Gulf Islands National Seashore, Personal Watercraft Use, 12988-13001 [05-4734]
Download as PDF
12988
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Affected ADs
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
(b) None.
National Park Service
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to certain Boeing
Model 767–300 series airplanes, certificated
in any category; as listed in Boeing Service
Bulletin 767–25–0334, Revision 1, dated June
19, 2002.
36 CFR Part 7
Unsafe Condition
AGENCY:
(d) This AD was prompted by a report
indicating that a hard short circuit condition
between the output of certain frequency
converters and their downstream circuit
breakers will produce a continuous output
current that could cause the undersized
output wiring to overheat when the
frequency converters fail to shut off. We are
issuing this AD to prevent overheating of the
output wiring of the frequency converters,
which could result in the failure of a wire
bundle and consequent adverse effects on
other systems sharing the affected wire
bundle.
ACTION:
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the
actions required by this AD performed within
the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Replace Frequency Converters
(f) Within 18 months after the effective
date of this AD, replace the frequency
converters used to supply power for medical
outlets with modified frequency converters,
and do any related actions, by doing all of
the actions specified in the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 767–
25–0334, Revision 1, dated June 19, 2002.
Credit for Previous Service Bulletin
(g) Actions done before the effective date
of this AD in accordance with Boeing Service
Bulletin 767–25–0334, dated November 7,
2002, are acceptable for compliance with the
requirements of paragraph (f) of this AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(h) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested in accordance with the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 8,
2005.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–5289 Filed 3–16–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
RIN 1024–AD21
Gulf Islands National Seashore,
Personal Watercraft Use
National Park Service, Interior.
Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The National Park Service
(NPS) is proposing to designate areas
where personal watercraft (PWC) may
be used in Gulf Islands National
Seashore, Florida and Mississippi. 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
May 16, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed
rule should be sent to the
Superintendent, Gulf Islands National
Seashore, 1801 Gulf Breeze Parkway,
Gulf Breeze, FL 32563. Comments may
also be sent by e-mail to
guis@den.nps.gov. If you comment by email, please include ‘‘PWC rule’’ in the
subject line and your name and return
address in the body of your Internet
message. Also, you may hand deliver
comments to Gulf Islands National
Seashore, 1801 Gulf Breeze Parkway,
Gulf Breeze, FL 32563. For additional
information see ‘‘Public Participation’’
under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
below.
Jerry
Case, Regulations Program Manager,
National Park Service, 1849 C Street,
NW., Room 7241, Washington, DC
20240. Phone: (202) 208–4206. E-mail:
jerry_case@nps.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Additional Alternatives
The information contained in this
proposed rule supports implementation
of portions of the preferred alternative
in the Environmental Assessment
published March 2004. The public
should be aware that two other
alternatives were presented in the EA,
including a no-PWC alternative, and
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 for 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 Gulf Islands National
Seashore
Gulf Islands National Seashore is
located in the northeastern portion of
the Gulf of Mexico and includes a
widely spaced chain of barrier islands
extending nearly 160 miles from the
eastern end of Santa Rosa Island in
Florida to Cat Island in Mississippi.
Other islands in the national seashore
include Horn, Petit Bois, and East Ship
and West Ship islands in Mississippi
and a section of Perdido Key in Florida.
Gulf Islands National Seashore also
includes mainland tracts at Pensacola
Forts and Naval Live Oaks Reservation
near Pensacola, Florida, and Davis
Bayou, adjacent to Ocean Springs,
Mississippi. The national seashore
contains 139,775.46 acres within the
authorized boundary, excluding Cat
Island (only a portion has been acquired
as of this date). Of this total acreage,
19,445.46 acres are fastlands (above
water) and 119,730 acres are submerged
lands.
Gulf Islands National Seashore
contains snowy-white beaches,
sparkling blue waters, fertile coastal
marshes, and dense maritime forests.
Visitors can explore 19th century forts,
enjoy shaded picnic areas, hike on
winding nature trails, and camp in
comfortable campgrounds. In addition,
Horn and Petit Bois islands located in
Mississippi are federally designated
wilderness areas. Nature, history, and
recreational opportunities abound in
this national treasure. All areas of Gulf
Islands National Seashore in the Florida
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
District and the Davis Bayou area in the
Mississippi District are reachable from
Interstate 10. The Mississippi District
barrier islands are only accessible by
boat.
Purpose of Gulf Islands National
Seashore
Gulf Islands National Seashore,
Florida and Mississippi, was authorized
by Act of Congress, Public Law 91–660,
January 8, 1971, to provide for
recognition of certain historic values
such as coastal fortifications and other
purposes such as the preservation and
enjoyment of undeveloped barrier
islands and beaches.
Gulf Islands National Seashore
conserves certain outstanding natural,
cultural and recreational resources
along the Northern Gulf Coast of Florida
and Mississippi. These include several
coastal defense forts spanning more
than two centuries of military activity,
historic and prehistoric archaeological
sites, and pristine examples of intact
Mississippi coastal barrier islands, salt
marshes, bayous, submerged grass beds,
complex terrestrial communities,
emerald green water, and white sand
beaches.
Gulf Islands National Seashore was
established for the following purposes:
• Preserve for public use and
enjoyment certain areas possessing
outstanding natural, historic, and
recreational values.
• Conserve and manage the wildlife
and natural resources.
• Preserve as wilderness any area
within the national seashore found to be
suitable and so designated in
accordance with the provisions of the
Wilderness Act (78 Stat. 890).
• Recognize, preserve, and interpret
the national historic significance of Fort
Barrancas Water Battery (Battery San
Antonio), Fort Barrancas; Advanced
Redoubt of Fort Barrancas at Pensacola
Naval Station; Fort Pickens on Santa
Rosa Island, Florida; Fort McRee site,
Perdido Key, Florida; and Fort
Massachusetts on West Ship Island,
Mississippi, in accordance with the Act
of August 21, 1935 (49 Stat. 666). That
act states: ‘‘it is a National policy to
preserve for public use historic sites,
buildings, and objects of National
significance for inspiration and benefits
of the people of the United States.’’
Significance of Gulf Islands National
Seashore
Gulf Islands National Seashore is
significant for the following reasons:
• Nationally significant historical
coastal defense forts representing a
continuum of development.
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
• Several mostly undisturbed, natural
areas in close proximity to major
population centers.
• Areas of natural significant high
quality beaches, dunes, and water
resources.
• Endangered species occur in several
areas.
• Contains regionally important
prehistoric archaeological sites.
• Provides outstanding controlled
areas conducive to the successful
reintroduction of native threatened and
endangered species.
• Provides habitat for early life stages
of many coastal and marine flora and
fauna of commercial and recreational
importance.
• Provides a benchmark to compare
environmental conditions in developed
areas of the Gulf Coast.
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’ 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12989
PWC Use at Gulf Islands National
Seashore
Personal watercraft use emerged at
Gulf Islands National Seashore in the
1980s. Although PWC use was a small
percentage of total boat use within the
national seashore, park staff believes
that use had increased over the five
years prior to the closure. If reinstated,
PWC use at the national seashore is not
expected to decrease. In fact, an increase
in usage would be expected as more
residents purchase personal watercraft
and tourism continues to grow.
Prior to the closure to personal
watercraft in April 2002, personal
watercraft were recognized as a Class A
motorboat and were treated as any other
such vessel. All regulations that apply
to any registered vessel operating in
waters of Florida and Mississippi that
are regulated by the NPS applied to
personal watercraft.
Personal watercraft were permitted
throughout the national seashore, except
as follows: no motorized vessels are
permitted above the mean high tide line
on the designated wilderness islands of
Horn and Petit Bois; the lakes, ponds,
lagoons and inlets of East Ship Island,
West Ship Island, Horn Island, Petit
Bois Island, and Cat Island (lands under
NPS management) are closed to the use
of motorized vessels; the lagoons of
Perdido Key within Big Lagoon are
closed to all combustion engines; and
the areas 200 feet from the remnants of
the old fishing pier and 200 feet from
the new fishing pier at Fort Pickens are
closed to all boating operations. There
are also seasonal closures to watercraft
to protect nesting shorebirds and other
sensitive wildlife and relict dunes.
Perdido Key in Florida and East Ship
and West Ship islands in Mississippi
have the most concentrated boating use
within the national seashore. Many area
residents in both States have boat docks
and own boats or personal watercraft,
and visit the national seashore.
Florida District. In Florida, the park is
situated between the Gulf of Mexico and
the Pensacola Bay system. Although the
Gulf offers almost unlimited area for
personal watercraft use, most operation
occurs within the bay. In 2000, personal
watercraft comprised 12.5% of all
registered vessels statewide. In the
Florida District of the park, it is
estimated that personal watercraft
comprised 0.5% of recreational boating.
Personal watercraft traversed along the
north shoreline of Santa Rosa Island
while very few traversed the south, or
Gulf, shoreline. In general, PWC usage
within the Florida District of the park
was concentrated in the Perdido Key
area. During the summer months, most
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
12990
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
areas of PWC use consisted of 6 or 7
personal watercraft per month, while on
a peak-use day PWC activity in the
Perdido Key area might have comprised
25 personal watercraft. The reason for
the higher use in the Perdido Key area
is the sheltered nature of the area and
the proximity to residences with
launching facilities.
Mississippi District. The Mississippi
portion of the park separates the Gulf of
Mexico from the Mississippi Sound.
Personal watercraft account for 6% of
the registered boats in Mississippi, and
it is estimated that they comprised
approximately 4% of recreational
boating in the Mississippi District of the
park. The islands are situated between
6 to 14 miles from the mainland,
weather conditions can change quickly,
and large ships use the intracoastal
waterway shipping channels. These
factors combined to limit PWC use in
the Mississippi District as transportation
to the islands, and use of Gulfside
waters was almost nonexistent except
immediately adjacent to the islands.
Observations of PWC use indicate that
they were mainly used for recreational
riding and not for transportation. Most
personal watercraft used in the
Mississippi District of the park were
towed by larger boats from the
Pascagoula/Biloxi/Gulfport, Mississippi,
area. The primary use season reflects
overall visitation patterns, with use
decreasing during the winter months.
PWC use areas are similar to general
motorboat use areas. Personal watercraft
were concentrated mostly on the east
and west tips of the islands, around the
West Ship Island Pier, and the entire
north side of Spoil Island.
Resource Protection and Public Use
Issues
Gulf Islands National Seashore
Environmental Assessment
As a companion document to this
proposed rule, NPS has issued the Gulf
Islands National Seashore, Personal
Watercraft Use Environmental
Assessment. The Environmental
Assessment (EA) was open for public
review and comment from April 19,
2004 to May 18, 2004. Copies of the
environmental assessment may be
downloaded at https://www.nps.gov/
guis/pphtml/documents.html or
obtained at park headquarters Monday
through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Mail
inquiries should be directed to park
headquarters: Gulf Islands National
Seashore, 1801 Gulf Breeze Parkway,
Gulf Breeze, FL 32563.
The purpose of the environmental
assessment was to evaluate a range of
alternatives and strategies for the
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
management of PWC use at Gulf Islands
to ensure the protection of park
resources and values while offering
recreational opportunities as provided
for in the National Seashore’s enabling
legislation, purpose, mission, and goals.
The analysis assumed alternatives
would be implemented beginning in
2002 and considered a 10-year period,
from 2002 to 2012.
The environmental assessment
evaluates three alternatives concerning
the use of personal watercraft at Gulf
Islands:
• The no-action alternative would
continue the prohibition of PWC use in
Gulf Islands National Seashore. No
special rule would be promulgated.
• Alternative A would reinstate PWC
use under a special NPS regulation as
previously managed.
• Alternative B would reinstate PWC
use under a special NPS regulation with
additional management prescriptions.
Based on the environmental analysis
prepared for PWC use at Gulf Islands,
alternative B is considered the
environmentally preferred alternative
because it would best fulfill park
responsibilities as trustee of this
sensitive habitat; ensure safe and
healthy, productive, and aesthetically
and culturally pleasing surroundings;
and attain a wider range of beneficial
uses of the environment without
degradation, risk to health or safety, or
other undesirable and unintended
consequences.
This document proposes regulations
to implement alternative B at Gulf
Islands National Seashore.
The NPS will consider the comments
received on this proposal, as well as the
comments received on the
Environmental Assessment when
making a final determination. In the
final rule, the NPS will implement
alternative B 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 PWC
use at Gulf Islands National Seashore.
Each of these issues is analyzed in the
Gulf Islands National Seashore,
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
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
impacts caused by these engines also
apply to two-stroke engines in personal
watercraft. Two-stroke engines (and
some personal watercraft) discharge a
gas-oil mixture into the water. Fuel used
in many PWC and motorboat engines
contains many hydrocarbons, including
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and
xylene (collectively referred to as
BTEX). Polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs) 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
all these compounds—BTEX and
PAHs—have potential adverse effects on
aquatic life and human health if present
at high enough concentrations. A
common gasoline additive, methyl
tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) also is
released with the unburned portion of
the gasoline. In 2001, premium grade
fuel (octane of 90 and higher) in Florida
had MTBE concentrations ranging from
0% to 10.8% of the fuel mixture, with
an average of 3.5%; no data was
available for Mississippi. For this
assessment, it was assumed that the
concentration of MTBE in fuel used by
all vessels in the Florida and
Mississippi districts is 3.5%. There are
no plans to ban the use of MTBE in fuels
in Florida or Mississippi. The PWC
industry suggests that although some
unburned fuel does enter the water, the
fuel’s gaseous state allows it to
evaporate readily.
A typical conventional (i.e.,
carbureted) two-stroke PWC engine
discharges as much as 30% of the
unburned fuel mixture into the exhaust.
At common fuel consumption rates, an
average two-hour ride on a personal
watercraft may discharge 3 gallons
(11.34 liters) of fuel into the water.
According to data from Personal
Watercraft Illustrated and the
Environmental Protection Agency, an
average 2000 model-year personal
watercraft can discharge between 3.8
and 4.5 gallons of fuel during one hour
at full throttle. (As described in
appendix A of the Environmental
Assessment, an estimated discharge rate
of 3 gallons per hour is used in the
water quality impact calculations.)
Florida District. Under the proposed
regulation, based on alternative B in the
Environmental Assessment, PWC use
would be reinstated in all waters within
the Florida District as previously
managed under the Superintendent’s
Compendium, and all State regulatory
requirements would apply. In addition,
a PWC flat wake zone would be
established a minimum of 300 yards
from all park shorelines. PWC flat wake
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
speed engine emissions were assumed
to be negligible; therefore it was
assumed that the same number of PWChours of full-throttle use under
alternative A in the three areas would
occur, but only beyond 300 yards of
park shorelines. This effectively reduces
the available water volume for diluting
PWC engine emissions.
The results of the water quality
analysis for PWC activity shows that for
all discharged pollutants evaluated, the
ecotoxicological threshold volumes
estimated for 2002 and 2012 would be
well below volumes of water available
at the three areas. Threshold volumes
range from 0.1 to 260 acre-feet, while
water volumes accessible to personal
watercraft under this alternative range
from 13,010 to 301,704 acre-feet.
