (anticipated for 2018).

The Hunt Plan would continue the current white-tailed deer and feral hog hunt program and would add turkey hunting to Lake Woodruff NWR. In 2008, the Service completed the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for Lake Woodruff NWR to guide refuge management and resource conservation over the 15-year life of the CCP. If approved, this Hunt Plan would replace the 1994 hunt plan and is a step-down management plan that was called for in the refuge’s CCP. The 2008 CCP included an analysis and a compatibility determination for turkey hunting; the compatibility determination in Section VIII of this Hunt Plan updates and replaces the 2008 compatibility determination for turkey hunting (USFWS 2008). The 2008 CCP also included a compatibility determination for deer and feral hog hunting. The development of this draft Hunt Plan is part of the process required to open the refuge to turkey hunting. The Service will take public comments on the Environmental Assessment and the draft Hunt Plan, will revise the Hunt Plan as appropriate, and will begin the process to formally open the refuge to turkey hunting (which will include an additional opportunity for public review and comment).

II. CONFORMANCE WITH STATUTORY AUTHORITY The Refuge Recreation Act of 1962 (16 U.S.C. §460K) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to administer national wildlife refuges, national fish hatcheries, and other conservation areas for recreational use. The Refuge Recreation Act requires: 1) that any recreational use permitted will not interfere with the primary purpose for which the area was established and 2) that funds are available for the development, operation, and maintenance of the permitted forms of recreation.

Fundamental to the management of lands within the National Wildlife Refuge System (System) is the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-57), an amendment to the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966. The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 provided a mission for the System and clear standards for its management, use, planning, and growth. The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 recognized that wildlife-dependent recreational uses involving hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and environmental education and interpretation, when determined to be compatible with the mission of the System and purposes of the refuge, are legitimate and appropriate public uses of the System. These six wildlife-dependent recreational uses are the priority general public uses of the System and shall receive priority consideration in planning and management. Hunting as specified in this Hunt Plan is a wildlife-dependent recreational use and the law states that as such, it “shall receive priority consideration in national wildlife refuge planning and management.” The Secretary of Interior may permit

hunting on a refuge if it is determined that the use is compatible. Hunting properly applied as a management tool inhibits the overpopulation of species within a given habitat community, and can provide for greater wildlife diversity.

Based on the hunter numbers proposed in this Hunt Plan and analyzed in the accompanying Environmental Assessment, deer and turkey hunting at Lake Woodruff NWR would not conflict with the national policy to maintain the biological diversity, integrity, and environmental health of Lake Woodruff NWR. The addition of turkey hunting would not materially interfere with or detract from the purposes of Lake Woodruff NWR. Refer to the compatibility determination in Section VIII of this Hunt Plan and the accompanying Environmental Assessment for more detailed analysis of the proposed turkey hunt.

Figure 3. Hunt Areas on Lake Woodruff NWR

III. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES The objectives of a deer, turkey, and feral hog hunting program on Lake Woodruff NWR are: 1. To provide public opportunities for high quality hunting experiences on the refuge and increase opportunities for hunting. 2. Provide hunting experiences to those who may not have opportunities otherwise by providing specialty hunts for disabled persons and increase hunter retention by providing specialty youth hunts. 3. To maintain biological diversity by preserving the natural diversity and variety of biotic communities occurring on refuge lands. 4. Maintain deer and turkey populations at levels compatible with habitat carrying capacities and aid in reducing invasive feral hog populations. 5. To provide opportunities for compatible public use of a valuable renewable resource on refuge lands, and provide wildlife-dependent public recreation as mandated by and according to Service policy.

Hunting objectives and strategies in the Lake Woodruff NWR CCP were designed to provide a quality hunting experience that meets Service guidelines and policies and refuge goals and objectives. The designs of the existing and proposed hunt plan directly support multiple goals and objectives of the 2008 CCP, including: • Wildlife and Habitat Management Goal III Exotic, Invasive, and Nuisance Species, Objective III.D.1 Feral Hogs; • Wildlife and Habitat Management Goal IV Fish, Wildlife, and Habitat Management, Objective IV.M.2 Herpetological Species; • Visitor Services Goal II Hunting, Objective II.A.1 Turkey Hunting; and • Visitor Services Goal II Hunting, Objective II.B.1 Deer Hunting.

Opening the existing deer and hog hunting area to turkey hunting would provide a quality, safe walk-in or boat-in opportunity for permitted hunters, while minimizing impacts to other wildlife and other recreational users. A quality hunting experience on the refuge is defined as having: (1) a high priority on safety; (2) clear and concise regulations that are readily available; (3) minimal conflict with refuge wildlife and habitat objectives; (4) minimal conflict with other priority public use activities; and (5) minimal conflict with neighboring lands.

IV. ASSESSMENT

A. Are wildlife populations present in numbers sufficient to sustain optimum population levels for priority refuge objectives other than hunting?

White-tailed Deer Regional Analysis: According to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), approximately 100,000 white-tailed deer are harvested annually and it is the most

popular hunted species in Florida (FWC 2008a). The number of deer harvested represents approximately 15 percent of the State’s total population, estimated at 600,000 (Labisky 2000). The goal of FWC is to manage the deer population at the local level providing hunting opportunities where acceptable (FWC 2008a).

Local Analysis: White-tailed deer harvest is essential to maintain the herd at or below habitat carrying capacity on Lake Woodruff NWR. Overpopulation leads to starvation, increased car-deer collisions, and poor overall herd health. Refuge deer and habitat surveys from the early 1970’s, when hunting was first introduced, reported over- browsing and poor deer health. Deer hunts have proven to be not only compatible with refuge objectives, but also beneficial in meeting them.

The population of white-tailed deer on Lake Woodruff NWR has remained steady since the beginning of the hunt program in 1972. Then, the deer population was estimated at 200 animals and updated population estimates over the past thirty years claim 225-250 animals. Twenty years ago, the average annual deer harvest reported was 30 deer. Changes in the hunt program including number of permits sold, area hunted, and hunting days have occurred since the beginning of the hunt program. Within the past eight years, average number of deer harvested was 20 with an even number of bucks and does taken. Hunters have reported deer in good health.

It is not expected that local deer populations would be significantly affected under the refuge’s hunting program. The proposed hunt would be expected to sustain the populations and minimize impacts to refuge resources, management activities, and other approved recreational uses so that goals and objectives would continue to be met for all other refuge management activities. Deer hunting would continue to be coordinated with FWC to ensure that the hunt is compatible with FWC’s “Strategic Plan for Deer Management in Florida 2008-2018” (FWC 2008a) as well as with refuge purposes, goals, and objectives.

Turkey Regional Analysis: Wild turkey populations in Florida are managed under the guidance of the FWC’s Wild Turkey Management Program (WTMP). The WTMP is charged with coordinating wild turkey management and research activities across the State and providing a Statewide approach to conservation and management of Florida’s wild turkey population. As a part of the FWC 10-year strategic plan (2008-2018) the following goal was developed: “Ensure healthy and sustainable wild turkey populations throughout the state while providing and promoting compatible uses of the resource” (FWC 2008b). The refuge would coordinate with the FWC to ensure that refuge turkey hunts remain within the State’s management guidelines. Turkey populations in Florida have increased substantially since 1970, as evidenced by a Statewide distribution assessment conducted in 2001 (Nicholson et al. 2005). Habitat loss, not hunting, appears to be the primary factor limiting their populations. Research has shown that in many cases hunters can remove a large portion of the gobblers from a population (up to 30 percent) without negatively impacting the health of the population (Vangilder 1992).

Local Analysis: Turkey surveys on the refuge began in 2005. Surveys were conducted using motion sensing camera stations, following the FWC protocols. It was recommended then that if populations are stable, a very limited turkey hunt (youth, disabled) may be initiated. The camera surveys give a very conservative minimum population estimate. FWC turkey biologists analyzed data from numerous years that show the number of male turkeys on the refuge were 9, 10, 12, and 11 for surveys conducted in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2012 respectively.

Turkey population surveys using motion detector cameras at five bait stations were conducted at Lake Woodruff NWR in 2012. Analysis by the FWC State Turkey Biologist of data collected supports a harvest of six adult male turkeys with subsequent harvest quotas increasing or decreasing based on harvest data and observations (Roger Shields, personal communication). The minimum population based on the area surveyed from 5 camera stations was 21 turkeys (4 adult males, 7 juvenile males and 10 females) and the liberal population estimate was 31 turkeys. These survey estimates provided enough data to support a limited spring turkey hunt on Lake Woodruff NWR.

The local turkey population has withstood hunting on surrounding private lands without a negative cumulative effect on turkey populations (Roger Shields, FWC Turkey Biologist, pers. comm.). In addition, the refuge has coordinated with the FWC and National Wild Turkey Federation to gather information on the refuge’s turkey population, hunter success rates, and impacts on local populations of turkeys associated with hunts on State lands in similar habitat types.

The turkey is a non-migratory species and therefore turkey hunting only impacts the local population. Turkey hunting would occur in accordance with applicable regulations under State seasons and bag limits, which would help ensure the provision of the hunting opportunity and the viability of the species. As proposed, turkey hunting on the refuge would sustain the population at a level sufficient to meet other refuge management and visitor services goals and objectives.

Feral Hog Regional Analysis: Feral hogs are present in all Florida counties and can be hunted during most other hunting seasons. They are considered an invasive species, control or complete eradication is desirable.

Local Analysis: Historically, hogs have been present on the refuge, but not in great numbers. Evidence of rooting has been found sporadically in recent years, but very few hogs have been taken from the refuge during hunts. Although the population of feral hogs on the refuge is perceived to be small, there is cause for concern because they are such prolific breeders. Complete eradication of feral hogs from the refuge is desirable. Hunting of feral hogs provides the refuge with another management tool to reduce this detrimental species, while at the same time, provide a compatible public use opportunity that is widely enjoyed by local hunters. Hunting of hogs on the refuge would continue to be an incidental use to permitted deer hunting and would be added as an incidental use for the proposed turkey hunt.

B. Is there competition for habitat between target species and other wildlife? If left to over-populate, deer could out-compete other wildlife species for food, cover, and space. Hunting programs keep deer populations at acceptable levels to preserve habitat conditions for other wildlife species. Turkeys are not known to out-compete other wildlife species on the refuge due to the population estimates based on surveys and the abundance of resources and habitat available to meet all life cycle needs. Feral hogs could grow to numbers that would greatly influence habitat availability and resources for numerous wildlife species including deer and turkey. Currently, feral hog presence is rarely documented on the refuge; therefore, little habitat competition occurs. However, any feral hog presence is detrimental to other species and complete eradication is optimal.

C. Are there unacceptable levels of predation by target species on other wildlife? Deer and turkey diets contain vegetation and invertebrates and are not detrimental to any other wildlife population levels. Predation levels by feral hogs on other wildlife on the refuge have not been measured. However, feral hogs are opportunistic omnivores which have the ability to impact prey species for native animals, and ground-nesting species, particularly quail and turkey, through nest destruction and predation. Any level of predation by a non-native species is unacceptable.

V. DESCRIPTION OF HUNTING PROGRAM Deer, feral hog, and turkey hunting would be allowed on 11,000 refuge acres. These 11,000 acres are already opened to deer and feral hog hunting; no additional areas would be opened to hunting at Lake Woodruff NWR. The seasons would be limited. For deer and feral hog, the hunt currently consists of two archery and two primitive gun hunts per area. The 2017 Environmental Assessment for the Draft Hunt Plan and Compatibility Determinations for turkey and deer hunting on the refuge allow flexibility in method of take to shotguns, archery, and primitive weapons as allowed by State regulations. In addition to the current deer and feral hog hunting opportunities, the refuge is proposing to open quota hunting for turkey in cooperation with the State of Florida. One spring youth turkey hunt would be conducted in cooperation with the FWC during the State spring turkey season. Youth hunts would be limited to hunters under 16 years, who would be accompanied and supervised by an adult (18 years or older) who has all applicable required permits, but who would not be permitted to take.

The refuge may serve as a host site for specialty hunts conducted in cooperation with FWC. These hunts would remain within State seasons abiding by State and Federal rules and regulations. Any future increase in season length would be balanced against the increased cost of administering the hunt and remain within State regulations. Refuge deer and feral hog hunts are currently operated as quota hunts, with permits selected through FWC’s Total Licensing System. This would continue under the proposed Hunt Plan and the turkey hunting permits would be issued through the same FWC system. Hunt areas would continue to be accessed through existing roads and fire breaks by foot and through navigable waterways by boat. Permitted hunters with proof of disability may gain additional access by applying for a Special Use Permit through the refuge manager.

Hunting in Florida is regulated by pertinent State regulations. All pertinent State laws and regulations contained in these codes also apply to the refuge hunting program. Annual consultation with the State would continue prior to finalizing refuge regulations to ensure that any changes are properly coordinated. The Service would only allow hunting to occur on the refuge within the State hunt season for that species. Refuge hunt seasons and regulations would be more restrictive than State seasons and regulations. Number of hunt days and bag limits would be determined each year based on previous hunt data and any other available science to ensure the sustainability of the target species (except feral hogs which would have unlimited take) and would be either equal to or more restrictive than the State bag limits for the target species.

Two Federal permits would be required in order to hunt at Lake Woodruff NWR: (1) hunters must purchase limited quota permits through the FWC Total Licensing System, and (2) hunters must obtain the refuge’s free, self-issuing hunt permit (annual Lake Woodruff NWR Hunt Brochure). Refuge hunt permits (brochure) would continue to be available through the refuge visitor center and downloaded from the refuge’s website. Additional applicable State permits would also be required. Specialty hunts for disabled persons, youth, or military veterans would be coordinated with FWC and participants would not be required to purchase a limited quota hunt permit through the FWC Total Licensing System, but would need a Special Use Permit (SUP) which would include specific rules and regulations for the hunt and the refuge brochure. A portion of the permit fee funds collected by FWC would be deposited in the refuge’s recreation fee program account, and would be used to defray hunt administration and management costs.

A. Areas of the refuge that support populations of the target species The pine uplands and forested wetlands support the majority of the deer, turkey, and feral hogs on the refuge. Marsh habitats are used as foraging and escape areas, except when seasonally flooded. The target species use nearly the entire refuge (21,574 acres) for some part of their life cycle. The proposed hunt area consists of approximately 11,000 acres of pine uplands, mixed oak scrub, hardwood swamp, and freshwater marsh habitats. The refuge is bounded by conservation lands to the north, west, and part of the southern boundary. White-tailed deer and turkey freely move and have access to habitat within the surrounding conservation lands.

B. Areas to be opened to hunting Figure 3 outlines the existing hunt areas, which would continue to be open to hunting under this Hunt Plan. An area must be properly posted or depicted on the refuge’s hunt brochure map and the boundary line must be clearly marked before an area is open to hunting. Approximately 11,000 acres of the refuge are currently open to deer and feral hog hunting; this Hunt Plan would add turkey hunting to the current hunt area. The acres open to hunting include the Western Unit, Eastside Unit, and Volusia Tract.

Western Unit The Western Unit is approximately 8,000 acres and includes Harry’s Creek Swamp (all the land between the St. Johns River and Norris Dead River) and Dexter, Tick, and Jones

islands. Access to the Western Unit is only by boat, and participants must furnish their own transportation. There are a number of launching ramps and fishing camps that rent boats in the general area.

Eastside Unit The Eastside Unit includes approximately 1,000 acres of refuge lands west of the CSX Railroad to the East Marsh. The Eastside Unit begins at the northern corner of the Eastside Road (at the check station) and continues south for about 2.5 miles and continues west to the marsh edge. Access to the Eastside Unit is only permitted from the Mud Lake Road entrance. Vehicle travel and parking are restricted to designated locations, which would be indicated in the Refuge Hunt Brochure each year. Access from the railroad right-of-way is prohibited.

Volusia Tract The Volusia Tract is approximately 2,000 acres and lies between Highland Park Road and Shell Road west of the CSX Railroad. Parking is available off of Highland Park Road (north end) and Shell Road (south end). Access from the railroad right-of-way is prohibited. Motorized vehicles are prohibited inside the Volusia Tract. Parking lots, gates, and hunter check stations would be clearly marked on the Refuge Hunt Brochure each year.

