[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 87 (Wednesday, May 5, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25043-25051]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-10140]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

36 CFR Part 7

RIN 1024-AC96


Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area, Personal Watercraft Use

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The National Park Service (NPS) is proposing to designate 
areas where personal watercraft (PWC) may be used in Bighorn Canyon 
National Recreation Area, Montana and Wyoming. This proposed rule 
implements the provisions of the NPS general regulations authorizing 
park areas to allow the use of PWC by promulgating a special 
regulation. The NPS Management Policies 2001 directs individual parks 
to determine whether PWC use is appropriate for a specific park area 
based on an evaluation of that area's enabling legislation, resources 
and values, other visitor uses, and overall management objectives.

DATES: Comments must be received by July 6, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed rule should be sent or hand 
delivered to Superintendent, Bighorn Canyon NRA, P.O. Box 7458, Fort 
Smith, MT 59035 or you may hand deliver your comments to the 
Headquarters at 5 Avenue B, Fort Smith, Montana. Comments may also be 
sent by e-mail to [email protected]. If you comment by e-mail, please 
include ``PWC rule'' in the subject line and your name and return 
address in the body of your Internet message.
    For additional information see ``Public Participation'' under 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kym Hall, Special Assistant, National 
Park Service, 1849 C Street, NW., Room 3145, Washington, DC 20240. 
Phone: (202) 208-4206. E-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

Additional Alternatives

    The information contained in this proposed rule supports 
implementation of the preferred alternative for Bighorn Canyon National 
Recreation Area (NRA) in the Environmental Assessment (EA) published 
June, 2003. The public should be aware that two other alternatives were 
presented in the EA, including a no-PWC alternative, and those 
alternatives should also be reviewed and considered when making 
comments on this proposed rule.

Personal Watercraft Regulation

    On March 21, 2000, the National Park Service published a regulation 
(36 CFR 3.24) on the management of personal watercraft (PWC) use within 
all units of the national park system (65 FR 15077). This regulation 
prohibits PWC use in all national park units unless the NPS determines 
that this type of water-based recreational activity is appropriate for 
the specific park unit based on the legislation establishing that park, 
the park's resources and values, other visitor uses of the area, and 
overall management objectives. The regulation banned PWC use in all 
park units effective April 20, 2000, except 21 parks, lakeshores, 
seashores, and recreation areas. The regulation established a 2-year 
grace period following the final rule publication to provide these 21 
park units time to consider whether PWC use should be permitted to 
continue.

Description of Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area

    Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area was established by an act 
of Congress on October 15, 1966, following the construction of the 
Yellowtail Dam by the Bureau of Reclamation. This dam, named after the 
famous Crow chairman Robert Yellowtail, harnessed the waters of the 
Bighorn River and turned this variable stream into a lake. The most 
direct route to the southern end of Bighorn is via Montana State road 
310 from Billings, Montana, or U.S. Highway 14A from Sheridan, Wyoming.
    Bighorn Lake extends approximately 60 miles through Wyoming and 
Montana, 55 miles of which are held within Bighorn Canyon. The 
Recreation Area is composed of more than 70,000 acres of land and 
water, which straddles the northern Wyoming and southern Montana 
borders. There are two visitor centers and other developed facilities 
in Fort Smith, Montana, and near Lovell, Wyoming. The Afterbay Lake 
below the Yellowtail Dam is a good spot for trout fishing and wildlife 
viewing for ducks, geese, and other animals. The Bighorn River below 
the Afterbay Dam is a world class trout fishing area.

Purpose of Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area

    The purpose and significance statements listed below are from 
Bighorn Canyon's Strategic Plan and Master Plan. Bighorn Canyon 
National Recreation Area was established to:
    1. Provide for public outdoor recreation use and enjoyment of 
Bighorn Lake (also referred to as Yellowtail Reservoir) and lands 
adjacent thereto within the boundary of the National Recreation Area on 
NPS lands.
    2. Preserve the scenic, scientific, and historic features 
contributing to public enjoyment of such lands and waters.
    3. To coordinate administration of the recreation area with the 
other purposes of the Yellowtail Reservoir project so that it will best 
provide for: (1) Public outdoor recreation benefits, (2) preservation 
of scenic, scientific, and historic features contributing to public 
enjoyment, and (3) management, utilization, and disposal of renewable 
natural resources that promotes or is compatible with and does not 
significantly impair public recreation or scenic, scientific, or 
historic, or features contributing to public enjoyment.

Significance of Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area

    Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area is significant for the 
following reasons:
    1. The outstanding scenic and recreational values of the 60-mile 
long, 12,700 acre Bighorn Lake.
    2. The history of over 10,000 years of continuous human habitation.

[[Page 25044]]

    3. The contribution the recreation area is making to the 
preservation of wild horses on the Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range, of 
which one-third is located within the recreation area, as well as the 
preservation of a Bighorn sheep herd that repatriated the area in the 
early 1970s.
    The 19,000 acre Yellowtail Wildlife Habitat, which preserves one of 
the best examples of a Cottonwood Riparian area remaining in the 
western United States.

Authority and Jurisdiction

    Under the National Park Service's Organic Act of 1916 (Organic Act) 
(16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) Congress granted the NPS broad authority to 
regulate the use of the Federal areas known as national parks. In 
addition, the Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 3) allows the NPS, through the 
Secretary of the Interior, to ``make and publish such rules and 
regulations as he may deem necessary or proper for the use and 
management of the parks * * *''
    16 U.S.C. 1a-1 states, ``The authorization of activities shall be 
conducted in light of the high public value and integrity of the 
National Park System and shall not be exercised in derogation of the 
values and purposes for which these various areas have been established 
* * *''
    As with the United States Coast Guard, NPS's regulatory authority 
over waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, including 
navigable waters and areas within their ordinary reach, is based upon 
the Property and Commerce Clauses of the U.S. Constitution. In regard 
to the NPS, Congress in 1976 directed the NPS to ``promulgate and 
enforce regulations concerning boating and other activities on or 
relating to waters within areas of the National Park System, including 
waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States * * *'' (16 
U.S.C. 1a-2(h)). In 1996 the NPS published a final rule (61 FR 35136, 
July 5, 1996) amending 36 CFR 1.2(a)(3) to clarify its authority to 
regulate activities within the National Park System boundaries 
occurring on waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

