[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 113 (Monday, June 13, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38213-38214]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13840]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[NPS-PWR-PWRO-20687; PPPWSEKI00/PX.DSEKI1303.00.1]
Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Restoration of
Native Species in High Elevation Aquatic Ecosystems Plan, Sequoia and
Kings Canyon National Parks, Fresno and Tulare Counties, California
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Park Service (NPS) has prepared a Plan and Final
Environmental Impact Statement for the restoration of native species in
high elevation aquatic ecosystems within Sequoia and Kings Canyon
National Parks (SEKI)--(Restoration Plan/Final EIS). The Restoration
Plan/Final EIS will guide management actions by the NPS to restore and
conserve the native species diversity and ecological function of
selected high elevation aquatic ecosystems that have been adversely
impacted by human activities and to increase the resistance and
resilience of these species and ecosystems to human induced
environmental modifications, such as nonnative fish, disease, and
climate change. The Restoration Plan/Final EIS would be implemented
over a period of 20 to 35 years, depending on the alternative selected,
with an internal evaluation of management effectiveness scheduled every
5 to 10 years.
DATES: The NPS will execute a Record of Decision not sooner than 30
days from the date of publication of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's notice of availability for the Restoration Plan/Final EIS in
the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Hendricks, Environmental
Compliance and Planning Coordinator, Sequoia and Kings Canyon National
Parks, 47050 Generals Highway, Three Rivers, CA 93271, (559)565-3102.
Electronic versions of the complete document are available online at
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/aquatics. Request printed documents or CDs
through email ([email protected]) (type ``Restoration Plan/Final
EIS'' in the subject line) or telephone (559)565-3102.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Park Service has prepared the
Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Restoration of Native
Species in High Elevation Aquatic Ecosystems Plan. This process was
conducted pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the implementing regulations promulgated by
the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR part 1502.9).
The overall goal of this Restoration Plan/Final EIS is to restore
clusters of waterbodies to their naturally fishless state in strategic
locations across SEKI to create high elevation ecosystems having more
favorable habitat conditions for the persistence of native species and
ecosystem processes. Preserving and restoring native wildlife and the
communities and ecosystems in which they occur is one of the guiding
principles for managing biological resources in national parks and is
among the desired conditions
[[Page 38214]]
established in SEKI's General Management Plan/Final Environmental
Impact Statement, approved in 2007.
From 1870 to 1988, nonnative fish were introduced into many
heretofore fishless waterbodies throughout SEKI. Surveys conducted from
1997 to 2002 determined that self-sustaining nonnative trout
populations had become established in approximately 575 lakes, ponds,
and marshes, plus connecting streams, and nearly all streams that drain
these sites from high to low elevations. Impacts of nonnative trout on
high elevation aquatic and adjacent terrestrial ecosystems are well
documented and occur at all levels of the food web. Nonnative trout
impact native species directly through predation and indirectly through
competition for food resources. Nonnative trout can disrupt the type
and distribution of species, and thus the natural function of aquatic
ecosystems.
Two species of mountain yellow-legged frogs (MYLFs) are integral
components of SEKI's high elevation aquatic ecosystems. Formerly
abundant MYLFs are today among the world's endangered amphibians: Over
92% of their populations in the Sierra Nevada have disappeared, and
most of the remaining populations are much smaller and more isolated
than they were historically. Extensive research has identified two
primary factors for this decline. The first factor is the introduction
of nonnative trout. Nonnative trout have several direct effects on
MYLFs, including predation, competition for food, restriction of
breeding to marginal habitat, and fragmentation of remaining
populations. The second factor is the recent spread of
chytridiomycosis, a disease caused by amphibian chytrid fungus, which
has infected and imperiled most remaining MYLF populations. A third
emerging factor is global climate change, which has begun to dry up
smaller, shallower ponds in SEKI. Ponds have become important habitat
for MYLFs because, in basins where nonnative trout occur, fish occupy
most of the larger lakes, which are more resistant to climate change.
This has restricted many MYLF populations to smaller waterbodies that
are more vulnerable to drought and warming.
