[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 219 (Tuesday, November 13, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56848-56852]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-28303]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Record of decision, cooperative management plan and 
environmental impact statement, Lower St. Croix National Scenic 
Riverway, Minnesota and Wisconsin.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the Interior's National Park Service, 
the state of Minnesota's Department of Natural Resources, and the state 
of Wisconsin's Department of Natural Resources have signed a record of 
decision (ROD) for the final cooperative management plan and final 
environmental impact statement for the Lower St. Croix National Scenic 
Riverway (Riverway), Minnesota and Wisconsin. The purpose of the 
cooperative management plan is to set forth the basic management 
philosophy for the riverway and to provide the strategies for 
addressing issues and achieving identified management objectives.
    The Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway is a narrow corridor 
that runs for 52 miles along the boundary of Minnesota and Wisconsin, 
from St. Croix Falls/Taylors Falls to the confluence with the 
Mississippi River. The National Park Service (NPS) manages a portion of 
the upper 27 miles of lands and waters of this corridor. The states of 
Minnesota and Wisconsin administer the lower 25 miles. The

[[Page 56849]]

states and the federal government jointly conduct planning for the 
riverway.

DATES: The Regional Director, NPS, Midwest Region approved the ROD, on 
May 7, 2001. The Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Natural 
Resources approved the ROD on May 2, 2001. The Secretary of the 
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources approved the ROD on October 
11, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Superintendent, St. Croix National 
Scenic Riverway, P.O. Box 708, St. Croix Falls, Wisconsin 54024, 
telephone 715-483-3284.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Introduction

    The NPS, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and 
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources prepared the final 
environmental impact statement (FEIS) for the cooperative management 
plan for the Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway (October 2000). 
Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act 
of 1969, Public Law 91-190 (as amended), and the regulations 
promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality at 40 CFR 1505.2, 
the Department of the Interior, NPS, has prepared the following ROD on 
the EIS.
    In Wisconsin, the Department of Natural Resources is required to 
comply with the Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act (WEPA) as described 
in s.1.11, Wis. Stats., and Ch. NR 150, Wis. Adm. Code, to assure 
consideration of the short and long-term environmental and economic 
consequences of policies, plans, programs or other actions upon the 
quality of the human environment. As a cooperating agency in plan 
development and in design of the public review process, the Department 
has assured the CMP/EIS satisfies the substantive and procedural 
requirements of WEPA.
    This ROD is a concise statement of what decisions were made, what 
alternatives were considered, the environmentally preferred 
alternative, the basis for the decision, and the mitigating measures 
developed to avoid or minimize environmental impacts.

Decision (Selected Action)

    The managing agencies will implement the preferred riverway 
management alternative and the preferred management structure option, 
as described in the FEIS (with some minor clarifications, as listed in 
appendix A (Errata Sheet) of this ROD).
    The managing agencies will emphasize protection and enhancement of 
the riverway's diverse character. Long stretches of the lower 
riverway's natural and rural landscape will be maintained, while 
allowing limited, planned development in communities that is consistent 
with the historic character of the communities. Limited new development 
could occur within existing municipalities along the river, although 
maintenance of the overall character of the municipalities will be 
emphasized. Outside of municipalities, landowners will be encouraged to 
maintain the natural character of the landscape, particularly the 
blufflines, as seen from the water. Protection of natural resources, 
including the valley's important biological diversity, will be 
enhanced. Riverway users will continue to find opportunities to engage 
in a wide range of recreational experiences. The emphasis will be on 
maintaining and enhancing the diverse landscape character and the 
diverse water-based recreational opportunities.
    The Lower St. Croix Management Commission will continue as the 
primary policy body for joint management of the riverway. The Minnesota 
DNR, Wisconsin DNR, and NPS will continue as the three voting members. 
The management commission will include an additional nonvoting member 
from the newly created Lower St. Croix Partnership Team that will serve 
an advisory role. The Minnesota-Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission will 
continue in its administrative support and nonvoting advisory roles. 
The three managing agencies will provide staff for the management 
commission for riverway management, and for plan implementation. The 
two state departments of natural resources will adopt rules to form a 
basis for riverway ordinances that local governments will be required 
to adopt and enforce. The states will have objection (Wisconsin) or 
certification (Minnesota) authority over local ordinances, amendments 
to the ordinances, and variances. The management commission's technical 
committee will review local zoning actions. The technical committee and 
managing agencies can comment on the proposed actions. Managing 
agencies will have no veto authority over a local government's decision 
on a conditional use permit, or subdivision; if there were 
disagreement, appeals could be made to the courts. Existing water use 
enforcement roles will continue and the three agencies will provide 
staff for on-water law enforcement, rescue, and related activities. The 
three agencies will provide staff for management of lands each owns.

