[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 72 (Friday, April 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16120-16121]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-07681]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

[NPS-IMR-GRSA-24169; PPWONRADE2, PMP00EI05.YP0000]


Ungulate Management Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement, 
Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve, Colorado

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The National Park Service announces the availability of a 
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Ungulate Management 
Plan (UMP) for Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve, Colorado. 
The UMP DEIS assesses the impacts that could result from continuing 
current management (the no-action alternative), or implementing any of 
the action alternatives for the future management of elk and bison at 
Great Sand Dunes. The NPS preferred alternative identified in the UMP 
DEIS is alternative 3.

DATES: The National Park Service will accept comments on the Draft 
Environmental Impact Statement for 45 days after the date the 
Environmental Protection Agency publishes their Notice of Availability 
in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Information will be available for public review and comment 
online at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/grsa, and in the Office of the 
Superintendent, Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve, 11500 
Highway 150 Mosca, Colorado 81146.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Acting Superintendent, Great Sand 
Dunes National Park and Preserve, 11500 Highway 150, Mosca, Colorado 
81146, (719) 378-6311, [email protected]; or Fred Bunch, 
Chief of Resource Management, Great Sand Dunes National Park and 
Preserve, 11500 Highway 150, Mosca, Colorado 81146, (719) 378-6361, 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The combined General Management Plan (GMP)/
Wilderness Study for the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve 
(GRSA) was approved in 2007. In the GMP Record of Decision, the NPS 
committed to developing an elk management plan to address concerns of 
elk overconcentration in GRSA. The GMP also addressed the potential 
future acquisition of the Medano Ranch from The Nature Conservancy 
(TNC). TNC currently manages a bison herd on these lands, and the GMP 
noted if additional bison habitat became available at some time in the 
future, the NPS could consider managing bison in the park.
    As a result of the guidance in the GMP and active, ongoing efforts 
to acquire the Medano Ranch, the NPS has prepared this Ungulate 
Management Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement (UMP DEIS). The 
purpose of the UMP DEIS is to determine the appropriate future 
management of elk and bison in GRSA. Action is needed at this time 
because:
     Elk and bison are currently on the landscape and there is 
no plan to address their management and impacts, both positive and 
negative, in support of desired habitat conditions.
     Disproportionate elk use in sensitive and highly 
productive/diverse areas of the park is leading to adverse impacts, 
particularly in wetland vegetation communities. In addition, the 
existing bison herd spends a disproportionate amount of time using 
these same vegetation communities, particularly during winter when elk 
overconcentration is the highest.
     Bison are currently managed by TNC on the Medano Ranch and 
portions of the Park and a decision is needed to determine whether to 
have bison at GRSA in the future and, if so, how to manage them.
     The Department of the Interior (DOI) Bison Conservation 
Initiative and the NPS Call to Action (Back Home on the Range), 
combined with additional information about bison and bison habitat in 
the San Luis Valley, provides an opportunity to reexamine the potential 
for bison conservation following the 2007 GMP.
    This UMP DEIS, which was prepared with the US Fish and Wildlife 
Service and Colorado Parks and Wildlife as cooperating agencies, 
evaluates the impacts of the no-action alternative (Alternative 1) and 
three action alternatives (Alternatives 2, 3, and 4).
    Under alternative 1, public elk hunting would continue in the 
Preserve, but there would be no other active elk management and no new 
action would occur to manage impacts from elk, including the effects of 
elk herbivory. TNC would continue to graze bison on the Medano Ranch 
until government acquisition and would be responsible for removing 
their bison and associated fencing prior to NPS acquisition of the 
Medano Ranch, in accordance with the 2007 GMP Record of Decision. Under 
this alternative, the NPS would remove the current bison fencing on NPS 
lands.
    Alternative 2 would incorporate active elk management to 
redistribute elk from areas of overconcentration. Public elk hunting 
would continue in the Preserve, and NPS would use elk dispersal tools 
in the Park, including non-lethal hazing, and limited lethal removal 
using trained volunteers and other authorized agents. Additional 
exclosures (fencing) would be constructed for the purpose of protecting 
sensitive habitat or for habitat restoration. This alternative would 
follow the current direction in the GMP for bison, as described for 
Alternative 1.
    Alternative 3 (the NPS Preferred Alternative) would include public 
elk hunting in the Preserve, and the same non-lethal and lethal elk 
redistribution tools described under Alternative 2. The NPS would also 
make a programmatic decision to amend the GMP and manage a bison herd 
in the park after acquisition of the Medano Ranch. For the first 5-7 
years after acquisition of the Medano Ranch, the NPS would seek to 
partner with TNC to manage the bison herd. After this timeframe, the 
NPS would assume responsibility of bison management within the existing 
bison fence, with a population goal of 80 to 260 animals. The bison 
range could be expanded within the life of the plan, at which point the 
NPS could consider a population goal between 80 and 560 animals. Tools 
used to manage bison abundance and distribution in the future would 
include roundup and translocation, hazing, and limited lethal removal.
    Under Alternative 4, public elk hunting in the Preserve would 
continue, and the NPS would use the same non-lethal and lethal elk 
redistribution tools described under Alternatives 2 and 3 in the Park. 
Under this alternative, the NPS would acquire the Medano Ranch and work 
with TNC to remove all bison, but would make a programmatic decision to 
amend the GMP so that after a period of 5-7 years, the NPS would 
establish a new conservation herd to be managed by the NPS. Once re-
established, bison abundance and range would be the same as described 
for alternative 3, as would potential future bison management tools.
    Because the range of alternatives includes the removal of bison 
completely or deferred NPS management of bison for 5-7 years, and 
because of concerns that the high

