FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 121

Appendix A: Laws Establishing 

the Ice Age National Scientific Reserve 

and the Ice Age National Scenic Trail
122 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 123

Appendixes
124 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 125

Appendixes

Appendix B: town of Cross Plains resolution 

regarding old sauk pass
126 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 127

Appendixes

Appendix C: Wisconsin Department 

of natural Resources Compliance Form 
128 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 

 

acronyms and abbreviations

 CBA Choosing by Advantages

 CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

 CLR cultural landscape report

 EIS environmental impact statement

 GMP general management plan

 NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

 NPS National Park Service

 CFR Code of Federal Regulations

 PEPC Planning, Environment, and Public Comment

 PL public law

 USC United States Code

 USDI U.S. Department of the Interior

 USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

WDNR Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

WDOT Wisconsin Department of Transportation

appendix D:
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 129

Appendixes

appendix E: Planning team

National Park Service

Ruth Heikkinen

Outdoor Recreation Planner

Project Manager, Primary Author 

10 years with the National Park Service

Masters of Public Management, 

University of Maryland

Christina Miller

Natural Resource Specialist–Planner

Project/Interdisciplinary Team Member

5 years with the National Park Service

Master’s in Environmental Policy and 

Management for Natural Resources, 

University of Denver

Tom Gilbert

Superintendent, Ice Age National Scenic Trail

Participant

30 years with the National Park Service

B.S., Park and Recreation Resources, 

Michigan State University

Pamela Schuler

Manager, Ice Age National Scenic Trail

Participant

20 Years with the National Park Service

Bachelor of Science, 

Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, 

University of Wisconsin

Dean Gettinger

Management Assistant

Participant

12 years with the National Park Service, 

3 years with the Bureau of Land Management

M.S., Resource Recreation and Tourism, 

University of Idaho

Mary Tano

Outdoor Recreation Planner

Participant

9 years with the National Park Service

Masters of Environmental Biology, 

Governors State University

Douglas T. Wilder

Coordinator - Geospatial Support Center

Mapping and data development

8 years with the National Park Service 

(15 years in Geographic Information Systems) 

M.S., Marine Science (Geology), 

University of South Florida 
130 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 

appendix E: Planning team (continued)

Wisconsin Department 

of Natural Resources

Jeff Prey

Senior Planner

Participant

25 years with the State of Wisconsin

M.S., University of Wisconsin – Madison 

Rene Lee

Park Manager

Participant

13 years with the Wisconsin Department 

of Natural Resources

Degree in Design Engineering and Law Enforcement, 

Madison Area Technical College 

Dana White Quam

Participant

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

Regional Park Specialist

30 years with the Department of Natural Resources

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Steven J. Lenz

District Manager, 

Leopold Wetland Management District

Planning Team Member or Participant

31 years with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

B.S., University of Wisconsin – Stevens Point

Partners

Ice Age Trail Alliance

Mike Wollmer

Executive Director

Participant

Executive Director since 2007, 

20 years as a volunteer associated with 

the Ice Age Trail Alliance

Bachelor of Business Administration, 

University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee

Andrew (“Drew”) Hanson III

Trailway Director

Participant 

13 years with the Ice Age Trail Alliance

Bachelors in Geography, 

University of Wisconsin – Madison

University of Wisconsin

David Mickelson

Glacial Geologist

Participant, Secondary Author

39 years with the University of Wisconsin – Madison

Ph.D., Geology, 

Ohio State University

John Harrington

Professor of Landscape Architecture

Participant

27 years with the University of Wisconsin – Madison

M.S., Landscape Architecture, 

University of Wisconsin – Madison

Dee Finnegan

Community Preservation Planner (through NPS 

Student Temporary Employment Program)

Participant

Current University of Wisconsin – Madison 

Landscape Architecture Graduate Student
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 131

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT

1

Comment/Response Report 

Comments within each piece of correspondence that are being responded to are highlighted in grey. Organization: Oak Valley Estates Homeowners Association Received: Mar 12,2012 16:46:26 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

Appreciate the opportunity to see and comment on plans for the Cross Plains Ice Age Complex. The residential complex that I live in, and my house in particular are directly across US Hwy 14 from the Northern border of the park (my home is actually visible on your maps), and so we will watch its development with great interest. I have just a couple comments, all relative to your preferred alternative 5 in the Executive Summary brochure you mailed to my home: 

1. I believe there is a typo when you refer to "working with the village of Cross Plains to manage traffic along Old Sauk Pass between Cleveland Road and North Birch Trail..." Those roads are in the town and not the village of Cross Plains, and that is the political jurisdiction I think you intend to work with. 2. A more substantive comment has to do with recreational bicycle traffic into and out of the complex. You mention in your document a bike path along US 14 from the City of Middleton to the complex (a distance of roughly 5 miles), but you also mention that you don't envision either the National Park Service or the DNR building such a path. Bike traffic from the Middleton/Madison area to the complex could be problematic, and most especially so in the absence of a bike path along US 14, since the bulk of that bike traffic will then travel along narrow back country roads in the townships of Cross Plains and probably Middleton. There are already problems and antipathy between bikers and local residents on these roads, and the greater bike traffic generated by the Ice Age Complex will only serve to exacerbate the situation. I think it's disingenuous for the NPS and DNR to disavow major responsibility in resolving the issue of bike traffic to and from the complex, which will be in and of itself the generator of such traffic. There are solutions (the State of Wisconsin owns the rail corridor along US 14 from the City of Middleton to the Village of Cross Plains and beyond, which would probably be an excellent place for a bike path), but there's a substantial cost in developing this and possibly bike lanes on township roads, and local governments are in no way equipped to handle this. I think planning for management of bike traffic from nearby municipalities and the complex needs to be an integral and early part of your planning for it. 3. In the same vein, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (I believe they also own the rail corridor I mentioned above) is planning a fairly substantial reworking of US 14 in the immediate area of the complex, and I think it would be prudent to talk with them, well in advance of it. The contact I have there on this project is Tom Koprowski, Jr., Planner/Project Manager, Wisconsin DOT-SW Region, 2101 Wright Street, Madison, WI 53704. 608-246-3869, thomas.koprowski@dot.wi.gov, if that's any use to you. 4. Lastly, the housing complex I live in, Oak Valley Estates, has a modest nature conservancy that we've been maintaining and developing for many years, largely through the sweat equity of the homeowners, including a prairie restoration with a couple ponds immediately across US 14 from the Ice Age Complex. As neighbors, I would hope we could call on your staff for advice and guidance from time to time on planning and managing our own lands.

All references to the “village” of Cross Plains have been changed to the “town” of Cross Plains. The plan states that a bike path could be accommodated – this means that the NPS 

and WDNR are willing to allow the placement of a bike path in this location should it be desired, however, the funding would have to be secured by other organizations in support of developing this path. The need for a Transportation Plan, in coordination with the expansion and study of Hwy 14 and bike path as well as to provide sustainable alternative transportation options, has been added to the section of the document, “Needed Future Studies and Plans.” The National Park Service has met with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation and their consultant regarding the improvements proposed for State Highway 14, and will continue to coordinate with them. The National Park Service welcomes coordinated efforts with adjacent landowners in resource management and preservation. 
132 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

2

Organization: Ice Age Trail alliance Received: Mar 20,2012 15:54:48 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

I am writing to support Alternative 5 (Preferred Alternative) for the Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains. In 

addition, I encourage the NPS to avoid any significant alteration or broadening of the proposed land uses beyond those already present in Alternatives 1 through 5. I especially hope the NPS will avoid permitting bicycle, horse, ATV, and snowmobile use of the Complex.

Horseback riding, snowmobiling, and mountain biking were evaluated during the planning process and a detailed explanation of why each of these activities were dismissed can be reviewed in the “Alternatives Considered but Dismissed” section in Chapter 2. The bike path noted under alternative 5, the preferred alternative, would be located along only Hwy 14 and would not traverse the Complex. Cyclists could, however, continue to utilize the currently paved road system through the Complex. 

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: Mar 25,2012 17:30:56 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

Thanks for the opportunity to provide comment on the Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains. I would like to see alterative #2 chosen, and go forward leasing space in the village of Cross Plains to house staff. One such location for staff might be the building that houses the nonprofit Ice Age Trail Foundation. If not that one, there are many other possibilities on Main Street. Building and staff should be located in the city, not out on the preserve. Let the preserve be as natural as possible without the roads, new buildings, amenities needed for water, sewer etc. That does not belong along Stagecoach Rd. There are plenty of places for picnics at the many local parks, such as Pope Park, Indian Lake and Festge Park...all with shelters for gatherings. Trails should be left natural, I am not a fan of paved trails, especially those that lead to the gorge along Stagecoach Rd. I would like to see trails dedicated to horses, as a neighbor to the west boards horses and it would be great to keep that local land use activity. Seeking ways to work with the local residents would build support for the project in the community. Remove the existing home on the federal land along Stagecoach Rd. keep the barn if needed for land management equipment and supplies (herbicide, fire equipment, etc.). Do hope funding for staff could be secured to help manage the trail on federal, state and the Ice Age Trail Foundation land, and to increase native vegetation (prairie, oak savanna) at various large preserves, including the Ice Age Trail Complex.

Locating staff and/or visitor services in the Village of Cross Plains was considered as part of this planning process. From both a cost and effectiveness perspective, these ideas were dismissed. The National Park Service is currently incurring costs to lease office space for staff administering the Ice Age National Scenic Trail that could be avoided if they were co-located with staff providing services to visitors at the Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains. Additionally, since the same staff may serve both functions, it is most efficient to have them together in one location. In order to provide a rich visitor experience as well as to prevent damage to resources, the best location for a visitor center was determined to be on previously-disturbed land close to what will likely be the most attractive destinations – the gorge and high points with impressive views of both the glaciated and driftless landscapes. There will be a variety of trails located on the site, most of which will be naturalappearing and built to sustainable standards. The trail to the gorge will be a popular destination that will need to accommodate a variety of users such as groups and people with disabilities, as well as protect the sensitivity of the site’s resources. Therefore, the trail will be wider and will require a stable surface. Trails to and around the Gorge need only be Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) or Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant which requires that surfaces be stable, firm, and slip resistant. Horseback riding within or across portions of the Complex was evaluated during the planning process. A detailed explanation of why this activity was dismissed can be reviewed in the “Alternatives Considered but Dismissed” section in Chapter 2. 