Impacts to aquatic organisms are
expected to be negligible for all
pollutants evaluated.
Threshold volumes for human health
benchmarks of benzo(a)pyrene and
benzene are also well below volumes of
water available at the three areas in
2002 and 2012. Threshold volumes
range from 7 to 310 acre-feet, while
water volumes available to personal
watercraft range from 13,010 to 301,704
acre-feet. Impacts to human health are
expected to be negligible for all
pollutants evaluated. Mixing, flushing,
and the resulting dilution of park waters
by adjacent waters would further reduce
pollutant concentrations. Tidal currents
at the Pensacola Bay entrance reach a
speed of 4.1 knots. Incoming tides
increase the available water volume,
especially at the Big Lagoon area of
Perdido Key where the average depth is
less than 8 feet. Outgoing tides transport
soluble pollutants out of park waters to
the Gulf of Mexico.
Mississippi District. Under the
proposed regulation, PWC use would be
reinstated in all waters within the
Mississippi District as previously
managed under the Superintendent’s
Compendium, and all State regulatory
requirements would apply. In addition,
a PWC flat wake zone would be
established 300 yards from park
shorelines at West Ship, East Ship, and
Spoil Islands and 0.5 mile from Horn
and Petit Bois Islands and West Ship
Island pier. PWC flat wake speed engine
emissions were assumed to be
negligible, so it was assumed that the
same number of PWC-hours of fullthrottle use under alternative A in
Mississippi Sound and in Gulf-side
waters would occur, but only beyond
the flat wake boundary. This effectively
reduces the available water volume for
diluting PWC engine emissions.
The results of the water quality
analysis for PWC activity shows that for
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
all discharged pollutants evaluated, the
ecotoxicological threshold volumes
estimated for 2002 and 2012 would be
well below volumes of water available
at both areas. Threshold volumes range
from 2 to 1,800 acre-feet, while water
volumes available to PWC use range
from 183,665 to 273,952 acre-feet.
Impacts to aquatic organisms are
expected to be negligible for all
pollutants evaluated.
Threshold volumes for human health
benchmarks of benzo(a)pyrene and
benzene are also well below volumes of
water available at both areas in 2002
and 2012. Threshold volumes range
from 140 to 2,200 acre-feet, while
volumes available to PWC use range
from 183,665 to 273,952 acre-feet.
Impacts to human health are expected to
be negligible for all pollutants
evaluated. Mixing, flushing, and the
resulting dilution of park waters by
adjacent waters would further reduce
pollutant concentrations. Incoming tides
increase the available water volume,
especially in shallow areas. Outgoing
tides transport soluble pollutants out of
park waters to Mississippi Sound and
the Gulf of Mexico.
Conclusion. Under the proposed
regulation, water quality impacts from
PWC use based on ecotoxicological and
human health benchmarks would be
negligible adverse for all pollutants in
all areas of the national seashore in
2002. In 2012, although PWC use is
projected to increase more rapidly than
non-PWC use, all water quality impacts
from PWC use are expected to remain
negligible due to reduced emission rates
of newer technology engines.
In 2002, personal watercraft
contributed approximately 30% of the
cumulative emissions from all
motorized watercraft, and in 2012,
personal watercraft will contribute
approximately 50% of the cumulative
emissions. Impacts would still be
negligible for all pollutants in all areas
of the national seashore in 2002 and
2012. At most, cumulative impact
threshold volumes would constitute less
than 5% of the volume available to
personal watercraft. In 2012, even with
increased motorcraft use, cumulative
water quality impacts from all
watercraft are expected to be lower than
in 2002 due to reduced emission rates.
It is recognized that the current phasein of cleaner running engine
technologies by the Personal Watercraft
Industry should result in a reduced
amount of water pollutants and an
overall reduction of hydrocarbon
emissions.
Implementation of this proposed
regulation would not result in an
impairment of water quality.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12991
Air Quality
Personal watercraft emit various
compounds that pollute the air. Up to
one third of the fuel delivered to the
typical two-stroke carbureted PWC
engine is unburned and discharged; 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). Personal
watercraft also emit fuel components
such as PAH 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
VOC2 and NOX emissions combine to
form ozone (O3). O3 causes respiratory
problems in humans, including coughs,
airway irritation, and chest pain during
inhalations. O3 is also toxic to sensitive
species of vegetation. It causes visible
foliar injury, decreases plant growth,
and increases plant susceptibility to
insects and disease. CO can affect
humans as well. It interferes with the
oxygen carrying capacity of blood,
resulting in lack of oxygen to tissues.
NOX and PM emissions associated with
PWC use can 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
PWC use are expected to be minimal. It
is recognized that the current phase-in
of cleaner running engine technologies
by the Personal Watercraft Industry
should result in a reduced amount of air
pollutants and an overall reduction of
hydrocarbon emissions.
Impacts to human health. Under the
proposed regulation, the use of the
national seashore by personal watercraft
would be reinstated with some
additional restrictions to the
management strategies in force prior to
the closure. The additional restrictions
would establish a flat wake zone 300
yards from all park shorelines at the
low-water mark, except at the West Ship
Island Pier and around all designated
wilderness boundaries where a 0.5-mile
flat wake zone would be established.
Furthermore, no PWC operation would
be permitted within 200 feet of nonmotorized watercraft and people in the
water. Human-health air quality impacts
from the proposed regulation would be
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
12992
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
the same as described for alternative A
for 2002 and 2012 in both Florida and
Mississippi and would be negligible for
CO, PM10, HC, and NOX. The human
health risk from PAH would also be
negligible in 2002 and 2012. The
additional restrictions would not change
the type of personal watercraft in use,
nor increase or decrease the number of
personal watercraft forecasted or their
daily duration of use between 2002 and
2012.
Because no reduction in PWC use is
expected, the proposed regulation
would result in the same air quality
impacts to human health from PWC
emissions as alternative A. The
additional management prescriptions
would not noticeably affect PWC
emissions as compared to alternative A;
therefore, the total increase in emissions
resulting from alternative A shown in
tables 40 and 41 of the Environmental
Assessment for the Florida and
Mississippi districts, respectively, is the
same for the proposed regulation.
Negligible adverse impacts from PWC
emissions for CO, PM10, HC, and NOX
would occur for 2002 and 2012 in both
the Florida and Mississippi districts.
The risk from PAH would also be
negligible in 2002 and 2012.
Cumulative adverse impacts from
PWC and other boating emissions at the
national seashore would be the same as
for alternative A. In the Florida District,
adverse impacts to human health from
air pollutants in 2002 would be
negligible for PM10 and NOX and
moderate for CO and HC. In 2012, levels
would remain negligible for PM10 and
NOX, and moderate for CO and HC. In
the Mississippi District, impacts would
be minor for CO and negligible for PM10,
HC, and NOX, in 2002. In 2012, CO
impact would increase to moderate; and
impacts for the other pollutants would
remain at 2002 levels. Regional ozone
emissions would improve due to a
reduction in HC emissions. The
proposed regulation would have
negligible adverse impacts to human
health air quality conditions, with
future reductions in PM10 and HC
emissions due to improved emission
controls. The PWC contribution to
emissions of HC is estimated to be less
than 1% of the cumulative boating
emissions in 2002 and 2012. All impacts
would be long term.
Implementation of the proposed
regulation would not result in an
impairment of air quality as it relates to
human health.
Impacts to air quality related values.
Under the proposed regulation, the
annual number of personal watercraft
using the Gulf Islands National Seashore
would be the same as alternative A for
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
both the Florida and Mississippi
districts. Additional management
prescriptions under the proposed
regulation, including flat wake
restrictions, would not affect PWC use
numbers and potential future increases.
The predicted emission levels and
impacts of continued PWC use to air
quality related values would be the
same as those described for alternative
A based on annual emission rates.
Impacts to air quality related values
from PWC in 2002 and 2012 would be
minor.
The impacts of the proposed
regulation on air quality related values
would be the same as alternative A.
Emissions of each pollutant would be
less than 50 tons per year in both 2002
and 2012. Minor adverse impacts to air
quality related values from PWC would
occur in both 2002 and 2012 in both
districts of the national seashore. In
both 2002 and 2012, adverse impacts
from cumulative emissions from
motorized boats and PWC would be
moderate in the Florida District, and
minor in the Mississippi District. This
conclusion is based on calculated levels
of pollutant emissions, regional SUM06
values, and the lack of observed
visibility impacts or ozone-related plant
injury in the national seashore.
Implementation of the proposed
regulation would not result in an
impairment of air quality related values.
Soundscapes
The primary soundscape issue
relative to PWC use is that other visitors
may perceive the sound made by
personal watercraft as an intrusion or
nuisance, thereby disrupting their
experiences. This disruption is
generally short term because personal
watercraft travel for a relatively short
time along the shore and spend most of
the time in outlying areas. However,
PWC occasionally congregate in popular
shoreline areas with other visitors, and
as PWC use increases, related noise may
become more of an issue, particularly
during certain times of the day.
Additionally, visitor sensitivity to PWC
noise varies from fisherman (more
sensitive) to swimmers at popular
beaches (less sensitive).
The biggest difference between noise
from personal watercraft and noise from
motorboats is that PWC continually
leave the water, which magnifies noise
in two ways. Without the muffling effect
of water, the engine noise is typically 15
dBA louder and the smacking of the
craft against the water surface results in
a loud ‘‘whoop’’ or series of them. With
the rapid maneuvering and frequent
speed changes, the impeller has no
constant ‘‘throughput’’ and no
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
consistent load on the engine.
Consequently, the engine speed rises
and falls, resulting in a variable pitch.
This constantly changing sound is often
perceived as more disturbing than the
constant sound from motorboats.
PWC users tend to operate close to
shore, to operate in confined areas, and
to travel in groups, making noise more
noticeable to other recreationists (e.g., if
identical boats emit 75 dB, two such
boats together would be expected to
emit 78 dB, three boats together would
emit 80 dB). Motorboats traveling back
and forth in one area at open throttle or
spinning around in small inlets also
generate complaints about noise levels;
however, most motorboats tend to
operate away from shore and to navigate
in a straight line, thus being less
noticeable to other recreationists.
Under this proposed regulation, based
on alternative B in the Environmental
Assessment, a special regulation would
be written to reinstate personal
watercraft use. Additional management
strategies would mitigate watercraft
safety concerns, protect natural and
cultural resources, and enhance overall
visitor experience.
PWC use would follow the same
patterns assumed in alternative A;
however, the proposed regulation would
implement flat wake zoning for personal
watercraft to help minimize the effects
of PWC noise to park visitors, including
anglers and near shoreline users of the
swimming, picnic, and camping areas.
The magnitude of noise near the speed
restriction areas would be dependent on
the changes in location and speed of the
personal watercraft. As described in the
analysis for alternative A in the
Environmental Assessment, a reduction
from 40 mph to 20 mph would reduce
PWC noise levels approximately 5 dBA.
Noise reductions would occur with
reductions in speed limits below 20
mph. Increasing the distance from the
personal watercraft to the listener from
100 to 200 feet would result in a noise
reduction of about 6 dBA.
The types of adverse impacts to the
soundscape of Gulf Islands National
Seashore would be generally the same
as alternative A because of the type of
sound. However, the level of impact
would be less due to increased distances
between the PWC activity and shoreline
activity. Overall, negligible to minor
adverse impacts would result from PWC
use on the soundscape of the national
seashore. Impacts would generally be
short in duration but occur over the
long-term. Although they could
periodically be more frequent at
shoreline areas on very high use days
where motorized watercraft noise may
predominate for most of the day, most
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
visitors to Gulf Islands National
Seashore during those high use periods
expect to hear motorized craft during
the day, as the seashore is known for
providing this type of recreational
opportunity in addition to other
activities. Since motorized noise would
be expected to be infrequent and at low
levels due to use restrictions, minor
adverse impacts might occur if PWC
users choose to operate in areas of the
park that are away from launch areas
and campgrounds, and where shoreline
visitors would be anticipating a quiet,
wilderness experience such as at Horn
and Petit Bois Islands. As in alternative
A, impacts could potentially increase if
the noise output on newer engines does
not decrease substantially enough to
overcome the increase in PWC use.
Noise from personal watercraft would
be short-term in duration but would be
expected to occur over the long-term.
Impacts would be negligible to minor
adverse depending on the location,
within the unit, the time of day, and the
time of year. Flat wake zoning would
reduce noise levels from PWC in
shoreline areas, specifically those areas
around Horn and Petit Bois Islands.
Impact levels would relate to the
number of personal watercraft operating
as well as the sensitivity of other
visitors and could potentially increase
by 2012 based on noise levels of newer
engine technology.
Cumulative adverse noise impacts
from personal watercraft and other
watercraft, commercial boats, and
aircraft would be negligible to moderate.
Impacts would be short in duration but
occur over the long-term because of the
high volume of annual boating use, and
could increase with increased boating
use in the future.
Implementation of the proposed
regulation would not result in an
impairment of the park’s soundscape.
Shoreline and Submerged Aquatic
Vegetation
Personal watercraft are able to access
areas that other types of watercraft may
not, which may cause direct disturbance
to vegetation. Indirect impact to
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.
Under the proposed regulation, PWC
use would be reinstated in all waters
within the national seashore as
previously managed under the Gulf
Islands National Seashore
Superintendent’s Compendium, and all
State regulatory requirements would
apply. In addition, a flat wake zone
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
would be established 300 yards from all
park shorelines except around the West
Ship Island Pier and around wilderness
boundaries (Horn and Petit Bois Islands)
where 0.5-mile flat wake zones would
be in effect. The flat wake zoning
component of the management
prescriptions under the proposed
regulation would minimize both erosion
effects from PWC induced wave action
and direct PWC disturbance to shoreline
marsh and dune communities. These
impacts would be adverse and
negligible under the proposed
regulation. Minor adverse impacts from
PWC use to emergent vegetation
communities within the national
seashore would result from visitor
disturbance to dune communities as a
result of PWC access. Overall, PWC use
would have negligible to minor adverse
impacts on shoreline vegetation
communities within the national
seashore.
Of the approximately 1,930 acres of
potential seagrass habitat within the
Florida District of the national seashore,
about 1,000 acres would be open to fullthrottle PWC use. In the Perdido Key
area of the Florida District, where PWC
use is most intense (peak use of 25
personal watercraft), only about 300 of
the 640 acres of seagrass habitat would
be accessible to PWC full-throttle use.
Direct and indirect PWC impacts to
seagrass beds would occur, but would
be minimized by the wake restrictions.
Potential direct impacts would include
collision, uprooting, and sediment
alteration. Indirect impacts would
include increased turbidity, decreased
available sunlight, and deposition of
suspended sediment, which adversely
affects the growth and health of seagrass
beds. Under the proposed regulation,
PWC use within the Florida District
would have impacts to submerged
aquatic vegetation communities that are
direct and indirect, minor, and shortand long-term.