PWC Use at Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area

    Personal watercraft use on Bighorn Lake began during the early 
1990s. During 2001, personal watercraft comprised approximately 5% of 
the boat use on Bighorn Lake. Before the ban was imposed in November 
2002, personal watercraft were allowed to operate throughout the 
national recreation area, but most personal watercraft use occurred at 
the north end of the lake in the vicinity of Ok-A-Beh Marina. The 
primary use season is mid-May through mid-September. During the other 
months the water is generally too cold for PWC use.
    Bighorn Canyon has two marinas: Horseshoe Bend and Ok-A-Beh. Both 
provide gas, rental docks, food, and boater supplies, typically from 
Memorial Day through Labor Day. Personal watercraft (before the ban) 
and other watercraft could also enter the lake at Barry's Landing, 
which has a launching ramp but no marina. Primitive access to the lake 
is available at the causeway, and access to the Bighorn and Shoshone 
Rivers is available throughout the Yellowtail Wildlife Habitat. 
Watercraft may be launched at the Afterbay launch ramp and on the river 
at the Afterbay and Three-Mile access areas.
    Personal watercraft (before the closure) and other watercraft are 
piloted over the main surface of the lake, along the lakeshore, and in 
coves and back bays. Boaters may camp at one of the national recreation 
area's 156 developed campsites or at one of nearly 30 primitive 
campsites.
    No surveys have been conducted regarding the operating hours of 
personal watercraft at Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area, though 
most personal watercraft probably operate between the hours of dawn to 
dusk. There are currently no State regulations regarding hours of 
operation in either Montana or Wyoming. Due to the narrowness of 
Bighorn Lake, most watercraft activity, including use of personal 
watercraft before the ban, occurs in the several wide sections of the 
lake, or watercraft traverse back and forth across the lake. Some 
thrill-seeking activity by personal watercraft users did occur.
    Before the ban on PWC use, PWC use was such a small percentage of 
the overall boating use within Bighorn Canyon that accidents involving 
PWC operators varied greatly from year to year. Two accidents were 
recorded at Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area during the 2000 and 
2001 seasons. Both accidents were attributed to the operators' 
inexperience in operating personal watercraft, allowing them to run 
into other vessels. Statistics for other vessel accidents per year are 
similar.
    Complaints regarding misuse of personal watercraft are infrequent, 
and the most commonly reported are wakes in the flat-wake zones near 
boat launch areas. Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area has issued 
citations under Montana and Wyoming State law to personal watercraft 
users for acts such as wake jumping, under-age riding, and failing to 
wear flotation devices. The most common citation has been for under-age 
riding. Montana State law requires riders age 13 and 14 to have a 
certificate, and riders 12 and younger must be accompanied by an adult. 
Wyoming State law requires riders to be 16 years old.

Resource Protection and Public Use Issues

Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area Environmental Assessment

    The environmental assessment was available for public review and 
comment for the period June 9, 2003, through July 11, 2003. To request 
a copy of the document call 307-548-2251 or write Bighorn Canyon 
National Recreation Area, Attn: PWC EA, 20 Highway 14A East, Lovell, WY 
82431. Requests may be e-mailed to [email protected]. A copy of the 
Environmental Assessment may also be found at www.nps.gov/bica/EAPWC.pdf.
    The purpose of the Environmental Assessment was to evaluate a range 
of alternatives and strategies for the management of PWC use at Bighorn 
Canyon to ensure the protection of park resources and values while 
offering recreational opportunities as provided for in the National 
Recreation Area's enabling legislation, purpose, mission, and goals. 
The assessment assumed alternatives would be implemented beginning in 
2002 and considered a 10-year period, from 2002 to 2012. The assessment 
also compares each alternative to PWC use before November 7, 2002, when 
the service-wide closure took effect. In addition, the Environmental 
Assessment defines such terms as ``negligible'' and ``adverse.'' In 
this document, these terms are used to describe the environmental 
impact. Refer to the EA for complete definitions.
    The environmental assessment evaluates three alternatives 
addressing the use of personal watercraft at Bighorn Canyon National 
Recreation Area:
    Alternative A--By using a special regulation, the park would 
reinstate PWC use under those restrictions that applied to PWC use 
before November 7, 2002, as defined in the park's Superintendent's 
Compendium. Under this alternative, the following areas would be closed 
to PWC use:
    1. Gated area south of Yellowtail Dam's west side to spillway 
entrance works, and Bighorn River from Yellowtail Dam to cable 3,500 
feet north.
    2. At Afterbay Dam--from fenced areas on west side of dam.

[[Page 25045]]

