Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Restoration of Native Species in High Elevation Aquatic Ecosystems Plan, Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, California, 60309-60311 [2013-23642]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 1, 2013 / Notices personal identifying information—may be made available to the public at any time. While you may ask us to withhold your personal identifying information from public disclosure, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Dated: September 25, 2013. Stephen M. Ricks, Field Supervisor, Jackson, Mississippi, Field Office, Southeast Region. [FR Doc. 2013–23871 Filed 9–30–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLAK910000–L13100000.PP0000– LXSIARAC0000] Notice of Public Meeting, BLM-Alaska Resource Advisory Council Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State Office, Interior. ACTION: Notice of public meeting. AGENCY: In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Alaska Resource Advisory Council (RAC) will meet as indicated below. DATES: The meeting will be held October 29–30, 2013 at the Office of Aviation Services located at 4405 Lear Court, Anchorage, Alaska 99502–1032. The meeting starts at 9 a.m. each day in training room #109. The council will accept comments from the public on Tuesday, October 29 from 3–4 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thom Jennings, RAC Coordinator, BLMAlaska State Office, 222 W. 7th Avenue #13, Anchorage, AK 99513. Telephone 907–271–3335 or 907–271–3322 or email tjenning@blm.gov. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1– 800–877–8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 15member Council advises the Secretary of the Interior, through the Bureau of Land Management, on a variety of planning and management issues associated with public land management in Alaska. At this meeting, topics planned for discussion include: • Land Use Planning. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Sep 30, 2013 Jkt 232001 • Integrated Arctic Management and Scenario Planning. • New Placer Mining Policies. • Update on Land Transfer Program. • Update on the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. • Other topics of interest to the RAC. All meetings are open to the public. During the public comment period, depending on the number of people wishing to comment and time available, time for individual oral comments may be limited. Please be prepared to submit written comments if necessary. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation, transportation, or other reasonable accommodations, should contact the BLM RAC Coordinator listed above. Dated: September 24, 2013. Ted A. Murphy, Acting State Director. [FR Doc. 2013–23917 Filed 9–30–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–JA–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 60309 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20240. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chief Realty Officer Glenna Vigil, National Park Service, Land Resources Program Center, Intermountain Region, 12795 West Alameda Parkway, Denver, Colorado 80228, telephone (303) 969– 2610. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 460l-9(c)(1), the boundary of Rocky Mountain National Park is modified to include 31.94 acres of donated land identified as Tract 02–171, tax parcel number 35224–39–901. The land is located in Larimer County, Colorado, immediately adjacent to the current eastern boundary of Rocky Mountain National Park. The boundary revision is depicted on Map No. 121/108,929B dated May 2013. 16 U.S.C. 460l-9(c)(1) provides that, after notifying the House Committee on Natural Resources and the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to make this boundary revision upon publication of notice in the Federal Register. The Committees have been notified of this boundary revision. The inclusion of this land donated by Rocky Mountain National Park Associates, Inc., a nonprofit organization that supports land protection projects at the park, will contribute to the preservation and protection of park and trail resources. National Park Service [NPS–IMR–ROMO–13765; PS.SROMO0001.01.1] Dated: August 22, 2013. John Wessels, Regional Director, Intermountain Region. [FR Doc. 2013–23924 Filed 9–30–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–CB–P Minor Boundary Revision at Rocky Mountain National Park National Park Service, Interior. ACTION: Notification of Boundary Revision. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AGENCY: The boundary of Rocky Mountain National Park is modified to include 31.94 acres of land donated to the United States. The land is located in Larimer County, Colorado, immediately adjacent to the current eastern boundary of Rocky Mountain National Park. DATES: The effective date of this boundary revision is October 1, 2013. ADDRESSES: The map depicting this boundary revision is available for inspection at the following locations: National Park Service, Land Resources Program Center, Intermountain Region, 12795 West Alameda Parkway, Denver, Colorado 80228, and National Park Service, Department of the Interior, SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 National Park Service [NPS–PWR–PWRO–13663; PPPWSEKIO0/ PX.DSEKI1303.00.1] Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Restoration of Native Species in High Elevation Aquatic Ecosystems Plan, Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, California National Park Service, Interior. Notice of availability. AGENCY: ACTION: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and consistent with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the National Park Service (NPS) announces the availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Restoration of Native Species in High Elevation SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\01OCN1.SGM 01OCN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 60310 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 1, 2013 / Notices Aquatic Ecosystems Plan (Restoration Plan/DEIS), Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks (SEKI or parks), California. The Restoration Plan is needed to provide long-term management direction to restore and conserve high elevation aquatic species and ecosystems in the parks. The NPS is considering expanding the current high elevation aquatic ecosystem restoration program within SEKI to encompass additional sites and incorporate alternative treatment methods. The Restoration Plan/DEIS identifies and evaluates the environmental impacts of four alternatives: the no action alternative; and three action alternatives including a