Alternatives Considered but Dismissed This section describes alternatives considered but eliminated from further study. The reason(s) for dismissal could include technical or economic infeasibility; inability to meet project objectives or resolve need; duplication with other, less environmentally damaging or less expensive alternatives; conflict with an up-to-date and valid park plan, statement of purpose and significance, or other policy, such that a major change in the plan or policy would be needed to implement; or too great an environmental impact. Table 2-2 describes the rationale for dismissing each alternative. Table 22: Rationale for Dismissed Alternatives Alternative Dismissed Dismissal Rationale Interpretation Building “ghostings” using upright wood frames. This effect could be misinterpreted that the Ojibwe who lived in the East Meadow are “gone,” while in reality their descendants are alive and well in the community. Interpretation of the pre-fur trade era. The project team identified that the pre-fur trade story is interpreted to the degree desired and feasible in the Heritage Center museum. Restoration of road and/or accessible portion of portage trail. The project team identified that the Revolutionary-era story is a minor event and is interpreted to the extent necessary in the Heritage Center museum. Infrastructure/Resources Management Large scale ground-disturbing activity, e.g., using heavy machinery to create surface. Previous archaeological studies demonstrate that the East Meadow contains underground archaeological resources that would be put at risk by disturbance. Ecological restoration as natural area, e.g., using native plantings. The East Meadow is unlikely to be a high-value natural area due to its history of human use and disturbance, as well as its current location close to the Grand Portage community. In addition, restoring it as a natural area would not meet the goals of the Park’s enabling legislation.
Where mitigation strategies differ significantly between the action alternatives, they are discussed separately for each; however, if they are quite similar, an overall mitigation discussion is included in the conclusion section for that resource topic. Historic and Cultural Resources Methodology – Historic and Cultural Resources Section 106 of the NHPA requires assessing effects to historic and cultural resources. Federal agencies are directed to coordinate Section 106 and NEPA compliance efforts, to ensure that the requirements of both statutes can be met “in a timely and efficient manner” (36 CFR 800.8). However, this EA is not a substitute for formal Section 106 requirements. Scoping meetings with Park staff, Band members, and other members of the public helped the project team elicit information regarding historic and cultural resources. In addition, the park superintendent consulted the RTC when questions arose about specific resources. These efforts are described in further detail in Chapter 5. This outreach, and the professional judgment of park resources management staff and cultural resources analysts, informed the development of the following areas of potential effect (APEs) for the project (Figure 31): The APE for archaeological resources is the same as the project area, and it includes all areas of proposed construction activities or other potential ground-disturbing activities associated with the proposed project. The APE for other cultural resources accounts for any physical, auditory, visual, or other relevant potential effects to historic properties. This includes the project area as well as some properties adjacent to the East Meadow, including the Holy Rosary Church to the north and Mount Rose to the southwest, to encompass historical views into the East Meadow. Although areas adjacent to the project to the east and west are heavily vegetated (Figure 32), which screens potential indirect visual and auditory effects, some clearing has been conducted of viewshed points along the Mount Rose trail, and plans are in place to clear further vegetation from the viewshed that existed historically from Mount Rose to the East Meadow. Figure : Affected Environment for Historic and Cultural Resources Figure : Vegetated area at eastern edge of East Meadow