Organization: Ice Age Trail Alliance Received: Mar 26,2012 13:10:09 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

I am a long-time hiker (I lived adjacent to the DNR property 1984-2003) and volunteer at the DNR property. I am one of three primary invasive plant control persons there; I am responsible for 95% of the garlic mustard surveillance. Both the DNR and NPS properties along Old Sauk Pass are wonderful. At the DNR, the glacial features, spring wildflowers, and restored prairies are beautiful. At the NPS, the distance views are very nice and the open space allows hiking, skiing, and snowshoeing. 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 133

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

3

The gorge: --When we have volunteer work days at the DNR property, I always take the volunteers over to see the gorge from its rim. They are impressed. I was out to the gorge yesterday to check my thought that the gorge from above or within is significantly more impressive in person than via photo. Yes, the gorge is deeper and its walls more vertical with the view of the eye versus that of the camera. --Hiking in the bottom of the gorge is a fine excursion. One gets the feel for the size and beauty of this geological feature. I think allowing visitors to walk up or down the floor of the gorge, from near the top off Old Sauk Pass down to the bottom would be a very attractive experience at Cross Plains State Park. (Note: there is an old farm road that allows essentially flat inclined walking from the bottom of the gorge back up to a field to the west above.) Alternative 3 in the executive summary mentions "partial access along the floor of the gorge." The central, most impressive, part of the gorge floor has the steepest walls. Above and below this section, the slopes are gentler. I think access to the gorge floor should run "top to bottom." --In Alternative 4, "a pedestrian bridge spanning the gorge" is considered. I think this would be a major mistake. One can get the feel of the gorge from its rims without needing a bridge across it. The experience of hiking the gorge floor would be seriously negatively impacted by such a structure above. --I "worry" a bit currently re the morel hunters in May climbing on the walls of the gorge in some places, causing erosion. Possibly with development of the State Park, positively-worded signs would dissuade most persons from climbing on the walls. The name of the gorge: I have always known it as Wilkie gorge. In their booklets about Dane County glacial landscapes, David Mickelson (2007) and Lee Clayton and John Attig (1997) refer to the gorge as "Wilkie gorge." Mac and Jane Wilkie, "custodians of the land," sold two of the major parcels which will become the park to the state and national governments. I think continuing to honor them a bit with the use of "Wilkie gorge" is appropriate. I see on pages 75, 79, 80, 81 in the draft management plan the gorge is called "Cross Plains gorge." I can't really imagine a person saying "Cross Plains gorge at Cross Plains State Park" in place of "Wilkie gorge at Cross Plains State Park." A certain absence of euphony with the former!

Typically, public lands/features are not named after people, although there are exceptions. The National Park Service Masterplan refers to it as the “Gorge.” Robert Black who wrote the book advocating for the Reserve called it the “Wilkie Gorge.” “Cross Plains Gorge” identifies a place and fits within the larger Ice Age National Scientific Reserve idea. 

Organization: Ice Age Trail Alliance Received: Mar 28,2012 13:46:47 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

I have read the summary and I am in favor of Alternative 5 - the Preferred Alternative. I think it offers the best possibilities for future education and enjoyment of the area while caring for the environmental factors.

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: Apr 16,2012 09:45:15 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

I like option 5. I think an interpretive center and administrative office would be great so the area children can learn about the ecosystem. It is hard to find good up to date info on the Ice Age Trail system so an office where one could meet with a ranger to plan a trip would be great. I would also like to see this new area hook up with the City of Middleton Trail system and the Pheasant Branch Preserve and the future Good Neighbor trial. Please send me updates by email and mail.
134 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

4

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: Apr 16,2012 12:06:45 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

I changed my mind, I like option 4 best because I the bike trail and primitive camping. I think it is important to have a bike trail across the property and link to the local bike trails. But I like option 5 because the visitors center. I would like hybrid of 4 and 5 with a visitor center and bike trail. 

A number of responses were received from the 2009 open house meetings that stated they did not want a bike trail across the site. Since there is already a scenic road system, bikes will follow it through the park. However, we are aware of the need for alternative transportation to and around the site. The issue will be address in the Transportation Plan.

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: Apr 20,2012 07:53:18 Correspondence Type: Web Form Correspondence Response 

I support alternative 5.

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: Apr 23,2012 00:00:00 Correspondence Type: Web Form & Letter 

Correspondence Response 

Once complete, the Draft General Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement, hereinafter referred to as the "draft plan", will be a landmark document in the more than fifty year effort to create an Ice Age National Park in Wisconsin. >Purpose of the Cross Plains Reserve< One of the questions that is easy for a person to ask about the Cross Plains Reserve is, "What's so special about it?" In an apparent attempt to answer this question, the draft plan quotes Robert Black from 1974. But Black did not live and work in Wisconsin for terribly long and thus did not know the area, or Wisconsin, as well as others before or since. As Wisconsin geologist Lee Clayton has said, Black was "obsessed" with the subglacial drainage way (i.e. Wilkie Gorge). The person who knew the area of the Cross Plains Reserve the best was Black's predecessor. Frederick Thwaites completed his master's degree in 1908 from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Thwaites wrote his master's thesis on the geology of the Cross Plains-Verona-Middleton area. He also worked for a period doing fieldwork in southern Wisconsin for eminent glacial geologist William Alden of the United States Geological Survey (USGS). Most of his distinguished career-38 years-was spent teaching geology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison where he authored the standard textbook on glacial geology that was used by college students around the United States for decades. Not surprisingly, Thwaites and Ice Age Trail founder Ray Zillmer corresponded with one another. The text of a letter Zillmer sent to Thwaites in 1958 is available at http://iceagenationalpark.blogspot.com/p/october-1958-letter-from-ray-zillmer-to.html 

Frederick Thwaites died in 1961. When the National Park Service was studying Ray Zillmer's proposal for an Ice Age National Park in the late 1950s and early 1960s, the body of work by Frederick Thwaites factored heavily in their research. Specifically, with his master's thesis focused on the area and years of leading geology classes on field trips through the area, Thwaites was the undisputable expert on the area of the Cross Plains Reserve. 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 135

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

5

In 1961 National Park Service geologist Robert Rose completed a report on areas under study for an Ice Age National Park in Wisconsin. The following excerpts from his report, "Preliminary Geological Report on 1961 Field Study of Proposed Ice Age Area in Wisconsin", clearly outline the uniqueness of the area he called the moraine-driftless area, between Madison, Verona and Cross Plains. "This report is based on a field study conducted during the last half of April, 1961. Its purpose is to identify and describe more specifically the more important segments considered in a proposed area of the National Park System which would feature the story of continental glaciation in America. Among the localities or segments evaluated there are four which are regarded as basically essential in the adequate presentation and interpretation of the story. These so-called key areas are: Kettle Moraine [Northern Purchase Unit], the moraine-driftless area near Cross Plains [emphasis added], the Devils Lake-Baraboo Range segment, and Interstate Park. Evidences of continental glaciation are to be found throughout North America north of the southernmost limit of the advance of the ice. Wisconsin is particularly rich in its abundance of varied evidences of glaciation located relatively close together - [and] offers the best opportunity for the establishment of a unit of the National Park System featuring continental glaciation. The driftless area of Wisconsin is world famous because it is an unglaciated area of considerable size - lying far within extensively glaciated territory. Several eminent geologists who have been consulted are unanimous in the view that a segment embracing a good example of the moraine-driftless area relationships is highly essential [emphasis added] in illustrating the story of continental glaciation. With the completion of each field study, beginning with the 

initial reconnaissance of 1958, the desirability of including such a segment becomes more firmly recognized. The relationships between moraine and bedrock [emphasis added] of sedimentary origin are most strikingly exhibited in an area of about 9,000 acres immediately south and east of Cross Plains. Within this area rugged morainal ridges belonging to the Wisconsin [Glaciation] occur while the strikingly eroded margins of the driftless area lie immediately to the west and south. In brief, this key area is a selfcontained unit scenically and scientifically." Therefore, based on Robert Rose's 1961 report, the intended purpose of the Cross Plains Reserve was to tell the story of the "relationships between moraine and bedrock of sedimentary origin". It was one of the four "key areas" in Wisconsin he and others identified. Notice that Rose initially referred to it as, "the moraine-driftless area near Cross Plains"-not something like, 'the subglacial channel near Cross Plains', as Black might have. The Cross Plains Reserve was chosen as a unit of the Ice Age National Scientific Reserve, and is most special, because of its two broad landscapes that sit side by side. It is a landscape crossroads with a several hundred million year old landscape on one side and a roughly 15,000 year old landscape on the other. This significance was understood in the years prior to, and instrumental to, Congress passing the 1964 law but has been obscured by the narrow focus of Mr. Black that followed. Since features associated with moraines are common and well-represented along other segments of the Ice Age Trail and at other units of the National Scientific Reserve, the critical role that the Cross Plains Reserve must fill (in completing the interpretation of the Ice Age story in Wisconsin), i.e. its purpose, is to showcase "the strikingly eroded margins of the driftless area". To succeed the Cross Plains Reserve must contain a representative portion of the Driftless Area which means the boundary of the Cross Plains 
136 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

6

Reserve must be expanded. Although Mr. Rose recommended 9,000 acres, significantly less acreage will suffice. >Boundary Expansion< Areas to Add to the Complex The 80 acres purchased by the DNR for the Ice Age Trail in 2010 that is located immediately west of proposed Ice Age Complex Addition Parcel B should be added to the Complex. It contains land formations that are textbook Driftless Area features and that are more dramatic than others currently in the Complex. If the 2010 acquisition parcel is excluded, the Complex falls short of being able to tell the story of an unglaciated landscape and how dramatically different the Driftless Area is from a glaciated landscape. Other parcels that contain significant Driftless Area landforms in the area bounded by Mineral Point Road, County Highway P, Stagecoach Road, North Birch Trail, Old Sauk Pass and Timber Lane should also be considered for additions to the Complex. Surrounding Scenic Resources Because the current and future proposed vegetation of the Complex is predominantly agriculture, grassland and oak opening, and because the Complex features vistas of both lands within and outside of the Complex, consideration must be given to the protection of surrounding undeveloped scenic areas that contribute to the visitor experience. Except for perhaps Wilkie Gorge, the most outstanding vistas of the Complex face outward toward surrounding lands. That is, some of the surrounding properties are more important to the visitor's experience of the scenery than properties within the Complex, as its boundaries are currently drawn. Protection of these scenic resources using some form of conservation or scenic easement or purchase of development rights would not change the current conditions of these areas and could be acquired from willing landowners. These important surrounding scenic resources are in two areas that are adjacent to the boundary of the Complex. First is an approximately one-quarter-mile by one-mile area that extends northwest from the proposed Ice Age Complex Addition Parcel A. The scenic resource straddles a portion of a ridge that Wisconsin's first scientist Increase A. Lapham referred to in 1861 as the Great Dividing Ridge. A scenic/conservation easement or purchase of development rights over this area would ensure protection of the long westward views of Blue Mounds from several of the high elevation points in the Complex. Just one building along the ridge through this area would mar the view and eliminate the potential of weaving Blue Mounds (the highest point of the Driftless Area) into the interpretive story of the Complex and one of the most scenicly significant views of the Complex. Existing agricultural practices and equestrian uses of this adjacent scenic resource area are compatible with purpose of the Complex and could be accommodated in the easement. The second, albeit lower priority, adjacent scenic resource in need of protection are the undeveloped bluffsides and blufftops north of highway 14. A scenic/conservation easement over these areas would ensure protection of the native prairie remnants present and of the pleasant view they provide from northfacing areas of the DNR's existing ownership. >Interpretation< The Complex offers a wonderful place, and in some ways the best place, to present various interpretive themes to the public. 