C. Species to be taken, hunting periods, and hunting access Species hunted would be limited to white-tailed deer, feral hog, and turkey. All hunts would fall within the State season framework. Feral hogs would be allowed to be taken during all deer and turkey hunt periods as an incidental take to the permitted hunt activity. Lake Woodruff NWR is located within FWC’s Deer Management Unit (DMU) C4 and season dates, antler restrictions, and legal take regulations are updated each year. The refuge hunt would follow FWC regulations and add Federal regulations specific to the refuge. Legal weapons would be limited to those permitted for the coinciding hunt (archery, primitive weapon, or shotgun).

Multiple access points throughout the refuge make the typical game check station impractical; therefore use of self-check stations would be used. Any game taken during the hunts must be checked at a refuge hunt self-check station (locations provided in Refuge Hunt Brochure). Hunt data cards would be provided at each check station and hunters would be required to fill out the data sheet for each day hunted regardless of success.

Deer Hunting Deer hunting would be allowed on 11,000 acres on the refuge (Figure 3). Eastside Unit and Volusia Tract would be archery only and a primitive weapon hunt would be allowed on the Western Unit (accessible by boat only).A total of 300 quota deer/hog permits would be available through a random drawing. In 2016, two 9-day archery hunts (October 1-9 and November 5-13) were held which had 100 permits for each hunt, and two 3-day primitive gun hunts (October 22-24 and October 29-31) which had 50 permits for each hunt. The dates and allowable method of take would be set each year by the

Refuge Manager within FWC regulations for DMU C4. Hunt dates are subject to change according to refuge management needs, staff availability, and hunter feedback.

Permitted hunters would be allowed to enter only the designated area for the specific hunt. For example, the Eastside Unit and Volusia Tract would both be accessible to all permitted archery hunters (no zones currently exist). The Eastside road may be opened at the discretion of the refuge manager to allow sufficient time for scouting; however, regardless of access allowed, no stands or flagging may be used until 2 days prior to the permitted hunt or it may be removed by refuge staff (see additional regulations in section VII.A. Refuge Specific Regulations). If necessary, the hunt units may be zoned to ensure a quality hunt. Non-hunters are prohibited from the hunt areas while hunts are in progress. Specialty hunts for youth, disabled persons, or military veterans may allow the use of shotguns as a method of take. Shotguns would be prohibited from being discharged within 100 feet of roads, facilities, and railroad tracks.

Turkey Hunting During the first year, six permits would be available for adults (18 or older) to supervise a youth hunter (under 16) during the first ten days of the State spring turkey season. One youth would be allowed to hunt, while supervised by a permitted adult hunter. Thereafter, the refuge would determine the feasibility of increasing hunting up to the entire spring season and/or allowing additional user groups (e.g., disabled hunters, family group hunters, or all hunters), or increasing/decreasing the number of permits based on hunt and/or survey data. Permitted take would be set each year according to available surveys, hunt data, refuge management needs, and habitat availability. Each year Lake Woodruff NWR would publish the specific hunt days, regulations, and open areas in a hunt brochure and on the Lake Woodruff NWR website (https://www.fws.gov/refuge/lake_woodruff/). No more than one turkey per permit holder would be permitted per season on Lake Woodruff NWR. Hunter densities would be limited to no more than one hunting party per 100 acres and as necessary, prime hunt areas would be zoned to ensure a quality hunt. Hunting party is defined as either one permitted hunter, one youth hunter with non-hunting permitted adult, or one permitted disabled hunter with a non-hunting assistant.

Shotguns and primitive weapons in accordance with State and Federal rules and regulations would be allowed for the proposed turkey hunt. Loads larger than number 2 shot and slugs would be prohibited. Only bearded adult male turkeys and feral hogs would be legal to take by youth hunters during the youth turkey hunt. Also for the youth hunt, permitted adults (18 or older) would supervise a youth hunter, but would not be permitted to harvest any game. Blinds would be allowed; however, clearing of vegetation would be prohibited. Non-hunting parties would be prohibited from the hunt area on hunt days. Access to hunt areas would be the same as for the deer hunt.

Specialty Hunts Specialty hunts for deer, turkey, and feral hog hosted by Lake Woodruff NWR would be managed as a full or partial guided hunt to assist wounded military veterans, disabled persons, and/or youth in coordination with FWC. Specialty hunts would not interfere with

any quota hunt and would comply with State and Federal regulations and bag limits. For example, the refuge may be used to host a specialty hunt for disabled military veterans through the Florida Forest Service’s (FFS) Operation Outdoor Freedom program. The FFS cooperates with FWC to issue hunt permits for a certain number of specialty hunts each year. No more than two specialty hunts would be conducted each year on the refuge outside of the scheduled quota hunts depending on available staff and resources. Specialty hunts would be limited to no more than six participants and would not exceed the overall take limit set by the refuge, which would be based on available surveys, previous hunt data, and habitat availability. Participants in specialty hunts may not be required to purchase a separate Lake Woodruff NWR quota hunt permit; however, the partnering agency or organization would need to apply for a refuge Special Use Permit (SUP) that would outline the specific rules and regulations for the specialty hunt. Participants would be required to have all other applicable FWC hunting licenses. FWC would supply a limited number of permits for the desired hunt species and the SUP would outline regulations specific to each hunt.

D. Justification for the permit, if one is required Permits ensure that a limited number of animals would be taken during the hunt and enables refuge staff to manage hunter densities for a high quality hunt. No more than one hunter per 100 acres would be permitted and refuge hunt areas would be zoned if needed to separate hunters. The permit system would assure compatibility and sustainability of the refuge hunt program.

E. Consultation and Coordination with the State The FWC was consulted during the planning stages for the proposed hunt program and refuge staff would continue to work closely with FWC regarding season dates, number of permits, bag limits, and to conduct surveys as needed to maintain a sustainable harvest for deer and turkey. State permits as well as refuge permits would be required and all hunts would be scheduled within the State hunting seasons.

F. Law Enforcement The enforcement of Refuge and state hunting regulations, trespass, and other public use violations associated with management of a National Wildlife Refuge is the responsibility of commissioned Federal wildlife Officers (FWO). Officers from Merritt Island NWR complex coordinate enforcement activities on Lake Woodruff NWR. The FWOs cooperate with and are assisted by county and FWC officers. The refuge officers regularly meet with state and county law enforcement agencies to develop strategies to ensure law enforcement operations are performed as safely and efficiently as possible.

Signs would be posted in the hunt areas and maps would be provided within the hunt brochure (Appendix 1). Hunt brochures will be made available at the refuge visitor center, entrance kiosk, and on the refuge website for digital download.

G. Funding and Staffing Requirements Annual hunt administration costs including salary, equipment, publication of annual regulations/brochure, boundary signs, sign maintenance, fuel, and other related activities

would total approximately $9,000. Refuge employees and staff from Merritt Island NWR complex support the hunt program as needed.

VI. MEASURES TAKEN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH OTHER MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES

A. Biological Conflicts The Refuge staff monitors species population trends to ensure that target species can be hunted at the Refuge without adversely affecting the species populations. These monitoring activities include direct observation of populations, consultation with State and Service biologists, and review of current species survey information and research. There has been no indication of adverse biological impacts associated with the refuge’s white-tailed deer hunting program. The Refuge has taken every precaution necessary to minimize biological conflict. The hunts proposed should have no negative impact on endangered or threatened species on the Refuge.

B. Public Use Conflicts The Refuge annually hosts over 100,000 visitors. These visitors have a variety of interests such as photography, bird watching, fishing, hunting, and wildlife observation. The majority of the refuge visitors are non-consumptive users. Hunting has been conducted on Lake Woodruff NWR since 1972. Most non–hunting visitors access the refuge via Mud Lake Road. Hunt areas are open to only permitted hunters during hunt days; however, the three hiking trails and the impoundments (which are not open to hunting) would continue to be open to the public during hunt days.

C. Administrative Conflicts Management of the hunt program causes minimal conflict with administrative responsibilities of the Refuge staff. The permit system is operated by FWC and requires limited coordination with refuge staff. The staff annually updates brochures and notifies the public of hunt dates and regulations. Refuge officers assigned to the Merritt Island NWR complex coordinate their schedules to provide adequate law enforcement coverage during hunting season. If schedule conflicts occur, officers from refuges outside the complex are detailed to Lake Woodruff NWR to provide law enforcement coverage. Overtime and travel costs are covered by hunt permit fees.

VII. CONDUCT OF THE HUNTING PROGRAM

A. Refuge-Specific Hunting Regulations Listed below are the proposed Refuge-specific regulations for Title 50 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 32, for hunting on Lake Woodruff NWR. Refuge regulations are subject to change through the annual notification process that includes a federal register notice. In addition to Federal regulations, State laws and regulations are adopted and in effect unless further restricted by Federal law or regulations. Licenses, permits, all hunting and fishing equipment and effects, and vehicles or other conveyances are subject to inspection by Federal and State officers.

Big Game Hunting If approved, we would allow hunting of white-tailed deer, feral hog, and turkey on designated areas of the refuge in accordance with State regulations and subject to the following conditions:

1. We require a Lake Woodruff Quota Hunt Permit, which can be purchased through Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and a signed Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge hunt permit (signed annual hunt brochure), which are free and nontransferable. Hunters must also have all applicable Florida hunting licenses and permits. Anyone on refuge land in possession of hunting equipment must sign, possess, and carry all applicable State and Federal permits at all times. State sponsored specialty hunts hosted by the Refuge would not require a Lake Woodruff Quota Permit, all other permit requirements apply.

2. All deer hunters must be on stands or in blinds while hunting.

3. We prohibit clearing vegetation.

4. We prohibit stalking or movement through the hunt area while hunting.

5. We prohibit scouting in the hunt area, whether you hold a permit for the current hunt or a future hunt, during the quota hunt.

6. We prohibit possession of hunting weapons while scouting.

7. Persons possessing, transporting, or carrying firearms on National Wildlife Refuges must comply with all provisions of State and local law. Persons may only use (discharge) firearms in accordance with refuge regulations (see § 27.42 of 50 CFR and refuge-specific regulations in part 32).

8. We close the hunt areas of the refuge to all public use except permitted hunters. The refuge is closed between legal sunset and legal sunrise, except permitted hunters may access the refuge 2 hours prior to legal sunrise each hunting day. All hunters must be off the refuge 2 hours after legal sunset.

9. You may set up stands or blinds 2 days prior to the hunt for which you are permitted, and you must remove them on or before the last day of your permitted hunt. You must clearly mark stands with the hunter’s name and address or the FWC customer number found on your hunting license. No more than one stand or blind per person may be on the refuge at any time, unless a permitted hunter is accompanied by a youth hunter. Stands and/or blinds for youth hunters must be placed within sight and normal voice contact of the permitted hunter’s stand and marked with the adult permitted hunter’s name and address or the FWC customer number and the word “YOUTH.”

10. If you use flagging or other trail marking material, you must print your name or FWC customer number on each piece or marker. You may set up flagging and trail markers 2 days prior to the permitted hunt, and you must remove them on or before the last day of the permitted hunt.

11. You must check out any game taken during the hunts at a self-check station.

12. The Western Unit is only accessible by boat.

13. We prohibit hunting with dogs.

14. We prohibit accessing the refuge through the railroad right-of-way.

15. Hunters under age 16 do not need a quota permit, but must be accompanied by a permitted adult age 18 or older. Each adult may supervise one youth hunter and must remain within sight and normal voice contact; the pair must share a single bag limit unless hunting during a designated Family or Youth Hunt.

16. Archery hunters must wear a vest or jacket containing back and front panels of at least 500 square inches (3,226 square centimeters) of solid-fluorescent-orange color when moving to and from their vehicle, to their deer stand or their hunting spot, and while tracking or dragging out their deer. We do not require archery hunters to wear solid-colored-fluorescent hunter orange when positioned in their stands to hunt. All State safety regulations apply.

17. We prohibit driving nails, spikes, or other metal objects into any tree. We prohibit hunting from any tree in which a metal object has been driven.

18. We prohibit shotgun loads larger than number two shot and slugs.

B. Anticipated Public Reaction to the Hunting Program Some comments that were submitted during the refuge’s CCP planning process were in opposition to hunting in general and some comments supported additional hunting opportunities on the refuge. The proposed action would create additional opportunities for traditional hunting on public lands in Florida and aid in the removal of feral hogs. There is a public demand for more hunting, more access, and longer seasons. Public reaction from surrounding communities to refuge hunts has been favorable and would be anticipated to be the same in the future. The Service does not anticipate high levels of public interest in the Hunt Plan and the Environmental Assessment, nor does it anticipate high levels of controversy associated with the Hunt Plan.

C. Hunter Application and Registration Procedures Lake Woodruff NWR partners with FWC to issue limited entry quota hunt permits. Prospective refuge hunters would apply at a Tax Collectors office or sub-agent, or online at the FWC official website. An application fee is assessed at the time of application, and hunters may check their permit status after the given selection date. Hunters would also

be required to sign and carry the free Refuge hunt permit (annual hunt brochure) as well as applicable State licenses and permits.

D. Description of Hunter Selection Process The hunters are selected by a computer drawing conducted by FWC. The selected hunter must pay the permit fee to receive the Lake Woodruff NWR quota hunt permit. This permit is non-transferrable and identifies the specific hunt and dates. Permits not purchased by the deadline will be forfeited and offered on a first-come, first-serve basis until sold out. The proposed youth turkey hunt permits would be issued through the same FWC Total Licensing System.

E. Media Selection for Announcing and Publicizing the Hunting Program FWC announces the dates of the application process, further announcement from the Refuge would not be necessary. If announcements are needed, the Refuge would send a press release to local Volusia County newspapers and to FWC to be included on their website and sent out to their mailing list of registered Florida hunters. Announcements would also be posted on the Lake Woodruff NWR website and Facebook page.

F. General Requirements The current refuge-specific hunting regulations are printed annually prior to the hunting season and are available for pick up at the Lake Woodruff NWR Visitor Center located at 2045 Mud Lake Road, DeLeon Springs, FL 32130. Questions can be directed to the Refuge Manager at 386-985-4673 or sent by e-mail to [email protected]. The hunt regulations may also be printed from the refuge website at https://www.fws.gov/refuge/lake_woodruff/.

State rules and regulations apply. For information on hunting in Florida or to apply for permits, visit http://myfwc.com/license/limited-entry-hunts/.

G. Hunter Requirements 1. Age: Applicants for the youth hunt must be under 16 years old at the time of the hunt. All hunters 16 years of age or older must purchase a Lake Woodruff NWR quota hunt permit. Hunters under the age of 16 do not need a permit, but must be accompanied by a permitted adult (18 years of age or older). Each adult may supervise one youth hunter and must remain within sight and normal voice contact. During the turkey youth hunt, adults may supervise a youth, but may not harvest a turkey. 2. Allowable equipment: Weapons permitted during archery season are bows in accordance with State regulations. Weapons permitted during primitive gun season are muzzleloading guns in accordance with State regulations. Weapons permitted during spring turkey season or specialty deer hunts are primitive weapons (muzzleloaders, State legal archery equipment) or shotguns (number 2 shot or smaller would be allowed for turkey hunting; slugs are prohibited). 3. Use of open fires: Open fires are not allowed.

4. License and permits: Permits for all hunts are issued through the FWC’s office of license and permitting. In addition to the FWC issued permit, all hunters must have all the required State of Florida hunting licenses and hunter safety certificates. Hunters must also have a signed current Lake Woodruff NWR Hunt Permit which can be found on the Lake Woodruff NWR Hunting Regulations Brochure. 5. Reporting Harvest: Hunters must fill out the Hunter Data Sheet at a self-check station at the end of each hunt regardless of successful take. Stations are located at the north end of the Eastside Unit on the Eastside Road, at the south end of the Volusia Tract off Shell Road, at the north end of the Volusia Tract off Highland Park Road, at the Ed Stone County Park off SR 44, and at Highland Park Fish Camp. 6. Stands and blinds: All hunters must be on stands or in blinds during the deer hunt. Blinds can be used for turkey hunting, but not required. No stalking or movement through the hunt area is permitted while hunting. Scouting in the hunt area, whether or not you hold a permit for the current hunt, is not permitted during quota hunts. Possession of hunting weapons while scouting is prohibited. Stands or blinds may be set-up two days prior to the hunt you are permitted for and must be removed the last day of your permitted hunt. Stands must be clearly marked with your permit number. No more than one stand or blind per permit may be on the refuge at any time, unless a permitted hunter is accompanied by a youth hunter. Stands for youth hunters must be placed within sight and normal voice contact of permitted hunter’s stand and marked with the permit number and the word “YOUTH”. It is unlawful to drive nails, spikes, or other metal objects into any tree, or to hunt from any tree in which a metal object has been driven. 7. Flagging: Hunters using flagging or other trail marking material must print their permit number on each piece or marker. Flagging and trail markers may be set-up two days prior to the hunt you are permitted for and must be removed the last day of your permitted hunt. Hunters who do not print their permit number on each marker, or do not remove their flagging or marking material by the last day of their permitted hunt will be cited for littering. Flagging, markers, or stands placed more than two days prior to the hunt will be removed and could result in loss of refuge hunt privileges. 8. Hours permitted: No overnight use is permitted on the refuge. No one may enter the hunt area prior to two hours before sunrise, and all hunters must clear the area by two hours after sunset.

