Special Regulations, Areas of the National Park Service, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, Dog Management, 9139-9151 [2016-03731]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
For the Commission.
Cynthia G. Pierre,
Chief Operating Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016–03530 Filed 2–23–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6570–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
31 CFR Part 1010
RIN 1506–AB23
Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network; Withdrawal of Finding and
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Regarding Liberty Reserve S.A.
Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network (‘‘FinCEN’’), Treasury.
ACTION: Withdrawal of finding and
notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
This document withdraws
FinCEN’s finding that Liberty Reserve
S.A. (‘‘Liberty Reserve’’) is a financial
institution of primary money laundering
concern and the related notice of
proposed rulemaking seeking to impose
the fifth special measure regarding
Liberty Reserve, pursuant to section 311
of the USA PATRIOT Act (‘‘Section
311’’). Because of material subsequent
developments that have mitigated the
money laundering risks associated with
Liberty Reserve, FinCEN has determined
that Liberty Reserve is no longer a
primary money laundering concern that
warrants the implementation of a
special measure under Section 311.
DATES: The finding and notice of
proposed rulemaking are withdrawn as
of February 24, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
FinCEN Resource Center at (800) 767–
2825.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
I. Background
On October 26, 2001, the President
signed into law the Uniting and
Strengthening America by Providing
Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept
and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001,
Public Law 107–56 (the ‘‘USA PATRIOT
Act’’). Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act
amends the anti-money laundering
provisions of the Bank Secrecy Act
(BSA), codified at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12
U.S.C. 1951–1959, and 31 U.S.C. 5311–
5314, 5316–5332, to promote the
prevention, detection, and prosecution
of international money laundering and
the financing of terrorism. Regulations
implementing the BSA appear at 31 CFR
chapter X. The authority of the
Secretary of the Treasury to administer
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
the BSA and its implementing
regulations has been delegated to the
Director of FinCEN.
Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act
(‘‘Section 311’’) grants the Director of
FinCEN the authority, upon finding that
reasonable grounds exist for concluding
that a foreign jurisdiction, foreign
financial institution, class of
transactions, or type of account is of
‘‘primary money laundering concern,’’
to require domestic financial
institutions and financial agencies to
take certain ‘‘special measures’’ to
address the primary money laundering
concern. The special measures
enumerated under Section 311 are
prophylactic safeguards that defend the
U.S. financial system from money
laundering and terrorist financing.
FinCEN may impose one or more of
these special measures in order to
protect the U.S. financial system from
these threats. To that end, special
measures one through four, codified at
31 U.S.C. 5318A(b)(1) through (4),
impose additional recordkeeping,
information collection, and information
reporting requirements on covered U.S.
financial institutions. The fifth special
measure, codified at 31 U.S.C.
5318A(b)(5), allows the Director to
prohibit or impose conditions on the
opening or maintaining of
correspondent or payable-through
accounts for the identified institution by
U.S. financial institutions.
II. The Finding and Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
A. The Finding and Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
Based upon review and analysis of
relevant information, consultations with
relevant Federal agencies and
departments, and after consideration of
the factors enumerated in Section 311,
the Director of FinCEN found that
reasonable grounds existed for
concluding that Liberty Reserve S.A.
(‘‘Liberty Reserve’’) was a financial
institution of primary money laundering
concern. FinCEN published a proposed
rule proposing the imposition of the
fifth special measure on June 6, 2013,
pursuant to the authority under 31
U.S.C. 5318A.1
B. Subsequent Developments
Since FinCEN’s finding and related
NPRM regarding Liberty Reserve,
material facts regarding the
circumstances of the proposed
rulemaking have changed. Liberty
Reserve was a web-based money transfer
system when FinCEN published notice
1 See 78 FR 34008 (June 6, 2013) (RIN 1506–
AB23).
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
9139
of its finding and NPRM on June 6,
2013. The Department of Justice
announced on May 28, 2013 that it had
charged seven of Liberty Reserve’s
principals and employees with moneylaundering, seized five domain names,
including ‘‘LibertyReserve.com,’’ and
seized or restricted the activity of 45
bank accounts related to Liberty
Reserve. In light of these actions, Liberty
Reserve has since ceased to function as
a financial institution.
III. Withdrawal of the Finding and
NPRM
For the reasons set forth above,
FinCEN hereby withdraws its finding
that Liberty Reserve is of primary
money laundering concern and the
related NPRM published on June 6,
2013, seeking to impose the fifth special
measure regarding Liberty Reserve.
Jamal El-Hindi,
Deputy Director, Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network.
[FR Doc. 2016–03830 Filed 2–23–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
36 CFR Part 7
[NPS–GOGA–19691; PX.XGOGA1604.00.1]
RIN 1024–AE16
Special Regulations, Areas of the
National Park Service, Golden Gate
National Recreation Area, Dog
Management
National Park Service, Interior.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The National Park Service
proposes to amend its special
regulations for Golden Gate National
Recreation Area regarding dog walking.
The rule would apply to 22 locations
within the park and would designate
areas within these locations for on-leash
and regulated (i.e., voice and sight
control) off-leash dog walking. Areas in
these 22 locations that are not
designated as open to dogs would be
closed to dogs, except for service
animals in accordance with National
Park Service regulations. The rule
would modify and, in some
circumstances, relax the National Park
System-wide pet regulations for these 22
locations. To the extent not modified by
this rule, dog walking in all NPSmanaged areas within the park would
continue to be regulated under National
Park System-wide pet regulations.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
9140
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Comments must be received by
11:59 EST on April 25, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by the Regulation Identifier
Number (RIN) 1024–AE16, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments
after searching for RIN 1024–AE16.
• Mail or hand deliver to: General
Superintendent, Golden Gate National
Recreation Area, Attn: Dog Management
Proposed Rule, Fort Mason, Building
201, San Francisco, CA 94123.
• Informational Meetings: The NPS
will schedule three (3) informational
meetings on this proposed dog
management rule during the 60-day
public comment period, and provide
public notice of these meetings in
regional newspapers and on the park
Web site at www.nps.gov/goga/
getinvolved/pub_mting_prop_rule.htm.
Information on specific locations, times,
and dates of these informational
meetings will be posted on the same
Web site and sent to those on the park’s
Public Affairs Office mailing list.
Please see the Public Participation
section under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION for more information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Golden Gate National Recreation Area,
Attn: Public Affairs Office (Alexandra
Picavet), Fort Mason, Building 201, San
Francisco, CA, 94123. Phone: (415) 561–
4728. Email: goga_dogmtg@nps.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Public Participation
It is the policy of the Department of
the Interior, whenever practicable, to
afford the public an opportunity to
participate in the rulemaking process.
The NPS initiated the rulemaking
process in 2002 and then convened a
Negotiated Rulemaking Committee in
2006. The committee, which was
comprised of representatives of multiple
stakeholder groups, met over the course
of sixteen months in an effort to reach
consensus on a dog walking rule for
GGNRA. Although the Negotiated
Rulemaking Committee was unable to
reach consensus on all issues, it did
reach consensus on some issues. These
limited areas of consensus and input
gained from committee discussions
were carried forward for analysis as the
park developed the range of alternatives
in the draft Plan/SEIS.
In addition to that effort, and in
accordance with the policy of the
Department of the Interior to afford the
public an opportunity to participate in
the rulemaking process, interested
persons may submit written comments
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
regarding this proposed rule by one of
the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section above
Please note that all submissions
received must include the agency name
and (RIN) 1024–AE16 for this
rulemaking. Comments received will be
posted without change to
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. If you
commented on the Draft Dog
Management Plan/Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement (draft
Plan/SEIS), your comment has been
considered in drafting the proposed
rule. Comments submitted during this
comment period should focus on this
proposed rule, not the draft Plan/SEIS.
For example, the National Park Service
invites comments on the definitions
contained in the proposed rule and the
clarity of the descriptions of areas open
to dog walking; the rules and
restrictions that apply to dog walking
and to Voice and Sight Control areas;
the rules and restrictions that apply to
the permitting program for walking four
to six dogs; and whether commercial
dog walking should be allowed under
the proposed rule. Comments on the
draft Plan/SEIS will be considered
untimely because the comment period
on the draft Plan/SEIS has closed.
Comments will not be accepted by fax,
email, or in any way other than those
specified above, and bulk comments in
any format (hard copy or electronic)
submitted on behalf of others will not be
considered. Organizations should direct
their members to submit comments
individually using one of the methods
described above.
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. Please note that submissions
merely stating support for or opposition
to the action under consideration
without providing supporting
information, although noted, will not be
considered in making a determination.
Please make your comments as specific
as possible and explain the basis for
them.
Background
Authority and Jurisdiction
The National Park Service (NPS)
manages the Golden Gate National
Recreation Area (GGNRA or park) as a
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
unit of the National Park System. Units
of the National Park System are
managed under the statutes commonly
known as the National Park Service
Organic Act of 1916, the General
Authorities Act of 1970, and the
Redwood Amendments of 1978 which
amended the General Authorities Act
(codified at 54 U.S.C. 100101 et. seq.).
As explained in NPS Management
Policies 2006, these interrelated
authorities express the fundamental
purpose of the National Park System
which is to conserve park resources and
values and to provide for visitor
enjoyment of these resources and
values. The mandate to protect park
resources and values is complemented
by a statutory prohibition on the
impairment of park resources and
values. To avoid impairment, park
managers are directed to seek ways to
avoid and minimize adverse impacts on
park resources and values to the greatest
extent practicable. Where there are
conflicts between conserving resources
and values and providing for enjoyment
of them, conservation is to be the
predominant goal. To aid in the
regulation of visitor activities within
units of the National Park System, 54
U.S.C. 100751(a) authorizes the
Secretary of the Interior, acting through
the NPS, to ‘‘prescribe such regulations
as the Secretary considers necessary or
proper for the use and management of
System units.’’
An additional source of legal
authority for the management of
GGNRA derives from the park’s
enabling legislation, which was enacted
in 1972 when Congress created the
GGNRA. The enabling legislation states
that the GGNRA was established ‘‘to
preserve for public use and enjoyment
certain areas of Marin and San
Francisco Counties, California,
possessing outstanding natural, historic,
scenic, and recreational values, and in
order to provide for the maintenance of
needed recreational open space
necessary to urban environment and
planning . . . .’’ (16 U.S.C. 460bb). The
enabling act directs the Secretary of the
Interior, acting through the NPS, to
‘‘utilize the resources in a manner
which will provide for recreation and
educational opportunities consistent
with sound principles of land use
planning and management,’’ and to
‘‘preserve the recreation area, as far as
possible, in its natural setting, and
protect it from development and uses
which would destroy the scenic beauty
and natural character of the area.’’ (16
U.S.C. 460bb).
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Description and Significance of Golden
Gate National Recreation Area
GGNRA is one of the most highlyvisited units of the National Park
System, with over 17.7 million visitors
per year. The park is comprised of
numerous federally-managed sites
interspersed with lands managed by
city, county, state, and regional agencies
as well as private lands. GGNRAmanaged lands include 29.2 miles of
bay and ocean shoreline within three
counties of the San Francisco Bay Area:
San Francisco, Marin, and San Mateo.
The park contains significant historical
and natural resources: 711 historic
structures, including five National
Historic Landmarks and 15 National
Register properties; 47 registered
archeological sites; nine cultural
landscapes, including five lighthouses;
3,968 plant and animal species,
including 37 federally-listed threatened
and endangered species (the 3rd largest
number of federally listed species in the
National Park System); and 19 separate
ecosystems in seven distinct
watersheds. Many of these species were
listed as threatened or endangered well
after the park’s establishment.
Since GGNRA was established in
1972, the amount of land managed by
the NPS has more than doubled as a
result of acquisitions and boundary
expansions. The park boundary now
encompasses approximately 80,000
acres in San Francisco, Marin, and San
Mateo counties. Of that total acreage,
the NPS owns and manages
approximately 18,500 acres.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Dog Walking in Golden Gate National
Recreation Area
Dog walking in some areas of GGNRA
began prior to the establishment of the
park, when dog walking, including offleash dog walking, occurred informally
at sites under the jurisdiction of other
federal, state, or local entities or when
the lands were privately owned. In the
park’s early years, those practices
continued largely uninterrupted, despite
the existence of a National Park Systemwide regulation that prohibited off-leash
dog walking and required all pets to be
on-leash or under physical restrictive
control (36 CFR 2.8, promulgated in
1966) or crated, caged, restrained onleash, or otherwise physically
controlled at all times (36 CFR 2.15,
promulgated in 1983).
In 1978, the GGNRA Citizens’
Advisory Commission, which was
established under the park’s enabling
legislation to coordinate public
involvement for the park, considered
and proposed a pet policy following
input from park staff and the public.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
The policy provided general guidance
on dog walking and recommended
certain locations in the park for on-leash
and off-leash, or ‘‘voice control,’’ dog
walking, and some locations that would
exclude dogs. In 1979, the Commission
recommended the pet policy to the
superintendent for adoption as a
GGNRA-specific policy (later known as
the 1979 Pet Policy). Although the NPS
never promulgated this policy as a
special regulation, for more than 20
years the park operated under it despite
the National Park System-wide
regulation prohibiting off-leash dog
walking.
Since 1979, the San Francisco Bay
Area population and overall use of
GGNRA lands have increased, as have
the number of dog walkers in the park
based on park staff observation, partly
due to the recent growth of the
commercial dog walking industry. At
the same time, the number of dogrelated conflicts between park users
with and without dogs has risen,
including dog bites and attacks, as has
the concern about the effect of
uncontrolled dog behaviors on park
visitor experiences. Resource concerns
have also increased since 1979 as park
staff gained greater knowledge of park
resources and as a result of the listing
of several species with habitat in areas
used by dog walkers as threatened,
endangered, or special-status species.
The NPS has also identified other native
plant and animal species that require
protection under the NPS’s broader
conservation mandate.
A resource protection conflict
between dog use and a listed species
occurred in the late 1990s when the
NPS sought to close 12 acres at Fort
Funston to dogs in order to protect bank
swallows (Riparia riparia), a bird
species listed as threatened by the State
of California in 1989. Fort Funston had
been designated as an off-leash ‘‘voice
control’’ area under the 1979 Pet Policy.
Dog walking groups challenged the
closure in U.S. District Court. (Fort
Funston Dog Walkers v. Babbitt, 96 F.
Supp. 2d 1021 (N.D. Cal. 2000).)
Following a determination that the NPS
had likely violated procedural rules in
adopting the closure, the NPS undertook
a subsequent public process and was
ultimately allowed to erect fences
closing the 12-acre area to dogs.
Additional legal challenges to the
NPS’s management of dog walking
occurred in the early 2000s. In January
2002, the NPS issued a Federal Register
notice explaining that the 1979 Pet
Policy was in conflict with the National
Park System-wide regulation that
requires dogs to be leashed (36 CFR
2.15) and that the NPS was therefore
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
9141
rescinding the 1979 Pet Policy. (67 FR
1424 at 1425 (Jan. 11, 2002).) The NPS
began enforcing the leash requirement
contained in 36 CFR 2.15, including in
areas formerly open to off-leash dog
walking under the 1979 Pet Policy. In
2004, several dog walkers who had been
cited for failing to leash their dogs
challenged the NPS decision to rescind
the 1979 Pet Policy. The U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of
California determined that the NPS did
not follow proper procedures in issuing
the 2002 Federal Register notice and
that public notice and comment was
required before adopting new
restrictions on dog use that significantly
changed public use patterns or were
highly controversial. (United States v.
Barley, 405 F. Supp. 2d 1121 (N.D. Cal.
2005.) As a result of that decision, the
1979 Pet Policy has remained in place
pending the completion of this notice
and comment rulemaking process,
except for portions of Ocean Beach and
Crissy Field (currently known as the
Snowy Plover Protection Area and
Wildlife Protection Area respectively)
where in 2008 the NPS adopted a
special regulation to restrict off-leash
dog walking to protect sensitive
wildlife. (36 CFR 7.97(d).) The proposed
rule would replace the special
regulation at 36 CFR 7.97(d) by
permanently closing these areas to dogs.
The closure of these areas would be
implemented by a provision of the
proposed rule that designates as closed
any areas at Crissy Field and Ocean
Beach not specifically opened to dogs.
Maps identifying the areas closed to
dogs would be made available to the
public. Upon its effective date, the final
rule would terminate and replace the
1979 Pet Policy within GGNRA.
Another recent modification to dog
walking in GGNRA is reflected in an
interim public use restriction and
permit requirement that NPS adopted in
June 2014 for commercial dog walkers.