preferred alternative. The Final Restoration Plan/ Final EIS would be implemented over a period of 25 to 35 years, with an internal evaluation of management effectiveness scheduled every 5 to 10 years. The NPS is inviting public review of the document to solicit feedback on the proposed alternatives and to hear ideas and concerns for consideration in the Final EIS. DATES: All written comments must be postmarked or transmitted not later than 60 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register of the Environmental Protection Agency’s notice of filing and release of the Draft EIS. Upon confirmation of this date, SEKI will notify all entities on the project mailing list, and announcements about the public review period will be provided on the project Web site http:// parkplanning.nps.gov/seki and distributed via local and regional press media. ADDRESSES: The Restoration Plan/DEIS is available in electronic format online at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/seki and written comments may be submitted directly to this Web site. Written comments may also be submitted by mail, hand delivered, or faxed to: Superintendent, Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, Attn: Aquatic Ecosystems Plan, 47050 Generals Highway, Three Rivers, CA 93271, Fax: 559–565–4202. Email comments will not be accepted. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we would be able to do so. All submissions from VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Sep 30, 2013 Jkt 232001 organizations and businesses, and individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, are made available for public inspection in their entirety. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Please contact the SEKI Office of Environmental Compliance and Planning at (559) 565–3102 to speak with an individual. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of this Restoration Plan/DEIS is to guide management actions by the NPS to restore and conserve native species diversity and ecological function to selected high elevation aquatic ecosystems that have been adversely impacted by human activities, and to increase the resistance and resilience of these species and ecosystems to human induced environmental modifications such as nonnative fish, disease, and unprecedented climate change. The overall goal of the Restoration Plan/ DEIS is to restore clusters of water bodies to a fishless state in strategic locations across SEKI to create high elevation ecosystems having more favorable habitat conditions for the persistency of native species and ecosystem processes. Action is needed at this time: (1) Because nonnative fish have severely reduced native biological diversity and disrupted ecological function; (2) to prevent the extinction of two species of mountain yellow-legged frogs (Rana muscosa and Rana sierrae; MYLF) and to restore MYLF populations to many locations in the parks where they have gone extinct; (3) to enable the NPS to fulfill its mission and policy directives to conserve native animals, plants and processes found in SEKI’s aquatic ecosystems; (4) because large scale restoration of more complex habitat (areas containing large lakes or clusters of many lakes with many and/or large connecting stream sections) is critical for native species and ecosystem recovery; (5) to increase the resistance and resilience of native high elevation aquatic species and ecosystems to human induced environmental change; and, (6) to restore and protect the natural qualities of wilderness character. The Restoration Plan/DEIS identifies and analyzes four alternatives: the no action (Alternative A); Prescription Treatment (Physical and Piscicide) Preceding Restoration (Alternative B, agency-preferred alternative); Physical Treatment Preceding Restoration (Alternative C); and Piscicide Treatment Preceding Restoration (Alternative D). PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Alternative A (no action): This alternative describes current management of high elevation aquatic ecosystems in SEKI and provides a baseline for comparison against the action alternatives. Under Alternative A, the existing high elevation aquatic ecosystem restoration effort for 26 water bodies would be completed (anticipated to conclude in 2016), maintained and monitored, but no new fish eradication activities would be initiated. After all treatments are completed, selfsustaining nonnative trout populations would continue to exist in 549 water bodies and hundreds of miles of stream. Alternatives B, C, and D (action alternatives) describe a range of reasonable and feasible approaches that either partially or fully meet the purpose and need for action and achieve the plan objectives. In addition, there are a number of activities described as common to all actions. These include development of criteria for the selection of basins for restoration; the development of criteria for selection of crew camp locations; ecosystem restoration and management, including protection and rebuilding extant population of MYLFs where opportunities still exist and reintroducing MYLFs to locations where populations have recently gone extinct; monitoring restoration work and ecosystem responses; continuing research; and fish disposal methods. The ‘‘minimum tools’’ necessary for accomplishing treatments in Wilderness are also identified. Under Alternative B, a prescription (detailed plan of action) for restoration would be developed for each proposed restoration area. Physical treatment (gill netting, electrofishing, disturbing redds and/or temporarily covering redds with boulders) would be utilized. Piscicide treatment methods would be considered for water bodies determined infeasible for physical treatment. Based on current knowledge of the proposed fish eradication sites, physical treatment would be applied in 49 water bodies and 14 miles of streams in 15 basins, and piscicide treatment would be applied in 38 water bodies and 27 miles of streams in 11 basins. After all treatments are completed, selfsustaining nonnative trout populations would continue to exist in 462 water bodies and hundreds of miles of stream. Under alternative C, only physical treatment methods would be used to eradicate nonnative fish by gill netting, electrofishing, disturbing and/or covering redds. Also, blasting rock to create vertical fish barriers in stream locations where natural barriers are inadequate to prevent fish movement E:\FR\FM\01OCN1.SGM 01OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 1, 2013 / Notices may be considered. Physical treatment methods would be applied in 49 water bodies and 14 miles of streams. After all treatments are completed, selfsustaining