VIII. DRAFT COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION Compatibility Determinations for deer and turkey hunting were completed during the 2008 CCP (USFWS 2008). Both uses were found compatible and the proposed hunt plan follows the stipulations laid out in both 2008 Compatibility Determinations; however, the proposed turkey hunt area was expanded and a new Compatibility Determination for turkey hunting was written and included here in this section of the 2017 Hunt Plan.

Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge Draft Compatibility Determination Proposed Use: Turkey Hunting Refuge Name: Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge Counties, State: Lake and Volusia counties, Florida Date Established: November 18, 1963

Establishing and Acquisition Authorities: Migratory Bird Conservation Act [16 United States Code (USC) §715d], Refuge Recreation Act (16 USC §§460k-1 and 460k- 2), Fish and Wildlife Act [16 USC §§742f(a)(4) and 742f(b)(1)], National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act [16 USC §668dd(a)(2)], and Endangered Species Act (16 USC §1534)

Refuge Purposes: Recognizing the high migratory bird benefits served by the lands and waters of the refuge, the Service administratively designated Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in 1963 under the Migratory Bird Conservation Act, outlining a primary purpose of these lands and waters:

• "...for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds." 16 U.S.C. § 715d (Migratory Bird Conservation Act)

In addition, the refuge has several additional purposes, as listed:

• “…the Secretary…may accept and use…real…property. Such acceptance may be accomplished under the terms and conditions of restrictive covenants imposed by donors…” 16 U.S.C. § 460k-2 (Refuge Recreation Act)

• “…wilderness areas…shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness…” 16 U.S.C. § 1131 (Wilderness Act)

• “…for the development, advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and wildlife resources…” 16 U.S.C. § 742f(a)(4) (Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956)

• “…for the benefit of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in performing its activities and services. Such acceptance may be subject to the terms of any restrictive or affirmative covenant or condition of servitude…” 16 U.S.C. § 742f(b)(1) (Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956)

• “…conservation, management, and restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans…” 16 U.S.C. § 668dd(a)(2) (National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act)

• “…to conserve (A) fish or wildlife which are listed as endangered species or threatened species…or (B) plants…” 16 U.S.C. § 1534 (Endangered Species Act)

National Wildlife Refuge System Mission: The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System, as defined by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act 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.

Other Applicable Laws, Regulations, and Policies: • Antiquities Act of 1906 (34 Stat. 225) • Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (15 USC §§703-711; 40 Stat. 755) • Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929 (16 USC §715r; 45 Stat. 1222) • Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act of 1934 (16 USC §§718-178h; 48 Stat. 451) • Criminal Code Provisions of 1940 (18 USC §41) • Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC §§668-668d; 54 Stat. 250) • Refuge Trespass Act of June 25, 1948 (18 USC §41; 62 Stat. 686) • Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 USC §§742a-742j; 70 Stat.1119) • Refuge Recreation Act of 1962 (16 USC §§460k-460k-4; 76 Stat. 653) • Wilderness Act (16 USC §1131; 78 Stat. 890) • Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 • National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 USC §470, et seq.; 80 Stat. 915) • National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 USC §§668dd, 668ee; 80 Stat. 927) • National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, NEPA (42 USC §4321, et seq; 83 Stat. 852) • Use of Off-Road Vehicles on Public Lands (Executive Order 11644, as amended by Executive Order 10989) • Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC §1531 et seq; 87 Stat. 884) • Refuge Revenue Sharing Act of 1935, as amended in 1978 (16 USC §715s; 92 Stat. 1319) • National Wildlife Refuge Regulations for the Most Recent Fiscal Year (50 CFR Subchapter C; 43 CFR §§3101.3-3) • Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986 (S.B. 740)

• North American Wetlands Conservation Act of 1990 • Food Security Act (Farm Bill) of 1990 as amended (HR 2100) • The Property Clause of the U.S. Constitution Article IV 3, Clause 2 • The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 8 • The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-57, USC §668dd) • Executive Order 12996, Management and General Public Use of the National Wildlife Refuge System. March 25, 1996 • Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 25-33 • Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 • Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990

Description of Use: Hunting is a priority public use of the National Wildlife Refuge System as identified in the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act. The refuge’s proposed Hunt Plan provides detailed information regarding turkey hunting on Lake Woodruff NWR (USFWS 2017a). Current refuge-specific regulations for hunting at Lake Woodruff NWR are found at 50 CFR §32.28; these regulations would be updated following approval of the Hunt Plan. Turkey hunting would be allowed on approximately 11,000 acres of the refuge on the following units: • Western Unit (~8,000 acres) – includes Harry’s Creek Swamp (all property between the St. John’s River and Norris Dead River), Dexter Island, Tick Island, and Jones Island and is accessible only by boat. • Eastside Unit (~1,000 acres) – includes approximately 1,000 acres of refuge lands west of the CSX Railroad to the East Marsh. The Eastside Unit begins at the northern corner of the Eastside Road (at the check station) and continues south for about 2.5 miles and continues west to the marsh edge. Access to the Eastside Unit is only permitted from the Mud Lake Road entrance. Vehicle travel and parking are restricted to designated locations, which would be indicated in the Refuge Hunt Brochure each year. Access from the railroad right-of-way is prohibited. • Volusia Tract (~2,000 acres) – is located between Highland Park Road and Shell Road west of the CSX Railroad (motorized travel is prohibited and access from the railroad right-of-way is prohibited).

The 11,000 acres proposed for hunting includes approximately 8,600 acres of freshwater marsh and 2,400 acres of uplands (pine savannah, mixed hardwoods, pine flatwoods, hammocks, and scrub).

Wildlife diversity is typical of that associated with central Florida wetlands. Lake Woodruff NWR’s bird list names 234 species, which can be seasonally found in the area. The refuge actively manages habitats for migratory birds and State or Federal listed species or species of concern. Several federally listed species use the refuge, including: West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus), wood stork (Mycteria americana), eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi), and whooping crane (Grus americana). Whooping cranes have not been documented on the refuge in nearly 10 years and eastern indigo snake has not been recorded in over 20 years. Occasionally, Everglade snail kite (Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeus), and Florida scrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) have been sighted on the refuge, but do not regularly reside, roost, or nest. All of these species have the potential to be found in or adjacent to the hunt areas. Concurrence from Ecological Services through an intra-service Section 7 review would be required before administering the hunt.

No more than one turkey per permit holder would be permitted per season on Lake Woodruff NWR. Hunter densities would be limited to no more than one hunting party per 100 acres and as necessary, prime hunt areas would be zoned to ensure a quality hunt. Hunting party is defined as either one permitted hunter, one youth hunter with non- hunting permitted adult, or one permitted disabled hunter with a non-hunting assistant.

Access to hunt areas would be restricted to foot, using existing open roads and fire breaks, and watercraft. Disabled hunters showing proof of disability would apply for a Special Use Permit through the refuge manager for additional or special access. Primitive weapons (i.e., muzzleloaders and State legal archery equipment) and shotguns would be allowed. Loads larger than number 2 shot and slugs would be prohibited. Hunting blinds may be used; however, clearing of vegetation is prohibited. Hunting activities would be permitted with a valid refuge hunt permit and appropriate State license under all applicable permits, requirements, laws, policies, and seasons. See State regulations for more information and for complete hunter safety requirements.

Because turkey hunting would be allowed on the refuge under the State season and bag limits, the refuge would coordinate annually with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). Any refuge-specific regulation changes would be noticed in the Federal Register and published in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

Availability of Resources: Annual hunt administration costs including salary, equipment, boundary signs, sign maintenance, and fuel are approximately $9,000 to support deer and feral hog hunting activities. Projected additional cost for administering the proposed turkey hunt would be approximately $2,500. Less than one full-time- employee equivalent would be expended on existing and proposed hunt-related activities. Administration of the hunt would entail annually updating and printing of the refuge hunting brochure, posting areas closed to all access except for hunt permit holders, distributing hunt data sheets, preparing check stations, placing “no parking” signs, surveys, data analysis, and grading roads and parking lots. Funds are currently available to meet the conditions set forth in the Refuge Recreation Act of 1962. Currently, hunters purchase permits for the quota hunting on the refuge through FWC’s online permitting and licensing system. The funds collected would continue to be used to help defray costs associated with hunt administration and management.

It is anticipated that sufficient funds would be available to continue the existing and proposed hunt program, and proposed hunting activities would not be anticipated to interfere with the primary purposes for which the refuge was established. Between annual appropriations and collection of hunt fees, funds would be anticipated to be adequate to meet the goals and objectives of the hunting program.

Anticipated Impacts of the Use: Turkey hunting on the Volusia Tract was analyzed in the 2008 Environmental Assessment and Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for Lake Woodruff NWR (USFWS 2008). The 2017 Environmental Assessment for the Lake Woodruff NWR Hunt Plan (Appendix 2) built upon the 2008 analysis of turkey hunting and provides more detailed information regarding impacts of the proposed turkey hunt (USFWS 2017b). By design, turkey hunting activities on Lake Woodruff NWR would be anticipated to have minimal impacts to habitat and wildlife populations. The local turkey population has withstood hunting on surrounding public and private lands for several years without a negative cumulative effect on turkey populations. In addition to this data, the refuge has coordinated with the FWC and National Wild Turkey Federation to gather information on the refuge’s turkey population, hunter success rates, and impacts on local populations of turkeys associated with hunts on State lands in similar habitat types.

Summary of short-term impacts: Lake Woodruff NWR has been open to hunting since 1972, with no documented disturbance to refuge habitats or unacceptable impacts to target or non-target wildlife populations. The impacts associated with turkey hunting are similar to those considered for other public use activities such as deer and feral hog hunting, wildlife viewing, and photography. Turkey hunting impacts would include direct mortality to the game species, short-term changes in the distribution and abundance of game species, and unrestricted travel through the hunt area.

The proposed hunt would have minimal short term impacts to wildlife including listed species, species of special concern, and migratory birds due to increased disturbance in the hunt areas during hunt days and scouting days. These impacts would be anticipated to be minor due the short period of permitted hunt days and low hunter densities. The risk of

taking non-target species is minimal due to hunter education requirements, law enforcement presence, permit requirements, and low hunter density. Federal or State listed species or other species of special concern are low in numbers and it is minimal risk of a hunter coming in contact with these species. Take of any listed species would be detrimental to the population; however, refuge laws and regulations prohibit take of any species except by permit. Federal Wildlife Officers would be present to enforce regulations and help minimize impacts to non-target species.

Minor short term impacts to air and water quality would be expected due to increased motor vehicle and boat traffic. The impact would be expected to be very short term and minor and would not have long-term impact to air or water quality on the refuge.

By keeping hunter densities low and limiting the allowable take to sustain the turkey population, the proposed hunt would provide a high quality hunt experience.

Summary of long-term impacts: To date, there has been no indication of adverse biological impacts associated with the refuge’s existing hunting program. However, if any hunted species experiences a negative effect to a point where the population can no longer be sustained, the refuge has the latitude to adjust hunting seasons and bag limits, or to close the refuge to hunting entirely. Should hunting pressure increase on the refuge to negatively affect populations; restrictions on quota, permits, number of allowable hunt days, or restrictions on certain hunt areas can be utilized to limit impacts. This latitude, coupled with monitoring of wildlife populations and habitat conditions by the Service and the FWC would help ensure that long-term negative impacts to either wildlife populations and/or habitats on the refuge would be unlikely.

There would be minor to no impact to geology, topography, soils, water quality and quantity, air quality, and hydrology due to the limited minor increase in motor vehicle and boating traffic. No new roads, trails, parking, or access points are proposed to accommodate hunting on the refuge. The use of existing roads and trails would accommodate turkey hunting. Any negative impacts to the physical environment would be mitigated by traffic regulations, use of existing roads and access points, and the limited number of permits issued.

Cumulative impacts: The turkey hunting area and limited hunt duration would not conflict with most other uses of the refuge and would not be anticipated to result in negative cumulative impacts to refuge resources. Hunt areas would be closed to other uses during the hunting season to create a safe buffer distance around concentrated areas of public use and facilities. With consideration of the home range and habitat availability of turkeys on the refuge, almost all of the game harvested would be from the refuge population. The hunt would be managed to ensure the long-term stability of this population. No negative cumulative effects from minor soil compaction, vegetation and wildlife disturbance, cultural resources, or the refuge environment would be anticipated from the use. Minor positive impacts to the surrounding community would be expected from gaining an additional recreational opportunity on the refuge. These impacts could have long term effects on hunter retention and recruitment providing a positive hunting

experience to youth and others that may not have other opportunities to hunt.

Determination:

Use is Not Compatible

X Use is Compatible with Following Stipulations

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility: During the refuge’s CCP process in 2008, a Compatibility Determination was completed for a turkey hunt. The proposed turkey hunt was found compatible with the listed stipulations:

• The methods of hunting to be considered include primitive weapons, archery, and shotguns. • Hunting would be limited to designated areas. • Quota hunt permits would be issued. • Hunting densities no greater than one hunting party per 100 acres would be allowed. • The number of turkey permitted to be taken would be based on annual population estimates. • Check stations would be used to collect hunt data and to monitor the quality of the hunt. • Vehicle access and parking would be limited and confined to existing fire lanes and unimproved roads. • Climbing spikes and permanent stands would not be permitted. • Off-road vehicles or ATVs would not be permitted. • No flagging or trail marking would be permitted.

This Compatibility Determination includes the above listed stipulations and the following stipulations are added:

• Access to hunt areas would be restricted to using existing open roads, fire breaks, and watercraft. • Loads larger than number 2 shot and slugs would be prohibited. • Hunting activities would be permitted with a valid refuge hunt permit and appropriate State license under all applicable permits, requirements, laws, policies, and seasons. • Specialty hunts would occur in compliance with all stipulations listed here, Federal and State regulations, and be conducted under the supervision of a refuge employee. • If unacceptable impacts are detected, Lake Woodruff NWR would modify or eliminate the activity.

• As needed, additional restrictions could be developed and imposed to ensure the compatibility of turkey hunting activities on Lake Woodruff NWR.

Justification: Hunting is a priority public use of the National Wildlife Refuge System, as identified in the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act. The Service’s policy is to provide expanded opportunities for appropriate and compatible wildlife- dependent public uses, consistent with sound fish and wildlife management and providing priority to the six uses identified in the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act: hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and environmental education and interpretation. Providing high quality and compatible opportunities for these priority public use activities contributes toward fulfilling the provisions of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act and supports the purposes, vision, and goals of Lake Woodruff NWR.

The turkey hunting opportunity on the refuge would provide an excellent forum for promoting increased awareness, understanding, appreciation, and support of Lake Woodruff NWR resources and programs and of the Service, as well as increased ethical outdoor behavior. The resulting enhanced understanding would help foster increased public stewardship of natural resources. The refuge hunt program would serve wildlife management and visitor services goals and objectives and is a public relations tool, providing quality recreational opportunities for the public, while also regulating specific animal populations at desired levels. The refuge’s proposed Hunt Plan was developed to ensure that associated public recreation and wildlife management objectives would be met in a responsible and consistent manner. The stipulations outlined above should minimize potential impacts relative to wildlife/human interactions, human impacts to habitat, and human/human interactions. Turkey hunting at Lake Woodruff NWR would not be anticipated to cause wildlife populations to materially decline, to impair physiological condition and production of wildlife species, to dramatically alter wildlife behavior and normal activity patterns, or to negatively impact overall welfare of wildlife or habitat. At the projected levels of visitation, turkey hunting at Lake Woodruff NWR would not conflict with the national policy to maintain the biological diversity, integrity, and environmental health of Lake Woodruff NWR nor would it materially interfere with or detract from the purposes of Lake Woodruff NWR. This Compatibility Determination is based on sound professional judgement.