    3. Afterbay Lake--Area between dam intake works and buoy/cable line 
100 feet west.
    4. Government docks as posted.
    5. At Ok-A-Beh gas dock (customers excepted).
    6. From Yellowtail Dam upstream to the log boom.
    7. In addition, docking would be limited at courtesy docks at Ok-A-
Beh, Barry's Landing, Horseshoe Bend, and at the Box Canyon Comfort 
Station Dock (exclusive of adjacent slips) to 15 minutes (official and 
concession vessels excepted). Crooked Creek Bay would be closed to 
towing of people and personal watercraft use. Also, Montana and Wyoming 
State laws would continue to apply to personal watercraft operators.
    8. Alternative B--By using a special regulation, the park would 
manage PWC use by imposing management prescriptions in addition to 
those restrictions in effect before November 7, 2002. In addition to 
those areas closed to PWC use listed in alternative A, alternative B 
would include a closure of the Bighorn Lake and shoreline south of the 
area known as the South Narrows (legal description R94W, T57N at the SE 
corner of Section 6, the SW corner of Section 5, the NE corner of 
Section 7, and the NW corner of Section 8). Bighorn Canyon National 
Recreation Area would also install buoys to delineate this boundary and 
personal watercraft users would be required to stay north of this 
boundary. Under alternative B, Bighorn Canyon would also establish a 
PWC user education program implemented through vessel inspections, law 
enforcement contacts, and signing.
    No-Action Alternative--Under the no-action alternative, the 
National Park Service would take no action to reinstate the use of 
personal watercraft at Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area and no 
special rule would be promulgated to continue personal watercraft use. 
Under this alternative, NPS would continue the ban on personal 
watercraft use at Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area begun in 
November 2002.
    Alternative B is the park's preferred alternative because it would 
best fulfill the park responsibilities as trustee of the sensitive 
habitat; ensure safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and 
culturally pleasing surroundings; and attain a wider range of 
beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk of health 
or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences.
    As previously noted, NPS will consider the comments received on 
this proposal, as well as the comments received on the Environmental 
Assessment. In the final rule, the NPS will implement one of these 
alternatives as proposed, or choose a different alternative or 
combination of alternatives. Therefore, the public should review and 
consider the other alternatives contained in the Environmental 
Assessment when making comments on this proposed rule.
    The following summarizes the predominant resource protection and 
public use issues associated with reinstating PWC use at Bighorn Canyon 
National Recreation Area. Each of these issues is analyzed in the 
Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area, Personal Watercraft Use 
Environmental Assessment.

Water Quality

    Most research on the effects of personal watercraft on water 
quality focuses on the impacts of two-stroke engines, and it is assumed 
that any impacts caused by these engines also apply to the personal 
watercraft powered by them. There is general agreement that two-stroke 
engines discharge a gas-oil mixture into the water. Fuel used in PWC 
engines contains many hydrocarbons, including benzene, toluene, 
ethylbenzene, and xylene (collectively referred to as BTEX) and 
polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). PAH also are released from boat 
engines, including those in personal watercraft. These compounds are 
not found appreciably in the unburned fuel mixture, but rather are 
products of combustion. Discharges of these compounds--BTEX and PAH--
have potential adverse effects on water quality.
    A typical conventional (i.e., carbureted) two-stroke PWC engine 
discharges as much as 30% of the unburned fuel mixture directly into 
the water. At common fuel consumption rates, an average two-hour ride 
on a personal watercraft may discharge 3 gallons of fuel into the 
water. According to the California Air Resources Board, an average 
personal watercraft can discharge between 1.2 and 3.3 gallons of fuel 
during one hour at full throttle. However, hydrocarbon (HC) discharges 
to water are expected to decrease substantially over the next 10 years 
due to mandated improvements in engine technology from the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    Under this proposed rule, PWC use would be reinstated within 
Bighorn Canyon with some new restrictions. In addition to the areas 
that were closed to PWC use before the ban, the proposed rule would 
also close Bighorn Lake and its shoreline south of the area known as 
the South Narrows. The adverse impacts on water quality from this 
proposed rule would be the same as was the case before the ban. Closure 
of the South Narrows area to PWC use would not measurably change water 
quality impacts because in an average year the water levels in this 
area are generally below the elevation of launch facilities thus 
precluding the use of PWC in that area. PWC use under the proposed rule 
would have negligible adverse effects on water quality based on 
ecotoxicological threshold volumes. All pollutant loads in 2002 and 
2012 from personal watercraft and other motorboats would be negligible 
and well below ecotoxicological benchmarks and criteria.
    Adverse water quality impacts from PWC from benzo(a)pyrene, 
benzene, and MTBE based on human health (ingestion of water and fish) 
benchmarks would be negligible in both 2002 and 2012, based on water 
quality criteria set by the EPA, as well as water quality criteria for 
Wyoming and Montana. Cumulative adverse impacts from personal 
watercraft and other watercraft would be negligible for benzo(a)pyrene, 
benzene and MTBE. Therefore, the implementation of the proposed rule 
would not result in an impairment of the water quality resource.

Air Quality

    PWC emit various compounds that pollute the air. In the two-stroke 
engines commonly used in PWC, the lubricating oil is used once and is 
expelled as part of the exhaust; and the combustion process results in 
emissions of air pollutants such as volatile organic compounds (VOC), 
nitrogen oxides (NOX), particulate matter (PM), and carbon 
monoxide (CO). PWC also emit fuel components such as benzene that are 
known to cause adverse health effects. Even though PWC engine exhaust 
is usually routed below the waterline, a portion of the exhaust gases 
go into the air. These air pollutants may adversely impact park visitor 
and employee health, as well as sensitive park resources.
    For example, in the presence of sunlight VOC and NOX 
emissions combine to form ozone. Ozone causes respiratory problems in 
humans, including cough, airway irritation, and chest pain during 
inhalations. Ozone is also toxic to sensitive species of vegetation. It 
causes visible foliar injury, decreases plant growth, and increases 
plant susceptibility to insects and disease. Carbon monoxide can affect 
humans as well. It interferes with the

[[Page 25046]]

oxygen carrying capacity of blood, resulting in lack of oxygen to 
tissues. NOX and PM emissions associated with PWC use can 
also degrade visibility. NOX can also contribute to acid 
deposition effects on plants, water, and soil. However, because 
emission estimates show that NOX from personal watercraft 
are minimal (less than 5 tons per year), acid deposition effects 
attributable to personal watercraft use are expected to be minimal.
    Under the proposed rule the annual number of personal watercraft 
using Bighorn Lake would be essentially the same as before the ban 
(approximately 449 PWC per year). Additional management strategies in 
the proposed rule would not affect the number of PWC using Bighorn Lake 
in 2002 through 2012. Therefore, the emission levels and impacts of 
continued PWC use to air quality related values would be negligible 
adverse. In addition, cumulative adverse impacts on air quality related 
values at Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area in both 2002 and 2012 
would also be negligible.
    This conclusion is based on calculated levels of pollutant 
emissions and the low SUM06 values (ozone levels). There are no 
observed visibility impacts or ozone-related plant injury in the 
recreation area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed rule would 
not result in an impairment of air quality related values.

