Appendixes, Selected References, 

Preparers and Consultants, and Index

Lake Michigan in the Winter Empire Bluff

A Day at the Beach
292 

Back of divider 
307 

APPENDIX B: ANALYSIS OF BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS 

As one of the provisions of Public Law 95-625, 

the National Parks and Recreation Act of 

1978, Congress directed that the National 

Park Service consider, as part of a planning 

process, what modifications of external 

boundaries might be necessary to carry out 

park unit purposes. 

NPS Management Policies 2006 (section 3.5 

Boundary Adjustments) state that the 

National Park Service will conduct studies of 

potential boundary adjustments and may 

make boundary revisions for the following 

reasons: 

1) Protect significant resources and values, 

or to enhance opportunities for public 

enjoyment related to park purposes; 

2) Address operational and management 

issues, such as the need for access or the 

need for boundaries to correspond to 

logical boundary delineations such as 

topographic or other natural features or 

roads; OR 

3) Otherwise protect park resources that are 

critical to fulfilling park purposes. 

Additionally, all recommendations for 

boundary changes must meet the following 

two criteria: 

4) The added lands will be feasible to 

administer considering their size, 

configuration, and ownership; costs; the 

views of and impacts on local 

communities and surrounding 

jurisdictions; and other factors such as 

the presence of hazardous substances or 

exotic species; 

5) Other alternatives for management and 

resource protection are not adequate. 

The following areas were assessed as potential 

additions to the Lakeshore based on public 

comments received and internal scoping. 

 

North and South Fox Islands 

North Fox and South Fox islands are located 

in Lake Michigan, approximately 17 and 24 

miles northeast, respectively, of North 

Manitou Island. The Fox Islands are part of 

Leelanau County, Michigan. North Fox is the 

smaller of the two islands at about 832 acres. 

The north island has been owned and 

managed by the state of Michigan since the 

year 2000. South Fox Island is about 3,400 

acres in size. Since 2001, about two-thirds of 

South Fox Island has been privately owned. 

The other third is owned and managed by the 

state, including a lighthouse on the southern 

tip of the island. There is no regular ferry 

service to South Fox Island, and it has no 

docks, fuel, or sheltered harbor. The state 

manages a special deer hunt on the island, and 

hunters can access the area using the seasonal 

service offered by the Manitou Island Transit 

ferry. 

The Fox Islands contain resources and values 

related to the Lakeshore’s purpose (dunes and 

beaches, for example). However, the 

resources and values at the islands are not 

critical to accomplishing the Lakeshore’s 

purpose, nor are the islands required for 

operational or management needs for the 

Lakeshore. If the islands were incorporated 

into the Lakeshore boundaries, they would be 

difficult and costly for the National Park 

Service to administer due to their distance 

from Lakeshore headquarters (more than 50 

miles) and from the docks in Leland, 

Michigan (more than 30 miles). Adequacy of 

other alternatives for the islands’ management 

and resource protection, such as continued 

management by the state and/or a long-term 

lease of lighthouse facilities by a nonprofit 

organization, depends upon the level of 

funding, as would be the case for NPS 

management. Dune areas on the Fox Islands 

are identified by the state of Michigan as 

“critical dunes areas,” affording them special 
APPENDIXES

308 

protection under the Sand Dune Protection 

and Management Act of 1976, as amended. 

Because the Fox Islands do not meet NPS 

criteria for boundary adjustments, the islands 

are not considered for inclusion in the 

National Lakeshore boundary in this General 

Management Plan. 

Point Betsie Lighthouse 

Point Betsie Lighthouse, built in 1858, is 

located on the Lake Michigan shore in Benzie 

County, south of Sleeping Bear Dunes 

National Lakeshore and north of Frankfort, 

Michigan. The lighthouse, which is listed on 

the National Register of Historic Places, is 

owned by Benzie County. In 2004 the 

lighthouse property was transferred by the 

Bureau of Land Management from U.S. 

Government management to ownership by 

Benzie County, with the Coast Guard 

retaining rights to operate the light and 

ownership of the modern house behind the 

lighthouse and the grounds on which that 

guest house sits. According to an operating 

agreement between Benzie County and the 

Friends of Point Betsie Lighthouse, Inc. 

