Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 1997 / Notices 59725

prepared under the authority of the

Federal Land Policy and Management

Act of 1976 (section 202). This plan and

FEIS is prepared under the authority of

the National Environmental Policy Act

of 1969.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Interlakes Special Recreation

Management Area is a 74,850 acre

region which encompasses lands

administered through the United States

Department of the Interior’s BLM,

National Park Service, Bureau of

Reclamation, and the Department of

Agriculture’s Forest Service. Once

approved, this plan will guide

management activities for the BLM for

the next 10 to 15 years. The National

Park Service, Bureau of Reclamation

and U.S. Forest Service may approve

this plan by continuing with this joint

planning effort and approving a Record

of Decision, or may implement portions

of this plan by tiering to this document

within their own planning documents.

DATES: Comments on this plan and FEIS

should be submitted in writing by

December 1, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charles M. Schultz, Area Manager,

Bureau of Land Management, 355

Hemsted Drive, Redding, CA 96002.

Dated: October 27, 1997.

Francis Berg,

Acting Area Manager.

[FR Doc. 97–29111 Filed 11–03–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–40–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

Record of Decision

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Record of Decision.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to regulations

promulgated by the Council on

Environmental Quality (40 CFR Section

1505.2) and the implementing

procedures of the National Park Service

(NPS) for the National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969 (40 U.S.C. 1501 et

seq.), the NPS has prepared this Record

of Decision with respect to the general

management plan and final

environmental impact statement,

Missouri/Niobrara/Verdigre Creek

National Recreational Rivers, Nebraska

and South Dakota. This Record of

Decision describes the recreational river

management alternatives considered,

mitigating measures adopted to avoid or

minimize environmental impacts, and

the reasoning behind the decisions

reached.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Superintendent, Niobrara/Missouri

National Scenic Riverways, 114 North

Sixth Street, O’Neill, Nebraska 68763–

0591, or 402–336–3970.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pub. L.

102–50, the Niobrara Scenic River

Designation Act of 1991, amended

section 3(a) of the Wild and Scenic

Rivers Act of 1968 to designate as

recreational rivers sections of the

Missouri River, Niobrara River, and

Verdigre Creek as listed below:

Missouri River: The 39-mile section

from the headwaters of Lewis and Clark

Lake to the Fort Randall Dam.

Niobrara River: The segment from the

western boundary of Knox County to its

confluence with the Missouri River (20

miles).

Verdigre Creek: The segment from the

north municipal boundary of Verdigre,

Nebraska, to its confluence with the

Niobrara River (8 miles).

The Act states these segments shall be

administered by the Secretary of the

Interior, who has delegated the task of

planning and operation to the NPS. As

such, the three segments have become a

unit of the National Park System.

The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act

directs the administering agency to

prepare a management plan and

establish final boundaries for protection

of important resources along designated

rivers. The Act requires the managing

agency to emphasize the protection of

scenic, historic, archeological, and

scientific features. It states that

recreational use may be permitted as

long as these values are not jeopardized.

Under the Act, the boundary is 0.25

mile from the ordinary high water mark

on both sides of the rivers until a final

boundary is established.

Decisions for management and

boundary: The NPS selects Alternative

5, the Preferred Alternative, for

management of the National

Recreational Rivers. The Preferred

Alternative was developed by the

planning team by combining aspects of

two other action alternatives. It includes

resource protection and a boundary

similar to alternative 3 and a

management philosophy similar to

alternative 2. This alternative neither

encourages nor discourages increased

visitor use. It also does not encourage

additional or expanded agricultural

practices. It strongly discourages

construction of residences or other

private development. Boundaries were

delineated to include important riverrelated habitat. Implementation of

natural resource objectives would take

precedence over other objectives where

possible without loss of significant

cultural resources. Management actions

would be accomplished through

cooperative associations with

landowners, county governments, state

and federal agencies, and private

interest groups.