The NPS and WDNR will continue to work with adjacent landowners or land management entities within the viewshed to protect the scenic resources as much as possible.There are five Primary Interpretive Themes identified for the Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains, and these are described in Chapter 1. The specifics of each theme would be further detailed in a Long-Range Interpretive Plan, which is identified in Chapter 2 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 137

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

7

First among these is the previously discussed moraine-driftless relationships that NPS geologist Robert Rose outlined in 1961. This is the most important interpretive theme of the Complex because it is the reason a National Scientific Reserve unit was designated at this place. Since glacial features are so prominent along the Ice Age Trail and conversely somewhat challenging to interpret at the Complex due to the suburbanization east of Timber Lane, the telltale features of the Driftless Area are most in need of interpretation at the Complex. Easily interpreted, textbook features of the unglaciated Driftless Area include bedrock outcrops (the larger and more dramatic, the better) and the absence of non-native boulders, i.e. erratics. An easy nature walk that is enjoyed by young and old is to walk from the Wilkie farmstead to the highpoint vista on the NPS property to enjoy the view to the west of the Driftless Area and then continue walking south to the old agricultural field edge where rocks were removed from cultivated fields and piled by past farmers. With minor prompting an untrained eye will notice that these rock piles are unlike other rock piles along nearly the entire length of the Ice Age Trail because they are absent of the rounded boulders that are commonplace in glaciated regions. For contrast, walk back to the former-Wilkie 

farmstead then across Old Sauk Pass road and continue north to the rock piles along the former agricultural fields near the middle of the current DNR ownership. These rock piles are noticeably different than those found a few minutes earlier on the current NPS ownership. A naturalist can weave these features into a fascinating story for visitors. Children love this exercise. It must be noted that we owe an interpretive thanks to the past farmers of these lands for their agricultural practice of moving rocks from cultivated fields to piles on field edges. Not only did they make it easier for themselves to farm these fields but they also made it easier for us to interpret the moraine-driftless relationships for the public. In this instance, the farmers organized the interpretive artifacts into museumlike displays for the convenience of naturalists and the public. The farmers should be recognized and these rock piles must be protected. There are a few sedimentary bedrock outcrops on the existing public lands of the Complex. Larger, more dramatic, more easily interpreted bedrock outcrops are slightly west of the proposed Complex boundary. Bedrock outcrops are important to the significance of this place because they are comprised of rock that is very different from the erratics of the nearby glaciated area. These relationships are of the precise kind that led 19th century geologists in Europe to ask questions and eventually begin to understand that it was continental glaciations, many thousands of years ago, that transported the rounded rocks that looked nothing like the nearby bedrock. Again, a naturalist can bring these stories to life for the visitor. A second interpretive theme of the Complex is glacial meltwater and small proglacial lakes. The draft plan does a fine job of noting this theme. A third interpretive theme is the story of the geologists who helped our civilization understand past continental glaciations, especially those who worked in Wisconsin. Our state has been home to some very big names in geology, including Thomas Chamberlin, Rollin Salisbury, William Alden and Frederick Thwaites. Chamberlin is responsible for a period of history being named the Wisconsin Glaciation and his connection to the Ice Age Trail is presented at http://pedestrianview.blogspot.com/2011/03/unwittingice-age-trail-pioneer.html Interpretation of this theme is most practical if an interpretive building/center is someday constructed at the Complex where the work of these prominent past geologists could be told in a set of interpretive displays. Another way to honor the important work of geologists, and their contributions to the existence of the Complex, would be to name landforms after them. For instance, Wilkie Gorge could be renamed, Black Gorge, to honor Robert Black's interest in this special feature-also giving the place a fitting enchanted name. A bedrock outcrop firmly within the Driftless Area could be 

named Salisbury Rock, to honor the co-author of the momentous 1885 USGS paper, "Preliminary paper on the driftless area of the upper Mississippi Valley". 

as a “Needed Future Study and Plan.” 
138 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES append

ix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

8

Other interpretive themes, such as the land cover types of agriculture, prairie and oak opening, as well as the difference between a bedrock quarry and an outwash quarry, could also be highlighted at the Complex. >Possible Future Trail Connection Location< Figure 8, Map for Alternative 5, Preferred Alternative shows a "Possible Future Trail Connection". The concept of this connection is sound because it would certainly benefit the public, however it is shown in an undesirable location because it would be too near existing private buildings to the east. A better location for such a connection would be between the 80-acre parcel purchased by the DNR in 2010 for the Ice Age Trail and the place along the existing Complex boundary that is shown on this map, so that the connection is less vertical, more horizontal or diagonal. >Trail Use< I agree with the draft plan's basic position that the Complex should be primarily a pedestrian use park. The public will gain the greatest benefit from, and appreciation of, the uniqueness of the Complex by walking. However, as the boundary is expanded westward, I see it as acceptable and even advantageous to allow a modest amount of equestrian and snowmobile use of carefully planned trails in those expanded areas to the west. 

Placing the IANST within the identified corridor would get the trail visitor off of the paved road (Timber Lane) and into more natural areas and for longer stretches of trail.This would provide a better visitor experience by more immediately placing the visitor within the landscape or landforms that resulted from continental glaciation, away from developments as much as possible. Also, this would provide a safer visitor experience by minimizing conflicts between hikers and vehicles on paved roads. 

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: Apr 24,2012 09:29:55 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

This comment is an addition to the 5-page document I posted last evening and mailed today. 

The name "Cross Plains Reserve" (i.e. "Cross Plains Unit of the Ice Age National Scientific Reserve") does not represent the place very well and is uninspiring. Although the Reserve is a landscape crossroads (hinted at in the "Cross" part of the current name), "Plains" is completely contrary to the landscape of the place. The current name says nothing about the uniqueness of this very special place. Forty years ago, before there was any public land at the place, it was simply convenient to name it (when the idea for the park was only a concept) after the nearest village and town. The current name has served the place well enough but now the current name inhibits its growth and development. Please consider changing the name to something more meaningful and inspiring. I recommend changing it to "Driftless Border Reserve" (i.e. "Driftless Border Unit of the Ice Age National Scientific Reserve"). This name change would give the place meaning, standing and context within the National Park System and State Park System of Wisconsin.

The “Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains was a working title for this area that reflects the varied designations, not a formal legal title. We are open to changing the name to something that better evokes the resource itself while still respecting the various designations. 

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: Apr 26,2012 14:58:18 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

This comment is in addition to those I submitted a couple days ago and mailed to the Denver address this morning. 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 139

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

9

>Land Transfers< All publicly owned properties shown on figure ES-1 that are located west of Timber Lane and that are not currently held by the National Park Service should be transferred to the National Park Service to be held permanently for the American people. The highest priorities for transfer to NPS should be the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service parcel known as Shovelers Sink and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources State Ice Age Trail Areas known as the former-McNutt, former-Laufenberg and formerZander. >The Ice Age National Scenic Trail< Trail layout and design of the future route of the Ice Age Trail should begin in 2013. The route of the Trail must remain south of Old Sauk Pass in order to minimize the number of road crossings and give future Trail users the most natural/primitive experience possible through the largest roadless area in Dane County. For background on Ice Age Trail roadless areas, see http://pedestrianview.blogspot.com/2012/01/roadless-areas-along-ice-age-trail.html

Placing the IANST within the identified corridor would get the trail visitor off of the paved road (Timber Lane) and into more natural areas and for longer stretches of trail.This would provide a better visitor experience by more immediately placing the visitor within the landscape or landforms that resulted from continental glaciation, away from developments as much as possible. Also, this would provide a safer visitor experience by minimizing conflicts between hikers and vehicles on paved roads. 

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: May 01,2012 05:25:42 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

I am a homeowner located within the proposed park with small children. I am concerned about the increase in traffic. Going for a walk on the road, especially with my children, will likely become hazardous if the proposed number of people actually start to visit the area. Additionally, getting to and from my home may become an annoyance, if not a safety concern. I have already encountered groups of people who walk in the middle of the road while visiting the park. They do not move to the side of the road. I am also concerned about the increase in noise pollution to the area. One of the reasons we live in the country is for the peace and quiet. We have had a few people already walking past our property with dogs who have not been on leashes. I am concerned about running into unfriendly dogs and possibly unfriendly people. I am particularly concerned about dogs coming up to my children. We play outside on a regular basis and I do not want to feel as though they cannot safely play outside. I am also concerned about people walking past our home. The property line between our home and the DNR land is very close to our house. Although at this time there aren't any plans to put in trails by our house, people are already visiting the area by us. If people continue to walk near our home, signs and possible barriers will need to be put up so people are aware that this is a private residence.

The Complex would be managed to ensure, to every extent possible, the safety and privacy of adjacent landowners. Once the Ice Age Trail staff is on-site, safety and privacy issues would likely be minimized as staff can provide visitors with appropriate site orientation and direction. Also, several of the user capacity indicators and standards that were developed for the protection of resources and visitor experiences, may be useful indicators for safety and privacy issues. These can be found in the “User Capacity” and “Indicators and Standards” sections in Chapter 2. Additionally, as noted in this General Management Plan, a separate plan will be developed to identify the best locations for trail placement. This trail development plan will consider a range of alternatives and be accompanied by an Environmental Assessment reflecting comments from the public, including residents of private lands adjacent to the Complex. Addressing safety and privacy concerns of residents will be 

a priority for this plan. As noted on pages 36 and 37 of this plan, dogs need to be onleash unless they are used for hunting, which will be allowed on only U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service land and WDNR property, as and where determined appropriate. Communication with our neighbors will be key and until the park is staffed, we might consider holding an annual neighborhood meeting to provide park updates and to address any potential issues regarding trail layout, dogs, burning, hunting, etc. 

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: May 01,2012 08:18:12 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

I sold 28 acres to the Ice Age Project several years ago. My understanding was there would not be any trails placed on the parcel of land that I sold to them. I understand that now there are monies available to 

The Complex would be managed to ensure, to every extent possible, the safety and privacy of adjacent landowners. Once the Ice Age Trail staff is on-site, safety and 
140 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

10

expand this project. 3 years ago I sold my home and remaining 8 acres of land joining the 28 acres to my daughter and her family. They have concerns that trails could be placed near their home which could potentially be a privacy and safety issue for their family. I would hope you would consider this concern if and when any trails for public use are placed. We need to balance privacy and safety concerns with public access to the wonderful field of prairie grasses and flowers that were placed on the 8 acre field on the Ice Age land that joins my daughter’s property. In the original agreement when I sold the 28 acres to the Ice Age project that no hunting would be allowed on this parcel of land. I would also hope agreement would continue to be honored. Please give due consideration to the above concerns identified above.

privacy issues would likely be minimized as staff can provide visitors with appropriate site orientation and direction. Also, several of the user capacity indicators and standards that were developed for the protection of resources and visitor experiences, may be useful indicators for safety and privacy issues. These can be found in the “User Capacity” and “Indicators and Standards” sections in Chapter 2. Additionally, as noted in this General Management Plan, a separate plan will be developed to identify the best locations for trail placement. This trail development plan will consider a range of alternatives and be accompanied by an Environmental Assessment reflecting comments from the public, including residents of private lands adjacent to the Complex. Addressing safety and privacy concerns of residents will be 

a priority for this plan. As noted on pages 36 and 37 of this plan, dogs need to be onleash unless they are used for hunting, which will be allowed on only U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service land and WDNR property, as and where determined appropriate. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources will need to follow-up with particular residents regarding understandings with the original agreement. Communication with our neighbors will be key and until the park is staffed, we might consider holding an annual neighborhood meeting to provide park updates and to address any potential issues regarding trail layout, dogs, burning, hunting, etc.

Organization: Ice Age Trail Alliance Received: May 01,2012 13:49:52 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

After examining the Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains ("Complex") Draft General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement ("Plan"), the Ice Age Trail Alliance ("Alliance") provides the following comments: 

Our foremost concern with the Plan is that it does not fully take into account the primacy of the Ice Age National Scenic Trail (NST) on the Complex. The Ice Age Trail NST is only briefly referenced in the Plan and is secondary to interpretation, land management and structures. The Ice Age NST must have a more predominant role in the Plan and on the property. Management, interpretation and structures should be designed for and from the Ice Age NST, which includes avoiding placement of structures and other potentially visual obtrusions within view from the Trail. Secondly, the Alliance the re-designation of existing State Ice Age Trail Areas (SIATAs) to State Parks will limit the predominance of the Ice Age NST on the Complex, open-up the property to non-compatible uses, be more difficult to change in the future, and cause a bad precedent for other conglomerations of state properties around the state. One solution to this issue is to dedicate the SIATAs via state statute 23.293 prior to converting them to State Parks. The boundaries of the dedicated SIATAs could be as they currently exist or in a corridor along the Ice Age Trail. Regardless, this would give the Ice Age NST the primacy and protection (from other uses) that is required for the long-term management of the Ice Age NST. An alternative solution to re-designation of state-owned properties is to give these and other properties within the Reserve to the National Park Service's Ice Age Trail office. This is particularly relevant as the preferred alternative places the NPS offices on the property. NPS ownership would ensure the primacy of the Ice Age NST on the Complex. 