Soundscapes

    Historically, PWC use patterns in Bighorn Canyon are characterized 
by several people per PWC who take turns riding. Personal watercraft 
will return to the area where a group is picnicking/camping to rest or 
switch riders. From park staff observations, personal watercraft 
generally run at higher speeds (and higher noise levels) leaving the 
launch or picnic/camping areas than when personal watercraft are in 
open water. While in the Montana jurisdictional area (which is the 
majority of the proposed use area), PWC users must travel at flat wake 
speed when operating on a lake within 100 feet of a drifting, trolling, 
or anchored watercraft, persons in the water, or on a river within 50 
feet of a dock, swimming raft, non-motorized boat, or anchored vessel. 
However, there are picnic and other shoreline use areas where PWC can 
operate closer to shore, if no swimmers are present. Users at the 
picnic areas or swimming areas at those locations are exposed to PWC 
noise as they come in and out of the shore area if allowed, and from 
the noise of several PWC that may be operating at high speeds in the 
vicinity. Currently, no Montana or Wyoming laws restrict PWC speed 
other than when in a flat wake area. The noise impact from a PWC coming 
into the shore area is dependent on the distance from shore that the 
operator slows down and at what speed they approach the shoreline. One 
PWC operating at 50 feet from shore at 40 mph would generate noise 
levels of approximately 78 dBA to a shoreline observer; at 20 mph, the 
noise level would be approximately 73 dBA. At a distance of 100 feet, 
the noise level would be approximately 6 dBA less than at a distance of 
50 feet. The noise level from two identical watercraft would be 3 dBA 
higher than from a single vessel. With new designs of personal 
watercraft, engines may be quieter in the future.
    The proposed rule would implement restrictions in addition to those 
in place before the closure. Specifically, PWC would not be allowed 
south of the area known as the South Narrows. The geographic 
restriction of the proposed rule would result in the elimination of PWC 
noise experienced by park visitors in the areas south of the South 
Narrows, including fishermen, shoreline, and near shoreline users of 
the swimming, picnic, and camping areas. Because PWC use is already 
limited in this area due to low water levels, beneficial impacts from a 
reduction of PWC noise would be negligible.
    Overall, the types and levels of adverse impacts from PWC to the 
soundscape north of the South Narrows would be generally the same as 
before the ban, which would include short-term, minor to moderate 
adverse impacts at certain locations along the lake on days of higher 
PWC use. Minor adverse impacts would occur at times and places where 
use is infrequent and distanced from other park users, for example, as 
PWC users operated farther from shore. Moderate adverse impacts would 
occur at landings on the lake on days of relatively consistent PWC 
operation with more than one PWC operating at one time. Moderate 
adverse impacts would occur from highly concentrated PWC use in one 
area and in areas where PWC noise is magnified off the surrounding 
cliffs. Impacts would generally be short-term, although could 
periodically be longer-term at shoreline areas on the very high use 
days, where motorized noise may predominate off and on for most of the 
day.
    Non-PWC noise sources in Bighorn Canyon include natural sounds such 
as waves or wind, other boats, and other visitor activities. Motorboats 
account for approximately 96% of all watercraft use on Bighorn Lake. 
Although some motorboats can generate maximum sound levels similar to 
PWC, the motorboats are generally not perceived to be as annoying due 
to their more typical steady rate of speed and direction. Further, at 
Bighorn Canyon, most are driven at slow speeds for fishing/trolling or 
sightseeing and create relatively low noise levels. The geographic 
restriction of this proposed rule would only slightly reduce cumulative 
noise impacts south of the South Narrows area compared to before the 
ban because PWC use is already limited in this area due to low water 
levels.
    The proposed rule would result in a negligible to moderate adverse 
impact on the national recreation area soundscape. PWC impacts would be 
negligible south of the South Narrows due to geographic restriction of 
PWC in this area. Minor and moderate PWC noise impacts would occur in 
the areas of the national recreation area north of the South Narrows. 
Impacts would generally be short-term, although could periodically be 
longer-term at shoreline areas on the very high use days, where 
motorized noise may predominate off and on for most of the day. 
Cumulative noise impacts from personal watercraft, motorboats, and 
other visitors would be minor to moderate because these sounds would be 
heard occasionally throughout the day, and may predominate on busy days 
during the high use season. Therefore, implementation of the proposed 
rule would not result in an impairment of soundscape values.

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

    Some research suggests that PWC use affects wildlife by causing 
interruption of normal activities, alarm or flight, avoidance or 
degradation of habitat, and effects on reproductive success. This is 
thought to be a result of the combination of PWC speed, noise, and 
ability to access sensitive areas, especially in shallow-water depths. 
Waterfowl and nesting birds are the most vulnerable to personal 
watercraft. Fleeing a disturbance created by personal watercraft may 
force birds to abandon eggs during crucial embryo development stages, 
prevent nest defense from predators, and contribute to stress and 
associated behavior changes. Impacts on sensitive species are 
documented under ``Threatened, Endangered, or Special Concern 
Species.''
    Under the proposed rule, PWC use would occur as before the ban, 
with additional restrictions. Restrictions on PWC use would include a 
closure of Bighorn Lake and shoreline south of the