Other Riverway Management Alternatives and Management Structure 
Options Considered

    Five other riverway management alternatives were evaluated in the 
draft and final environmental impact statements.
    Alternative A would seek to maintain long stretches of the lower 
riverway's natural and rural landscape, while allowing limited, planned 
development within the boundary that was consistent with the historic 
character of the riverway's communities. However, a slightly greater 
proportion of the lower riverway would encompass town landscapes, 
allowing greater opportunities for development within or adjacent to 
riverway towns. Additional residential development would also occur in 
rural areas. Riverway users would continue to find an array of 
recreational opportunities, including increased opportunities for more 
social activity on parts of the river, but no efforts would be made to 
regulate user activities if they were not causing significant damage to 
the resource or posing safety hazards to others.
    Alternative B would stress maintaining the current landscape 
character within the riverway boundary and maintaining the diversity of 
water recreational experiences as much as possible. However, the 
overall level of recreational use would be allowed to increase but some 
use would be reallocated and separated. New development would be more 
limited than alternative A and slightly more limited than the preferred 
alternative.
    Alternative C would achieve the same conditions as alternative B--
views of the land within the boundary and the diversity of river 
recreational experiences would be maintained. The major difference from 
other alternatives would be in the strategy used to maintain the 
diversity of recreational experiences would be to freeze the growth of 
recreational use.
    Alternative D would promote and restore the natural qualities of 
the lower riverway--the predominance of natural features over modern 
developments would increase. Natural landscapes would be restored where 
feasible and managing agencies would strive to make the landscape 
appear more natural than it does now. Emphasis would be placed on 
promoting quieter, slower, and less intrusive experiences that would 
not disturb others. Overall recreational use would be reduced.
    Alternative E, the no-action alternative, provides a baseline for

[[Page 56850]]

comparing the other alternatives. The managing agencies would continue 
to manage the lower riverway as they have in the past. The agencies 
would continue to follow the 1976 Master Plan (with some changes based 
on current management practices) and the Lower St. Croix Management 
Commission's policy resolution. Management would focus on maintaining 
existing land use and recreational use patterns and would react to 
recreational use as they have in the past. Rural residential 
development would be allowed to a greater degree than all of the 
alternatives except alternative A. The Riverway Management Policy 
Resolution would be used to address new issues that arose.
    Four management structure options were evaluated in the draft and 
final environmental impact statements.
    Option 1 would also retain the management commission but would 
include a local government representative. The planning task force 
would be restructured and made permanent. It would assist in rules 
interpretation, mediation, and coordination for land management and/or 
water use management. Options 2 and 3 would further expand the 
management commission and create a water patrol. Option 2 would create 
a joint powers board for land use management, whereas option 3 would 
create a riverway board to manage land use. Option 4 would continue the 
existing management structure for policy direction and land and water 
use.

Environmentally Preferred Alternative

    A ROD must identify the environmentally preferable alternative, 
which is that alternative which causes the least damage to the 
biological environment, and that best protects, preserves, and enhances 
historic, cultural, and natural resources. Alternative D is the 
environmentally preferred alternative, although not by a great measure 
over the selected action. Alternative D includes a greater emphasis on 
restoration of natural qualities, fewer areas for new residential or 
commercial development, and a reduction in overall water use and speed 
levels when compared to the selected action and the other alternatives. 
Alternative D would result in primarily negligible to moderate positive 
effects to resources, compared to primarily negligible to minor 
positive effects to resources under the selected action. However, the 
selected action provides greater, more holistic emphasis on the 
maintenance and enhancement of the outstandingly remarkable values for 
which the riverway was designated as a unit of the national wild and 
scenic river system (namely, scenic, recreational, and geologic 
values). The selected action better ensures the riverway's unique 
diversity of landscape character and water surface recreational 
opportunities, which result in somewhat fewer benefits to resources 
than under alternative D.
    The management structure options address the organizational 
structure and administration of the riverway only. Impacts of these 
options are associated with nonenvironmental type effects such as 
costs, staffing requirements, and agency roles and responsibilities. 
Consequently, there is no environmentally preferred option.