NEPA Compliance for Refuge Use Description: Categorical Exclusion without Environmental Action Statement Categorical Exclusion and Environmental Action Statement X Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision

Public Review and Comment: Development of the Lake Woodruff NWR CCP included a public scoping period and the Environmental Assessment and Draft CCP were made available for public comment for 30 days during September 2006. Over 30 people attended a public scoping meeting for the CCP in 2006 and over 30 written comments were submitted during public scoping. A total of 30 individuals, organizations, businesses,

and governmental agencies submitted comments on the final CCP, including two organizations, 23 individuals, the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians, and four State and local governmental agencies (including the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Department of State, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and Lake County). The majority of comments received in 2008 regarding the potential addition of a refuge turkey hunt to Lake Woodruff NWR were favorable. [See the final CCP for Lake Woodruff for more detailed information regarding public involvement and public comments submitted at that time (FWS 2008).]

The current process to update the refuge Hunt Plan builds on the planning and public involvement process of the 2008 CCP. The Environmental Assessment and 2017 draft Hunt Plan for Lake Woodruff NWR will be made available for a public comment period of 30 days. The documents will be available on the Lake Woodruff NWR website, links to the documents will be provided on the refuge’s Facebook page and provided in news releases sent to local media. A public meeting will be held during the comment period to present the plan to the public, answer questions, and record comments. Substantive comments will be addressed in the final Hunt Plan.

References for Compatibility Determination: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017a. Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge Draft Hunt Plan. Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge. DeLeon Springs, FL. 30 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017b. Environmental Assessment for the Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge Hunt Plan. Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge. DeLeon Springs, FL. 37 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan. Southeast Region. Atlanta, GA. 239 pp. http://www.fws.gov/southeast/planning/CCP/LakeWoodruffFinalPg.html

Mandatory 15-year Re-evaluation Date:

Approval of Compatibility Determination

Candice Stevenson, Refuge Manager, Lake Woodruff NWR: Signature Date

Layne Hamilton, Project Leader, Merritt Island NWR Complex: Signature Date

Chris Swanson, Regional Compatibility Coordinator, Southeast Region: Signature Date

Kathleen Burchett, Refuge Supervisor, Area II, Southeast Region: Signature Date

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

REFERENCES Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2008a. Strategic Plan for Deer Management in Florida 2008-2018. Prepared by the Deer Management Standing Team. Tallahassee, Florida. http://myfwc.com/media/464652/DeerManagementPlan2008_2018.pdf

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2008b. Strategic Plan for Wild Turkey Management. Prepared by the Wild Turkey Management Standing Team. Tallahassee, Florida. http://myfwc.com/media/460317/Turkey_StrategicPlan.pdf

Labisky, R. 2000. UF Research: Does Make Up For Losses Of Hunted Bucks. University of Florida News. http://news.ufl.edu/2000/11/16/deer/

Nicholson, D. S., L. S. Perrin, C. Morea, and R. Shields. 2005. The distribution and relative abundance of wild turkeys in Florida. Proceedings of the Ninth Wild Turkey Symposium 9:101-106.

Vangilder, L.D. 1992. Population dynamics. pages 144-164 in J.G. Dickinson, Ed. The wild turkey: biology and management. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, PA.

Appendix 1 2017 Hunt Brochure

Appendix 2 Environmental Assessment for the Lake Woodruff NWR Hunt Plan 2017

Environmental Assessment

for the

Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge

Hunt Plan

Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge DeLeon Springs, FL Volusia and Lake Counties, FL

For Further Information, Contact:

Refuge Manager U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge 2045 Mud Lake Road DeLeon Springs, FL 32130

Prepared by: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service August 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS: 1.0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION ...... 1 1.1 Introduction: ...... 1

1.2 Location: ...... 1

1.3 Background: ...... 3

1.4 Purpose and Need for Action: ...... 3

1.5 Decision to be Made: ...... 5

1.6 Regulatory Compliance: ...... 5

1.7 Public Involvement and Issues Identified: ...... 7

2.0 ALTERNATIVES...... 8 2.1 Alternative A – No Action Alternative (Continue Current Hunt Program): ...... 9 2.2 Alternative B – Proposed Action (Expand the existing Hunt Program to add a Spring Turkey Hunt with incidental take of feral hogs): ...... 9

2.3 Alternative Considered, But Dismissed From Detailed Analysis: ...... 14

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT: ...... 14 3.1 Physical Environment: ...... 15

3.2 Biological Environment: ...... 15

3.2.1 Vegetative Communities: ...... 15

3.2.2 Wildlife: ...... 15

3.2.3 Threatened and Endangered Species and Other Special Status Species: ...... 17

3.3 Human Environment: ...... 18

3.3.1 Cultural Resources: ...... 18

3.3.2 Socioeconomic Resources: ...... 18

3.3.3 Public Use/Recreation: ...... 19

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ...... 19 4.1 Physical Environment: ...... 20

4.1.1 Impacts on Geology:...... 20

4.1.2 Impacts on Topography and Soils: ...... 20

4.1.3 Impacts on Hydrology: ...... 20

4.1.4 Impacts on Water Quality and Quantity: ...... 21

4.1.5 Impacts on Air Quality: ...... 21

4.2 Biological Environment: ...... 21

4.2.1 Impacts on Habitat:...... 21

4.2.2 Impacts on Wildlife: ...... 22

4.2.3 Impacts on Threatened and Endangered Species and Other Special Status Species: ....22

4.3 Human Environment: ...... 23

4.3.1 Impacts on Cultural Resources: ...... 23

4.3.2 Impacts on Socioeconomic Resources: ...... 23

4.3.3 Impacts to Visitor Services/Recreation ...... 23

4.4 Assessment of Cumulative Impacts: ...... 23

4.4.1 Anticipated Direct and Indirect Impacts of the Proposed Action on Wildlife Species: 24

4.4.2 Anticipated Direct and Indirect Impacts of Proposed Action on Other Wildlife Dependent Recreation, Refuge Facilities, and Cultural Resources: ...... 28

4.4.3 Anticipated Impacts of Proposed Hunt on Refuge Environment and Community: ...... 29

4.4.4 Other Past, Present, Proposed and Reasonably Foreseeable Hunts (and Other Activities) and Anticipated Impacts: ...... 30

4.4.5 Anticipated Impacts if Individual Hunts are Allowed to Accumulate: ...... 32

4.5 Environmental Justice: ...... 32

4.6 Indian Trust Assets: ...... 33

4.7 Unavoidable Adverse Effects: ...... 33

4.8 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources: ...... 33

4.9 Table 1 - Summary of Environmental Effects by Alternative: ...... 33

5.0 CONSULTATION, COORDINATION, AND DOCUMENT PREPARATION ...... 35 5.1 Agencies and individuals consulted in the preparation of this document include: ...... 35

5.2 References: ...... 35

LIST OF FIGURES: Figure 1. Location of Lake Woodruff NWR ...... 2 Figure 2. Existing and proposed hunt areas of Lake Woodruff NWR ...... 4 Figure 3. Public Use Zones identified on Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge ...... 13

LIST OF TABLES: Table 1. Summary of Environmental Effects by Alternative ...... 33

1.0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION

1.1 Introduction: In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and implementing regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] §§1500-1508), this Environmental Assessment (EA) evaluates the effects associated with the proposed Hunt Plan for Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge (NWR, refuge). Part of the Merritt Island NWR Complex, Lake Woodruff NWR is located in Central Florida in Volusia and Lake counties in DeLeon Springs (Figure 1). See Section 1.6 for a more complete list of additional applicable regulations and policies. NEPA requires examination of the effects of a proposed action on the natural and human environment.

In 2008, the Service completed the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for Lake Woodruff NWR to guide refuge management and resource conservation over the 15-year life of the CCP (USFWS 2008). The 2008 CCP included an objective for the refuge to evaluate the feasibility of turkey hunting on the refuge (Visitor Services Goal III Hunting, Objective II.A.1 Turkey Hunting). The proposed Hunt Plan would update and replace the 1994 Hunt Plan and would be a step-down management plan that was called for in the refuge’s CCP. The 2008 CCP included an analysis and a Compatibility Determination for turkey hunting; if the Hunt Plan is approved, the Compatibility Determination in Section VIII of the proposed Hunt Plan would update and replace the 2008 Compatibility Determination for turkey hunting. The 2008 CCP also included an analysis and Compatibility Determination for the continuation of white-tailed deer and feral hog hunting as outlined in the proposed hunt program. The development of the proposed Hunt Plan is required to open the refuge to turkey hunting. The Service will take public comments on the Environmental Assessment and the draft Hunt Plan, will revise the Hunt Plan as appropriate, and will begin the process to formally open the refuge to turkey hunting and additional specialty hunts. If approved, the hunt opportunities would be published in the Federal Register, providing another opportunity for public review and comment.

1.2 Location: Located in central Florida north of Orlando and west of Daytona Beach, Lake Woodruff NWR consists of ~21,574 acres in central Florida along the St. Johns River, Florida’s largest river (Figure 1). The majority of the refuge is within Volusia County, with a small portion in Lake County. Managed as part of the Merritt Island NWR Complex (Merritt Island NWR, St. John’s NWR, and Lake Woodruff NWR), the refuge headquarters office is located in DeLeon Springs, Florida, which is seven miles north of DeLand, FL. The refuge derives its name from Lake Woodruff, a 2,200-acre water body of State-owned waters that the refuge encircles. The surrounding landscape includes a mosaic of public lands in north-central Florida. The St. Johns River forms much of the western boundary between the refuge and the nearly 400,000-acre Ocala National Forest. Lake George State Forest is adjacent to the refuge to the north. The eastern boundary of the refuge is the community of DeLeon Springs.

Figure 1. Location of Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge

An important feature of the refuge, the St. Johns River is a series of interconnected lakes stretching 310 miles from its southern formation in Indian River County’s swamps north to Jacksonville in Duval County near the Florida-Georgia border. The geographical position of the refuge, straddling the temperate and subtropical biotic provinces, contributes to the vast species richness of the area. The refuge is uniquely situated to support a wide variety of resident and migratory species. The 2,200-acre Lake Woodruff formed during the Pleistocene (100,000 years before present) when the St. Johns River basin was a large coastal lagoon complex. The eastern boundary of the refuge is part of an ancient dune system known as the Atlantic Coastal Ridge (Schnable and Goodell 1968) which formed when sea levels fell sharply during glaciation. The resulting differences in elevation present on the refuge, from prehistoric dunes to shallow lakes, have created a variety of habitats, including freshwater marshes, hardwood swamps, and a variety of upland habitats.

1.3 Background: Deer hunting occurred in this area prior to the establishment of the refuge in 1963. Hunting of white-tailed deer and feral hog began in 1972 and has continued since 1994 under the refuge’s approved hunt plan. The refuge is currently open to hunting of white-tailed deer and feral hog under State seasons, bag limits, permits, and other requirements. The proposed Hunt Plan would continue the existing hunt program and would add turkey hunting and provide additional opportunities for disabled persons, veterans, or other special group hunting.

Hunting has been identified as a priority wildlife-dependent activity under the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act. The refuge currently allows hunting for white-tailed deer and feral hog on approximately 11,000 acres of upland forests and freshwater marsh habitat of the refuge’s approximately 21,574 acres (Figure 2). Hunt areas are accessed through existing roads and fire breaks by foot and through navigable waterways by boat. A quota is established for the number of hunters. The 2008 CCP included a compatibility determination for deer and feral hog hunting. Appendix 1 in the proposed Hunt Plan includes the 2016 hunt brochure for Lake Woodruff NWR, which outlines requirements and restrictions for current hunting on the refuge.

1.4 Purpose and Need for Action: The purpose of updating the Lake Woodruff NWR Hunt Plan is to ensure that Lake Woodruff NWR serves the purposes of the refuge and pursues goals and objectives outlined in the 2008 CCP. The development of the EA and the proposed Hunt Plan addresses the need to conserve wildlife and habitat, while providing opportunities for appropriate and compatible public use activities and the need to ensure the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the refuge. More specifically, the development of the EA and the proposed Hunt Plan address the need to manage self-sustaining populations of deer and turkey on the refuge, while providing for compatible hunting opportunities for deer and turkey. The documents also address the need to conserve wildlife and habitat on the refuge by controlling feral hogs, while also providing for appropriate and compatible hunting opportunities of this damaging, invasive species.

Figure 2. Existing and proposed hunt areas of Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge

1.5 Decision to be Made: The Service’s Southeast Regional Chief of the National Wildlife Refuge System will review the recommendations assessed in this EA and select one of the two alternatives presented. The Southeast Regional Chief of the National Wildlife Refuge System will also determine whether this EA is adequate to support a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) or whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would need to be prepared.

To initiate or expand hunting programs, the Service must publish such in the Federal Register, including any proposed and final refuge-specific regulations prior to implementing them. The regulations are only one element of a complete opening package, which includes the following documents: hunt plan; compatibility determination; documentation pursuant to compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended and appropriate NEPA decision document (i.e., EA and FONSI or EIS and Record of Decision); Endangered Species Act Section 7 evaluation; and the draft refuge-specific hunting regulations.

This EA serves as the NEPA document which analyzes the anticipated impacts on the human environment, including the environmental, cultural, and historical resources of the two alternatives: No Action Alternative (continue current Hunt Program) and Proposed Action (expand the existing Hunt Program to include a Spring Season Turkey Hunt).

1.6 Regulatory Compliance: A national wildlife refuge is guided by the mission and goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS), the purposes of the individual refuge, Service policy, and applicable laws and international treaties. Relevant guidance includes the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997; Refuge Recreation Act of 1962; and selected portions of the Code of Federal Regulations and Fish and Wildlife Service Manual.

The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System 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” (National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Public Law 105-57).

The goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System are to:

• Conserve a diversity of fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats, including species that are endangered or threatened with becoming endangered; • Develop and maintain a network of habitats for migratory birds, anadromous and inter- jurisdictional fish, and marine mammal populations that is strategically distributed and carefully managed to meet important life history needs of these species across their ranges; 5

• Conserve those ecosystems, plant communities, wetlands of national or international significance, and landscapes and seascapes that are unique, rare, declining, or underrepresented in existing protection efforts; • Provide and enhance opportunities to participate in compatible wildlife-dependent recreation (hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and environmental education and interpretation); and • Foster understanding and instill appreciation of the diversity and interconnectedness of fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats (601 FW 1.8).

The NWRS Improvement Act of 1997 provides guidelines and directives for the administration and management of all areas in the NWRS. It states that national wildlife refuges must be protected from incompatible or harmful human activities to ensure that Americans can enjoy National Wildlife Refuge System lands and waters. Before activities or uses are allowed on a national wildlife refuge, the uses must be found to be compatible. A compatible use “… will not materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of the mission of the Refuge System or the purposes of the refuges.” In addition, “wildlife-dependent recreational uses may be authorized on a refuge when they are compatible and not inconsistent with public safety.” The Act also recognized that wildlife-dependent recreational uses involving hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation, when determined to be compatible with the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System and purposes of the refuge, are legitimate and appropriate public uses of the NWRS and they shall receive priority consideration in planning and management.

This EA was prepared by the Service and represents compliance with applicable Federal statutes, regulations, Executive Orders, and other compliance documents, including the listed:

• American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. §1996) • Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 U.S.C. §470) • Clean Air Act of 1972, as amended (42 U.S.C. §7401 et seq.) • Clean Water Act of 1972, as amended (33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq.) • Endangered Species Act of 1973, (ESA) as amended (16 U.S.C. §1531 et seq.) • Executive Order 12898, Federal Action Alternatives to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations, 1994 • Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958, as amended (16 U.S.C. §661 et seq.) • Floodplain Management (Executive Order 11988) • National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq.) • Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR §1500 et seq.) • National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. §470 et seq.) • Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (25 U.S.C. §3001 et seq.) • Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment (Executive Order 11593) • Protection of Wetlands (Executive Order 11990)

• National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, as amended (33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq.) • Executive Order 13112, Invasive Species (issued in February 1999) • Administrative Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. §§551-559, §§701-706, and §§801-808) as amended • Antiquities Act of 1906 (16 U.S.C. §§431-433) • Bald Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. §§668-668d) as amended • Federal Land Recreation Enhancement Act (REA), 16 U.S.C. §6803(c), Consolidated Appropriations Act (PL 108-447) • Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. §§742a-754j-2) • Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. §§2901-2911) as amended • Fish and Wildlife Improvement Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. §7421) • Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. §§703-712) as amended • National Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. §§668dd-668ee) as amended • Recreation Hunting Safety and Preservation Act of 1994 (16 U.S.C. §§5201-5201) Refuge Recreation Act (16 U.S.C. §§460K-460K-4) as amended • Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. §§670a-680o) as amended • Soil and Water Conservation Act of 1977 (16 U.S.C. §§2001-2009) as amended

Specific Service policies reflected in the draft Hunt Plan and in this EA include: 601 FW 3 Biological Integrity, Diversity and Environmental Health; 602 FW 4 Step-down Management Planning; 603 FW 1 Appropriate Refuge Uses; 603 FW 2 Compatibility; and 605 FW 2 Hunting. Further, this EA reflects compliance with applicable State of Florida and local regulations, statutes, policies, and standards for conserving the environment and environmental resources such as water and air quality, endangered plants and animals, and cultural resources. To ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act, an Intra-Service Section 7 consultation will be conducted for the proposed action alternative. Following the consultation, a FONSI may be issued if no significant impacts are found. The Service will consult with the Southeast Regional Archaeologists and the State Historic Preservation Office to ensure continued protection of cultural resources.

