Finding of No Significant Impact
Environmental Assessment for Boundary Expansion Study Theodore Roosevelt National Park, North Dakota
Agency: National Park Service, United States Department of Interior
Background: The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508), and National Park Service (NPS) Director's Order-12 and Handbook (Conservation Planning and Environmental Impact Analysis and Decision-Making) direct the NPS to consider the environmental consequences of its proposed actions. The NPS has conducted an environmental assessment (EA) that provides an analysis of the environmental consequences of expanding the Elkhom Ranch Unit of Theodore Roosevelt National Park by about 6,581 acres to protect more of Theodore Roosevelt's original ranch.
Preferred Alternative
The Preferred Alternative is Alternative B described in the EA. This alternative would expand the boundary of Theodore Roosevelt National Park near the Elkhorn Ranch Unit (currently 218 acres) by 6,581 acres. Boundary expansion lands would consist of the privately owned Eberts Ranch, two smaller privately owned parcels, and parcels managed by the State Historical Society of North Dakota, North Dakota State Lands Department, and the United States Forest Service. Land would only be acquired from willing sellers. The boundary expansion would generally follow geographic section lilies and the Little Missouri River. The study area would be protected under this alternative, but not all of the property ranched by Theodore Roosevelt would be protected. The largest component of the boundary expansion is the main portion of the Eberts Ranch (4,190 acres). The ranch is currently managed for cattle/calf production. The property extends to the middle of the Little Missouri River on the west side, and otherwise generally follows geographic section lines.
The Preferred Alternative is also the Environmentally Preferred Alternative when measured against the six criteria listed in Section 101 of NEPA.
Criterion 1 (Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations) is best met by the Preferred Alternative which emphasizes:
Preserving land used by Theodore Roosevelt in his North Dakota ranching operations. Protecting the views from the site of Theodore Roosevelt's Elkhorn Ranch house. Providing for ecological restoration efforts and exotic plant control on the additional land. Allowing for minimal development to keep the area in a primitive condition.
Criterion 2 (Assure for all generations safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings) is best met by the Preferred Alternative which emphasizes:
Additional recreational opportunities on the expanded park lands (camping, hiking, wildlife watching). Interpretive opportunities for the public to learn about the history of the area and its significance in the life of Theodore Roosevelt.
Criterion 3 (Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk of health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences) is best met by the Preferred Alternative, which emphasizes:
Increased visitation and recreation in the area. Continued grazing of the area, possibly as a grass bank or swing pasture. Continued hunting in the area. Continued responsible oil and gas development in the area. Active management of exotic species. Providing for the restoration of existing cultivated fields to a native p)ant community. Minimal development and adaptive use of existing structures.
Criterion 4 (Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage and maintain, wherever possible, an environment that supports diversity and variety of individual choice) is best met by the Preferred Alternative, which emphasizes:
Protection of the lands ranched by Theodore Roosevelt in the late 1800s. Increased opportunities to tell the significant story of Theodore Roosevelt's time in the badlands. Communicating the value of a sense of place and stewardship to the public. Establishing perpetual public access for canoeists and other visitors to the east bank of the Little Missouri River in the vicinity of the Elkhom Ranch.
Criterion 5 (Achieve a balance between population and resource use that will permit high standards of living and wide sharing of life's amenities) is best met by the Preferred Alternative which emphasizes:
Encouraging varied recreation in an area that is showing an increase in many types of recreation. Preventing subdivision of the property and other construction that would impair the view from the Elkhorn Ranch site and also detract from the scenic views of the adjacent land. Making three miles of the east bank of the Little Missouri River available for public access.
Criterion 6 (Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources) is best met by the Preferred Alternative which emphasizes:
Possible use of the property as a grass bank to be used by ranchers during periods of drought or when resting or improving the range condition on their other grazing allotments. Possible use of supplemental alternative energy sources for facility operations.
Other Alternatives Considered
A No-Action Alternative was also examined in the EA. The No-Action Alternative would not provide for the protection of natural and cultural resources and the scenic and historic views. It would also not allow the public to access the area ranched by Theodore Roosevelt or to have increased opportunities to learn the story of Roosevelt's experiences in the North Dakota badlands.