Commercial dog walkers who use
GGNRA lands in Marin and San
Francisco counties are now limited to
no more than 6 dogs at any one time,
and they must obtain a permit from NPS
when walking between four (4) and six
(6) dogs at any one time. This interim
restriction was adopted by GGNRA
following limits placed on dog walkers
in surrounding jurisdictions. [See link:
https://www.nps.gov/goga/learn/
management/upload/
2014_Superintendent-sCompendiumV2_access.pdf]. If the
proposed rule is adopted by NPS, the
interim permit requirement would be
superseded by the final GGNRA dog
walking special regulation.
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
9142
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Today, many parts of the San
Francisco Bay Area are highly
urbanized, and some city, county, and
state lands in the San Francisco Bay
Area have either limited areas available
for dog walking or prohibit dog walking
on their lands altogether. Some
residents of San Francisco, Marin, and
San Mateo counties view GGNRA lands
as their backyards. Some local residents
with dogs find park lands convenient
and have come to expect them to be
available for dog walking. These same
GGNRA lands, especially the coastal
sites, are also popular with a variety of
park visitors who seek to experience the
national park free from dogs. Within the
overarching mandate to protect park
resources and values, the proposed rule
addresses the interests of these diverse
users by designating areas that are
appropriate for on- or off-leash dog
walking, by adopting restrictions on dog
use in other areas such as limitations on
the number of dogs, and by closing areas
that are not appropriate for dog use.
Dog Management Planning and
Environmental Impact Analysis
In 2002, the NPS issued an Advance
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking asking
for public input on whether the NPS
should develop a new regulation for dog
walking in GGNRA. Following review of
public comments, the NPS initiated a
dog management planning process
under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), together
with a Negotiated Rulemaking process
in an effort to develop a consensusbased proposed rule. After meeting for
a 16 month period, the Negotiated
Rulemaking Committee, comprised of
representative stakeholders, was unable
to reach consensus on a proposed rule
and elected not to extend its charter.
The NPS decided to continue the dog
management planning process under
NEPA and its associated public
involvement process and through the
traditional notice and comment
rulemaking process.
The NPS released the draft Dog
Management Plan/Environmental
Impact Statement for public comment in
2011.The resulting public comments,
and the addition of a major new tract of
land to the park (Rancho Corral de
Tierra), prompted the NPS to issue an
updated draft plan and supplemental
EIS (draft Plan/SEIS). The draft Plan/
SEIS was open for public comment from
September 6, 2013 until February 18,
2014. The draft Plan/SEIS is available
online at https://parkplanning.nps.gov/
documentsList.cfm?projectID=11759 by
clicking on the link entitled ‘‘Draft Dog
Management Plan/Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
Proposed Rule
Relationship To Draft Plan/SEIS
The proposed rule is based on the
preferred alternative (Alternative F)
described in the draft Plan/SEIS, which
has been modified slightly based on
public comment and further analyses. In
general, the principal changes relate to
conditions for walking four to six dogs
under an NPS permit, the adjustment of
two Voice and Sight Control Areas
(Crissy Airfield and upper Fort
Funston), the addition of four new trail
segments for on-leash dog walking
(Rancho Corral de Tierra), and the
elimination of one (Fort Baker),
clarifying definitions, and additional
considerations for the Monitoring and
Management Program. These specific
changes are incorporated in this
proposed rule and will be included in
the Preferred Alternative in the Final
Dog Management Plan/Environmental
Impact Statement. The proposed rule
uses updated and corrected trail and
road names that are different than the
names used in the draft/SEIS. To reduce
confusion, the changes to trail and road
names are posted on the park Web site
at https://www.nps.gov/goga/learn/
management/completed-plans-andprojects.htm and are identified in the
table at the end of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
General Summary
The 22 locations covered by the
proposed rule are as follows by County:
• Marin County: Stinson Beach, Muir
Beach, Homestead Valley, Oakwood
Valley, Alta Trail, Marin Headlands/
Rodeo Beach and Vicinity, Marin
Headlands/Rodeo Valley, and Fort
Baker.
• San Francisco County: Fort Mason,
Crissy Field, Fort Point National
Historic Site, Baker Beach, Lands End,
Fort Miley, Sutro Heights Park, Ocean
Beach, and Fort Funston.
• San Mateo County: Mori Point,
Milagra Ridge, Sweeney Ridge, Cattle
Hill (if NPS acquires management
responsibility for this area), and Rancho
Corral de Tierra.
Within the locations listed above, the
proposed rule would designate specific
areas where dogs would be required to
stay on leash, where dogs may be offleash but only when under immediate
voice and sight control, and where dog
walking would be prohibited. Maps of
trails, beaches, and other areas open to
dog walking would be available at park
visitor centers and on the park Web site
once a final rule is issued. Maps for this
proposed rule are available online at
www.regulations.gov (click on ‘‘Open
Docket Folder’’ after searching for RIN
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1024–AE16) and on the park Web site at
https://www.nps.gov/goga/getinvolved/
prop-rule-maps.htm. Due to the small
scale of these maps and the large areas
covered, one overview map (#1) is
provided along with nineteen (19) other
maps (from maps #2 to #20) to cover the
twenty-two (22) park locations
addressed in this proposed rule (with 3
maps covering 2 locations each); these
maps are visual aids to illustrate the
detailed area descriptions provided in
the rule, which are controlling.
The proposed rule provides for onleash and off-leash dog walking
opportunities within these locations in
a manner that is consistent with NPS’s
legal mandates to conserve park
resources and values and provide for
recreational and educational
opportunities. The rule is consistent
with sound principles of land use
planning and management, and
preserves the park’s natural setting and
protects it from uses that could destroy
its scenic beauty and natural character.
Limitations and restrictions on dog
walking in these locations are designed
to avoid or minimize adverse impacts
on park resources, promote health and
safety, reduce conflicts between diverse
user groups, and address management
responsibilities.
Under 36 CFR 1.2(c), special
regulations for an NPS unit may modify
or relax regulations in 36 CFR part 2
that apply to the entire National Park
System. The proposed rule would
modify and, in some circumstances,
relax the National Park System-wide pet
regulations at 36 CFR 2.15 for the
locations listed above. To the extent not
modified or relaxed by this rule, the
National Park System-wide pet
regulations at 36 CFR 2.15 would
continue to apply to pets, including
dogs, within GGNRA. Within GGNRA’s
22 park locations identified in this rule,
the following subsections of 36 CFR
2.15 would still apply: subsections
(a)(1), (a)(4), (c), (d), (e) and (f).
The proposed rule would authorize
areas open to on-leash or off-leash dog
walking to be closed or subject to
additional restrictions, on a temporary
or permanent basis, for the protection or
restoration of park resources, special
events, implementation of management
responsibilities, health and safety,
infrastructure projects, visitor use
conflicts, or other factors within the
discretion of the superintendent.
There are two scenarios under which
dog walking opportunities may be
expanded under the proposed rule.
First, if the state and local entities with
land management authority for Sharp
Park Beach in San Mateo County (see
Mori Point map #17) decide to change
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
dog walking uses at Sharp Park Beach,
a 0.2 acre area in the southeast corner
of the beach that is administered by the
NPS may also be so designated by the
superintendent. Second, if the park adds
new trails to the park’s trail system in
any of the 22 locations covered by the
rule, the superintendent may designate
such trails as open to on-leash dog
walking. The NPS would conduct the
appropriate level of NEPA compliance
prior to designating any new trails for
on-leash dog walking and provide
public notice of the corresponding new
trail uses under one or more of the
methods listed in 36 CFR 1.7(a) before
any such uses would be implemented.
For GGNRA locations not addressed
by this rule, including lands in the
northern district of the park managed by
the Point Reyes National Seashore, 36
CFR 2.15 would still apply.
The proposed rule also would not
change the rules relating to dog walking
on lands, known as Area B, managed by
the Presidio Trust. Dog walking on
lands managed by the Presidio Trust is
managed in accordance with the Trust’s
regulations in 36 CFR part 1001 and an
Interim Final Rule regarding
commercial dog walking that went into
effect on October 1, 2014. The Interim
Final Rule requires commercial dog
walkers with four to six dogs to obtain
and comply with an NPS permit when
walking dogs in Area B and prohibits
commercial dog walkers from having
more than six dogs at one time. (See:
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-201408-19/pdf/2014-19514.pdf). The Trust’s
Interim Final Rule will remain in place
until the Trust issues a Final Rule.
Designated Dog Walking Areas and
Permit Requirement
The following elements would apply
to all of the locations within GGNRA
that would be governed by the proposed
rule:
• Dog walking would be prohibited
except in the specific areas or on the
trails identified in the proposed rule.
Dog walking would not be allowed offtrail, in campgrounds, on designated
swimming beaches, on informal (i.e.
‘‘social’’) trails, in public buildings, or
in any area not designated by the
proposed rule as open to dogs.
• Dog walking on-leash would be
allowed in parking lots, on sidewalks,
and on shoulders of paved, public
roads.
• All dogs would be required to have
a current rabies vaccination, and dog
walkers would be responsible for
providing evidence of that for any dog
in their care when walking in the park.
• All dogs would be required to be
licensed and tagged in accordance with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
applicable ordinances of the county
where the dog’s owner resides.
• Each dog walker would be required
to have the dog owner’s name, home
address, and phone number available
for each dog walked and must provide
this information upon request to any
person authorized to enforce the
regulation.
• No more than three dogs may be
walked per dog walker at one time
without a permit. All dog walkers
walking between four and six dogs must
obtain an NPS permit. (An example of
the 2015 interim permit for commercial
dog walkers is available at: https://
www.nps.gov/goga/planyourvisit/
loader.cfm?csModule=security/
getfile&PageID=867836).
• No more than six dogs may be
walked per dog walker at any one time.
• Commercial dog walking is allowed
in areas open to dog walking according
to the rules in this proposed rule for
each park location.
• Service animals accompanying a
person with a disability would be
allowed in the park in accordance with
National Park System-wide regulations.
• Informal trails are not official trails
and therefore are not listed in the
proposed rule and would be closed to
dog walking.
• Dog walking areas in each location
would be delineated and marked.
Standard landscape design elements
(e.g. vegetative barriers, fencing,
signage, landscape contours, paths, etc.)
may be installed to aid differentiation of
dog walking areas provided that wildlife
movement is protected. Landscape
design elements may also be utilized to
protect restoration areas, delineate areas
that require closure or separation for
safety purposes, to reduce user conflicts,
or to address other dog management
needs.
• Dog walkers may not enter the park
with more than six dogs at one time. In
addition, dog walkers entering the park
with four or more dogs may not
circumvent the permit requirement by
walking fewer than four dogs at one
time.
Æ Permits would specify the areas,
times and conditions under which this
activity may occur.
Æ Display of the NPS-issued, permit
identification by the permitted dog
walker would be required at all times
when the permittee is walking four to
six dogs in GGNRA.
Æ All permits would require proof of
liability insurance and approved doghandling training through existing
regionally or nationally-accredited
training courses offered by organizations
approved by the local county
jurisdiction in which the activity will
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
9143
occur, and as accepted by the
superintendent. A list of such courses
can be obtained through the local
county jurisdiction for that county in
which the dog walking permit is being
requested. A list of courses accepted by
the superintendent will be posted on the
park’s Web site.
Æ The NPS intends to recover the
costs of administering the special use
permit program under 54 U.S.C. 103104.
In order to obtain a special use permit
to walk more than three dogs at one
time, the proposed rule would require
dog walkers to pay a permit fee to allow
the NPS to recover these costs.
Uncontrolled and Unattended Dogs
To protect park resources, reduce
visitor conflict, enhance public safety,
and aid enforcement and monitoring,
the proposed rule would define the
terms ‘‘uncontrolled dog’’ and
‘‘unattended dog.’’ The definition of
‘‘uncontrolled dog’’ includes behavior
by a dog that results in uninvited or
unwanted physical contact with a
person or another animal. To prevent
unwanted and/or unsolicited contact
from a dog, dog walkers are advised to
ask another person (with or without a
dog) whether it is acceptable for their
dog to approach the other person or that
person’s dog. Contact by a dog that
results in uninvited or unwanted
physical contact would violate the
proposed rule. Short of actual physical
contact, the definition of uncontrolled
dog also includes threatening behavior
by dogs towards people or other animals
such as snarling, growling, snapping,
chasing, charging, repeated barking at,
howling, or uninvited taking or
attempting to take food. Such behavior
would violate the proposed rule.
The rule would prohibit dogs from
being left unattended outside, tied or
untied. It would also prohibit dogs from
being left unattended in a parked
vehicle where they could create a
nuisance, disturb the peace and
tranquility of the park, or disturb
wildlife; or where they could reasonably
be expected to experience suffering or
distress (e.g., exposure to high
temperatures, direct sunlight, or
inadequate ventilation).
Proof of Rabies Vaccination and Owner
Identification
For the protection of the public and
other pets, all dogs within GGNRA must
have a current rabies vaccination. All
three counties that encompass GGNRA
lands (as well as neighboring Alameda
County) require dogs to be licensed,
require proof of a current rabies
vaccination to acquire the license, and
issue a proof of license (e.g., tag) that
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
9144
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
may be fixed to the dog’s collar and that
enables the identity of the owner to be
confirmed. The NPS will accept these
and other similarly issued municipal
licenses as proof of current rabies
vaccination and owner identification. In
counties where current rabies
documentation is not required, where
such ‘‘annual’’ tags are not issued, or
where counties are not able to release
that information to NPS for purposes of
health and safety or law enforcement, a
dog walker must produce official
documentation of a current rabies
vaccination (such as vaccine certificates
by providers authorized to administer
the vaccine by relevant state or local
authorities) upon request.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Monitoring-Based Management
Program
As provided by the draft plan/SEIS,
all areas open to dog walking, including
Voice and Sight-Control Areas, would
be subject to a Monitoring-Based
Management Program to gauge
compliance with NPS regulations and
ensure continued protection of park
resources, visitors, and staff. This
program would include monitoring and
recording of noncompliance with the
proposed rule, including behavior that
meets the definition of an uncontrolled
dog or an unattended dog, dog walking
in prohibited areas, and off-leash dog
walking in areas where leashes are
required. The program would also
monitor and record dog-related
violations of other NPS regulations,
such as for hazardous conditions (e.g.,
aggressive behavior, dog rescues) (36
CFR 2.34(a)(4)), violations of areas
closed to the public or to dogs (36 CFR
1.5(f)), protection of threatened or
endangered species (36 CFR 2.2(a)(2)
and 50 CFR part 17), vegetation (36 CFR
2.1(a)(1)(ii)), wildlife (36 CFR 2.2(a)(2)),
and government and third party
property (36 CFR 2.31(a)(3)).
If the superintendent determines that
the level of compliance with dog-related
regulations is approaching an
unacceptable level based on issues such
as the number or types of violations or
dog-related impacts to resources,
visitors, park staff, health and safety, or
peace and tranquility, or is imposing an
undue burden on administrative
resources, the superintendent must act
to prevent those unacceptable impacts
by taking management actions.
Examples of primary management
actions include increased outreach and
education; increased area-focused
enforcement of regulations; proposed
fine increases; additional fencing,
barriers or separations; or special use
permit restrictions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
If primary management actions do not
sufficiently address the problem, the
superintendent would implement
secondary management actions.
Examples of secondary management
actions may include, but are not limited
to increased buffer zones, and
additional use restrictions (e.g. limiting
the number of dogs off-leash at any one
time with one dog walker, requiring tags
or permits for accessing Voice and Sight
Control Areas, or short or long-term, dog
walking area closures). The authority to
implement primary or secondary
management actions is provided in
section (11) and would be exercised
independent of the superintendent’s
authority under 36 CFR 1.5 in order to
provide the NPS with the needed
flexibility to respond to the impacts of
dog walking in designated areas and
prevent unacceptable impacts or
conditions before they occur. Public
notice of any action taken under this
authority would be given pursuant to
one or more of the methods set forth in
36 CFR 1.7(a). Advance public notice
would not be required in emergency
situations.
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
This certification is based on
information contained in the economic
analyses found in the report entitled
‘‘Economic Analysis of the Proposed
Rule for Dog Management in the Golden
Gate National Recreation Area,’’ that is
available online at https://www.nps.gov/
goga/getinvolved/plan-dog-mgt-rr.htm.
Compliance With Other Laws,
Executive Orders, and Department
Policy
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. It
addresses public use of national park
lands, and imposes no requirements on
other agencies or governments. A
statement containing the information
required by Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not
required.
Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of
Management and Budget will review all
significant rules. OIRA has determined
that this rule is not significant.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the
principles of Executive Order 12866
while calling for improvements in the
nation’s regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty,
and to use the best, most innovative,
and least burdensome tools for
achieving regulatory ends. The
executive order directs agencies to
consider regulatory approaches that
reduce burdens and maintain flexibility
and freedom of choice for the public
where these approaches are relevant,
feasible, and consistent with regulatory
objectives. Executive Order 13563
emphasizes further that regulations
must be based on the best available
science and that the rulemaking process
must allow for public participation and
an open exchange of ideas. We have
developed this rule in a manner
consistent with these requirements.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5
U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.