(“Friends”), the capital assets will continue to 

be owned by Benzie County and operated by 

the Friends. The Friends are responsible for 

fundraising to accomplish this, along with the 

county who will apply for various state and 

federal grants. 

The Point Betsie Lighthouse and its 

surrounding property do not contain 

resources and values related to the 

Lakeshore’s purpose. Including the lighthouse 

property within the National Lakeshore 

would not address NPS operational and 

management needs, nor are the resources and 

values at the lighthouse critical to fulfilling the 

National Lakeshore’s purpose. If the Point 

Betsie Lighthouse were incorporated into the 

Lakeshore boundaries, additional operational 

funding would be required for maintaining 

and administering this resource. The 

cooperative agreement between Benzie 

County (owner) and the Friends of Point 

Betsie Lighthouse is an adequate alternative to 

NPS management and resource protection. 

For these reasons, the lighthouse is not 

considered for inclusion in the National 

Lakeshore boundary in this General 

Management Plan. 

North Manitou Shoal Light 

The North Manitou Shoal Light (“the Crib”) 

is located offshore from Leland, Michigan. 

The light tower, which is still in service, marks 

the end of North Manitou Shoal, a shallow 

area of the Manitou Passage. The light is listed 

on the National Register of Historic Places 

and consists of a square, two-story, white steel 

building set on a massive concrete crib. The 

light is owned and managed by the U.S. Coast 

Guard. 

The North Manitou Shoal Light does not 

contain resources and values related to the 

Lakeshore’s purpose. Furthermore, including 

the lighthouse property within the National 

Lakeshore would not address NPS operational and management needs, and the 

resources and values at the lighthouse are not 

critical to fulfilling the National Lakeshore’s 

purpose. If the North Manitou Shoal Light 

were incorporated into the Lakeshore 

boundaries, additional operational funding 

would be required for maintaining and 

managing the light. Because the lighthouse is 

still active, continued ownership and management by the U.S. Coast Guard is an appropriate alternative. For these reasons, the 

North Manitou Shoal Light is not considered 

for inclusion in the National Lakeshore 

boundary in this General Management Plan. 

Additional Lake Michigan 

Beach and Shoreline 

During public scoping for this General 

Management Plan, a few members of the 

public suggested that the National Park 
Appendix B: Analysis of Boundary Adjustments 

309 

Service should acquire more beach or 

shoreline along Lake Michigan. The only 

specific suggestion along these lines was to 

acquire beach land located between Old 

Indian Trail (near the south end of the 

National Lakeshore) and Point Betsie, about 3 

miles away. This area, which is bordered by 

Crystal Lake to the south and east, is largely 

forest land, but includes a dune area adjacent 

to the shoreline around Point Betsie. The area 

is in private ownership, and land uses include 

a golf course and numerous private 

residences. 

This area does contain resources and values 

related to the Lakeshore’s purpose (e.g., 

beaches and dune formations). However, 

including more beach lands within the 

National Lakeshore would not address NPS 

operational and management needs, and the 

resources and values in this area are not 

critical to fulfilling the National Lakeshore’s 

purpose. In addition, many of the natural 

resources in this area have been severely 

altered and fragmented. The dune area that 

includes and surrounds Point Betsie is 

identified by the state as a “critical dune area,” 

affording it special protection under the Sand 

Dune Protection and Management Act of 

1976, as amended. The area between the south 

end of Sleeping Bear Dunes and Point Betsie 

would not be feasible to acquire due to very 

high real estate prices for Lake Michigan 

frontage. 

Fishtown 

Fishtown is located on the docks along the 

Carp River where it empties into Lake 

Michigan in Leland, Michigan, north of 

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. 

This 1-acre cluster of small wooden structures 

is listed on the National Register of Historic 

Places and is privately owned. Some of 

Fishtown's buildings were built in the late 

1800s, when lumbering and iron smelting 

were dominant industries in northern 

Leelanau County. The fishing era began 

around 1900 and flourished over the next 

three decades, when most of Fishtown’s 

fishing shanties, icehouses, and smokehouses 

were constructed. Most of the structures now 

house retail businesses, but fishing activities 

continue there today as well. 