In the Mississippi District, a flat wake
zone would be established 300 yards
from park shorelines at West Ship, East
Ship, and Spoil Islands and 0.5 mile
from the shorelines at Horn and Petit
Bois Islands and West Ship Island pier.
Approximately 700 of the 3,300 acres of
potential seagrass habitat would be
accessible to full-throttle PWC use
under the proposed regulation. Direct
and indirect adverse PWC impacts to
seagrass habitats would occur, but
would be minimized by the flat wake
zoning. Under the proposed regulation,
PWC use within the Mississippi District
would have impacts to seagrass habitats
that are direct and indirect, minor, and
short- and long-term.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12993
Projected increases in PWC use
within the national seashore would
potentially result in higher levels of
impacts in 2012 relative to 2002.
PWC use would cause negligible
adverse impacts to shoreline vegetation
from physical disturbance and wave
action, and minor adverse impacts from
visitor access to emergent shoreline
vegetation communities. PWC use under
the proposed regulation would have
impacts to seagrass habitats that are
direct and indirect, minor, and shortand long-term, because shallow water
habitats in the national seashore are the
preferred areas for PWC use,
particularly the Perdido Key and
Mississippi Sound areas. The flat wake
zoning would restrict PWC impacts to
about one-half of the potential seagrass
habitat in Florida and one-quarter of the
potential seagrass habitat in Mississippi.
Therefore, the proposed regulation,
based on alternative B in the
Environmental Assessment, would have
fewer adverse impacts to shoreline and
submerged aquatic vegetation than
alternative A. Cumulative impacts to
shoreline vegetation would include
effects from all visitor activities,
including PWC use and other motorized
vessels, and would be minor to
moderate. Cumulative impacts to
seagrass habitats associated with use by
all motorized vessels would be minor to
moderate locally, as motorboat use
could continue to cause propeller
scarring and sediment resuspension and
its effects. Impacts would potentially be
higher in 2012 relative to 2002 due to
projected increases in PWC and other
motorized watercraft use.
Implementation of this proposed
regulation would not result in an
impairment of shoreline or submerged
aquatic vegetation.
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 a 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, or contribute to
stress and associated behavior changes.
Impacts to sensitive species, such as
the manatee and the Perdido Key beach
mouse, are discussed in the
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
12994
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
‘‘Threatened, Endangered, or Special
Concern Species’’ section.
Under the proposed regulation, based
on alternative B of the Environmental
Assessment, PWC use would occur as
under alternative A, with additional
management prescriptions. A flat wake
zone would be established 300 yards
from all park shorelines, with the
exception of the West Ship Island Pier,
where a flat wake zone would extend
0.5 mile from the shoreline and 0.5 mile
from either side of the pier. A flat wake
zone would also be established 0.5 mile
from the shorelines around all
designated wilderness boundaries and
no PWC operation would be permitted
within 200 feet of non-motorized
watercraft and people in the water.
Impacts to aquatic wildlife species,
especially in high use areas such as the
Perdido Key area, the area north of
Santa Rosa Island, and Mississippi
Sound would be fewer than alternative
A. The proposed regulation would
minimize impacts from PWC because
the most shallow water habitats and
considerable portions of seagrass bed
habitats lie within the PWC flat wake
zones prescribed by the proposed
regulation. Aquatic wildlife species
inhabiting shallow protected waters and
seagrass beds within the flat wake zone
would not be subjected to PWC fullthrottle impacts. However, PWC use in
areas providing essential fish habitats
could disrupt normal feeding and other
critical life functions of fish and
shellfish species and could adversely
affect suitability of these areas to meet
life cycle requirements. Adverse
impacts to fish and shellfish and their
habitat from PWC-generated sediment
resuspension and emissions may occur
in these areas. Reinstating PWC use in
park waters with the establishment of a
PWC flat wake zone would have fewer
adverse impacts than alternative A. The
proposed regulation is expected to have
short-term, minor, direct and indirect
adverse impacts to aquatic wildlife
species and habitats.
The extended flat wake zoning under
the proposed regulation would
minimize impacts from PWC activity to
terrestrial wildlife species by restricting
speed near shoreline habitat areas and
thus limiting the potential for
disturbance from noise and rapid
approach by personal watercraft.
Impacts to terrestrial mammals from
PWC use would be negligible due to
both the infrequent use of shoreline
areas by these species and the extension
of flat wake zoning.
Prior established seasonal closures of
areas around avian nesting sites in
conjunction with increased flat wake
zoning under the proposed regulation
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
would minimize long-term impacts to
nesting individuals. Adverse impacts to
avian species from PWC noise and
activity within the national seashore
would be negligible to minor from shortterm disturbance from PWC noise and
access to loafing or foraging shorebirds,
wading birds, and other water birds.
Osprey would also experience shortterm negligible to minor adverse effects
due to the potential for PWC access to
disturb roosting or feeding activities.
Projected increases in PWC use
within the national seashore would
result in higher levels of impacts in
2012 relative to 2002.
Under the proposed regulation, flat
wake zoning prescriptions would
minimize impacts to shoreline wildlife
within the national seashore.
Reinstating PWC use in park waters
while establishing a flat wake zone is
expected to have short-term, minor,
direct and indirect adverse impacts to
aquatic wildlife species and habitats.
PWC use would contribute negligible
short-term adverse impacts to terrestrial
mammals, and negligible to minor
mostly short-term adverse impacts to
avian species with primary habitat
located in shoreline areas.
Cumulative impacts to aquatic and
avian wildlife associated with all types
of motorized vessel use are expected to
be short-term, minor, direct and
indirect, and adverse. There would be a
slight potential for some long-term
impacts to avian species if nesting
individuals are disturbed to an extent
that would cause individuals to
relocate. Cumulative impacts to
terrestrial wildlife would be negligible
to minor and short term.
Impacts in 2012 would likely be
higher relative to 2002 levels due to the
projected increase in PWC and other
motorized watercraft use within the
national seashore.
Implementation of the proposed
regulation would not result in
impairment to aquatic or terrestrial
wildlife or wildlife habitat.
Threatened, Endangered, or Special
Concern Species
The same issues described for PWC
use and general wildlife also pertain to
special status 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. In addition to wildlife,
threatened, endangered, or special
concern plant species are also at risk
from disturbance related to PWC use.
Special status species at the national
seashore include federally listed
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
threatened, endangered, or candidate
species. Additionally, some species at
Gulf Islands National Seashore are
designated by the States of Florida and/
or Mississippi as threatened,
endangered, or special concern species.
Under the proposed regulation, based
on alternative B of the Environmental
Assessment, PWC use would occur as
under alternative A, with additional
management prescriptions. A flat wake
zone would be established 300 yards
from all park shorelines, with the
exception of the West Ship Island Pier,
where a flat wake zone would extend
0.5 mile from the shoreline and 0.5 mile
from either side of the pier. A flat wake
zone would also be established 0.5 mile
from the shorelines around all
designated wilderness boundaries and
no PWC operation would be permitted
within 200 feet of non-motorized
watercraft and people in the water.
The extended flat wake zoning under
the proposed regulation would
minimize impacts from PWC activity to
threatened and endangered species by
restricting speed near shoreline habitat
areas and thus limiting the potential for
disturbance from noise and rapid
approach by personal watercraft.
Potential impacts to special status
species from PWC use within the
national seashore under the proposed
regulation are as follows.
Aquatic Species. PWC use may affect,
but is not likely to adversely affect, the
Florida manatee, Atlantic green, Kemp’s
ridley, Atlantic loggerhead, and alligator
snapping sea turtles through collisions
and noise impacts. The 300-yard PWC
flat wake zone would encompass much
of the shallow seagrass habitats in the
Perdido Key area and north of Santa
Rosa Island in the Florida District, and
in Mississippi Sound in the Mississippi
District where manatees and turtles may
occur, thereby minimizing the chance of
collisions.
The Gulf sturgeon and its designated
critical habitat may be affected but are
not likely to be adversely affected by
PWC noise and water quality impacts,
because much of this habitat in the
national seashore occurs within the 300yard PWC flat wake zone. PWC use may
affect, but is unlikely to adversely affect,
the State listed saltmarsh topminnow.
The PWC flat wake zone restriction
would eliminate full-throttle PWC use
in the salt marsh and shoreline habitats
of the national seashore where this fish
occurs.
Terrestrial Species. Direct adverse
impacts from personal watercraft to the
Perdido Key beach mouse and the Santa
Rosa beach mouse would be unlikely
due to the nocturnal nature of both
species and the general avoidance of
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
human activity. Closures of sensitive
dune ecosystems as stated in the Gulf
Islands National Seashore
Superintendent’s Compendium would
minimize the potential for indirect
effects related to PWC access and
resultant visitor activity in habitat areas.
PWC use under the proposed regulation
may affect the Perdido Key and Santa
Rosa species of beach mouse, but
adverse effects to the species would be
unlikely.
The gopher tortoise could be
potentially affected by disturbance to
individuals or habitat from people with
shoreline access, including PWC users.
Within the national seashore, the gopher
tortoise is known mainly to occur in
inland locations, away from areas of
PWC access, and is unlikely to be
adversely affected by PWC use.
Avian Species. Flat wake zoning of
personal watercraft within at least 300
yards of shoreline areas would
minimize adverse impacts from PWC
noise and physical disturbance to the
federally or State listed bird species in
both the Florida and Mississippi
districts of the national seashore. Minor
effects from PWC use to special status
bird species may occur under the
proposed regulation. As in other
alternatives, seasonal closures of
important nesting sites for shoreline
birds reduce the potential for impacts to
nesting individuals. Under the proposed
regulation, the slower speeds and
decreased noise from personal
watercraft that would result from
implementation of flat wake zoning in
shoreline areas, would preclude adverse
effects from PWC use within the
national seashore to the bald eagle,
piping plover, American peregrine
falcon, brown pelican, southeastern
snowy plover, least tern, southeastern
American kestrel, black skimmer,
reddish egret, snowy egret, and little
blue heron. Any effects that would
occur from PWC use would be shortterm in nature and would likely result
in temporary flight responses by loafing
or foraging individuals.
Special Status Plants. The additional
management prescriptions under the
proposed regulation would not affect
the accessibility of shoreline areas or
reduce the potential for PWC users to
disembark and explore the islands,
potentially impacting special status
plant species.
The affinity of the white-top pitcher
plant for bogs and other wet
environments precludes impacts from
typical recreational exploration and
trampling within either the Florida or
Mississippi district of the national
seashore. No effects to this species are
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
expected to result from PWC access
within the national seashore.
Within the national seashore,
populations of Cruise’s golden aster and
Godfrey’s golden aster that occur in
dune communities would be the most
susceptible to trampling by visitors with
PWC access to the shoreline. Closures of
sensitive dune communities to foot
traffic as mandated by the
Superintendent’s Compendium would
serve as a measure of protection for both
Cruise’s and Godfrey’s golden asters
from PWC user access. PWC use within
the national seashore may affect, but is
unlikely to adversely affect Cruise’s
golden aster and Godfrey’s golden aster.
Visitors who gain access by personal
watercraft and explore areas away from
the shoreline may affect Curtiss’
sandgrass. Adverse impacts are unlikely
as it is not present in the open shoreline
areas of the shoreline where visitor
exploration and access is likely to occur.
Large-leaved jointweed may be
affected but is unlikely to be adversely
affected by PWC activity within the
national seashore due to the isolated
occurrence of the species in locations
away from open shoreline areas where
personal watercraft would be likely to
land and to its location in the Naval
Live Oaks area where PWC use would
be low.
Conclusion. Reinstating PWC use
within the national seashore and
establishing a PWC flat wake zone
would minimize the likelihood of
adverse effects on threatened or
endangered species in the national
seashore boundaries from PWC use.
PWC use may affect, but would be
unlikely to adversely affect, any
federally or State-listed species. In
combination with prior mandated
closures of sensitive habitat areas, the
extension of flat wake zoning to a
minimum of 300 yards from the
shoreline under the proposed regulation
would serve as a measure of protection
against impacts from PWC use to
terrestrial and avian special status
species. PWC use would have no effect
on the white-top pitcher plant.
Cumulative impacts to special status
species from non-PWC sources would
be the same as under alternative A. PWC
use would contribute slightly to
cumulative effects, but PWC or other
visitor use and activities would not be
likely to cause adverse impacts to
special status species within the
national seashore.
Implementation of the proposed
regulation would not result in an
impairment of threatened or endangered
species.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12995
Visitor Use and Experience
Some research suggests that PWC use
is viewed by some segments of the
public as a nuisance due to their noise,
speed, and overall environmental
effects, while others believe personal
watercraft are no different from other
watercraft and that people have a right
to enjoy the sport. The primary concern
involves changes in noise, pitch, and
volume due to the way personal
watercraft are operated. Additionally,
the sound of any watercraft can carry for
long distances, especially on a calm day.
Under the proposed regulation, based
on alternative B of the Environmental
Assessment, PWC use would be
reinstated as described under alternative
A, with additional management
prescriptions. A flat wake zone would
be established 300 yards from all park
shorelines, with the exception of the
West Ship Island Pier, where a flat wake
zone would extend 0.5 mile from the
shoreline and 0.5 mile from either side
of the pier. A flat wake zone would also
be established 0.5 mile from the
shorelines around all designated
wilderness boundaries and no PWC
operation would be permitted within
200 feet of non-motorized watercraft
and people in the water.
Impact on PWC Users. Under the
proposed regulation, PWC use would be
reinstated and all of the national
seashore waters would be accessible to
PWC use except where restricted.
Implementation of the above mentioned
flat wake areas would prohibit high
speed maneuvering in these areas, but
this type of activity would still be
allowed outside of the flat wake areas
within park waters. Compared to the
baseline of no PWC use in the national
seashore, the proposed regulation would
have beneficial impacts on PWC users,
because they would be allowed to
recreate with a personal watercraft in
the national seashore. However,
implementation of the restrictions
included in the proposed regulation
would have negligible adverse impacts
on the visitor experience of PWC users,
because their access would be more
limited.
Impact on Other Boaters. The
majority of motorized boating in the
Florida District occurs in Gulf waters on
the south side of the islands (4,500
compared to 500 in non-Gulf waters in
2002). However, PWC favor the bay and
sound areas, where waters are calm (2
PWC in Gulf waters compared to 37 in
non-Gulf waters in 2002). The PWC
restrictions defined by Escambia
County, Florida, would also apply
under alternative B, benefiting boaters
in this area.
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
12996
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
PWC are more prevalent and more
evenly distributed in the Mississippi
District (a total of 161 PWC in
Mississippi in 2002). Conversely, far
fewer boaters visit the Mississippi
District (1,607 in Mississippi compared
to 5,000 in Florida in 2002). East and
West Ship islands experience the
heaviest visitor use and boaters there
would likely experience the biggest
impacts. PWC concentrate in areas that
boaters also prefer, usually on the east
and west ends of the islands, around the
West Ship Island Pier, and the north
side of Spoil Island.