This rule:
(a) Does not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more.
(b) Will not cause a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, State, or
local government agencies, or
geographic regions.
(c) Does not have significant adverse
effects on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or
the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Takings (Executive Order 12630)
This rule does not affect a taking of
private property or otherwise have
takings implications under Executive
Order 12630. A takings implication
assessment is not required.
Federalism (Executive Order 13132)
Under the criteria in section 1 of
Executive Order 13132, this rule does
not have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant the preparation
of a Federalism summary impact
statement. This proposed rule only
affects use of NPS administered lands
and waters. It has no outside effects on
other areas. A Federalism summary
impact statement is not required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order
12988)
This rule will not have a significant
economic effect on a substantial number
of small entities under the Regulatory
This rule complies with the
requirements of Executive Order 12988.
This rule:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a)
requiring that all regulations be
reviewed to eliminate errors and
ambiguity and be written to minimize
litigation; and
(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2)
requiring that all regulations be written
in clear language and contain clear legal
standards.
Consultation With Indian Tribes
(Executive Order 13175 and Department
Policy)
The Department of the Interior strives
to strengthen its government-togovernment relationship with Indian
Tribes through a commitment to
consultation with Indian Tribes and
recognition of their right to selfgovernance and tribal sovereignty. We
have evaluated this rule under the
Department’s consultation policy and
under the criteria in Executive Order
13175 and have determined that it has
no substantial direct effects on federally
recognized Indian tribes and that
consultation under the Department’s
tribal consultation policy is not
required. Tribes traditionally associated
with GGNRA were consulted, however,
in the development of the draft Plan/
SEIS.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain any new
collections of information that require
approval by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork
Reduction Act. OMB has approved the
information collection requirements
associated with NPS Special Park Use
Permits and has assigned OMB Control
Number 1024–0026 (expires 08/31/16).
An agency may not conduct or sponsor
and a person is not required to respond
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
County
Map
No.
Marin .................................
Marin .................................
Marin .................................
Marin .................................
Marin .................................
Marin .................................
Marin .................................
San Francisco ...................
San Francisco ...................
San Francisco ...................
San Francisco ...................
San Francisco ...................
San Francisco ...................
5
5
5
5
7
8
8
9
9
9
9
11
11
San Francisco ...................
San Francisco ...................
11
11
San Francisco ...................
San Francisco ...................
San Francisco ...................
11
11
12
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
to a collection of information (e.g., NPS
survey) unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act
The preferred alternative from the
draft Plan/SEIS, which this rule
proposes to implement, constitutes a
major Federal action with the potential
to significantly affect the quality of the
human environment. We have prepared
the draft Plan/SEIS in accordance with
the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969. Because of their interrelatedness, the draft Plan/SEIS serves
as NEPA compliance for this rule. The
public comment period for the draft
Plan/SEIS closed on February 18, 2014.
The draft Plan/SEIS is available online
at https://parkplanning.nps.gov/
documentsList.cfm?projectID=11759 by
clicking on the link entitled ‘‘Draft Dog
Management Plan/Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement.’’ A
final Plan/FEIS will be developed after
public comments on the proposed rule
have been analyzed and considered as
appropriate. A final rule will be
published after a Record of Decision has
been issued on the FEIS.
Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive
Order 13211)
This rule is not a significant energy
action under the definition in Executive
Order 13211. A Statement of Energy
Effects is not required.
Clarity of This Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 (section 1(b)(12)) and 12988
(section 3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 (section
1(a)), and by the Presidential
Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write
all rules in plain language. This means
that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(c) Use common, everyday words and
clear language rather than jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. To better help us revise the
rule, your comments should be as
specific as possible. For example, you
should tell us the numbers of the
sections or paragraphs that you find
unclear, which sections or sentences are
too long, the sections where you feel
lists or tables would be useful, etc.
Drafting Information: The primary
authors of this regulation are: Russel J.
Wilson, Chief, Division of Regulations,
Jurisdiction, and Special Park Uses,
National Park Service; Jay Calhoun,
Regulations Program Specialist,
National Park Service; Michael
Edwards, Project Manager,
Environmental Quality Division,
National Park Service; Mike Savidge,
Chief, Strategic Planning, Golden Gate
National Recreation Area, National Park
Service; and Shirwin Smith, former
Management Assistant, Golden Gate
National Recreation Area, National Park
Service.
Table of Updated Trail and Road
Names
The following table identifies the
updated trail and road names that are
different than the names used in the
draft/SEIS.
Updated trail and road names
used in proposed rule
Trail and road names used in draft/SEIS
Oakwood Valley Road ..............................................
Oakwood Valley Trail ................................................
Pacheco Fire Road ...................................................
Orchard Fire Road ....................................................
Smith Road Connector Trail .....................................
Bay Trail ....................................................................
Center Road ..............................................................
Trail north from Great Meadow ................................
Trail east of Youth Hostel .........................................
Stairs from Great Meadow to Lower Ft. Mason .......
Paths around Great Meadow ....................................
Presidio Coastal Trail ................................................
Unmarked connector between Battery East Trail
and Presidio Promenade.
Andrews Road ..........................................................
Connector between Battery East Trail and Coastal
Trail on the west side of the Golden Gate Bridge
toll plaza.
Presidio Coastal Trail ................................................
Fort Point Promenade ...............................................
Access Trails to south beach from parking lots. ......
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
9145
Oakwood Valley Trail.
Oakwood Meadow Trail.
Pacheco Trail.
Orchard Trail.
Smith Trail.
Fort Baker Bay Trail.
Fort Baker Trail.
Fort Mason Bay Trail.
Black Point Battery Trail.
Fort Mason Stairs.
Great Meadow Paths.
Coastal Trail.
Battery East Spur Trail.
Andrews Trail.
Presidio Promenade.
Coastal Trail.
Marine Drive.
Access Trails #3, 4, 5 and 6.
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
9146
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
County
Map
No.
San Francisco ...................
13
San Francisco ...................
13
San Francisco ...................
13
San Francisco ...................
13
San Francisco ...................
13
San
San
San
San
...................
...................
...................
...................
14
14
14
16
San Francisco ...................
San Francisco ...................
16
16
San Mateo ........................
San Mateo ........................
San Mateo ........................
18
18
19
San Mateo ........................
19
San Mateo ........................
20
San Mateo ........................
20
San Mateo ........................
20
San
San
San
San
........................
........................
........................
........................
20
20
20
20
San Mateo ........................
20
San Mateo ........................
20
Francisco
Francisco
Francisco
Francisco
Mateo
Mateo
Mateo
Mateo
Updated trail and road names
used in proposed rule
Trail and road names used in draft/SEIS
Connector between Coastal Trail and Camino del
Mar Trail/Legion of Staircase.
Steps from Legion of Honor parking lot to Coastal
Trail.
Trail from Merrie Way Parking Lot north to Coastal
Trail.
Trails from Merrie Way Parking Lot west to Coastal
Trail.
Trail from Merrie Way Parking Lot west to El Camino del Mar.
Trail through Sutro Heights .......................................
48th to Sutro Loop Trail ............................................
Balboa to Sutro Loop Trail ........................................
Sunset Trail from north end of Fort Funston to main
parking lot.
Battery Davis Road on east side of the battery .......
Eastern connector from Battery Davis Trail to
Funston Beach Trail (North).
Milagra Ridge Fire Road ...........................................
Trail to bunker ...........................................................
Sweeney Ridge Trail from Shelldance Nursery to
the Notch Trail.
Farallon View Trail from Baquiano Trail to western
Cattle Hill boundary.
Connector trail north of old San Pedro Mountain
Road.
Connector trail north of old San Pedro Mountain
Road.
Connector trail south of old San Pedro Mountain
Road.
Vicente Ridge Trail ...................................................
Connector to Vicente Ridge Trail .............................
Denniston Ridge Trail ...............................................
Memorial Loop ..........................................................
Connector from Memorial Loop to junction with
Denniston Ridge Trail.
Connector from community to Clipper Ridge Trail ...
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7
National Parks, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, the
National Park Service proposes to
amend 36 CFR part 7 as follows:
Legion of Honor Trail.
Memorial Stairs.
Merrie Way Trail.
Lands End Staircase, North and South.
Fort Miley Trail.
Sutro Heights Loop Trail.
Sutro Heights Trail.
La Playa Trail.
Coastal Trail.
Battery Davis Trail.
Funston Trail.
Milagra Ridge Road.
Milagra Battery Trail.
Mori Ridge Trail.
Cattle Hill Trail.
Farallone Trail.
Corona Pedro Trail.
Le Conte Trail.
San Vicente Trail.
Ranchette Trail.
French Trail.
Flat Top Trail and Clipper Ridge Trail (lower section).
Clipper Ridge Trail.
Almeria and San Carlos Trails.
PART 7—SPECIAL REGULATIONS,
AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK
SYSTEM
1. The authority citation for part 7
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 54 U.S.C. 100101, 100751,
320102; Sec. 7.96 also issued under D.C.
Code 10–137 and D.C. Code 50–2201.07.
2. In § 7.97, revise paragraph (d) to
read as follows:
■
In Marin County:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
In San Mateo County:
(ii) To the extent not modified or
relaxed by the regulations contained in
paragraph (d) of this section, the
regulations in section 2.15 of this
chapter govern pets, including dog
walking, within Golden Gate National
Recreation Area. Paragraph (d) of this
section does not apply to service dogs
accompanying persons with a disability
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
Golden Gate National Recreation
*
*
*
*
*
(d)(1) What is the scope of this
regulation? (i) The regulations contained
in this paragraph (d) apply to persons
with dogs at the following locations
within Golden Gate National Recreation
Area:
Stinson Beach, Muir Beach, Homestead Valley, Oakwood Valley, Alta Trail, Marin Headlands/Rodeo
Beach and vicinity, Marin Headlands/Rodeo Valley, and Fort Baker.
Fort Mason, Crissy Field, Fort Point National Historic Site, Baker Beach, Lands End, Fort Miley, Sutro
Heights Park, Ocean Beach, and Fort Funston.
Mori Point, Milagra Ridge, Sweeney Ridge, Cattle Hill (if NPS assumes management responsibility for
this area), and Rancho Corral de Tierra.
In San Francisco County:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
§ 7.97
Area.
Jkt 238001
as authorized under applicable National
Park Service regulations.
(2) What terms do I need to know?
The following definitions apply to
paragraph (d) of this section only:
Leash means a chain, rope, cord, or
strap not longer than 6 feet in length
with a clip or snap for rapid attachment
to a choke chain, collar, or harness, all
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the parts of which are of sufficient
strength to hold the weight of the dog
and are suitable for walking the dog and
controlling it.
Unattended dog means a dog left
without a guardian in sight, tied or
untied outside; or left in a parked
vehicle, where it creates a nuisance,
disturbs the peace and tranquility of the
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
park, or disturbs wildlife; or left where
the dog could reasonably be expected to
experience suffering or distress due to,
for example, exposure to high
temperatures, direct sunlight, or
inadequate ventilation.
Uncontrolled dog means a dog, on or
off-leash, that exhibits any behavior that
threatens, disturbs, harasses, or
demonstrates aggression toward another
person, dog, or domesticated animal or
wildlife in a manner that a reasonable
person would find threatening,
disturbing, harassing, or aggressive.
Such behaviors include snarling,
growling, repeated barking at, howling,
chasing, charging, snapping at, or
uninvited attempting to take or taking
food from a person; demonstrating
uninvited or unwanted physical contact
with a person or another animal;
annoying, pursuing, hunting, harming,
wounding, attacking, capturing, or
killing wildlife or a domesticated
animal; digging into ground, soil or
vegetation; or failing to be under voice
and sight control in a Voice and Sight
Control Area.
Voice and Sight Control Area means
an area designated in paragraph (d) of
this section and identified on maps
available at park visitor centers and on
the park Web site where dogs may be
walked off-leash when under voice and
sight control.
Voice and sight control means a dog
that is within direct eyesight of the dog
walker and that the dog walker is able
to both immediately recall directly to
his or her side, without regard to
circumstances or distractions, and
attach a leash to the dog’s collar. The
9147
dog walker must demonstrate this
ability when requested to do so by an
authorized person.
(3) Where may I walk or take a dog
at the locations identified in this
paragraph (d)? You may walk or take a
dog at the locations identified in
paragraph (d)(1) of this section only in
those areas specified below and subject
to the restrictions as noted in this
paragraph (d).
(i) You may walk a dog on-leash in
parking lots, on sidewalks, on paved
public roads, and in all areas where offleash use is authorized.
(ii) You may walk one to three dogs
per person at one time on-leash in the
areas designated in the following table.
The maps referenced in the table will be
available at park visitor centers and on
the park Web site.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 1 TO § 7.97—ON-LEASH DOG WALKING: ONE TO THREE DOGS
(A) Stinson Beach (see map #2)
(1) Designated connecting trail from a signed trailhead between the dunes on the western side of the northern parking lot to the countyowned Upton Beach.
(2) North and Central picnic areas.
(B) Muir Beach (see map #3)
(1) Trail parallel to the access road from Pacific Way Bridge through the Muir Beach parking lot.
(2) Muir Beach Trail.
(3) The sand beach and surf area outside the fenced or signed buffer areas. When there is a surface water connection between the ocean
and the lagoon, dogs are not allowed into the surface waters connecting the lagoon and the ocean.
(C) Homestead Valley (see map #4)
(1) Homestead Trail from Four Corners to two community connecting trails beyond the GGNRA boundary, the Eagle Trail and an extension
of the Homestead Trail.
(2) Homestead Summit Trail from Homestead Fire Road to junction with the Homestead Trail at Four Corners.
(3) Homestead Fire Road from Lattie Lane to Panoramic Highway.
(D) Oakwood Valley (see map #5)
(1) That section of the Rhubarb Trail from the Tamalpais Community Service District’s property access at the park boundary, east to Tennessee Valley Road.
(2) Oakwood Valley Trail (formerly Oakwood Valley Fire Road) to the junction with the Alta Trail.
(E) Alta Trail (see map #5)
(1) Alta Trail from the entrance at Donahue Street to the junction with the Morning Sun Trail.
(2) Orchard and Pacheco Trails from the park boundary to the Alta Trail.
(F) Marin Headlands/Rodeo Beach and Vicinity (see map #6)
(1) Coastal Trail from the Fort Cronkhite parking area to its intersection with Old Bunker Road, and continuing east on the Old Bunker
Road south to the Fort Cronkhite Trail and back along the Lagoon Trail to the Fort Cronkhite parking lot.
(2) Beach access steps at the north end of the beach. When there is a surface water connection between the ocean and the lagoon, dogs
are not allowed on the beach access steps or in the surface water connecting the ocean and the lagoon.
(3) Lagoon Trail along Mitchell Road to and over the pedestrian bridge to the beach.
(4) Batteries Loop Trail (from the Battery Alexander parking lot trailhead).
(G) Marin Headlands/Rodeo Valley (see map #7)
(1) Rodeo Avenue Trail and Morning Sun Trail connecting to and including the Alta Trail.
(2) Rodeo Valley Trail from the trailhead at the intersection of Bunker and McCullough Roads to the intersection with the Bobcat Trail.
(3) Bobcat Trail between Rodeo Valley Trail and Miwok Trail.
(4) Miwok Trail from Bobcat Trail to Lagoon Trail.
(5) Smith Trail from parking lot to Rodeo Valley Trail.
(H) Fort Baker (see map #8)
(1) Parade Ground.
(2) The length of the Fort Baker Bay Trail from the northern parking lot off Conzelman Road at the northwest end of the Golden Gate
Bridge down along Sommerville Road and up to section of same trail along East Road to the park boundary.
(3) Fort Baker Trail from southern intersection with Fort Baker Bay Trail at Sommerville Road to the northern intersection with the Fort
Baker Bay Trail at East Road.
(4) Connecting trail from northeastern section of main parking lot (south of Bay Area Discovery Museum) to Fort Baker Bay Trail, and connecting paths from western side of same parking lot to Center Road.
(I) Fort Mason (see map #9)
(1) The multi-use Fort Mason Bay Trail (McDowell Avenue) from the north end of Van Ness Avenue at the Municipal Pier to Laguna Street.
(2) The Black Point Battery Trail from Van Ness Avenue through the lower gun platform level of Black Point Battery to the Fort Mason Bay
Trail.
(3) Great Meadow paths and grass areas south of the Fort Mason Bay Trail between the western side of Building 201 (GGNRA Park Headquarters) and Laguna Street.