Fishtown has been purchased by the nonprofit Fishtown Preservation Society to ensure 

that its historic integrity is preserved for 

public enjoyment. Their plan is to maintain 

and preserve Fishtown’s historic structures, 

boats, and equipment, and to continue to lease 

the buildings to retail businesses, including 

commercial fishing operations, in order to 

continue public access there. 

Fishtown does not contain resources and 

values related to the Lakeshore’s purpose. 

Including the Fishtown property within the 

National Lakeshore would not address NPS 

operational and management needs, and the 

resources and values at the lighthouse are not 

critical to fulfilling the National Lakeshore’s 

purpose. If Fishtown were incorporated into 

the Lakeshore boundaries, additional 

operational funding would be required for 

maintaining and administering this resource. 

Acquisition and management by the Fishtown 

Preservation Society is an adequate alternative 

to NPS management and resource protection. 

For these reasons, Fishtown is not considered 

for inclusion in the National Lakeshore 

boundary in this General Management Plan. 
310 

APPENDIX C: COST SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES 

No Action Preferred 

Alternative Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C 

One-Time Capital Costs

Facility 

(Construction)(1) $3,200,000 $14,100,000 $11,000,000 $40,100,000 $27,800,000

Non-Facility (2) $3,400,000 $3,400,000 $3,400,000 $2,700,000 $2,700,000

Deferred 

Maintenance (3) $15,400,000 $15,400,000 $15,400,000 $15,400,000 $15,400,000

TOTAL 

ALTERNATIVE 

COSTS (1)(2)(3) 

$22,000,000 $32,900,000 $29,800,000 $58,200,000 $45,900,000

Annual Operating Costs (in 2007 dollars)

ONPS (4) $3,900,000 $4,400,000 $4,200,000 $4,400,000 $4,500,000

Staff- FTE (5) 66 79 77 79 85 

The presentation of costs in a general 

management plan is applied to the types and 

general intensities of development in a 

comparative format. The following applies to costs 

presented in this general management plan: 

• The costs are presented as estimates and are 

not appropriate for budgeting purposes. 

• The cost estimates were developed in 2007; 

they are very general and intended for 

alternative comparison purposes only. 

• The cost estimates were developed using 

industry standards to the extent available and 

they represent the total costs of projects. 

However, due to cost estimating uncertainty, 

actual costs could be as much as 30% lower 

or 50% higher than noted. 

• Actual costs will be determined at a later date 

and will take into consideration the design of 

facilities, identification of detailed resource 

protection needs, and changing visitor 

expectations. 

• Initial construction was assumed to occur in 

year one except for construction of a Benzie 

Corridor scenic road (alternative B) and 

construction of a Benzie Corridor hike/bike 

trail (alternative C); these were assumed to 

occur in year 25. For the preferred alternative, 

Benzie Corridor construction costs (for a 

scenic road and/or hike/bike trail) were not

included because, similar to the no-action 

alternative, construction is not anticipated to 

occur within the life of the plan. 

• Approval of the general management plan 

does not guarantee funding or staffing for 

proposed actions. 

• Project funding will not come all at once; it 

will likely take many years to secure and may 

be provided by partners, donations, or other 

nonfederal sources. 

• Some proposals may not be funded within the 

life of this General Management Plan and full 

implementation may occur many years into 

the future. 

NOTES 

(1) Facility (construction) costs include costs for 

new facilities that are proposed in the action 

alternatives. For the no-action alternative, 

construction costs include only projects that 

are already planned and funded. 

(2) Non-facility costs include natural and cultural 

resources management activities and visitor 

use projects. 

(3) Deferred maintenance costs are those needed 

to improve Lakeshore assets (structures and 

facilities) to a good condition based on NPS 

standards and calculating tools. 

(4) Annual operating costs (ONPS) are the total 

annual costs for maintenance and operations 
Appendix C: Cost Summary of GMP Alternatives 

311 

associated with each alternative. Included are 

all costs related to Lakeshore maintenance 

(e.g., utilities, materials, supplies, and leasing) 

and visitor services, law enforcement, 

resource management, and administration 

operations (including staff salaries and 

benefits). These costs are based on the 

current budget. 