[[Page 25047]]

area known as the South Narrows. Buoys would be installed to delineate 
the boundary and PWC users would be required to stay north of this 
boundary. A user education program would also be implemented through 
vessel inspections, law enforcement contacts, and signing. Interactions 
between wildlife and human visitors would be limited because of the low 
abundance of wildlife within the PWC use areas and the lack of 
shoreline access.
    The proposed rule would result in some beneficial impacts on 
wildlife as increased user awareness and a decreased area of PWC 
activity would reduce the likelihood of user and wildlife conflicts. 
The Yellowtail Wildlife Habitat area, typically an area of infrequent 
PWC use due to low water levels but with potential for use when water 
levels are sufficient, would be closed. Adverse impacts on fish and 
wildlife from PWC use on Bighorn Lake would remain negligible to minor, 
but would be less than those predicted without the additional 
restrictions. All wildlife impacts would be temporary and short term.
    The cumulative effects of the proposed rule would be the same as 
before the ban. Adverse impacts on wildlife and wildlife habitat from 
visitor activities including PWC and boating use would be short-term 
and minor to moderate.
    Therefore, when compared to before the ban, the reinstatement of 
PWC use with additional restrictions and education efforts would have 
beneficial impacts on wildlife due to the decreased noise and 
disturbance from PWC. Although reduced, impacts on wildlife and 
wildlife habitat from PWC use would remain adverse negligible to minor 
in 2002 and 2012, similar to before the ban. All wildlife impacts from 
personal watercraft would be temporary and short term. Cumulative 
adverse impacts from visitor activities would be minor to moderate 
which is the same as before the ban. Lake level fluctuations would also 
contribute to cumulative adverse impacts through minor to moderate 
levels of short to long-term habitat disturbance. Therefore, the 
implementation of the proposed rule would not result in impairment to 
wildlife or wildlife habitat.

Threatened, Endangered, or Special Concern Species

    The same issues described for PWC use and general wildlife also 
pertain to special concern species. Potential impacts from personal 
watercraft include inducing flight and alarm responses, disrupting 
normal behaviors and causing stress, degrading habitat quality, and 
potentially affecting reproductive success. Special status species at 
the recreation area include Federal or State listed threatened, 
endangered, or candidate species. Additionally, some species at Bighorn 
Lake are designated by Wyoming and/or Montana as special concern 
species.
    The Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C 1531 et seq.) mandates that 
all Federal agencies consider the potential effects of their actions on 
species listed as threatened or endangered. If the National Park 
Service determines that an action may adversely affect a Federally 
listed species, consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is 
required to ensure that the action will not jeopardize the species' 
continued existence or result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of critical habitat.
    Under this proposed rule, PWC use would occur as it did prior to 
the closure, with additional restrictions. Restrictions on PWC use 
would include a closure of Bighorn Lake and shoreline south of the area 
known as the South Narrows. Buoys would be installed to delineate the 
boundary and PWC users would be required to stay north of this 
boundary. A user education program will also be implemented through 
vessel inspections, law enforcement contacts, and signing.
    The closure of the southernmost portion of Bighorn Lake would 
eliminate noise and disturbance from the infrequent use that occurs in 
this area when water levels are sufficient for PWC use. Special status 
species that are known to occur in this area such as the bald eagle and 
persistent sepal yellowcress would benefit from the closure and no 
effect on these species would be expected from PWC under the proposed 
rule. The establishment of a user education program would assist in 
lowering PWC accident frequency, as well as in increasing PWC user 
awareness of potential conflicts with wildlife. This would lead to a 
reduction in the potential for PWC-related effects on special status 
species relative to before the ban.
    Under the proposed rule, cumulative impacts on special status 
species would be similar to before the ban and may affect, but would 
not likely adversely affect special status species or their habitat. 
Cumulative impacts would result from lake level fluctuations as well as 
visitor activities that are concentrated mostly in developed areas 
rather than in habitat for special status species.
    Under the proposed rule, PWC use at Bighorn Lake may affect, but 
would not likely adversely affect, special status species including 
Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep, American peregrine falcon, Townsend's 
big-eared bat, or northern leopard frog. However, the potential for 
impacts on these species would be reduced relative to before the ban 
due to the decreased area of allowed PWC use and increased PWC user 
education efforts. Potential effects on the bald eagle and persistent 
sepal yellowcress would be eliminated by the closure of the area south 
of the South Narrows to PWC use and no effects from PWC would occur to 
these species under this proposed rule. There would be no PWC-caused 
effects on all other Federal or State listed species including the 
mountain plover, plains spadefoot toad, Hapeman's sullivantia, Lesica's 
bladderpod, sweetwater milkvetch, or rabbit buckwheat as was the case 
before the ban. All impacts on special status species would be 
temporary and short term. Cumulative impacts may affect but would not 
be likely to adversely affect special status species and would result 
from lake level fluctuations as well as visitor activities that are 
concentrated mostly in developed areas rather than in habitat for 
special status species. Therefore, the implementation of this proposed 
rule would not result in an impairment of threatened or endangered 
species.

Shoreline Vegetation

    PWC are able to access areas that other types of watercraft may 
not, which may cause direct disturbance to vegetation. Indirect impact 
on shoreline vegetation may occur through trampling if operators 
disembark and engage in activities on shore. In addition, wakes created 
by personal watercraft may affect shorelines through erosion by wave 
action. The proposed rule aims to limit these disturbances to the 
shoreline areas.
    Under the proposed rule, PWC use would occur as before the ban with 
additional restrictions. Restrictions on PWC use would include a 
closure of Bighorn Lake and shoreline south of the area known as the 
South Narrows. Buoys would be installed to delineate the boundary and 
PWC users would be required to stay north of this boundary. A user 
education program will also be implemented through vessel inspections, 
law enforcement contacts, and signing.
    The closure of the area south of the South Narrows would have 
potential benefits to the wetland and riparian communities during times 
when water levels are sufficient for PWC access. In addition, the user 
education program would increase the awareness of visitors to the 
importance of these vegetation

[[Page 25048]]

communities. Impacts from PWC use to shorelines and sensitive shoreline 
vegetation would remain negligible, adverse, and short-term.
    Cumulative adverse impacts related to other watercraft and visitor 
activities would be the same as before the ban and would be negligible 
to minor. Impacts from water level fluctuations to shorelines and 
shoreline vegetation would continue to be minor to moderate.
    Reduced PWC access would eliminate adverse impacts in the southern 
most portion of the national recreation area during times when there 
are sufficient water levels to provide access by PWC, resulting in 
beneficial impacts on sensitive shoreline vegetation. Cumulative 
adverse impacts from PWC and other watercraft use and visitor 
activities would remain negligible to minor, while impacts from lake 
level fluctuations would remain minor to moderate. Therefore, the 
implementation of this proposed rule would not result in an impairment 
of shoreline vegetation.