(4) The triangular grass area between Shafter Court and the park boundary along Bay Street.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
9148
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 1 TO § 7.97—ON-LEASH DOG WALKING: ONE TO THREE DOGS—Continued
(5) Grass area between MacArthur and Van Ness Avenues south of Building 9. Grass areas between MacArthur Avenue and the Fort
Mason Quad residences.
(6) Grass area between Building 101 and entrance road to Bay Street parking lot.
(7) Grass area between Franklin Street exit to Bay Street and entrance road to Shafter Court.
(J) Crissy Field (see map #10)
(1) Crissy Field Promenade from the eastern park boundary to Marine Drive.
(2) All access paths connecting the Promenade to Central Beach.
(3) All flat grass and composite areas of East Crissy Field between the Promenade Cut-off Trail and the southern section of the East Beach
Picnic Trail, in the west, to the eastern park boundary, bounded in the north by the Promenade and by the Fort Mason Multi-Use Path in
the south, including the East Beach picnic area.
(4) Crissy Airfield.
(5) The developed paths and hardened areas (not stairs) outside the National Marine Sanctuary’s Gulf of the Farallones buildings and outside the Crissy Center facilities.
(6) The Mason Street Multi-Use path.
(7) Crissy Field Warming Hut picnic area.
(K) Fort Point National Historic Site (see map #11)
(1) Northern shoulder of Marine Drive west along the multi-use access road to the fort.
(2) Battery East Trail from Marine Drive continuing west to the intersection with the Presidio Promenade.
(3) The Andrews Trail connecting to and including the full length of the Presidio Promenade from Long Avenue to the Coastal Trail.
(4) Coastal Trail on the western side of the southern Golden Gate Bridge approach going south to the Merchant Road parking lot and
Baker Beach.
(L) Baker Beach (see map #12)
(1) Coastal Trail from the connection with the Presidio Promenade at the south side of the Golden Gate Bridge to the Baker Beach parking
lot.
(2) That section of beach extending south from access Trail #3 to the signed, restricted buffer area at Lobos Creek, and the shallow, tidal
waters immediately off-shore of the on-leash area.
(3) Beach access Trail #3 thru Trail #6 and the access path from the 25th Avenue gate to the beach.
(4) All picnic areas except the south picnic area, a designated dog-free area.
(M) Lands End (see map #13)
(1) Coastal Trail from the eastern park boundary near 32nd Avenue to the Lands End parking lot.
(2) El Camino del Mar Trail from the park boundary to the Memorial parking lot.
(3) Legion of Honor Trail.
(4) Memorial Stairs.
(5) Merrie Way Trail.
(6) The north and south Lands End Staircase Trails.
(N) Fort Miley (see map #13)
(1) The East Fort Miley Trail from Clement Street to the NPS boundary at the Legion of Honor (just beyond its intersection with the Veteran’s Trail).
(O) Sutro Heights Park (see map #14)
(1) The access trail from the Sutro parking lot.
(2) Sutro Heights Loop Trail and adjacent grass lawn areas within this trail loop.
(3) Sutro Heights Trail and adjacent grass lawn areas between it and the Sutro Heights Loop Trail.
(4) La Playa Trail.
(5) The parapet.
(P) Ocean Beach (see map #15)
(1) Coastal Trail south from the Cliff House along the sidewalk continuing on that section of trail east of the dunes paralleling the Great
Highway to Sloat Boulevard.
(2) Beach access stairs between Stairwell #1, the northernmost stairwell closest to the Cliff House, and Stairwell #21.
(Q) Fort Funston (see map #16)
(1) The Coastal Trail from the Great Highway south to the Coastal Trail Sand Ladder connecting to Funston Beach.
(2) The Battery Davis Trail (East).
(3) The John Muir Trail.
(4) That trail along northern edge of main parking lot between the Coastal and Chip Trails.
(5) That segment of the Sunset Trail from the main parking lot south to the southern parking lot below the main entrance.
(R) Mori Point (see map #17)
(1) Old Mori Trail.
(2) Pollywog Trail.
(3) Coastal Trail.
(4) The southeastern section of Sharp Park beach within the NPS boundary.
(S) Milagra Ridge (see map #18)
(1) Milagra Ridge Road within the park boundary from Sharp Park Road entrance west to the Milagra Battery Trail.
(2) Milagra Battery Trail from Battery #244 to the parking lot at the west boundary of the site (Connemara).
(T) Sweeney Ridge (see map #19)
(1) Sneath Lane from the parking area west up to the intersection with the Sweeney Ridge Trail.
(2) Sweeney Ridge Trail from the Portola Discovery site to the former Nike Missile site.
(U) Cattle Hill (see map #19) If the National Park Service acquires management responsibility for Cattle Hill, after giving public notice in accordance with 36 CFR 1.7, dog walking would be authorized on:.
(1) The Baquiano Trail from Fassler Avenue up to Cattle Hill Trail.
(2) The Cattle Hill Trail.
(V) Rancho Corral de Tierra (see map #20)
Montara area:
(1) Le Conte Trail.
(2) Corona Pedro Trail.
(3) Old San Pedro Mountain Road.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
9149
TABLE 1 TO § 7.97—ON-LEASH DOG WALKING: ONE TO THREE DOGS—Continued
(4) Farallon Trail from the park boundary in the west continuing east to its intersection with the Corona Pedro Trail.
Moss Beach area:
(5) San Vicente Trail.
(6) Ranchette Trail.
El Granada area:
(7) French Trail between the San Carlos Trail and its intersection with the Clipper Ridge Trail.
(8) Flat Top Trail.
(9) Clipper Ridge Trail.
(10) Almeria Trail.
(11) San Carlos Trail.
(iii) You may walk four to six dogs per
person at one time on-leash only
pursuant to a permit issued by the NPS
in areas designated in the following
table. The maps referenced in the table
will be available at park visitor centers
and on the park Web site.
TABLE 2 TO § 7.97— ON-LEASH DOG WALKING: FOUR TO SIX DOGS
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(A) Alta Trail (see map #5). Alta Trail from the entrance at Donahue Street south to the intersection with the Orchard Trail.
(B) Marin Headlands/Rodeo Beach & Vicinity (see map #6)
(1) Beach access steps at the north end of the beach. When there is a surface water connection between the ocean and the lagoon, dogs
are not allowed on the beach access steps or in the surface water connecting the ocean and the lagoon.
(2) Lagoon Trail along Mitchell Road to and over the pedestrian bridge to the beach.
(C) Fort Baker (see map #8)
(1) Parade Ground.
(2) The length of the Fort Baker Bay Trail from the northern parking lot off Conzelman Road at the northwest end of the Golden Gate
Bridge down along Sommerville Road and up to section of same trail along East Road to the park boundary.
(3) Fort Baker Trail from southern intersection with Fort Baker Bay Trail at Sommerville Road to the northern intersection with the Fort
Baker Bay Trail at East Road.
(4) Connecting trail from northeastern section of main parking lot (south of Bay Area Discovery Museum) to Fort Baker Bay Trail, and connecting paths from western side of same parking lot to Center Road.
(D) Fort Mason (see map #9)
(1) The multi-use Fort Mason Bay Trail (McDowell Avenue) from the north end of Van Ness Avenue at the Municipal Pier to Laguna Street.
(2) The Black Point Battery Trail from Van Ness Avenue through the lower gun platform level of Black Point Battery to the Fort Mason Bay
Trail.
(3) Great Meadow paths south of the Fort Mason Bay Trail between the western side of Building 201 (GGNRA Park Headquarters) and Laguna Street.
(4) The triangular grass area between Shafter Court and the park boundary along Bay Street.
(5) Grass area between MacArthur and Van Ness Avenues south of Building 9. Grass areas between MacArthur Avenue and the Fort
Mason Quad residences.
(6) Grass area between Building 101 and entrance road to Bay Street parking lot.
(7) Grass area between Franklin Street exit to Bay Street and entrance road to Shafter Court.
(E) Crissy Field (see map #10)
(1) Crissy Airfield.
(2) Crissy Promenade: The portion of the trail leading from the western-most side of the East Beach parking lot to the eastern-most access
path to Central Beach; and those short segments of the Crissy Promenade that provide a direct crossing and connection between the
Crissy Airfield paths and the paths leading to the western portion of Central Beach, designated for Direct Beach Access.
(3) The Mason Street Multi-Use path.
(F) Baker Beach (see map #12)
(1) Beach access Trail #3 thru Trail #6 and the access path from the 25th Avenue gate to the beach.
(2) That section of beach extending south from access Trail # 3 to the signed, restricted buffer area at Lobos Creek, and the shallow, tidal
waters immediately off-shore of the on-leash area.
(G) Fort Funston (see map #16)
(1) The Coastal Trail between the Funston Beach Trail (North) to the Coastal Trail Sand Ladder on Funston Beach.
(2) The Battery Davis Trail (East).
(3) The John Muir Trail.
(4) That trail along northern edge of main parking lot between the Coastal and Chip Trails
(5) That segment of the Sunset Trail from the main parking lot south to the southern parking lot below the main entrance.
(iv) You may walk one to three dogs
per person at one time on-leash or under
voice and sight control in the Voice and
Sight Control Areas designated in the
following table. The maps referenced in
the table will be available at park visitor
centers and on the park Web site.
TABLE 3 TO § 7.97—VOICE AND SIGHT CONTROL OR ON-LEASH DOG WALKING: ONE TO THREE DOGS
(A) Marin Headlands/Rodeo Beach and Vicinity (see map #6). On the beach west and south of the signed or fenced buffer areas from the
northern terminus of the beach south to the ‘‘sea stacks’’ which divide Rodeo Beach from South Rodeo Beach, including the adjacent waters
immediately off-shore. When there is a surface water connection between the ocean and the lagoon, dogs are not allowed on the beach access steps or in the surface water connecting the ocean and the lagoon.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
9150
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 3 TO § 7.97—VOICE AND SIGHT CONTROL OR ON-LEASH DOG WALKING: ONE TO THREE DOGS—Continued
(B) Fort Mason (see map #9). The southwest section of upper Fort Mason bounded on the northwest by the diagonal path connecting the Fort
Mason Bay Trail to the Laguna Street path and continuing southward to Bay Street and then eastward to the parking lot and north to the
hedges bordering the path around the Great Meadow, continuing northwest back to the Fort Mason Bay Trail.
(C) Crissy Field (Central Beach) (see map #10). Central Beach from the fenced, eastern boundary of the western foredunes to the fenced buffer
zone on the west side of the tidal marsh outlet to the bay, including the adjacent waters immediately off-shore, but not including the dunes,
on-leash paths to the beach, or the sand spit and waters north of the tidal marsh outlet.
(D) Crissy Field (Crissy Airfield) (see map #10). Central area of Crissy Airfield, bounded by the middle path on its western side and a newly-proposed path (aligned in the north from the second-most western access to Central beach to the Mason Street multi-use path in the south) on
its eastern side and by on-leash buffers along its northern and southern boundaries.
(E) Ocean Beach (see map #15). The northern terminus of the beach to Stairwell 21, including the adjacent waters immediately off-shore.
(F) Fort Funston (Upper Funston) (see map #16)
(1) The area northeast of the Funston Trail, bordered by a signed northern border paralleling and aligned with the Funston Beach (North)
Trail, east to the bottom of the embankment in the northeast, and the tree line in the east and south.
(2) The Funston Trail.
(3) The area east of, but not including, the Coastal Trail, north of the main parking lot, encompassing the Chip Trail and its eastern embankment, to the intersection with the on-leash John Muir Trail.
(4) The Battery Davis Trail (West).
(G) Fort Funston (Funston Beach) (see map #16)
(1) Funston Beach extending south from the intersection with Funston Beach Trail (North) to the intersection with, but not including, the
Coastal Trail Sand Ladder on the beach; includes the adjacent waters immediately off-shore.
(2) Funston Beach Trail (North).
(v) You may walk four to six dogs per
person at one time on-leash or under
voice and sight control only pursuant to
a permit issued by the NPS in the Voice
and Sight Control Areas designated in
the following table. The maps
referenced in the table will be available
at park visitor centers and on the park
Web site.
TABLE 4 TO § 7.97—VOICE AND SIGHT CONTROL OR ON-LEASH DOG WALKING: FOUR TO SIX DOGS
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(A) Marin Headlands/Rodeo Beach & Vicinity (see map #6). On the beach west and south of the signed or fenced buffer areas from the northern terminus of the beach south to the ‘‘sea stacks’’ which divide Rodeo Beach from South Rodeo Beach, including the adjacent waters immediately off-shore. When there is a surface water connection between the ocean and the lagoon, dogs are not allowed on the beach access
steps or in the surface water connecting the ocean and the lagoon.
(B) Fort Mason (see map #9). The southwest section of upper Fort Mason bounded on the northwest by the diagonal path connecting the Fort
Mason Bay Trail to the Laguna Street path and continuing southward to Bay Street and then eastward to the parking lot and north to the
hedges bordering the path around the Great Meadow, continuing northwest back to the Fort Mason Bay Trail.
(C) Crissy Field (Central Beach) (see map #10). Central Beach from the fenced, eastern boundary of the western foredunes to the fenced buffer
zone on the west side of the tidal marsh outlet to the bay, including the adjacent waters immediately off-shore, but not including the dunes,
on-leash paths to the beach, or the sand spit and waters north of the tidal marsh outlet.
(D) Crissy Field (Crissy Airfield) (see map #10). Central area of Crissy Airfield, bounded by the middle path on its western side and a newly-proposed (aligned in the north from the second-most western access to Central beach to the Mason Street multi-use path in the south) path on
its eastern side and by on-leash buffers along its northern and southern boundaries.
(E) Ocean Beach (see map #15). The northern terminus of the beach to Stairwell 21, including the adjacent waters immediately off-shore.
(F) Fort Funston (Upper Funston) (see map #16)
(1) The area northeast of the Funston Trail, bordered by a signed northern border paralleling and aligned with the Funston Beach (North)
Trail, east to the bottom of the embankment in the northeast, and the tree line in the east and south.
(2) The Funston Trail.
(3) The area east of, but not including, the Coastal Trail, north of the main parking lot, encompassing the Chip Trail and its eastern embankment, to the intersection with the on-leash John Muir Trail.
(4) The Battery Davis Trail (West).
(G) Fort Funston (Funston Beach) (see map #16)
(1) Funston Beach extending south from the intersection with Funston Beach Trail (North) to the intersection with, but not including, the
Coastal Trail Sand Ladder on the beach; includes the adjacent waters immediately off-shore.
(2) Funston Beach Trail (North).
(vi) You may not walk a dog on- or
off-leash in campgrounds, public
buildings, designated swimming
beaches, sensitive habitat areas, and any
other areas not specifically opened to
dog walking in this paragraph (d).
(vii) If the park adds new trails to the
park’s trail system in any of the 22
locations covered by this paragraph (d),
the superintendent may designate such
trails as open to on-leash dog walking.
If the state and local entities with land
management authority for Sharp Park
Beach decide to change dog walking
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
uses at Sharp Park Beach, the
superintendent may designate the small,
adjacent southeast corner (0.2 acres) of
the beach that is administered by the
NPS for the same use. Notice of this
change will be provided by one or more
of the methods in section 1.7 of this
chapter.
(viii) Areas open to dog walking by
this paragraph (d)will be identified on
maps available at park visitor centers
and on the park Web site.
(4) When must I have a leash? A leash
must be attached to each dog and
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
simultaneously held by the dog walker,
unless the dog is present in a Voice and
Sight Control Area or the dog is fully
confined in a vehicle, cage or crate. In
a Voice and Sight Control Area, a leash
for each dog must be carried by the dog
walker but does not have to be attached
to the dog, provided that the dog is
under voice and sight control.
(5) How many dogs may I walk at one
time without a permit? You may walk
up to three dogs at one time per person
within areas designated as open to dog
walking in paragraph (d) of this section
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules
in accordance with the leash
requirements that apply to each area.
(6) May I leave a dog unattended? No.
An unattended dog is prohibited.
(7) May I walk more than three dogs
at one time? (i) Walking four to six dogs
per person at one time is prohibited
unless you obtain a dog walking permit
from the NPS and remain in areas
designated for that use in paragraph
(d)(3) of this section during the times
specified in paragraph (d)(9) below.
(ii) Walking more than six dogs at one
time is prohibited.
(iii) Persons may not enter the park
with more than six dogs at one time. In
addition, dog walkers entering the park
with four or more dogs may not
circumvent the permit requirement by
leaving dogs unattended or in a parked
vehicle while they walk fewer than four
dogs at one time.