The Ice Age National Scenic Trail (IANST) across the interpretive site is very important. We would design the site to meet the IANST’s interpretive and experiential needs (providing for quiet and remote opportunities). Please see the zone descriptions in Chapter 2, on page 37 regarding what would and would not be allowed in each respective zone in the preferred alternative, and more specifically, within the area proposed for siting of the IANST. 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 141

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

11

Provided the primacy of the Ice Age NST was ensured, the Alliance would strongly support the proposed expansion of the boundaries, including an increase of the boundary to the west of Parcel A and south of Parcel B. This expansion would protect westerly view of the Driftless area and Blue Mounds and help expand a very narrow pinch point between Parcels A & B. Any development near this location would have a dramatic, negative effect on trail users at this pinch point. The Ice Age Trail Alliance appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Complex's Plan and, as the primary work force for development of the property, hopes our comments resonate with the planning team.Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: May 01,2012 15:33:22 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

I am a long time area resident, with immediate family and friends currently living in the area who are directly impacted by the Management Plan for the Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains. In general, I believe I share the majority of end goals, such as preserving and protecting the existing rural land and minimizing residential or commercial development. However, my comments focus on various concerns I have about the impact on the existing area from the development of the Ice Age Complex. My primary concerns, as detailed below, relate to those of safety for area residents and wildlife, as well as preservation of privacy: 

Proximity to Area Homes. Should the development of a network of trails be implemented, I would strongly encourage that park management consider existing long time area residents' homes when making decisions about trail placement, etc. 

 Hikers. I am aware of various incidents in the recent past where park visitors have been 

hiking within a few feet of area residential homes. This feels like an intrusion of privacy and presents safety concerns to homeowners - homeowners who value residing in the subject rural area, with the privacy it offers. With the increase in the number of expected park visitors discussed in the various alternatives of the management plan, this concern increases even more. Given the general support from the area of the park, including the sale of additional acres by area residents over time to the WDNR, etc., I strongly encourage management for the project to consider the proximity to residents when creating the location of trails. 

 Dogs. Another significant safety concern relates to pets. There have already been multiple 

incidents experienced by my family and friends where park-goers have let their dogs off of leashes and specific incidents where park visitors have actually lost their pets (and family/friends have helped find). With small children in the area (both residents and other park visitors), pets running free is a considerable risk of safety. While the park may have a written rule that all dogs must be on leashes, clearly it is not being followed by some park visitors to-date. With the expected increases in number of visitors, this safety issue increases significantly. How is this rule going to be enforced and the risk mitigated? For example, can management consider designating certain areas of the park as dog friendly, but construct a fence around this designated area. 

 Hunting. Clearly, life safety concerns (e.g. from stray bullets, etc.) significantly increase in 

conjunction with increases in hunters being encouraged in the area. This risk applies even to residents inside their homes, and also to other park visitors. 

Potential for Increase in Crime. Encouraging large numbers of the public in close quarters to private homes could significantly increase the potential of crime to property and person. The "Socioeconomic" section of the management plan discusses expected increases in property values proximate to parkland, 

The Complex would be managed to ensure, to every extent possible, the safety and privacy of adjacent landowners. Once the Ice Age Trail staff is on-site, safety and privacy issues would likely be minimized as staff can provide visitors with appropriate site orientation and direction. Also, several of the user capacity indicators and standards that were developed for the protection of resources and visitor experiences, may be useful indicators for safety and privacy issues. These can be found in the “User Capacity” and “Indicators and Standards” sections in Chapter 2. Additionally, as noted in this General Management Plan, a separate plan will be developed to identify the best locations for trail placement. This trail development plan will consider a range of alternatives and be accompanied by an Environmental Assessment reflecting comments from the public, including residents of private lands adjacent to the Complex. Addressing safety and privacy concerns of residents will be 

a priority for this plan. As noted on pages 36 and 37 of this plan, dogs need to be onleash unless they are used for hunting, which will be allowed on only U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service land and WDNR property, as and where determined appropriate. There will also be a transportation plan to address traffic and alternative transportation options. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources will need to follow-up with particular residents regarding understandings with the original agreement. Communication with our neighbors will be key and until the park is staffed, we might consider holding an annual neighborhood meeting to provide park updates and to address any potential issues regarding trail layout, dogs, burning, hunting, etc. 
142 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

12

but have possible increases in crime been studied? Safety Risks on Existing Roadways. While this was addressed in the management plan, I wanted to reiterate my concerns as it clearly is a significant safety concern for homeowners, pedestrians, wildlife and bicyclists. The more people driving to the area will increase the risk of dangerous speeding drivers, in particular in this stretch where visibility is severely limited. Have any studies been done relating to traffic incidents at other parks that have been implemented? Will police patrol in the area increase? Prairie Burning. I am aware of a specific incident that happened this year where an area home experienced an enormous safety risk during the prairie burning. Various witnesses noticed that during the spring prairie burning, the field was deserted when there was still active smoke being produced. How is this danger going to be managed going forward, even with the currently designated prairie land, but also including if prairie land increases with the implementation of the plans? In general, I would just like to reiterate that some of the land over time was acquired for this project from owners who still have family owning private land in the area. My understanding of the intent when selling to the WDNR (or other agencies) was to preserve/protect the land and eliminate risk of development on the acquired land. I want to encourage decision makers to remain consistent with the intent of the sellers and not penalize remaining residents in the area by introducing new privacy and safety concerns should the project proceed and expand (and introduce significantly higher amounts of park visitors traversing the land, develop trails throughout the park, construct additional structures, etc.). Finally, I have one question from the Management Plan, relating to Alternative 4 on Page xi - this alternative indicates "limiting" access to Old Sauk Pass, and states that this is same concept as proposed under Alternatives 3 and 5. However, Alternatives 3 and 5 state the plan is for "managing" traffic along Old Sauk Pass. Please clarify.

Language in alternative 4 has been changed to note that traffic will be “managed,” not “limited.” 

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: May 01,2012 20:50:38 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

Regarding the planned Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains: I am highly supportive of the Preferred Alternative (Alternative 5). I have walked all over the relevant properties multiple times, in all four seasons, with friends, family, or by myself. I attended both public outreach meetings March 26 and 27, 2012, and have also read much of the 164-page Draft General Management Plan/EIS. I am very impressed with the large amount of public input that was gathered in previous years leading up to the formulation of the five Alternative plans, through public listening sessions and frequent networking with community, neighbors and other interested people. I am even more impressed with the excellent job that NPS staff and partners did of actually being responsive to input. The Alternative 5 does seem to best represent what most of the people seemed to be saying, both in previous input periods and at the two public sessions held a few weeks ago. It may be the case that funds are not immediately available to institute all the ideas of Alternative 5, but it strikes me as the wisest approach to the properties and the public Complex. In particular: I think it is very wise to place a future visitor center where it is proposed, on Old Sauk Pass very near Wilkie house and barn, and to use Wilkie house as the visitor contact station prior to that. This is where most people will want to be - it offers close, central access to many of the best natural features in the Complex. With the history of house/barn/farming at that site, I don't think a tastefully designed parking lot and visitor center will be very disruptive to the scenery at all. It will present itself as a desirable destination that is easy to access while still feeling buffered, remote and rural (very important as Madison area develops more intensely around the Complex in future years). Placing primary operations 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 143

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

13

near Hwy 14, Old Sauk Rd/Timber Lane or Mineral Point will not give visitors anything approaching the "out in nature" feel that they might feel if they start their hike or visit a visitor center near Wilkie house. Potential increased vehicle traffic is not likely to be heavy enough to overtax the capacity of those local roads. I hope that NPS and partners will avoid any compromises that allow alternative uses that the current plan avoids - such as off-road biking, horseback trails, and definitely no motorized uses (snowmobiling, ATV, dirt bikes). That policy should, if anything, be more strict. I know there is a traditional snowmobile trail that comes off of the main snowmobile trail along high ridge at S edge of property and heads down onto former Zander property - onto DNR land that NPS may not fully control. Although it is nice to get along with neighbors or honor the many potential land uses, there are many other snowmobile trails in a network in the Towns of Middleton and Cross Plains and adjacent towns and throughout the county, so it would not be a great loss to more than a few very local individuals to lose that one snowmobile trail that goes right through the proposed Ice Age Complex. Snowmobiles ruin the experience for hikers, snowshoers and skiers who are within a half mile of snowmobiles, even if only one goes by during the entire hike (you spend the rest of the time wondering how many more will come). The Ice Age Complex will be a popular winter destination once hiking trails are opened up and publicized. But it may also become a magnet for increased snowmobile visits if those are allowed. Now is the time, early on, to set a clear policy to avoid that. Stick with the land use that is the primary goal, and leave other recreational uses to other lands. It would be excellent if a 24-hour potable public water source were available, and even better if it were designed to work all year around. I support the dogs-on-leash policy. It would be a real shame to prevent people from bringing their dogs, including people who may be visiting from large distances away, but an equal shame if it became a local off-leash dog-park (Dane County already supplies many of those). I know you folks know this last item is a priority, and are working on it, but perhaps the action has not been sufficiently active on the part of NPS and federal partners: Please purchase the remaining needed properties, especially along Timber Lane! It amazes me that political will and public funding has not been successfully attracted/extracted/demanded, for this very important task. What a shame, and a failure on the part of NPS staff, if this NPS complex was graced by one or many new suburban homes or etc., well within view within the natural boundaries of the Complex (mainly along W side of Timber Lane). South of the problematic available home lots on former Uebersetzig property, the entire Showers property should be acquired - not just an interior segment. The existing few houses on W. side of Timber Lane are more than enough. County, State and Federal partners need to make another strong run at purchasing these lands, and they need strong visible leadership from NPS in public view (including news stories - wear your ranger uniform and get pictures published!). The NPS imprimatur is popular and persuasive with the public where DNR and local Dane County Board politics are not. This visibility on the matter can be accomplished while honoring NPS policies about staff activities: just promote the Complex itself, and when asked, let it be known (using appropriately neutral language) that those properties are in fact very important to the overall integrity of the site and to future visitor experiences for generations to come. The quiet back-room discussions have been much too quiet. These purchases need to get done before it is too late, and if you want your Complex to be a success, it is my impression (from what I can observe) that NPS staff need to be more visible and quotable on this subject. Thank you for putting forward the excellent Preferred Alternative 5, which I heartily support. This will create a Complex that is worthy of the NPS brand, and offer thousands of future citizens (school-children and adults) both the chance and the motivation to experience the fascinating natural features and the peaceful natural environment that the Complex area is quite unique in offering.

