[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 213 (Tuesday, November 4, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59725-59728]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-29131]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
Record of Decision
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
ACTION: Record of Decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to regulations promulgated by the Council on
Environmental Quality (40 CFR Section 1505.2) and the implementing
procedures of the National Park Service (NPS) for the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (40 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.), the NPS has
prepared this Record of Decision with respect to the general management
plan and final environmental impact statement, Missouri/Niobrara/
Verdigre Creek National Recreational Rivers, Nebraska and South Dakota.
This Record of Decision describes the recreational river management
alternatives considered, mitigating measures adopted to avoid or
minimize environmental impacts, and the reasoning behind the decisions
reached.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Superintendent, Niobrara/Missouri
National Scenic Riverways, 114 North Sixth Street, O'Neill, Nebraska
68763-0591, or 402-336-3970.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pub. L. 102-50, the Niobrara Scenic River
Designation Act of 1991, amended section 3(a) of the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act of 1968 to designate as recreational rivers sections of the
Missouri River, Niobrara River, and Verdigre Creek as listed below:
Missouri River: The 39-mile section from the headwaters of Lewis
and Clark Lake to the Fort Randall Dam.
Niobrara River: The segment from the western boundary of Knox
County to its confluence with the Missouri River (20 miles).
Verdigre Creek: The segment from the north municipal boundary of
Verdigre, Nebraska, to its confluence with the Niobrara River (8
miles).
The Act states these segments shall be administered by the
Secretary of the Interior, who has delegated the task of planning and
operation to the NPS. As such, the three segments have become a unit of
the National Park System.
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act directs the administering agency to
prepare a management plan and establish final boundaries for protection
of important resources along designated rivers. The Act requires the
managing agency to emphasize the protection of scenic, historic,
archeological, and scientific features. It states that recreational use
may be permitted as long as these values are not jeopardized. Under the
Act, the boundary is 0.25 mile from the ordinary high water mark on
both sides of the rivers until a final boundary is established.
Decisions for management and boundary: The NPS selects Alternative
5, the Preferred Alternative, for management of the National
Recreational Rivers. The Preferred Alternative was developed by the
planning team by combining aspects of two other action alternatives. It
includes resource protection and a boundary similar to alternative 3
and a management philosophy similar to alternative 2. This alternative
neither encourages nor discourages increased visitor use. It also does
not encourage additional or expanded agricultural practices. It
strongly discourages construction of residences or other private
development. Boundaries were delineated to include important river-
related habitat. Implementation of natural resource objectives would
take precedence over other objectives where possible without loss of
significant cultural resources. Management actions would be
accomplished through cooperative associations with landowners, county
governments, state and federal agencies, and private interest groups.
The NPS will remain the administrator of the recreational rivers as
authorized by Congress. The degree of NPS presence will depend on the
success of local governments in maintaining existing landscapes and
providing for recreational uses. To fulfill its river management
responsibilities, the NPS will continue to have staff on or near the
river to manage inherently federal requirements of the law, administer
cooperative agreements, and monitor ongoing water, land and visitor use
activities along the designated rivers.
Alternative 5 emphasizes management for conserving, protecting, and
restoring riverine biological diversity on public land and includes
potential for technical assistance and incentives for private property
owners to do the same. Implementation on private land would take place
through local protection and restoration efforts, including federal
standards for minimum protection requirements and the use of
regulations and a flexible package of financial incentives, funding
options, and technical assistance.
Local concerns were expressed during public meetings regarding: an
unwanted influx of visitors on the river; dangers the dynamic nature of
the river presents to novice users; and increased river bank erosion
caused by additional power boat use. Because of those concerns this
alternative allows only for the replacement of river access sites lost
to sedimentation and the improvement (not expansion) of existing
facilities. Present recreational uses will continue (fishing, boating,
hunting, etc.) and there could be expansion of visitor services and
facilities as long as they did not add significant numbers of people to
the river.
