[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 174 (Friday, September 6, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47174-47176]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-22698]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service


Record of Decision, Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore; Final 
Environmental Impact Statement: Beaver Basin Rim Road

Introduction

    Pursuant to regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental 
Quality (40 CFR Section 1505.2) and the implementing procedures of the 
National Park Service for the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(40 USC 1501 et seq.), the National Park Service has prepared this 
Record of Decision with respect to the Final Environmental Impact 
Statement: Beaver Basin Rim Road, Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, 
Michigan.
    This Record of Decision describes the road provision alternatives 
that were considered, mitigating measures adopted to avoid or minimize 
environmental impacts, and the decision reached.

Decision

    The National Park Service adopts the proposed (preferred) 
alternative (Alternative B), which is to construct a two-lane paved 
road of approximately 13 miles length within the shoreline zone of the 
Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore.
    The road would run from the vicinity of Legion Lake near the 
intersection of the Little Beaver Campground entrance road with Alger 
County Road H-58 northeasterly to near the Twelvemile Beach Campground 
entrance road intersection with Alger County H-58. The road impact on 
the environment would be minimal.
    In constructing the road as described under Alternative B, the 
National Park Service would be complying with the direction of the 
Congress as stipulated in Public Law 89-668 [80 Stat. 922 sec. 6(b)(1)] 
to provide a scenic drive within the shoreline zone of the national 
lakeshore. The adopted alternative is consistent with this 
congressional mandate and would implement the management directions of 
the General Management Plan, Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore (NPS, 
USDI 1981). The National Park Service takes the position that, in the 
absence of environmental impacts precluding construction of the road, 
it must comply

[[Page 47175]]

with this express congressional direction, and that it should implement 
the related provisions of the 1981 General Management Plan.
    In issuing this decision, the National Park Service recognizes that 
there is considerable public opposition to this action despite the 
findings of the environmental impact analysis and the congressional 
direction to construct the scenic shoreline drive. In response to that 
opposition and efforts of members of the 104th Congress to eliminate by 
means of amendatory legislation the congressionally mandated scenic 
drive, the National Park Service will take no immediate action to 
implement this project. If legislation in the form of an amendment to 
P.L. 89-688 (section 6 (b)(1)) is enacted, the National Park Service 
will revise the general management plan for Pictured Rocks National 
Lakeshore to be consistent with the direction of such legislation.

Alternatives Considered

    The environmental impact statement analyzed three road provision 
alternatives. Alternative A: No Action (Continuation of Existing 
Conditions), Alternative B: Shoreline Zone Corridor (Proposed Action), 
and Alternative C: Inland Buffer Zone Corridor.
    The environmental impact statement considered and eliminated from 
further consideration three other alternatives for the location and 
design of the shoreline road. These three alternatives were offered 
during preparation of the environmental impact statement: (1) Upgrading 
County Road H-58, (2) Construct a Paved Trail, and (3) Construct a 
Gravel Road. The upgrading of County Road H-58 had been previously 
evaluated and rejected as alternative 3 in the environmental assessment 
prepared in 1981 for the General Management Plan, Pictured Rocks 
National Lakeshore.

Alternative B: Shoreline Zone Corridor (Proposed Action)

    Construction activities associated with the adopted alternative 
would directly affect 82 acres of mixed northern hardwood and pinelands 
forest vegetation. Of the 82 acres, 47 would be replanted with grasses 
and forbs upon completion of the road. Another two acres would be 
cleared for two scenic overlooks of the Beaver Basin area of the park. 
The road corridor is entirely within the shoreline zone on lands owned 
by the National Park Service. No land acquisition would be required. 
Most of the road would be located 400 feet or more back (south and 
east) of the Beaver Basin Rim. Existing old road traces totaling about 
5 percent of the entire road would be used wherever possible. Two spur 
roads would be constructed off the main road to two overlooks that 
would provide views of Beaver Basin, Beaver Lake, Grand Portal Point, 
Lake Superior, and the Sevenmile Creek area.
    There are no threatened or endangered species affected. However, 
the National Park Service would undertake further section 7(c) of the 
Endangered Species Act consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service with respect to potential impacts on the eastern timber wolf, 
in particular, and other species prior to the initiation of any 
construction activity.
    Due to the road construction, there would be a temporary, minor 
effect on air quality and a temporary, major increase in noise levels. 
Also, there would be minor increases in pollutants from automobile and 
bus traffic and a minor to moderate increase in noise due to projected 
use of the new road. There would be a minor overall impact on park 
soils and vegetation resulting from construction of the main road, spur 
roads, parking areas, and overlooks. Impacts on wildlife populations, 
including recovery of the eastern timber wolf, would be relatively 
minor. There would be no impacts on cultural resources because there 
are no extant buildings, and an archeological survey found no 
significant sites. The anticipated increase in visitation would cause 
some components of the existing visitor experiences to be lost, but a 
new experience would be offered. Significant social impacts, 
particularly in the Grand Marais area, would be caused by increased 
traffic and decreased tranquility. There could be a significant 
increase in visitor expenditures in Munising and Grand Marais. An 
increase in seasonal NPS staff would be necessary to provide law 
enforcement and maintenance for the new section of road and its 
associated spur roads, parking areas, and overlooks.