(5) Total full-time equivalents (FTE) are the 

number of staff required to maintain 

Lakeshore assets at a good level and provide 

acceptable visitor services, protection of 

resources, and other operational support. Fulltime equivalent staff would likely be NPS 

employees. However, Lakeshore managers 

would explore opportunities to work with 

partners, volunteers, and other federal 

agencies to assist in the effective and efficient 

management of the Lakeshore. Those hours 

might be in addition to or instead of NPS 

employees. 
312 

APPENDIX D: DEVELOPMENT OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 

INITIAL PLANNING STEPS 

Work on the Sleeping Bear Dunes National 

Lakeshore General Management Plan / 

Wilderness Study / Environmental Impact 

Statement began in late 2005. The planning 

team consisted of Sleeping Bear Dunes 

National Lakeshore staff, the NPS Midwest 

Region Chief of Planning and Compliance, 

and technical specialists from the National 

Park Service’s Denver Service Center. 

Early steps in the planning process included 

the following (see chapter 1 for details): 

• Reaffirm the Lakeshore’s purpose and 

significance. 

• Identify the Lakeshore’s fundamental 

resources and values. 

• Consider legislative mandates. 

• Recognize planning issues. 

• Identify desired conditions. 

The planning team conducted field trips and 

gathered and studied information on National 

Lakeshore resources, visitor uses and values, 

and planning issues. The team also solicited 

input from the public. (See chapter 6 for a 

summary of public involvement.) With help 

from the public, the planning team developed 

four alternative concepts (including no action) 

for managing the Lakeshore. These concepts 

were presented to the public in a newsletter, 

and then comments from the public were 

gathered and reviewed. 

Based on public input and further consideration, the planning team developed the four 

alternative concepts into four full preliminary 

alternatives. These draft alternatives were 

then presented in another newsletter and at 

public meetings, and once again public 

comments were collected and reviewed. 

Possible consequences of the preliminary 

alternatives were considered and additional 

field investigations were conducted. 

DEVELOPING THE 

PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 

The next major step was to develop a 

preferred alternative. After reviewing the 

public comments on the preliminary 

alternatives, the planning team used an 

evaluation process called “Choosing by 

Advantages” to evaluate the four preliminary 

alternatives (no action, alternative A, 

alternative B, and alternative C). In using this 

process, the planning team asks, “What and 

how large are the advantages of each alternative?”, “How important are these advantages?”, and finally “Are these advantages 

worth their associated costs?” The Choosing 

by Advantages process does not “weigh” 

evaluation criteria in advance so that certain 

criteria are automatically more important than 

others. Rather, the process focuses on the 

differences between alternatives and 

determining how important those differences 

(advantages) are. 

After addressing the Choosing by Advantages 

questions in detail, the team used the resulting 

information to develop the preferred alternative. Alternative A provided the overall best 

value (greatest total advantage for the cost 

expended). Thus, to build the preferred 

alternative, the team started with alternative 

A, then studied the Choosing by Advantages 

results to see where elements of other 

alternatives could be incorporated (or 

substituted for elements of alternative A) to 

add advantages without adding too much 

additional cost. 

RATIONALE FOR AND 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 

ABOUT THE PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE 

This section provides more information about 

and rationale for the preferred alternative. 
Appendix D: Development of the Preferred Alternative 

313 

High Use Zone. The M-22 and M-109 road 

corridors were zoned high use in the 

preferred alternative to acknowledge 

continued vehicular use of these state 

transportation routes3

. Along these corridors, 

the width of the high use zone is 300 feet (each 

side) from the highway centerline to allow for 

a possible future M-22/M-109 hike/bike trail. 

Within this high use zone, wherever it turns 

out that land is not needed for the bike trail, 

the width of the high use zone would revert 

back to the M-22 or M-109 right-of-way, and 

lands would revert to adjacent management 

zoning. 

The area around Lake Michigan Road (in 

Benzie County, near the Platte River) was 

zoned high use to recognize the relatively high 

level of use and activity that occurs along the 

road, at Platte Point, and in and around the 

Platte River campground and picnic area. This 

high use zone extends to the northeast 

towards Tiesma Road to allow for a new Lake 

Michigan boat ramp or dock in this area, 

although a new boat ramp or dock is not 

proposed by the National Park Service. (A 

separate study would be needed to determine 

whether any such facility would be appropriate in this area. If such a study indicated that a 

new boat ramp or dock is not appropriate 

here, the high use zone beyond the Lake 

Michigan Road area would revert to the 

experience nature zone and Tiesma Road 

would revert to the recreation zone). NPSowned Tiesma Road would remain open in 

any event. 