The Alternative 5 boundary for the 39-mile stretch of the Missouri
River includes the river, its islands, and a minimum setback of 200
feet from the 1991 ordinary high water mark (32,000 cfs). Also included
is the Karl Mundt National Wildlife Refuge and all other federal and
state fee land within 0.25 mile of the river. In addition, significant
cottonwood stands and land that would be covered by a U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (COE) high release of 60,000 cfs is included within the
boundary. All fee and easement lands included in the boundary will
continue to be managed by the present land managers.
[[Page 59726]]
For the Niobrara and Verdigre Creek National Recreational Rivers
the boundary includes the rivers, its islands, a minimum setback of 200
feet from the ordinary high water mark, and significant natural areas
as identified by the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission. The Niobrara
National Recreational River boundary includes land that would be
affected by a rise in the groundwater table as projected by the COE.
Other management alternative considered:
Alternative 1, No Action: In the no-action alternative the river
area would continue to evolve without benefit of a coordinated,
comprehensive effort by the NPS and its partners and generally would
continue current trends. The current conditions include a mix of
private property with some local, state, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, and COE management. Existing conditions would continue with
varied management under federal, state, and local laws and by property
owners with minimal coordination. The NPS would assign an individual to
provide minimal monitoring of conditions along the rivers and limited
coordination and review among federal, state, and local agencies. Other
managing agencies, whether federal, state, or local, would work from
existing offices and NPS staff would work at an undetermined location.
The designation act established an interim boundary during the
planning period. The boundary includes the three rivers, their islands,
and land within 0.25 mile of the 1991 ordinary high water mark on each
side of the rivers (see alternative 1 maps). The 0.25-mile boundary
would remain in place under this alternative.
Protection of the scenery and natural features would depend on
existing or developing programs including county zoning, voluntary
landowner covenants, and other private land strategies. It would be
unrealistic to believe any of these controls or strategies would have
as their primary goal the maintenance of wild and scenic river values.
Therefore, the no action alternative was determined not to implement
the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act on these rivers as Congress has directed
and intended. The long-term protection of the river and adjacent land
and provision of a good quality visitor experience could not be ensured
under this alternative.
Alternative 2, Rural Landscape Integrity and Character: This
alternative would emphasize the rural landscape. It would maintain
patterns of land use while protecting significant natural and cultural
resources. This alternative seeks to stabilize visitor use at or near
current levels. It allows for limited construction of new residences or
other private development. Implementation of rural landscape objectives
would be emphasized as long as significant natural and cultural
resources were not compromised.
Alternative 2 would rely heavily on the cooperation of local
property owners and officials. Private land would be managed through
local means such as zoning, land use management plans, or property
owner agreements. The alternative would rely on counties and property
owner agreements to develop standards for protecting private land and
meeting the objectives and goals of this plan and the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act. Local plans consistent with the recreational river
legislation incorporating voluntary practices that preserve the
landscape and river values would be developed in cooperation with the
NPS.
The visitor experience under alternative 2 would be similar to the
activities, orientation, and interpretation presently available.
Interpretation and information would emphasize safety and preservation
of the recreational rivers' values. Additional interpretation
emphasizing land stewardship and the integrity of the landscape could
be offered through cooperative efforts.
The boundaries for the Missouri and Niobrara river segments under
this alternative would include the river and its islands and be
established as a 200-foot setback from the 1991 ordinary high water
mark. COE land within 0.25 mile of the river is within the boundary.
Along the Missouri River segment the Fort Randall historic site,
Niobrara State Park, Verdel Landing, and Karl Mundt National Wildlife
Refuge would be included to help depict the rural agrarian, natural,
and historic character of the landscape. The Verdigre Creek boundary
would be established as a 200-foot setback from the riverbank. All fee
and easement lands included within the boundary would continue to be
managed by the present land managers.
Total land area above the 1991 ordinary high water mark for the
Missouri National Recreational River would be 4,718 acres. Total land
area above the 1991 ordinary high water mark for the Niobrara National
Recreational River and Verdigre Creek would be 1,559 acres.