(8) How do I obtain an NPS dog
walking permit? (i) Annual permits may
be obtained by applying in person at the
Golden Gate National Recreation Area,
Office of Special Uses, Fort Mason, San
Francisco, CA. 94123, or on the park
Web site. All permits will require proof
of liability insurance and proof of
successfully completing a dog-handling
training course that is accepted by the
superintendent. The NPS charges a fee
to recover the costs of administering the
special use permits. Permit applicants
must pay the fee charged by the NPS in
order to obtain a special use permit.
(ii) Violation of a term or condition of
a permit issued in accordance with this
section is prohibited. In addition, the
superintendent may temporarily or
permanently revoke a person’s dog
walking permit, or deny a person’s
request for a dog walking permit, based
upon documented violation(s) of NPS
regulations or failure to comply with the
terms and conditions of a dog walking
permit.
(9) At what times will permitted dog
walking of four to six dogs be allowed?
Permitted dog walking of four to six
dogs is only authorized Monday through
Friday between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. The
times for permitted dog walking of four
to six dogs may be adjusted by the
superintendent following public notice
consistent with one of the methods
listed in § 1.7(a) of this chapter.
(10) What other restrictions apply in
areas open to dog walking under this
paragraph (d)? (i) All dogs must have
identification tags affixed to their collar
that confirm proof of current rabies
vaccinations and their owner’s name,
address, and phone number; except as
provided for in paragraph (d)(10)(ii) of
this section.
(ii) In counties or municipalities
where an annual dog license is issued
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 23, 2016
Jkt 238001
that requires proof of a current rabies
vaccination, a valid, current county or
municipal license tag suffices for such
proof. In counties or municipalities
where such current rabies
documentation is not required, where
such ‘‘annual’’ tags are not issued or
where counties or municipalities are not
able to release that information to NPS
for purposes of health and safety or law
enforcement, a dog walker must
produce official documentation meeting
the requirements in paragraph (d)(10)(i)
of this section when asked by any
authorized person.
(iii) A dog walker must immediately
pick up a dog’s excrement and place it
in a designated garbage container or
remove it from the park. Excrement may
not be left on the ground, even if
bagged, and may not be deposited in
compost or recycling receptacles, or left
on the ground in the park for collection
later.
(iv) An uncontrolled dog is
prohibited. A dog walker must be in
control of his or her dog at all times
regardless of circumstances or
distractions. An authorized person may
instruct a dog walker to remove an
uncontrolled dog from the park.
(v) A dog in heat is prohibited.
(vi) A dog under four months old
must be leashed, crated or confined in
a carrier at all times, including in Voice
and Sight Control Areas.
(vii) Dogs are not allowed to breed in
the park.
(11) May the superintendent impose
additional closures or restrictions in
areas open to dog walking? Yes. Areas
or portions thereof that are open to onleash or off-leash dog walking may be
closed or subject to additional
restrictions by the superintendent, on a
temporary or permanent basis, for the
protection or restoration of park
resources, special events,
implementation of management
responsibilities, health and safety,
infrastructure projects, visitor use
conflicts, or other factors within the
discretion of the superintendent. Except
in emergency situations, the NPS will
provide public notice of such changes
under one or more of the methods listed
in § 1.7 of this chapter before any such
changes are implemented.
Dated: January 28, 2016.
Michael Bean,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish
and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2016–03731 Filed 2–23–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–EJ–P
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
9151
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 151210999–6081–01]
RIN 0648–BF59
Fisheries of the Northeastern United
States; Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery;
Framework Adjustment 27
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
NMFS proposes to approve
and implement measures included in
Framework Adjustment 27 to the
Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery
Management Plan, which the New
England Fishery Management Council
adopted and submitted to NMFS for
approval. The purpose of Framework 27
is to prevent overfishing, improve yieldper-recruit, and improve the overall
management of the Atlantic sea scallop
fishery. Framework 27 would: Set
specifications for the scallop fishery for
fishing year 2016, including days-at-sea
allocations, individual fishing quotas,
and sea scallop access area trip
allocations; create a new rotational
closed area south of Closed Area II to
protect small scallops; and open the
northern portion of the Nantucket
Lightship Access Area to the Limited
Access General Category fleet and
transfer 19 percent of the Limited
Access General Category access area
trips from the Mid-Atlantic Access Area
to the northern portion of the Nantucket
Lightship Access Area.
DATES: Comments must be received by
March 25, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The Council is developing
an environmental assessment (EA) for
this action that describes the proposed
measures and other considered
alternatives and provides a thorough
analysis of the impacts of the proposed
measures and alternatives. The Council
submitted a decision draft of the
framework to NMFS that includes the
draft EA, a description of the Council’s
preferred alternative, the Council’s
rationale for selecting each alternative,
and an Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA). Copies of the decision
draft of the framework, the draft EA, and
the IRFA, are available upon request
from Thomas A. Nies, Executive
Director, New England Fishery
Management Council, 50 Water Street,
Newburyport, MA 01950.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\24FEP1.SGM
24FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 36 (Wednesday, February 24, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9139-9151]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03731]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
36 CFR Part 7
[NPS-GOGA-19691; PX.XGOGA1604.00.1]
RIN 1024-AE16
Special Regulations, Areas of the National Park Service, Golden
Gate National Recreation Area, Dog Management
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Park Service proposes to amend its special
regulations for Golden Gate National Recreation Area regarding dog
walking. The rule would apply to 22 locations within the park and would
designate areas within these locations for on-leash and regulated
(i.e., voice and sight control) off-leash dog walking. Areas in these
22 locations that are not designated as open to dogs would be closed to
dogs, except for service animals in accordance with National Park
Service regulations. The rule would modify and, in some circumstances,
relax the National Park System-wide pet regulations for these 22
locations. To the extent not modified by this rule, dog walking in all
NPS-managed areas within the park would continue to be regulated under
National Park System-wide pet regulations.
[[Page 9140]]
DATES: Comments must be received by 11:59 EST on April 25, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the Regulation
Identifier Number (RIN) 1024-AE16, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments after searching for RIN 1024-
AE16.
Mail or hand deliver to: General Superintendent, Golden
Gate National Recreation Area, Attn: Dog Management Proposed Rule, Fort
Mason, Building 201, San Francisco, CA 94123.
Informational Meetings: The NPS will schedule three (3)
informational meetings on this proposed dog management rule during the
60-day public comment period, and provide public notice of these
meetings in regional newspapers and on the park Web site at
www.nps.gov/goga/getinvolved/pub_mting_prop_rule.htm. Information on
specific locations, times, and dates of these informational meetings
will be posted on the same Web site and sent to those on the park's
Public Affairs Office mailing list.
Please see the Public Participation section under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION for more information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Golden Gate National Recreation Area,
Attn: Public Affairs Office (Alexandra Picavet), Fort Mason, Building
201, San Francisco, CA, 94123. Phone: (415) 561-4728. Email:
goga_dogmtg@nps.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation
It is the policy of the Department of the Interior, whenever
practicable, to afford the public an opportunity to participate in the
rulemaking process. The NPS initiated the rulemaking process in 2002
and then convened a Negotiated Rulemaking Committee in 2006. The
committee, which was comprised of representatives of multiple
stakeholder groups, met over the course of sixteen months in an effort
to reach consensus on a dog walking rule for GGNRA. Although the
Negotiated Rulemaking Committee was unable to reach consensus on all
issues, it did reach consensus on some issues. These limited areas of
consensus and input gained from committee discussions were carried
forward for analysis as the park developed the range of alternatives in
the draft Plan/SEIS.
In addition to that effort, and in accordance with the policy of
the Department of the Interior to afford the public an opportunity to
participate in the rulemaking process, interested persons may submit
written comments regarding this proposed rule by one of the methods
listed in the ADDRESSES section above
Please note that all submissions received must include the agency
name and (RIN) 1024-AE16 for this rulemaking. Comments received will be
posted without change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. If you commented on the Draft Dog Management
Plan/Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (draft Plan/SEIS),
your comment has been considered in drafting the proposed rule.
Comments submitted during this comment period should focus on this
proposed rule, not the draft Plan/SEIS. For example, the National Park
Service invites comments on the definitions contained in the proposed
rule and the clarity of the descriptions of areas open to dog walking;
the rules and restrictions that apply to dog walking and to Voice and
Sight Control areas; the rules and restrictions that apply to the
permitting program for walking four to six dogs; and whether commercial
dog walking should be allowed under the proposed rule. Comments on the
draft Plan/SEIS will be considered untimely because the comment period
on the draft Plan/SEIS has closed. Comments will not be accepted by
fax, email, or in any way other than those specified above, and bulk
comments in any format (hard copy or electronic) submitted on behalf of
others will not be considered. Organizations should direct their
members to submit comments individually using one of the methods
described above.
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. Please note that submissions merely stating support for
or opposition to the action under consideration without providing
supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in
making a determination. Please make your comments as specific as
possible and explain the basis for them.
Background
Authority and Jurisdiction
The National Park Service (NPS) manages the Golden Gate National
Recreation Area (GGNRA or park) as a unit of the National Park System.
Units of the National Park System are managed under the statutes
commonly known as the National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, the
General Authorities Act of 1970, and the Redwood Amendments of 1978
which amended the General Authorities Act (codified at 54 U.S.C. 100101
et. seq.). As explained in NPS Management Policies 2006, these
interrelated authorities express the fundamental purpose of the
National Park System which is to conserve park resources and values and
to provide for visitor enjoyment of these resources and values. The
mandate to protect park resources and values is complemented by a
statutory prohibition on the impairment of park resources and values.
To avoid impairment, park managers are directed to seek ways to avoid
and minimize adverse impacts on park resources and values to the
greatest extent practicable. Where there are conflicts between
conserving resources and values and providing for enjoyment of them,
conservation is to be the predominant goal. To aid in the regulation of
visitor activities within units of the National Park System, 54 U.S.C.
100751(a) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the
NPS, to ``prescribe such regulations as the Secretary considers
necessary or proper for the use and management of System units.''
An additional source of legal authority for the management of GGNRA
derives from the park's enabling legislation, which was enacted in 1972
when Congress created the GGNRA. The enabling legislation states that
the GGNRA was established ``to preserve for public use and enjoyment
certain areas of Marin and San Francisco Counties, California,
possessing outstanding natural, historic, scenic, and recreational
values, and in order to provide for the maintenance of needed
recreational open space necessary to urban environment and planning . .
. .'' (16 U.S.C. 460bb). The enabling act directs the Secretary of the
Interior, acting through the NPS, to ``utilize the resources in a
manner which will provide for recreation and educational opportunities
consistent with sound principles of land use planning and management,''
and to ``preserve the recreation area, as far as possible, in its
natural setting, and protect it from development and uses which would
destroy the scenic beauty and natural character of the area.'' (16
U.S.C. 460bb).
[[Page 9141]]
Description and Significance of Golden Gate National Recreation Area
GGNRA is one of the most highly-visited units of the National Park
System, with over 17.7 million visitors per year. The park is comprised
of numerous federally-managed sites interspersed with lands managed by
city, county, state, and regional agencies as well as private lands.
GGNRA-managed lands include 29.2 miles of bay and ocean shoreline
within three counties of the San Francisco Bay Area: San Francisco,
Marin, and San Mateo. The park contains significant historical and
natural resources: 711 historic structures, including five National
Historic Landmarks and 15 National Register properties; 47 registered
archeological sites; nine cultural landscapes, including five
lighthouses; 3,968 plant and animal species, including 37 federally-
listed threatened and endangered species (the 3rd largest number of
federally listed species in the National Park System); and 19 separate
ecosystems in seven distinct watersheds. Many of these species were
listed as threatened or endangered well after the park's establishment.
Since GGNRA was established in 1972, the amount of land managed by
the NPS has more than doubled as a result of acquisitions and boundary
expansions. The park boundary now encompasses approximately 80,000
acres in San Francisco, Marin, and San Mateo counties. Of that total
acreage, the NPS owns and manages approximately 18,500 acres.
Dog Walking in Golden Gate National Recreation Area
Dog walking in some areas of GGNRA began prior to the establishment
of the park, when dog walking, including off-leash dog walking,
occurred informally at sites under the jurisdiction of other federal,
state, or local entities or when the lands were privately owned. In the
park's early years, those practices continued largely uninterrupted,
despite the existence of a National Park System-wide regulation that
prohibited off-leash dog walking and required all pets to be on-leash
or under physical restrictive control (36 CFR 2.8, promulgated in 1966)
or crated, caged, restrained on-leash, or otherwise physically
controlled at all times (36 CFR 2.15, promulgated in 1983).
In 1978, the GGNRA Citizens' Advisory Commission, which was
established under the park's enabling legislation to coordinate public
involvement for the park, considered and proposed a pet policy
following input from park staff and the public. The policy provided
general guidance on dog walking and recommended certain locations in
the park for on-leash and off-leash, or ``voice control,'' dog walking,
and some locations that would exclude dogs. In 1979, the Commission
recommended the pet policy to the superintendent for adoption as a
GGNRA-specific policy (later known as the 1979 Pet Policy). Although
the NPS never promulgated this policy as a special regulation, for more
than 20 years the park operated under it despite the National Park
System-wide regulation prohibiting off-leash dog walking.
Since 1979, the San Francisco Bay Area population and overall use
of GGNRA lands have increased, as have the number of dog walkers in the
park based on park staff observation, partly due to the recent growth
of the commercial dog walking industry. At the same time, the number of
dog-related conflicts between park users with and without dogs has
risen, including dog bites and attacks, as has the concern about the
effect of uncontrolled dog behaviors on park visitor experiences.
Resource concerns have also increased since 1979 as park staff gained
greater knowledge of park resources and as a result of the listing of
several species with habitat in areas used by dog walkers as
threatened, endangered, or special-status species. The NPS has also
identified other native plant and animal species that require
protection under the NPS's broader conservation mandate.
A resource protection conflict between dog use and a listed species
occurred in the late 1990s when the NPS sought to close 12 acres at
Fort Funston to dogs in order to protect bank swallows (Riparia
riparia), a bird species listed as threatened by the State of
California in 1989. Fort Funston had been designated as an off-leash
``voice control'' area under the 1979 Pet Policy. Dog walking groups
challenged the closure in U.S. District Court. (Fort Funston Dog
Walkers v. Babbitt, 96 F. Supp. 2d 1021 (N.D. Cal. 2000).) Following a
determination that the NPS had likely violated procedural rules in
adopting the closure, the NPS undertook a subsequent public process and
was ultimately allowed to erect fences closing the 12-acre area to
dogs.
Additional legal challenges to the NPS's management of dog walking
occurred in the early 2000s. In January 2002, the NPS issued a Federal
Register notice explaining that the 1979 Pet Policy was in conflict
with the National Park System-wide regulation that requires dogs to be
leashed (36 CFR 2.15) and that the NPS was therefore rescinding the
1979 Pet Policy. (67 FR 1424 at 1425 (Jan. 11, 2002).) The NPS began
enforcing the leash requirement contained in 36 CFR 2.15, including in
areas formerly open to off-leash dog walking under the 1979 Pet Policy.
In 2004, several dog walkers who had been cited for failing to leash
their dogs challenged the NPS decision to rescind the 1979 Pet Policy.
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
determined that the NPS did not follow proper procedures in issuing the
2002 Federal Register notice and that public notice and comment was
required before adopting new restrictions on dog use that significantly
changed public use patterns or were highly controversial. (United
States v. Barley, 405 F. Supp. 2d 1121 (N.D. Cal. 2005.) As a result of
that decision, the 1979 Pet Policy has remained in place pending the
completion of this notice and comment rulemaking process, except for
portions of Ocean Beach and Crissy Field (currently known as the Snowy
Plover Protection Area and Wildlife Protection Area respectively) where
in 2008 the NPS adopted a special regulation to restrict off-leash dog
walking to protect sensitive wildlife. (36 CFR 7.97(d).) The proposed
rule would replace the special regulation at 36 CFR 7.97(d) by
permanently closing these areas to dogs. The closure of these areas
would be implemented by a provision of the proposed rule that
designates as closed any areas at Crissy Field and Ocean Beach not
specifically opened to dogs. Maps identifying the areas closed to dogs
would be made available to the public. Upon its effective date, the
final rule would terminate and replace the 1979 Pet Policy within
GGNRA.
Another recent modification to dog walking in GGNRA is reflected in
an interim public use restriction and permit requirement that NPS
adopted in June 2014 for commercial dog walkers. Commercial dog walkers
who use GGNRA lands in Marin and San Francisco counties are now limited
to no more than 6 dogs at any one time, and they must obtain a permit
from NPS when walking between four (4) and six (6) dogs at any one
time. This interim restriction was adopted by GGNRA following limits
placed on dog walkers in surrounding jurisdictions. [See link: https://www.nps.gov/goga/learn/management/upload/2014_Superintendent-s-CompendiumV2_access.pdf]. If the proposed rule is adopted by NPS, the
interim permit requirement would be superseded by the final GGNRA dog
walking special regulation.