The NPS will remain the

administrator of the recreational rivers

as authorized by Congress. The degree

of NPS presence will depend on the

success of local governments in

maintaining existing landscapes and

providing for recreational uses. To

fulfill its river management

responsibilities, the NPS will continue

to have staff on or near the river to

manage inherently federal requirements

of the law, administer cooperative

agreements, and monitor ongoing water,

land and visitor use activities along the

designated rivers.

Alternative 5 emphasizes

management for conserving, protecting,

and restoring riverine biological

diversity on public land and includes

potential for technical assistance and

incentives for private property owners

to do the same. Implementation on

private land would take place through

local protection and restoration efforts,

including federal standards for

minimum protection requirements and

the use of regulations and a flexible

package of financial incentives, funding

options, and technical assistance.

Local concerns were expressed during

public meetings regarding: an unwanted

influx of visitors on the river; dangers

the dynamic nature of the river presents

to novice users; and increased river

bank erosion caused by additional

power boat use. Because of those

concerns this alternative allows only for

the replacement of river access sites lost

to sedimentation and the improvement

(not expansion) of existing facilities.

Present recreational uses will continue

(fishing, boating, hunting, etc.) and

there could be expansion of visitor

services and facilities as long as they

did not add significant numbers of

people to the river.

The Alternative 5 boundary for the

39-mile stretch of the Missouri River

includes the river, its islands, and a

minimum setback of 200 feet from the

1991 ordinary high water mark (32,000

cfs). Also included is the Karl Mundt

National Wildlife Refuge and all other

federal and state fee land within 0.25

mile of the river. In addition, significant

cottonwood stands and land that would

be covered by a U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers (COE) high release of 60,000

cfs is included within the boundary. All

fee and easement lands included in the

boundary will continue to be managed

by the present land managers.
59726 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 1997 / Notices

For the Niobrara and Verdigre Creek

National Recreational Rivers the

boundary includes the rivers, its

islands, a minimum setback of 200 feet

from the ordinary high water mark, and

significant natural areas as identified by

the Nebraska Game and Parks

Commission. The Niobrara National

Recreational River boundary includes

land that would be affected by a rise in

the groundwater table as projected by

the COE.

Other management alternative

considered:

Alternative 1, No Action: In the noaction alternative the river area would

continue to evolve without benefit of a

coordinated, comprehensive effort by

the NPS and its partners and generally

would continue current trends. The

current conditions include a mix of

private property with some local, state,

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and COE

management. Existing conditions would

continue with varied management

under federal, state, and local laws and

by property owners with minimal

coordination. The NPS would assign an

individual to provide minimal

monitoring of conditions along the

rivers and limited coordination and

review among federal, state, and local

agencies. Other managing agencies,

whether federal, state, or local, would

work from existing offices and NPS staff

would work at an undetermined

location.

The designation act established an

interim boundary during the planning

period. The boundary includes the three

rivers, their islands, and land within

0.25 mile of the 1991 ordinary high

water mark on each side of the rivers

(see alternative 1 maps). The 0.25-mile

boundary would remain in place under

this alternative.

Protection of the scenery and natural

features would depend on existing or

developing programs including county

zoning, voluntary landowner covenants,

and other private land strategies. It

would be unrealistic to believe any of

these controls or strategies would have

as their primary goal the maintenance of

wild and scenic river values. Therefore,

the no action alternative was

determined not to implement the Wild

and Scenic Rivers Act on these rivers as

Congress has directed and intended.

The long-term protection of the river

and adjacent land and provision of a

good quality visitor experience could

not be ensured under this alternative.

Alternative 2, Rural Landscape

Integrity and Character: This alternative

would emphasize the rural landscape. It

would maintain patterns of land use

while protecting significant natural and

cultural resources. This alternative

seeks to stabilize visitor use at or near

current levels. It allows for limited

construction of new residences or other

private development. Implementation of

rural landscape objectives would be

emphasized as long as significant

natural and cultural resources were not

compromised.

