General Management Plan/Wilderness Study/Off-Road Vehicle Management Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Big Cypress National Preserve Addition, Florida, 71730-71731 [2010-29769]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
71730
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 24, 2010 / Notices
Director’s Order Number 2 (Park
Planning) and Director’s Order Number
12 (Conservation Planning,
Environmental Impact Analysis, and
Decision-making) the NPS announces
the availability of the ROD for the GMP/
FEIS for the Tuskegee Airmen National
Historic Site, Tuskegee, Alabama. On
August 11, 2010, the Regional Director,
NPS, Southeast Region, approved the
ROD for the project. The ROD includes
a description of the project’s
background, a decision statement,
synopses of other alternatives
considered, the basis for the final
decision, findings on impairment of the
site’s resources and values, a
description of the environmentally
preferable alternative, and an overview
of public and agency involvement in the
planning process.
DATES: The ROD was signed by the
Regional Director, NPS, Southeast
Region, on August 11, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the ROD are
available by contacting the Park
Superintendent at the Tuskegee Airmen
National Historic Site (NHS), 1616
Chappie James Avenue, Tuskegee,
Alabama 36083; telephone: 334–727–
6390.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Five
alternatives were evaluated in the EIS.
Alternative A, the no-action alternative,
described current management of the
site and served as a basis for comparison
in evaluating the other alternatives.
Alternative B emphasized the natural
environment by keeping Tuskegee
Airmen NHS largely undeveloped and
natural in character outside of the core
historic area. Alternative C aims to
restore much of the Park to its historic
1945 appearance. Alternative D is the
selected alternative. It preserves and
protects cultural resources and the core
historic area while offering the most
diversity of visitor interpretive
programs, natural areas, and
recreational opportunities. Alternative E
preserved the core historic area and
offered the most recreational
opportunities.
Among the five alternatives
considered, the selected alternative best
protects the diversity of Park resources
while also maintaining a range of
quality visitor experiences, meets NPS
purposes and goals for the Tuskegee
Airmen NHS, and meets National
Environmental Policy Act goals. The
selected alternative will not result in the
impairment of Park resources and will
allow the NPS to conserve Park
resources and provide for their
enjoyment by visitors.
Authority : The authority for publishing
this notice is 40 CFR. 1506.6.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:30 Nov 23, 2010
Jkt 223001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Contact the Superintendent, Tuskegee
Airmen NHS, at the address and
telephone number shown above. An
electronic copy of the ROD is available
on the Internet at https://
parkplanning.nps.gov.
The responsible official for this ROD
is the Regional Director, Southeast
Region, NPS, 100 Alabama Street, SW.,
1924 Building, Atlanta, Georgia 30303.
Dated: September 20, 2010.
David Vela,
Regional Director, Southeast Region.
[FR Doc. 2010–29539 Filed 11–23–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–KB–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[2031–A046–409]
General Management Plan/Wilderness
Study/Off-Road Vehicle Management
Plan, Final Environmental Impact
Statement, Big Cypress National
Preserve Addition, Florida
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice of Availability of the
Final Environmental Impact Statement
for the General Management Plan/
Wilderness Study/Off-Road Vehicle
Management Plan (FEIS/GMP/WS/ORV
Plan), Big Cypress National Preserve
(Preserve) Addition.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and
National Park Service (NPS) policy in
Director’s Order Number 2 (Park
Planning) and Director’s Order Number
12 (Conservation Planning,
Environmental Impact Analysis, and
Decision-making), the NPS announces
the availability of a Final Environmental
Impact Statement for the GMP/WS/ORV
Plan for the Big Cypress National
Preserve Addition, Florida.
The 1991 GMP for the original
Preserve contains no guidance for the
approximately 147,000 acres added to
the Preserve in 1988 by Public Law 100–
301 (the Addition). A GMP is needed to
clearly define resource conditions and
visitor experiences to be achieved in the
Addition.
DATES: The National Park Service will
execute a Record of Decision (ROD) no
sooner than 30 days following
publication by the Environmental
Protection Agency of the Notice of
Availability of the Final Environmental
Impact Statement.
ADDRESSES: The document will be
available for public review online at
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
https://www.parkplanning.nps.gov/bicy.