nonnative trout populations would continue to exist in 500 water bodies and hundreds of miles of stream. Alternative D emphasizes speed in recovering habitat because MYLF populations are declining rapidly. To achieve this, only piscicide treatment would be used for nonnative fish eradication. Properly applied, piscicides can eliminate fish from targeted water bodies in 1 to 2 years, in contrast to physical treatment methods which can take up to 6 years for lakes and up to 10 years for streams. Based on current knowledge of the proposed fish eradication sites, piscicide treatment would be used for 87 water bodies, approximately 41 miles of streams, and connecting fish-containing habitat as necessary. After all treatments are completed, self-sustaining nonnative trout populations would continue to exist in 462 water bodies and hundreds of miles of stream. Decision Process: All comments received on the Restoration Plan/DEIS will be duly considered in preparing the Final EIS. The Final EIS is expected to be available in late spring 2014. A Record of Decision would be prepared no sooner than 30 days after release of the Final EIS. Because this is a delegated EIS, the official responsible for approving the final Restoration Plan is the Regional Director, Pacific West Region, National Park Service; subsequently the official responsible for implementation of the approved Restoration Plan is the Superintendent, Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks. Dated: July 31, 2013. Christine S. Lehnertz, Regional Director, Pacific West Region. [FR Doc. 2013–23642 Filed 9–30–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–FF–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES [Investigation Nos. 731–TA–1131, 1132, and 1134 (Review)] Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From Brazil, China, and the United Arab Emirates; Institution of Five-Year Reviews United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: The Commission hereby gives notice that it has instituted reviews SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:45 Sep 30, 2013 Jkt 232001 pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)) (the Act) to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty order on polyethylene terephthalate (‘‘PET’’) film, sheet, and strip from Brazil, China, and the United Arab Emirates would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, interested parties are requested to respond to this notice by submitting the information specified below to the Commission; 1 to be assured of consideration, the deadline for responses is October 31, 2013. Comments on the adequacy of responses may be filed with the Commission by December 16, 2013. For further information concerning the conduct of these reviews and rules of general application, consult the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part 207). DATES: Effective Date: October 1, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Messer (202–205–3193), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearingimpaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 205–1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (http:// www.usitc.gov). The public record for these reviews may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background.—On November 10, 2008, the Department of Commerce issued antidumping duty orders on imports of PET film from Brazil, China, and the United Arab Emirates (73 FR 66595). The Commission is conducting reviews to determine whether revocation of the orders would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to the domestic industry within 1 No response to this request for information is required if a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) number is not displayed; the OMB number is 3117–0016/USITC No. 13–5–296, expiration date June 30, 2014. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to average 15 hours per response. Please send comments regarding the accuracy of this burden estimate to the Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 60311 a reasonably foreseeable time. It will assess the adequacy of interested party responses to this notice of institution to determine whether to conduct full or expedited reviews. The Commission’s determinations in any expedited reviews will be based on the facts available, which may include information provided in response to this notice. Definitions.—The following definitions apply to these reviews: (1) Subject Merchandise is the class or kind of merchandise that is within the scope of the five-year reviews, as defined by the Department of Commerce (‘‘Commerce’’). (2) The Subject Countries in these reviews are Brazil, China, and the United Arab Emirates. (3) The Domestic Like Product is the domestically produced product or products which are like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the Subject Merchandise. In its original determinations, the Commission defined a single Domestic Like Product coextensive with Commerce’s scope. (4) The Domestic Industry is the U.S. producers as a whole of the Domestic Like Product, or those producers whose collective output of the Domestic Like Product constitutes a major proportion of the total domestic production of the product. In its original determinations, the Commission defined a single Domestic Industry consisting of all U.S. producers of the Domestic Like Product, except U.S. producer Terphane. The Commission determined in the original investigations that appropriate circumstances existed to exclude Terphane from the domestic industry as a related party. (5) The Order Date is the date that the antidumping duty orders under review became effective. In these reviews, the Order Date is November 10, 2008. (6) An Importer is any person or firm engaged, either directly or through a parent company or subsidiary, in importing the Subject Merchandise into the United States from a foreign manufacturer or through its selling agent. Participation in the reviews and public service list.—Persons, including industrial users of the Subject Merchandise and, if the merchandise is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations, wishing to participate in the reviews as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in section 201.11(b)(4) of the Commission’s rules, no later than 21 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register. The Secretary will E:\FR\FM\01OCN1.SGM 01OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 190 (Tuesday, October 1, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60309-60311]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23642]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