Alternative C: Inland Buffer Zone Corridor

    The road would be located generally parallel to the proposed 
alignment of alternative B about 800 feet south and east of the Beaver 
Basin Rim to a point east of the Sevenmile area where it would turn 
directly east across the Kingston Plains to intersect with Alger County 
H-58 north of Kingston Lake. It would be situated on largely non-NPS 
owned lands within the park inland buffer zone.
    Construction activities associated with a road within the inland 
buffer zone of the park are similar to those of alternative B. The 
overlook locations would be the same as those for alternative B. and 
old road traces would be used wherever possible for the new road. 
Approximately 87 acres of forest vegetation (mixed northern hardwoods 
and pineland) would be effected with 38 acres permanently lost and 49 
acres replanted to grasses and forbs. The length of this road would be 
11.5 miles. The National Park Service would be required to acquire 
2,560 acres of land (330 acres by donation from the State of Michigan).
    Impacts for air quality, noise, soils, vegetation, wildlife, 
cultural resources, visitor use and experience, socioeconomic 
environment, and park operations would be similar to those of 
alternative B. As in the case of alternative B., the National Park 
Service would initiate further section 7(c) Endangered Species Act 
consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with respect to 
the eastern timber wolf and other threatened and endangered species 
prior to beginning any construction.

Alternative A: No Action (Continuation of Existing Conditions)

    In alternative A (no-action alternative), the current management of 
Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore would continue. A new park road would 
not be built, and existing park roads would be maintained at current 
levels. Access into the park would not change. Visitors would continue 
to drive outside the park, primarily through the park's inland buffer 
zone on county road H-58 or on state highways 28 and 77, to get from 
one end of the park to the other. This alternative would not be 
consistent with the intent of Public Law 89-668, which directed NPS 
development of a scenic drive within the shoreline zone of the national 
lakeshore.
    Overall impacts on air quality, noise, soils, vegetation, wildlife 
(including recovery of the eastern timber wolf), and visual resources/
quality would be minor because no new road construction actions would 
be taken that affect these resources. There would be no impacts on 
cultural resources. If current visitation rates continue, there would 
be a significant increase in the number of visitors to the park by 
2003, but the effect on the visitor experience should be negligible. If 
visitation increased, there would be a significant increase in visitor 
expenditures as well as a significant change in the lifestyle for 
residents of Grand Marais. In order to provide the appropriate level of 
services, the park would need to increase its seasonal staff.

[[Page 47176]]