[[Page 9142]]
Today, many parts of the San Francisco Bay Area are highly
urbanized, and some city, county, and state lands in the San Francisco
Bay Area have either limited areas available for dog walking or
prohibit dog walking on their lands altogether. Some residents of San
Francisco, Marin, and San Mateo counties view GGNRA lands as their
backyards. Some local residents with dogs find park lands convenient
and have come to expect them to be available for dog walking. These
same GGNRA lands, especially the coastal sites, are also popular with a
variety of park visitors who seek to experience the national park free
from dogs. Within the overarching mandate to protect park resources and
values, the proposed rule addresses the interests of these diverse
users by designating areas that are appropriate for on- or off-leash
dog walking, by adopting restrictions on dog use in other areas such as
limitations on the number of dogs, and by closing areas that are not
appropriate for dog use.
Dog Management Planning and Environmental Impact Analysis
In 2002, the NPS issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
asking for public input on whether the NPS should develop a new
regulation for dog walking in GGNRA. Following review of public
comments, the NPS initiated a dog management planning process under the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), together with a
Negotiated Rulemaking process in an effort to develop a consensus-based
proposed rule. After meeting for a 16 month period, the Negotiated
Rulemaking Committee, comprised of representative stakeholders, was
unable to reach consensus on a proposed rule and elected not to extend
its charter. The NPS decided to continue the dog management planning
process under NEPA and its associated public involvement process and
through the traditional notice and comment rulemaking process.
The NPS released the draft Dog Management Plan/Environmental Impact
Statement for public comment in 2011.The resulting public comments, and
the addition of a major new tract of land to the park (Rancho Corral de
Tierra), prompted the NPS to issue an updated draft plan and
supplemental EIS (draft Plan/SEIS). The draft Plan/SEIS was open for
public comment from September 6, 2013 until February 18, 2014. The
draft Plan/SEIS is available online at https://parkplanning.nps.gov/documentsList.cfm?projectID=11759 by clicking on the link entitled
``Draft Dog Management Plan/Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement.''
Proposed Rule
Relationship To Draft Plan/SEIS
The proposed rule is based on the preferred alternative
(Alternative F) described in the draft Plan/SEIS, which has been
modified slightly based on public comment and further analyses. In
general, the principal changes relate to conditions for walking four to
six dogs under an NPS permit, the adjustment of two Voice and Sight
Control Areas (Crissy Airfield and upper Fort Funston), the addition of
four new trail segments for on-leash dog walking (Rancho Corral de
Tierra), and the elimination of one (Fort Baker), clarifying
definitions, and additional considerations for the Monitoring and
Management Program. These specific changes are incorporated in this
proposed rule and will be included in the Preferred Alternative in the
Final Dog Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement. The proposed
rule uses updated and corrected trail and road names that are different
than the names used in the draft/SEIS. To reduce confusion, the changes
to trail and road names are posted on the park Web site at https://www.nps.gov/goga/learn/management/completed-plans-and-projects.htm and
are identified in the table at the end of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
General Summary
The 22 locations covered by the proposed rule are as follows by
County:
Marin County: Stinson Beach, Muir Beach, Homestead Valley,
Oakwood Valley, Alta Trail, Marin Headlands/Rodeo Beach and Vicinity,
Marin Headlands/Rodeo Valley, and Fort Baker.
San Francisco County: Fort Mason, Crissy Field, Fort Point
National Historic Site, Baker Beach, Lands End, Fort Miley, Sutro
Heights Park, Ocean Beach, and Fort Funston.
San Mateo County: Mori Point, Milagra Ridge, Sweeney
Ridge, Cattle Hill (if NPS acquires management responsibility for this
area), and Rancho Corral de Tierra.
Within the locations listed above, the proposed rule would
designate specific areas where dogs would be required to stay on leash,
where dogs may be off-leash but only when under immediate voice and
sight control, and where dog walking would be prohibited. Maps of
trails, beaches, and other areas open to dog walking would be available
at park visitor centers and on the park Web site once a final rule is
issued. Maps for this proposed rule are available online at
www.regulations.gov (click on ``Open Docket Folder'' after searching
for RIN 1024-AE16) and on the park Web site at https://www.nps.gov/goga/getinvolved/prop-rule-maps.htm. Due to the small scale of these maps
and the large areas covered, one overview map (#1) is provided along
with nineteen (19) other maps (from maps #2 to #20) to cover the
twenty-two (22) park locations addressed in this proposed rule (with 3
maps covering 2 locations each); these maps are visual aids to
illustrate the detailed area descriptions provided in the rule, which
are controlling.
The proposed rule provides for on-leash and off-leash dog walking
opportunities within these locations in a manner that is consistent
with NPS's legal mandates to conserve park resources and values and
provide for recreational and educational opportunities. The rule is
consistent with sound principles of land use planning and management,
and preserves the park's natural setting and protects it from uses that
could destroy its scenic beauty and natural character. Limitations and
restrictions on dog walking in these locations are designed to avoid or
minimize adverse impacts on park resources, promote health and safety,
reduce conflicts between diverse user groups, and address management
responsibilities.
Under 36 CFR 1.2(c), special regulations for an NPS unit may modify
or relax regulations in 36 CFR part 2 that apply to the entire National
Park System. The proposed rule would modify and, in some circumstances,
relax the National Park System-wide pet regulations at 36 CFR 2.15 for
the locations listed above. To the extent not modified or relaxed by
this rule, the National Park System-wide pet regulations at 36 CFR 2.15
would continue to apply to pets, including dogs, within GGNRA. Within
GGNRA's 22 park locations identified in this rule, the following
subsections of 36 CFR 2.15 would still apply: subsections (a)(1),
(a)(4), (c), (d), (e) and (f).
The proposed rule would authorize areas open to on-leash or off-
leash dog walking to be closed or subject to additional restrictions,
on a temporary or permanent basis, for the protection or restoration of
park resources, special events, implementation of management
responsibilities, health and safety, infrastructure projects, visitor
use conflicts, or other factors within the discretion of the
superintendent.
There are two scenarios under which dog walking opportunities may
be expanded under the proposed rule. First, if the state and local
entities with land management authority for Sharp Park Beach in San
Mateo County (see Mori Point map #17) decide to change
[[Page 9143]]
dog walking uses at Sharp Park Beach, a 0.2 acre area in the southeast
corner of the beach that is administered by the NPS may also be so
designated by the superintendent. Second, if the park adds new trails
to the park's trail system in any of the 22 locations covered by the
rule, the superintendent may designate such trails as open to on-leash
dog walking. The NPS would conduct the appropriate level of NEPA
compliance prior to designating any new trails for on-leash dog walking
and provide public notice of the corresponding new trail uses under one
or more of the methods listed in 36 CFR 1.7(a) before any such uses
would be implemented.
For GGNRA locations not addressed by this rule, including lands in
the northern district of the park managed by the Point Reyes National
Seashore, 36 CFR 2.15 would still apply.
The proposed rule also would not change the rules relating to dog
walking on lands, known as Area B, managed by the Presidio Trust. Dog
walking on lands managed by the Presidio Trust is managed in accordance
with the Trust's regulations in 36 CFR part 1001 and an Interim Final
Rule regarding commercial dog walking that went into effect on October
1, 2014. The Interim Final Rule requires commercial dog walkers with
four to six dogs to obtain and comply with an NPS permit when walking
dogs in Area B and prohibits commercial dog walkers from having more
than six dogs at one time. (See: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-08-19/pdf/2014-19514.pdf). The Trust's Interim Final Rule will remain
in place until the Trust issues a Final Rule.
Designated Dog Walking Areas and Permit Requirement
The following elements would apply to all of the locations within
GGNRA that would be governed by the proposed rule:
Dog walking would be prohibited except in the specific
areas or on the trails identified in the proposed rule. Dog walking
would not be allowed off-trail, in campgrounds, on designated swimming
beaches, on informal (i.e. ``social'') trails, in public buildings, or
in any area not designated by the proposed rule as open to dogs.
Dog walking on-leash would be allowed in parking lots, on
sidewalks, and on shoulders of paved, public roads.
All dogs would be required to have a current rabies
vaccination, and dog walkers would be responsible for providing
evidence of that for any dog in their care when walking in the park.
All dogs would be required to be licensed and tagged in
accordance with applicable ordinances of the county where the dog's
owner resides.
Each dog walker would be required to have the dog owner's
name, home address, and phone number available for each dog walked and
must provide this information upon request to any person authorized to
enforce the regulation.
No more than three dogs may be walked per dog walker at
one time without a permit. All dog walkers walking between four and six
dogs must obtain an NPS permit. (An example of the 2015 interim permit
for commercial dog walkers is available at: https://www.nps.gov/goga/planyourvisit/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&PageID=867836).
No more than six dogs may be walked per dog walker at any
one time.
Commercial dog walking is allowed in areas open to dog
walking according to the rules in this proposed rule for each park
location.
Service animals accompanying a person with a disability
would be allowed in the park in accordance with National Park System-
wide regulations.
Informal trails are not official trails and therefore are
not listed in the proposed rule and would be closed to dog walking.
Dog walking areas in each location would be delineated and
marked. Standard landscape design elements (e.g. vegetative barriers,
fencing, signage, landscape contours, paths, etc.) may be installed to
aid differentiation of dog walking areas provided that wildlife
movement is protected. Landscape design elements may also be utilized
to protect restoration areas, delineate areas that require closure or
separation for safety purposes, to reduce user conflicts, or to address
other dog management needs.
Dog walkers may not enter the park with more than six dogs
at one time. In addition, dog walkers entering the park with four or
more dogs may not circumvent the permit requirement by walking fewer
than four dogs at one time.
[cir] Permits would specify the areas, times and conditions under
which this activity may occur.
[cir] Display of the NPS-issued, permit identification by the
permitted dog walker would be required at all times when the permittee
is walking four to six dogs in GGNRA.
[cir] All permits would require proof of liability insurance and
approved dog-handling training through existing regionally or
nationally-accredited training courses offered by organizations
approved by the local county jurisdiction in which the activity will
occur, and as accepted by the superintendent. A list of such courses
can be obtained through the local county jurisdiction for that county
in which the dog walking permit is being requested. A list of courses
accepted by the superintendent will be posted on the park's Web site.
[cir] The NPS intends to recover the costs of administering the
special use permit program under 54 U.S.C. 103104. In order to obtain a
special use permit to walk more than three dogs at one time, the
proposed rule would require dog walkers to pay a permit fee to allow
the NPS to recover these costs.
Uncontrolled and Unattended Dogs
To protect park resources, reduce visitor conflict, enhance public
safety, and aid enforcement and monitoring, the proposed rule would
define the terms ``uncontrolled dog'' and ``unattended dog.'' The
definition of ``uncontrolled dog'' includes behavior by a dog that
results in uninvited or unwanted physical contact with a person or
another animal. To prevent unwanted and/or unsolicited contact from a
dog, dog walkers are advised to ask another person (with or without a
dog) whether it is acceptable for their dog to approach the other
person or that person's dog. Contact by a dog that results in uninvited
or unwanted physical contact would violate the proposed rule. Short of
actual physical contact, the definition of uncontrolled dog also
includes threatening behavior by dogs towards people or other animals
such as snarling, growling, snapping, chasing, charging, repeated
barking at, howling, or uninvited taking or attempting to take food.
Such behavior would violate the proposed rule.
The rule would prohibit dogs from being left unattended outside,
tied or untied. It would also prohibit dogs from being left unattended
in a parked vehicle where they could create a nuisance, disturb the
peace and tranquility of the park, or disturb wildlife; or where they
could reasonably be expected to experience suffering or distress (e.g.,
exposure to high temperatures, direct sunlight, or inadequate
ventilation).
Proof of Rabies Vaccination and Owner Identification
For the protection of the public and other pets, all dogs within
GGNRA must have a current rabies vaccination. All three counties that
encompass GGNRA lands (as well as neighboring Alameda County) require
dogs to be licensed, require proof of a current rabies vaccination to
acquire the license, and issue a proof of license (e.g., tag) that
[[Page 9144]]
may be fixed to the dog's collar and that enables the identity of the
owner to be confirmed. The NPS will accept these and other similarly
issued municipal licenses as proof of current rabies vaccination and
owner identification. In counties where current rabies documentation is
not required, where such ``annual'' tags are not issued, or where
counties are not able to release that information to NPS for purposes
of health and safety or law enforcement, a dog walker must produce
official documentation of a current rabies vaccination (such as vaccine
certificates by providers authorized to administer the vaccine by
relevant state or local authorities) upon request.
Monitoring-Based Management Program
As provided by the draft plan/SEIS, all areas open to dog walking,
including Voice and Sight-Control Areas, would be subject to a
Monitoring-Based Management Program to gauge compliance with NPS
regulations and ensure continued protection of park resources,
visitors, and staff. This program would include monitoring and
recording of noncompliance with the proposed rule, including behavior
that meets the definition of an uncontrolled dog or an unattended dog,
dog walking in prohibited areas, and off-leash dog walking in areas
where leashes are required. The program would also monitor and record
dog-related violations of other NPS regulations, such as for hazardous
conditions (e.g., aggressive behavior, dog rescues) (36 CFR
2.34(a)(4)), violations of areas closed to the public or to dogs (36
CFR 1.5(f)), protection of threatened or endangered species (36 CFR
2.2(a)(2) and 50 CFR part 17), vegetation (36 CFR 2.1(a)(1)(ii)),
wildlife (36 CFR 2.2(a)(2)), and government and third party property
(36 CFR 2.31(a)(3)).
If the superintendent determines that the level of compliance with
dog-related regulations is approaching an unacceptable level based on
issues such as the number or types of violations or dog-related impacts
to resources, visitors, park staff, health and safety, or peace and
tranquility, or is imposing an undue burden on administrative
resources, the superintendent must act to prevent those unacceptable
impacts by taking management actions. Examples of primary management
actions include increased outreach and education; increased area-
focused enforcement of regulations; proposed fine increases; additional
fencing, barriers or separations; or special use permit restrictions.
If primary management actions do not sufficiently address the
problem, the superintendent would implement secondary management
actions. Examples of secondary management actions may include, but are
not limited to increased buffer zones, and additional use restrictions
(e.g. limiting the number of dogs off-leash at any one time with one
dog walker, requiring tags or permits for accessing Voice and Sight
Control Areas, or short or long-term, dog walking area closures). The
authority to implement primary or secondary management actions is
provided in section (11) and would be exercised independent of the
superintendent's authority under 36 CFR 1.5 in order to provide the NPS
with the needed flexibility to respond to the impacts of dog walking in
designated areas and prevent unacceptable impacts or conditions before
they occur. Public notice of any action taken under this authority
would be given pursuant to one or more of the methods set forth in 36
CFR 1.7(a). Advance public notice would not be required in emergency
situations.
Compliance With Other Laws, Executive Orders, and Department Policy
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget will
review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this rule is not
significant.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of Executive Order
12866 while calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system
to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best,
most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory
ends. The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory
approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of
choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible,
and consistent with regulatory objectives. Executive Order 13563
emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available
science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public
participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this
rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule 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 information
contained in the economic analyses found in the report entitled
``Economic Analysis of the Proposed Rule for Dog Management in the
Golden Gate National Recreation Area,'' that is available online at
https://www.nps.gov/goga/getinvolved/plan-dog-mgt-rr.htm.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule:
(a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more.
(b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions.
(c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per
year. The rule does not have a significant or unique effect on state,
local or tribal governments or the private sector. It addresses public
use of national park lands, and imposes no requirements on other
agencies or governments. A statement containing the information
required by Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not
required.
Takings (Executive Order 12630)
This rule does not affect a taking of private property or otherwise
have takings implications under Executive Order 12630. A takings
implication assessment is not required.
Federalism (Executive Order 13132)
Under the criteria in section 1 of Executive Order 13132, this rule
does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism summary impact statement. This proposed
rule only affects use of NPS administered lands and waters. It has no
outside effects on other areas. A Federalism summary impact statement
is not required.
Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 12988)
This rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988.
This rule:
[[Page 9145]]
(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all
regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be
written to minimize litigation; and
(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all
regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal
standards.