[NPS-PWR-PWRO-13663; PPPWSEKIO0/PX.DSEKI1303.00.1]


Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Restoration of 
Native Species in High Elevation Aquatic Ecosystems Plan, Sequoia and 
Kings Canyon National Parks, California

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and 
consistent with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the 
National Park Service (NPS) announces the availability of a Draft 
Environmental Impact Statement for the Restoration of Native Species in 
High Elevation

[[Page 60310]]

Aquatic Ecosystems Plan (Restoration Plan/DEIS), Sequoia and Kings 
Canyon National Parks (SEKI or parks), California. The Restoration Plan 
is needed to provide long-term management direction to restore and 
conserve high elevation aquatic species and ecosystems in the parks. 
The NPS is considering expanding the current high elevation aquatic 
ecosystem restoration program within SEKI to encompass additional sites 
and incorporate alternative treatment methods.
    The Restoration Plan/DEIS identifies and evaluates the 
environmental impacts of four alternatives: the no action alternative; 
and three action alternatives including a preferred alternative. The 
Final Restoration Plan/Final EIS would be implemented over a period of 
25 to 35 years, with an internal evaluation of management effectiveness 
scheduled every 5 to 10 years. The NPS is inviting public review of the 
document to solicit feedback on the proposed alternatives and to hear 
ideas and concerns for consideration in the Final EIS.

DATES: All written comments must be postmarked or transmitted not later 
than 60 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register of 
the Environmental Protection Agency's notice of filing and release of 
the Draft EIS. Upon confirmation of this date, SEKI will notify all 
entities on the project mailing list, and announcements about the 
public review period will be provided on the project Web site http://parkplanning.nps.gov/seki and distributed via local and regional press 
media.