As funding allows, the public partners have ongoing conversations with landowners regarding the purchase of their properties. As a result of this and other public comments, we have noted the Carter Hudson property along Timber Lane on the Preferred Alternative map – it is now reflected as being part of the Park Operation & Visitor Orientation zone and could be used as an off-site maintenance as previously noted under Alternative 4 or as public parking which could be an outcome of the Transportation Plan. 
144 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

14

Organization: Ice Age Trail Alliance - Dane County Chapter Received: May 02,2012 07:41:48 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

COMMENTS ON THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE FOR THE DRAFT GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS Disperse visitor use - do not concentrate it. Leave the geological features for those interested in geology. Do not impose dog walkers, joggers, etc. on those coming to see and experience the geology. Direct these other users to other areas of the Reserve. Restore the entire Reserve to the prairie/savanna and woodland (in the meltwater gorge) that lived there for centuries before Anglo settlement of southern Wisconsin. Plan for the Reserve to be an integral part of a large metropolitan area. Integrate it into the transportation and land use plans of the metropolitan area. Do not plan it as an isolated, rural destination park. It is critical to understand the Cross Plains IANSR as an urban edge park or preserve rather than as a single attraction destination park somewhere in the hinterlands. As a large park on the fringe of a metropolitan area of nearly 500,000 people it will be visited by large numbers of people for a variety of different outdoor recreation experiences. It is easily conceivable that the majority of the visitors will not be interested in viewing or understanding the geological features that are the reason for preserving the area. Even now the majority of people I have seen walking in the "original" Cross Plains IANSR (north of Old Sauk Pass) are not going to the meltwater gorge. 

To focus all of the attention of the Cross Plains IANSR on the meltwater gorge area and draw people to that area who have no interest in the geology will create unnecessary congestion on a narrow, rural winding road and require construction of parking lots and facilities that will intrude upon and mar the very features intended for preservation. This approach follows the tradition of leading people directly to the most spectacular attractions within parks - the Old Faithful model in Yellowstone, for example - in the rural tradition of travel by automobile. For a park or preserve located at the edge of the city the approach should be to disperse use rather than concentrating it and to take advantage of public transportation to get visitors to the area. Since the CPIANSR is located on a very popular bicycling route improvements that make this form of transportation more pleasant and safer should be an integral part of the General Management Plan. Travel to the CPIANSR by automobile should be discouraged rather than encouraged. To favor bicycling, automobile travel to the park via Old Sauk Pass should be discouraged or at least not favored by adding significant parking lots. To help disperse visitors to the CPIANSR and to favor getting there by public transportation the main contact stations or visitor centers should be located on Mineral Point Road (Cty Hwy S) and U.S. Hwy 14. If only one such center is desired an alternate to either of those sites is the Showers farmstead area on Timber Lane. Building a visitor center and parking area there would be far less intrusive than building such a complex at or near the Wilkie farmstead and in the pro-glacial lake basin (Uebersetzig Tract). As Madison continues to grow westward public bus service will be extended along Mineral Point Road and likely also along Old Sauk Road. This one or these two bus routes could easily travel along Timber Lane and bring visitors to a visitor center either at the Showers tract or along Mineral Point Road at either the southeast or southwest corners of the Shoveler's Sink tract. The argument that these locations for an interpretive center are too remote from the "main attraction" (the meltwater gorge and the lake basin that fed it) seems based on the assumption that everyone coming to 

Locating staff and/or visitor services in the Village of Cross Plains was considered as part of this planning process. From both a cost and effectiveness perspective, these ideas were dismissed. The National Park Service is currently incurring costs to lease office space for staff administering the Ice Age National Scenic Trail that could be avoided if they were co-located with staff providing services to visitors at the Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains. Additionally, since the same staff may serve both functions, it is most efficient to have them together in one location. In order to provide a rich visitor experience as well as to prevent damage to resources, the best location for a visitor center was determined to be on previously-disturbed land close to what will likely be the most attractive destinations – the gorge and high points with impressive views of both the glaciated and driftless landscapes. The need for a Transportation Plan, in coordination with the expansion and study of Hwy 14 and bike path as well as to provide sustainable alternative transportation options, has been added to the section of the document, “Needed Future Studies and Plans.” 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 145

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

15

the CPIANSR is doing so to view that attraction. For a remote rural park the assumption that all the visitors are coming to see the featured attraction is probably quite justified, but for a large park on the edge of a large metropolitan area that assumption seems unjustified and likely to lead to congestion and overuse of sensitive areas. Besides the best view of the several features of the glacial/Driftless Area topography is from the east-west ridge along the Showers' north boundary, a place proposed to be reached only by trail. The use of Prairie Moraine County Park near Verona provides some ways to anticipate use of the CPIANSR. The 160 acres of this park contain glacial features as impressive and important as the meltwater features of the CPIANSR. The stretch of terminal moraine in Prairie Moraine County Park has been cited by WGNHS glaciologists as the "finest segment of the moraine on public property in southern Wisconsin." Despite the quality of this geologic feature and the Ice Age National Scenic Trail running along it easily 95% of the people using Prairie Moraine County Park hardly seem to notice it, since they are preoccupied with their dogs. The = of Prairie Moraine County Park devoted to "off leash" dog walking is one of the most heavily used of Dane County's parks. Similarly, a large percentage of the people visiting the CPIANSR are walking their dogs - often going there to escape the crowds at Prairie Moraine County Park. The size and location of the CPIANSR offer the possibility of restoring the largest prairie/savanna in Dane County - large enough to actually "feel" like an expanse of prairie rather than a tiny remnant - large enough to function as a prairie for grassland birds and other species. An ecologically restored CPIANSR will be larger than the entire University of Wisconsin Arboretum with a prairie dwarfing by many times the famous Curtis Prairie - right at the edge of the second largest city in Wisconsin. The whole restoration should be designed to be managed with controlled burns, carrying on the Native-American practices that helped to create the landscape after the glaciers vanished. All of the recreational uses contemplated in the General Management Plan, including interpretation of the landscape can be accommodated in this restored prairie/savanna as long as the trails and other features are designed to fit with fire. People using the preserve seem to prefer loop trails (they have made several such social trails). The CPIANSR should include a number of interconnected loop trails - a chain of trail loops connected by the Ice Age National Scenic Trail, for instance, with several trailhead access points around the perimeter of the Reserve. Use the Wilkie farmstead as a residence for the resident caretaker for the CPIANSR (a permanent presence will be needed as soon as possible to help police and guide respectful visitation of the Reserve). Use the barn for storage of equipment needed for the significant eco-system/landscape restoration that should be done over the entire area of the CPIANSR. Acquire the Ueberstzig farmstead and remove all the buildings. They are an obstacle to viewing and understanding the flow of meltwater into the lowest lake in the chain. It is good and appropriate to plan for the entire area within the boundary of the CPIANSR. Showing the best location for various visitor and maintenance facilities, even if located on property that is currently privately owned, reinforces the need to acquire all of the land within the boundary for public benefit. All of the land included within the CPIANSR boundary, including the additions proposed in the General Management Plan, will be invaluable public open space and must be acquired and restored to a functioning prairie/savanna ecosystem.
146 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

16

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: May 02,2012 11:30:38 Correspondence Type: Web Form & E-mail 

Correspondence Response 

COMPLIMENTS & CONCERNS Thank you for scheduling dual times for the two recent Ice Age open house events in the Towns of Middleton and Cross Plains. Scheduling both late afternoon as well as early evening sessions better accommodated the varying schedules of local residents, some of whom still work on farms as well as 

those with jobs in Madison or other distant locales. This gesture marked an improvement over the earlier review sessions that coincided with staff schedules rather than residents attending the Ice Age programs. 

Unfortunately, aside from those individuals already on your mailing lists, I found no public announcements promoting the recent open houses in any of the local print media. That void in letting people know about the events included rural weekly Middleton and Cross Plains area newspapers as well as the Madison daily newspaper, the weekly free paper distributed throughout Dane County and the official websites for the Towns of Middleton and Cross Plains. Getting out information using the town sites would not have been expensive and would have reached a far broader audience than represented by the current Ice Age mailing list. One of Ice Age staff told me that press releases were routinely sent out close to the actual date of public events sponsored by the Park Service, but in this case that policy clearly accounted for the unfortunate lack of information about the two open house programs or the opportunity to learn about the proposed current alternatives reaching the general population. After the two open houses, I contacted the editor of the News Sickle Arrow, who noted that while he had received an informational announcement about the two Ice Age events - it arrived AFTER the deadline for the issue of his paper distributed on Thursday prior to the Monday and Tuesday open houses. That breakdown in communication is especially unfortunate in that I believe the current review sessions and reaction period are the last opportunities for citizens to express their preferences in person or in writing-- before the Park Service's final decisions on the Cross Plains Complex. LOCAL VS. NATIONAL PRIORITIES When reviewing the elaborate color brochure describing the five alternative visions for the Cross Plains Complex, I was dismayed by the repeated references to the "village" rather than the "town" of Cross Plains with regard to the roads within the project area and also the maps showing the area under consideration. Not only did such errors in identifying the relevant governmental entity and specific locale convey the impression that the project was no longer being coordinated at a local level, but that the original vision also had been altered from that of a singularly unique and fragile "reserve" to a generic "park" featuring amenities found in many other state or national parks where visitor counts must justify funding allocations. I don't believe that camping and biking activities are what the Wilkies had envisioned, nor do they seem compatible to many other people who've supported the Ice Age programs over the years. PRESERVING LOCAL STRUCTURES While most alternatives in the fifteen-page brochure mention saving the Wilkie house, the accompanying text has been crafted to easily allow for its demise. At the recent TCP open house, someone mentioned that the nomination for placing the house on the National Register of Historic Places had failed-implying that the house was not very important. In fact, it has been identified on the Wisconsin Historical Society's 

Press releases were sent to several prominent local news media sources by both the DNR as well as the NPS (by Public Information Officers at both the local and regional offices) the Monday and Tuesday of the week prior to the public meetings. All references to the “village” of Cross Plains have been changed to the “town” of Cross Plains. 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 147

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

17

"Architecture and History Inventory" and also by the Town of Cross Plains as an important for its local rarity. There used to be many similar cut-stone houses in Dane County, but due to neglect and changes in ownership that number has declined significantly over the years. The Wilkie house and another currently owned by Laura Zander are the only two stone houses constructed in the Town of Cross Plains during approximately the same time period. The loss of either would be at odds with objectives with regard to preserving historic local buildings set forth in the recently completed comprehensive plan for the Town of Cross Plains. I urge you to consider saving both the Wilkie house and barn - at least until the Ice Age Complex has developed to a point that decisions about their fate can be determined with some basis of comparison for or against their retention. To demolish these structures without the funding in hand to pay for replacements - especially at a time when the nation's economic condition is so tenuous and the current congress opposed to supporting such projects - seems ill advised. Better to adapt what you have (see the book titled "Barn Again" for what others have done with old barns) and keep the Wilkie Gorge from being compromised by countless heavy trucks driving to the Old Sauk Pass site on inadequate roads to deliver building materials, establishing a huge construction site and parking lot and creating uncontrolled drainage into this once pristine area. Please don't risk destroying the very attraction that people want to preserve for posterity. Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: May 02,2012 19:09:45 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

Visitor Center - I do not think a visitor's center is necessary. Something smaller such as a stand with educational materials, maps and a bathroom is sufficient. The more we build the less unique the area will become. Traffic - The projected visitation will cause a major burden on the town and its residents. More money will need to be spent expanding and maintaining the roads. Traffic is already an issue due to the number of cyclists. When my family first moved into the area cars were rarely heard driving by. In a few years when visitation picks up I expect things will sound a lot like living in Madison. Water Quality - I am concerned about issues coming up with the well water supply and quality. Soundscape - Noise pollution will be an issue due to the increased number of visitors and vehicles in the area. 

