FONSI__Template_508-Compliant__Jan2025_2.pdf

Finding of No Significant Impact and Decision to [insert short title of action]

[Insert refuge name] National Wildlife Refuge

City, State

NEPA Unique Identifier: [Insert ID provided by HQ]

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is [insert summary from proposed action section of

EA].

Selected Action Alternative – [insert title of preferred alternative from EA] [Describe what you propose to do and how you propose to do it – the who, what, where, when, and how, including information on timing and duration of the project, connected actions, etc.]

The preferred alternative was selected over the other alternatives because:

[Describe how implementation of the chosen alternative will affect the refuge; list highlights of what it will do. Some examples are as follows, the last two should be in all FONSIs:

1. This alternative best meets the purpose and need for action as described in the environmental assessment and the Service’s priorities and mandates as outlined by the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act (NWRSAA) to “provide for the conservation for fish, wildlife, and plants, and their habitats within the System” in addition to “ensuring the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of refuges is maintained” (16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(4)).

2. The preferred alternative is in compliance with Service policy regarding the use of herbicides and integrated pest management on National Wildlife Refuges (Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Policy (569 FW 1), Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health (601 FW 3), and Habitat Management Plans (620 FW 1).

3. The preferred alternative supports implementation of the purpose for which the refuge was established.

4. This proposal does not initiate widespread controversy or litigation.

5. There are no conflicts with local, state, regional, or federal, law, plans or policies.]

Other Alternatives Considered and Analyzed Alternative B – [insert title of this alternative from EA] [Cut and paste from the EA both the brief description of the action and the summary of findings and conclusions regarding the action]

This alternative was not selected, because:

[describe reasons why this alternative wasn’t selected. Typically, you look back to how the alternative does not meet the purpose and need or would have significant impacts. Examples from an invasive species management decision include:

1. This alternative would limit the refuge from selecting the most appropriate technique in controlling invasive species or undesirable vegetation in an integrated pest management protocol.

2. The alternative would prevent the refuge from adequately controlling invasive species and other non-desirable vegetation and would cause negative impacts to important wildlife habitats on the refuge.

3. With this alternative the refuge would not be expected to meet its purpose or mission as habitats would eventually be degraded with invasive species and other undesirable vegetation. This would negatively affect refuge resources like migratory birds, resident wildlife, and threatened and endangered species. The loss of habitat diversity would negatively affect wildlife-dependent recreation and the refuge’s environmental health.

This would then limit Sherburne NWR’s resilience in the face of stressors like climate change, new invasive species introductions, and disease outbreaks.

4. This alternative does not best meet the purpose and need as described in the environmental assessment and does not allow the Service’s to meet its priorities and mandates as outlined by the NWRSAA.]

Summary of Effects of the Selected Action An Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to provide decision-making framework that 1) explored a reasonable range of alternatives to meet project objectives, 2) evaluated potential issues and impacts to the refuge, resources and values, and 3) identified mitigation measures to lessen the degree or extent of these impacts. The EA evaluated the effects associated with alternatives as outlined above. The Environmental Assessment and all other compliance documentation is incorporated as part of this finding.

Implementation of the agency’s decision would be expected to result in the following environmental, social, and economic effects:

[Describe/list relevant portions of the environmental assessment. Make sure to include a comprehensive summary of all affected resources evaluated and indicate which resources were not evaluated further. Example language: “The preferred alternative should have minimal effects on the environment and social and economic human environment. The environmental assessment provides a comprehensive summary of impacts to affected resources, including, terrestrial wildlife and aquatic species, threatened and endangered species and other special status species, habitat and vegetation, water quality, research and natural areas, refuge management and operations, visitor use and experience, and local and regional economies.

Resources including floodplains, cultural resources, environmental justice, geology and soils and air quality either do not exist in the project area or were determined to not be affected.” This introductory paragraph is followed by a summary of each of the affected resources evaluated.]

