Record of Decision

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 river-

related 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.

[[Page 59726]]

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 no-action 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 river-related 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

[[Page 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-to-day 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 no-condemnation 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

[[Page 59728]]

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