The Preferred Alternative and Significance Criteria
The intensity or severity of impacts resulting from implementation of the Preferred Alternative are evaluated using the ten (10) significance criteria listed in 40 CFR 1508.27. Key areas in which impacts were evaluated included: cultural resources, biological communities, threatened and endangered species, water quality, soils, air quality, visual resources and noise, land use and recreational opportunities, park
operations, nonfederal oil and gas operations, and the socioeconomic environment.
Criterion 1: Impacts that may be both beneficial and adverse. A significant effect may exist even if the Federal agency believes that on balance the effect will be beneficial.
The Preferred Alternative would result in some pennanent negligible, minor, and moderate effects to certain resource areas as discussed below under other individual criteria. However, the Preferred Alternative would not have a significant impact on the environmental, cultural, or socioeconomic resources of Theodore Roosevelt National Park.
Criterion 2: Public safety and health
The Preferred Alternative would have no effect on public safety and health.
Criterion 3: Wetlands, floodplains, ecologically sensitive areas; threatened or endangered species; scientific, cultural, or historic resources
The Preferred Alternative would not impact wetlands, floodplains, ecologically sensitive areas, or scientific resources. It would have short term and long tenn, minor to, beneficial effects to threatened and endangered species and their habitats. It would have long term, minor to moderate, beneficial effects on cultural and historic resources due to the opportunity to preserve them.
Criterion 4: The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment is likely to be highly controversial
There is some controversy regarding socioeconomic effects of the proposal. Some members of the public commented that the park expansion would: have negative impacts to the tax base; decrease taxes and royalties received from energy development, and may eventually eliminate energy development altogether; decrease grazing revenues; and require additional county maintenance and improvements to roads serving the area.
Others felt that the proposal would: enhance the local economy due to increased tourism from additional visitors who would use the area or visitors increasing their length of stay; would have little effect on taxes because the Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) would nearly cover the lost property tax revenue.
Criterion 5: The degree to which the potential impacts are highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks.
The Preferred Alternative is a straightforward proposal that involves no uncertain impacts or unique or unknown risks.
Criterion 6: Whether the action may establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects, or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration.
The Preferred Alternative does not establish a precedent for future actions with si~ificant effects since the alternative involves park boundary expansion and land acquisition only. The EA discusses that any
future services or facilities would be either existing structures retrofitted for park use or be minimal in scope to be consistent with the remote and isolated experiences that Theodore Roosevelt had on this land. Any future services or facilities will be determined through a General Management Plan and associated National Environmental Policy Act planning as required by National Park Service policy.
Criterion 7: Whether the action is related to other actions that may have individual insignificant impacts but cumulatively significant effects.
There are no other actions pending that, with the addition of the preferred alternative, would have individual insignificant impacts but cumulatively significant effects.
Criterion 8: The degree to which an action may adversely affect historic properties in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, or other significant scientific, archeological, or cultural resources.
The current Elkhorn Ranch Unit of the park is considered too small to be nominated to the National Register of Historic Places as a cultural landscape. However, incorporation of the study area into the park could allow the National Park Service to nominate a larger tract of land, including the Elkhorn Ranch, as a cultural landscape and afford it more protection. This would constitute a long-term, moderate, beneficial effect. The Preferred Alternative would afford more protection for all cultural resources, but would have no other impacts on other known significant scientific, archeological, or cultural resources.
Criterion 9: The degree to which an action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened species or its habitat.
Under the Preferred Alternative, habitat for federal and state listed threatened and endangered or sensitive species would be protected under National Park Service regulations. Rare plants and natural communities that occur on the lands proposed for inclusion would also be protected under NPS policies. This could have long-term, minor to moderate, beneficial effects on these species and communities.
Criterion 10: Whether the action threatens a violation of federal, state, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment.
The Preferred Alternative would not violate any environmental protection law or regulation.