Alternative 2 would rely heavily on

the cooperation of local property owners

and officials. Private land would be

managed through local means such as

zoning, land use management plans, or

property owner agreements. The

alternative would rely on counties and

property owner agreements to develop

standards for protecting private land

and meeting the objectives and goals of

this plan and the Wild and Scenic

Rivers Act. Local plans consistent with

the recreational river legislation

incorporating voluntary practices that

preserve the landscape and river values

would be developed in cooperation with

the NPS.

The visitor experience under

alternative 2 would be similar to the

activities, orientation, and interpretation

presently available. Interpretation and

information would emphasize safety

and preservation of the recreational

rivers’ values. Additional interpretation

emphasizing land stewardship and the

integrity of the landscape could be

offered through cooperative efforts.

The boundaries for the Missouri and

Niobrara river segments under this

alternative would include the river and

its islands and be established as a 200-

foot setback from the 1991 ordinary high

water mark. COE land within 0.25 mile

of the river is within the boundary.

Along the Missouri River segment the

Fort Randall historic site, Niobrara State

Park, Verdel Landing, and Karl Mundt

National Wildlife Refuge would be

included to help depict the rural

agrarian, natural, and historic character

of the landscape. The Verdigre Creek

boundary would be established as a 200-

foot setback from the riverbank. All fee

and easement lands included within the

boundary would continue to be

managed by the present land managers.

Total land area above the 1991

ordinary high water mark for the

Missouri National Recreational River

would be 4,718 acres. Total land area

above the 1991 ordinary high water

mark for the Niobrara National

Recreational River and Verdigre Creek

would be 1,559 acres.

Although NPS actions under this

alternative would have minimal

negative impacts to any of the resources,

the boundary would not include some

significant bottomland and periodically

flooded areas that contribute to the

biologic integrity of the river. The NPS

has determined that alternative 2 is

minimally acceptable in meeting the

intent of the Wild and Scenic Rivers

Act.

Alternative 3, Riverine Biological

Management: This alternative would

emphasize the recreational rivers’

biological diversity. It would improve

the quantity, quality, and diversity of

native plant and animal (primarily

aquatic) habitat. A meandering river,

eroding banks, sandbars, backwater

areas, cottonwood forests, and instream

snag habitat were characteristics of the

pre-dam river that would be recreated

where feasible.

This alternative neither encourages

nor discourages increased visitor use. It

also does not encourage additional or

expanded agricultural practices. It

strongly discourages construction of

residences or other private

development. Boundaries were

delineated to include important riverrelated habitat. Implementation of

natural resource objectives would take

precedence over other objectives where

possible without loss of significant

cultural resources.

The primary goal of this alternative

would be to protect and restore the

Missouri River and the lower stretches

of the Niobrara River and Verdigre

Creek as a nearly natural ecosystem.

The boundary for the Missouri

National Recreational River under this

alternative would include the river, its

islands, and a minimum setback of 200

feet from the 1991 ordinary high water

mark. Also included is the Karl Mundt

National Wildlife Refuge and all other

federal and state land within 0.25 mile

of the river. Other criteria used in

determining the remaining land inside

the boundary include significant

biological bottomland as defined by the

Nebraska Game and Parks Commission

and land that would be covered by a

COE release of 60,000 cfs. All fee and

easement lands included within the

boundary will continue to be managed

by the present land managers.

The boundary for the Niobrara

National Recreational River would

include a minimum setback of 200 feet

from the riverbank plus significant

biological bottomland areas as identified

by the Nebraska Game and Parks

Commission. Also included are COE

projections for areas that might be

affected by a rise in the water table. The

Verdigre Creek boundary would include

a minimum setback of 200 feet from the

riverbank plus significant biological

bottomland as identified by the

Nebraska Game and Parks Commission.

