Appendices A-P Appendices A-P Gopher Snake Addison Mohler/USFWS Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Appendix A. Appropriate Use Determinations A.1. Introduction The Appropriate Refuge Uses Policy (603 FW 1 [2006]) outlines the process that the Service uses to determine when general public uses on refuges may be considered. Priority public uses previously defined as wildlife-dependent uses (hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and environmental education and interpretation) under the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 are generally exempt from appropriate use review. Other exempt uses include situations in which the Service does not have adequate jurisdiction to control the activity, as well as refuge management activities. In essence, the appropriate use policy provides refuge managers with a consistent procedure to first screen and then document decisions concerning a public use. When a use is determined to be appropriate, refuge managers must then decide if the use is compatible before allowing it on a refuge. The policy also requires review of existing public uses. During the comprehensive conservation process (CCP) process, the Refuge Manager evaluated all existing and proposed uses at Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) using the following guidelines and criteria as outlined in the appropriate use policy: Do we have jurisdiction over the use? Does the use comply with applicable laws and regulations (Federal, State, Tribal, and local)? Is the use consistent with applicable executive orders and Department of the Interior (Department) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) policies? Is the use consistent with public safety? Is the use consistent with goals and objectives in an approved management plan or other document? Has an earlier documented analysis not denied the use or is this the first time the use has been proposed? Is the use manageable within available budget and staff? Will this be manageable in the future within existing resources? Does the use contribute to the public’s understanding and appreciation of the refuge’s natural or cultural resources, or is the use beneficial to the refuge’s natural or cultural resources? Can the use be accommodated without impairing existing wildlife-dependent recreational uses or reducing the potential to provide quality (see section 1.6D of the appropriate use policy for description of recreational uses) compatible, wildlife-dependent recreation into the future. The following uses were evaluated and are included in this document. Refuge Use Appropriate Page Boating at No-wake Speeds at Lake Lowell Unit Yes A-3 Competitive Cycling No A-7 Competitive Jogging No A-11 Competitive Rowing No A-15 Cycling and Jogging by Individuals and Groups Yes A-19 Farming and Grazing Yes A-23 Appendix A. Appropriate Use Determinations A-1 Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Float Plane (landing and taking off) No A-27 Traditional Geocaching (burial or placement of a No A-31 physical cache) High-speed Watercraft at Lake Lowell Unit Yes A-35 Horseback Riding by Individuals and Groups Yes A-39 Ice Skating No A-43 Radio-controlled Planes No A-45 Research Yes A-49 Swimming and Beach Use Yes A-53 Walking with Pets (dogs) Yes A-57 Sailing Regattas Yes A-63 Mosquito Management Yes A-67 The Refuge Manager and staff members completed compatibility determinations in Appendix B, for each of the following appropriate uses: boating at no-wake speeds, individuals biking, jogging, and horseback riding; farming and grazing, high-speed watercraft, research, swimming and beach use, picnicking, walking with pets, sailing regattas, and mosquito management. A-2 Appendix A. Appropriate Use Determinations Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Finding of Appropriateness of a Refuge Use Refuge Name: Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge Use: Boating at No-wake Speeds at Lake Lowell Unit This form is not required for wildlife-dependent recreational uses; take regulated by the State, or uses already described in a refuge CCP or step-down management plan approved after October 9, 1997. Decision criteria: YES NO (a) Do we have jurisdiction over the use? (b) Does the use comply with applicable laws and regulations (federal, state, tribal, and local)? (c) Is the use consistent with applicable executive orders and Department and Service policies? (d) Is the use consistent with public safety? (e) Is the use consistent with goals and objectives in an approved management plan or other document? (f) Has an earlier documented analysis not denied the use, or is this the first time the use has been proposed? (g) Is the use manageable within available budget and staff? (h) Will this be manageable in the future within existing resources? (i) Does the use contribute to the public’s understanding and appreciation of the Refuge’s natural or cultural resources, or is