ADDRESSES: The Restoration Plan/DEIS is available in electronic format 
online at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/seki and written comments may be 
submitted directly to this Web site. Written comments may also be 
submitted by mail, hand delivered, or faxed to: Superintendent, Sequoia 
and Kings Canyon National Parks, Attn: Aquatic Ecosystems Plan, 47050 
Generals Highway, Three Rivers, CA 93271, Fax: 559-565-4202. Email 
comments will not be accepted.
    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or 
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be 
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying 
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can 
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying 
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we would be 
able to do so. All submissions from organizations and businesses, and 
individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of 
organizations or businesses, are made available for public inspection 
in their entirety.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Please contact the SEKI Office of 
Environmental Compliance and Planning at (559) 565-3102 to speak with 
an individual.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of this Restoration Plan/DEIS is 
to guide management actions by the NPS to restore and conserve native 
species diversity and ecological function to selected high elevation 
aquatic ecosystems that have been adversely impacted by human 
activities, and to increase the resistance and resilience of these 
species and ecosystems to human induced environmental modifications 
such as nonnative fish, disease, and unprecedented climate change. The 
overall goal of the Restoration Plan/DEIS is to restore clusters of 
water bodies to a fishless state in strategic locations across SEKI to 
create high elevation ecosystems having more favorable habitat 
conditions for the persistency of native species and ecosystem 
processes.
    Action is needed at this time: (1) Because nonnative fish have 
severely reduced native biological diversity and disrupted ecological 
function; (2) to prevent the extinction of two species of mountain 
yellow-legged frogs (Rana muscosa and Rana sierrae; MYLF) and to 
restore MYLF populations to many locations in the parks where they have 
gone extinct; (3) to enable the NPS to fulfill its mission and policy 
directives to conserve native animals, plants and processes found in 
SEKI's aquatic ecosystems; (4) because large scale restoration of more 
complex habitat (areas containing large lakes or clusters of many lakes 
with many and/or large connecting stream sections) is critical for 
native species and ecosystem recovery; (5) to increase the resistance 
and resilience of native high elevation aquatic species and ecosystems 
to human induced environmental change; and, (6) to restore and protect 
the natural qualities of wilderness character.
    The Restoration Plan/DEIS identifies and analyzes four 
alternatives: the no action (Alternative A); Prescription Treatment 
(Physical and Piscicide) Preceding Restoration (Alternative B, agency-
preferred alternative); Physical Treatment Preceding Restoration 
(Alternative C); and Piscicide Treatment Preceding Restoration 
(Alternative D).
    Alternative A (no action): This alternative describes current 
management of high elevation aquatic ecosystems in SEKI and provides a 
baseline for comparison against the action alternatives. Under 
Alternative A, the existing high elevation aquatic ecosystem 
restoration effort for 26 water bodies would be completed (anticipated 
to conclude in 2016), maintained and monitored, but no new fish 
eradication activities would be initiated. After all treatments are 
completed, self-sustaining nonnative trout populations would continue 
to exist in 549 water bodies and hundreds of miles of stream.
    Alternatives B, C, and D (action alternatives) describe a range of 
reasonable and feasible approaches that either partially or fully meet 
the purpose and need for action and achieve the plan objectives. In 
addition, there are a number of activities described as common to all 
actions. These include development of criteria for the selection of 
basins for restoration; the development of criteria for selection of 
crew camp locations; ecosystem restoration and management, including 
protection and rebuilding extant population of MYLFs where 
opportunities still exist and reintroducing MYLFs to locations where 
populations have recently gone extinct; monitoring restoration work and 
ecosystem responses; continuing research; and fish disposal methods. 
The ``minimum tools'' necessary for accomplishing treatments in 
Wilderness are also identified.
    Under Alternative B, a prescription (detailed plan of action) for 
restoration would be developed for each proposed restoration area. 
Physical treatment (gill netting, electrofishing, disturbing redds and/
or temporarily covering redds with boulders) would be utilized. 
Piscicide treatment methods would be considered for water bodies 
determined infeasible for physical treatment. Based on current 
knowledge of the proposed fish eradication sites, physical treatment 
would be applied in 49 water bodies and 14 miles of streams in 15 
basins, and piscicide treatment would be applied in 38 water bodies and 
27 miles of streams in 11 basins. After all treatments are completed, 
self-sustaining nonnative trout populations would continue to exist in 
462 water bodies and hundreds of miles of stream.
    Under alternative C, only physical treatment methods would be used 
to eradicate nonnative fish by gill netting, electrofishing, disturbing 
and/or covering redds. Also, blasting rock to create vertical fish 
barriers in stream locations where natural barriers are inadequate to 
prevent fish movement

[[Page 60311]]

may be considered. Physical treatment methods would be applied in 49 
water bodies and 14 miles of streams. After all treatments are 
completed, self-sustaining nonnative trout populations would continue 
to exist in 500 water bodies and hundreds of miles of stream.
    Alternative D emphasizes speed in recovering habitat because MYLF 
populations are declining rapidly. To achieve this, only piscicide 
treatment would be used for nonnative fish eradication. Properly 
applied, piscicides can eliminate fish from targeted water bodies in 1 
to 2 years, in contrast to physical treatment methods which can take up 
to 6 years for lakes and up to 10 years for streams. Based on current 
knowledge of the proposed fish eradication sites, piscicide treatment 
would be used for 87 water bodies, approximately 41 miles of streams, 
and connecting fish-containing habitat as necessary. After all 
treatments are completed, self-sustaining nonnative trout populations 
would continue to exist in 462 water bodies and hundreds of miles of 
stream.
    Decision Process: All comments received on the Restoration Plan/
DEIS will be duly considered in preparing the Final EIS. The Final EIS 
is expected to be available in late spring 2014. A Record of Decision 
would be prepared no sooner than 30 days after release of the Final 
EIS. Because this is a delegated EIS, the official responsible for 
approving the final Restoration Plan is the Regional Director, Pacific 
West Region, National Park Service; subsequently the official 
responsible for implementation of the approved Restoration Plan is the 
Superintendent, Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks.

    Dated: July 31, 2013.
Christine S. Lehnertz,
Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
[FR Doc. 2013-23642 Filed 9-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-FF-P