In addition, a limited number of CDs
and hard copies will be made available
at Preserve headquarters. You may also
request a hard copy or CD by contacting
Big Cypress National Preserve, 33100
Tamiami Trail East, Ochopee, Florida
34141–1000; telephone 239–695–1103.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public
scoping was initiated in the summer of
2001. Public meetings and seven
newsletters were used to keep the
public informed and involved
throughout the planning process for the
Addition. The Draft GMP/WS/ORV
Plan/EIS was distributed to other
agencies, interested organizations, and
individuals for their review and
comment during the summer of 2009.
Four public meetings and wilderness
hearings were held.
The draft document was revised as a
result of public and agency feedback
received during the public comment
period. The Final GMP/WS/ORV Plan/
EIS provides a framework for
management, use, and development
options for the Addition by the NPS for
the next 15 to 20 years. It describes four
management alternatives for
consideration, including a no-action
alternative that continues the current
management framework. The three
action alternatives present a range of
ORV opportunities, proposed
wilderness, and visitor facilities. The
document analyzes the environmental
impacts of the alternatives.
The four alternatives (with names as
they appear in the document) are as
follows:
Alternative A: No-Action
Alternative—the continuation of current
management practices and trends. The
enabling legislation would be the longterm document to guide management
and development of the Preserve.
Alternative B: The concept for
management under alternative B would
be to enable visitor participation in a
wide variety of outdoor recreational
experiences. It would nearly maximize
motorized access to sustainable trails
(up to 132 miles of motorized trails),
provide the least amount of proposed
wilderness (about 37,567 acres), and
develop limited new hiking-only trails.
The entire off-road vehicle (ORV) trail
system would be implemented without
phased establishment and the
assessment of monitoring results. New
visitor and operations facilities along
the I–75 corridor would also be
provided.
Preferred Alternative: The preferred
alternative would provide diverse
frontcountry and backcountry
recreational opportunities, enhance day
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 24, 2010 / Notices
use and interpretive opportunities along
road corridors, and enhance recreational
opportunities with new facilities and
services. This alternative would provide
substantial ORV access to sustainable
trails (approximately 130 miles of
motorized trails), provide a moderate
amount of proposed wilderness (about
47,067 acres), provide nonmotorized
trail opportunities and new camping
opportunities, and develop a
partnership approach to visitor
orientation. Implementation of the ORV
trail system would be phased to ensure
protection of sensitive species and the
environment. Areas found to be eligible
for wilderness designation but not
proposed as wilderness would be
protected through management zoning
that would maintain and protect natural
values. New visitor and operations
facilities along the I–75 corridor would
also be provided.
Alternative F: Alternative F would
emphasize resource preservation,
restoration, and research while
providing recreational opportunities
with limited facilities and support. This
alternative would provide the maximum
amount of wilderness (about 71,260
acres), no ORV use, and minimal new
facilities for visitor contact along I–75.
Authority: The authority for publishing
this notice is 40 CFR 1506.6.
Big
Cypress National Preserve at the address
and telephone number shown above.
The responsible official for this Final
EIS is the Regional Director, Southeast
Region, NPS, 100 Alabama Street, SW.,
1924 Building, Atlanta, Georgia 30303.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dated: November 18, 2010.
Gayle Hazelwood,
Acting Regional Director, Southeast Region,
National Park Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–29769 Filed 11–22–10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310–V6–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
National Park Service
Notice of Availability of the Record of
Decision for the Harvest of GlaucousWinged Gull Eggs by Huna Tlingit in
Glacier Bay National Park and
Preserve Legislative Environmental
Impact Statement
National Park Service, Interior.
Notice of availability of the
Record of Decision for the Harvest of
Glaucous-Winged Gull Eggs by Huna
Tlingit in Glacier Bay National Park and
Preserve Legislative Environmental
Impact Statement.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:30 Nov 23, 2010
Jkt 223001
The National Park Service
(NPS) announces the availability of the
Record of Decision (ROD) for the
Legislative Environmental Impact
Statement (LEIS) on the Harvest of
Glaucous-Winged Gull Eggs by Huna
Tlingit in Glacier Bay National Park and
Preserve.