Under the proposed regulation, PWC
would be prohibited within 200 feet of
non-motorized watercraft and people in
the water. The additional flat wake
restrictions included the proposed
regulation would also benefit motorized
boaters in both districts, because they
would likely share the same waters as
PWC users. Therefore, impacts to
motorized boaters would be long-term
and adverse due to an increase in the
number of vessels operating in the same
space, but negligible to minor.
Personal watercraft would be
operating in park waters along with
non-motorized watercraft users.
However, PWC would be prohibited
from areas 200 feet from the old fishing
pier and 200 feet from the new fishing
pier at Fort Pickens. In addition, a flat
wake zone would be established 300
yards from all park shorelines, except at
the West Ship Island Pier, where the flat
wake zone would extend 0.5 mile from
the shoreline and either side of the pier.
The flat wake zone would also extend
0.5 mile from the shoreline around all
wilderness boundaries. PWC would also
be prohibited within 200 feet of nonmotorized watercraft. The proposed
canoe trail along the north side of
Perdido Key would provide a nonmotorized boat route for canoeists and
kayakers to enjoy. The canoe trail would
be within the flat wake zone established
300 yards from the shoreline, providing
beneficial impacts to these nonmotorized boaters. In addition, park
staff have received no documented
complaints from non-motorized boaters
concerning PWC use, and few canoeists
and kayakers visit the park. Therefore,
impacts to non-motorized watercraft
under the proposed regulation would be
long-term, adverse, and negligible to
minor.
Impact on Other Visitors. Swimmers,
anglers, campers, hikers, and other
shoreline visitors to the national
seashore would have contact with
personal watercraft users. Shoreline
areas that are popular with both
personal watercraft and other shoreline
users include the north sides of the
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
Mississippi islands and the Perdido Key
area.
Swimmers. High-density beach use
occurs on Rosamond Johnson Beach at
Perdido Key, Opal Beach in the Santa
Rosa area, Langdon Beach at Fort
Pickens, and West Ship Island. PWC use
in the Florida District would likely be
concentrated in the Perdido Key area
primarily on the bay, or north side of
the key. However, few PWC traversed
the south, or Gulf shoreline, reducing
the amount of adverse impacts to the
Rosamond Johnson Beach (in Perdido
Key), as well as Opal and Langdon
Beach, where PWC use was less
frequent. The proposed regulation
would further restrict PWC use by
establishing a flat wake zone 300 yards
from all park shorelines, which would
benefit swimmers at all swim beaches.
The proposed regulation would also
prohibit PWC use within 200 feet of
people in the water. For these reasons,
impacts from PWC use in the Florida
District would likely be long-term,
adverse, and minor.
Most PWC use in the Mississippi
District would likely occur as
recreational riding on the north side of
the islands, as before the ban. PWC use
would be concentrated on the east and
west ends of the Mississippi islands and
around the West Ship Island Pier. West
Ship Island experiences most of the
high-density beach use in the
Mississippi District. However,
swimming is prohibited within 200 feet
of the West Ship Island Pier, and under
the proposed regulation a flat wake zone
would be established 0.5 mile from the
shoreline and either side of the pier,
minimizing some impacts to beach users
in the area. Therefore, impacts to
swimmers from PWC use in this area of
West Ship Island would likely be longterm, adverse, and minor. In addition, a
flat wake zone would also be
established 0.5 mile from the shorelines
around the wilderness areas of Horn and
Petit Boise islands, limiting impacts to
swimmers and beach users on these
islands. The lakes, ponds, lagoons, and
inlets of the islands in the Mississippi
District would be closed to motorized
vessels. These restrictions, coupled with
lower visitation at the islands of Cat,
East Ship, Horn, and Petit Bois, would
likely result in long-term, adverse,
negligible to minor impacts to
swimmers in the Mississippi District.
For the reasons stated above, overall
impacts to swimmers in both the Florida
and Mississippi districts would be longterm, adverse, and minor.
Divers. Diving and snorkeling are
common near Fort Pickens and the sea
grass beds north of Santa Rosa Island,
which are both in the Florida District.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
PWC prefer the calm waters of Santa
Rosa Sound, which is north of the
island, so divers there would be
adversely impacted. Diving and PWC
use are both prohibited within 200 feet
of the Fort Pickens piers. However,
snorkelers would benefit from the
restriction described under the
proposed regulation limiting PWC use
to flat wakes 300 yards from all park
shorelines. In addition, the proposed
regulation would further prohibit PWC
operation within 200 feet of people in
the water, which would benefit both
snorkelers and divers. For these reasons,
impacts to divers and snorkelers would
be long-term and adverse, but negligible
due to the distribution of PWC, the
additional restrictions imposed under
the proposed regulation, and the small
number of PWC users and divers that
visit the park.
Anglers. Impacts to anglers would be
similar to those described under
alternative A of the Environmental
Assessment. The same restrictions
would apply to the lagoons of Perdido
Key and the fishing piers at Fort
Pickens. However, the proposed
regulation calls for an additional flat
wake zone 300 yards from all park
shorelines. In addition, a flat wake zone
would extend 0.5 mile from the
shoreline and either side of the pier at
West Ship Island, and a 0.5-mile flat
wake zone would be established around
the wilderness islands of Horn and Petit
Bois. Although the additional flat wake
restrictions would benefit anglers in all
areas of the park, impacts would likely
be long-term and adverse, but negligible
due to additional PWC restrictions.
Campers and Hikers. Impacts to
campers and hikers would be similar to
those described under alternative A of
the Environmental Assessment,
particularly in the Florida District since
most of the restrictions under the
proposed regulation would apply to the
Mississippi District. However, the
proposed regulation calls for
establishment of a flat wake zone 300
yards from all park shorelines, which
would benefit all campers and hikers at
the park. PWC use at Horn and Petit
Bois islands in the Mississippi District
would be restricted to flat wake speed
0.5 mile from the shoreline, which
would benefit users of these wilderness
areas. PWC operation would be limited
to daylight hours in both districts, when
campers may be participating in other
activities.
PWC use would have long-term,
negligible to minor, adverse impacts on
the experience of all camping and
hiking visitors due to the additional
restrictions described under the
proposed regulation.
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Conclusion. The proposed regulation
would provide overall beneficial
impacts on PWC users, because they
would be allowed to recreate with a
personal watercraft in the national
seashore, although PWC users would be
required to comply with additional
restrictions. Impacts of PWC use on
motorized and non-motorized boaters
would be negligible to minor, long-term,
adverse. Impacts to swimmers would
also be long-term, adverse, and minor.
Impacts to divers, snorkelers, and
anglers would be long-term and adverse,
but negligible. PWC use would have
long-term, negligible to minor, adverse
impacts on the experience of all
camping and hiking visitors. Overall
PWC use would result in long-term,
adverse, negligible to minor impacts to
non-PWC users. Cumulative impacts
would be long-term, adverse, and minor.
Visitor Conflict and Safety
Industry representatives report that
PWC accidents decreased in some States
in the late 1990s. The National
Transportation Safety Board reported
that in 1996 personal watercraft
represented 7.5% of State-registered
recreational boats but accounted for
36% of recreational boating accidents.
In the same year, PWC operators
accounted for more than 41% of people
injured in boating accidents. PWC
operators accounted for approximately
85% of the persons injured in accidents
studied in 1997. Since PWC operators
can be as young as 12 in several States,
accidents can involve children. The
American Academy of Pediatrics
recommends that no one younger than
16 operate personal watercraft.
In Florida in 2000, personal watercraft
comprised 12.5% of all registered
vessels statewide and accounted for
32% of all boating accidents. In the
Florida District in 2000, 44 boating
violation citations were issued, 36% of
which were to personal watercraft. An
analysis of park boating violations in
Mississippi from 1997 to September
2001 reveals that 58% of the violations
involved a personal watercraft.
Under the proposed regulation, based
on alternative B of the Environmental
Assessment, PWC use would be
reinstated as under alternative A, with
additional management prescriptions. A
flat wake zone would be established 300
yards from all park shorelines, with the
exception of at the West Ship Island
Pier, where a flat wake zone would
extend 0.5 mile from the shoreline and
0.5 mile from either side of the pier. A
flat wake zone would also be
established 0.5 mile from the shorelines
around all designated wilderness
boundaries, and no PWC operation
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
would be permitted within 200 feet of
non-motorized watercraft and people in
the water. In addition, PWC user and
boater education would be provided
through interpretive talks, onsite
bulletins, and brochures given to PWC
registrants and visitors who rent
personal watercraft. These educational
efforts would benefit all seashore
visitors described below.
Impact on PWC Users. Under the
proposed regulation, PWC use would be
reinstated and all of the national
seashore waters would be accessible to
PWC use except where restricted.
Implementation of the flat wake zones
would not permit high speed
maneuvering use in these areas, but this
type of activity would be permitted
outside these areas in park waters.
However, PWC users would experience
beneficial safety impacts because the
restrictions would minimize conflicts
and potential for accidents between
PWC, other PWC, and non-PWC users.
Overall, impacts to PWC users would be
long-term, beneficial, and minor.
Impact on Other Boaters. The
majority of motorized boating in the
Florida District occurs in Gulf waters on
the south side of the islands. However,
PWC favor the bay and sound areas,
where waters are calm. This natural
distribution would help alleviate
conflicts between boaters and PWC
users in the Florida District.
PWC are more prevalent and more
evenly distributed in the Mississippi
District, which has far fewer boaters
than the Florida District. East and West
Ship islands experience the heaviest
visitor use and boaters there would
likely experience the biggest impacts.
PWC concentrate in areas that boaters
also prefer, usually on the east and west
ends of the islands, around the West
Ship Island Pier, and the north side of
Spoil Island. In addition, PWC would
also be prohibited within 200 feet of
non-motorized watercraft in both
districts. A flat wake zone would be
established 300 yards from all park
shorelines, except at the West Ship
Island Pier, where the flat wake zone
would extend 0.5 mile from the
shoreline and either side of the pier.
The flat wake zone would also extend
0.5 mile from the shoreline around all
wilderness boundaries. These
restrictions would provide additional
safety measures to both PWC and
motorboat users at the seashore.
For the reasons described above,
impacts to motorized boaters in both
districts would be long-term and
adverse. However, these impacts would
be negligible to minor due to the
additional restrictions and PWC
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12997
prohibitions defined under the
proposed regulation.
PWC would interact with nonmotorized boaters as well. PWC use
would be prohibited 200 feet from the
old fishing pier and 200 feet from the
new fishing pier at Fort Pickens. The
proposed canoe trail along the north
side of Perdido Key would provide a
safe, non-motorized boat route for
canoeists and kayakers to enjoy because
it would be within the flat wake zone
established 300 yards from the
shoreline. In addition, park staff have
received no documented complaints
from non-motorized boaters concerning
PWC use. Nonmotorized boaters would
also benefit from safety measures
provided by additional restrictions
described above. In addition, both
Mississippi and Florida require that
PWC operators use cut-off devices,
which would not necessarily reduce the
amount of conflict but would improve
safety for non-motorized watercraft
users at the seashore. Therefore, impacts
to non-motorized watercraft under the
proposed regulation would be longterm, adverse, and negligible to minor.
Impact on Other Visitors. Swimmers,
anglers, campers, hikers, and other
shoreline visitors to the national
seashore would have contact with
personal watercraft users. Shoreline
areas that are popular with both
personal watercraft and other shoreline
users include the north sides of the
Mississippi islands and the Perdido Key
area.
Swimmers. Impacts to swimmers
would be similar to those described
under alternative A of the
Environmental Assessment. However,
the proposed regulation would further
restrict PWC use by establishing a flat
wake zone 300 yards from all park
shorelines, which would benefit
swimmers at non-designated swim
beaches. The proposed regulation would
also prohibit PWC use within 200 feet
of people in the water, providing
additional safety and reducing the
likelihood of conflicts and accidents.
In addition, a flat wake zone would
also be established 0.5 mile from the
shorelines around the wilderness areas
of Horn and Petit Bois islands, limiting
impacts to swimmers and beach users
on these islands. The lakes, ponds,
lagoons, and inlets of the islands in the
Mississippi District would be closed to
motorized vessels.
Both Mississippi and Florida require
that PWC operators use cut-off devices,
which would not necessarily reduce the
amount of conflict but would improve
safety for swimmers at the seashore.
Therefore, impacts to swimmers from
PWC use in both districts would likely
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
12998
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
be long-term, adverse, and minor due to
additional restrictions and the
concentration of PWC activity to the
north side of most designated swim
beaches.
Anglers. Impacts to anglers would be
similar to those described under
alternative A of the Environmental
Assessment. The proposed regulation
calls for an additional flat wake zone
300 yards from all park shorelines at the
low-water mark. In addition, a flat wake
zone would extend 0.5 mile from the
shoreline and either side of the pier at
West Ship Island, and a 0.5-mile flat
wake zone would be established around
the wilderness islands of Horn and Petit
Bois. Although the additional flat wake
restrictions would benefit anglers in all
areas of the park, impacts would likely
be long-term and adverse, but negligible
due to additional PWC restrictions.
Campers and Hikers. The Florida
District receives a much higher amount
of camping visitation compared to the
Mississippi District. The Fort Pickens
campground provides the highest
number of campsites (200) but is not
located on the shoreline, and primitive
camping is also allowed on the east end
of Perdido Key. The Davis Bayou
campground in the Mississippi District
provides 51 campsites. No designated
campsites exist on the Mississippi
islands, but backcountry camping
occurs on the islands.
Backcountry campers on Perdido Key
and East Ship Island would experience
long-term, minor, adverse impacts from
PWC use under the proposed regulation.
A flat wake zone would be established
300 yards from all park shorelines,
which would reduce impacts to campers
and hikers. PWC use at Horn and Petit
Bois islands would be restricted to flat
wake speed one-half mile from the
shoreline, which would benefit users of
these wilderness areas. PWC operation
would be limited to daylight hours in
both districts, when campers may be
participating in other activities.
PWC use would have long-term,
minor, adverse impacts on the
experience of all camping and hiking
visitors due to restrictions contained
under the proposed regulation and
distribution of types of visitor activities.
Conclusion. Impacts to PWC users
would be long-term, beneficial, and
minor. Impacts to motorized and nonmotorized boaters would be long-term,
adverse, and negligible to minor.
Swimmers would likely experience
long-term, adverse, and minor impacts.
Anglers in all areas of the park would
likely experience long-term and adverse,
but negligible impacts due to additional
PWC restrictions. PWC use would have
long-term, minor, adverse impacts on
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
the experience of all camping and
hiking visitors due to restrictions
contained under the proposed
regulation and distribution of types of
visitor activities. Cumulative impacts
would be adverse and minor over the
short term and long term.
Cultural Resources
PWC users would have access to
unknown archaeological and submerged
cultural resources under the proposed
regulation. Both known and
undocumented submerged resources
exist. Given the expanded wake
restrictions under the proposed
regulation, PWC use is unlikely to result
in damage to submerged resources close
to shore. Water depth is likely to protect
other submerged resource.