Hikers - I am concerned about trails being too close to my home and hikers ending up on my property. This is already an issue. I can't imagine how much worse it will become. Numerous signs and barriers will be needed to ensure that visitors respect nearby homeowners. Dogs - Dogs are currently a large problem. Lost dogs and dog owners show up at our home regularly. Crime - I currently find beer cans on the side of the road and am concerned about additional littering and crime when the area is opened up to more visitors. Park Fees - I do expect to enjoy some aspects of the plan and would appreciate it if all park facilities and trails were accessible to town residents at no charge. In summary I understand how special this area is and why you want more people to enjoy it. However knowing what I know now I would never have moved here. Everything I loved about this area and my 

The Complex would be managed to ensure, to every extent possible, the safety and privacy of adjacent landowners. Once the Ice Age Trail staff is on-site, safety and privacy issues would likely be minimized as staff can provide visitors with appropriate site orientation and direction. Also, several of the user capacity indicators and standards that were developed for the protection of resources and visitor experiences, may be useful indicators for safety and privacy issues. These can be found in the “User Capacity” and “Indicators and Standards” sections in Chapter 2. Additionally, as noted in this General Management Plan, a separate plan will be developed to identify the best locations for trail placement. This trail development plan will consider a range of alternatives and be accompanied by an Environmental Assessment reflecting comments from the public, including residents of private lands adjacent to the Complex. Addressing safety and privacy concerns of residents will be 

a priority for this plan. As noted on pages 36 and 37 of this plan, dogs need to be on-
148 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

18

home seems to be at risk. leash unless they are used for hunting, which will be allowed on only U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service land and WDNR property, as and where determined appropriate. Communication with our neighbors will be key and until the park is staffed, we might consider holding an annual neighborhood meeting to provide park updates and to address any potential issues regarding trail layout, dogs, burning, hunting, etc. No fees will be charged to visitors. 

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: May 02,2012 20:05:54 Correspondence Type: Web Form 

Correspondence Response 

Would like to have the land remain as is to prevent invasion of privacy and to ensure preservation of life style and rights of existing residents and land owners.

The Complex would be managed to ensure, to every extent possible, the safety and privacy of adjacent landowners. Once the Ice Age Trail staff is on-site, safety and privacy issues would likely be minimized as staff can provide visitors with appropriate site orientation and direction. Also, several of the user capacity indicators and standards that were developed for the protection of resources and visitor experiences, may be useful indicators for safety and privacy issues. These can be found in the “User Capacity” and “Indicators and Standards” sections in Chapter 2. Additionally, as noted in this General Management Plan, a separate plan will be developed to identify the best locations for trail placement. This trail development plan will consider a range of alternatives and be accompanied by an Environmental Assessment reflecting comments from the public, including residents of private lands adjacent to the Complex. Addressing safety and privacy concerns of residents will be 

a priority for this plan. As noted on pages 36 and 37 of this plan, dogs need to be onleash unless they are used for hunting, which will be allowed on only U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service land and WDNR property, as and where determined appropriate. Communication with our neighbors will be key and until the park is staffed, we might consider holding an annual neighborhood meeting to provide park updates and to address any potential issues regarding trail layout, dogs, burning, hunting, etc. 

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: May 07,2012 00:00:00 Correspondence Type: Letter 

Correspondence Response 

I read about the Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains and want to express my concern that the American Transmission Company has proposed many hi-voltage transmission lines 345KV, 170' tall (possibly) towers to forever damage our scenic environment, hurt property values, and tourism and with all kinds of ecological harm - part of a Midwest power grid throughout Wisconsin, as proposed. Please review this issue at non-company website (i.e. - the "other" side) so you can know how it's unneeded and costly, and would negatively impact the Ice Age Complex plan. Please see: www.soulofthekickapoo.org. Speakers can be requested thru that website. My husband's cartoon (enclosed) has been published in various papers to educate the public. This transmission line power grid thru S. Wisconsin would affect us all and is not needed!

The National Park Service is coordinating with the American Transmission Company and has provided them with comments regarding our concerns for this site as well as the Ice Age National Scenic Trail and Ice Age National Scientific Reserve. 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 149

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

19

Organization: Dane County Land and Water Resources Department (County Government) Received: May 03,2012 00:00:00 Correspondence Type: E-mail 

Correspondence Response 

Between 2007 and 2011, Dane County Parks’ staff, County Board Supervisors and the County Executive contributed considerable time and $1.5 million toward the purchase of the 137 acre Carter-Hudson tract in the Ice Age Complex. Dane County Parks has been a very active partner on trail development, acquisition and lands management for the Ice Age National Scenic Trail throughout the entire county. We have reviewed the draft Ice Age Complex report and been in contact with Jeff Prey and Pam Schuler with some further thoughts on the plan. The Dane County Park Commission also discussed some preliminary reactions to the plan at their March 28, 2012 meeting. Please consider the following comments from Dane County Parks on the Draft GMP and EIS: 

1. Include Dane County Parks on page 7, Chapter 1 background information pertaining to the history of how existing public lands came into place. 2. In 2005 Dane County, the Town of Middleton, Natural Heritage Land Trust and WDNR partnered to purchase the nearly 300 acre Sunnyside Unit of the Black Earth Creek Natural Resource Area immediately east of the northern Complex project area boundary. Consider a boundary expansion recommendation that would provide connectivity between the Complex and Sunnyside Unit. 3. Related to comment 2, under "Relationship Of Other Planning Efforts To This General Management Plan" on page 27, consider including the 2012-17 Dane County Parks and Open Space Plan. The plan includes a Black Earth Creek Natural Resource Area planning boundary that encompasses the Complex boundary. A general reference to potential partnerships with Dane County and the Natural Heritage Land Trust for future land acquisition and trail connectivity projects could be beneficial for inclusion in future grant requests. 4. As outlined within the plan, the WDNR and National Park Service will primarily be responsible for management of lands within the Complex. Consider adding language recommending that Dane County may consider a future transfer of ownership and/or management responsibilities to the most suitable agency. In talking with Pam Schuler it is our understanding that additional planning efforts will be forthcoming for this project area that will further define future operation and management objectives for the Complex. Please keep us informed regarding the status of these future planning processes.

Dane County Parks have been included. The 2012-17 Dane County Park and Open Space Plan has been added. This language has been added. 

Organization: Town of Middleton (Trails and Parks) Received: Mar 26,2012 00:00:00 Correspondence Type: Park Form 

Correspondence Response 

Moving primitive camping a positive. 

Local Middleton trails - can they be connected to the Ice Age Trail? Vote for #5.

Yes, as long as uses are compatible. Many local trails connect to the Ice Age National Scenic Trail. 
150 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES append

ix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

20

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: Mar 27,2012 00:00:00 Correspondence Type: Park Form 

Correspondence Response 

I appreciate & welcomed that earlier alternatives for the site called for closing off Old Sauk Pass to through traffic for general public vehicular travel. I still think that's a good idea, especially after the site is fully developed and site usage would go it [?]. Such closing would provide for increased safety of pedestrians going to attractions on both sides of the road and for bicyclists traveling on this road. It would also increase options, if it became apparent after experience with development of the site, for providing alternative means to getting to the core or heart of the site besides driving to it.

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: Mar 27,2012 00:00:00 Correspondence Type: Park Form 

Correspondence Response 

I think Preferred Alternative is Fabulous & strongly encourage progress on this option. I struggle with the concept some have expressed that you can highlight the significant features without adding some support facilities & more recreational uses. To truly feature this wonderful area requires trails & small facilities. I think this plan fits that perfectly. While I agree with some of the naysayers that area infrastructure (i.e. roads) can't handle the increased volume we hope to have, that is no reason to not pursue the preferred option. Roads can easily be improved & the existing roads have the space to do so. Thank you for all the hard work & great information on this.

Organization: Unaffiliated Individual Received: Mar 27,2012 00:00:00 Correspondence Type: Other 

Correspondence Response 

MAIN POINTS: 

1. Educational vs. Recreational Emphasis. Since its inception, expansion and development of the park has shifted from primarily educational to recreational interests. Projecting this trend into the future, the concept of a scientific reserve could be overshadowed by recreational uses. 2. Land Acquisition. Rights to critical regions within the reserve's original boundaries have yet to be acquired. Critically, the west 100 acres of the Showers' farm is needed to link the two main blocks of public land. Similarly, a wildlife corridor is needed to tie Coyle's Pond to Shovelor's Sink. 3. Small Size. Even if expanded as envisioned in the Preferred alternative, the Complex is small compared with most state parks. Multiple use of public places is a useful concept, but one modest-sized area cannot serve all the desires of all parties.

Under the no action alternative, or the continuation of current management, there are no interpretive opportunities at the Complex, there are only recreational opportunities. The preferred alternative provides the interpretation and educational piece to the Complex. Land acquisition will occur on a willing-seller basis and as funding allows. The uses, as described under the preferred alternative, include hiking, road biking, one primitive camping area, and opportunities for education and interpretation. Horseback riding, mountain biking, and snowmobiling uses have been considered but dismissed. Hunting, fishing, and trapping may be allowed on DNR-owned property, if and where these activities are determined appropriate. 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 151

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

21

Organization: Black Earth Creek Conservation Organization (Non-Governmental) Received: Mar 26,2012 00:00:00 Correspondence Type: Other 

Correspondence Response 

The General Management Plan for the Cross Plains Ice Age Complex is again asking for citizen input. There will be an Open House, March 26, 6 to 8 P.M. at the Town of Middleton Town Hall and on March 

27 from 5 to 7 P.M. at the Town of Cross Plains Community Center in Pine Bluff. There is presently 1,473 acres in the Complex and it could possibly be expanded to 1,701 in the future. In comparison to most National Parks this will be a very small park. Therefore, I am suggesting the area remain as natural as possible. The significance of the land is the collection of glacial landforms including the Wilkie Gorge carved by the glacial meltwater. If buildings are built, parking lots created and extensive trails developed the geology will be altered and lost. What is man-made will visually over power what is natural. If you go to one of the meetings, you will see that of the 5 plans presented, alternative 5 is the preferred plan of the planning team. This would contain a visitor center with a wide variety of indoor and outdoor interpretive programming. It would contain a complex of buildings to accommodate the Ice Age Trail Staff and to support administration and maintenance functions. There would be a trail to and along the gorge with surfaced overlooks and an extensive varied hiking trail network throughout the Complex. When the land near highway 14 has been purchased it would accommodate primitive camping and a picnic area. 