Although NPS actions under this alternative would have minimal
negative impacts to any of the resources, the boundary would not
include some significant bottomland and periodically flooded areas that
contribute to the biologic integrity of the river. The NPS has
determined that alternative 2 is minimally acceptable in meeting the
intent of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
Alternative 3, Riverine Biological Management: This alternative
would emphasize the recreational rivers' biological diversity. It would
improve the quantity, quality, and diversity of native plant and animal
(primarily aquatic) habitat. A meandering river, eroding banks,
sandbars, backwater areas, cottonwood forests, and instream snag
habitat were characteristics of the pre-dam river that would be
recreated where feasible.
This alternative neither encourages nor discourages increased
visitor use. It also does not encourage additional or expanded
agricultural practices. It strongly discourages construction of
residences or other private development. Boundaries were delineated to
include important river-related habitat. Implementation of natural
resource objectives would take precedence over other objectives where
possible without loss of significant cultural resources.
The primary goal of this alternative would be to protect and
restore the Missouri River and the lower stretches of the Niobrara
River and Verdigre Creek as a nearly natural ecosystem.
The boundary for the Missouri National Recreational River under
this alternative would include the river, its islands, and a minimum
setback of 200 feet from the 1991 ordinary high water mark. Also
included is the Karl Mundt National Wildlife Refuge and all other
federal and state land within 0.25 mile of the river. Other criteria
used in determining the remaining land inside the boundary include
significant biological bottomland as defined by the Nebraska Game and
Parks Commission and land that would be covered by a COE release of
60,000 cfs. All fee and easement lands included within the boundary
will continue to be managed by the present land managers.
The boundary for the Niobrara National Recreational River would
include a minimum setback of 200 feet from the riverbank plus
significant biological bottomland areas as identified by the Nebraska
Game and Parks Commission. Also included are COE projections for areas
that might be affected by a rise in the water table. The Verdigre Creek
boundary would include a minimum setback of 200 feet from the riverbank
plus significant biological bottomland as identified by the Nebraska
Game and Parks Commission. Total land area above the 1991 ordinary high
water mark for the Missouri National Recreational River would be
[[Page 59727]]
10,463 acres. Total land area above the 1991 ordinary high water mark
for the Niobrara National Recreational River and Verdigre Creek would
be 5,962 acres.
The NPS has determined that this alternative would be fully
acceptable and would meet the intent of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
Alternative 4, Visitor Use Balanced with Resources Protection:
Consistent with resource protection and goals and objectives of the
general management plan, implementation of recreational uses would be
emphasized in this alternative. The NPS and its partners would be
actively involved in day-to-day management of the rivers. Private and
public recreational development (including river access points, scenic
roads, trails, and structures) would remain, and some future expansion
is envisioned. Land needed for visitor facilities would be acquired
from willing sellers. Additional sites or improvements are proposed in
Nebraska near the Pishelville Bridge, Sunshine Bottom, and Verdigre
Creek. Additional locations for primitive camping along the river could
be developed if warranted by increased recreation demand.
Interpretation of cultural and natural resources would be important for
resource protection as well as for visitor education and enjoyment.
Natural features of the landscape would be maintained, such as
sandbars and beaches, backwater areas for recreational fishing, and
open spaces. Cooperative efforts to enhance backwater areas, sandbars,
and other habitats would be encouraged to preserve resources and
increase recreational fishery and wildlife viewing opportunities.
Significant resources would be inventoried and monitored to protect
river-related resources from visitor use and other recreational
stresses.
This alternative encourages the continuation of agricultural
practices and landscapes as important elements of pastoral scenes that
visitors can enjoy. It encourages compatible agricultural practices,
and it allows for an increase in construction of residences within the
residential and other private development land class.