Other popular National Lakeshore areas that 

were zoned high use to allow for high levels of 

visitor use and interpretive activities include 

the Pierce Stocking Scenic Drive and the Dune 

Climb. The Lakeshore’s maintenance facility 

 

3 State owned road rights-of-way are not controlled 

by the National Park Service. Showing state-owned 

road rights-of-way within the high use management 

zone is not intended to suggest otherwise, but rather 

to indicate continued use under management by the 

state. 

area, located just south of Empire, was also 

zoned high use. 

Experience History Zone. Areas of the 

National Lakeshore containing cultural 

resources that are fundamental to the Lakeshore’s significance (see chapter 1) were 

zoned experience history. These areas are 

Glen Haven (including the area around the 

Sleeping Bear Point Life-Saving Museum), 

Port Oneida Rural Historic District, and the 

U.S. Life-Saving Service Station/villages and 

lighthouse on the Manitou Islands. In 

addition, on South Manitou Island the NPSowned portion of the farm loop tour and 

adjacent fields and the schoolhouse were 

zoned experience history. The primary 

management emphasis in these areas is to 

preserve historic structures and landscapes 

and provide visitors the opportunity to enjoy 

and learn about them. 

Recreation Zone. Areas zoned recreation in 

the preferred alternative include the 

following: 

• Lake Michigan beach areas and the 0.25-

mile-wide strip of Lake Michigan within 

the National Lakeshore boundary — to 

allow continued access by watercraft 

(except for personal watercraft, or jet 

skis). 

• County-owned road corridors — to 

recognize continued vehicular and other 

use of these routes for recreational and 

other purposes.4

 

• School Lake and Loon Lake —to permit 

continued motorboat and other 

recreational uses. 

• The Platte River — to permit moderate 

levels of recreational use, including use of 

motorboats. 

 

4. County-owned road rights-of-way are not 

controlled by the National Park Service. Showing 

county-owned road rights-of-way within the 

recreation management zone is not intended to 

suggest otherwise, but rather to indicate continued 

use under management by the counties. 
APPENDIXES

314 

• To allow for a possible M-22/M-109 

hike/bike trail developed at the initiative 

of Lakeshore partners, the area between 

Peterson Road and north of Platte River 

campground; the area southeast of the 

Lakeshore’s Empire maintenance area 

and west of M-22; the area south of Glen 

Haven and north of the Dune Climb 

(west of M-109); plus corridors or twotracks east of the Pierce Stocking Scenic 

Drive and north of Alligator Hill. If these 

areas are not needed for the bike trail, 

they would revert back to the experience 

nature zone (except for county roads and 

the D. H. Day group campground, which 

would retain the recreation zone). 

• Various trailhead areas — to allow for 

trailhead parking. 

• Various farmsteads, farm fields, and 

other historic elements that are either 

adjacent to M-22 or where there is 

minimal conflict with the adjacent 

experience nature zone — to allow for 

preservation as “scene setters” or 

possible adaptive reuse/rehabilitation by 

partners or the National Park Service. 

Examples include the Boekeloo cabin 

and immediate landscape, the Ken-TuckU-Inn and immediate landscape, 

Tweddle School, the Tweddle farmstead, 

the Bufka farmstead and surrounding 

open fields, and the Eitzen and Kropp 

farmsteads. 

• The wooded area (“Burnham Woods”) 

south of the Glen Lakes and east of M-22 

— to allow consideration for a possible 

future designated mountain bike trail 

system. 

• The area east of Glen Haven — to 

maintain the rustic character of the D. H. 

Day campground and surroundings, and 

to permit moderate use levels in this area. 

• The Benzie Corridor — to allow for a 

future scenic road per the Lakeshore’s 

enabling legislation, and/or a hike/bike 

trail. About 10% of the 1,100-acre Benzie 

Corridor has been purchased by the 

National Park Service from willing sellers 

over the past quarter century, so 

development of a scenic road or 

hike/bike trail is likely decades off into 

the future. Based on public input 

received to date and preliminary impact 

analyses, NPS managers concluded that 

(a) the Benzie Corridor should remain 

within the Lakeshore’s legislated 

boundary, and (b) future managers 

should have the flexibility to study and 

decide, based on the circumstances, 

public input, and other best available 

information at the time, whether a scenic 

road or hike/bike trail (or both) should 

be built within the Benzie Corridor5

. 