Visitor Experience

    The proposed rule will minimize potential conflicts between PWC use 
and other park visitors. PWC use would be reinstated as before the ban, 
with some additional restrictions including a closure of Bighorn Lake 
and shoreline south of the area known as the South Narrows. Buoys would 
be installed to delineate the boundary, and PWC would be required to 
stay north of this boundary.
    Impacts on PWC Users. The use restriction south of the South 
Narrows would have a negligible adverse impact on the experience of PWC 
users. This area is not popular with PWC users and the rest of the lake 
would still be open to PWC use; however, the restriction does eliminate 
the possibility of PWC use in this area. Overall, this proposed rule 
would have a long-term negligible adverse impact on PWC users at 
Bighorn Canyon.
    Impacts on Other Boaters. Other boaters (motorized and non-
motorized) would interact with PWC operators and experience impacts 
similar to before the ban. The PWC use restriction south of the South 
Narrows would benefit other boaters using this area, as there would be 
no potential for PWC to adversely impact their experience. Further, 
since this part of Bighorn Canyon has not historically had high PWC 
use, closure south of the South Narrows would not force a large number 
of PWC to other parts of the lake and shoreline, thereby impacting 
other boaters. Therefore, impacts on all boaters south of the South 
Narrows will be beneficial, and north of the South Narrows will be 
negligible adverse.
    Impacts on Other Visitors. Campers, swimmers, water skiers, 
anglers, hikers, and other shoreline visitors to the lake would 
interact with PWC users and experience impacts similar to those that 
occurred before the ban on PWC use. Closure of the lake south of the 
South Narrows would not result in PWC users relocating to other parts 
of the lake since this was not a high PWC use area. Thus, impacts on 
other visitors would be similar to before the ban. Under the proposed 
rule, north of the South Narrows the impact would be negligible to 
minor adverse on the shoreline visitors and minor to moderate adverse 
on those seeking natural quiet. South of the South Narrows impacts 
would be beneficial to all visitors.
    The cumulative impacts on visitor use and experience under the 
proposed rule would be the same as before the ban. Predictable 
cumulative impacts related to the use of personal watercraft, motorized 
boats, and other visitor activities would be negligible adverse over 
the short and long term. Designation of the closed area south of the 
South Narrows would have a negligible adverse impact on most PWC users 
since this area has not had high PWC use, and most of Bighorn Lake 
would still be open for use. Other boaters and all shoreline users 
would experience negligible adverse impacts north of the South Narrows 
and beneficial impacts south of the South Narrows. Cumulative effects 
of PWC use, other watercraft, and other visitors would result in long-
term, negligible adverse impacts.

Visitor Conflict and Safety

    The proposed rule will minimize or reduce the potential for PWC 
user accidents and the potential safety conflicts between PWC users and 
other water recreationists. Under the proposed rule PWC use would be 
reinstated as before the ban, with additional restrictions including a 
closure of Bighorn Lake and shoreline south of the area known as the 
South Narrows. Buoys would be installed to delineate this boundary, 
with PWC required to stay north of this boundary.
    Personal Watercraft/Swimmer Conflicts. The greatest potential for 
conflict between PWC and swimmers is at the designated swim beaches at 
Horseshoe Bend and Ok-A-Beh. The area south of the South Narrows is not 
a high swim-use area, thus impacts on swimmers related to visitor 
safety and conflicts would be negligible adverse.
    Personal Watercraft/Other Boat Conflicts. Impacts on other boaters 
would be similar to before the ban north of the South Narrows and would 
be negligible to minor adverse. South of the South Narrows, impacts on 
other boaters would be beneficial, due to closing this area to PWC use.
    Personal Watercraft/Other Visitor Conflicts. Bighorn Lake and its 
shoreline are used by a variety of visitors, including, campers, 
anglers, and hikers; however, due to the steep topography of the 
shoreline, most activity is concentrated near developed areas. 
Shoreline areas that are popular with both PWC and other shoreline 
users include Horseshoe Bend and Ok-A-Beh. Since lakewide PWC use is 
expected to increase by one PWC per high-use day by 2012, conflicts and 
safety issues between PWC users and other visitors would be expected to 
increase minimally north of the South Narrows and would be negligible 
adverse. South of the South Narrows, impacts on safety and conflict 
issues related to all other visitors would be beneficial.
    Cumulative impacts would be similar to before the ban. Predictable 
cumulative impacts related to the use of personal watercraft, motorized 
boats, and other visitor activities would be negligible adverse over 
the short and long term. Reinstated PWC use under the proposed rule 
would have beneficial impacts on visitor conflict and safety goals 
south of the South Narrows. North of the South Narrows impacts on 
visitor conflict and safety goals would be negligible adverse. 
Cumulative impacts related to visitor conflicts and safety would be 
negligible to minor adverse for all user groups in the short and long 
term, particularly near the high use areas.

