[Federal Register: November 18, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 222)] [Notices] [Page 63056-63057] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18no99-71] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Final Environmental Impact Statement for General Management Plan, Redwood National and State Parks, Humboldt and Del Norte Counties, California; Notice of Availability Summary: Pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 81-190 as amended), the National Park Service, Department of the Interior, has prepared a final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) assessing the potential impacts of adopting a General Management Plan (GMP) for Redwood National and State Parks. These parks comprise a 105,516-acre cooperative federal- state parklands area that preserves some of the last remaining stands of the world's tallest trees along 35 miles of scenic northwestern California coastline. The document identifies and evaluates the potential environmental consequences of a Proposed Action and three Alternatives; appropriate mitigation measures are also identified and evaluated. Once approved, the GMP will guide resource management and preservation, watershed protection, restoration, and other stewardship activities (as well interpretation, site planning and other operations) for the next 10-15 years. This FEIS/GMP document also incorporates all the elements of an Environmental Impact Report/General Plan, which were prepared concurrently by the State of California's Department of Parks and Recreation. Although this comprehensive document results and benefits from a cooperative effort, each agency has slightly different requirements for completing the conservation planning and environmental impact analysis process. Proposal and Alternatives This document presents and analyzes four alternatives for joint management of the commingled Redwood National and State Parks. The concept under Alternative 1 (the proposed action) would be to emphasize the protection of the parks' resources and values (including proactive restoration where sensitive resources are at risk). A variety of opportunities for visitors to be inspired by cultural and natural values would be ensured. Under Alternative 2 (no action), existing management policies and resources protection, preservation, and restoration programs would be continued; some trail development and new campgrounds as described in previously approved plans for the area would also occur. Under Alternative 3 the agencies would emphasize resource restoration, protection, and preservation; the opportunities for public use and enjoyment of parklands would be limited to experiences consistent with a high degree of resource stewardship. Under Alternative 4 priority would be placed on providing a wide spectrum of appropriate visitor experiences, consistent with overarching stewardship obligations to protect parklands resources and values. The degree of foreseeable impact varies according to each Alternative, and includes: major beneficial effects from watershed and estuary restoration; some short-term adverse effects from proposed facility development and visitor use activities; and substantial economic benefits from park visitation, operations, and construction in the Humboldt-Del Norte area. Both the Draft and Final documents evaluate the same Proposed Action and Alternatives. The environmental consequences of the Alternatives are fully documented in the FEIS. No significant adverse impacts are foreseen from the three action Alternatives, because each includes provisions to avoid or mitigate potentially significant impacts. However, the No-Action Alternative could result in significant long-term impacts to natural and cultural resources due to management and protection activities insufficient to keep pace with conditions and trends foreseen. Estimated costs to implement the Alternatives are presented and compared in the appendices. Public Review Public collaboration with various local and regional organizations and individuals was formally initiated with a Notice of intent published in the Federal Register on May 24, 1996. Public scoping meetings were held in Brookings, Oregon and Eureka, Orick, Klamath, and Crescent City, California during June, 1996. During this period a number of focus group meetings and workshops were held. Consultations were undertaken with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and the California State Historic Preservation Office. The Yurok Tribal Heritage Preservation Officer participated as an active consultant in the overall conservation planning and environmental analysis process (following a one-day scoping workshop undertaken with eight American Indian Tribes, Rancherias, and Nations). The Draft EIS/GMP was formally released July 9, 1998 for a 60 day public review (which was extended for 30 days through November 8, 1998). During the draft review period, four public meetings and numerous workshops and informal meetings were conducted in local communities. Approximately 600 written comments and preprinted signed forms were received. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For more information or to obtain a copy of the document, contact the Superintendents, Redwood National and State Parks, 1111 Second Street, Crescent City, CA 95531; or telephone 1-800- 423-6101 or voice/TDD 707-464-6101; or via e-mail at redw__superintendent@nps.gov. The document will also be available at area libraries. the no-action period for the FEIS/GMP will extend for thirty (30) days after the Environmental Protection Agency's notification of the filing of the document is published in the Federal Register. Subsequently, the National Park Service will prepare a Record of Decision, which will also be duly noticed in the Federal Register. The official responsible for the NPS decision is the Regional Director, Pacific West Region; the responsibility for the State decision is vested with the California State Park and Recreation Commission in concert with the Depart of Parks and Recreation. The officials responsible for implementation are the Superintendents, Redwood National and State Parks. [[Page 63057]] Dated: November 9, 1999. John J. Reynolds, Regional Director, Pacific West Region. [FR Doc. 99-30112 Filed 11-17-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-70-M