1.7 Public Involvement and Issues Identified: In 2006, the refuge began working with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and the Wild Turkey Federation to monitor the population status of turkey on the refuge in order to determine the feasibility of establishing a turkey hunt at Lake Woodruff NWR. Turkey hunting was identified in the 2008 CCP as a potential public use opportunity. A compatibility determination for turkey hunting was completed as part of the 2008 CCP.

The CCP planning process included a public scoping meeting on September 7, 2006, a public review and comment period on the EA and draft CCP from April 23 to May 26, 2008, and related appropriate notice and mailings. Public comments submitted during the CCP planning process related to the proposed turkey hunting ranged from banning all hunting on the refuge to expanding opportunities for hunting on the refuge; opening the refuge to youth turkey hunting

was a specific comment submitted during the CCP planning process. (See Appendix D in the final CCP for the refuge for more information about the comments submitted during the CCP.)

Since development of the CCP, the refuge has continued to work with FWC’s lead turkey Biologist to evaluate the potential for turkey harvest on the refuge. It was determined that the current minimum estimate of the turkey populations on the refuge could sustain a harvest of six adult males for the first hunt. The refuge then began the planning process to open the refuge to turkey hunting.

Letters to Ocala National Forest, Hontoon Island State Park, Blue Springs State Park, DeLeon Springs State Park, Lower Wekiva River State Park, FWC, and the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) were sent out on May 2, 2014 to inform the adjacent land managers of the Service’s proposal to expand hunting opportunities, to engage them in the planning process, and to gather any issues or concerns they may have regarding the proposal. Further, in July 2016, the Service sent letters to the Tribal Historic Preservation Officers for the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, the Poarch Band of Creeks, the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, and the Seminole Tribe of Florida to ensure that no new issues or concerns had arisen regarding turkey hunting on Lake Woodruff NWR since the development of the CCP. No comments have been received from the Tribes.

The Service will provide a 30-day public review and comment period on the EA and the draft Hunt Plan (including the draft compatibility determination for turkey hunting). Public notices would be posted at the refuge and on the refuge’s webpage and Facebook page. Notice of the availability of the EA and draft Hunt Plan would be mailed out to the refuge’s mailing list and a press release would be sent to local media. All comments received during the public review and comment period will be reviewed and incorporated into the development of the final Hunt Plan. The public will be notified of the final decision and the availability of the final Hunt Plan. The Service anticipates that the Lake Woodruff NWR Hunt Plan will be included in the annual National Wildlife Refuge System Federal Register notice in 2018 that would provide refuge- specific regulation changes and opening packages for new hunting opportunities. Barring any changes, the proposed Hunt Plan for Lake Woodruff NWR could go into effect for the 2018- 2019 hunting season.

2.0 ALTERNATIVES The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS, Service) evaluated two alternatives in this EA:

• No Action Alternative (Continue Current Hunt Program), would continue hunting of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and feral hog (Sus scrofa) on approximately 11,000 acres of Lake Woodruff NWR.

• Proposed Action Alternative, would continue hunting of white-tailed deer and feral hog and would add turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) hunting within the existing 11,000 acre hunt area within the designated State spring turkey season and add specialty hunts for youth, disabled persons, or military veterans that would follow State rules and regulations, allow

take of game species within the approved hunt plan (deer, feral hog, and turkey), and take place within the 11,000 acres currently opened to hunting.

2.1 Alternative A – No Action Alternative (Continue Current Hunt Program): Under the No Action Alternative, the current management direction would continue. Current white-tailed deer and feral hog hunts would continue; however, no additional hunting would be established. There would be no appreciable additional cost to the refuge under this alternative. There would be no change to current public use and wildlife management programs on the refuge. Figure 2 outlines the existing approximately 11,000 acres of hunt areas for white-tailed deer and feral hog on the refuge, which would continue under Alternative A. The 2008 Compatibility Determination for deer and feral hog hunting, federal regulations (50 CFR §32.28), State regulations, and the Lake Woodruff NWR Hunt Brochure outline the requirements and restrictions for current deer and feral hog hunting on the refuge.

The existing designated hunt areas include about 8,600 acres of freshwater marsh and about 2,400 acres of uplands. The current hunt program allows 300 individual permitted hunters on the refuge at designated times to hunt white-tailed deer and feral hog. There are 24 hunt days allowed each year which are split into two 9-day archery limited hunts and two 3-day primitive gun limited hunts. Permitted hunt dates fall within the State’s deer hunt season and we follow State antler restrictions and other rules and regulations for deer hunting. The number of permits and hunt dates can be changed according to population survey data and/or refuge management needs; however, the hunt is managed within the State rules and regulations set each year by FWC.

2.2 Alternative B – Proposed Action (Expand the existing Hunt Program to add a Spring Turkey Hunt with incidental take of feral hogs): Under the Proposed Action, the Service would continue the existing upland game hunt for deer and feral hog, which has been designed to be compatible with Lake Woodruff NWR’s purposes and consistent with State laws and regulations on approximately 11,000 acres within Lake Woodruff NWR as described above in section 2.1. The deer hunt would be managed in compliance with the 2008 deer and feral hog Compatibility Determination and in accordance with refuge and FWC rules and regulations. The Compatibility Determination lists the following stipulations for deer and feral hog hunting on Lake Woodruff NWR:

• The methods of hunting to be considered include primitive weapons, archery, and shotguns. • Hunting will be limited to designated areas. • Quota hunt permits will be issued. • Hunting densities no greater than one hunting party per 100 acres will be allowed. • The number of deer permitted to be taken will be based on annual population estimates. • Check stations will be used to collect hunt data and to monitor the quality of the hunt. • Vehicle access and parking will be limited and confined to existing fire lanes and unimproved roads. • Climbing spikes and permanent stands will not be permitted.

• Off-road vehicles or ATVs will not be permitted. • If required, liberal bag limits or extended seasons may be established for feral hogs as part of a wider effort to eliminate this non-native species. • No flagging or trail marking will be permitted.

The current deer hunting regulations would remain in effect and additional regulations would be updated to 50 CFR §32.28 for turkey hunting on Lake Woodruff NWR. In addition to Federal regulations, State laws and regulations are adopted and in effect unless they have been further restricted by Federal law or regulations.

The proposed changes to the hunt program would include: Adding turkey hunting with incidental take of feral hog within the existing approximately 11,000 acre hunt area and within designated State hunting seasons. Specialty hunts for youth, disabled persons, or military veterans would follow Federal and State rules and regulations, would allow take of game species within the approved hunt plan (deer, feral hog, and turkey), and would occur within the 11,000 acres opened to hunting.

During the refuge’s CCP process, a Compatibility Determination was completed for the turkey hunt. The proposed hunt was found compatible with the listed stipulations:

The existing turkey hunt Compatibility Determination would be revised (see Section VIII in the draft Hunt Plan for the proposed compatibility determination) to specifically outline the proposed youth turkey hunt with incidental take of feral hog. The updated Compatibility Determination for turkey hunting would include the listed stipulations from 2008 and add the following:

• Specialty hunts would occur in compliance with all stipulations listed here, Federal and State regulations, and be conducted under the supervision of a refuge employee. • If unacceptable impacts are detected, Lake Woodruff NWR would modify or eliminate the activity. • As needed, additional restrictions could be developed and imposed to ensure the compatibility of turkey hunting activities on Lake Woodruff NWR.

The proposed hunt would abide by these stipulations and the Service would consult with Federal and/or State biologists before each spring turkey hunt season to ensure adequate hunt-able turkey populations on Lake Woodruff NWR based on habitat and best available science. The proposed turkey hunt would not interfere with other upland game hunts. Other public use opportunities would remain open and available during hunt days, and the refuge would separate user groups by public use zones (Figure 3). These public use zones have been identified to ensure a quality visit for all user groups. The zones represent a natural separation of user groups present on the refuge. The proposed hunt area would continue to provide hunting opportunities in a less intense area of the refuge and would provide a more enjoyable experience to hunters. Turkey hunting would be allowed on approximately 11,000 acres of the refuge, currently open to deer hunting, on the following units: • Western Unit (~8,000 acres) – includes Harry’s Creek Swamp (all property between the St. John’s River and Norris Dead River), Dexter Island, Tick Island, and Jones Island and is accessible only by boat. • Eastside Unit (~1,000 acres) – includes approximately 1,000 acres of refuge lands west of the CSX Railroad to the East Marsh. The Eastside Unit begins at the northern corner of the Eastside Road (at the check station) and continues south for about 2.5 miles and continues west to the marsh edge. Access to the Eastside Unit is only permitted from the Mud Lake Road entrance. Vehicle travel and parking are restricted to designated locations, which would be indicated in the Refuge Hunt Brochure each year. Access from the railroad right-of-way is prohibited. • Volusia Tract (~2,000 acres) – is located between Highland Park Road and Shell Road west of the CSX Railroad (motorized travel is prohibited and access from the railroad right-of-way is prohibited).

During the first year, the proposed turkey quota hunt would allow the adult permit holder to supervise a youth hunter to hunt during the first ten days of the State spring turkey season. One youth (under 16) would be allowed to hunt, while supervised by a permitted adult hunter (aged 18 or older). Thereafter, the refuge would determine the feasibility of increasing hunting up to the entire spring season and/or allowing additional user groups (e.g., disabled hunters, family group hunters, or all hunters), or increasing/decreasing the number of permits based on hunt and/or survey data. Permitted take would be set each year according to available surveys, hunt data, refuge management needs, and habitat availability. Since the feral hog is a damaging, invasive species and since the control and elimination of feral hogs serves refuge purposes, goals, and objectives, there would be no bag limit for feral hogs. Each year Lake Woodruff NWR would publish the specific hunt days, regulations, and open areas in a hunt brochure and on the Lake Woodruff NWR website (https://www.fws.gov/refuge/lake_woodruff/). No more than one turkey per permit holder would be permitted per season on Lake Woodruff NWR. Hunter densities would be limited to no more than one hunting party per 100 acres and as necessary, prime hunt areas would be zoned to ensure a quality hunt. Hunting party is defined as either one permitted hunter, one youth hunter with non-hunting permitted adult, or one permitted disabled hunter with a non-hunting assistant.

Access to hunt areas would be restricted to foot, using existing open roads and fire breaks, and watercraft. All hunters must obtain applicable State licenses, the appropriate Lake Woodruff NWR quota permit (except specialty hunts), and a self-issuing permit located in the Lake Woodruff NWR’s Hunt Brochure.

This EA evaluates the impacts of any potential specialty hunts that may be hosted by Lake Woodruff NWR to allow youth disabled persons, or military veterans to participate in full or partially guided hunts on the refuge as available. Any specialty hunts allowed would remain in compliance with Federal and State rules and regulations and the proposed Hunt Plan. Because these specialty hunts would be coordinated by an agency or organization that partners with FWC, the permits would be provided by FWC and participants may not be required to purchase a separate Lake Woodruff NWR quota hunt permit. Participants would be required to have all other applicable State hunt licenses. The partnering agency would need to apply for a refuge Special Use Permit (SUP) that would outline the specific rules and regulations for the specialty hunt. FWC would supply a limited number of permits for the desired hunt species and the SUP would outline regulations within the State’s framework and would be more restrictive than the State, but not less. These hunts would only be allowed as long as it is compatible with refuge management goals and the population of hunted species was sustainable. Specialty hunts for youth, disabled persons, or military veterans serve to increase accessibility for those with mobility issues, assist military service members, and increase hunter retention.

Figure 3. Public Use Zones identified on Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge: Primary Use Zone (inset/bottom map) has more intensive visitation than the Secondary Use Zone (remainder of the refuge). The majority of fishing and hunting opportunities occur in the Secondary Use Zone. The Primary Use Zone is mostly used for hiking, bicycling, birdwatching, interpretive walks and environmental education.

2.3 Alternative Considered, But Dismissed From Detailed Analysis: The Service considered limiting hunting for turkey to only 2,000 acres of the Volusia Tract. This alternative was dismissed from detailed analysis because it would not meet the stated purpose and need (see Section 1.4 of the EA). Adding turkey hunting to only 2,000 acres would limit the flexibility of management decisions to respond to biological data and/or environmental conditions while providing turkey hunting opportunities.

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT: Lake Woodruff NWR is located near the historic DeLeon Springs State Park, which was named for the famed Spanish explorer who may have led Spanish forces through this area in 1513 in his quest for the Fountain of Youth. Prior to Spanish exploration, this area was occupied by the Timucuan Indians and their predecessors dating back 8,000 years. Numerous Indian mounds and middens are located throughout this area. According to local sources, in 1804, William Williams moved from New Smyrna Beach to settle at Spring Garden, now known as DeLeon Springs, and was the first to raise corn and cotton. After Florida became a United States territory in 1821, Major Joseph Woodruff bought out Williams’ 2,020-acre share of Spring Garden in 1823. The lake became known as Lake Woodruff and the refuge was later named accordingly.

The refuge currently contains ~21,574 acres and is comprised of approximately 11,100 acres of freshwater marsh; 7,200 acres of hardwood swamps; 2,400 acres of uplands; and more than 800 acres of lakes, streams, and canals. The 11,000 acres proposed for hunting includes approximately 8,600 acres of freshwater marsh and 2,400 acres of uplands (pine savannah, mixed hardwoods, pine flatwoods, hammocks, and scrub).

Wildlife diversity is typical of that associated with central Florida wetlands. Lake Woodruff NWR’s bird list names 234 species, which can be seasonally found in the area. Several federally listed species also use the refuge, including: West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus), wood stork (Mycteria americana), eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi), and whooping crane (Grus americana). Whooping cranes have not been documented on the refuge in nearly 10 years. Occasionally, Everglade snail kite (Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeus), and Florida scrub- jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) have been sighted on the refuge, but do not regularly reside, roost, or nest. All of these species have the potential to be found in or adjacent to the hunt areas.

A more detailed description of the affected environment can be found in the refuge’s 2008 CCP (USFWS 2008). Chapter II. Refuge Overview in the 2008 CCP are incorporated herein by reference including: • Ecosystem Context • Regional Conservation Plans and Initiatives • Ecological Threats and Problems • Physical Resources • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources

• Socioeconomic Environment • Refuge Administration and Management Updated information is provided below to specifically describe the affected environment of the hunt areas.

3.1 Physical Environment: Sections included here are to provide additional information not already referenced by the aforementioned chapters of the CCP. All aspects of the Physical Environment are analyzed by this EA in Section 4.0 Environmental Consequences.

Hydrology

Water Quality and Quantity Water quality is a measure of the physical and chemicals characteristics of water. The waters of Lake Woodruff and tributaries are not part of the refuge; however, water quality affects the wildlife and habitats managed on the refuge. The north flowing St. John’s River impacts water quality and quantity when the river level is higher than the marsh and flows into the refuge. North of the refuge, the DeLeon Spring produces 19 millions of gallons of water daily. This flows into Spring Garden Lake located just east of the refuge. Refuge impoundments are managed by pumping the spring fed water from Spring Garden Lake each winter for waterfowl habitat.

The Statewide Comprehensive Verified List of Impaired Waters includes the St. Johns River in the Lake Woodruff Unit (for dissolved oxygen and mercury) and it includes Lake Woodruff (for mercury) (Florida Department of Environmental Protection 2014). Although these waterbodies are not part of the refuge, the refuge is directly adjacent to them and impacted by these impairments.

3.2 Biological Environment: The vegetative and animal communities within the existing hunt area are included here. Additional information can be found in the CCP.

