Assabet River NWR Final CCP - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Wetland habitat: Photo by John Grabill
Chapter 4: Management Direction
resulting effects and consequences of each alternative. The selected
alternative, “prescribed fire and wildland fire suppression” is discussed in
detail in the EA. Alternatives which were considered, but not selected,
include differing combinations of: allowing naturally ignited fires to burn in
some instances; use of prescribed burning to achieve wildlife resource and
habitat objectives; and, wildland fire suppression. A “no-action” alternative
of allowing all fires to burn at all times was initially considered, but
dismissed as not suitable for further consideration in the development of
this proposal. The no-action alternative was rejected because it fails to
meet Service policy in regards to potential liability for losses of life and
property, as well as its unacceptable environmental, social, and economic
costs.
The mission of the Complex is to protect and provide quality habitat for fish
and wildlife resources and for the development, advancement,
management, and conservation thereof. By defining an appropriate level of
wildland fire protection, and integrating a prescribed fire program based
on biological needs, the FMP and EA are fully supportive and sensitive to
the purpose of the Complex, and of benefit to the Service, in performing its
activities and services.
Land Protection
The Service is currently working on a new national land
conservation policy and strategic growth initiative. This policy
will develop a vision and process for growth of the Refuge
System, helping individual refuges better evaluate lands
suitable for inclusion in the Refuge System. The process will
help ensure that lands the Service protects are of national and
regional importance and meet certain nationwide standards
and goals. Also, some of the focus of reevaluating Refuge
System growth has come from the need to address nationwide
operations and maintenance (O&M) backlogs on existing
properties. Many refuges, including Assabet River NWR, are
not fully staffed under current budgets and have significant
O&M backlogs. Expanding boundaries creates a need for
additional staff, O&M funds, as well as additional dollars for
the land protection itself. Our Director has asked that we
focus, on acquiring inholdings within already approved
boundaries. The Service may make slight modifications to a
refuge boundary to acquire additional lands of high resource
value adjacent to the refuge, if we have a willing seller.
The Service’s land acquisition policy is to obtain the minimum interest
necessary to satisfy refuge objectives. Conservation easements can
sometimes be used in this context, when they can be shown to be a costeffective
method of protection. In general, conservation easements must
preclude destruction or degradation of habitat, and allow refuge staff to
Comprehensive Conservation Plan - 61 -