Total land area above the 1991 ordinary

high water mark for the Missouri

National Recreational River would be
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 1997 / Notices 59727

10,463 acres. Total land area above the

1991 ordinary high water mark for the

Niobrara National Recreational River

and Verdigre Creek would be 5,962

acres.

The NPS has determined that this

alternative would be fully acceptable

and would meet the intent of the Wild

and Scenic Rivers Act.

Alternative 4, Visitor Use Balanced

with Resources Protection: Consistent

with resource protection and goals and

objectives of the general management

plan, implementation of recreational

uses would be emphasized in this

alternative. The NPS and its partners

would be actively involved in day-today management of the rivers. Private

and public recreational development

(including river access points, scenic

roads, trails, and structures) would

remain, and some future expansion is

envisioned. Land needed for visitor

facilities would be acquired from

willing sellers. Additional sites or

improvements are proposed in Nebraska

near the Pishelville Bridge, Sunshine

Bottom, and Verdigre Creek. Additional

locations for primitive camping along

the river could be developed if

warranted by increased recreation

demand. Interpretation of cultural and

natural resources would be important

for resource protection as well as for

visitor education and enjoyment.

Natural features of the landscape

would be maintained, such as sandbars

and beaches, backwater areas for

recreational fishing, and open spaces.

Cooperative efforts to enhance

backwater areas, sandbars, and other

habitats would be encouraged to

preserve resources and increase

recreational fishery and wildlife

viewing opportunities. Significant

resources would be inventoried and

monitored to protect river-related

resources from visitor use and other

recreational stresses.

This alternative encourages the

continuation of agricultural practices

and landscapes as important elements of

pastoral scenes that visitors can enjoy.

It encourages compatible agricultural

practices, and it allows for an increase

in construction of residences within the

residential and other private

development land class.

The boundary would include a

minimum setback of 200 feet from the

riverbank, plus significant resource

areas and potential public use areas on

the rivers. Karl Mundt National Wildlife

Refuge, Niobrara State Park, and Fort

Randall historic site are included within

the boundary in this alternative because

they are public facilities that contribute

to the goals of the alternative. Other

state land and COE fee land within 0.25

mile of the 1991 ordinary high water

mark would also be included. All fee

and easement land included within the

boundary would continue to be

managed by the present land managers.

Total land area above the 1991

ordinary high water mark for the

Missouri National Recreational River is

6,443 acres. Total land area above the

1991 ordinary high water mark for the

Niobrara National Recreational River

and Verdigre Creek is 1,492 acres.

The NPS feels this alternative allows

for the protection of sufficient

bottomlands and other biologically

important lands to fully comply with

the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Because

of local concerns regarding increased

river traffic this alternative was not

selected.

Measures to Minimize Harm: Because

few specific land purchase or

construction projects are proposed and

the alternatives are general strategies for

long-term management, the

consequences are assessed in general

terms. Foreseeable short term impacts

are identified along with long-term

impacts and potential mitigating

measures. The impacts of all the action

alternatives are similar.

Recreational use of the river has been

relatively stable but with no coordinated

management. The selected alternative

provides for increased visitor

management and for controls to be

placed on visitor use if resources are

threatened by that use or if negative

visitor experiences result from increased

use of the rivers.

New boat access areas are permitted

to replace access areas lost to

sedimentation. The selected sites could

cover several acres each. Some habitat

would be lost, temporary construction

induced siltation could occur, but

would be minimized through

appropriate construction techniques.

Public access sites would be checked for

fossils or cultural artifacts before and

during construction. If either were

found the state historical society and/or

appropriate Indian tribes would be

consulted.

Suggested guidelines for development

are available in each alternative.

Recreational home developments have

been occurring along the Missouri River.

The selected alternative acts to control

these developments. Currently there is

no zoning in any of the counties. Along

with the guidelines, cooperative land

owner agreements, voluntary easements,

and deed restrictions could be used to

control development. If the guidelines

and other methods of control are not

successful and continued development

threatens river resources the plan states

that the current policy of nocondemnation will have to be revisited.