3.2.1 Vegetative Communities: The existing hunt area contains freshwater marshes, upland and bottomland forests, and shrublands. The vegetative communities found within the existing and proposed hunt area include: freshwater marsh, pine and palmetto flatwoods, longleaf pine/wiregrass savanna, oak- sand pine scrub, mixed hardwood/conifer, hardwood hammocks, palm hammocks, ephemeral wetlands, hardwood swamp, and willow swamp.

3.2.2 Wildlife: Lake Woodruff NWR supports a high diversity of fish and wildlife species. Several invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals inhabit the proposed hunt area. The proposed hunt species are described below.

Wild turkey Two of the five subspecies of wild turkey occur in Florida; the eastern subspecies (M. g. silvestris) and the Florida, or Osceola subspecies (M. g. osceola). With respect to the two subspecies of turkeys occurring in Florida, the Osceola subspecies is distributed throughout the peninsular part of the state (FWC 2008b). Differences in these subspecies are superficial with Osceola tending to be slightly smaller and both serve similar ecological functions as prey species (FWC 2008b). Lake Woodruff NWR lies within the range of the Osceola subspecies.

Most mortality from predators occurs before turkeys reach maturity. Wild turkey hens in Florida typically begin laying in late March or early April. Clutches average 10.3 eggs and take approximately 12-13 days to lay (Williams and Austin 1988). Poults will roost on the ground for the first 14 days after hatching, during this period, approximately 70 percent mortality occurs, primarily through predation (Williams and Austin 1988).

Wild turkeys need a variety of habitats to complete life cycles. Forested habitat with adequate escape cover from predators, nesting habitat consists of dense ground-cover vegetation providing concealment, and grassy open areas with abundant insects for brood rearing (FWC 2008b). The refuge contains forested habitats with adequate cover, open grassy areas, and ephemeral pools.

Turkey surveys began in 2005, to assess the turkey population on the refuge. Surveys were conducted using motion sensing camera stations, following the FWC protocols. It was recommended then that if populations are stable, a very limited turkey hunt (youth, disabled) may be initiated. The camera surveys give a very conservative minimum population estimate. FWC turkey biologists analyzed data from numerous years that show the number of male turkeys on the refuge were 9, 10, 12, and 11 for surveys conducted in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2012 respectively.

White-tailed Deer The population of white-tailed deer on Lake Woodruff has remained steady since the beginning of the hunt program in 1972. Then, the deer population was estimated at 200 animals and updated population estimates over the past thirty years claim 225-250 animals. Twenty years ago, the average deer harvest reported was 30 deer. Changes in the hunt program including number of permits sold, area hunted, and hunting days have occurred since the beginning of the hunt program. Within the past eight years, average number of deer harvested was 20 with an even number of bucks and does taken. Hunters have reported deer in good health.

Feral Hogs Feral Hog activity has been reported periodically on the refuge, mainly on Tick Island and the east side units. Few hogs have been harvested from the refuge. Feral hog sightings are limited and signs of hogs have not been reported in several years. The number of hogs on the refuge is hard to determine given the lack of recent observations. Feral hogs are considered an invasive nuisance species detrimental to habitat and other wildlife species.

The feral hog is an extremely invasive introduced non-native species. It can harbor several infectious diseases, some of which can be transmissible to humans and some of which can be fatal to wildlife (Forrester 1991). By rooting and wallowing, feral hogs destroy wildlife habitat. Damage includes erosion along waterways and wetlands and the loss of native plants. Additionally, feral hogs compete directly for food with deer, bears, turkeys, squirrels, and many other birds and mammals. They are predators of small mammals and deer fawns, as well as eggs of ground-nesting birds, such as turkeys. They also prey on ground dwelling reptiles and amphibians. Historically, hogs have been present on the refuge, but not in great numbers. Evidence of rooting has been found sporadically in recent years, but very few hogs have been taken from the refuge during hunts. Although the population of feral hogs on the refuge is perceived to be small, there is cause for concern because they are such prolific breeders. Complete eradication of feral hogs from the refuge is desirable. Hunting of feral hogs provides the refuge with another management tool to reduce this detrimental species, while at the same time, provide a compatible public use opportunity that is widely enjoyed by local hunters. Hunting of hogs on the refuge would continue to be an incidental use to permitted deer hunting and would be added as an incidental use for the proposed turkey hunt.

3.2.3 Threatened and Endangered Species and Other Special Status Species: There are six federally listed wildlife species and one candidate for listing that could potentially occur in the proposed hunt area, the eastern indigo snake (threatened), Florida scrub-jay (threatened), wood stork (threatened), whooping crane (endangered), Everglade snail kite (endangered), West Indian manatee (threatened) and gopher tortoise (Gopherous polyphemus) which is a candidate for federal listing. There are three species which are federally listed due to similarity to another federally listed threatened or endangered species. The American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) primarily uses the freshwater marshes on the refuge and is listed due to similarity to the federally endangered American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus). Also, the Cassius blue butterfly (Leptotes cassius theonus) and ceraunus blue butterfly (Hemiargus ceraunus antibubastus) are listed as threatened due to similarity to the Miami blue butterfly (Cyclargus thomasi bethunebakeri).

Other species of special status of refuge management concern include: bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and swallow-tailed kite (Elanoides forficatus). The following are State Threatened (ST) or State Species of Special Concern (SSC) found on the refuge (FWC 2017): Florida sandhill crane (Grus canadensis pratensis, ST), little blue heron (Egretta caerulea, ST), Southeastern American kestrel (Falco sparverius paulus, ST), osprey (Pandion haliaetus, SSC), and tricolored heron (Egretta tricolor, ST).

The eastern indigo snake, Florida scrub-jay, wood stork, whooping crane, and everglade snail kite have only been seen intermittently or have not been seen for many years on the refuge. Habitat does exist on the refuge for these species within the existing hunt areas. West Indian manatees do not occur within the proposed hunt areas; however, hunters access the navigable waters where manatees do occur. The refuge does not include the navigable waterways of the St. John’s River, its tributaries, Lake Woodruff or other lakes which the refuge surrounds. Manatees are considered in this EA because the Western Unit hunt area is accessible by boat only which may affect manatees.

3.3 Human Environment:

3.3.1 Cultural Resources: The Service is legally mandated to inventory, assess, and protect cultural resources located on those lands that the agency owns, manages, or controls. The Service’s cultural resource policy is delineated in 614 FW 1-5 and 126 FW 1-3. In the Service’s Southeast Region, the cultural resource review and compliance process is initiated by contacting the Regional Historic Preservation Officer/Regional Archaeologist (RHPO/RA). The RHPO/RA would determine whether the proposed undertaking has the potential to impact cultural resources, identify the “area of potential effect,” determine the appropriate level of scientific investigation necessary to ensure legal compliance, and initiates consultation with the pertinent State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and federally recognized Tribes.

The recorded historic properties have cultural and religious significance to the Seminole Tribe of Florida, the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians, the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, and the Poarch Band of Creeks. Consultation with these Tribes would be carried out as part of the compliance with both NEPA and the NHPA, as well as meeting the federal government’s obligations to consult pursuant to Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments; Secretarial Order 3206: American Indian Tribal Rights, and Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities and the Endangered Species Act; and Tribal consultation policy.

3.3.2 Socioeconomic Resources: Lake Woodruff NWR is north of the Greater Orlando Metropolitan Area (Orlando/Kissimmee/Sanford) and west of the Greater Daytona Beach Metropolitan Area (Daytona Beach/Deltona/Ormond Beach), which together have a combined estimated population of nearly 3 million as of July 1, 2015 (U.S. Census Bureau 2016). The refuge is predominantly located in Volusia County with a small portion in Lake County. As of July 1, 2015 the estimated population for Volusia County was 517,887 and for Lake County was 325,875 (U.S. Census Bureau 2016). The July 1, 2015 estimate for the nearby city of Deland was 30,195 (U.S. Census Bureau 2016).

According to a 2011 survey, 6.4 million Florida residents and nonresidents 16 years old and older fished, hunted, or observed wildlife in Florida (Department of Interior et al. 2011). Of the total number of participants, 3.1 million fished, 242 thousand hunted, and 4.3 million participated in wildlife-watching activities, which includes observing, feeding, and 18

photographing wildlife (Department of Interior et al. 2011). Residents and non-residents spent $9 billion in 2011 on wildlife recreation in Florida and hunters spent $716 million. (Department of Interior et al, 2011). The average trip per expenditure per hunter in Florida was $1,152 in 2011 (Department of Interior et al. 2011). FWC reports that hunting in Florida represents a $1.6 billion economic contribution to Florida (FWC 2011).

According to Volusia County Tourism, 9,500,000 people visited Volusia County in 2015 and spent $5.4 billion. In 2015, a survey of visitors from West Volusia County showed that the majority (79%) of out of state visitors and 29% of in-state visitors to West Volusia County participated in sightseeing and 9% of out of state and in-state visitors participated in fishing (Mid-Florida Marketing and Research Inc. 2015). Both of these activities could have included a trip to the refuge. Most out of state visitors (93%) were looking for escape, relaxation, change of scenery, and educational aspects of the area (Mid-Florida Marketing and Research Inc. 2015).

3.3.3 Public Use/Recreation: Lake Woodruff NWR provides opportunities for a variety of public use activities, most of them include wildlife observation and photography, environmental education and interpretation, fishing, and hunting. Several trails, parking areas, and wildlife viewing areas are available and the refuge serves nearly 100,000 visitors annually. The current hunt program allows 300 individual permitted hunters on the refuge at designated times to hunt white-tailed deer and feral hog. Hunter visitation varies according to scouting intensity, success rate, and number of days spent hunting during the allotted quota period. The existing hunt area is closed to all other visitation during hunt days to allow a quality hunt and for the safety of all visitors. The existing hunt areas do not interfere with the main public use areas around the impoundments and interpretive walking trails. Hunters are not allowed to access the impoundment areas to reach hunt areas. This separation of user groups has worked well in keeping user conflicts to a minimum.

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES This chapter analyzes and discusses the potential environmental effects or consequences that can reasonably be expected by the implementation of the alternatives. An analysis of the effects has been conducted on the physical environment, biological environment, and socioeconomic environment. The direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the following alternatives are considered: • Alternative A - Continue Current Hunt Program, would continue hunting of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and feral hog (Sus scrofa) on approximately 11,000 acres of Lake Woodruff NWR.

• Alternative B - Proposed Action Alternative, would continue hunting of white-tailed deer and feral hog and would add turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) hunting within the existing 11,000 acre hunt area within the designated State spring turkey season and add specialty hunts for youth, disabled persons, or military veterans that would follow State rules and regulations, allow take of game species within the approved hunt plan (deer, feral hog, and turkey), and take place within the 11,000 acres currently opened to hunting.

Direct effects are the impacts that would be caused by the proposed action at the same time and place as the triggering action. Indirect effects are impacts that occur later in time or distance from the triggering action. Cumulative effects are incremental impacts resulting from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, including those taken by federal and nonfederal agencies, as well as actions undertaken by private individuals. Cumulative impacts may result from singularly minor, but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.

4.1 Physical Environment:

4.1.1 Impacts on Geology: Alternative A--No Action Alternative There would be no change to impacts to geology under the No Action Alternative. Negative impacts to geology would be minimal since vehicle access would continue to be limited to the existing refuge road system.

Alternative B--Proposed Action Same as alternative A, no impacts are expected due to the minor increase of additional hunting parties for the proposed spring turkey hunt. No additional roads or parking areas are necessary or proposed to accommodate the proposed action.

4.1.2 Impacts on Topography and Soils: Alternative A--No Action Alternative There would be no change in impacts to topography and soils under the No Action Alternative. Deer and hog hunting would result in short term and discrete minor compaction of soils resulting from foot travel concentrated around major access points, parking areas, and along existing fire breaks. The impact to topography and soils would continue to be minimal under Alternative A.

Alternative B--Proposed Action Same as alternative A, due to the minor increase of foot and vehicle traffic associated with additional hunting parties. No additional roads, landscaping, or other changes to the soil or topography is necessary or proposed to accommodate the proposed action. Negative impacts to the topography and soils would be minimal because vehicle access would be limited to the existing road system and the increase in hunting parties would be minor.

4.1.3 Impacts on Hydrology: Alternative A--No Action Alternative There would be no change to impacts to hydrology under Alternative A. Deer and hog hunting would result in no impacts to hydrology from use of existing roads. Wetland areas would continue to be closed to vehicle access, and off-road vehicular travel would continue to be prohibited.

Alternative B--Proposed Action Same as alternative A, change in impacts to hydrology is not expected. No changes to roads, access, or land management are proposed to accommodate the proposed action that would impact hydrology.

4.1.4 Impacts on Water Quality and Quantity: Alternative A--No Action Alternative There would be little to no change in impacts to water quality and quantity under the No Action Alternative. Potential spills may occur from hunter boat traffic which would cause a temporary negative impact to water quality in the immediate vicinity, but would not have a major impact to water quality in the long term or to the whole of Lake Woodruff and its tributaries.

Alternative B--Proposed Action Same as alternative A, no change to water quantity or quality is expected with the minor addition of turkey hunting parties.

4.1.5 Impacts on Air Quality: Alternative A--No Action Alternative No change to air quality is expected under the current program.

Alternative B--Proposed Action The proposed action may result in some short-term negative impacts at a local scale, as a result of increased vehicular traffic in the area. However, the increase would be small, due to the minor increase of turkey hunting parties. Temporary impacts to air quality from emissions produced by vehicles would be minimal and would be undetectable shortly after the vehicles were parked or exited the area.

4.2 Biological Environment:

4.2.1 Impacts on Habitat: Alternative A--No Action Alternative Impacts to habitat would be expected to remain the same from continuation of current management under Alternative A. Continuing deer and feral hog hunting would not be anticipated to have lasting negative habitat impacts.

Alternative B--Proposed Action This alternative would have possible short-term impacts on individual plants from hunters walking to and from hunt sites. The increase in foot traffic would have minor impacts because of the limited number of hunters and low hunter densities (1 hunter/100 acres). Hunters would not be permitted to manipulate vegetation or clear trails. Parking would only be permitted on established parking areas and roadsides. All-terrain vehicles would not be permitted. Minor positive habitat impacts could be realized with the removal of additional damaging hogs from the refuge.

4.2.2 Impacts on Wildlife: Alternative A--No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, the existing habitat conditions would be maintained. There would be no change anticipated in the diversity or abundance of wildlife that use the hunt area.

Alternative B--Proposed Action Impacts to wildlife under Alternative B would be anticipated to be similar to Alternative A. The proposed action would not adversely affect the turkey or deer population due to the limitation of hunter permits (see section 4.4.1 for more detailed information). Direct mortality to hunted species is expected; however, low hunter densities and the low number of allowed permits would not adversely affect the population of turkeys or deer on the refuge. Under Alternative B, there would be additional opportunities to remove feral hogs from the refuge which would have a positive impact to native species (see section 4.4.1 for more detailed information). Non-game species could be temporarily disturbed by hunters in the area; however, this impact would be expected to be short-term and negligible. Take of non-target wildlife would not be expected due to hunter education regarding regulations and law enforcement presence. Accidental or intentional take of non-game species is anticipated to be non-existent or very small. Negative impacts to wildlife populations would not be anticipated under Alternative B.

4.2.3 Impacts on Threatened and Endangered Species and Other Special Status Species: Alternative A--No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, the impacts would be expected to remain the same for threatened or endangered species and other special status species of refuge management concern. Minor to no impacts would be expected to these species under Alternative A.

Alternative B--Proposed Action Under Alternative B, impacts to listed or special status species would be similar to Alternative A. Eastern indigo snakes and Florida pine snakes are particularly vulnerable to mortality from motor vehicles. Any increase in motor vehicle traffic would have a negative effect on these snakes; however, motorized travel is only allowed on the East Side Road and Mud Lake Road entering the refuge. Under Alternative B, the motor vehicle traffic increase is negligible and would have a minor increase of risk to these species. No changes to motor vehicle access in proposed under Alternative B.

Federal Wildlife Officers would patrol hunt areas to prevent or investigate any disturbance, take, or harassment to listed species or special status species during hunt days. The proposed action could have negative impacts to listed species or special status species due to the increased number of hunter access; however, this impact is expected to be small with a low likelihood of accidental take or disturbance. Negative impacts to threatened, endangered, or other special status species is not expected.

