CRATERS of the MOON General Management Plan

APPENDIX A:

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
CRATERS OF THE MOON NATIONAL MONUMENT, IDAHO

ACTION — The National Park Service has prepared a General Management Plan to guide the management, development, and use of Craters of the Moon National Monument over the next 10-15 years. The major actions proposed in the plan include construction of a new visitor Center, group orientation facility, and entrance road approximately three-quarters of a mile north of the existing visitor center; remodeling and expansion of the headquarters for administration and operations, and expansion of maintenance facilities; changes in the roads and parking in the existing developed area to accommodate the proposed changes to the building functions; and rehabilitation of the main park road and associated turnouts and parking areas.

No major change in the direction of resource management for the monument is proposed. Inventory and monitoring of natural and cultural resources will continue, with an increased emphasis on awareness, management, and protection of cultural resources. Continuing cooperation and coordination with the Bureau of Land Management concerning management of grazing, mining, and wildland fires was recommended to ensure preservation of monument resources and significant related resources on lands adjacent to the monument. It is important that an air quality management plan be developed for the monument to protect the Class I air quality of the Craters of the Moon Wilderness. A proposal to modify the northern boundary of the monument to ensure greater protection of the monument's wildlife, vegetation, and watershed is under proposed. No other boundary changes are proposed.

The interpretive program will continue to serve visitors of all abilities. Redesign of the Devil's Orchard trail to be barrier-free is proposed. The program will he expanded to include area history with consideration given to developing interpretation for the Big Sink area and in conjunction with a mountain bike/ski trail proposed for Goodale's Cutoff. Cooperation with the BLM in interpreting the land adjacent to the monument is proposed.

SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES AND MAJOR IMPACTS — The Environmental Assessment accompanying the General Management Plan indicated that approximately 4.4 acres of mountain big sagebrush/bluebunch wheatgrass vegetation will be affected by construction under the proposal. The proposal will have no effects on floodplains, wetlands, threatened, endangered, or rare species, significant cultural resources, or the Craters of the Moon Wilderness. the proposed redevelopment will improve the quality of monument visitors' experience by relieving crowding and reducing congestion in and around the visitor center and campground, and remodeling or replacing outdated visitor facilities. Park operations will be improved by providing better maintenance facilities, expanding work space, and reducing the intrusion of visitor traffic into the housing area.

The Environmental Assessment evaluated the proposal and three alternatives. The no action alternative (alternative 1) was evaluated, but was rejected because it would perpetuate crowding and congestion for both visitors and park staff.

The minimum requirements alternative (alternative 2: remodel) was evaluated and found to offer some relief of the crowding in park offices and the visitor center. However, the alternative would not eliminate the congestion on the entrance road and visitor center parking, nor the congestion created by having administration, maintenance, and employee housing share the main visitor circulation pattern.

The seasonal variations alternative (alternative 3: summer visitor center) was also evaluated. It was rejected because of the increase in present operating costs from having two visitor facilities, including one that would require winterization, and the loss of a full range of interpretive opportunities for winter visitors. Additionally, the placement of maintenance facilities across the highway would increase cross-traffic, result in the loss of an additional 1.35 acres of vegetation, and increase the snow-removal operations required to function.

PUBLIC REVIEW - The service contacted the Idaho State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO) and Advisory Council on Historic Preservation under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), amended. No comment was received from the Advisory Council. The SHPO's response was one of support for additional cultural surveys to meet responsibilities under Section 1 10 of the NHPA. The SHPO also requested review of any proposed modification to structures older than 50 years and noted that continued use of previously impacted segments of Goodale's Cutoff would not cause additional damage to the trail. the National Park Service will work closely with the SHPO to coordinate future consultations and inventory activities wider Sections 106 and 110 the service will consult on future projects as outlined in Appendix F of the final plan.

A public comment period lasted 30 days following the distribution of the draft General Management Plan/Environmental Assessment on December 23, 1991. Nine written responses were received. Open houses to discuss the proposals were held in Arco, Burley, Ketchum, and Idaho Falls between January 20 and 23, 1992. Twenty individuals attended these meetings. Of the nine letters, seven supported the proposal and two opposed on the ground of cost. Comments at the open houses were generally favorable. No comments were received that required revisions to the proposal. Other comments have been noted and incorporated into the final plan.

Special briefings on the draft plan were also conducted for the Bureau of Land Management, Idaho Conservation League, Sierra Club, Butte County Commissioners, Lost River Joint Chamber of Commerce, and the staff of Senator Steve Symms, Senator Larry Craig and Congressman Richard Stallings.

DETERMINATION — Based on public and agency comments on the proposal and environmental assessment and on analyses of issues and alternatives, together with the ability of mitigation measures to alleviate impacts, the National Park Service believes that no substantial controversies exist.

It is the determination of the National Park Service that the proposed actions do not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Nor is the proposed action without precedence or similar to one that normally requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement. Individual construction projects in the proposal will be further evaluated prior to implementation. Therefore, an environmental impact statement will not be prepared.

Recommended
Jonathan B. Jarvis
Superintendent, Craters of the of National Monument
4-23-92

Approved
Michael Tollefson
Acting Regional Director, Pacific Northwest Region
4-29-92

TABLE OF CONTENTS