National Park Service National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of the Interior Biscayne National Park Biscayne National Park Florida Florida Biscayne National Park National Biscayne Biscayne National Park Draft General Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement Environmental Impact Statement Environmental General Management Plan April 2011 ii Draft General Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement Biscayne National Park Miami-Dade County, FL _____________________________________________________________________________ Biscayne National Monument was authorized by an act of Congress in 1968 (Public Law 90-606), expanded in 1974 (PL 93-477), and redesignated as a national park and expanded again in 1980 (PL 96-287). The last comprehensive management plan for the park was completed in 1983. Much has changed since 1983 — the population near the park has greatly increased, visitor use patterns and types have changed, and people have brought new recreational activities into the park. Each of these changes has implications for how visitors access and use the national park and the facilities needed to support those uses, how resources are managed and protected, and how the National Park Service manages its operations. A new plan is needed. This document examines 5 alternatives for managing Biscayne National Park for the next 15 to 20 years. It also analyzes the impacts of implementing each of the alternatives. The “no-action” alternative, alternative 1, consists of the existing park management and trends and serves as a basis for comparison in evaluating the other alternatives. The concept for park management under alternative 2 would be to emphasize the recreational use of the park while providing for resource protection as governed by law, policy, or resource sensitivity. This concept would be accomplished by providing a high level of services, facilities, and access to specific areas of the park. The concept for park management under alternative 3 would be to allow all visitors a full range of visitor experiences throughout most of the park and would use a permit system to authorize a limited number of visitors to access some areas of the park. Management actions would provide strong natural and cultural resource protection and diverse visitor experiences. Alternative 4 is the National Park Service’s preferred alternative and would emphasize strong natural and cultural resource protection while providing a diversity of visitor experiences. Some areas would be reserved for focused types of visitor use. The concept for park management under alternative 5 would be to promote the protection of natural resources, including taking actions to optimize conditions for protection and restoration. A permit system would be used in some parts of the park. Other areas would have limited numbers of visitors, manner of access, and recreational activities to provide certain experiences. The key impacts of implementing the no-action alternative (alternative 1) would be no new impacts on natural resources or soils; a continuation of existing impacts on visitor experience and park operations; and no adverse effects on cultural resources. The key impacts of implementing alternative 2 would be negligible to moderate adverse impacts on natural resources, no adverse effect on cultural resources, mostly beneficial visitor experience impacts, adverse park operation impacts, and beneficial economic impacts. The key impacts of implementing alternative 3 would be approximately the same as for alternative 2. The key impacts of implementing alternative 4 would be beneficial for natural resources, no adverse effect on cultural resources, beneficial and adverse impacts on visitor experience, adverse impacts on park operations, and beneficial and adverse impacts on the local economy. The key impacts of implementing alternative 5 would be beneficial for natural resources, no adverse effect on cultural resources, beneficial and adverse impacts on visitor experience, adverse impacts on park operations, and both beneficial and adverse impacts on the local economy. This Draft General Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement has been distributed to other agencies and interested organizations and individuals for their review and comment. The public comment period for this document will last for 60 days after the Environmental Protection Agency’s notice of availability has been published in the Federal Register. Readers are encouraged to enter written comments on this draft plan on the park planning website at http://parkplanning/nps.gov/BISC. Please note that NPS practice is to make comments, including names and addresses of respondents, available for public review; see the following “How to Comment on this Plan” discussion for further information. U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service HOW TO COMMENT ON THIS PLAN Comments on this plan are welcome and will Before including your address, phone be accepted for 60 days after the Environ- number, e-mail address, or other personal mental Protection Agency’s notice of identifying information in your comment, you availability appears in the Federal Register. If should be aware that your entire comment— you wish to respond to the material in this including your personal identifying document, you may submit your comments by information—may be made publicly available any one of several methods. You may mail at any time. Although you can ask us in your written comments to comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, Biscayne National Park GMP we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do National Park Service so. M. Elmer (DSC–P) P.O. Box 25287 We will always make submissions from Denver, CO 80225-0287 organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as You may also comment via the National Park representatives of or officials of organizations Service’s planning website or businesses, available for public inspection (http://parkplanning.nps.gov/bisc). You may in their entirety. also hand-deliver comments at public meetings to be announced in the media This method for public comment submittal following release of this document. In listed above stems from court rulings addition, comments may be sent or hand- concerning the release of public comments, delivered to Biscayne National Park, 9700 SW and it is included as recommended by the 328 Street, Homestead, FL 33033-5634 Office of the Solicitor, Department of the Interior. ii SUMMARY Biscayne National Monument was established mandates, present different ways to manage in 1968 (Public Law 90-606), expanded in resources and visitor use and improve 1974 (Public Law 93-477), and redesignated as facilities and infrastructure at the national a national park and expanded again in 1980 park. The five alternatives are the no-action (Public Law 96-287). alternative (continuing current management), alternative 2, alternative 3, alternative 4 (NPS The last comprehensive planning effort preferred), and alternative 5. (general management plan) for Biscayne National Park was completed in 1983. Much has occurred since 1983—the population near ALTERNATIVE 1 the park has greatly increased, visitor use (THE NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE) patterns and types have changed, and people want to bring new recreational activities into The no-action alternative consists of a the park. Each of these changes has major continuation of existing management and implications for how visitors access and use trends at Biscayne National Park and provides the national park and the facilities needed to a baseline for comparison in evaluating the support those uses, how resources are changes and impacts of the other alternatives. managed, and how the National Park Service The National Park Service would continue to (NPS) manages its operations. A new plan is manage the national park as it is currently needed to being managed. Existing operations and Clearly define resource conditions and visitor facilities would continue, and no new visitor experiences to be achieved in construction would be authorized other than Biscayne National Park. what has already been approved and funded. Current law, policy, and plans, would Provide a framework for NPS managers continue to provide the framework of to use when making decisions about how guidance. to best protect national park resources, how to provide a diverse range of visitor The important impacts of continuing existing experience opportunities, how to management conditions and trends would manage visitor use, and what kinds of include no new impacts on natural resources, facilities, if any, to develop in the no adverse effect on cultural resources, a national park. continuation of adverse effects on visitor Ensure that this foundation for decision experience, a continuation of adverse effects making has been developed in on park operations, and no new impact on the consultation with interested socioeconomic environment. stakeholders and adopted by the NPS leadership after an adequate analysis of the benefits, impacts, and economic ALTERNATIVE 2 costs of alternative courses of action. The concept for park management under This Draft General Management Plan / alternative 2 would be to emphasize the Environmental Impact Statement presents five recreational use of the park while providing alternatives, including the National Park for resource protection as governed by law, Service’s preferred alternative, for future policy, or resource sensitivity. This concept