Measures to mitigate and/or minimize adverse effects have been incorporated into the selected action. These measures include:

[Describe/list relevant portions of the EA; a mitigated finding of no significant impact shall include the enforceable mitigation requirements or commitments that will be undertaken and the authority to enforce them, such as terms and conditions or other measures in a relevant permit, incidental take statement, or other agreement; a monitoring and compliance plan must also be prepared; see EA template guidance for additional details]

Documentation of significance While refuges, by their nature, are unique areas protected for conservation of fish, wildlife and habitat, the proposed action will not have a significant impact on refuge resources and uses for several reasons above and those enumerated below. As described in, 40 CFR §1501.3(d), significance is determined by examining the context of the action and the intensity of the effect. Based on the analysis in the EA, which is summarized in these sections, the Service has determined that the preferred alternative can be implemented without significant adverse effects.

1. The actions will not have a significant adverse effect on public health and safety [[EA, page #]].

2. The project will not have significant adverse effects on any unique characteristics of the geographic area such as historic or cultural resources, Tribal sacred sites, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas. [EA, page #].

3. The project will not violate relevant Federal, State, Tribal, or local laws or other requirements and is not inconsistent with Federal, State, Tribal, or local policies designed for the protection of the environment.

4. The effects on the quality of the human environment are not likely to be highly controversial [EA, page #].

5. The actions do not involve highly uncertain effects on the human environment [EA, page

6. The actions will not establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects nor does it represent a decision in principle about a future consideration [EA, page #].

7. There will be no cumulative significant impacts on the environment. Cumulative impacts have been analyzed with consideration of other similar activities on adjacent lands, in past action, and in foreseeable future actions [EA, page #].

8. The actions will not significantly affect any site listed in, or eligible for listing in, the

National Register of Historic Places, nor will they cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historic resources [EA, page #].

9. Potential impacts to threatened or endangered species and Federally designated critical habitat have been addressed through an Intra-Service Consultation for Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act [EA, page #].

10. [EA, page #]The action area is not within or near the refuge designated wilderness area and as such will have no positive or negative impacts to wilderness. The refuge does have additional special designations such as a Research and Natural Areas and this action does not impact that designation [EA, page #].

11. There is no scientific controversy over the impacts of this action and the impacts of the proposed action are relatively certain.

12. The project will have no significant adverse effects on communities with environmental justice concerns.

13. The project will have no significant adverse effects on the rights of Tribal Nationals that have been reserved through treaties, statutes, or Executive Orders.

14. The proposal is not expected to have any substantial short- or long-term adverse effects on wetlands and floodplains, pursuant to Executive Orders 11990 and 11988 [EA, page

Public Involvement, State Coordination and Tribal Consultation The proposal has been thoroughly coordinated with all interested and/or affected parties.

Parties contacted include:

[Provide a list of parties contacted]

On [date], the Service put the EA out for a [#] day public review and comment. The Service [received/did not receive] public comments on the EA [Summarize comments, issues raised, and any response to comments. Reference the summary response to comment document for more detail and only provide a summary of comments here.]

State Coordination [Describe any coordination with the States. Include issues raised and how they were addressed].

Tribal Consultation [Describe any consultation with the Tribes. Include issues raised and how they were addressed].

Finding of No Significant Impact Based upon a review and evaluation of the information contained in the EA as well as other documents and actions of record affiliated with this proposal, the Service has determined that the proposal to implement the continued use of aerial applications as a method/tool for applying herbicides on the Sherburne NWR does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment under the meaning of section 102

(2) (c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (as amended). As such, an environmental impact statement is not required.

Decision The Service has decided to [insert concise summary of selected action and when it will begin.

Can include language about compatibility and system mission if applicable, “This action is compatible with the purpose of the refuge and the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System.”]

The action is consistent with applicable laws and policies.

Signature

National Wildlife Refuge System Regional Chief Signature and Date

Supporting documents:

Environmental Assessment Intra-Service Section 7 determination Environmental Action Statement [insert any additional supporting material such as compatibility determination, step-down plan, regional historic preservation office clearance form]