The Proposed Rule

    Under the proposed rule in Sec.  7.92 the following areas would 
remain closed to PWC operations:
    1. Gated area south of Yellowtail Dam's west side to spillway 
entrance works and Bighorn River from Yellowtail Dam to cable 3,500 
feet north.
    2. At Afterbay Dam from fenced areas on west side of dam up to the 
dam.
    3. In Afterbay Lake, the area between dam intake works and buoy/
cable line 100 feet west.
    4. Government docks as posted.
    5. At Ok-A-Beh, the gas dock except for customers.
    6. From Yellowtail Dam upstream to the log boom.
    7. Big Horn Lake and shoreline south of the area known as the South 
Narrows

[[Page 25049]]

near the Yellowtail Wildlife Habitat Area.
    Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area would install buoys to 
delineate the south boundary. Personal watercraft users would be 
required to stay north of this boundary. Bighorn Canyon would establish 
a PWC user education program implemented through vessel inspections, 
law enforcement contacts, and signing. Additionally the park will 
develop maps of the park with all closures delineated and post these 
maps on the park's Web site. All applicable State of Montana and State 
of Wyoming laws would continue to apply to personal watercraft users. 
It should be noted that the water area south of the South Narrows is 
closed to all vessels. There is not enough water in that area of the 
lake to sustain vessel use at this time. Should the water levels rise 
in the future, the area would continue to remain closed to all vessels 
for wildlife habit management purposes.

Summary of Economic Impacts

    Alternative A would permit PWC use as previously managed within the 
park before the November 7, 2002, ban, while Alternative B would permit 
PWC use with additional management strategies. Alternative B is the 
preferred alternative, and includes a closure of the reservoir and 
shoreline south of the area known as the South Narrows, and a PWC user 
education program implemented through vessel inspections, law 
enforcement contacts, and signing. Alternative C is the no-action 
alternative and represents the baseline conditions for this economic 
analysis. Under that alternative, the November 7, 2002, ban would be 
continued. All benefits and costs associated with Alternatives A and B 
are measured relative to that baseline.
    The primary beneficiaries of Alternatives A and B would be the park 
visitors who use PWCs and the businesses that provide services to PWC 
users such as rental shops, restaurants, gas stations, and hotels. 
Additional beneficiaries include individuals who use PWCs outside the 
park due to the November 7, 2002, ban. Over a ten-year horizon from 
2003 to 2012, the present value of benefits to PWC users is expected to 
range between $540,900 and $693,650, depending on the alternative 
analyzed and the discount rate used. The present value of benefits to 
businesses over the same timeframe is expected to range between $27,420 
and $210,640. These benefit estimates are presented in Table 1. The 
amortized values per year of these benefits over the ten-year timeframe 
are presented in Table 2.

      Table 1.--Present Value of Benefits for PWC Use in Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area, 2003-2012
                                                   [2001 $] a
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       PWC users          Businesses                        Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative A:
    Discounted at 3% b..............     $693,650  $36,980 to $210,640....  $730,630 to $904,290.
    Discounted at 7% b..............     $569,370  $29,230 to $166,440....  $598,600 to $735,810.
Alternative B:
    Discounted at 3% b..............     $658,960  $34,700 to $196,470....  $693,660 to $855,430.
    Discounted at 7% b..............     $540,900  $27,420 to $155,240....  $568,320 to $696,140.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Benefits were rounded to the nearest ten dollars, and may not sum to the indicated totals due to independent
  rounding.
b Office of Management and Budget Circular A-4 recommends a 7% discount rate in general, and a 3% discount rate
  when analyzing impacts to private consumption.


   Table 2.--Amortized Total Benefits per Year for PWC Use in Bighorn
               Canyon National Recreation Area, 2003-2012
                                [2001 $]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Amortized total  benefits per
                                                     year a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative A:
    Discounted at 3% b...............  $85,652 to $106,010.
    Discounted at 7% b...............  $85,227 to $104,763.
Alternative B:
    Discounted at 3% b...............  $81,318 to $100,282.
    Discounted at 7% b...............  $80,916 to $99,115.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a This is the present value of total benefits reported in Table 1
  amortized over the ten-year analysis timeframe at the indicated
  discount rate.
b Office of Management and Budget Circular A-4 recommends a 7% discount
  rate in general, and a 3% discount rate when analyzing impacts to
  private consumption.

    The primary group that would incur costs under Alternatives A and B 
would be the park visitors who do not use PWCs and whose park 
experiences would be negatively affected by PWC use within the park. At 
Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area, non-PWC uses include boating, 
canoeing, fishing, and hiking. Additionally, the public could incur 
costs associated with impacts to aesthetics, ecosystem protection, 
human health and safety, congestion, nonuse values, and enforcement. 
However, these costs could not be quantified because of a lack of 
available data. Nevertheless, the magnitude of costs associated with 
PWC use would likely be greatest under Alternative A, and lower for 
Alternative B due to increasingly stringent restrictions on PWC use.
    Because the costs of Alternatives A and B could not be quantified, 
the net benefits associated with those alternatives (benefits minus 
costs) also could not be quantified. However, from an economic 
perspective, the selection of Alternative B as the preferred 
alternative was considered reasonable even though the quantified 
benefits are smaller than under Alternative A. That is because the 
costs associated with non-PWC use, aesthetics, ecosystem protection, 
human health and safety, congestion, and nonuse values would likely be 
greater under Alternative A

[[Page 25050]]

than under Alternative B. Quantification of those costs could 
reasonably result in Alternative B having the greatest level of net 
benefits.

Compliance With Other Laws

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Order 12866)

    This document is not a significant rule and has not been reviewed 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866.
    (1) This rule will not have an effect of $100 million or more on 
the economy. It will not adversely affect in a material way the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities. The National Park Service has completed the report 
entitled ``Economic Analysis of Management Alternatives for Personal 
Watercraft in Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area (MACTEC 
Engineering and Consulting, Inc., July 2003).
    (2) This rule will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise 
interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency. Actions 
taken under this rule will not interfere with other agencies or local 
government plans, policies or controls. This rule is an agency specific 
rule.
    (3) This rule does not alter the budgetary effects of entitlements, 
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights or obligations of 
their recipients. This rule will have no effects on entitlements, 
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights or obligations of 
their recipients. No grants or other forms of monetary supplements are 
involved.
    (4) This rule does not raise novel legal or policy issues. This 
rule is one of the special regulations being issued for managing PWC 
use in National Park Units. The National Park Service published general 
regulations (36 CFR 3.24) in March 2000, requiring individual park 
areas to adopt special regulations to authorize PWC use. The 
implementation of the requirement of the general regulation continues 
to generate interest and discussion from the public concerning the 
overall effect of authorizing PWC use and National Park Service policy 
and park management but the specific effects of this rule are nominal.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of the Interior certifies that this rulemaking will 
not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small 
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 
This certification is based on a report entitled ``Economic Analysis of 
Management Alternatives for Personal Watercraft in Bighorn Canyon 
National Recreation Area'' (MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., 
July 2003).