Potential impacts directly attributable
to unrestricted PWC use are difficult to
quantify. The most likely impact to
archaeological sites would result from
PWC users landing in areas otherwise
inaccessible to most other national
seashore visitors and illegally collecting
or damaging artifacts. According to park
staff, looting and vandalism of cultural
resources has been a problem. A direct
correlation of impacts attributed to PWC
users is difficult to draw, since many of
these areas are also accessible to other
watercraft users and visitors. Under the
proposed regulation, PWC users within
the national seashore would have only
minor adverse impacts on listed or
potentially listed archaeological
resources.
Restricting areas of use and the
establishment of a flat wake speed zone
would serve as a measure to minimize
impacts on potentially listed
archaeological resources from possible
illegal collection and vandalism.
Cumulative impacts from other
activities on archaeological resources
that are readily accessible could be
minor to moderate and adverse, due to
the number of visitors and the potential
for illegal collection or destruction.
Implementation of the proposed
regulation would not result in an
impairment of cultural resources.
The Proposed Rule
Under this NPRM, which is based on
the preferred alternative, alternative B, a
special regulation at 36 CFR 7.12 would
reinstate PWC use at the national
seashore. The proposed rule would
include the management actions listed
under alternative A, as well as
additional management prescriptions
under alternative B to protect natural
and cultural resources, to mitigate PWC
safety concerns, to provide for visitor
health and safety, and to enhance
overall visitor experience.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The management actions listed under
alternatives A and B include the
following:
1. Area of Use and Location
Restrictions. PWC use would be allowed
throughout the national seashore, except
in areas where use restrictions for all
vessels had been in place before April
22, 2002, including:
• The lakes, ponds, lagoons and inlets
of East Ship Island, West Ship Island,
Horn Island, Petit Bois Island and Cat
Island are closed to the use of motorized
vessels.
• The lagoons of Perdido Key within
Big Lagoon are closed.
• The areas 200 feet from the
remnants of the old fishing pier and 200
feet from the new fishing pier at Fort
Pickens are closed.
• Operating a vessel in excess of 5
mph or creating a wake is prohibited
within 500 feet of the Davis Bayou
launch ramp, the West Ship Island Pier,
the Horn Island Pier, and the Fort
Pickens Pier; within the buoyed, area at
Spoil (Sand) Island; and within the
posted area on the north side of Perdido
Key near the Fort McRee site.
• Seasonal closures within the
seashore to protect wildlife and habitat
as determined necessary by
superintendent.
• PWC would be allowed to beach at
any point along the shore not closed by
the above.
The additional management
restrictions under alternative B include
the following:
• A flat wake zone would be
expanded to 300 yards from all park
shorelines with the exception of:
—At the West Ship Island Pier a flat
wake zone would extend 0.5 mile
from the shoreline and 0.5 mile from
either side of the pier.
—Around all designated wilderness
boundaries a flat wake zone would be
established 0.5 mile from the
shorelines.
• No PWC operation would be
permitted within 200 feet of nonmotorized watercraft and people in the
water.
In addition, applicable State and
Federal boating laws and regulations
would apply to PWC operators,
including regulations that address
reckless or negligent operation,
excessive speed, hazardous wakes or
washes, hours of operation, age of
driver, and distance between vessels.
The boating regulations for Florida and
Mississippi have been adopted by the
NPS and apply to PWC use at Gulf
Islands National Seashore.
Further, it is a management objective
of the park staff at Gulf Islands National
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
12999
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Seashore to promote and enhance PWC
user and boater education through
interpretive talks, onsite bulletins, and
brochures given to PWC registrants and
visitors who rent personal watercraft.
Within the capabilities of staff levels
and funding, the park will also seek to
increase awareness and enhance
enforcement of Federal laws and
regulations pertaining to harassment of
marine mammals through ongoing water
patrols (Marine Mammal Protection Act,
Endangered Species Act).
Summary of Economic Impacts:
Personal Watercraft Regulations in Gulf
Islands National Seashore
Alternative C, the no-action
alternative, represents the baseline of
this analysis. Under that alternative, all
PWC use would remain prohibited in
the park. Alternative A would permit
PWC use as managed in the park prior
to the ban and Alternative B would
permit PWC use, but with additional
restrictions compared with pre-ban
management. All benefits and costs
associated with these regulatory
alternatives are measured relative to the
baseline established by Alternative C.
Therefore, there are no incremental
benefits or costs associated with
Alternative C.
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. The present
value of benefits to PWC users are
estimated to range between $670,100
and $881,500 for these alternatives. The
present value of benefits to PWC users
for Alternatives A and B are estimated
to range between $479,900 and
$4,130,400. Additional beneficiaries
include the individuals who use PWCs
outside the park where PWC users that
are displaced from the park may decide
to ride if PWC use within the park were
prohibited. 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 GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE, 2003–2012
[In thousands] a
PWC
users
Alternative A:
Discounted
Discounted
Alternative B:
Discounted
Discounted
Businesses
Total
at 3% b .........................................................................................
at 7% b .........................................................................................
$881.5
705.3
$664.6 to $4,130.4 ......
511.9 to 3,181.2 ..........
$1,546.1 to $5,011.9.
1,217.2 to 3,886.5.
at 3% b .........................................................................................
at 7% b .........................................................................................
837.5
670.1
623.1 to 3,859.6 ..........
479.9 to 2,972.6 ..........
1,460.5 to 4,697.0.
1,149.9 to 3,642.7.
a Benefits
may not sum to the indicated totals due to independent rounding.
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.
b Office
TABLE 2.—AMORTIZED TOTAL BENEFITS PER YEAR FOR PWC USE IN GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE, 2003–2012
[In thousands]
Amortized total
benefits per year a
Alternative A:
Discounted
Discounted
Alternative B:
Discounted
Discounted
at 3% b .............................................................................................................................................................
at 7% b .............................................................................................................................................................
$181.3 to $587.5.
173.3 to 553.4.
at 3% b .............................................................................................................................................................
at 7% b .............................................................................................................................................................
171.2 to 550.6.
163.7 to 518.6.
aThis
is the present value of total benefits reported in Table 1 amortized over the ten-year analysis timeframe at the indicated discount rate.
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.
b Office
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 Gulf Islands
National Seashore, 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
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
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
somewhat smaller than under
Alternative A. That is because the costs
associated with non-PWC use,
aesthetics, ecosystem protection, human
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
health and safety, congestion, and
nonuse values would likely be greater
under Alternative A 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 a significant rule
and has 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.
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
13000
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
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 ‘‘’Economic
Analysis of Personal Watercraft
Regulations in Gulf Islands National
Seashore’’’ (MACTEC Engineering,
January 2004).
(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.
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 Personal Watercraft
Regulations in Gulf Islands National
Seashore’’ (MACTEC Engineering,
January 2004).
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,
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
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
The National Park Service has
analyzed this rule in accordance with
the criteria of the National
Environmental Policy Act and has
prepared a draft Environmental
Assessment (EA). The EA was available
for public review and comment from
April 19, 2004 to May 18, 2004. Copies
of the environmental assessment may be
downloaded at https://www.nps.gov/
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
guis/pphtml/documents.html or
obtained at park headquarters Monday
through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Mail
inquiries should be directed to park
headquarters: Gulf Islands National
Seashore, 1801 Gulf Breeze Parkway,
Gulf Breeze, FL 32563.
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 ‘‘§ ’’ and a numbered heading;
for example § 7.12, Gulf Islands
National Seashore.) (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,
NW., Washington, DC 20240. You may
also e-mail the comments to this
address: Exsec@ios.doi.gov.
Drafting Information: The primary
authors of this regulation are: Nina
Kelson, Hank Snyder, and J.D. Lee, Gulf
Islands National Seashore; Sarah
Bransom, Environmental Quality
Division; and Kym Hall and Jerry Case,
NPS, Washington, DC.
Public Participation
If you wish to comment, you may
submit your comments by any one of
several methods. You may mail
comments to Gulf Islands National
Seashore, 1801 Gulf Breeze Parkway,
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 51 / Thursday, March 17, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Gulf Breeze, FL 32563. You may also
comment via the Internet to:
guis@den.nps.gov. Please also include
‘‘PWC Rule’’ in the subject line and your
name and return address in the body of
your Internet message. Finally, you may
hand deliver comments to Gulf Islands
National Seashore, 1801 Gulf Breeze
Parkway, Gulf Breeze, FL 32563.
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
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. Add new paragraph (c) to § 7.12 to
read as follows:
Gulf Islands National Seashore.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Personal Watercraft (PWC). (1)
PWCs may operate within Gulf Islands
National Seashore except in the
following closed areas:
(i) The lakes, ponds, lagoons and
inlets of Cat Island, East Ship Island,
West Ship Island, Horn Island, and Petit
Bois Island;
(ii) The lagoons of Perdido Key within
Big Lagoon;
(iii) The areas within 200 feet from
the remnants of the old fishing pier and
within 200 feet from the new fishing
pier at Fort Pickens; and
(iv) Within 200 feet of non-motorized
vessels and people in the water.
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:48 Mar 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
Dated: February 23, 2005.
Paul Hoffman,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Fish and Wildlife
and Parks.
[FR Doc. 05–4734 Filed 3–16–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–52–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
1. The authority for part 7 continues
to read as follows:
§ 7.12
(2) PWC may not be operated at
greater than flat wake speed in the
following locations:
(i) Within 0.5 miles from the shoreline
or either side of the pier at the West
Ship Island Pier;
(ii) Within 0.5 miles from the
shoreline on the designated wilderness
islands of Horn and Petit Bois; and
(iii) Within 300 yards from all other
park shorelines.
(3) PWC are allowed to beach at any
point along the shore except as follows:
(i) PWC may not beach in any
restricted area listed in paragraph (c)(1)
of this section; and
(ii) PWC may not beach above the
mean high tide line on the designated
wilderness islands of Horn and Petit
Bois.
(4) 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.
[DA 05–551; MB Docket No. 05–67, RM–
11116]
Radio Broadcasting Services; Clinton,
Fisher, Indianapolis and Lawrence, IN
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Audio Division requests
comments on a petition jointly filed by
Indy Lico, Inc. and WFMS Lico, Inc.,
proposing (1) the upgrade from Channel
230A to Channel 230B1 at Fishers, the
reallotment of Channel 230B1 from
Fishers to Lawrence, Indiana, and the
modification of Station WISG(FM)’s
license accordingly; (2) the reallotment
of Channel 238B from Indianapolis to
Fishers, Indiana, and the modification
of Station WFMS(FM)’s license
accordingly; and (3) the substitution of
Channel 229A for Channel 230A at
Clinton, Indiana, to accommodate the
Lawrence reallotment. Channel 230B1
can be reallotted to Lawrence in
compliance with the Commission’s
minimum distance separation
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
13001
requirements with a site restriction of
12.6 kilometers (7.8 miles) south at
Station WISG(FM)’s requested site. The
coordinates for Channel 230B1 at
Lawrence are 39–43–37 North Latitude
and 86–03–00 West Longitude. See
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, infra.
DATES: Comments must be filed on or
before April 25, 2005, reply comments
on or before May 10, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In
addition to filing comments with the
FCC, interested parties should serve the
petitioner, or its counsel or consultant,
as follows: Mark N. Lipp, Esq., Vinson
& Elkins, L.L.P., 1455 Pennsylvania
Ave., Suite, 600, Washington, DC 2004–
1008 (Counsel for Petitioner).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sharon P. McDonald, Media Bureau,
(202) 418–2180.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of
Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No.
05–67, adopted March 2, 2005, and
released March 4, 2005. The full text of
this Commission decision is available
for inspection and copying during
normal business hours in the FCC
Reference Information Center (Room
CY–A257), 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC. The complete text of
this decision may also be purchased
from the Commission’s copy contractor,
Best Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II,
445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20054, telephone 1–
800–378–3160 or https://
www.BCPIWEB.com. This document
does not contain proposed information
collection requirements subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13. In addition,
therefore, it does not contain any
proposed information collection burden
‘‘for small business concerns with fewer
than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4).
Additionally, Channel 238B can be
reallotted to Fishers at Station
WFMS(FM)’s presently licensed site.
The coordinates for Channel 238B are
39–46–03 North Latitude and 86–00–12
West Longitude. Channel 229A can be
substituted at Clinton at Station WPFM–
FM’s presently licensed site. The
coordinates for Channel 229A at Clinton
are 39–33–01 North Latitude and 87–
28–32 West Longitude.
Provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to
this proceeding.
Members of the public should note
that from the time a Notice of Proposed
Rule Making is issued until the matter
E:\FR\FM\17MRP1.SGM
17MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 51 (Thursday, March 17, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12988-13001]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-4734]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
36 CFR Part 7
RIN 1024-AD21
Gulf Islands National Seashore, 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 Gulf Islands
National Seashore, Florida and Mississippi. 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 May 16, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed rule should be sent to the
Superintendent, Gulf Islands National Seashore, 1801 Gulf Breeze
Parkway, Gulf Breeze, FL 32563. Comments may also be sent by e-mail to
guis@den.nps.gov. 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. Also, you may hand deliver comments to Gulf
Islands National Seashore, 1801 Gulf Breeze Parkway, Gulf Breeze, FL
32563. For additional information see ``Public Participation'' under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry Case, Regulations Program
Manager, National Park Service, 1849 C Street, NW., Room 7241,
Washington, DC 20240. Phone: (202) 208-4206. E-mail: jerry_
case@nps.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Additional Alternatives
The information contained in this proposed rule supports
implementation of portions of the preferred alternative in the
Environmental Assessment published March 2004. 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 for 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 Gulf Islands National Seashore
Gulf Islands National Seashore is located in the northeastern
portion of the Gulf of Mexico and includes a widely spaced chain of
barrier islands extending nearly 160 miles from the eastern end of
Santa Rosa Island in Florida to Cat Island in Mississippi. Other
islands in the national seashore include Horn, Petit Bois, and East
Ship and West Ship islands in Mississippi and a section of Perdido Key
in Florida. Gulf Islands National Seashore also includes mainland
tracts at Pensacola Forts and Naval Live Oaks Reservation near
Pensacola, Florida, and Davis Bayou, adjacent to Ocean Springs,
Mississippi. The national seashore contains 139,775.46 acres within the
authorized boundary, excluding Cat Island (only a portion has been
acquired as of this date). Of this total acreage, 19,445.46 acres are
fastlands (above water) and 119,730 acres are submerged lands.
Gulf Islands National Seashore contains snowy-white beaches,
sparkling blue waters, fertile coastal marshes, and dense maritime
forests. Visitors can explore 19th century forts, enjoy shaded picnic
areas, hike on winding nature trails, and camp in comfortable
campgrounds. In addition, Horn and Petit Bois islands located in
Mississippi are federally designated wilderness areas. Nature, history,
and recreational opportunities abound in this national treasure. All
areas of Gulf Islands National Seashore in the Florida
[[Page 12989]]
District and the Davis Bayou area in the Mississippi District are
reachable from Interstate 10. The Mississippi District barrier islands
are only accessible by boat.