Consultation With Indian Tribes (Executive Order 13175 and Department
Policy)
The Department of the Interior strives to strengthen its
government-to-government relationship with Indian Tribes through a
commitment to consultation with Indian Tribes and recognition of their
right to self-governance and tribal sovereignty. We have evaluated this
rule under the Department's consultation policy and under the criteria
in Executive Order 13175 and have determined that it has no substantial
direct effects on federally recognized Indian tribes and that
consultation under the Department's tribal consultation policy is not
required. Tribes traditionally associated with GGNRA were consulted,
however, in the development of the draft Plan/SEIS.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain any new collections of information that
require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. OMB has approved the information collection
requirements associated with NPS Special Park Use Permits and has
assigned OMB Control Number 1024-0026 (expires 08/31/16). An agency may
not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a
collection of information (e.g., NPS survey) unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act
The preferred alternative from the draft Plan/SEIS, which this rule
proposes to implement, constitutes a major Federal action with the
potential to significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
We have prepared the draft Plan/SEIS in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Because of their inter-relatedness,
the draft Plan/SEIS serves as NEPA compliance for this rule. The public
comment period for the draft Plan/SEIS closed on February 18, 2014. The
draft Plan/SEIS is available online at https://parkplanning.nps.gov/documentsList.cfm?projectID=11759 by clicking on the link entitled
``Draft Dog Management Plan/Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement.'' A final Plan/FEIS will be developed after public comments
on the proposed rule have been analyzed and considered as appropriate.
A final rule will be published after a Record of Decision has been
issued on the FEIS.
Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive Order 13211)
This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition
in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is not
required.
Clarity of This Rule
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 (section 1(b)(12)) and
12988 (section 3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 (section 1(a)), and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(c) Use common, everyday words and clear language rather than
jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections
or paragraphs that you find unclear, which sections or sentences are
too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful,
etc.
Drafting Information: The primary authors of this regulation are:
Russel J. Wilson, Chief, Division of Regulations, Jurisdiction, and
Special Park Uses, National Park Service; Jay Calhoun, Regulations
Program Specialist, National Park Service; Michael Edwards, Project
Manager, Environmental Quality Division, National Park Service; Mike
Savidge, Chief, Strategic Planning, Golden Gate National Recreation
Area, National Park Service; and Shirwin Smith, former Management
Assistant, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, National Park Service.
Table of Updated Trail and Road Names
The following table identifies the updated trail and road names
that are different than the names used in the draft/SEIS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trail and road names used in Updated trail and road names
County Map No. draft/SEIS used in proposed rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marin.................................. 5 Oakwood Valley Road........... Oakwood Valley Trail.
Marin.................................. 5 Oakwood Valley Trail.......... Oakwood Meadow Trail.
Marin.................................. 5 Pacheco Fire Road............. Pacheco Trail.
Marin.................................. 5 Orchard Fire Road............. Orchard Trail.
Marin.................................. 7 Smith Road Connector Trail.... Smith Trail.
Marin.................................. 8 Bay Trail..................... Fort Baker Bay Trail.
Marin.................................. 8 Center Road................... Fort Baker Trail.
San Francisco.......................... 9 Trail north from Great Meadow. Fort Mason Bay Trail.
San Francisco.......................... 9 Trail east of Youth Hostel.... Black Point Battery Trail.
San Francisco.......................... 9 Stairs from Great Meadow to Fort Mason Stairs.
Lower Ft. Mason.
San Francisco.......................... 9 Paths around Great Meadow..... Great Meadow Paths.
San Francisco.......................... 11 Presidio Coastal Trail........ Coastal Trail.
San Francisco.......................... 11 Unmarked connector between Battery East Spur Trail.
Battery East Trail and
Presidio Promenade.
San Francisco.......................... 11 Andrews Road.................. Andrews Trail.
San Francisco.......................... 11 Connector between Battery East Presidio Promenade.
Trail and Coastal Trail on
the west side of the Golden
Gate Bridge toll plaza.
San Francisco.......................... 11 Presidio Coastal Trail........ Coastal Trail.
San Francisco.......................... 11 Fort Point Promenade.......... Marine Drive.
San Francisco.......................... 12 Access Trails to south beach Access Trails #3, 4, 5 and 6.
from parking lots..
[[Page 9146]]
San Francisco.......................... 13 Connector between Coastal Legion of Honor Trail.
Trail and Camino del Mar
Trail/Legion of Staircase.
San Francisco.......................... 13 Steps from Legion of Honor Memorial Stairs.
parking lot to Coastal Trail.
San Francisco.......................... 13 Trail from Merrie Way Parking Merrie Way Trail.
Lot north to Coastal Trail.
San Francisco.......................... 13 Trails from Merrie Way Parking Lands End Staircase, North and
Lot west to Coastal Trail. South.
San Francisco.......................... 13 Trail from Merrie Way Parking Fort Miley Trail.
Lot west to El Camino del Mar.
San Francisco.......................... 14 Trail through Sutro Heights... Sutro Heights Loop Trail.
San Francisco.......................... 14 48th to Sutro Loop Trail...... Sutro Heights Trail.
San Francisco.......................... 14 Balboa to Sutro Loop Trail.... La Playa Trail.
San Francisco.......................... 16 Sunset Trail from north end of Coastal Trail.
Fort Funston to main parking
lot.
San Francisco.......................... 16 Battery Davis Road on east Battery Davis Trail.
side of the battery.
San Francisco.......................... 16 Eastern connector from Battery Funston Trail.
Davis Trail to Funston Beach
Trail (North).
San Mateo.............................. 18 Milagra Ridge Fire Road....... Milagra Ridge Road.
San Mateo.............................. 18 Trail to bunker............... Milagra Battery Trail.
San Mateo.............................. 19 Sweeney Ridge Trail from Mori Ridge Trail.
Shelldance Nursery to the
Notch Trail.
San Mateo.............................. 19 Farallon View Trail from Cattle Hill Trail.
Baquiano Trail to western
Cattle Hill boundary.
San Mateo.............................. 20 Connector trail north of old Farallone Trail.
San Pedro Mountain Road.
San Mateo.............................. 20 Connector trail north of old Corona Pedro Trail.
San Pedro Mountain Road.
San Mateo.............................. 20 Connector trail south of old Le Conte Trail.
San Pedro Mountain Road.
San Mateo.............................. 20 Vicente Ridge Trail........... San Vicente Trail.
San Mateo.............................. 20 Connector to Vicente Ridge Ranchette Trail.
Trail.
San Mateo.............................. 20 Denniston Ridge Trail......... French Trail.
San Mateo.............................. 20 Memorial Loop................. Flat Top Trail and Clipper
Ridge Trail (lower section).
San Mateo.............................. 20 Connector from Memorial Loop Clipper Ridge Trail.
to junction with Denniston
Ridge Trail.
San Mateo.............................. 20 Connector from community to Almeria and San Carlos Trails.
Clipper Ridge Trail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7
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
0
1. The authority citation for part 7 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 54 U.S.C. 100101, 100751, 320102; Sec. 7.96 also
issued under D.C. Code 10-137 and D.C. Code 50-2201.07.
0
2. In Sec. 7.97, revise paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 7.97 Golden Gate National Recreation Area.
* * * * *
(d)(1) What is the scope of this regulation? (i) The regulations
contained in this paragraph (d) apply to persons with dogs at the
following locations within Golden Gate National Recreation Area:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Marin County: Stinson Beach, Muir Beach,
Homestead Valley, Oakwood
Valley, Alta Trail, Marin
Headlands/Rodeo Beach and
vicinity, Marin Headlands/Rodeo
Valley, and Fort Baker.
In San Francisco County: Fort Mason, Crissy Field, Fort
Point National Historic Site,
Baker Beach, Lands End, Fort
Miley, Sutro Heights Park, Ocean
Beach, and Fort Funston.
In San Mateo County: Mori Point, Milagra Ridge,
Sweeney Ridge, Cattle Hill (if
NPS assumes management
responsibility for this area),
and Rancho Corral de Tierra.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) To the extent not modified or relaxed by the regulations
contained in paragraph (d) of this section, the regulations in section
2.15 of this chapter govern pets, including dog walking, within Golden
Gate National Recreation Area. Paragraph (d) of this section does not
apply to service dogs accompanying persons with a disability as
authorized under applicable National Park Service regulations.
(2) What terms do I need to know? The following definitions apply
to paragraph (d) of this section only:
Leash means a chain, rope, cord, or strap not longer than 6 feet in
length with a clip or snap for rapid attachment to a choke chain,
collar, or harness, all the parts of which are of sufficient strength
to hold the weight of the dog and are suitable for walking the dog and
controlling it.
Unattended dog means a dog left without a guardian in sight, tied
or untied outside; or left in a parked vehicle, where it creates a
nuisance, disturbs the peace and tranquility of the
[[Page 9147]]
park, or disturbs wildlife; or left where the dog could reasonably be
expected to experience suffering or distress due to, for example,
exposure to high temperatures, direct sunlight, or inadequate
ventilation.
Uncontrolled dog means a dog, on or off-leash, that exhibits any
behavior that threatens, disturbs, harasses, or demonstrates aggression
toward another person, dog, or domesticated animal or wildlife in a
manner that a reasonable person would find threatening, disturbing,
harassing, or aggressive. Such behaviors include snarling, growling,
repeated barking at, howling, chasing, charging, snapping at, or
uninvited attempting to take or taking food from a person;
demonstrating uninvited or unwanted physical contact with a person or
another animal; annoying, pursuing, hunting, harming, wounding,
attacking, capturing, or killing wildlife or a domesticated animal;
digging into ground, soil or vegetation; or failing to be under voice
and sight control in a Voice and Sight Control Area.
Voice and Sight Control Area means an area designated in paragraph
(d) of this section and identified on maps available at park visitor
centers and on the park Web site where dogs may be walked off-leash
when under voice and sight control.
Voice and sight control means a dog that is within direct eyesight
of the dog walker and that the dog walker is able to both immediately
recall directly to his or her side, without regard to circumstances or
distractions, and attach a leash to the dog's collar. The dog walker
must demonstrate this ability when requested to do so by an authorized
person.
(3) Where may I walk or take a dog at the locations identified in
this paragraph (d)? You may walk or take a dog at the locations
identified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section only in those areas
specified below and subject to the restrictions as noted in this
paragraph (d).
(i) You may walk a dog on-leash in parking lots, on sidewalks, on
paved public roads, and in all areas where off-leash use is authorized.
(ii) You may walk one to three dogs per person at one time on-leash
in the areas designated in the following table. The maps referenced in
the table will be available at park visitor centers and on the park Web
site.
Table 1 to Sec. 7.97--On-Leash Dog Walking: One to Three Dogs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Stinson Beach (see map #2)
(1) Designated connecting trail from a signed trailhead between the
dunes on the western side of the northern parking lot to the county-
owned Upton Beach.
(2) North and Central picnic areas.
(B) Muir Beach (see map #3)
(1) Trail parallel to the access road from Pacific Way Bridge
through the Muir Beach parking lot.
(2) Muir Beach Trail.
(3) The sand beach and surf area outside the fenced or signed buffer
areas. When there is a surface water connection between the ocean
and the lagoon, dogs are not allowed into the surface waters
connecting the lagoon and the ocean.
(C) Homestead Valley (see map #4)
(1) Homestead Trail from Four Corners to two community connecting
trails beyond the GGNRA boundary, the Eagle Trail and an extension
of the Homestead Trail.
(2) Homestead Summit Trail from Homestead Fire Road to junction with
the Homestead Trail at Four Corners.
(3) Homestead Fire Road from Lattie Lane to Panoramic Highway.
(D) Oakwood Valley (see map #5)
(1) That section of the Rhubarb Trail from the Tamalpais Community
Service District's property access at the park boundary, east to
Tennessee Valley Road.
(2) Oakwood Valley Trail (formerly Oakwood Valley Fire Road) to the
junction with the Alta Trail.
(E) Alta Trail (see map #5)
(1) Alta Trail from the entrance at Donahue Street to the junction
with the Morning Sun Trail.
(2) Orchard and Pacheco Trails from the park boundary to the Alta
Trail.
(F) Marin Headlands/Rodeo Beach and Vicinity (see map #6)
(1) Coastal Trail from the Fort Cronkhite parking area to its
intersection with Old Bunker Road, and continuing east on the Old
Bunker Road south to the Fort Cronkhite Trail and back along the
Lagoon Trail to the Fort Cronkhite parking lot.
(2) Beach access steps at the north end of the beach. When there is
a surface water connection between the ocean and the lagoon, dogs
are not allowed on the beach access steps or in the surface water
connecting the ocean and the lagoon.
(3) Lagoon Trail along Mitchell Road to and over the pedestrian
bridge to the beach.
(4) Batteries Loop Trail (from the Battery Alexander parking lot
trailhead).
(G) Marin Headlands/Rodeo Valley (see map #7)
(1) Rodeo Avenue Trail and Morning Sun Trail connecting to and
including the Alta Trail.
(2) Rodeo Valley Trail from the trailhead at the intersection of
Bunker and McCullough Roads to the intersection with the Bobcat
Trail.
(3) Bobcat Trail between Rodeo Valley Trail and Miwok Trail.
(4) Miwok Trail from Bobcat Trail to Lagoon Trail.
(5) Smith Trail from parking lot to Rodeo Valley Trail.
(H) Fort Baker (see map #8)
(1) Parade Ground.
(2) The length of the Fort Baker Bay Trail from the northern parking
lot off Conzelman Road at the northwest end of the Golden Gate
Bridge down along Sommerville Road and up to section of same trail
along East Road to the park boundary.
(3) Fort Baker Trail from southern intersection with Fort Baker Bay
Trail at Sommerville Road to the northern intersection with the
Fort Baker Bay Trail at East Road.
(4) Connecting trail from northeastern section of main parking lot
(south of Bay Area Discovery Museum) to Fort Baker Bay Trail, and
connecting paths from western side of same parking lot to Center
Road.
(I) Fort Mason (see map #9)
(1) The multi-use Fort Mason Bay Trail (McDowell Avenue) from the
north end of Van Ness Avenue at the Municipal Pier to Laguna
Street.
(2) The Black Point Battery Trail from Van Ness Avenue through the
lower gun platform level of Black Point Battery to the Fort Mason
Bay Trail.
(3) Great Meadow paths and grass areas south of the Fort Mason Bay
Trail between the western side of Building 201 (GGNRA Park
Headquarters) and Laguna Street.
(4) The triangular grass area between Shafter Court and the park
boundary along Bay Street.
[[Page 9148]]
(5) Grass area between MacArthur and Van Ness Avenues south of
Building 9. Grass areas between MacArthur Avenue and the Fort Mason
Quad residences.
(6) Grass area between Building 101 and entrance road to Bay Street
parking lot.
(7) Grass area between Franklin Street exit to Bay Street and
entrance road to Shafter Court.
(J) Crissy Field (see map #10)
(1) Crissy Field Promenade from the eastern park boundary to Marine
Drive.
(2) All access paths connecting the Promenade to Central Beach.
(3) All flat grass and composite areas of East Crissy Field between
the Promenade Cut-off Trail and the southern section of the East
Beach Picnic Trail, in the west, to the eastern park boundary,
bounded in the north by the Promenade and by the Fort Mason Multi-
Use Path in the south, including the East Beach picnic area.
(4) Crissy Airfield.
(5) The developed paths and hardened areas (not stairs) outside the
National Marine Sanctuary's Gulf of the Farallones buildings and
outside the Crissy Center facilities.
(6) The Mason Street Multi-Use path.
(7) Crissy Field Warming Hut picnic area.
(K) Fort Point National Historic Site (see map #11)
(1) Northern shoulder of Marine Drive west along the multi-use
access road to the fort.
(2) Battery East Trail from Marine Drive continuing west to the
intersection with the Presidio Promenade.
(3) The Andrews Trail connecting to and including the full length of
the Presidio Promenade from Long Avenue to the Coastal Trail.
(4) Coastal Trail on the western side of the southern Golden Gate
Bridge approach going south to the Merchant Road parking lot and
Baker Beach.
(L) Baker Beach (see map #12)
(1) Coastal Trail from the connection with the Presidio Promenade at
the south side of the Golden Gate Bridge to the Baker Beach parking
lot.
(2) That section of beach extending south from access Trail #3 to
the signed, restricted buffer area at Lobos Creek, and the shallow,
tidal waters immediately off-shore of the on-leash area.
(3) Beach access Trail #3 thru Trail #6 and the access path from the
25th Avenue gate to the beach.
(4) All picnic areas except the south picnic area, a designated dog-
free area.
(M) Lands End (see map #13)
(1) Coastal Trail from the eastern park boundary near 32nd Avenue to
the Lands End parking lot.
(2) El Camino del Mar Trail from the park boundary to the Memorial
parking lot.
(3) Legion of Honor Trail.
(4) Memorial Stairs.
(5) Merrie Way Trail.
(6) The north and south Lands End Staircase Trails.
(N) Fort Miley (see map #13)
(1) The East Fort Miley Trail from Clement Street to the NPS
boundary at the Legion of Honor (just beyond its intersection with
the Veteran's Trail).