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)

    This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This proposed rule:
    a. Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or 
more.
    b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for 
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government 
agencies, or geographic regions.
    c. Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, 
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of 
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or 
tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per 
year. The rule does not have a significant or unique effect on State, 
local or tribal governments or the private sector. This rule is an 
agency specific rule and does not impose any other requirements on 
other agencies, governments, or the private sector.

Takings (Executive Order 12630)

    In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the rule does not have 
significant takings implications. A taking implication assessment is 
not required. No taking of personal property will occur as a result of 
this rule.

Federalism (Executive Order 13132)

    In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the rule does not have 
sufficient Federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a 
Federalism Assessment. This proposed rule only affects use of NPS 
administered lands and waters. It has no outside effects on other areas 
by allowing PWC use in specific areas of the park.

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 12988)

    In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of the 
Solicitor has determined that this rule does not unduly burden the 
judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of the Order.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This regulation does not require an information collection from 10 
or more parties and a submission under the Paperwork Reduction Act is 
not required. An OMB Form 83-I is not required.

National Environmental Policy Act

    As a companion document to this NPRM, NPS has issued the Personal 
Watercraft Use Environmental Assessment for Bighorn Canyon National 
Recreation Area. The environmental assessment was available for public 
review and comment for the period June 9, 2003, through July 11, 2003. 
To request a copy of the document call 307-548-2251 or write Bighorn 
Canyon National Recreation Area, Attn: PWC EA, 20 Highway 14A East, 
Lovell, WY 82431. Requests may be e-mailed to [email protected]. A 
copy of the environmental assessment may also be found at www.nps.gov/bica/EAPWC.pdf.

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

    In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, 
``Government to Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments'' (59 FR 22951) and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated potential 
effects on Federally recognized Indian tribes and have determined that 
there are no potential effects.

Clarity of Rule

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations 
that are easy to understand. We invite your comments on how to make 
this rule easier to understand, including answers to questions such as 
the following: (1) Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated? (2) 
Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that interferes with 
its clarity? (3) Does the format of the rule (grouping and order of 
sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its 
clarity? (4) Would the rule be easier to read if it were divided into 
more (but shorter) sections? (A ``section'' appears in bold type and is 
preceded by the symbol ``Sec.  '' and a numbered heading; for example 
[Sec.  7.92 Bighorn Canyon Recreation Area]) (5) Is the description of 
the rule in the ``Supplementary Information'' section of the preamble 
helpful in understanding the proposed rule? What else could we do to 
make the rule easier to understand?
    Send a copy of any comments that concern how we could make this 
rule easier to understand to: Office of Regulatory Affairs, Department 
of the Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street,

[[Page 25051]]

NW., Washington, DC 20240. You may also e-mail the comments to this 
address: [email protected].
    Drafting Information: The primary authors of this regulation are: 
Judy Shafer, Office of Policy and Regulations and Kym Hall, Special 
Assistant, Washington, DC.

Public Participation

    Comments on the proposed rule should be sent to Superintendent, 
Bighorn Canyon NRA, P.O. Box 7458, Fort Smith, MT 59035 or you may hand 
deliver your comments to the Headquarters at 5 Avenue B, Fort Smith, 
Montana. Comments may also be sent by e-mail to [email protected]. If 
you comment by e-mail, please include ``PWC rule'' in the subject line 
and your name and return address in the body of your Internet message.
    Our practice is to make comments, including names and addresses of 
respondents, available for public review during regular business hours. 
Individual respondents may request that we withhold their home address 
from the rulemaking record, which we will honor to the extent allowable 
by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or address, you must 
state this prominently at the beginning of your comment. However, we 
will not consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from 
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying 
themselves as representatives or officials or organizations or 
businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7

    District of Columbia, National Parks, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    In consideration of the foregoing, the National Park Service 
proposes to amend 36 CFR part 7 as follows:

PART 7--SPECIAL REGULATIONS, AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM

    1. The authority for Part 7 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9a, 460(q), 462(k); Sec. 7.96 also 
issued under D.C. Code 8-137(1981) and D.C. Code 40-721 (1981).

    2. Amend Sec.  7.92 by adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:


Sec.  7.92  Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area.

* * * * *
    (d) Personal Watercraft (PWC). (1) PWC use is allowed in Bighorn 
Canyon National Recreation Area, except in the following areas:
    (i) In the gated area south of Yellowtail Dam's west side to 
spillway entrance works and Bighorn River from Yellowtail Dam to cable 
3,500 feet north.
    (ii) At Afterbay Dam from fenced areas on west side of dam up to 
the dam.
    (iii) In Afterbay Lake, the area between dam intake works and buoy/
cable line 100 feet west.
    (iv) At Government docks as posted.
    (v) At the Ok-A-Beh gas dock, except for customers.
    (vi) From Yellowtail Dam upstream to the log boom.
    (vii) In Bighorn Lake and shoreline south of the area known as the 
South Narrows (legal description R94W, T57N at the SE corner of Section 
6, the SW corner of Section 5, the NE corner of Section 7, and the NW 
corner of Section 8). Personal watercraft users are required to stay 
north of the boundary delineated by park installed buoys.
    (2) The Superintendent may temporarily limit, restrict, or 
terminate access to the areas designated for PWC use after taking into 
consideration public health and safety, natural and cultural resource 
protection, and other management activities and objectives.

    Dated: April 19, 2004.
Paul Hoffman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 04-10140 Filed 5-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-FY-P