Basis for Decision

    The Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway is included in the 
national wild and scenic rivers system because of its scenic, 
recreational, and geologic values. These combined values are the 
hallmark of this diverse resource. Both the riverway's landscape 
character and its water-based recreation reflect diverse uses. Parts of 
the valley remain relatively wild and undisturbed, while other areas 
reflect the valley's proximity to a large urban area. On-water 
recreation reflects the diversity of the surroundings: experiences 
range from the quiet solitude of a nonmotorized area to a very social 
and highly motorized environment. The new management strategy for the 
Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway provides greater emphasis than 
ever to ensure continuation and enhancement of that diversity. This 
emphasis on protection of the riverway's diversity, along with 
improvements in the protection of riverway's natural, cultural, and 
scenic resources, reduction in conflicts between landowners and 
recreational users, and implementation costs provided the basis for 
selecting the preferred alternative for implementation.
    It must also be noted that the Lower St. Croix Planning Task Force, 
composed of interested members of the public, citizens representing 
boaters, businesses, landowners, environmental groups, local 
governments, and various other interests, and staff of the riverway 
managing agencies, played a key role in developing the preferred 
alternative and completing the riverway plan. The overall direction and 
most of the elements of the preferred alternative for managing the 
lower riverway were agreed upon by the citizen-driven task force in a 
consensus-based process.
    The managing agencies consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service (FWS) on two occasions regarding the likely effects of the 
cooperative management plan on the endangered winged mapleleaf and 
Higgins' eye pearly mussels. Based on those consultations, the FWS 
determined that the selected action would not jeopardize the continued 
existence of the two species. A copy of the FWS' April 2, 2001 
biological opinion is attached to this ROD as appendix B.

Findings on Impairment of Riverway Resources and Values

    The NPS may not allow the impairment of riverway resources and 
values unless directly and specifically provided for by legislation or 
proclamation establishing the riverway. Impairment that is prohibited 
by the NPS Organic Act and the General Authorities Act is an impact 
that, in the professional judgment of the responsible NPS manager, 
would harm the integrity of riverway resources or values, including the 
opportunities that otherwise would be present for the enjoyment of 
those resources or values. In determining whether impairment would 
occur, park managers examine the duration, severity, and magnitude of 
the impact; the resources and values affected; and direct, indirect, 
and cumulative effects of the action. According to NPS policy, an 
impact would be more likely to constitute an impairment to the extent 
that it affects a resource or value whose conservation is: (a) 
Necessary to fulfill specific purposes identified in the establishing 
legislation or proclamation of the riverway; (b) key to the natural or 
cultural integrity of the riverway or to opportunities for enjoyment of 
the riverway; or (c) identified as a goal in the riverway's general 
management plan or other relevant NPS planning documents.
    This policy does not prohibit all impacts to riverway resources and 
values. The NPS has the discretion to allow impacts to riverway 
resources and values when necessary and appropriate to fulfill the 
purposes of a riverway, so long as the impacts do not constitute 
impairment. Moreover, an impact is less likely to constitute impairment 
if it is an unavoidable result, which cannot be further mitigated, of 
an action necessary to preserve or restore the integrity of riverway 
resources or values.
    After analyzing the environmental impacts described in the final 
cooperative management plan/environmental impact statement and public 
comments received, the NPS has determined that implementation of the 
preferred alternative will not constitute an impairment to the Lower 
St. Croix National Scenic Riverway's resources

[[Page 56851]]

and values. The actions comprising the preferred alternative are 
intended to maintain and enhance the outstandingly remarkable values 
for which the riverway was designated as a unit of the national wild 
and scenic river system. While the preferred alternative would have 
some adverse effects on park resources and recreational use, none of 
the impacts would adversely affect resources or values to a degree that 
would prevent the NPS from fulfilling the purposes of the riverway, 
threaten the natural or cultural integrity of the riverway, or 
eliminate the opportunity for people to enjoy the riverway. Overall, 
the preferred alternative would protect and enhance the riverway's 
natural, cultural, and scenic resources and the diverse recreational 
uses found there.

Measures To Minimize Harm

    The preferred alternative provides a policy-level management 
framework for the riverway. Within this broad context, the preferred 
alternative includes all practical measures to minimize environmental 
harm. However, additional appropriate mitigation will be identified as 
part of follow-up implementation plans and for individual construction 
projects (such as bridge and utility line replacements) to further 
minimize resource impacts. Additional environmental documentation, with 
mitigation measures, will be required before project implementation. 
Management actions designed to avoid or minimize impacts to resources, 
such as keeping people away from bald eagle nests, will continue to be 
employed as necessary. New regulations may be instituted to address 
resource protection needs that might arise from recreational use within 
the riverway. The managing agencies will also implement their 
respective components of the FWS's recovery plans for the endangered 
winged mapleleaf mussel and the Higgins' eye pearly mussel, which 
include measures to minimize impacts and recover these species.