Roads leading to the Visitor Center would need extensive widening and rebuilding with guard rails to make it safe for the added car and bus traffic. This would destroy the quaint scenic roads that twist and turn as they approach the Complex. Encouraging traffic into the area would require around the clock security. The one-time cost of approximately $7.09 million in [2010 dollars] would be for renovating the Wilkie property, the Visitor Center and other new construction in the core area. Also designing and installing exhibits, constructing trails and a possible amphitheater. It would not include acquisition or easements. A staff of 14 full time employees will be required to manage the Complex and the Ice Age Trail with an annual operating cost of $1.26 million. Putting the Visitor Center in Cross Plains as well as the administrative offices would save a lot of money and preserve the landscape. Many people would be interested in learning the history of the glacial ecology but not hiking a trail. The Visitor Center would capture a large audience from the traffic on HWY 14. The Village could better serve the buses than our Town roads and eliminate the fear of fast food and souvenir shops turning the quaint roads into another Wis. Dells. Senior bus trips would most likely want to visit the Center but not be interested in walking the gorge and therefore eliminate a lot of traffic, noise and diesel fumes. The planners for the Department of Transportation tells me that putting the Center in Cross Plains would solve some of the rerouting problems of township roads to get the traffic from the Complex to highway 14. There would be significant cost saving to building or buying in the Village. Village streets and sidewalks can be used to access the Center. Water and sewer hook-up and village policing would be available. Huge parking lots and buildings would not impact the geology of the site. Over the years I have actively supported the purchase of land for the Ice Age Complex. One cold winter 

The need for a Transportation Plan, in coordination with the expansion and study of Hwy 14 and bike path as well as to provide sustainable alternative transportation options, has been added to the section of the document, “Needed Future Studies and Plans.” The Complex would be managed to ensure, to every extent possible, the safety and privacy of adjacent landowners. Once the Ice Age Trail staff is on-site, safety and privacy issues would likely be minimized as staff can provide visitors with appropriate site orientation and direction. Locating staff and/or visitor services in the Village of Cross Plains was considered as part of this planning process. From both a cost and effectiveness perspective, these ideas were dismissed. The National Park Service is currently incurring costs to lease office space for staff administering the Ice Age National Scenic Trail that could be avoided if they were co-located with staff providing services to visitors at the Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains. Additionally, since the same staff may serve both functions, it is most efficient to have them together in one location. In order to provide a rich visitor experience as well as to prevent damage to resources, the best location for a visitor center was determined to be on previously-disturbed land close to what will likely be the most attractive destinations – the gorge and high points with impressive views of both the glaciated and driftless landscapes. 
152 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

22

day I went to a Natural Resources Board hearing and spoke in favor of one of the land purchases as I knew two of our Town Board members would be there speaking against it. Other times I wrote letters of support. I was the first to speak out to stop a large subdivision that was being planned for the Faga site. There was even a Town recall election to save our Land Use Plan. Not all the action to secure these lands was taken at the Federal or DNR level. There has been a lot of effort on the local level to support these land acquisitions. As an environmentalist I believe in treading lightly on the land, using what we already have and managing our public funds in a frugal way. I see the greatest use of the park as a site for families and hikers that can explore the park at their leisure and appreciate the sights, sounds and solitude. I have lived in the Township for 40 years and been an activist to preserve the Black Earth Creek and valley with its soil rich farmland. I will close with the Anonymous quote on the last page of the Management Plan. "TAKE ONLY PICTURES, LEAVE ONLY FOOTPRINTS."

Land acquisition will occur on a willing-seller basis and as funding allows. 

Organization: EPA - Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (Federal Government) Received: Apr 23,2012 00:00:00 Correspondence Type: Letter 

Correspondence Response 

In accordance with our responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act, the Council on 

Environmental Quality's NEPA Implementing Regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508), and Section 309 of the Clean Air, we have reviewed the Draft Management Plan and EIS for the above-mentioned project. The Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains comprises land within a unit of the Ice Age National Scientific Reserve; it also includes the interpretative site for the Ice Age National Scenic Trail. Lands within the Complex are owned and managed by the National Park Service, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Dane County Parks, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The proposed Management Plan establishes the necessary framework to assist the partners in establishing a consistent vision for the Complex. The Management Plan/EIS identifies desired conditions in various parts of the Complex, identifies necessary developments and support facilities to achieve the desired conditions, and ensures that a foundation for decision making is developed in consultation with the public. The Management Plan/EIS does not, however, describe how particular programs or projects would be implemented. The Management Plan/EIS examines five alternatives for managing the site for the next 15-20 years. The action alternatives describe how site management would change in different ways by applying management areas to maps of the Complex to define management intent for resource conditions as well as for visitor experience. Desired conditions and analyses of impacts of implementing each alternative are detailed for the five alternatives. The five alternatives are summarized as follows: Alternative 1-No Action or Continuation of Current Management: This alternative looks into the future of current management and describes how the Complex would look in the future if no new actions were taken. Alternative 2-Ecological Restoration Emphasis: This alternative proposes to restore the ecosystem throughout most of the site to a period before European settlement. Restoration would support interpretation of how natural conditions in the Complex would have evolved after the glacial period under 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 153

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

23

minimal human influence. Alternative 3-Interpretation and Education Emphasis: This alternative focuses on interpreting how the glacial landscape evolved over time since the retreat of the last glacier. Throughout most of the Complex, ecological resources would be managed to reveal the glacial landscape. Alternative 4-Outdoor Recreation Emphasis: This alternative offers visitors a variety of low-impact outdoor recreation experiences in support of and compatible with preservation and interpreting of the glacial significance of the Complex. Alternative 5-Preferred Alternative: This alternative offers ranger interpretive programming of the landscape since the retreat of the last glacier as well as a broad outdoor experience. Based on our review of the Management Plan/EIS, we have assigned a rating of Environmental Concerns - Adequate (EC-1) to this document. Our rating is based on: 1) issues connected to water quality, 2) information concerning current management areas, and 3) discussions with relevant entities concerning future bike paths and traffic management. Water Quality: The Management Plan/EIS indicates the region surrounding the Complex contains one of the Midwest's most important trout fishing streams, Black Earth Creek. Additionally, several lakes, intermittent streams, and springs exist within the Complex. As indicated in the document, an increase in impervious surfaces from development within the Complex as envisioned in the alternatives would result in more surface water runoff and impacts on stream and lake water quality. Given that the Park Service and its partners have indicated they will renovate the Wilkie parcel to U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards, we recommend the Park Service and its partners investigate the use of permeable pavers to reduce runoff and related soil erosion impacts and to better manage stormwater on site. Management Areas: Most of Chapter Two, "Alternatives, Including the Preferred Alternative," is dedicated to describing the five management areas and the alternative futures for the Complex developed by the planning team. As the Management Plan/EIS indicates, the action alternatives indicate how site management would change in different ways by applying management areas (descriptions of distinct sets of resource conditions and visitor experiences) to maps of the complex to define management intent for resource conditions and visitor experiences for each location. We recommend a map(s) illustrating the current management area system under the No Action Alternative be included in the Management Plan/EIS. This addition would enhance the discussion featured in Table 2; Five Management Areas for the Ice Age Complex, and the "Proposed Management Areas" shown in the map of each Alternative contained in Chapter Two. The addition would also allow reviewers to understand what areas will change from current conditions under each alternative and by how much. Bike Path Along U.S. Highway 14: The Management Plan/EIS indicates that there have been local efforts to build a bike path along the section of U.S. Highway 14 that forms the northern boundary of the Complex in order to connect bike paths in the City of Middleton to the Village of Cross Plains. The Preferred Alternative is zoned to accommodate this bike path. However, the Management Plan indicates that neither the National Park Service nor the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources envisions constructing the bike path; rather the agencies would accommodate local efforts to build this path. We recommend the Management Plan/EIS be revised to include a summary of any discussions with Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) concerning this bike path. A summary of current discussions between local entities and WisDOT would inform reviewers of the likelihood that this bike path will materialize. 

Under the no action alternative, management areas would not be applicable as the Complex would continue to be managed as it is currently, and currently there are no management zones developed for the Complex. The management areas in Chapter Two were developed as part of the planning process in determining a new management approach to the Complex and therefore apply to only the action alternatives. Effectively, the map on page iv in the Summary is the map applicable to the no action alternative as it shows the land ownership and subsequent management of each respective land ownership/management entity – Wisconsin DNR, NPS, Dane County Parks, USFWS, and private ownership. We have not had any discussions regarding the bike path with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. We have met with the Good Neighbor Committee who is planning and advocating for it. They are supported by the City of Middleton and Dane County Parks. 
154 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

24

Aquatic Resources: Two wetland areas - one small wetland in the southeast corner of the Complex and two small floodplains in the southeast and northwest portions of the site - are mentioned in the Management Plan/EIS. Two elements of the proposed alternatives could affect wetlands and floodplains -building a picnic area near Black Earth Creek and building a trail in the same area. Even though impacts to these resources are speculative at this juncture, we recommend the Park Service and its partners follow the measures listed below to minimize impacts to wetlands during construction should these plans be implemented at some point in the future. Perform construction in wetlands during frozen ground conditions, if feasible; Minimize width of temporary access roads; Use easily-removed materials for construction of temporary access roads and staging areas (e.g., swamp/timber mats) in lieu of materials that sink (e.g., stone, rip-rap, wood chips); Use swamp/timber mats or other alternative matting to distribute the weight of the construction equipment. This will minimize soil rutting and compaction; Use vehicles and construction equipment with wider tires or rubberized tracks, or use low ground pressure equipment to further minimize impacts during construction access and staging; Use long-reach excavators, where appropriate, to avoid driving or staging in wetlands; and place mats under construction equipment to contain any spills. Diesel Emissions: The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has determined that diesel exhaust is a potential occupational carcinogen, based on a combination of chemical, genotoxicity, and carcinogenicity data. In addition, acute exposures to diesel exhaust have been linked to health problems such as eye and nose irritation, headaches, nausea, asthma, and other respiratory system issues. Although every construction site is unique, common actions can reduce exposure to diesel exhaust. EPA recommends that the Park Service and its partners commit to the following actions during construction: Using low-sulfur diesel fuel (less than 0.05% sulfur). Retrofitting engines with an exhaust filtration device to capture diesel particulate matter before it enters the construction site. Positioning the exhaust pipe so that diesel fumes are directed away from the operator and nearby workers, thereby reducing the fume concentration to which personnel are exposed. Using catalytic converters to reduce carbon monoxide, aldehydes, and hydrocarbons in diesel fumes. These devices must be used with low sulfur fuels. Using enclosed, climate-controlled cabs pressurized and equipped with high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters to reduce the operators' exposure to diesel fumes. Pressurization ensures that air moves from inside to outside. HEPA filters ensure that any incoming air is filtered first. Regularly maintaining diesel engines, which is essential to keeping exhaust emissions low. Follow the manufacturer's recommended maintenance schedule and procedures. Smoke color can signal the need for maintenance. For example, blue/black smoke indicates that an engine requires servicing or tuning. Reducing exposure through work practices and training, such as turning off engines when vehicles are stopped for more than a few minutes, training diesel-equipment operators to perform routine inspection, and maintaining filtration devices. Purchasing new vehicles that are equipped with the most advanced emission control systems available. With older vehicles, using electric starting aids such as block heaters to warm the engine reduces diesel emissions. Miscellaneous: Figure 12: Detailed Map of Glacial and Related Deposits in the Ice Age Complex, includes areas labeled "L" and "H." However, these complexes are not included in the key and are not mentioned in the accompanying narrative. We feel the document would be enhanced by including a discussion of these deposit types. We commend two aspects, in particular, of the Preferred Alternative. The first is the proposed renovation of the former Wilkie property into a highly-sustainable, gold-certified LEED standard facility. The Wilkie property is slated to accommodate offices for Ice Age National Scenic Trail staff and provide a visitor center. The second is the proposed creation of a wildlife corridor providing unbroken habitat between the former Wilkie property and Shoveler Sink Waterfowl Production Area, resulting in minor beneficial 

The NPS is required to implement a “no net loss of wetlands” policy and to manage wetlands in compliance with NPS mandates and the requirements of Executive Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands), the Clean Water Act, and the procedures described in Director’s Order 77-1 (Wetland Protection). The NPS will avoid direct and indirect support of new construction in wetlands unless there are no practicable alternatives and the proposed action includes all practicable measures to minimize harm to wetlands. (NPS Management Policies 2006, 4.6.5) 

The NPS will incorporate sustainable principles and practices into design, siting, construction, building materials, utility systems, recycling of all unusable materials, and waste management. Best management practices will be used for all phases of construction activity, including preconstruction, actual construction, and postconstruction. (NPS Management Policies 2006, 9.1.3) The NPS has a responsibility to protect air quality under both the 1916 Organic Act and the Clean Air Act (CAA). Accordingly, the Service will seek to perpetuate the best possible air quality in parks to preserve natural resources and systems, preserve cultural resources, and sustain visitor enjoyment, human health, and scenic vistas. The Service will actively promote and pursue measures to protect park resources and values from the adverse impacts of air pollution. (NPS Management Policies 2006, 4.7.1) These areas are noted in the narrative on page 78. 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 155

Appendixes

appendix F: COMMENT/RESPONSE REPORT (CONTINUED)

impacts to wildlife and habitat. Please send one copy of the Final Management Plan/EIS and Record of Decision to my attention once it becomes available. Should you have any questions regarding the contents of this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me or Kathy Kowal at (312) 353-5206 or via email at kowal.kathleen@epa.gov. A summary of the rating system used in the evaluation of this document is enclosed for your reference.