Experience Nature Zone. The remainder of 

the National Lakeshore was zoned experience 

nature, in keeping with the purpose of the 

National Lakeshore: to “preserve outstanding 

natural features, including forests, beaches, 

dune formations, and ancient glacial 

phenomena in their natural setting, and 

protect them from developments and uses 

that would destroy the scenic beauty and 

natural character of the area, for the benefit, 

inspiration, education, recreation, and 

enjoyment of the public.” 

Wilderness Proposal. Based on public input, 

preliminary impact analyses, and the 

Choosing by Advantages evaluation, the 

planning team started with alternative A’s 

wilderness proposal and modified it as 

follows: 

 

5. The NPS vision of the scenic road at the time of 

this writing is as follows. The road would provide an 

identifiable southern entrance to the National 

Lakeshore. It would include an interchange on US31. From there it would continue in a generally 

northwesterly direction along the Crystal Ridge to an 

intersection with M-22. The road would provide 

scenic variety and offer outstanding scenic views of 

Lake Michigan, Empire Bluffs, Platte Lake, and 

Crystal Lake. Complementary facilities along the 

scenic road would likely include an entrance station, 

scenic overlooks, picnic areas, restrooms, and hiking 

and biking trails. The road would likely be similar to 

Pierce Stocking Scenic Drive, only with two-way 

traffic. It would be closed to commercial traffic. 
Appendix D: Development of the Preferred Alternative 

315 

• south portion of the Lakeshore — added 

a wilderness exclusion around Empire 

Bluffs Trail to facilitate trail maintenance 

and to ensure that hang gliding could 

continue there; added a wilderness 

exclusion around the Treat farmstead to 

facilitate maintenance of open farm fields 

• north portion of the Lakeshore — added 

a wilderness exclusion around the Bufka 

farm to facilitate maintenance or 

rehabilitation of the farmstead and 

surrounding farm fields 

• South Manitou Island — added a 

wilderness exclusion for the farm loop 

tour route, including the schoolhouse, to 

allow continuation of the interpretive 

tours and to facilitate maintenance, 

rehabilitation, or restoration of the 

structures, farmsteads, and surrounding 

fields. 

• North Manitou Island — added a 

wilderness exclusion for all of Cottage 

Row to facilitate maintenance, 

rehabilitation, or restoration of these 

structures and immediate surroundings. 

Other Elements of the 

Preferred Alternative 

• Parking at Platte River Point (near the 

mouth of the Platte River) could be 

improved to enhance vehicular 

circulation and reduce congestion. 

• The Esch Beach road end would be 

improved to address resource impacts 

and safety concerns associated with 

parking and improve vehicular 

circulation there. 

• Access for canoes and kayaks would be 

improved at some inland lakes to 

facilitate such use and address natural 

resource impacts (trampling, erosion, 

etc.) 

• The Crystal River access area would be 

upgraded or relocated and a small 

parking area would be provided to 

address natural resource impacts 

(trampling, erosion of gravel into the 

river, etc.) 

• Motorboats would no longer be allowed 

on Bass Lake (Leelanau County) and 

North Bar Lake to improve visitor 

experiences for nonmotorized uses 

(canoeing, kayaking, fishing, and 

swimming). 

• Little Glen Lake picnic area would be 

improved to facilitate beach use. For 

example, the sand area along the beach 

would be expanded and flush toilets 

might be constructed. 

• Valley View campground, which is not 

very popular with visitors, would be 

abandoned and the area returned to 

more natural conditions. A replacement 

campground for hikers and paddlers 

would be provided in a more attractive 

location closer to the Lake Michigan 

shoreline as a part of the bay-to-bay trail 

proposal. 

• On South Manitou Island, provided there 

is demand and the service is 

economically feasible, concession auto 

tours to near the Giant Cedars would be 

allowed to the end of the county-owned 

road; from there, tours would continue 

on foot for a short distance to the trees. 