the use beneficial to the Refuge’s natural or cultural resources? (j) Can the use be accommodated without impairing existing wildlife-dependent recreational uses or reducing the potential to provide quality (see section 1.6D. for description), compatible, wildlife-dependent recreation into the future? Where we do not have jurisdiction over the use (“no” to (a)), there is no need to evaluate it further as we cannot control the use. Uses that are illegal, inconsistent with existing policy, or unsafe (“no” to (b), (c), or (d)) may not be found appropriate. If the answer is “no” to any of the other questions above, we will generally not allow the use. If indicated, the refuge manager has consulted with State fish and wildlife agencies. Yes ___ No When the refuge manager finds the use appropriate based on sound professional judgment, the refuge manager must justify the use in writing on an attached sheet and obtain the refuge supervisor’s concurrence. Based on an overall assessment of these factors, my summary conclusion is that the proposed use is: Not Appropriate____ Appropriate _ Refuge Manager:______________________________________ Date:______________________ If found to be Not Appropriate, the refuge supervisor does not need to sign concurrence if the use is a new use. If an existing use is found Not Appropriate outside the CCP process, the refuge supervisor must sign concurrence. If found to be Appropriate, the refuge supervisor must sign concurrence. Refuge Supervisor:______________________________________ Date:______________________ A compatibility determination is required before the use may be allowed. FWS Form 3-2319 02/06 Appendix A. Appropriate Use Determinations A-3 Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Appropriate Use Justification Refuge Name: Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge Use: Boating at No-wake Speeds at Lake Lowell Unit (a) Do we have jurisdiction over the use? Yes. On June 24, 2010, the Department of the Interior Office of the Solicitor concluded that the Service had jurisdiction over surface water uses on Lake Lowell and that Lake Lowell was not in existence at statehood and, therefore, is not classified as navigable water. (b) Does the use comply with applicable laws and regulations (Federal, State, Tribal, and local)? Yes. The Refuge is not aware of any laws or regulations that would preclude this use on the Lake Lowell Unit of Deer Flat NWR. (c) Is the use consistent with applicable Executive orders and Department and Service policies? Yes. The Refuge is not aware of any Executive orders or Department or Service policies that would preclude this use on the Lake Lowell Unit of Deer Flat NWR. (d) Is the use consistent with public safety? Yes. Boaters using Lake Lowell must comply with all State and Federal boater safety requirements. (e) Is the use consistent with goals and objectives in an approved management plan or other document? Yes. We are currently at the maximum boating visits identified in the 1990 Master Plan, as updated in 1996 (USFWS 1996). (f) Has an earlier documented analysis not denied the use or is this the first time the use has been proposed? Yes. No compatibility determinations have been previously completed for this use. (g) Is the use manageable within available budget and staff? Yes. This use is currently manageable in partnership with the Canyon County Sheriff’s Department. (h) Will this be manageable in the future within existing resources? Yes, as long as we continue to partner with the Canyon County Sheriff’s Department. (i) Does the use contribute to the public’s understanding and appreciation of the refuge’s natural or cultural resources, or is the use beneficial to the refuge’s natural or cultural resources? A-4 Appendix A. Appropriate Use Determinations Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Yes. This mode of transportation allows fishermen, wildlife observers, and other wildlife-dependent recreationists to access to wildlife and environments that could not be reached otherwise. This access increases their enjoyment of the Refuge and appreciation of its wildlife and habitats. Boating at no- wake speeds, in the areas provided by the Preferred Alternative, should cause fewer disturbances to wildlife than high-speed boating. Motorized boats can also cover a larger area in a relatively short time in comparison to nonmotorized boats, affecting more area and providing less time for wildlife to react. Compared to motorboats, human-powered boats like canoes and kayaks appear to cause fewer disturbances to most wildlife species (DeLong 2002; Huffman 1999). Boats traveling at no-wake speeds do cause some level of disturbance to wildlife but the slow speed, low noise levels, and low approach velocity minimizes the adverse effects associated with boat use in no-wake zones while allowing wildlife-dependent recreationists access to wildlife and environments that could not be reached otherwise.