The Record of Decision (ROD)
documents the NPS determination that
harvest of glaucous-winged gull eggs
could be authorized in Glacier Bay
National Park without impairing the
biological sustainability of the Park’s
glaucous-winged gull population or
impacting other Park purposes and
values. Implementation of the decision
would require promulgation of public
law and regulations, revising Title 36 of
the Code of Federal Regulations.
Section 4 of the Glacier Bay National
Park Resource Management Act of 2000
(Pub. L. 106–455) directed the NPS to
‘‘* * * undertake a study of sea gulls
living within the park to assess whether
sea gull eggs can be collected on a
limited basis without impairing the
biological sustainability of the sea gull
population in the park.’’ The legislation
also states that if the study determines
collection could occur without
impairing the biological sustainability of
the gull population in the park, ‘‘ * * *
the Secretary shall submit
recommendations for legislation * * *’’
to the House and Senate authorizing
committees.
The ROD documents the NPS
selection of Alternative 3 (Two Annual
Harvest Visits to Five Locations) based
on consideration of the Park’s purposes
and mission, NPS policies, resource
information and values analyzed in the
Final Legislative Environmental Impact
Statement (FLEIS), and comments
received throughout the LEIS process.
The FLEIS analysis determined this
alternative would not adversely impact
Park purposes and resources.
Disturbance to nesting gulls is expected
to be minimal. The FLEIS analysis
concluded that these effects would be
minor and would not affect
sustainability of gull populations in the
Park.
The basis for the decision stems from
Park objectives and purposes and the
need to respond to Section 4 of Public
Law 106–455. Specifically, the decision
was based on the following objectives:
• Provide for a limited gull egg harvest
in the Park by tribal members of the
Hoonah Indian Association (HIA)
• Not impair the biological
sustainability of the Park’s glaucouswinged gull population
• Protect Park resources and values
The ROD briefly discusses the
background of the project, states the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71731
decision and discusses its basis,
identifies mitigating measures,
summarizes public involvement,
describes other alternatives considered,
specifies the environmentally preferable
alternative, provides a non-impairment
determination, and provides a
conclusion.
ADDRESSES: The ROD can be found
online at the NPS Planning,
Environment and Public Comment Web
site at https://parkplanning.nps.gov/
index.cfm. Copies of the ROD are
available on request from: Wayne
Howell, Glacier Bay National Park and
Preserve, Box 140, Gustavus, Alaska
99826. Telephone: (907) 697–2662.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Wayne Howell, Glacier Bay National
Park and Preserve, Box 140, Gustavus,
Alaska 99826. Telephone: (907) 697–
2662.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NPS
prepared an EIS, as required, under the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) of 1969 and Council of
Environmental Quality regulations (40
CFR Parts 1500–1508). A Notice of
Intent to prepare an environmental
impact statement, published in the
Federal Register on September 18, 2006
(71 FR 54687), formally initiated the
NPS planning and EIS effort. A Draft EIS
was issued on December 19, 2008 (73
FR 77837) with a 77-day public
comment period. A Federal Register
notice announcing the availability of the
Final EIS was published on May 26,
2010 (75 FR 29574), commencing the
required 30-day no-action period (71 FR
3290). The Final EIS described and
analyzed the environmental impacts of
two action alternatives and a no-action
alternative.
The ROD describes how the selected
Alternative (Alternative 3—Two Annual
Harvest Visits to Five Locations) could
be implemented upon enactment of
legislation to authorize the annual
harvest of glaucous-winged gull eggs at
up to five designated locations in
Glacier Bay National Park on two
separate dates by members of the Huna
Indian Association (HIA). Legislative
proposals from the NPS are subject to
review by the Department of the Interior
and the Executive Office of the
President before transmittal to Congress
can be approved. Thus, a legislative
proposal is not included in the Record
of Decision. If legislation authorizing
the annual harvest of glaucous-winged
gull eggs is enacted, each year the NPS
and the HIA would prepare a harvest
plan to identify sites open to harvest
based on annual monitoring and harvest
history. A first harvest visit could occur
at each of the open sites on or before the
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 24, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71730-71731]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29769]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[2031-A046-409]
General Management Plan/Wilderness Study/Off-Road Vehicle
Management Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Big Cypress
National Preserve Addition, Florida
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact
Statement for the General Management Plan/Wilderness Study/Off-Road
Vehicle Management Plan (FEIS/GMP/WS/ORV Plan), Big Cypress National
Preserve (Preserve) Addition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C) of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 and National Park Service (NPS) policy in Director's
Order Number 2 (Park Planning) and Director's Order Number 12
(Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision-
making), the NPS announces the availability of a Final Environmental
Impact Statement for the GMP/WS/ORV Plan for the Big Cypress National
Preserve Addition, Florida.