User capacity management strategies 

(e.g., education, supervision by tour 

leaders, fences, and/or boardwalks) 

would be implemented as needed to 

prevent visitor use-related impacts to the 

cedar trees and surrounding vegetative 

community. 

• Day ferry trips to North Manitou Island 

(once or twice a week, not daily) would 

be allowed provided there is demand and 

the service is economically feasible. The 

intent is to allow a different segment of 

visitors to experience this island. 
APPENDIXES

316 

• On North Manitou Island, designated 

camping would be required within 

certain problem areas to confine and 

address natural resource impacts. In 

areas where use has not resulted in 

problems, dispersed camping would 

continue. 

• At Bow Lakes, a small parking area and a 

loop hiking trail would be provided to 

facilitate visitor use on NPS-owned 

lands.
317 

APPENDIX E: WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS 

Section 5(d) of the National Wild and Scenic 

Rivers Act (16 USC 1271-1287) requires that 

“In all planning for the use and development 

of water and related land resources, 

consideration shall be given by all Federal 

agencies involved to potential national wild, 

scenic and recreational river areas.” It further 

requires that “the Secretary of the Interior 

shall make specific studies and investigations 

to determine which additional wild, scenic 

and recreational river areas . . . shall be 

evaluated in planning reports by all Federal 

agencies as potential alternative uses of water 

and related land resources involved.” 

The National Park Service has compiled and 

maintains a Nationwide Rivers Inventory 

(NRI), which is a register of river segments 

that potentially qualify as national wild, scenic 

or recreational river areas. The inventory is a 

listing of more than 3,400 free-flowing river 

segments in the United States that are believed 

to possess one or more “outstandingly 

remarkable” natural or cultural values judged 

to be of more than local or regional significance. The original inventory, completed in 

1982, was conducted by the U.S. Department 

of the Interior with the cooperation of state 

and local agencies. To be listed, river segments 

had to meet the following three basic criteria: 

• be free flowing (and generally 25 miles or 

longer) 

• be relatively undeveloped (both river and 

corridor) 

• possess outstanding natural and/or 

cultural values 

In 1990, National Lakeshore staff inventoried 

and evaluated rivers and river segments that 

may have had potential for inclusion into the 

national wild and scenic rivers system. Five 

streams were inventoried: Platte River, Otter 

Creek, Shalda Creek, Crystal River, and Good 

Harbor Creek. Only the Platte River was 

identified by the Lakeshore staff for possible 

study and inclusion at that time. 

A major update to the Nationwide Rivers 

Inventory was initiated in 1993. To be eligible 

for listing on the updated inventory, river 

segments had to meet the following two 

criteria: 

• be free flowing (no mileage requirement) 

• have at least one “outstandingly 

remarkable” value 

The Crystal River and the Platte River were 

included on the 1993 update. The entire 3-

mile segment of the Crystal River within the 

National Lakeshore was included, with the 

following description: “Sinuous river channel 

following beach ridges. Large wetlands 

associated with interdunal wetlands. Remnant 

beaches contain rich diversity of species. 

Popular canoeing stream.” The entire segment 

of the Platte River within the National 

Lakeshore (4 miles) was included, with the 

following description: “Sinuous river channel 

following remnant beach ridges. Major 

archeological resources relative to midwoodland period Indian encampments. 

Popular canoeing destination. Important 

salmon and trout resource.” 

In 2005, NPS staff completed acquisition of 

the 104 acres of land identified in the 

Lakeshore boundary expansion authorized by 

Public Law (PL) 108-229. These lands include 

6,300 feet of river frontage along the Crystal 

River, approximately 0.6 miles along both 

banks. The land contains important wetland, 

riparian, and upland habitat for a variety of 

species within mixed northern forests. It also 

provides a natural backdrop for recreational 

river users and exceptional vistas for visitors 

who are hiking, biking or driving on nearby 

trails and roads. 
APPENDIXES

318 

The National Park Service recommends that 

this additional 0.6-mile reach of the Crystal 

River be added to the 3 miles already on the 

Nationwide Rivers Inventory when it is next 

updated.
319

APPENDIX F: CONSULTATION LETTERS
APPENDIXES

320
Appendix F: Consultation Letters

321
APPENDIXES

322
Appendix F: Consultation Letters

323