[[Page 16121]]

concentration of elk could be resulting in impacts on certain park 
resources such as wetlands, the initial phase of this plan would focus 
on managing elk to alter their high concentrations at certain times in 
the Park. Over the long term, the NPS would develop quantitative 
metrics of ecological integrity and vegetative condition as additional 
triggers to adaptively manage elk and, possibly, bison, depending on 
the selected action. Over the long-term, the NPS would use adaptive 
monitoring and adaptive management of elk and, if appropriate, bison, 
to support a historical array of ecologically healthy plant communities 
across the Park's landscape that are used by these ungulates, 
specifically riparian and wetland communities, as well as shrub and 
grassland communities. The goal of this long-term adaptive management 
framework is to continually evaluate the effectiveness of the ungulate 
management plan; improve management over time; and ensure that impacts 
of elk and bison, and their management inside the Park, remain in the 
range predicted in the UMP/EIS.
    The NPS is preparing this UMP DEIS to analyze specific proposals 
related to elk management tools that might be used to address 
overconcentration issue, while providing a programmatic (broader and 
higher level) analysis of potential decisions about the future of bison 
in GRSA. Those decisions include (1) whether or not to amend the GMP to 
allow for bison at GRSA, and if so, how many bison might be 
appropriate; (2) when the NPS would assume bison management 
responsibilities; and (3) what management tools the NPS might use upon 
assuming bison management responsibilities. This programmatic analysis 
is intended to address the general environmental issues, impacts, and 
benefits relating to these broad decisions about bison. NPS feels this 
a meaningful point to make these broad decisions, but there is too much 
uncertainty at this time as to the ultimate specific implementation of 
potential bison management tools, should the NPS select an alternative 
that includes bison at GRSA. If such an alternative becomes the 
selected action, this programmatic National Environmental Policy Act 
review for bison would support more specific subsequent decisions and 
provide a body of information that can be incorporated by reference 
into any future planning/compliance that may be needed.
    Public Participation: After the Environmental Protection Agency 
Notice of Availability is published, the NPS will schedule public 
meetings to be held during the comment period. Dates, times, and 
locations of these meetings will be announced in press releases and on 
the NPS Planning, Environment, and Public Comment website for the UMP 
DEIS at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/grsa.
    How To Comment: You are encouraged to comment on the UMP DEIS at 
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/grsa. You may also hand-deliver or mail 
your comments to the Superintendent, Great Sand Dunes National Park and 
Preserve, 11500 Highway 150, Mosca, Colorado 81146. Written comments 
will also be accepted during scheduled public meetings discussed above. 
Comments will not be accepted by fax, email, or by any method other 
than those specified above. Bulk comments in any format (hard copy or 
electronic) submitted on behalf of others will not be accepted. Before 
including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal 
identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your 
entire comment--including your personal identifying information--may be 
made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your 
comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public 
review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 43 CFR part 46.


    Dated: April 2, 2018.
Sue E. Masica,
Regional Director, Intermountain Region, National Park Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-07681 Filed 4-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4312-52-P