Purpose of Gulf Islands National Seashore
Gulf Islands National Seashore, Florida and Mississippi, was
authorized by Act of Congress, Public Law 91-660, January 8, 1971, to
provide for recognition of certain historic values such as coastal
fortifications and other purposes such as the preservation and
enjoyment of undeveloped barrier islands and beaches.
Gulf Islands National Seashore conserves certain outstanding
natural, cultural and recreational resources along the Northern Gulf
Coast of Florida and Mississippi. These include several coastal defense
forts spanning more than two centuries of military activity, historic
and prehistoric archaeological sites, and pristine examples of intact
Mississippi coastal barrier islands, salt marshes, bayous, submerged
grass beds, complex terrestrial communities, emerald green water, and
white sand beaches.
Gulf Islands National Seashore was established for the following
purposes:
Preserve for public use and enjoyment certain areas
possessing outstanding natural, historic, and recreational values.
Conserve and manage the wildlife and natural resources.
Preserve as wilderness any area within the national
seashore found to be suitable and so designated in accordance with the
provisions of the Wilderness Act (78 Stat. 890).
Recognize, preserve, and interpret the national historic
significance of Fort Barrancas Water Battery (Battery San Antonio),
Fort Barrancas; Advanced Redoubt of Fort Barrancas at Pensacola Naval
Station; Fort Pickens on Santa Rosa Island, Florida; Fort McRee site,
Perdido Key, Florida; and Fort Massachusetts on West Ship Island,
Mississippi, in accordance with the Act of August 21, 1935 (49 Stat.
666). That act states: ``it is a National policy to preserve for public
use historic sites, buildings, and objects of National significance for
inspiration and benefits of the people of the United States.''
Significance of Gulf Islands National Seashore
Gulf Islands National Seashore is significant for the following
reasons:
Nationally significant historical coastal defense forts
representing a continuum of development.
Several mostly undisturbed, natural areas in close
proximity to major population centers.
Areas of natural significant high quality beaches, dunes,
and water resources.
Endangered species occur in several areas.
Contains regionally important prehistoric archaeological
sites.
Provides outstanding controlled areas conducive to the
successful reintroduction of native threatened and endangered species.
Provides habitat for early life stages of many coastal and
marine flora and fauna of commercial and recreational importance.
Provides a benchmark to compare environmental conditions
in developed areas of the Gulf Coast.
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' 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 Gulf Islands National Seashore
Personal watercraft use emerged at Gulf Islands National Seashore
in the 1980s. Although PWC use was a small percentage of total boat use
within the national seashore, park staff believes that use had
increased over the five years prior to the closure. If reinstated, PWC
use at the national seashore is not expected to decrease. In fact, an
increase in usage would be expected as more residents purchase personal
watercraft and tourism continues to grow.
Prior to the closure to personal watercraft in April 2002, personal
watercraft were recognized as a Class A motorboat and were treated as
any other such vessel. All regulations that apply to any registered
vessel operating in waters of Florida and Mississippi that are
regulated by the NPS applied to personal watercraft.
Personal watercraft were permitted throughout the national
seashore, except as follows: no motorized vessels are permitted above
the mean high tide line on the designated wilderness islands of Horn
and Petit Bois; the lakes, ponds, lagoons and inlets of East Ship
Island, West Ship Island, Horn Island, Petit Bois Island, and Cat
Island (lands under NPS management) are closed to the use of motorized
vessels; the lagoons of Perdido Key within Big Lagoon are closed to all
combustion engines; and the areas 200 feet from the remnants of the old
fishing pier and 200 feet from the new fishing pier at Fort Pickens are
closed to all boating operations. There are also seasonal closures to
watercraft to protect nesting shorebirds and other sensitive wildlife
and relict dunes.
Perdido Key in Florida and East Ship and West Ship islands in
Mississippi have the most concentrated boating use within the national
seashore. Many area residents in both States have boat docks and own
boats or personal watercraft, and visit the national seashore.
Florida District. In Florida, the park is situated between the Gulf
of Mexico and the Pensacola Bay system. Although the Gulf offers almost
unlimited area for personal watercraft use, most operation occurs
within the bay. In 2000, personal watercraft comprised 12.5% of all
registered vessels statewide. In the Florida District of the park, it
is estimated that personal watercraft comprised 0.5% of recreational
boating. Personal watercraft traversed along the north shoreline of
Santa Rosa Island while very few traversed the south, or Gulf,
shoreline. In general, PWC usage within the Florida District of the
park was concentrated in the Perdido Key area. During the summer
months, most
[[Page 12990]]
areas of PWC use consisted of 6 or 7 personal watercraft per month,
while on a peak-use day PWC activity in the Perdido Key area might have
comprised 25 personal watercraft. The reason for the higher use in the
Perdido Key area is the sheltered nature of the area and the proximity
to residences with launching facilities.
Mississippi District. The Mississippi portion of the park separates
the Gulf of Mexico from the Mississippi Sound. Personal watercraft
account for 6% of the registered boats in Mississippi, and it is
estimated that they comprised approximately 4% of recreational boating
in the Mississippi District of the park. The islands are situated
between 6 to 14 miles from the mainland, weather conditions can change
quickly, and large ships use the intracoastal waterway shipping
channels. These factors combined to limit PWC use in the Mississippi
District as transportation to the islands, and use of Gulfside waters
was almost nonexistent except immediately adjacent to the islands.
Observations of PWC use indicate that they were mainly used for
recreational riding and not for transportation. Most personal
watercraft used in the Mississippi District of the park were towed by
larger boats from the Pascagoula/Biloxi/Gulfport, Mississippi, area.
The primary use season reflects overall visitation patterns, with use
decreasing during the winter months.
PWC use areas are similar to general motorboat use areas. Personal
watercraft were concentrated mostly on the east and west tips of the
islands, around the West Ship Island Pier, and the entire north side of
Spoil Island.
Resource Protection and Public Use Issues
Gulf Islands National Seashore Environmental Assessment
As a companion document to this proposed rule, NPS has issued the
Gulf Islands National Seashore, Personal Watercraft Use Environmental
Assessment. The Environmental Assessment (EA) was open for public
review and comment from April 19, 2004 to May 18, 2004. Copies of the
environmental assessment may be downloaded at https://www.nps.gov/guis/
pphtml/documents.html or obtained at park headquarters Monday through
Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Mail inquiries should be directed to park
headquarters: Gulf Islands National Seashore, 1801 Gulf Breeze Parkway,
Gulf Breeze, FL 32563.
The purpose of the environmental assessment was to evaluate a range
of alternatives and strategies for the management of PWC use at Gulf
Islands to ensure the protection of park resources and values while
offering recreational opportunities as provided for in the National
Seashore's enabling legislation, purpose, mission, and goals. The
analysis assumed alternatives would be implemented beginning in 2002
and considered a 10-year period, from 2002 to 2012.
The environmental assessment evaluates three alternatives
concerning the use of personal watercraft at Gulf Islands:
The no-action alternative would continue the prohibition
of PWC use in Gulf Islands National Seashore. No special rule would be
promulgated.
Alternative A would reinstate PWC use under a special NPS
regulation as previously managed.
Alternative B would reinstate PWC use under a special NPS
regulation with additional management prescriptions.
Based on the environmental analysis prepared for PWC use at Gulf
Islands, alternative B is considered the environmentally preferred
alternative because it would best fulfill park responsibilities as
trustee of this sensitive habitat; ensure safe and healthy, productive,
and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings; and attain a
wider range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation,
risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended
consequences.
This document proposes regulations to implement alternative B at
Gulf Islands National Seashore.
The NPS will consider the comments received on this proposal, as
well as the comments received on the Environmental Assessment when
making a final determination. In the final rule, the NPS will implement
alternative B 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 PWC use at Gulf Islands National
Seashore. Each of these issues is analyzed in the Gulf Islands National
Seashore, 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 two-stroke
engines in personal watercraft. Two-stroke engines (and some personal
watercraft) discharge a gas-oil mixture into the water. Fuel used in
many PWC and motorboat engines contains many hydrocarbons, including
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (collectively referred to as
BTEX). Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) 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 all these compounds--BTEX and
PAHs--have potential adverse effects on aquatic life and human health
if present at high enough concentrations. A common gasoline additive,
methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) also is released with the unburned
portion of the gasoline. In 2001, premium grade fuel (octane of 90 and
higher) in Florida had MTBE concentrations ranging from 0% to 10.8% of
the fuel mixture, with an average of 3.5%; no data was available for
Mississippi. For this assessment, it was assumed that the concentration
of MTBE in fuel used by all vessels in the Florida and Mississippi
districts is 3.5%. There are no plans to ban the use of MTBE in fuels
in Florida or Mississippi. The PWC industry suggests that although some
unburned fuel does enter the water, the fuel's gaseous state allows it
to evaporate readily.
A typical conventional (i.e., carbureted) two-stroke PWC engine
discharges as much as 30% of the unburned fuel mixture into the
exhaust. At common fuel consumption rates, an average two-hour ride on
a personal watercraft may discharge 3 gallons (11.34 liters) of fuel
into the water. According to data from Personal Watercraft Illustrated
and the Environmental Protection Agency, an average 2000 model-year
personal watercraft can discharge between 3.8 and 4.5 gallons of fuel
during one hour at full throttle. (As described in appendix A of the
Environmental Assessment, an estimated discharge rate of 3 gallons per
hour is used in the water quality impact calculations.)
Florida District. Under the proposed regulation, based on
alternative B in the Environmental Assessment, PWC use would be
reinstated in all waters within the Florida District as previously
managed under the Superintendent's Compendium, and all State regulatory
requirements would apply. In addition, a PWC flat wake zone would be
established a minimum of 300 yards from all park shorelines. PWC flat
wake
[[Page 12991]]
speed engine emissions were assumed to be negligible; therefore it was
assumed that the same number of PWC-hours of full-throttle use under
alternative A in the three areas would occur, but only beyond 300 yards
of park shorelines. This effectively reduces the available water volume
for diluting PWC engine emissions.
The results of the water quality analysis for PWC activity shows
that for all discharged pollutants evaluated, the ecotoxicological
threshold volumes estimated for 2002 and 2012 would be well below
volumes of water available at the three areas. Threshold volumes range
from 0.1 to 260 acre-feet, while water volumes accessible to personal
watercraft under this alternative range from 13,010 to 301,704 acre-
feet. Impacts to aquatic organisms are expected to be negligible for
all pollutants evaluated.
Threshold volumes for human health benchmarks of benzo(a)pyrene and
benzene are also well below volumes of water available at the three
areas in 2002 and 2012. Threshold volumes range from 7 to 310 acre-
feet, while water volumes available to personal watercraft range from
13,010 to 301,704 acre-feet. Impacts to human health are expected to be
negligible for all pollutants evaluated. Mixing, flushing, and the
resulting dilution of park waters by adjacent waters would further
reduce pollutant concentrations. Tidal currents at the Pensacola Bay
entrance reach a speed of 4.1 knots. Incoming tides increase the
available water volume, especially at the Big Lagoon area of Perdido
Key where the average depth is less than 8 feet. Outgoing tides
transport soluble pollutants out of park waters to the Gulf of Mexico.
Mississippi District. Under the proposed regulation, PWC use would
be reinstated in all waters within the Mississippi District as
previously managed under the Superintendent's Compendium, and all State
regulatory requirements would apply. In addition, a PWC flat wake zone
would be established 300 yards from park shorelines at West Ship, East
Ship, and Spoil Islands and 0.5 mile from Horn and Petit Bois Islands
and West Ship Island pier. PWC flat wake speed engine emissions were
assumed to be negligible, so it was assumed that the same number of
PWC-hours of full-throttle use under alternative A in Mississippi Sound
and in Gulf-side waters would occur, but only beyond the flat wake
boundary. This effectively reduces the available water volume for
diluting PWC engine emissions.
The results of the water quality analysis for PWC activity shows
that for all discharged pollutants evaluated, the ecotoxicological
threshold volumes estimated for 2002 and 2012 would be well below
volumes of water available at both areas. Threshold volumes range from
2 to 1,800 acre-feet, while water volumes available to PWC use range
from 183,665 to 273,952 acre-feet. Impacts to aquatic organisms are
expected to be negligible for all pollutants evaluated.
Threshold volumes for human health benchmarks of benzo(a)pyrene and
benzene are also well below volumes of water available at both areas in
2002 and 2012. Threshold volumes range from 140 to 2,200 acre-feet,
while volumes available to PWC use range from 183,665 to 273,952 acre-
feet. Impacts to human health are expected to be negligible for all
pollutants evaluated. Mixing, flushing, and the resulting dilution of
park waters by adjacent waters would further reduce pollutant
concentrations. Incoming tides increase the available water volume,
especially in shallow areas. Outgoing tides transport soluble
pollutants out of park waters to Mississippi Sound and the Gulf of
Mexico.
Conclusion. Under the proposed regulation, water quality impacts
from PWC use based on ecotoxicological and human health benchmarks
would be negligible adverse for all pollutants in all areas of the
national seashore in 2002. In 2012, although PWC use is projected to
increase more rapidly than non-PWC use, all water quality impacts from
PWC use are expected to remain negligible due to reduced emission rates
of newer technology engines.
In 2002, personal watercraft contributed approximately 30% of the
cumulative emissions from all motorized watercraft, and in 2012,
personal watercraft will contribute approximately 50% of the cumulative
emissions. Impacts would still be negligible for all pollutants in all
areas of the national seashore in 2002 and 2012. At most, cumulative
impact threshold volumes would constitute less than 5% of the volume
available to personal watercraft. In 2012, even with increased
motorcraft use, cumulative water quality impacts from all watercraft
are expected to be lower than in 2002 due to reduced emission rates. It
is recognized that the current phase-in of cleaner running engine
technologies by the Personal Watercraft Industry should result in a
reduced amount of water pollutants and an overall reduction of
hydrocarbon emissions.
Implementation of this proposed regulation would not result in an
impairment of water quality.
Air Quality
Personal watercraft emit various compounds that pollute the air. Up
to one third of the fuel delivered to the typical two-stroke carbureted
PWC engine is unburned and discharged; 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). Personal watercraft also emit fuel
components such as PAH 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 VOC2 and NOX emissions combine to form
ozone (O3). O3 causes respiratory problems in
humans, including coughs, airway irritation, and chest pain during
inhalations. O3 is also toxic to sensitive species of
vegetation. It causes visible foliar injury, decreases plant growth,
and increases plant susceptibility to insects and disease. CO can
affect humans as well. It interferes with the oxygen carrying capacity
of blood, resulting in lack of oxygen to tissues. NOX and PM
emissions associated with PWC use can 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 PWC use are expected
to be minimal. It is recognized that the current phase-in of cleaner
running engine technologies by the Personal Watercraft Industry should
result in a reduced amount of air pollutants and an overall reduction
of hydrocarbon emissions.