The Restoration Plan/Final EIS therefore proposes to recover
smaller relatively-simple habitats using physical tools and larger
more-complex habitats (including whole basins) using alternative tools.
Because eradication of nonnative fish from larger, more-complex
habitats has been determined infeasible using gill nets and
electrofishers, the NPS is considering alternatives using piscicides
(rotenone) in order to restore these ecologically significant habitats.
Alternative A: No-action/Status Quo would continue the ongoing
ecosystem restoration effort for 25 waterbodies, but no new fish
eradication activities would be initiated. Physical treatment methods
(gill netting, electrofishing, disturbing redds, and/or temporarily
covering spawning habitat with boulders) would continue to be utilized
until 2017. Native species and ecological processes in high elevation
aquatic ecosystems would be monitored. Research on native species,
ecological processes, and their stressors would continue in accordance
with NPS policy. After all treatments are completed, self-sustaining
nonnative trout populations would continue to exist in 550 waterbodies
(252 lakes, 235 ponds, 63 marshes) and hundreds of miles of stream.
Alternative B (NPS preferred alternative) would include physical
and piscicide treatments preceding restoration. Under this alternative,
a prescription (detailed plan of action) for restoration would be
developed for each proposed restoration area based on the criteria for
basin selection, pre-treatment surveys, habitat size, basin topography,
wilderness values, visitor use, and field crew safety. Prescriptions
would consider the actual distribution of fish, results of amphibian
surveys, and whether any unique habitats were detected (such as
springs). Physical treatment as described under alternative A, plus
trapping, would be utilized. Piscicide treatment methods would be
considered for waterbodies determined infeasible for physical
treatment. Based on current knowledge of the proposed fish eradication
sites, physical treatment would be applied in 52 waterbodies (27 lakes,
24 ponds, 1 marsh; total of 492 ac/199 ha) and 15 mi (25 km) of streams
in 17 basins, and piscicide treatment would be applied in 33
waterbodies (4 lakes, 25 ponds, and 4 marshes; total of 142 ac/57 ha)
and 16 mi (25 km) of streams in 9 basins. In addition, any unsurveyed
habitat adjacent to treated lakes, ponds, marshes, and streams found to
contain nonnative fish would also require treatment in order to
eradicate fish from the geographic area. After all treatments are
completed, self-sustaining nonnative trout populations would continue
to exist in 465 waterbodies (221 lakes, 186 ponds, 58 marshes) and
hundreds of miles of stream.
Alternative C would use physical treatment methods only to
eradicate nonnative fish, and blasting rock to create vertical fish
barriers (if needed). In comparison to alternative B, excluded from the
list of proposed restoration waterbodies are long reaches of stream,
several large lakes, and interconnected lake complexes that are too
large for effective physical treatment. Physical treatment methods
would be applied in 52 waterbodies (27 lakes, 24 ponds, and 1 marsh;
total of 492 ac/199 ha) and 15 mi (25 km) of streams contained in 17
basins. In addition, any unsurveyed habitat adjacent to treated lakes,
ponds, marshes, and streams found to contain nonnative fish would be
treated to eradicate fish from the entire scope of the restoration
area. After all treatments are completed, self-sustaining nonnative
trout populations would continue to exist in 498 waterbodies (225
lakes, 211 ponds, 62 marshes) and hundreds of miles of stream.
Alternative D emphasizes speed in recovering habitat because MYLF
populations are declining rapidly. To achieve this, only piscicide
treatment would be used for nonnative fish eradication, which can be
conducted faster than using physical methods. Piscicide treatment would
be used for 85 waterbodies (31 lakes, 49 ponds, and 5 marshes; total of
634 ac/257 ha), approximately 31 mi (50 km) of streams, and connected
fish-containing habitat as necessary. After all treatments are
completed, self-sustaining nonnative trout populations would continue
to exist in 465 waterbodies (221 lakes, 186 ponds, 58 marshes) and
hundreds of miles of stream.
Dated: March 25, 2016.
Patricia L. Neubacher,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
[FR Doc. 2016-13840 Filed 6-10-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-FF-P