Outside Organization: Town of Cross Plains (County Government) Received: May,21,2012 00:00:00 Correspondence Type: Letter 

Correspondence Response 

I'm writing to relay the concerns of citizens in the Town regarding the planning process for the Ice Age National Scenic Reserve based on discussion we had at both the Town Plan Commission and Board meetings in May 2012. 

First, I think there is strong Town support for past and future acquisitions of properties for the reserve. Many think the first priority should be continued acquisition of the remaining properties before any extensive facility development. Many people now expressing concerns about the development plans were early and consistent supports of no residential development in this area and public acquisition of the properties. Second, there is broad support on the Board and in the Town for the idea that the Town should have "a seat at the table" as planning evolves from a master plan to an implementation plan. The Town is already on record agreeing to cooperate with the NPS as plans are implemented. The scale and location of any buildings, lighting and parking on the property will have significant impacts on road infrastructure and maintenance, area traffic patterns and adjacent residential property owners. Third, some of the early supports for preservation of this property are concerned that new improvements will detract from the both the unique geological features of the property or emphasize maintenance and administration over education and preservation. I hope that you share the goals that planned improvements to the property will emphasize preservation and education and that traffic impacts on the town and property neighbors will be minimized. I also hope that the final plan can acknowledge and articulate these goals to address the concerns being expressed by long time supports of preservation of this property. Finally, it would be helpful to clearly articulate that the Town will be involved early and often in implementation planning for the property.

Land acquisition will occur on a willing-seller basis and as funding allows. The park will continue to engage communities, partners, and the public as implementation activities occur. Buildings would be constructed or retrofitted to be highly sustainable, which includes reducing the amount of light pollution and impermeable surfaces that would affect runoff into Black Earth Creek. The need for a Transportation Plan, in coordination with the expansion and study of Hwy 14 and bike path as well as to provide sustainable alternative transportation options, has been added to the section of the document, “Needed Future Studies and Plans.” As with all the alternatives presented, the preferred alternative would provide interpretation and educational opportunities. The revegetation efforts would return the land to a type of native vegetation that would not obscure the view of glacial features and would therefore assist in the interpretation of the landscape. With a new site, and the potential for increased visitation, the discussion of maintenance and administration is absolutely necessary as activities and operations associated with maintenance and administration would help to ensure the protection and preservation of the site to the greatest extent practicable. 
156 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

APPENDIXES 
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 157

References

references and works consulted

Black, Robert F. 1974. Geology of Ice Age National Scientific 

Reserve of Wisconsin, University of Connecticut, 

Storrs, pp. 72–75.

Duncan, C., B. Abel, D. Ewert, M.L. Ford, S. Mabey, 

D. Mehlman, P. Patterson, R. Sutter and 

M. Woodrey. 2002. “Protecting Stopover Sites 

for Forest-Dwelling Migratory Landbirds.” 

The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA. 

Unpublished report.

eBird. 2008. Access at http://ebird.org/content/ebird/news/

the-state-of-ebird-2008-read-this.

Stynes, Daniel J. 2009. National Park Visitor 

Spending and Payroll Impacts 2008. 

National Park Service, Social Science Program. 

Michigan State University. October 2009. 

TCP (Town of Cross Plains). 2009. Town of Cross Plains 

Comprehensive Plan. September 8. Access at 

http://danedocs.countyofdane.com/webdocs/PDF/plandev/

Cross_Plains_Comprehensive_Plan.pdf. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. 

Leopold Wetland Management District, 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan.

UW (University of Wisconsin Board of Regents). 2001. 

Exploring Options to Restore Wisconsin’s Oak Savanna. 

Editorial assistance by B. Webendarfer. 

University of Wisconsin – Extension 

Environmental Resources Center. Available at 

http://www.prairieoaks.com/images/savanna.pdf.

VCP (Village of Cross Plains). 2008. Village of Cross Plains 

Final Comprehensive Plan. June 9. 

Access at http://www.cross-plains.wi.us/files/Final%20

Cross%20Plains%20Comprehensive%20Plan%20

Adopted%206%209%2008(4).pdf

WDNR et al. (Wisconsin Depart of Natural Resources, 

Bureau of Parks and Recreation); 

National Park Service, Ice Age National Scenic Trail; 

Ice Age Park and Trail Foundation; and Bay-Lake 

Regional Planning Commission. 2006. Ice Age National 

Scenic Trail Corridor Plan and Environmental Assessment for 

Kewaunee, Manitowoc, and Sheboygan Counties, Wisconsin. 

PUB-PR-811 06. December. Available at http://dnr.wi.gov/

master_planning/completed_archive/parks_trails/lmiat/

LMIAT_Final.pdf
158 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

REFERENCES

references and works 

consulted (continued) 

WDNR (Wisconsin Depart of Natural 

Resources, 

South Central Region). 1998. 

Feasibility Study 

and Environmental Analysis for the 

Cross Plains Unit, 

Ice Age National Scientific Reserve 

Study Area. December.

http://files.usgwarchives.net/wi/dane/history/1877/

madisond/crosspla39nms.txt

Madison, Dane County and surrounding towns; 

being a history and guide to places of scenic 

beauty and historical note found in the towns of 

Dane County and surroundings, including the 

organization of the towns, and early intercourse 

of the settlers with the Indians, their camps, 

trails, mounds, etc. With a complete list of county 

supervisors and officers, and legislative members, 

Madison Village and City Council. Illustrated, 

Madison, Wis.: published by Wm. J. Park & Co., 

Booksellers, Stationers and Binders, 11 King Street. 

1877. Copyright. Wm. J. Park & Co. 1877. David 

Atwood, Stereotyper and Printer, Madison, Wis.

A Phase I Archeological Survey of Proposed Work 

on the Ice Age National Scenic Trail in Dane, 

pole, Marathon, Taylor, and Waupaca Counties, 

Wisconsin. Prepared for National Park Service 

by Mississippi Valley Archeology Center at the 

University of Wisconsin-LaCrosse. Reports of 

Investigations No. 587. September 2005.

Phase I Archeological Investigations of Six 

Segments of the Ice Age National Scenic Trail in 

Manitowoc, Dane, Waushara, Polk, and Marquette 

Counties, Wisconsin. Prepared for the National 

Park Service by Commonwealth Cultural Resources 

Group, Inc. WR-0392. September 2009.
FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 159

Index

Index

biking, bike path, xvi, xvii, xviii, 20, 27, 36, 38, 53, 

71, 90, 94, 97, 101, 104, 107

camping, xi, xii, xvii, xviii, 20, 37, 47, 48, 50, 56, 59, 

60, 61, 62, 66, 104, 107

comprehensive plan, vi, xvi, 7, 81, 85, 100, 101

cultural resources, 11, 19, 23, 85, 86, 113

Dane County, i, vii, xiii, xxv, 8, 22, 27, 28, 33, 81, 84, 

85, 92, 103, 104, 132

education, 12, 19, 58, 59, 64, 67, 101

gorge, iii, ix, x, xi, xii, xiii, xiv, xv, xvii, xviii, 3, 4, 12, 

21, 22, 41, 43, 45, 47, 48, 50, 51, 63, 65, 68, 76, 80, 

81, 82, 91, 92, 93, 94, 101, 104, 107

hiking, ix, xii, xiii, xvi, xvii, xviii, 20, 37, 41, 43, 48, 

50, 52, 53, 62, 64, 81, 92, 97, 103, 105, 106

horse, horseback riding, 20, 36, 37, 38, 51, 52, 81

hunting, viii, 20, 36, 38, 39

Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains, Ice Age Complex, 

complex, i, ii, iii, iv, vii, viii, ix, x, xi, xii, xiii, xiv, 

xv, xvi, xvii, xviii, xix, xxi, xxii, xxv, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 

10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 

31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 47, 48, 

50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 59, 60, 61, 62, 64, 66, 69, 

70, 71, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 

89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 

102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 111, 112, 113, 124

Ice Age National Scenic Trail, i, ii, iii, vi, vii, viii, ix, 

x, xi, xii, xiii, xxiv, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 31, 33, 

36, 39, 41, 43, 45, 47, 48, 50, 52, 53, 55, 61, 62, 63, 

66, 68, 92, 95, 103, 105, 106, 111, 112, 121, 129, 

131, 132

Ice Age National Scientific Reserve, Ice Age Reserve, 

reserve, i, iii, v, vi, vii, viii, xxiv, xxv, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 

10, 11, 12, 28, 31, 32, 33, 105, 121

interpretive, interpretation, i, ii, iii, vi, vii, viii, ix, x, xi, 

xii, xiv, xv, xvi, xvii, xviii, 4, 8, 9, 11, 12, 17, 19, 22, 

39, 41, 45, 47, 48, 50, 57, 61, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 70, 

86, 89, 93, 94, 97, 100, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108

natural resources, xv, xvi, 12, 24, 27, 37, 55, 59, 60, 

85, 97, 100, 102, 108

orientation, ix, x, 22, 37, 43, 45, 51, 58

parking, viii, ix, xii, xiii, xiv, xv, 24, 37, 39, 41, 50, 51, 

53, 55, 56, 59, 64, 67, 68, 91, 92, 93

snowmobiling, snowmobile trail, 20, 36, 38, 52, 

53, 90

state park, 19, 33, 38

threatened and endangered, 18

trail, ii, vi, viii, ix, x, xi, xii, xiii, xiv, xv, xvii, xviii, 7, 8, 

11, 13, 23, 36, 39, 41, 43, 45, 47, 48, 50, 52, 53, 57, 

58, 65, 66, 68, 78, 91, 92, 93, 97, 103, 105, 106, 107

U.S. Highway 14, xii, xxi, 27, 48, 50, 82, 90, 94, 96

visitor center, x, xi, xii, xiv, 37, 45, 47, 48, 51, 63, 64, 

65, 66, 93

Wilkie gorge, Wilkie, vi, vii, viii, ix, x, xi, xii, xiii, 

xviii, 8, 20, 21, 24, 25, 41, 45, 47, 48, 50, 62, 64, 

65, 78, 81, 106, 113

Wisconsin, i, ii, iii, vi, vii, viii, xii, xxi, xxiv, 3, 4, 7, 

8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 

28, 31, 32, 38, 39, 48, 75, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 

92, 101, 102, 103, 105, 108, 111, 112, 

113, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132
160 ICE AGE COMPLEX AT CROSS PLAINS

INDEX
As the nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for 

most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering sound use 

of our land and water resources; protecting our fish, wildlife, and biological diversity; preserving 

the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historic places; and providing for 

the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The department assesses our energy and mineral 

resources and works to ensure that their development is in the best interests of all our people by 

encouraging stewardship and citizen participation in their care. The department also has a major 

responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island 

territories under U.S. administration.

NPS 650/108558 September 2012/Printed on recycled paper.
Lush wooded landscape

Surrounding hills

Ice Age Complex

Cross Plains, Wisconsin

 

National Park Service – U.S. Department of the Interior

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

Ice Age Complex at Cross Plains 

Wisconsin