Other Alternatives

(1) Upgrading County Road H-58
    Analyzed and rejected as alternative 3 of the environmental 
assessment for the 1981 General Management Plan, Pictured Rocks 
National Lakeshore, the upgrade and paving of existing county road H-58 
from Legion Lake to the Twelvemile Beach Campground was proposed by 
participants in the EIS preparation process. A spur road would be built 
to a proposed new overlook at Beaver Basin. Except for a small section 
of road near the Twelvemile Beach Campground and the overlook spur 
road, the proposed park road would be located either completely outside 
the park boundary or in the inland buffer zone. Under this alternative, 
H-58 would continue to be a county road and would be maintained by the 
county. The road would continue to be open to commercial traffic and 
groomed for snowmobile use.
    This alternative was rejected from analysis for several reasons. 
First, H-58 existed prior to the park's enabling legislation (80 Stat. 
922), and as such it could not qualify as the scenic shoreline drive 
authorized by the act. The legislative history of the enabling 
legislation specifically states that the shoreline drive is to be built 
within the park's shoreline zone. Designating this portion of H-58 as 
the shoreline drive would not be consistent with congressional intent. 
For these reasons, the Department of the Interior's regional solicitor 
concluded that H-58 could not qualify as the scenic shoreline drive 
authorized by Congress.
    In addition to the above legislative requirements, most of H-58 
between Legion Lake and Twelvemile Beach Campground is too far from the 
actual Lake Superior shoreline to reasonably be considered a shoreline 
drive. Also, H-58 is not owned or maintained by the National Park 
Service and portions are not within the park boundary. The park Service 
has no authority or funding source to upgrade a county (or state) owned 
roadway. The Park Service could not manage use of the road or the 
adjacent land. Using H-58 as the shoreline drive does not separate park 
visitor traffic from local or commercial traffic. Thus, a park 
experience is not provided to visitors by upgrading H-58. Finally, 
visitors still would have to drive outside the park and would not have 
access to the center of the park.
(2) Construct a Paved Trail
    Several individuals and groups proposed that the National Park 
Service construct a paved trail for nonmotorized use instead of a new 
road. This new trail could be used by hikers, bikers, horses, and 
visitors in wheelchairs. Presumably, it would follow the same alignment 
as the proposed road. This alternative was rejected because it would be 
inconsistent with both the park's enabling legislation (which called 
for development of a shoreline drive) and the 1981 General Management 
Plan (which called for construction of a road along the rim of Beaver 
Basin). In addition, this trail would serve only a small segment of the 
public. Many more park visitors probably would drive a road than would 
walk or bike on a 13-mile-long trail through the woods.
(3) Construct a Gravel Road
    An alternative was advanced to construct a new road with a gravel 
surface instead of pavement. This alternative would be inconsistent 
with the park's general management plan, which called for the main 
east-west road through the park (including the new road) to be paved. 
Constructing a gravel surface road would not eliminate environmental 
impacts. Although a gravel road would be partially permeable to 
precipitation and would be less expensive to construct, it would result 
in many of the same impacts as a paved road (e.g., increased noise, 
loss of vegetation, wildlife disturbance). In addition, a gravel road 
would result in increased dust and increased potential for erosion and 
vehicle damage, and would require more routine maintenance than a paved 
road.

Measures To Minimize Harm

    This record of decision incorporates mitigation measures identified 
in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (Mitigating Measures pages 
29-33) and in the section 7(c) Endangered Species Act consultation 
comments of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    Several design features of the road and management actions will 
help minimize natural resource impacts of the road. These include 
siting the road away from the escarpment, designing it as a two-lane 
roadway with a posted speed of 35 mph, prohibiting commercial vehicles 
(except tour buses), not plowing the road in winter, eliminating by 
reclaiming all ``two tracks'' and trails providing vehicle and 
pedestrian access into the Beaver Basin from the escarpment, and 
prohibiting parking along the road except at the two overlooks 
provided.
    Specific actions to be taken to minimize harm are described in the 
Final Environmental Impact Statement under the following subject 
classifications: Road Design and Construction (pages 29-30), Air 
Quality and Noise (pages 30-31), Water Quality (page 31), Soils (pages 
31-32), Vegetation (page 32), Wolves (page 32), Public Use of the Road 
(pages 32-33), and Federal Highway Administration Preconstruction 
Contract Requirements (page 33). Among the specific actions to be taken 
to minimize the road impacts would be the revegetation of disturbed 
areas with native plantings. The basis for this revegetation program 
would be preparation of a native plants revegetation plan and the 
subsequent propagation of plant materials to be used in the 
reclamation.

Comments on the Final EIS

    The National Park Service received a total of 699 written responses 
regarding the draft Environmental Impact Statement. Additional 
responses were received regarding the Final Environmental Impact 
Statement. Two were responses from other federal agencies and six 
responses were from state, county, and local agencies. Twenty responses 
were from private groups or organizations. All comments received were 
reviewed in preparing this record of decision, and it was concluded 
that all issues relevant to the adequacy of the Final Environmental 
Impact Statement: Beaver Basin Rim Road have been addressed.

Conclusion

    Following evaluation of the public review comments concerning the 
alternatives and environmental impacts presented in the draft 
environmental impact statement, and considering the legislative mandate 
to develop a scenic shoreline drive, the National Park Service believes 
that the selected alternative is the legally consistent course of 
action for development and management of Pictured Rocks National 
Lakeshore. However, in response to considerable public opposition to 
this proposed road, and the efforts of members of Congress to eliminate 
the legislative requirement for this development, the National Park 
Service will take no immediate action to implement the project.

    Dated: July 31, 1996.
William W. Schenll,
Field Director, Midwest Field Area.
[FR Doc. 96-22698 Filed 9-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P