Public involvement And Consultation
Impact topics were identified by the planning team with input from other federal and state agencies, as well as on the basis of federal laws, regulations, orders, and NPS policy. Protection of a portion of Roosevelt's original ranch, some of which is prominently visible from Roosevelt's Elkhorn Ranch home site, is the main objective of the Boundary Expansion Study.
A news release was issued on April 16, 2002, announcing the NPS intention to conduct a boundary expansion study/EA for Theodore Roosevelt National Park. The news release, or a related article, was carried by most area newspapers and radio stations. Also on April 16, 2002, the National Park Service mailed over 201 scoping letters.
The EA was available for public review from November 15 through December 20, 2002. Over 200 copies were mailed. to federal agencies, Tribes, state and local agencies, and private organizations and individuals on the park's mailing list. The EA was also posted on the park's web site and news releases
were issued. Between November 19 and 25, six public meetings were held around the state, Approximately 325 people attended these meetings.
The following Tribes and tribal representatives received copies of the environmental assessment for review and comment:
Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes Fort Yates Reservation Gros Ventre Spirit Lake Tribe Standing Rock Lakota Sioux Tribe Three Affiliated Tribes Trenton Indian Service Area Turtle Mountain Band of Pembina Chippewa
No response was received from the Tribes.
The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) is also the Director of the State Historical Society of North Dakota (SHSND). That office was consulted several times during the internal and external scoping process. The SHPO sent a letter dated May 17, 2002, providing specific information on their parcels and stating that the boundary expansion would enhance the Theodore Roosevelt National Park Elkhorn Ranch site. The SHPO did not have any specific comments on the EA.
The National Park Service received a letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on August 21,2002, stating that if the evaluation shows a "no effect" situation on endangered, threatened, and candidate species, then no further consultation is necessary. The EA showed no potential adverse effects to these species.
A total of 1064 letters or e-mails were received from the public, of which 901 were "form" correspondence. Of the 901 pieces of form correspondence, 10 supported No Action, 230 supported park expansion as explained in the EA, and 661 recommended a national preserve designation.
Of the 163 pieces of unique correspondence, 124 supported National Park Service acquisition, and 39 supported No Action.
Of the l06 unique letters received from North Dakota addresses, 76 supported National Park Service acquisition while 30 supported the No Action alternative.
Finding of No Significant Impact and No Impairment
Based on my review of the facts and analysis contained in this environmental assessment, which is incorporated herein, I conclude that the Preferred Alternative for an expansion of the boundary of Theodore Roosevelt National Park near the Elkhorn Ranch unit would not have a significant impact either by itself or considering cumulative impacts. Accordingly, the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, regulations promulgated by the President's Council on Environmental Quality, and provisions of National Park Service (NPS) Director's Order-12 and Handbook (Conservation Planning and Environmental Impact Analysis and Decision-Making) have been fulfilled. Furthermore, the Preferred Alternative would not impair park resources or values and would not violate the NPS Organic Act. An environmental impact statement is not required and would not be prepared for implementation of the Preferred Alternative.
The National Park Service has determined the proposed boundary expansion meets the criteria for national significance, feasibility of administration, and merits protection for future generations. While all lands within the ranch are worthy of protection, having natural, scientific and historic values, priority consideration for acquisition by NPS should be given to the viewshed of the existing Elkhorn Unit and associated river lands, which was part of Theodore Roosevelt's Elkhorn Ranch and is critical to protecting the integrity of the existing park unit. Many comments favored other management approaches other than those examined by this boundary expansion study, which would allow for preservation of the entire property along with the continuation of traditional uses, such as hunting, grazing, and oil and gas extraction. There are a variety of protection mechanisms available including cooperation with others, such as the State of North Dakota that would achieve the protection goals. At this time, therefore, the National Park Service recommends acquisition of only the highest priority lands (i.e., those within the viewshed of Theodore Roosevelt's Elkhorn Ranch). The National Park Service does not at this time recommend the entire acreage described in the preferred alternative be added to the National Park System. Thus, interested parties may explore alternative management approaches to protecting the entire ranch for future generations.
Recommended: /s/ Earl L. Hempstead, Acting Superintendent 10/2/03
Approved: /s/ Ernest Quintana 10/6/03 Midwest Regional Director