The boundary would include a minimum setback of 200 feet from the
riverbank, plus significant resource areas and potential public use
areas on the rivers. Karl Mundt National Wildlife Refuge, Niobrara
State Park, and Fort Randall historic site are included within the
boundary in this alternative because they are public facilities that
contribute to the goals of the alternative. Other state land and COE
fee land within 0.25 mile of the 1991 ordinary high water mark would
also be included. All fee and easement land included within the
boundary would continue to be managed by the present land managers.
Total land area above the 1991 ordinary high water mark for the
Missouri National Recreational River is 6,443 acres. Total land area
above the 1991 ordinary high water mark for the Niobrara National
Recreational River and Verdigre Creek is 1,492 acres.
The NPS feels this alternative allows for the protection of
sufficient bottomlands and other biologically important lands to fully
comply with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Because of local concerns
regarding increased river traffic this alternative was not selected.
Measures to Minimize Harm: Because few specific land purchase or
construction projects are proposed and the alternatives are general
strategies for long-term management, the consequences are assessed in
general terms. Foreseeable short term impacts are identified along with
long-term impacts and potential mitigating measures. The impacts of all
the action alternatives are similar.
Recreational use of the river has been relatively stable but with
no coordinated management. The selected alternative provides for
increased visitor management and for controls to be placed on visitor
use if resources are threatened by that use or if negative visitor
experiences result from increased use of the rivers.
New boat access areas are permitted to replace access areas lost to
sedimentation. The selected sites could cover several acres each. Some
habitat would be lost, temporary construction induced siltation could
occur, but would be minimized through appropriate construction
techniques. Public access sites would be checked for fossils or
cultural artifacts before and during construction. If either were found
the state historical society and/or appropriate Indian tribes would be
consulted.
Suggested guidelines for development are available in each
alternative. Recreational home developments have been occurring along
the Missouri River. The selected alternative acts to control these
developments. Currently there is no zoning in any of the counties.
Along with the guidelines, cooperative land owner agreements, voluntary
easements, and deed restrictions could be used to control development.
If the guidelines and other methods of control are not successful and
continued development threatens river resources the plan states that
the current policy of no-condemnation will have to be revisited.
Farming and ranching are recognized as valuable tools in
maintaining the rural nature of the area. Current levels of use and
methods have not been detrimental to the rivers and no controls are
foreseen. The NPS would encourage best management practices be in place
and for good land stewardship to continue.
Specific impacts and measures that would be taken to mitigate
potential negative impacts are described in the Final Environmental
Impact Statement on pages 144-187. Compliance with existing laws and
executive orders is described on pages 188-193.
Comments on the draft and final general management plan and
environmental impact statement (GMP/EIS): The draft GMP/EIS was
released to the public on July 12, 1996. Approximately 1,100 copies of
the draft plan were mailed to federal, state, and local officials,
organizations, and individuals. Public meetings were held between
August 13-21 in Yankton, Pickstown, Springfield, and Wagner, South
Dakota; and Norfolk, Niobrara, Verdigre, Verdel, and Spencer, Nebraska.
The public comment period ended September 14, 1996.
A total of 75 written comments were received during the public
review period. A majority of the comments came from the local area and
suggested the rivers be deauthorized as a component of the Wild and
Scenic Rivers System. Because this would require an additional act of
Congress, the NPS cannot comply with these suggestions, and would not
support such a proposal.
Some comments were directed towards the silt aggradation occurring
in the Missouri and Niobrara rivers. The siltation is a result of
decreased water flow velocity as it enters Lewis and Clark Lake. The
reduced water velocity decreases the silt load carrying capacity of the
river and causes deposition (aggradation). This is not a result of the
recreational river designation or the general management plan. The NPS
has agreed to work cooperatively with the COE to explore viable
solutions to the problem.
In July 1997 the final GMP/EIS was printed and distributed to more
than 300 individuals, agencies, and organizations. In the document the
NPS named the preferred alternative and boundary. There were seven
comments received on the final plan, one from a federal agency, two
from private organizations, and four from landowners. To the extent
possible comments and concerns therein have
[[Page 59728]]
been addressed in the following section and/or other sections of this
document.