(O) Sutro Heights Park (see map #14)
(1) The access trail from the Sutro parking lot.
(2) Sutro Heights Loop Trail and adjacent grass lawn areas within
this trail loop.
(3) Sutro Heights Trail and adjacent grass lawn areas between it and
the Sutro Heights Loop Trail.
(4) La Playa Trail.
(5) The parapet.
(P) Ocean Beach (see map #15)
(1) Coastal Trail south from the Cliff House along the sidewalk
continuing on that section of trail east of the dunes paralleling
the Great Highway to Sloat Boulevard.
(2) Beach access stairs between Stairwell #1, the northernmost
stairwell closest to the Cliff House, and Stairwell #21.
(Q) Fort Funston (see map #16)
(1) The Coastal Trail from the Great Highway south to the Coastal
Trail Sand Ladder connecting to Funston Beach.
(2) The Battery Davis Trail (East).
(3) The John Muir Trail.
(4) That trail along northern edge of main parking lot between the
Coastal and Chip Trails.
(5) That segment of the Sunset Trail from the main parking lot south
to the southern parking lot below the main entrance.
(R) Mori Point (see map #17)
(1) Old Mori Trail.
(2) Pollywog Trail.
(3) Coastal Trail.
(4) The southeastern section of Sharp Park beach within the NPS
boundary.
(S) Milagra Ridge (see map #18)
(1) Milagra Ridge Road within the park boundary from Sharp Park Road
entrance west to the Milagra Battery Trail.
(2) Milagra Battery Trail from Battery #244 to the parking lot at
the west boundary of the site (Connemara).
(T) Sweeney Ridge (see map #19)
(1) Sneath Lane from the parking area west up to the intersection
with the Sweeney Ridge Trail.
(2) Sweeney Ridge Trail from the Portola Discovery site to the
former Nike Missile site.
(U) Cattle Hill (see map #19) If the National Park Service acquires
management responsibility for Cattle Hill, after giving public notice
in accordance with 36 CFR 1.7, dog walking would be authorized on:.
(1) The Baquiano Trail from Fassler Avenue up to Cattle Hill Trail.
(2) The Cattle Hill Trail.
(V) Rancho Corral de Tierra (see map #20)
Montara area:
(1) Le Conte Trail.
(2) Corona Pedro Trail.
(3) Old San Pedro Mountain Road.
[[Page 9149]]
(4) Farallon Trail from the park boundary in the west continuing
east to its intersection with the Corona Pedro Trail.
Moss Beach area:
(5) San Vicente Trail.
(6) Ranchette Trail.
El Granada area:
(7) French Trail between the San Carlos Trail and its
intersection with the Clipper Ridge Trail.
(8) Flat Top Trail.
(9) Clipper Ridge Trail.
(10) Almeria Trail.
(11) San Carlos Trail.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) You may walk four to six dogs per person at one time on-leash
only pursuant to a permit issued by the NPS in areas designated in the
following table. The maps referenced in the table will be available at
park visitor centers and on the park Web site.
Table 2 to Sec. 7.97-- On-Leash Dog Walking: Four to Six Dogs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Alta Trail (see map #5). Alta Trail from the entrance at Donahue
Street south to the intersection with the Orchard Trail.
(B) Marin Headlands/Rodeo Beach & Vicinity (see map #6)
(1) Beach access steps at the north end of the beach. When there is
a surface water connection between the ocean and the lagoon, dogs
are not allowed on the beach access steps or in the surface water
connecting the ocean and the lagoon.
(2) Lagoon Trail along Mitchell Road to and over the pedestrian
bridge to the beach.
(C) Fort Baker (see map #8)
(1) Parade Ground.
(2) The length of the Fort Baker Bay Trail from the northern parking
lot off Conzelman Road at the northwest end of the Golden Gate
Bridge down along Sommerville Road and up to section of same trail
along East Road to the park boundary.
(3) Fort Baker Trail from southern intersection with Fort Baker Bay
Trail at Sommerville Road to the northern intersection with the
Fort Baker Bay Trail at East Road.
(4) Connecting trail from northeastern section of main parking lot
(south of Bay Area Discovery Museum) to Fort Baker Bay Trail, and
connecting paths from western side of same parking lot to Center
Road.
(D) Fort Mason (see map #9)
(1) The multi-use Fort Mason Bay Trail (McDowell Avenue) from the
north end of Van Ness Avenue at the Municipal Pier to Laguna
Street.
(2) The Black Point Battery Trail from Van Ness Avenue through the
lower gun platform level of Black Point Battery to the Fort Mason
Bay Trail.
(3) Great Meadow paths south of the Fort Mason Bay Trail between the
western side of Building 201 (GGNRA Park Headquarters) and Laguna
Street.
(4) The triangular grass area between Shafter Court and the park
boundary along Bay Street.
(5) Grass area between MacArthur and Van Ness Avenues south of
Building 9. Grass areas between MacArthur Avenue and the Fort Mason
Quad residences.
(6) Grass area between Building 101 and entrance road to Bay Street
parking lot.
(7) Grass area between Franklin Street exit to Bay Street and
entrance road to Shafter Court.
(E) Crissy Field (see map #10)
(1) Crissy Airfield.
(2) Crissy Promenade: The portion of the trail leading from the
western-most side of the East Beach parking lot to the eastern-most
access path to Central Beach; and those short segments of the
Crissy Promenade that provide a direct crossing and connection
between the Crissy Airfield paths and the paths leading to the
western portion of Central Beach, designated for Direct Beach
Access.
(3) The Mason Street Multi-Use path.
(F) Baker Beach (see map #12)
(1) Beach access Trail #3 thru Trail #6 and the access path from the
25th Avenue gate to the beach.
(2) That section of beach extending south from access Trail # 3 to
the signed, restricted buffer area at Lobos Creek, and the shallow,
tidal waters immediately off-shore of the on-leash area.
(G) Fort Funston (see map #16)
(1) The Coastal Trail between the Funston Beach Trail (North) to the
Coastal Trail Sand Ladder on Funston Beach.
(2) The Battery Davis Trail (East).
(3) The John Muir Trail.
(4) That trail along northern edge of main parking lot between the
Coastal and Chip Trails
(5) That segment of the Sunset Trail from the main parking lot south
to the southern parking lot below the main entrance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iv) You may walk one to three dogs per person at one time on-leash
or under voice and sight control in the Voice and Sight Control Areas
designated in the following table. The maps referenced in the table
will be available at park visitor centers and on the park Web site.
Table 3 to Sec. 7.97--Voice and Sight Control or On-Leash Dog Walking:
One to Three Dogs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Marin Headlands/Rodeo Beach and Vicinity (see map #6). On the beach
west and south of the signed or fenced buffer areas from the northern
terminus of the beach south to the ``sea stacks'' which divide Rodeo
Beach from South Rodeo Beach, including the adjacent waters immediately
off-shore. When there is a surface water connection between the ocean
and the lagoon, dogs are not allowed on the beach access steps or in
the surface water connecting the ocean and the lagoon.
[[Page 9150]]
(B) Fort Mason (see map #9). The southwest section of upper Fort Mason
bounded on the northwest by the diagonal path connecting the Fort Mason
Bay Trail to the Laguna Street path and continuing southward to Bay
Street and then eastward to the parking lot and north to the hedges
bordering the path around the Great Meadow, continuing northwest back
to the Fort Mason Bay Trail.
(C) Crissy Field (Central Beach) (see map #10). Central Beach from the
fenced, eastern boundary of the western foredunes to the fenced buffer
zone on the west side of the tidal marsh outlet to the bay, including
the adjacent waters immediately off-shore, but not including the dunes,
on-leash paths to the beach, or the sand spit and waters north of the
tidal marsh outlet.
(D) Crissy Field (Crissy Airfield) (see map #10). Central area of Crissy
Airfield, bounded by the middle path on its western side and a newly-
proposed path (aligned in the north from the second-most western access
to Central beach to the Mason Street multi-use path in the south) on
its eastern side and by on-leash buffers along its northern and
southern boundaries.
(E) Ocean Beach (see map #15). The northern terminus of the beach to
Stairwell 21, including the adjacent waters immediately off-shore.
(F) Fort Funston (Upper Funston) (see map #16)
(1) The area northeast of the Funston Trail, bordered by a signed
northern border paralleling and aligned with the Funston Beach
(North) Trail, east to the bottom of the embankment in the
northeast, and the tree line in the east and south.
(2) The Funston Trail.
(3) The area east of, but not including, the Coastal Trail, north of
the main parking lot, encompassing the Chip Trail and its eastern
embankment, to the intersection with the on-leash John Muir Trail.
(4) The Battery Davis Trail (West).
(G) Fort Funston (Funston Beach) (see map #16)
(1) Funston Beach extending south from the intersection with Funston
Beach Trail (North) to the intersection with, but not including,
the Coastal Trail Sand Ladder on the beach; includes the adjacent
waters immediately off-shore.
(2) Funston Beach Trail (North).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(v) You may walk four to six dogs per person at one time on-leash
or under voice and sight control only pursuant to a permit issued by
the NPS in the Voice and Sight Control Areas designated in the
following table. The maps referenced in the table will be available at
park visitor centers and on the park Web site.
Table 4 to Sec. 7.97--Voice and Sight Control or On-Leash Dog Walking:
Four to Six Dogs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Marin Headlands/Rodeo Beach & Vicinity (see map #6). On the beach
west and south of the signed or fenced buffer areas from the northern
terminus of the beach south to the ``sea stacks'' which divide Rodeo
Beach from South Rodeo Beach, including the adjacent waters immediately
off-shore. When there is a surface water connection between the ocean
and the lagoon, dogs are not allowed on the beach access steps or in
the surface water connecting the ocean and the lagoon.
(B) Fort Mason (see map #9). The southwest section of upper Fort Mason
bounded on the northwest by the diagonal path connecting the Fort Mason
Bay Trail to the Laguna Street path and continuing southward to Bay
Street and then eastward to the parking lot and north to the hedges
bordering the path around the Great Meadow, continuing northwest back
to the Fort Mason Bay Trail.
(C) Crissy Field (Central Beach) (see map #10). Central Beach from the
fenced, eastern boundary of the western foredunes to the fenced buffer
zone on the west side of the tidal marsh outlet to the bay, including
the adjacent waters immediately off-shore, but not including the dunes,
on-leash paths to the beach, or the sand spit and waters north of the
tidal marsh outlet.
(D) Crissy Field (Crissy Airfield) (see map #10). Central area of Crissy
Airfield, bounded by the middle path on its western side and a newly-
proposed (aligned in the north from the second-most western access to
Central beach to the Mason Street multi-use path in the south) path on
its eastern side and by on-leash buffers along its northern and
southern boundaries.
(E) Ocean Beach (see map #15). The northern terminus of the beach to
Stairwell 21, including the adjacent waters immediately off-shore.
(F) Fort Funston (Upper Funston) (see map #16)
(1) The area northeast of the Funston Trail, bordered by a signed
northern border paralleling and aligned with the Funston Beach
(North) Trail, east to the bottom of the embankment in the
northeast, and the tree line in the east and south.
(2) The Funston Trail.
(3) The area east of, but not including, the Coastal Trail, north of
the main parking lot, encompassing the Chip Trail and its eastern
embankment, to the intersection with the on-leash John Muir Trail.
(4) The Battery Davis Trail (West).
(G) Fort Funston (Funston Beach) (see map #16)
(1) Funston Beach extending south from the intersection with Funston
Beach Trail (North) to the intersection with, but not including,
the Coastal Trail Sand Ladder on the beach; includes the adjacent
waters immediately off-shore.
(2) Funston Beach Trail (North).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(vi) You may not walk a dog on- or off-leash in campgrounds, public
buildings, designated swimming beaches, sensitive habitat areas, and
any other areas not specifically opened to dog walking in this
paragraph (d).
(vii) If the park adds new trails to the park's trail system in any
of the 22 locations covered by this paragraph (d), the superintendent
may designate such trails as open to on-leash dog walking. If the state
and local entities with land management authority for Sharp Park Beach
decide to change dog walking uses at Sharp Park Beach, the
superintendent may designate the small, adjacent southeast corner (0.2
acres) of the beach that is administered by the NPS for the same use.
Notice of this change will be provided by one or more of the methods in
section 1.7 of this chapter.
(viii) Areas open to dog walking by this paragraph (d)will be
identified on maps available at park visitor centers and on the park
Web site.
(4) When must I have a leash? A leash must be attached to each dog
and simultaneously held by the dog walker, unless the dog is present in
a Voice and Sight Control Area or the dog is fully confined in a
vehicle, cage or crate. In a Voice and Sight Control Area, a leash for
each dog must be carried by the dog walker but does not have to be
attached to the dog, provided that the dog is under voice and sight
control.
(5) How many dogs may I walk at one time without a permit? You may
walk up to three dogs at one time per person within areas designated as
open to dog walking in paragraph (d) of this section
[[Page 9151]]
in accordance with the leash requirements that apply to each area.
(6) May I leave a dog unattended? No. An unattended dog is
prohibited.
(7) May I walk more than three dogs at one time? (i) Walking four
to six dogs per person at one time is prohibited unless you obtain a
dog walking permit from the NPS and remain in areas designated for that
use in paragraph (d)(3) of this section during the times specified in
paragraph (d)(9) below.
(ii) Walking more than six dogs at one time is prohibited.
(iii) Persons may not enter the park with more than six dogs at one
time. In addition, dog walkers entering the park with four or more dogs
may not circumvent the permit requirement by leaving dogs unattended or
in a parked vehicle while they walk fewer than four dogs at one time.
(8) How do I obtain an NPS dog walking permit? (i) Annual permits
may be obtained by applying in person at the Golden Gate National
Recreation Area, Office of Special Uses, Fort Mason, San Francisco, CA.
94123, or on the park Web site. All permits will require proof of
liability insurance and proof of successfully completing a dog-handling
training course that is accepted by the superintendent. The NPS charges
a fee to recover the costs of administering the special use permits.
Permit applicants must pay the fee charged by the NPS in order to
obtain a special use permit.
(ii) Violation of a term or condition of a permit issued in
accordance with this section is prohibited. In addition, the
superintendent may temporarily or permanently revoke a person's dog
walking permit, or deny a person's request for a dog walking permit,
based upon documented violation(s) of NPS regulations or failure to
comply with the terms and conditions of a dog walking permit.
(9) At what times will permitted dog walking of four to six dogs be
allowed? Permitted dog walking of four to six dogs is only authorized
Monday through Friday between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. The times for permitted
dog walking of four to six dogs may be adjusted by the superintendent
following public notice consistent with one of the methods listed in
Sec. 1.7(a) of this chapter.
(10) What other restrictions apply in areas open to dog walking
under this paragraph (d)? (i) All dogs must have identification tags
affixed to their collar that confirm proof of current rabies
vaccinations and their owner's name, address, and phone number; except
as provided for in paragraph (d)(10)(ii) of this section.
(ii) In counties or municipalities where an annual dog license is
issued that requires proof of a current rabies vaccination, a valid,
current county or municipal license tag suffices for such proof. In
counties or municipalities where such current rabies documentation is
not required, where such ``annual'' tags are not issued or where
counties or municipalities are not able to release that information to
NPS for purposes of health and safety or law enforcement, a dog walker
must produce official documentation meeting the requirements in
paragraph (d)(10)(i) of this section when asked by any authorized
person.
(iii) A dog walker must immediately pick up a dog's excrement and
place it in a designated garbage container or remove it from the park.
Excrement may not be left on the ground, even if bagged, and may not be
deposited in compost or recycling receptacles, or left on the ground in
the park for collection later.
(iv) An uncontrolled dog is prohibited. A dog walker must be in
control of his or her dog at all times regardless of circumstances or
distractions. An authorized person may instruct a dog walker to remove
an uncontrolled dog from the park.
(v) A dog in heat is prohibited.
(vi) A dog under four months old must be leashed, crated or
confined in a carrier at all times, including in Voice and Sight
Control Areas.
(vii) Dogs are not allowed to breed in the park.
(11) May the superintendent impose additional closures or
restrictions in areas open to dog walking? Yes. Areas or portions
thereof that are open to on-leash or off-leash dog walking may be
closed or subject to additional restrictions by the superintendent, on
a temporary or permanent basis, for the protection or restoration of
park resources, special events, implementation of management
responsibilities, health and safety, infrastructure projects, visitor
use conflicts, or other factors within the discretion of the
superintendent. Except in emergency situations, the NPS will provide
public notice of such changes under one or more of the methods listed
in Sec. 1.7 of this chapter before any such changes are implemented.
Dated: January 28, 2016.
Michael Bean,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2016-03731 Filed 2-23-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-EJ-P