4.3 Human Environment:

4.3.1 Impacts on Cultural Resources: Alternative A--No Action Alternative No change to impacts to cultural resources would be anticipated under Alternative A. Negative impacts could occur to cultural resources if hunters removed or disturbed artifacts. Refuge hunts have been occurring since 1972 with little or no impacts to cultural resources. Minor to no impacts are expected to occur to cultural resources under Alternative A.

Alternative B--Proposed Action Under Alternative B, impacts to cultural resources would be the same as Alternative A. A negligible amount of users would be added to the current users within the hunt areas under Alternative B and little to no impacts are expected to occur to cultural resources. Federal Wildlife Officers would patrol during hunt days and while hunters are scouting.

4.3.2 Impacts on Socioeconomic Resources: Alternative A--No Action Alternative The economic and social conditions of the area would remain the same under Alternative A.

Alternative B--Proposed Action Under Alternative B, a minor positive impact would be expected on the local community through a minor increase in sales of hunting supplies, increased visitation, and increased recreational and subsistence hunting opportunity.

4.3.3 Impacts to Visitor Services/Recreation Alternative A--No Action Alternative There would be no change to public use and recreation on the refuge under Alternative A.

Alternative B--Proposed Action Under Alternative B, impacts to visitor services and recreation would be anticipated to be similar to Alternative A. The addition of turkey hunting to the existing hunt area would have a positive effect by opening refuge areas to new recreational hunting opportunities. Any effect to other visitors under this alternative is expected to be negligible due to the low number of hunt days that would be added in the proposed hunt. Lower visitation occurs during the spring turkey season; therefore, impacts to other visitors would be minor.

4.4 Assessment of Cumulative Impacts: A cumulative impact is defined as an impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the proposed action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future action regardless of what agency (federal or nonfederal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (40 CFR §1508.7).

Cumulative impacts are the overall, net effects on a resource that arise from multiple actions. Impacts can “accumulate” spatially, when different actions affect different areas of the same resource. They can also accumulate over the course of time, from actions in the past, the present, and the future. Occasionally, different actions counterbalance one another, partially cancelling out each other’s effects on a resource. But more typically, multiple effects add up, with each additional action contributing an incremental impact on the resource.

Under both alternatives, the continued deer and feral hog hunt and the proposed turkey and feral hog hunt would have limited hunt duration, would not conflict with other uses of the refuge, and would not be anticipated to result in negative cumulative impacts to refuge resources. Alternative B would add a slight increase to additional hunters; however, the number of hunters allowed would be limited due to the quota permit system which limits the number of hunters based on current and future turkey population data and hunt data. Hunter impacts are also limited by the length of the hunt season, hunter density (1 hunter/100 acres), and allowable hunt areas.

Under both alternatives, visitor use areas would continue to be zoned to create a safe buffer distance around concentrated areas of public use and facilities. Due to home range and habitat availability for the target species, almost all of the game harvested would be from the refuge population. The hunt would be managed to ensure the long-term stability of the deer and turkey populations. No negative cumulative effects from minor soil compaction, vegetation and wildlife disturbance, cultural resources, or refuge environment would be anticipated from the continued deer and feral hog hunt or the proposed turkey and feral hog hunt. Minor positive impacts to the surrounding community would be expected from gaining an additional recreational opportunity on the refuge. These impacts could have long term positive effects on hunter retention and recruitment, providing a positive hunting experience to youth and others who may not have other opportunities to hunt. Neither alternative would be anticipated to result in negative cumulative impacts.

4.4.1 Anticipated Direct and Indirect Impacts of the Proposed Action on Wildlife Species:

Turkey Turkeys are non-migratory and therefore hunting only impacts the local population. Because wild turkeys are a polygamous species, more of the male segment of the population can be removed through hunting without adversely affecting the population. Acceptable spring harvests of the male segment are suggested to range as high as 30% (Vangilder 1992). At this level of harvest, population modeling indicates that populations would still be allowed to grow. In contrast, research has shown that turkey populations are particularly sensitive to increases in adult hen mortality and removal of as little as 10% of the female component would lead to population declines (Suchy at al. 1983, Vangilder and Kurzejeski 1995).

Biologically, the most conservative hunting framework is a gobblers-only spring harvest that fully protects hens from harvest. Experience has shown that such a conservative framework is ecologically sound and tends to produce stable harvests and stable or expanding populations. Establishment of bag limits and controls on hunter numbers additionally safeguards against overharvesting the population by controlling the harvest rate (Healy and Powell 1999). Healy

and Powell (1999) explain that bag limits constrain harvest by the most skilled hunters and thereby spread the harvest to the most individuals. Bag limits also establish a cap on total harvest, particularly when used in conjunction with limits on hunter numbers. Healy and Powell (1999) point out, however, that the greatest control over harvest rate is obtained by simply controlling hunter numbers. Regulating hunter numbers can also be used to provide for a quality (i.e., low hunter-density) hunting experience.

Another, slightly less conservative framework seeks to balance protection of the resource with providing additional opportunity. Emphasis is still on the spring gobbler harvest and ensuring opportunity for population growth, but the strategy recognizes that a small amount (less than 10% of the total population) of either-sex fall harvest can occur and still allow for population expansion. The limited fall-harvest aims to minimize the risk of too great a fall harvest of the population during years of poor reproduction and food availability. This strategy makes no attempt to increase the harvest of a larger fall population that occurs some years as a result of especially good reproductive success.

In Florida, the FWC uses one or the other of these two harvest frameworks on public wildlife management areas (WMAs)—either the very conservative spring gobblers-only harvest or a slightly less conservative spring gobblers-only with limited either-sex fall harvest. On WMAs adjacent to and nearby Lake Woodruff NWR, wild turkey harvest strategies typically fall into the slightly less conservative framework, although the very conservative strategy occurs on some areas (namely the Dexter/Mary Farms Unit of Lake George WMA). On areas where a limited fall-harvest opportunity exists in the form of legal either-sex harvest during a fall archery season, harvest records from these, as well as other WMAs Statewide, indicate that realized harvest in the fall is minimal and essentially insignificant on a population scale.

For monitoring population size and the effects of hunting pressure, a simple and fairly reliable gauge of population size and trends can be obtained from either gobbler-only harvest or harvest per unit of hunter effort (Healy and Powell 1999, Lint et al. 1995). Where resources permit, Healy and Powell (1999) recommend the collection of an independent population index to complement the use of harvest data. From all assessments, hunted turkey populations on WMAs surrounding Lake Woodruff NWR have been stable for many years, supporting the continued use of these conservative harvest frameworks. The Dexter/Mary Farms Unit of the Lake George WMA, with the most conservative framework among nearby WMAs, has maintained a very high hunter success rate, and population indices derived from camera surveys reflect a stable, if not increasing, turkey population (Roger Shields, FWC turkey biologist, personal communication). Seminole State Forest likewise reports consistently high harvest success rates over the past 5 years, indicative of a stable turkey population (Roger Shields, FWC turkey biologist, personal communication). Trend data on turkey occurrence in Ocala National Forest denote a stable distribution of turkey on the area over the past eight years in the presence of conservative hunting pressure (Roger Shields, FWC turkey biologist, personal communication). Collectively, these data, along with observations of onsite biologists, confirm that hunting has not limited or adversely affected the wild turkey populations on these areas and suggest that similarly structured seasons elsewhere would likewise provide for adequate protection of the wild turkey resource.

The proposed turkey hunt on the refuge would potentially remove 6 male turkeys from the refuge during the first year of implementation which is a conservative estimate of allowable take based on turkey surveys conducted on the refuge since 2005. The camera surveys conducted also represent a conservative estimate of the turkey population on the refuge. By continuing this survey technique and gaining insight from hunter data, the Service would recommend a conservative allowable take each year the turkey hunt would be conducted and would maintain a sustainable, healthy turkey population while providing an additional hunting opportunity. The impacts of the proposed hunts allowed on the refuge would be mitigated and limited by the designs of the quota system, allowing a certain number of hunters and take; the dispersion of the hunters within the hunt area (1 hunter/100 acres); the required hunter education and licensing; the requirement of adult supervision for youth hunters; Federal Wildlife Officer and refuge staff oversight; the closure of the hunt area to other users; the use of existing roadways, parking areas, and trails; the requirement that no vegetation be manipulated and no trails be cleared; the limitation on the type of weapons and loads; and the use of check stations to provide hunt data to monitor the success of the hunt. Refuge staff would have the latitude to respond to changing conditions to minimize negative impacts to target species, other wildlife, habitat, other public use activities, and refuge management as necessary.

The Service would not anticipate negative direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to the turkey population from the proposed turkey hunt at Lake Woodruff NWR.

Feral Hogs Overpopulations of feral hogs, an invasive animal species not native to Florida, could result in widespread negative habitat impacts on the refuge. Feral hogs uproot vegetation, disrupt habitat, create areas that look much like plowed fields, and create potential locations for the establishment and spread of exotic plants. Further, feral hogs are omnivorous and are known to eat a variety of wildlife species. The primary intention of feral hog hunts would be to increase pressure on this population and assist in the population control of this unwanted species. This activity would assist the refuge in the control of this species. Injury and direct mortality is expected as well as short-term changes in hog distribution and abundance. A positive impact to the public would be expected based on the local demand for increased hunting on the refuge. Any removal of these destructive animals would have a positive impact to wildlife and habitat on the refuge and for the neighboring properties and habitat.

Feral hog numbers are low on the refuge; however, populations can increase quickly. It is sound management to continue opportunities to remove these invasive species whenever possible. An additional opportunity to remove hogs during the spring turkey hunt would be neutral to positive for all habitat and native wildlife species on the refuge.

Executive Order 13112, Invasive Species, issued in February 1999, instructs Federal Agencies to: prevent the introduction of invasive species; detect and respond rapidly to and control populations of such species in a cost-effective and environmentally sound manner; monitor invasive species populations accurately and reliably; provide for restoration of native species and habitat conditions in ecosystems that have been invaded; conduct research on invasive species and develop technologies to prevent introduction and provide for environmentally sound control

of invasive species; and promote public education on invasive species and the means to address them.

White-tailed Deer Hunting intensity can influence habitat use for highly mobile wildlife species such as deer, which can move away from an area of heavy disturbance. Disturbance impacts associated with upland hunting would be seasonal. Injury and direct mortality would be expected as well as short-term changes in deer distribution and abundance. Direct mortality can impact isolated, resident deer populations by reducing breeding populations to a point where the isolated population can no longer be sustained; however, this would not be anticipated under either alternative.

The average deer home range in Florida is 500 to 600 acres for an adult female and 750 to 1,600 acres for adult males (FWC 2008a). Therefore, only local impacts would be expected to occur. State-wide, approximately 100,000 deer are harvested annually (FWC 2008a), which represents approximately 15 percent of the State’s total population, estimated at 600,000 (Labisky 2000). Like many prey species, deer populations adjust to various harvest levels through a compensatory response. As deer densities are reduced through hunting (or predation), more forage is available for surviving deer, increasing their reproductive capacity. Richter and Labisky (1985) reported that deer in Florida showed a higher mean number of fetuses per pregnant doe on hunted land than on non-hunted sites. Furthermore, the incidence of twinning (doe producing twins) was 38% on hunted sites and 14% on non-hunted sites (Richter and Labisky 1985). No twinning was observed among pregnant fawns or yearlings from non-hunted areas, whereas 18% of the pregnant yearlings and 33% of pregnant fawns from hunted areas carried twins (Richter and Labisky 1985). Additionally, white-tailed deer are adapted to and thrive in highly fragmented habitats (Nixon et al. 2001) and their numbers are likely to remain at huntable levels even as the landscape becomes more urban.

Direct mortality to deer would be expected under the refuge’s deer hunt; however, negative long- term cumulative effects would not be anticipated for the local deer population. The timing, duration and anticipated harvest levels of the refuge’s hunt program would not be anticipated to result in adverse cumulative impacts to refuge resources, wildlife populations, or the surrounding environment. Under the Proposed Action alternative the impacts associated with deer hunting would be expected to be unchanged. Refuge staff would monitor harvest rates through a deer check system and restrict harvest if needed to ensure a sustainable deer population for future hunts. Potential impacts of the Proposed Action would be mitigated and limited by the designs of the quota system, allowing a certain number of hunters and take; the dispersion of the hunters within the hunt area (1 hunter/100 acres); the required hunter education and licensing; the requirement of adult supervision for youth hunters; Federal Wildlife Officer and refuge staff oversight; the closure of the hunt area to other users; the use of existing roadways, parking areas, and trails; the requirement that no vegetation be manipulated and no trails be cleared; the limitation on the type of weapons and loads; and the use of check stations to provide hunt data to monitor the success of the hunt. Refuge staff would have the latitude to respond to changing conditions to minimize negative impacts to target species, other wildlife, habitat, other public use activities, and refuge management as necessary.

The Service would not anticipate negative direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to the deer population from the continuance of deer hunting at Lake Woodruff NWR.

4.4.1.1 Migratory Species: The Proposed Action would not be anticipated to have negative direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts on populations of migratory species.

4.4.1.2 Endangered Species: It is the policy of the Service to protect and preserve all native species of fish, wildlife, and plants, including their habitats, which are designated as threatened or endangered with extinction. Negative direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to populations of federally-listed species would not be anticipated.

Regional Analysis A Section 7 consultation would be conducted with the Jacksonville Ecological Services Office on the proposed action of offering turkey hunting on approximately 11,000 acres of the refuge.

Local Analysis Neither alternative would be expected to have adverse impacts to Federal nor State listed species. The low number of federally listed species that could be encountered and the design of the hunt program provide the expectation that little to no negative impacts to federally listed species would be expected.

4.4.2 Anticipated Direct and Indirect Impacts of Proposed Action on Other Wildlife Dependent Recreation, Refuge Facilities, and Cultural Resources: Neither alternative would be anticipated to result in negative cumulative impacts to other refuge recreation programs, facilities, or cultural resources.

4.4.2.1 Other Wildlife-Dependent Recreation: The refuge has other public use wildlife-dependent opportunities in or around the proposed hunt area that could be affected by the proposed hunt program. Before the hunt, the refuge would notify the public through displaying signs or notices in the hunt area. The hunt could temporarily interfere with wildlife observation and photography through disturbance of other users. Generally, many of these non-hunting activities do not occur frequently in the proposed hunt area; they more often occur in the primary public use zone which is outside the proposed hunt area. These conflicts would be anticipated to be temporary and short-term. Implementing the proposed hunt program would bring a new public hunt opportunity to an area with a demand for increased hunting opportunities.

As public use levels expand across time, the potential for unanticipated conflicts among and with user groups may be present. However, with the low amount of visitor activities in this area, the risk of the public being disturbed would be minimal. In the event such unanticipated conflicts may occur as a result of implementing this hunt program, the refuge’s visitor use programs would be adjusted as needed to eliminate or minimize each problem, so that it could continue to 28

provide a mix of quality wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities. Federal Wildlife Officers and other refuge staff would work to ensure that non-hunting visitors do not enter hunt areas during hunt days. The proposed plan would only increase the amount of hunt days up to 10 additional days during the spring turkey season during the first year and any increase in hunt days after the first year would not exceed the allowable hunt days set by the state agency. At this time of year, only estimated 10-20 visitors on a given day would not be allowed in the hunt area; however, these users could access other public use areas. These hunt areas would be accessible to all user groups during the remainder of the year which would be approximately 85-90% of the year that is not hunted. Hunting season dates and regulations would be set and regulated to allow all user groups to experience a quality visit while on the refuge. The impacts to other user groups would be minimized by the design of the proposed hunts. The refuge would have the flexibility to modify the hunt program in order to meet the needs of both the wildlife-dependent recreational user groups and refuge management.

4.4.2.2 Refuge Facilities: The Service defines facilities as: “Real property that serves a particular function(s) such as buildings, roads, utilities, water control structures, raceways, etc.”

Under the Proposed Action those facilities most utilized by hunters would be existing interior service roads, hunter check stations, and trails. The refuge would need to continue to maintain several small hunter check stations and signs that provide information. The cost of maintaining the check stations would be negligible and the majority of information signs would be provided regardless of hunting access. Roads and other facilities are currently used to accommodate refuge management operations and other visitors, thus no additional costs to maintain them would be associated with the proposed hunt. The addition of these limited hunts would slightly increase vehicular traffic; however, impacts on these facilities would be minor in the short term and over time. Any negative impacts that might be experienced by these facilities would be reduced by appropriate regulation(s) or changes.