Impacts to human health. Under the proposed regulation, the use of
the national seashore by personal watercraft would be reinstated with
some additional restrictions to the management strategies in force
prior to the closure. The additional restrictions would establish a
flat wake zone 300 yards from all park shorelines at the low-water
mark, except at the West Ship Island Pier and around all designated
wilderness boundaries where a 0.5-mile flat wake zone would be
established. Furthermore, no PWC operation would be permitted within
200 feet of non-motorized watercraft and people in the water. Human-
health air quality impacts from the proposed regulation would be
[[Page 12992]]
the same as described for alternative A for 2002 and 2012 in both
Florida and Mississippi and would be negligible for CO,
PM10, HC, and NOX. The human health risk from PAH
would also be negligible in 2002 and 2012. The additional restrictions
would not change the type of personal watercraft in use, nor increase
or decrease the number of personal watercraft forecasted or their daily
duration of use between 2002 and 2012.
Because no reduction in PWC use is expected, the proposed
regulation would result in the same air quality impacts to human health
from PWC emissions as alternative A. The additional management
prescriptions would not noticeably affect PWC emissions as compared to
alternative A; therefore, the total increase in emissions resulting
from alternative A shown in tables 40 and 41 of the Environmental
Assessment for the Florida and Mississippi districts, respectively, is
the same for the proposed regulation. Negligible adverse impacts from
PWC emissions for CO, PM10, HC, and NOX would
occur for 2002 and 2012 in both the Florida and Mississippi districts.
The risk from PAH would also be negligible in 2002 and 2012.
Cumulative adverse impacts from PWC and other boating emissions at
the national seashore would be the same as for alternative A. In the
Florida District, adverse impacts to human health from air pollutants
in 2002 would be negligible for PM10 and NOX and
moderate for CO and HC. In 2012, levels would remain negligible for
PM10 and NOX, and moderate for CO and HC. In the
Mississippi District, impacts would be minor for CO and negligible for
PM10, HC, and NOX, in 2002. In 2012, CO impact
would increase to moderate; and impacts for the other pollutants would
remain at 2002 levels. Regional ozone emissions would improve due to a
reduction in HC emissions. The proposed regulation would have
negligible adverse impacts to human health air quality conditions, with
future reductions in PM10 and HC emissions due to improved
emission controls. The PWC contribution to emissions of HC is estimated
to be less than 1% of the cumulative boating emissions in 2002 and
2012. All impacts would be long term.
Implementation of the proposed regulation would not result in an
impairment of air quality as it relates to human health.
Impacts to air quality related values. Under the proposed
regulation, the annual number of personal watercraft using the Gulf
Islands National Seashore would be the same as alternative A for both
the Florida and Mississippi districts. Additional management
prescriptions under the proposed regulation, including flat wake
restrictions, would not affect PWC use numbers and potential future
increases. The predicted emission levels and impacts of continued PWC
use to air quality related values would be the same as those described
for alternative A based on annual emission rates. Impacts to air
quality related values from PWC in 2002 and 2012 would be minor.
The impacts of the proposed regulation on air quality related
values would be the same as alternative A. Emissions of each pollutant
would be less than 50 tons per year in both 2002 and 2012. Minor
adverse impacts to air quality related values from PWC would occur in
both 2002 and 2012 in both districts of the national seashore. In both
2002 and 2012, adverse impacts from cumulative emissions from motorized
boats and PWC would be moderate in the Florida District, and minor in
the Mississippi District. This conclusion is based on calculated levels
of pollutant emissions, regional SUM06 values, and the lack of observed
visibility impacts or ozone-related plant injury in the national
seashore.
Implementation of the proposed regulation would not result in an
impairment of air quality related values.
Soundscapes
The primary soundscape issue relative to PWC use is that other
visitors may perceive the sound made by personal watercraft as an
intrusion or nuisance, thereby disrupting their experiences. This
disruption is generally short term because personal watercraft travel
for a relatively short time along the shore and spend most of the time
in outlying areas. However, PWC occasionally congregate in popular
shoreline areas with other visitors, and as PWC use increases, related
noise may become more of an issue, particularly during certain times of
the day. Additionally, visitor sensitivity to PWC noise varies from
fisherman (more sensitive) to swimmers at popular beaches (less
sensitive).
The biggest difference between noise from personal watercraft and
noise from motorboats is that PWC continually leave the water, which
magnifies noise in two ways. Without the muffling effect of water, the
engine noise is typically 15 dBA louder and the smacking of the craft
against the water surface results in a loud ``whoop'' or series of
them. With the rapid maneuvering and frequent speed changes, the
impeller has no constant ``throughput'' and no consistent load on the
engine. Consequently, the engine speed rises and falls, resulting in a
variable pitch. This constantly changing sound is often perceived as
more disturbing than the constant sound from motorboats.
PWC users tend to operate close to shore, to operate in confined
areas, and to travel in groups, making noise more noticeable to other
recreationists (e.g., if identical boats emit 75 dB, two such boats
together would be expected to emit 78 dB, three boats together would
emit 80 dB). Motorboats traveling back and forth in one area at open
throttle or spinning around in small inlets also generate complaints
about noise levels; however, most motorboats tend to operate away from
shore and to navigate in a straight line, thus being less noticeable to
other recreationists.
Under this proposed regulation, based on alternative B in the
Environmental Assessment, a special regulation would be written to
reinstate personal watercraft use. Additional management strategies
would mitigate watercraft safety concerns, protect natural and cultural
resources, and enhance overall visitor experience.
PWC use would follow the same patterns assumed in alternative A;
however, the proposed regulation would implement flat wake zoning for
personal watercraft to help minimize the effects of PWC noise to park
visitors, including anglers and near shoreline users of the swimming,
picnic, and camping areas. The magnitude of noise near the speed
restriction areas would be dependent on the changes in location and
speed of the personal watercraft. As described in the analysis for
alternative A in the Environmental Assessment, a reduction from 40 mph
to 20 mph would reduce PWC noise levels approximately 5 dBA. Noise
reductions would occur with reductions in speed limits below 20 mph.
Increasing the distance from the personal watercraft to the listener
from 100 to 200 feet would result in a noise reduction of about 6 dBA.
The types of adverse impacts to the soundscape of Gulf Islands
National Seashore would be generally the same as alternative A because
of the type of sound. However, the level of impact would be less due to
increased distances between the PWC activity and shoreline activity.
Overall, negligible to minor adverse impacts would result from PWC use
on the soundscape of the national seashore. Impacts would generally be
short in duration but occur over the long-term. Although they could
periodically be more frequent at shoreline areas on very high use days
where motorized watercraft noise may predominate for most of the day,
most
[[Page 12993]]
visitors to Gulf Islands National Seashore during those high use
periods expect to hear motorized craft during the day, as the seashore
is known for providing this type of recreational opportunity in
addition to other activities. Since motorized noise would be expected
to be infrequent and at low levels due to use restrictions, minor
adverse impacts might occur if PWC users choose to operate in areas of
the park that are away from launch areas and campgrounds, and where
shoreline visitors would be anticipating a quiet, wilderness experience
such as at Horn and Petit Bois Islands. As in alternative A, impacts
could potentially increase if the noise output on newer engines does
not decrease substantially enough to overcome the increase in PWC use.
Noise from personal watercraft would be short-term in duration but
would be expected to occur over the long-term. Impacts would be
negligible to minor adverse depending on the location, within the unit,
the time of day, and the time of year. Flat wake zoning would reduce
noise levels from PWC in shoreline areas, specifically those areas
around Horn and Petit Bois Islands. Impact levels would relate to the
number of personal watercraft operating as well as the sensitivity of
other visitors and could potentially increase by 2012 based on noise
levels of newer engine technology.
Cumulative adverse noise impacts from personal watercraft and other
watercraft, commercial boats, and aircraft would be negligible to
moderate. Impacts would be short in duration but occur over the long-
term because of the high volume of annual boating use, and could
increase with increased boating use in the future.
Implementation of the proposed regulation would not result in an
impairment of the park's soundscape.
Shoreline and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
Personal watercraft are able to access areas that other types of
watercraft may not, which may cause direct disturbance to vegetation.
Indirect impact to 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.
Under the proposed regulation, PWC use would be reinstated in all
waters within the national seashore as previously managed under the
Gulf Islands National Seashore Superintendent's Compendium, and all
State regulatory requirements would apply. In addition, a flat wake
zone would be established 300 yards from all park shorelines except
around the West Ship Island Pier and around wilderness boundaries (Horn
and Petit Bois Islands) where 0.5-mile flat wake zones would be in
effect. The flat wake zoning component of the management prescriptions
under the proposed regulation would minimize both erosion effects from
PWC induced wave action and direct PWC disturbance to shoreline marsh
and dune communities. These impacts would be adverse and negligible
under the proposed regulation. Minor adverse impacts from PWC use to
emergent vegetation communities within the national seashore would
result from visitor disturbance to dune communities as a result of PWC
access. Overall, PWC use would have negligible to minor adverse impacts
on shoreline vegetation communities within the national seashore.
Of the approximately 1,930 acres of potential seagrass habitat
within the Florida District of the national seashore, about 1,000 acres
would be open to full-throttle PWC use. In the Perdido Key area of the
Florida District, where PWC use is most intense (peak use of 25
personal watercraft), only about 300 of the 640 acres of seagrass
habitat would be accessible to PWC full-throttle use. Direct and
indirect PWC impacts to seagrass beds would occur, but would be
minimized by the wake restrictions. Potential direct impacts would
include collision, uprooting, and sediment alteration. Indirect impacts
would include increased turbidity, decreased available sunlight, and
deposition of suspended sediment, which adversely affects the growth
and health of seagrass beds. Under the proposed regulation, PWC use
within the Florida District would have impacts to submerged aquatic
vegetation communities that are direct and indirect, minor, and short-
and long-term.
In the Mississippi District, a flat wake zone would be established
300 yards from park shorelines at West Ship, East Ship, and Spoil
Islands and 0.5 mile from the shorelines at Horn and Petit Bois Islands
and West Ship Island pier. Approximately 700 of the 3,300 acres of
potential seagrass habitat would be accessible to full-throttle PWC use
under the proposed regulation. Direct and indirect adverse PWC impacts
to seagrass habitats would occur, but would be minimized by the flat
wake zoning. Under the proposed regulation, PWC use within the
Mississippi District would have impacts to seagrass habitats that are
direct and indirect, minor, and short- and long-term.
Projected increases in PWC use within the national seashore would
potentially result in higher levels of impacts in 2012 relative to
2002.
PWC use would cause negligible adverse impacts to shoreline
vegetation from physical disturbance and wave action, and minor adverse
impacts from visitor access to emergent shoreline vegetation
communities. PWC use under the proposed regulation would have impacts
to seagrass habitats that are direct and indirect, minor, and short-
and long-term, because shallow water habitats in the national seashore
are the preferred areas for PWC use, particularly the Perdido Key and
Mississippi Sound areas. The flat wake zoning would restrict PWC
impacts to about one-half of the potential seagrass habitat in Florida
and one-quarter of the potential seagrass habitat in Mississippi.
Therefore, the proposed regulation, based on alternative B in the
Environmental Assessment, would have fewer adverse impacts to shoreline
and submerged aquatic vegetation than alternative A. Cumulative impacts
to shoreline vegetation would include effects from all visitor
activities, including PWC use and other motorized vessels, and would be
minor to moderate. Cumulative impacts to seagrass habitats associated
with use by all motorized vessels would be minor to moderate locally,
as motorboat use could continue to cause propeller scarring and
sediment resuspension and its effects. Impacts would potentially be
higher in 2012 relative to 2002 due to projected increases in PWC and
other motorized watercraft use.
Implementation of this proposed regulation would not result in an
impairment of shoreline or submerged aquatic vegetation.
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 a 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, or contribute to stress and
associated behavior changes.
Impacts to sensitive species, such as the manatee and the Perdido
Key beach mouse, are discussed in the
[[Page 12994]]
``Threatened, Endangered, or Special Concern Species'' section.
Under the proposed regulation, based on alternative B of the
Environmental Assessment, PWC use would occur as under alternative A,
with additional management prescriptions. A flat wake zone would be
established 300 yards from all park shorelines, with the exception of
the West Ship Island Pier, where a flat wake zone would extend 0.5 mile
from the shoreline and 0.5 mile from either side of the pier. A flat
wake zone would also be established 0.5 mile from the shorelines around
all designated wilderness boundaries and no PWC operation would be
permitted within 200 feet of non-motorized watercraft and people in the
water.
Impacts to aquatic wildlife species, especially in high use areas
such as the Perdido Key area, the area north of Santa Rosa Island, and
Mississippi Sound would be fewer than alternative A. The proposed
regulation would minimize impacts from PWC because the most shallow
water habitats and considerable portions of seagrass bed habitats lie
within the PWC flat wake zones prescribed by the proposed regulation.
Aquatic wildlife species inhabiting shallow protected waters and
seagrass beds within the flat wake zone would not be subjected to PWC
full-throttle impacts. However, PWC use in areas providing essential
fish habitats could disrupt normal feeding and other critical life
functions of fish and shellfish species and could adversely affect
suitability of these areas to meet life cycle requirements. Adverse
impacts to fish and shellfish and their habitat from PWC-generated
sediment resuspension and emissions may occur in these areas.
Reinstating PWC use in park waters with the establishment of a PWC flat
wake zone would have fewer adverse impacts than alternative A. The
proposed regulation is expected to have short-term, minor, direct and
indirect adverse impacts to aquatic wildlife species and habitats.
The extended flat wake zoning under the proposed regulation would
minimize impacts from PWC activity to terrestrial wildlife species by
restricting speed near shoreline habitat areas and thus limiting the
potential for disturbance from noise and rapid approach by personal
watercraft. Impacts to terrestrial mammals from PWC use would be
negligible due to both the infrequent use of shoreline areas by these
species and the extension of flat wake zoning.
Prior established seasonal closures of areas around avian nesting
sites in conjunction with increased flat wake zoning under the proposed
regulation would minimize long-term impacts to nesting individuals.
Adverse impacts to avian species from PWC noise and activity within the
national seashore would be negligible to minor from short-term
disturbance from PWC noise and access to loafing or foraging
shorebirds, wading birds, and other water birds. Osprey would also
experience short-term negligible to minor adverse effects due to the
potential for PWC access to disturb roosting or feeding activities.
Projected increases in PWC use within the national seashore would
result in higher levels of impacts in 2012 relative to 2002.
Under the proposed regulation, flat wake zoning prescriptions would
minimize impacts to shoreline wildlife within the national seashore.
Reinstating PWC use in park waters while establishing a flat wake zone
is expected to have short-term, minor, direct and indirect adverse
impacts to aquatic wildlife species and habitats. PWC use would
contribute negligible short-term adverse impacts to terrestrial
mammals, and negligible to minor mostly short-term adverse impacts to
avian species with primary habitat located in shoreline areas.
Cumulative impacts to aquatic and avian wildlife associated with
all types of motorized vessel use are expected to be short-term, minor,
direct and indirect, and adverse. There would be a slight potential for
some long-term impacts to avian species if nesting individuals are
disturbed to an extent that would cause individuals to relocate.