Public Involvement

    Public involvement was vitally important throughout the planning 
process. The public had two primary avenues by which it participated in 
the development of the plan--participation in the Lower St. Croix 
Planning Task Force and responses to newsletters, workbooks, and the 
draft and final versions of the plan/EIS. The task force met 53 times 
between February 1996 and August 1998. Membership in the task force was 
open throughout the planning process to all interested citizens. 
Persons could attend any meetings they wanted to; new participants were 
welcome throughout the process. Notification of task force meetings and 
workshops was provided through mailing lists and news releases; all 
meetings were open to the public.
    During the planning process two newsletters and three workbooks 
were prepared and mailed to the public. Newsletter No. 1 (May 1996) 
alerted citizens that the planning process was beginning. It included 
draft purpose, significance, and exception resource/value statements, 
and asked for public comment on these statements, on desired futures 
for the riverway, and on issues the plan should address.
    Newsletter No. 2 (November 1996) summarized responses to Newsletter 
No. 1 and identified changes made in the purpose, significance, and 
exceptional resource/value statements based on the public's comment. 
The newsletter also identified the issues and concerns to be addressed 
in the plan, described landscape units of the lower St. Croix, and 
described the activities of the task force. This newsletter was 
informational and no public input was collected.
    In April 1997 Workbook No. 1 was published. The workbook described 
potential land and water management areas, and five preliminary 
management alternatives (plus a ``no action'' alternative), as well as 
a ``vision'' for the lower riverway. The public was asked to comment on 
the management alternatives and on the vision statement.
    Workbook No. 2 (April 1998) was intended to compile the existing 
products of the task force and serve as a reference tool for persons 
who intended to participate in a preferred alternative workshop. This 
workbook was informational and no public input was collected.
    Workbook No. 3 (also April 1998) focused on the guidelines for 
revising state land use and surface water regulations. The public was 
asked to indicate its support for different options being considered by 
the task force.
    The draft cooperative management plan/environmental impact 
statement for the Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway was released 
to the public on September 17, 1999. The 60-day public review period 
ended on November 30, 1999. About 650 copies of the document were 
distributed to federal and state officials and agencies, local 
governments, organizations, individuals, and public libraries. The 
document also was available via the internet. Informational open houses 
were held on October 26 and 27, 1999. The purpose of the open houses 
was to discuss and answer questions about the document and solicit 
written comments concerning the plan. The managing agencies received 
almost 900 written responses during the public review period (including 
600 ``form'' postcards). The plan was subsequently revised and the 
final cooperative management plan/environmental impact statement was 
distributed in October 2000. About 475 copies of the final document 
were distributed in both paper and CD-ROM formats. The final plan/EIS 
also was available via the internet.
    Because of irregularities in the distribution of the final document 
and because of reinitiation of consultation with the FWS pursuant to 
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, the managing agencies elected 
to extend the required 30-day ``no action'' period until January 31, 
2001. This resulted in a no action period of more than 90 days. Notice 
of this decision was published in the Federal Register and in local 
papers; a letter explaining the extension also was sent to the project 
mailing list. Between release of the final plan and January 31, 2001, 
the managing agencies received 23 written responses from the public. 
Most of the responses repeated comments that already had been provided 
on the draft plan/EIS and responded to by the managing agencies. 
Concerns related to the following general topic areas were expressed: 
land use regulation guidelines, water surface use guidelines, 
regulatory uniformity between the states of Minnesota and Wisconsin, 
and geographic boundaries of land management areas. Many of the 
comments were about issues that are beyond the scope of the plan or 
that will be addressed in state rulemaking processes that will commence 
upon approval of this ROD.

Conclusion

    The above factors and considerations justify selection of the 
alternative identified as the preferred alternative in the final 
environmental impact statement. The managing agency officials 
responsible for the approval of the selected action are the NPS' 
Midwest Regional Director, the Minnesota Department of Natural 
Resources Commissioner, and the Wisconsin Department of Natural 
Resources Secretary. By his signature, Secretary Bazzell is certifying 
WEPA compliance.

    Note: Appendices A and B (referred to above) have been omitted 
from this notice. Persons who are interested in obtaining copies of 
the appendices should contact the Superintendent, Lower St. Croix 
National

[[Page 56852]]

Scenic Riverway, at the address or telephone number noted above.


    Dated: October 18, 2001.
David N. Given,
Acting Regional Director, Midwest Region.
[FR Doc. 01-28303 Filed 11-9-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P