Farming and ranching are recognized

as valuable tools in maintaining the

rural nature of the area. Current levels

of use and methods have not been

detrimental to the rivers and no controls

are foreseen. The NPS would encourage

best management practices be in place

and for good land stewardship to

continue.

Specific impacts and measures that

would be taken to mitigate potential

negative impacts are described in the

Final Environmental Impact Statement

on pages 144–187. Compliance with

existing laws and executive orders is

described on pages 188–193.

Comments on the draft and final

general management plan and

environmental impact statement (GMP/

EIS): The draft GMP/EIS was released to

the public on July 12, 1996.

Approximately 1,100 copies of the draft

plan were mailed to federal, state, and

local officials, organizations, and

individuals. Public meetings were held

between August 13–21 in Yankton,

Pickstown, Springfield, and Wagner,

South Dakota; and Norfolk, Niobrara,

Verdigre, Verdel, and Spencer,

Nebraska. The public comment period

ended September 14, 1996.

A total of 75 written comments were

received during the public review

period. A majority of the comments

came from the local area and suggested

the rivers be deauthorized as a

component of the Wild and Scenic

Rivers System. Because this would

require an additional act of Congress,

the NPS cannot comply with these

suggestions, and would not support

such a proposal.

Some comments were directed

towards the silt aggradation occurring in

the Missouri and Niobrara rivers. The

siltation is a result of decreased water

flow velocity as it enters Lewis and

Clark Lake. The reduced water velocity

decreases the silt load carrying capacity

of the river and causes deposition

(aggradation). This is not a result of the

recreational river designation or the

general management plan. The NPS has

agreed to work cooperatively with the

COE to explore viable solutions to the

problem.

In July 1997 the final GMP/EIS was

printed and distributed to more than

300 individuals, agencies, and

organizations. In the document the NPS

named the preferred alternative and

boundary. There were seven comments

received on the final plan, one from a

federal agency, two from private

organizations, and four from

landowners. To the extent possible

comments and concerns therein have
59728 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 1997 / Notices

been addressed in the following section

and/or other sections of this document.

Clarifications requested through

written comments: The NPS would

consider boat access areas inside and

outside the boundary that serve the

recreational rivers as replaceable if

substantial access was lost as a result of

sediment aggradation in the river.

Ramps lost outside the recreational river

boundary could be replaced within the

boundary. Examples of access areas

serving the recreational rivers that are

lost, or threatened are the Missouri

River access areas at Springfield and

Running Water, South Dakota, and

Niobrara, Nebraska.

The NPS decision to not actively

promote recreational use on the river

was based on input of the Federal

Advisory Commission in consultation

with the Secretary of the Interior during

the development of the plan, by local

representatives on the planning team,

and by comments received from the

general public during the planning

process. The Wild and Scenic Rivers

Act, Section 10(a) allows for

‘‘management plans for any such

component’’ to ‘‘establish varying

degrees of intensity for its protection

and development, based on the special

attributes of the area.’’ In this case the

NPS feels there are legitimate safety

concerns resulting from shifting sand

bars and a significant increase in power

boat use on the Missouri National

Recreational River. Canoeing danger

exists from the high winds that frequent

the area and the width of the river.

While the NPS has agreed not to

actively promote increased use there is

recognition in the plan that increased

use may occur as the result of actions

taken by others. As long as those actions

do not threaten river resources or add

significant visitor numbers to the river

NPS will act to guide such growth rather

than restrict it.

While local governments clearly have

existing local law enforcement

responsibilities and cooperative

relations will be sought, all references to

law enforcement in the final plan

should be understood to mean that the

NPS will not delegate Federal law

enforcement responsibilities with

respect to the water surfaces and on

lands it owns, or other inherently

Federal responsibilities as described in

the statutes related to the administration

of the National Park System, the Wild

and Scenic Rivers Act, and the Act

establishing the Missouri/Niobrara/

Verdigre Creek National Recreational

Rivers.