Clarifications requested through written comments: The NPS would
consider boat access areas inside and outside the boundary that serve
the recreational rivers as replaceable if substantial access was lost
as a result of sediment aggradation in the river. Ramps lost outside
the recreational river boundary could be replaced within the boundary.
Examples of access areas serving the recreational rivers that are lost,
or threatened are the Missouri River access areas at Springfield and
Running Water, South Dakota, and Niobrara, Nebraska.
The NPS decision to not actively promote recreational use on the
river was based on input of the Federal Advisory Commission in
consultation with the Secretary of the Interior during the development
of the plan, by local representatives on the planning team, and by
comments received from the general public during the planning process.
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, Section 10(a) allows for ``management
plans for any such component'' to ``establish varying degrees of
intensity for its protection and development, based on the special
attributes of the area.'' In this case the NPS feels there are
legitimate safety concerns resulting from shifting sand bars and a
significant increase in power boat use on the Missouri National
Recreational River. Canoeing danger exists from the high winds that
frequent the area and the width of the river. While the NPS has agreed
not to actively promote increased use there is recognition in the plan
that increased use may occur as the result of actions taken by others.
As long as those actions do not threaten river resources or add
significant visitor numbers to the river NPS will act to guide such
growth rather than restrict it.
While local governments clearly have existing local law enforcement
responsibilities and cooperative relations will be sought, all
references to law enforcement in the final plan should be understood to
mean that the NPS will not delegate Federal law enforcement
responsibilities with respect to the water surfaces and on lands it
owns, or other inherently Federal responsibilities as described in the
statutes related to the administration of the National Park System, the
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, and the Act establishing the Missouri/
Niobrara/Verdigre Creek National Recreational Rivers.
The COE has purchased flood easements on some of the periodically
flooded land along the Missouri and Niobrara rivers. This land remains
in private landownership but the COE possesses the right to flood the
land. The NPS would not affect the easement relationship between
private landowners and the COE. Neither would the NPS boundary alter
the payments under the Payment in Lieu of Taxes Act. The periodically
flooded land is included within the boundary not because it is COE
easement land but because of its contribution to fish and wildlife
habitat.
Currently the Yankton Sioux Tribe is challenging the size and
location of its reservation boundary. When a final outcome is
determined the NPS will honor the final court decision. Until that time
any NPS management actions within the disputed area will be minimal and
dependent on cooperative agreement with private landowners and the
Yankton Sioux Tribe.
The recreational river boundary maps depicted in the final GMP
include public lands such as the USFWS Karl Mundt National Wildlife
Refuge, as well as easement lands. The Vicinity/Study Area map on page
5 inadvertently portrayed USFWS easement land as a part of the refuge.
That easement is not part of the Karl Mundt Refuge and should not have
been portrayed as such on that map. The maps on pages 29, 49, 61, 73,
and 87 accurately portray the easement land but the arrow points to it
as a part of the Karl Mundt Refuge. That arrow should have been
pointing to the lower section that is a part of the refuge and not to
the easement land. The maps in the final GMP/EIS are designed to be
general and for orientation purposes only, and have no formal standing.
When the official boundary map for this unit is published the above
mentioned errors will be corrected.
Selection of the preferred alternative: All of the action
alternatives for management of the rivers are considered acceptable
from an environmental standpoint. The boundaries vary with each
alternative and preference was placed on the alternatives that included
significant wetlands and bottomlands. The preferred alternative was
selected because it is considered the most effective alternative for
meeting the legislative intent of protecting river values and
maintaining the existing economic uses along the river. This
alternative will require a minimum of Federal land acquisition, which
is consistent with legislative intent. The selected alternative is not
expected to have any significant adverse effects on natural or cultural
values in the recreational river boundaries.
Dated: October 27, 1997.
David N. Given,
Deputy Regional Director, Midwest Region.
[FR Doc. 97-29131 Filed 11-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P