4.4.2.3 Cultural Resources: Hunting, regardless of method or species targeted, is a consumptive activity that has not posed a threat to cultural resources on and/or near the refuge during the time it has been allowed on the refuge. It would be anticipated that the additional proposed hunt would also not pose additional threats to these important resources. There would be the potential for accidental or intentional disturbance of cultural resources under any public use activity. Federal Wildlife Officers would increase patrol of these areas during hunt days to help prevent any violation. Hunter education and licensing requirements would help to minimize any impacts to cultural resources. If cultural resource impacts were found, the refuge would modify or eliminate the use to remove the threat, as appropriate or educate all visitors about illegal removal of cultural resources.

4.4.3 Anticipated Impacts of Proposed Hunt on Refuge Environment and Community: Neither alternative would be anticipated to result in negative cumulative impacts to the refuge environment or the local community.

4.4.3.1 Refuge Environment: Due to the design of the hunt program, the small number of hunters, and outlined restrictions, negative impacts to the refuge environment associated with the proposed hunting activities would be anticipated to be minor. It is expected that some minor disturbance to vegetation would occur as a result of people engaging in the proposed hunting activities. Air quality would experience minor impacts due to increased fossil fuel emissions as people travel to and from hunting areas. The increased traffic from limited hunts would not likely cause disturbance or affect the character of the refuge. No additional roads would be open for the proposed hunt, so vegetation impacts would be anticipated to be light and impacts would be contained to foot traffic. Some additional staff time would be needed to administer the program and would include Federal Wildlife Officers, biologists, and refuge rangers. Funds would be expended to develop associated permits, refuge hunt brochures, and signs. The refuge would be participating in the State quota hunt program (FWC’s Total Licensing System), resulting in additional recreational fee revenue. Regulations, permit requirements, and law enforcement patrol would help to minimize any negative impacts of the proposed hunt. Risks to public health and safety would be minimized. Negative cumulative impacts to the refuge environment would not be anticipated.

4.4.3.2 Refuge Community: Neutral to minor positive and minor negative impacts to the refuge community associated with the proposed hunting activities would be anticipated. These impacts would include the chance of disturbance to private property owners and residential areas adjacent to the Volusia Tract and Eastside hunt units. The proposed addition of turkey hunters during the spring turkey season would result in a slight increase in public use of these areas on hunt days. There would be a slight increase in noise impacts to residential areas resulting from the discharge of firearms. Shotgun use poses a slightly increased safety risk to people and property in adjacent residential areas and along the CSX railroad right-of-way. However, increased public safety risks and noise- related impacts resulting from the proposed hunting activities would be ameliorated by enforcing temporary no hunting zones where the refuge boundary abuts private properties and the railroad right-of-way and requiring a no shooting buffer of 100 feet from all roads. The economic impact of the proposed hunt program could include a relatively minor increase in sales of hunting licenses, ammunition, and other hunting accessories and services (e.g., food purchases at local stores and restaurants and accommodations at local hotels) by the limited number of people who would be participating in these hunts. The Proposed Action Alternative would result in a gain of public hunting opportunities in Florida, a region dominated by development, which would have a beneficial impact on the hunting public and on hunter retention/recruitment.

4.4.4 Other Past, Present, Proposed and Reasonably Foreseeable Hunts (and Other Activities) and Anticipated Impacts: The Service is not aware of any past, present, or reasonably foreseeable planned actions that would result in a significant cumulative impact when added to the refuge’s Proposed Action Alternative of continuing the existing deer and feral hog hunt and adding a turkey hunt with incidental take of feral hogs to the existing refuge hunt areas. Deer and turkey hunting would not be anticipated to have any long-term or far-reaching effects on the regional populations of these species, since the home ranges of deer and turkeys limit them primarily to the refuge. Hunting seasons would not coincide with breeding and nesting seasons of migratory birds, so cumulative 30

effects caused by hunting-induced disturbance would be minimal. There would be minimal negative effects to other wildlife, including listed species. Conflicts between hunters and other consumptive and non-consumptive users are not expected to occur. Experience has proven that time and space zoning (e.g., separate use areas and use periods) are effective tools in eliminating conflicts between user groups.

Past Virtually all the lands managed by the Service at Lake Woodruff NWR were hunted before the land was acquired. During this time, hunting was not well-regulated. Further, historic extraction activities, agricultural and timber operations, and development all had an impact on the resources of the refuge. However, hunting activities on the refuge and in the area evolved with the development of regulations, seasons, bag limits, and permit requirements. Further, with the acquisition of the refuge and other conservation areas in the landscape, historic extraction, agriculture, and timber operations were modified or eliminated on those conservation lands, providing conservation benefits to the landscape.

Present The refuge has worked and continues to work in cooperation with FWC biologists and staff in an ongoing effort to establish hunt regulations to maintain a sustainable deer and turkey population on the refuge. Current refuge hunts are very well controlled by number of hunters, season lengths, weapons allowed, and law enforcement presence. The State and Federal regulations on hunting ensure sustainable populations of hunted species (other than feral hogs, which would have a target of declining populations) with a neutral to positive affect to non-target species through protection and decreased negative wildlife and habitat impacts from feral hogs. Existing turkey hunting in the area indicates stable distributions of turkey (e.g., in Ocala National Forest, area WMAs, and Seminole State Forest) (see section 4.4.1 for more information). Existing deer hunting in the area indicates a stable State-wide population (see section 4.4.1 for more information). Existing turkey, deer, and feral hog hunting activities in the area would not be anticipated to have negative cumulative impacts to turkey and deer populations, other native wildlife populations, native habitats, or other elements of the human environment. Ideally, hunting of feral hog would have negative impacts to hog populations, which would have positive benefits for native wildlife and habitat.

Future The proposed opening of the existing hunt area on the refuge to turkey hunting would not be anticipated to negatively impact wildlife populations and habitat on the refuge, and would be anticipated to help decrease feral hogs and their associated negative impacts on the refuge and in the area. Refuge staff would continue to promote native flora and fauna diversity through active habitat management activities that achieve refuge wildlife and habitat priorities, goals, and objectives. Existing turkey hunting in the area indicates stable distributions of turkey (e.g., in Ocala National Forest, area WMAs, and Seminole State Forest) (see section 4.4.1 for more information). Existing deer hunting in the area indicates a stable State-wide population (see section 4.4.1 for more information). The addition of the proposed turkey and incidental feral hog hunting to the area would not be anticipated to have negative cumulative impacts to the refuge’s or area turkey populations, other native wildlife populations, native habitats, or other elements of 31

the human environment. Ideally, hunting of feral hog would have negative impacts to hog populations, which would have positive benefits for native wildlife and habitat.

As public use levels increase over time, the potential for unanticipated conflicts between and within user groups may be present on the refuge. In the event such unanticipated conflicts occur as a result of expanding the hunt program under this proposal, the refuge’s visitor use programs would be adjusted as needed to eliminate or minimize each problem, so that the refuge could continue to provide high quality wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities. Hunting season dates and regulations would be set and regulated to allow user groups to experience a quality visit while on the refuge. The refuge would have the flexibility to modify the hunt program in order to meet the needs of all wildlife-dependent recreational user groups. It is assumed that an increase in visitors to this area would create the potential for beneficial economic effects and a positive image for the local community.

4.4.5 Anticipated Impacts if Individual Hunts are Allowed to Accumulate: The Service has determined that the Proposed Action would not have significant negative cumulative impacts to the refuge environment or refuge programs, including refuge wildlife populations and habitat. This determination was based upon a careful analysis of potential environmental impacts of hunting on the refuge together with other projects and/or actions. Hunting is an appropriate wildlife management tool that can be used to manage wildlife populations. Some wildlife disturbance would occur during the limited hunting seasons. Proper zoning, regulations, and refuge seasons would be utilized to minimize any negative impacts to wildlife populations using the refuge. Field checks by Federal Wildlife Officers would be planned, conducted, and coordinated with staff and other agencies to maintain compliance with regulations and assess species populations and numbers harvested. The hunt would be decreased or eliminated if negative impacts occur. Positive impacts to the overall deer and turkey populations would be expected based on previous data showing a stabilized, healthy population of deer on the refuge after over 40 years of managed hunting and based on sustainable turkey hunt programs within the surrounding conservation areas. Accumulated negative impacts to the feral hog population would be positive for the refuge environment.

4.5 Environmental Justice: Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority and Low- Income Populations; February 11, 1994) was designed to focus the attention of Federal Agencies on the environmental and human health conditions of minority and low-income populations, with the goal of achieving environmental protection for all communities. The Order directed federal agencies to develop environmental justice strategies to aid in identifying and addressing disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority and low-income populations. The Order is intended to promote nondiscrimination in federal programs substantially affecting human health and the environment, and to provide minority and low income communities with access to public information and opportunities for participation in matters related to human health and the environment.

None of the alternatives described in this EA would disproportionately place any adverse environmental, economic, social, or health impacts on minority and low income populations. Implementation of the Proposed Action is anticipated to provide negligible minor benefits to the environment and people in the surrounding communities.

4.6 Indian Trust Assets: No Indian Trust Assets have been identified in the proposed hunt area of Lake Woodruff NWR. There are no reservations or ceded lands present. Because Indian Trust Assets are not believed to be present, no impacts are anticipated to result from implementation of either alternative described in the EA.

4.7 Unavoidable Adverse Effects: As proposed under Alternative B, the implementation of turkey hunting on the refuge may result in some unavoidable adverse impacts. Some deer and turkeys would be taken; however, there would be no discernable effect on populations of deer and turkey on the refuge. There would also be some short-term disturbance to other resident wildlife during hunt days, but these impacts are expected to be minimal, short-lived, and discrete.

4.8 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources: None of the alternatives would result in a commitment of nonrenewable resources.

4.9 Table 1 - Summary of Environmental Effects by Alternative: Alternative A: Alternative B: Environmental No Action Alternative Proposed Action Alternative Resource (Continue Current Hunt (Expand the Current Hunt Plan Program) to include a Spring Turkey Hunt) Impacts to Geology No change; vehicle access is Same as alternative A, no proposed limited to existing road system additional roads required Impacts to No change; minor soil Same as alternative A, with minor Topography and compaction could result from increase associated with the Soils hunter foot travel; off-road additional hunting parties. vehicle travel is prohibited Impacts to No change; no impacts due to use Same as alternative A, no proposed Hydrology of existing open roads; wetland changes to roads, access, or areas would remain closed to management that would impact vehicle access and off-road travel hydrology would be prohibited Impacts to Water No change; minor impacts to Similar to alternative A, with minor Quality and water quality from potential fuel increase of a negative impact Quantity spills from increased hunter boat associated with the additional traffic hunting parties, minor to no impact to water quality and no impact to water quantity Impacts to Air No change; minor vehicle Similar to alternative A with minor

Quality emissions and stirring of road increase of minor air quality dust expected, minor negligible impacts associated with the impacts to air quality additional hunting parties, negligible impacts Impacts on Habitat No change; current deer and hog Similar to Alternative A with minor hunt results in minor negative increase of negative impact impacts to individual plants from associated with additional hunting trampling by hunters parties Impacts on No change; currently there are Similar to Alternative A with minor Resident Wildlife minor direct negative effects from increase in risk of negative impact disturbance by visitors on trails or due to additional hunting parties hunting within the proposed hunt and turkey mortality. Minor to no area, as well as increased deer and negative impacts to resident species hog mortality, no negative impacts to resident wildlife species Impacts to No change; minor to no negative Similar to Alternative A with minor Migratory Species impact to migratory species increase of risk of negative impact from additional hunting parties Impacts on No change; current deer and hog Similar to Alternative A, with Threatened and hunt results in minor direct minor increase of negative effect Endangered Species negative effects from disturbance due to additional hunting parties, to listed species and slight minor to no impacts to listed increase of potential manatee boat species collisions, minor to no impacts to listed species Impacts on Cultural No change; current deer and hog Similar to Alternative A, minor Resources hunt results in minor direct negative effect by increasing refuge negative effect resulting from use with the additional hunting hunter foot traffic. parties. Impacts on No change; current deer and hog Similar to Alternative A, with Socioeconomic hunt likely has slight minor increase associated with Resources socioeconomic benefit to local additional hunting parties, no businesses. negligible impacts Impacts to Visitor No change; negligible impacts Similar to Alternative A, negligible Services/Recreation with opportunity for variety of impacts, minor positive impact of wildlife-oriented recreation with opening refuge to new hunting temporary closures of some areas opportunities. Minor negative to non-hunters impacts from closing areas to non- hunters during spring turkey season. Impacts on Public No change; minor risks to public Similar to Alternative A, minor Health and Safety safety; risks minimized by increase in safety risks with the limiting number of hunters and addition of hunting parties instituting temporary closures. 34

Impacts of Refuge No change; maintenance required Similar to Alternative A with minor Facilities for gates, roads, and parking lots, increase of maintenance needed no negative impacts to refuge from the addition of a new hunt, no facilities negative impacts to refuge facilities

5.0 CONSULTATION, COORDINATION, AND DOCUMENT PREPARATION

5.1 Agencies and individuals consulted in the preparation of this document include: • U.S. Forest Service • Tribal Historic Preservation Officers for the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, the Poarch Band of Creeks, the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, and the Seminole Tribe of Florida • Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission • Florida Park Service • St. John’s Rive Water Management District • National Wild Turkey Federation

5.2 References: Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census bureau. 2011 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation.

Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 2014. Watershed Assessment. Statewide Comprehensive Verified List of Impaired Waters. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/watersheds/assessment/a-lists.htm

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2011. Economics for Fish and Wildlife Recreation in Florida. http://myfwc.com/about/overview/economics/ Accessed February 24, 2017.

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2017. Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Species. Updated January 2017. 12 pp. http://myfwc.com/media/1515251/threatened-endangered-species.pdf

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2008a. Strategic Plan for Deer Management in Florida 2008-2018. Prepared by the Deer Management Standing Team. Tallahassee, Florida. http://myfwc.com/media/464652/DeerManagementPlan2008_2018.pdf

Forrester, D.J. 1991. Parasites and Diseases of Wild Mammals in Florida. University of Florida Press. Gainesville, FL, USA.

Healy, W. M., and S. M. Powell. 1999. Wild turkey harvest management: biology, strategies, and techniques. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sheperdstown, WV. Biological Technical Publication BTP-R5001-1999:1-96.

Labisky, R. 2000. UF Research: Does Make Up For Losses Of Hunted Bucks. University of Florida News. http://news.ufl.edu/2000/11/16/deer/

Lint, J. R., B. D. Leopold, and G. A. Hurst. 1995. Comparison of abundance indexes and population estimates for wild turkey gobblers. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23:164-168.

Mid-Florida Marketing and Research Inc. 2015. West Volusia Visitor Profile. Unpublished data.

Nixon, C. M., L. P. Hansen, P. A. Brewer, J. E. Chelsvig, T. L. Esker, D. Etter, J. B. Sullivan, R. G. Koerkenmeier, and P. C. Mankin. 2001. Survival of white-tailed deer in intensively farmed areas of Illinois. Canadian Journal of Zoology 79:581-588.

Richter, A. R., and R. F. Labisky. 1985. Reproductive Dynamics Among Disjunct White-Tailed Deer Herds in Florida. Journal of Wildlife Management 49(4):964-971.

Schnable, J.E. and Goodell, H.G. 1968. Pleistocene-Recent Stratigraphy, Evolution and Development of the Appalachicola Coast, Florida. Special paper #112. Geological Society of America.

Suchy, W. J., W. R. Clark, and T. W. Little. 1983. Influence of simulated harvest on Iowa wild turkey populations. Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci. 90:98-102.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2016. Population and Housing Narrative Profile 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Geography 32130. U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. Washington, DC. http://thedataweb.rm.census.gov/TheDataWeb_HotReport2/profile/2015/5yr/np01.hrml? SUMLEV=860&zcta=32130 Accessed February 24, 2017.

U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau. 2011 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. https://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/fhw11-fl.pdf Accessed April 21, 2017.

Vangilder, L.D. 1992. Population dynamics. pages 144-164 in J.G. Dickinson, Ed. The wild turkey: biology and management. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, PA. 36

Vangilder, L. D., and E. W. Kurzejeski. 1995. Population ecology of the eastern wild turkey in northern Missouri. Wildl. Monogr. 130:1-50.

Williams, L. E., Jr. and D. H. Austin. 1988. Studies of the wild turkey in Florida. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission Technical Bulletin 10.