Cumulative impacts to terrestrial wildlife would be negligible to minor
and short term.
Impacts in 2012 would likely be higher relative to 2002 levels due
to the projected increase in PWC and other motorized watercraft use
within the national seashore.
Implementation of the proposed regulation would not result in
impairment to aquatic or terrestrial wildlife or wildlife habitat.
Threatened, Endangered, or Special Concern Species
The same issues described for PWC use and general wildlife also
pertain to special status 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. In addition to wildlife,
threatened, endangered, or special concern plant species are also at
risk from disturbance related to PWC use. Special status species at the
national seashore include federally listed threatened, endangered, or
candidate species. Additionally, some species at Gulf Islands National
Seashore are designated by the States of Florida and/or Mississippi as
threatened, endangered, or special concern species.
Under the proposed regulation, based on alternative B of the
Environmental Assessment, PWC use would occur as under alternative A,
with additional management prescriptions. A flat wake zone would be
established 300 yards from all park shorelines, with the exception of
the West Ship Island Pier, where a flat wake zone would extend 0.5 mile
from the shoreline and 0.5 mile from either side of the pier. A flat
wake zone would also be established 0.5 mile from the shorelines around
all designated wilderness boundaries and no PWC operation would be
permitted within 200 feet of non-motorized watercraft and people in the
water.
The extended flat wake zoning under the proposed regulation would
minimize impacts from PWC activity to threatened and endangered species
by restricting speed near shoreline habitat areas and thus limiting the
potential for disturbance from noise and rapid approach by personal
watercraft.
Potential impacts to special status species from PWC use within the
national seashore under the proposed regulation are as follows.
Aquatic Species. PWC use may affect, but is not likely to adversely
affect, the Florida manatee, Atlantic green, Kemp's ridley, Atlantic
loggerhead, and alligator snapping sea turtles through collisions and
noise impacts. The 300-yard PWC flat wake zone would encompass much of
the shallow seagrass habitats in the Perdido Key area and north of
Santa Rosa Island in the Florida District, and in Mississippi Sound in
the Mississippi District where manatees and turtles may occur, thereby
minimizing the chance of collisions.
The Gulf sturgeon and its designated critical habitat may be
affected but are not likely to be adversely affected by PWC noise and
water quality impacts, because much of this habitat in the national
seashore occurs within the 300-yard PWC flat wake zone. PWC use may
affect, but is unlikely to adversely affect, the State listed saltmarsh
topminnow. The PWC flat wake zone restriction would eliminate full-
throttle PWC use in the salt marsh and shoreline habitats of the
national seashore where this fish occurs.
Terrestrial Species. Direct adverse impacts from personal
watercraft to the Perdido Key beach mouse and the Santa Rosa beach
mouse would be unlikely due to the nocturnal nature of both species and
the general avoidance of
[[Page 12995]]
human activity. Closures of sensitive dune ecosystems as stated in the
Gulf Islands National Seashore Superintendent's Compendium would
minimize the potential for indirect effects related to PWC access and
resultant visitor activity in habitat areas. PWC use under the proposed
regulation may affect the Perdido Key and Santa Rosa species of beach
mouse, but adverse effects to the species would be unlikely.
The gopher tortoise could be potentially affected by disturbance to
individuals or habitat from people with shoreline access, including PWC
users. Within the national seashore, the gopher tortoise is known
mainly to occur in inland locations, away from areas of PWC access, and
is unlikely to be adversely affected by PWC use.
Avian Species. Flat wake zoning of personal watercraft within at
least 300 yards of shoreline areas would minimize adverse impacts from
PWC noise and physical disturbance to the federally or State listed
bird species in both the Florida and Mississippi districts of the
national seashore. Minor effects from PWC use to special status bird
species may occur under the proposed regulation. As in other
alternatives, seasonal closures of important nesting sites for
shoreline birds reduce the potential for impacts to nesting
individuals. Under the proposed regulation, the slower speeds and
decreased noise from personal watercraft that would result from
implementation of flat wake zoning in shoreline areas, would preclude
adverse effects from PWC use within the national seashore to the bald
eagle, piping plover, American peregrine falcon, brown pelican,
southeastern snowy plover, least tern, southeastern American kestrel,
black skimmer, reddish egret, snowy egret, and little blue heron. Any
effects that would occur from PWC use would be short-term in nature and
would likely result in temporary flight responses by loafing or
foraging individuals.
Special Status Plants. The additional management prescriptions
under the proposed regulation would not affect the accessibility of
shoreline areas or reduce the potential for PWC users to disembark and
explore the islands, potentially impacting special status plant
species.
The affinity of the white-top pitcher plant for bogs and other wet
environments precludes impacts from typical recreational exploration
and trampling within either the Florida or Mississippi district of the
national seashore. No effects to this species are expected to result
from PWC access within the national seashore.
Within the national seashore, populations of Cruise's golden aster
and Godfrey's golden aster that occur in dune communities would be the
most susceptible to trampling by visitors with PWC access to the
shoreline. Closures of sensitive dune communities to foot traffic as
mandated by the Superintendent's Compendium would serve as a measure of
protection for both Cruise's and Godfrey's golden asters from PWC user
access. PWC use within the national seashore may affect, but is
unlikely to adversely affect Cruise's golden aster and Godfrey's golden
aster.
Visitors who gain access by personal watercraft and explore areas
away from the shoreline may affect Curtiss' sandgrass. Adverse impacts
are unlikely as it is not present in the open shoreline areas of the
shoreline where visitor exploration and access is likely to occur.
Large-leaved jointweed may be affected but is unlikely to be
adversely affected by PWC activity within the national seashore due to
the isolated occurrence of the species in locations away from open
shoreline areas where personal watercraft would be likely to land and
to its location in the Naval Live Oaks area where PWC use would be low.
Conclusion. Reinstating PWC use within the national seashore and
establishing a PWC flat wake zone would minimize the likelihood of
adverse effects on threatened or endangered species in the national
seashore boundaries from PWC use. PWC use may affect, but would be
unlikely to adversely affect, any federally or State-listed species. In
combination with prior mandated closures of sensitive habitat areas,
the extension of flat wake zoning to a minimum of 300 yards from the
shoreline under the proposed regulation would serve as a measure of
protection against impacts from PWC use to terrestrial and avian
special status species. PWC use would have no effect on the white-top
pitcher plant.
Cumulative impacts to special status species from non-PWC sources
would be the same as under alternative A. PWC use would contribute
slightly to cumulative effects, but PWC or other visitor use and
activities would not be likely to cause adverse impacts to special
status species within the national seashore.
Implementation of the proposed regulation would not result in an
impairment of threatened or endangered species.
Visitor Use and Experience
Some research suggests that PWC use is viewed by some segments of
the public as a nuisance due to their noise, speed, and overall
environmental effects, while others believe personal watercraft are no
different from other watercraft and that people have a right to enjoy
the sport. The primary concern involves changes in noise, pitch, and
volume due to the way personal watercraft are operated. Additionally,
the sound of any watercraft can carry for long distances, especially on
a calm day.
Under the proposed regulation, based on alternative B of the
Environmental Assessment, PWC use would be reinstated as described
under alternative A, with additional management prescriptions. A flat
wake zone would be established 300 yards from all park shorelines, with
the exception of the West Ship Island Pier, where a flat wake zone
would extend 0.5 mile from the shoreline and 0.5 mile from either side
of the pier. A flat wake zone would also be established 0.5 mile from
the shorelines around all designated wilderness boundaries and no PWC
operation would be permitted within 200 feet of non-motorized
watercraft and people in the water.
Impact on PWC Users. Under the proposed regulation, PWC use would
be reinstated and all of the national seashore waters would be
accessible to PWC use except where restricted. Implementation of the
above mentioned flat wake areas would prohibit high speed maneuvering
in these areas, but this type of activity would still be allowed
outside of the flat wake areas within park waters. Compared to the
baseline of no PWC use in the national seashore, the proposed
regulation would have beneficial impacts on PWC users, because they
would be allowed to recreate with a personal watercraft in the national
seashore. However, implementation of the restrictions included in the
proposed regulation would have negligible adverse impacts on the
visitor experience of PWC users, because their access would be more
limited.
Impact on Other Boaters. The majority of motorized boating in the
Florida District occurs in Gulf waters on the south side of the islands
(4,500 compared to 500 in non-Gulf waters in 2002). However, PWC favor
the bay and sound areas, where waters are calm (2 PWC in Gulf waters
compared to 37 in non-Gulf waters in 2002). The PWC restrictions
defined by Escambia County, Florida, would also apply under alternative
B, benefiting boaters in this area.
[[Page 12996]]
PWC are more prevalent and more evenly distributed in the
Mississippi District (a total of 161 PWC in Mississippi in 2002).
Conversely, far fewer boaters visit the Mississippi District (1,607 in
Mississippi compared to 5,000 in Florida in 2002). East and West Ship
islands experience the heaviest visitor use and boaters there would
likely experience the biggest impacts. PWC concentrate in areas that
boaters also prefer, usually on the east and west ends of the islands,
around the West Ship Island Pier, and the north side of Spoil Island.
Under the proposed regulation, PWC would be prohibited within 200
feet of non-motorized watercraft and people in the water. The
additional flat wake restrictions included the proposed regulation
would also benefit motorized boaters in both districts, because they
would likely share the same waters as PWC users. Therefore, impacts to
motorized boaters would be long-term and adverse due to an increase in
the number of vessels operating in the same space, but negligible to
minor.
Personal watercraft would be operating in park waters along with
non-motorized watercraft users. However, PWC would be prohibited from
areas 200 feet from the old fishing pier and 200 feet from the new
fishing pier at Fort Pickens. In addition, a flat wake zone would be
established 300 yards from all park shorelines, except at the West Ship
Island Pier, where the flat wake zone would extend 0.5 mile from the
shoreline and either side of the pier. The flat wake zone would also
extend 0.5 mile from the shoreline around all wilderness boundaries.
PWC would also be prohibited within 200 feet of non-motorized
watercraft. The proposed canoe trail along the north side of Perdido
Key would provide a non-motorized boat route for canoeists and kayakers
to enjoy. The canoe trail would be within the flat wake zone
established 300 yards from the shoreline, providing beneficial impacts
to these non-motorized boaters. In addition, park staff have received
no documented complaints from non-motorized boaters concerning PWC use,
and few canoeists and kayakers visit the park. Therefore, impacts to
non-motorized watercraft under the proposed regulation would be long-
term, adverse, and negligible to minor.
Impact on Other Visitors. Swimmers, anglers, campers, hikers, and
other shoreline visitors to the national seashore would have contact
with personal watercraft users. Shoreline areas that are popular with
both personal watercraft and other shoreline users include the north
sides of the Mississippi islands and the Perdido Key area.
Swimmers. High-density beach use occurs on Rosamond Johnson Beach
at Perdido Key, Opal Beach in the Santa Rosa area, Langdon Beach at
Fort Pickens, and West Ship Island. PWC use in the Florida District
would likely be concentrated in the Perdido Key area primarily on the
bay, or north side of the key. However, few PWC traversed the south, or
Gulf shoreline, reducing the amount of adverse impacts to the Rosamond
Johnson Beach (in Perdido Key), as well as Opal and Langdon Beach,
where PWC use was less frequent. The proposed regulation would further
restrict PWC use by establishing a flat wake zone 300 yards from all
park shorelines, which would benefit swimmers at all swim beaches. The
proposed regulation would also prohibit PWC use within 200 feet of
people in the water. For these reasons, impacts from PWC use in the
Florida District would likely be long-term, adverse, and minor.
Most PWC use in the Mississippi District would likely occur as
recreational riding on the north side of the islands, as before the
ban. PWC use would be concentrated on the east and west ends of the
Mississippi islands and around the West Ship Island Pier. West Ship
Island experiences most of the high-density beach use in the
Mississippi District. However, swimming is prohibited within 200 feet
of the West Ship Island Pier, and under the proposed regulation a flat
wake zone would be established 0.5 mile from the shoreline and either
side of the pier, minimizing some impacts to beach users in the area.
Therefore, impacts to swimmers from PWC use in this area of West Ship
Island would likely be long-term, adverse, and minor. In addition, a
flat wake zone would also be established 0.5 mile from the shorelines
around the wilderness areas of Horn and Petit Boise islands, limiting
impacts to swimmers and beach users on these islands. The lakes, ponds,
lagoons, and inlets of the islands in the Mississippi District would be
closed to motorized vessels. These restrictions, coupled with lower
visitation at the islands of Cat, East Ship, Horn, and Petit Bois,
would likely result in long-term, adverse, negligible to minor impacts
to swimmers in the Mississippi District.
For the reasons stated above, overall impacts to swimmers in both
the Florida and Mississippi districts would be long-term, adverse, and
minor.
Divers. Diving and snorkeling are common near Fort Pickens and the
sea grass beds north of Santa Rosa Island, which are both in the
Florida District. PWC prefer the calm waters of Santa Rosa Sound, which
is north of the island, so divers there would be adversely impacted.
Diving and PWC use are both prohibited within 200 feet of the Fort
Pickens piers. However, snorkelers would benefit from the restriction
described under the proposed regulation limiting PWC use to flat wakes
300 yards from all park shorelines. In addition, the proposed
regulation would further prohibit PWC operation within 200 feet of
people in the water, which would benefit both snorkelers and divers.
For these reasons, impacts to divers and snorkelers would be long-term
and adverse, but negligible due to the distribution of PWC, the
additional restrictions imposed under the proposed regulation, and the
small number of PWC users and divers that visit the park.
Anglers. Impacts to anglers would be similar to those described
under alternative A of the Environmental Assessment. The same
restrictions would apply to the lagoons of Perdido Key and the fishing
piers at Fort Pickens. However, the proposed regulation calls for an
additional flat wake zone 300 yards from all park shorelines. In
addition, a flat wake zone would extend 0.5 mile from the shoreline and
either side of the pier at West Ship Island, and a 0.5-mile flat wake
zone would be established around the wilderness islands of Horn and
Petit Bois. Although the additional flat wake restrictions would
benefit anglers in all areas of the park, impacts would likely be long-
term and adverse, but negligible due to additional PWC restrictions.
Campers and Hikers. Impacts to campers and hikers would be similar
to those described under alternative A of the Environmental Assessment,
particularly in the Florida District since most of the restrictions
under the proposed regulation would apply to the Mississippi District.
However, the proposed regulation calls for establishment of a flat wake
zone 300 yards from all park shorelines, which would benefit all
campers and hikers at the park. PWC use at Horn and Petit Bois islands
in the Mississippi District would be restricted to flat wake speed 0.5
mile from the shoreline, which would benefit users of these wilderness
areas. PWC operation would be limited to daylight hours in both
districts, when campers may be participating in other activities.
PWC use would have long-term, negligible to minor, adverse impacts
on the experience of all camping and hiking visitors due to the
additional restrictions described under the proposed regulation.
[[Page 129