The COE has purchased flood

easements on some of the periodically

flooded land along the Missouri and

Niobrara rivers. This land remains in

private landownership but the COE

possesses the right to flood the land.

The NPS would not affect the easement

relationship between private

landowners and the COE. Neither would

the NPS boundary alter the payments

under the Payment in Lieu of Taxes Act.

The periodically flooded land is

included within the boundary not

because it is COE easement land but

because of its contribution to fish and

wildlife habitat.

Currently the Yankton Sioux Tribe is

challenging the size and location of its

reservation boundary. When a final

outcome is determined the NPS will

honor the final court decision. Until that

time any NPS management actions

within the disputed area will be

minimal and dependent on cooperative

agreement with private landowners and

the Yankton Sioux Tribe.

The recreational river boundary maps

depicted in the final GMP include

public lands such as the USFWS Karl

Mundt National Wildlife Refuge, as well

as easement lands. The Vicinity/Study

Area map on page 5 inadvertently

portrayed USFWS easement land as a

part of the refuge. That easement is not

part of the Karl Mundt Refuge and

should not have been portrayed as such

on that map. The maps on pages 29, 49,

61, 73, and 87 accurately portray the

easement land but the arrow points to

it as a part of the Karl Mundt Refuge.

That arrow should have been pointing

to the lower section that is a part of the

refuge and not to the easement land.

The maps in the final GMP/EIS are

designed to be general and for

orientation purposes only, and have no

formal standing. When the official

boundary map for this unit is published

the above mentioned errors will be

corrected.

Selection of the preferred alternative:

All of the action alternatives for

management of the rivers are considered

acceptable from an environmental

standpoint. The boundaries vary with

each alternative and preference was

placed on the alternatives that included

significant wetlands and bottomlands.

The preferred alternative was selected

because it is considered the most

effective alternative for meeting the

legislative intent of protecting river

values and maintaining the existing

economic uses along the river. This

alternative will require a minimum of

Federal land acquisition, which is

consistent with legislative intent. The

selected alternative is not expected to

have any significant adverse effects on

natural or cultural values in the

recreational river boundaries.

Dated: October 27, 1997.

David N. Given,

Deputy Regional Director, Midwest Region.

[FR Doc. 97–29131 Filed 11–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–70–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

Dayton Aviation Heritage Commission;

Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice sets the schedule

for the forthcoming meeting of the

Dayton Aviation Heritage Commission.

Notice of this meeting is required under

the Federal Advisory Committee Act

(Pub. L. 92–463).

DATE, TIME, AND ADDRESS: Tuesday,

December 2, 1997, 5:15 p.m. to 6:30

p.m., Innerwest Priority Board

conference room, 1024 West Third

Street, Dayton, Ohio 45407.

This business meeting will be open to

the public. Space and facilities to

accommodate members of the public are

limited and persons accommodated on

a first-come, first-served basis. The

Chairman will permit attendees to

address the Commission, but may

restrict the length of presentations. An

agenda will be available from the

Superintendent, Dayton Aviation, 1

week prior to the meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William Gibson, Superintendent,

Dayton Aviation, National Park Service,

P.O. Box 9280, Wright Brothers Station,

Dayton, Ohio 45409, or telephone 513–

225–7705.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Dayton Aviation Heritage Commission

was established by Public Law 102–419,

October 16, 1992.

Dated: October 24, 1997.

William W. Schenk,

Regional Director, Midwest Region.

[FR Doc. 97–29130 Filed 11–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–70–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places;

Notification of Pending Nominations

Nominations for the following

properties being considered for listing

in the National Register were received

by the National Park Service before

October 25, 1997. Pursuant to section

60.13 of 36 CFR Part 60 written