The 1991 GMP for the original Preserve contains no guidance for the
approximately 147,000 acres added to the Preserve in 1988 by Public Law
100-301 (the Addition). A GMP is needed to clearly define resource
conditions and visitor experiences to be achieved in the Addition.
DATES: The National Park Service will execute a Record of Decision
(ROD) no sooner than 30 days following publication by the Environmental
Protection Agency of the Notice of Availability of the Final
Environmental Impact Statement.
ADDRESSES: The document will be available for public review online at
https://www.parkplanning.nps.gov/bicy. In addition, a limited number of
CDs and hard copies will be made available at Preserve headquarters.
You may also request a hard copy or CD by contacting Big Cypress
National Preserve, 33100 Tamiami Trail East, Ochopee, Florida 34141-
1000; telephone 239-695-1103.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public scoping was initiated in the summer
of 2001. Public meetings and seven newsletters were used to keep the
public informed and involved throughout the planning process for the
Addition. The Draft GMP/WS/ORV Plan/EIS was distributed to other
agencies, interested organizations, and individuals for their review
and comment during the summer of 2009. Four public meetings and
wilderness hearings were held.
The draft document was revised as a result of public and agency
feedback received during the public comment period. The Final GMP/WS/
ORV Plan/EIS provides a framework for management, use, and development
options for the Addition by the NPS for the next 15 to 20 years. It
describes four management alternatives for consideration, including a
no-action alternative that continues the current management framework.
The three action alternatives present a range of ORV opportunities,
proposed wilderness, and visitor facilities. The document analyzes the
environmental impacts of the alternatives.
The four alternatives (with names as they appear in the document)
are as follows:
Alternative A: No-Action Alternative--the continuation of current
management practices and trends. The enabling legislation would be the
long-term document to guide management and development of the Preserve.
Alternative B: The concept for management under alternative B would
be to enable visitor participation in a wide variety of outdoor
recreational experiences. It would nearly maximize motorized access to
sustainable trails (up to 132 miles of motorized trails), provide the
least amount of proposed wilderness (about 37,567 acres), and develop
limited new hiking-only trails. The entire off-road vehicle (ORV) trail
system would be implemented without phased establishment and the
assessment of monitoring results. New visitor and operations facilities
along the I-75 corridor would also be provided.
Preferred Alternative: The preferred alternative would provide
diverse frontcountry and backcountry recreational opportunities,
enhance day
[[Page 71731]]
use and interpretive opportunities along road corridors, and enhance
recreational opportunities with new facilities and services. This
alternative would provide substantial ORV access to sustainable trails
(approximately 130 miles of motorized trails), provide a moderate
amount of proposed wilderness (about 47,067 acres), provide
nonmotorized trail opportunities and new camping opportunities, and
develop a partnership approach to visitor orientation. Implementation
of the ORV trail system would be phased to ensure protection of
sensitive species and the environment. Areas found to be eligible for
wilderness designation but not proposed as wilderness would be
protected through management zoning that would maintain and protect
natural values. New visitor and operations facilities along the I-75
corridor would also be provided.
Alternative F: Alternative F would emphasize resource preservation,
restoration, and research while providing recreational opportunities
with limited facilities and support. This alternative would provide the
maximum amount of wilderness (about 71,260 acres), no ORV use, and
minimal new facilities for visitor contact along I-75.
Authority: The authority for publishing this notice is 40 CFR
1506.6.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Big Cypress National Preserve at the
address and telephone number shown above.
The responsible official for this Final EIS is the Regional
Director, Southeast Region, NPS, 100 Alabama Street, SW., 1924
Building, Atlanta, Georgia 30303.
Dated: November 18, 2010.
Gayle Hazelwood,
Acting Regional Director, Southeast Region, National Park Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-29769 Filed 11-22-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-V6-P
