apostle islands national lakeshore

361 Pages·2011·5.47 MB·English

National Park Service National Park Service
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of the Interior
Apostle Islands National Lakeshore • Wisconsin Apostle Islands National Lakeshore • Wisconsin
EXPERIENCE YOUR AMERICA
A
P
O
S
T
L
E

I
S
L
A
N
D
S

N
A
T
I
O
N
A
L

L
A
K
E
S
H
O
R APOSTLE ISLANDS
E
NATIONAL LAKESHORE
General Management Plan
E W G
nv il en Wilderness Management Plan
iro de er Environmental Impact Statement
nm rne al M
ent ss M an
a a
l Im ana gem
p g
a e e
c m n
t S en t P
tat t P lan
e l
m a
n
e
n
t
April 2011
Final General Management Plan / Wilderness Management Plan /
Environmental Impact Statement
for Apostle Islands National Lakeshore
ii
Final General Management Plan / Wilderness Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement
Apostle Islands National Lakeshore
Bayfield and Ashland Counties, Wisconsin
____________________________________________________________________________________
Apostle Islands National Lakeshore was authorized by an act of Congress on September 26, 1970 (Public
Law 91-424). The last comprehensive management plan for the park was completed in 1989. Much has
changed since then—visitor use patterns and types have changed, people are seeking out new recreational
activities in the park, and the Gaylord Nelson Wilderness was designated in December 2004. Each of
these changes has implications for how visitors access and use the park, the facilities needed to support
those uses, how resources are managed, and how the National Park Service manages its operations. A new
plan is needed.
This document examines four alternatives for managing Apostle Islands National Lakeshore for the next
15–20 years. It also analyzes the impacts of implementing each of the alternatives. Alternative 1, the “no-
action” alternative, consists of the existing park management and serves as a basis for comparison in
evaluating the other alternatives. The concept for park management under alternative 2 would be to
provide opportunities for more people to have an island experience. The concept for park management
under alternative 3 would be to provide primitive, lake-oriented recreation and education opportunities
that include some new and different opportunities. The emphasis in alternative 4 would be on providing
a greater variety of structured recreation opportunities on the islands, in nonwilderness areas, and on the
mainland. Alternative 2 is the National Park Service’s preferred alternative.
The Final General Management Plan / Wilderness Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement
has been distributed to other agencies and interested organizations and individuals for their review
and comment.

U.S. Department of the Interior • National Park Service
i
ii
SUMMARY

This Final General Management Plan / provide a variety of personal and nonpersonal
Wilderness Management Plan / Environmental services.
Impact Statement describes the general path
the National Park Service (NPS) intends to
follow in managing Apostle Islands National Alternative 1, The
Lakeshore for the next 15–20 years. More No-Action Alternative
specifically, this plan is intended to
Under alternative 1, the National Park Service
• clearly define resource conditions and would continue to manage Apostle Islands
visitor uses and experiences to be National Lakeshore as it has been managed
achieved in Apostle Islands National since the 1989 general management plan was
Lakeshore approved and the Gaylord Nelson Wilderness
• provide a framework for park managers to was designated in 2004.
use when making decisions about how to
best protect park resources, how to The natural resource program would continue
provide quality visitor uses and to focus on inventorying and monitoring,
experiences, how to manage visitor use, resource protection and restoration, research,
and what types of facilities, if any, to and mitigation where appropriate.
develop in/near Apostle Islands National
Lakeshore The cultural resource program would
• provide direction for management of the continue to focus on surveying cultural
resources; protecting historic structures and
Gaylord Nelson Wilderness, including its
landscapes, particularly in and around the
resources and visitors.
light stations; and on mitigation where

appropriate.
The general management plan does not

describe how particular programs or projects
The interpretation and education programs
should be prioritized or implemented. Those
would continue to provide a variety of
decisions will be addressed in future more-
personal and nonpersonal services similar to
detailed planning efforts. All future plans will
those offered currently.
tier from the approved general management

plan.
In alternative 1, most of the adverse impacts

on natural resources, wilderness character,
This Final General Management Plan /
visitors, and park operations would be
Wilderness Management Plan / Environmental
negligible to minor in magnitude. No adverse
Impact Statement examines four alternatives
impacts would occur to cultural resources.
for managing Apostle Islands National
Among the key impacts would be the
Lakeshore. In all of the alternatives, NPS
following. Sandscapes and shorelines would
managers would continue to strive to protect
continue to be affected by visitors in localized
and maintain natural and cultural resource
areas. Minor to moderate, long-term, adverse
conditions. Natural and cultural resource
impacts would occur to the natural
management would concentrate on long-term
soundscape in localized areas due to visitor
monitoring, research, restoration, and
use and NPS management activities. Moderate
mitigation where appropriate. Interpretation/
to major, long-term, beneficial impacts to
education programs would continue to
iii
SUMMARY
visitor use and experience would continue Center would be replaced with a smaller
due to continued opportunities for high- structure that offers the same level of visitor
quality lake and island recreation services as today but has less office space. A
opportunities. Minor to moderate, long-term, new ranger station and accessible beach ramp
adverse impacts would occur to park would be developed at Meyers Beach.
operations due to continued inadequate
facilities, fragmentation of park staff and Compared to alternative 1, most of the
facilities, staffing shortages, and lack of impacts of alternative 2 on natural resources,
funding. None of these impacts would be wilderness character, visitors, and park
considered unacceptable or would result in operations would be long term and negligible
the impairment of park resources and values. to minor in magnitude. No adverse impacts
would occur to cultural resources. Among the
key impacts would be the following.
Alternative 2, The Sandscapes and shorelines would continue to
Preferred Alternative be affected by visitors and by existing docks,
resulting in minor to moderate, long-term,
Alternative 2 would focus on providing
adverse impacts in localized areas. New
opportunities for more people to have an
developments in this alternative and increased
island experience.
visitor use on some islands would result in

minor to moderate, long-term, adverse
Two light stations would be restored or
impacts to vegetation and to the natural
rehabilitated, similar to the Raspberry Island
soundscape in localized areas. Minor to
light station. Part of the Long Island light
major, long-term, beneficial impacts would
station would be rehabilitated for park staff
occur to visitor use and experiences due to
housing.
enhanced access to the islands and increased

recreational opportunities. Long-term,
If feasible, additional transportation
beneficial impacts would occur to park
opportunities would be sought to encourage
operations due to improved park facilities,
visitors to come to Sand, Basswood, and Oak
decreased staff fragmentation, and increased
islands. Some additional visitor facilities
staffing levels. Long-term, beneficial impacts
would be developed on these islands,
also would occur to the socioeconomic
including day use areas, new trails, and
environment due to increased spending by
campsites.
visitors and the National Park Service under

alternative 2. None of the impacts of
Manitou fish camp would be preserved and
alternative 2 would be considered
stabilized, the cultural landscape would be
unacceptable or would result in the
partially rehabilitated, and the area would be
impairment of park resources and values.
interpreted.

There would be no change in the number of
Alternative 3
public docks, but some docks would be
relocated, improved, or expanded. Alternative 3 would focus on providing
primitive, lake-oriented recreation and
The Bayfield visitor center would be built in a education opportunities, with some new and
new location closer to the water to improve different opportunities provided.
contact with visitors and to be located with an
operations center. The park headquarters Focus would continue on maintaining the
would remain in the Old Bayfield County Raspberry Island light station; part of the
Courthouse. The Little Sand Bay Visitor
iv
Summary
Long Island light station would be Focus would continue on maintaining the
rehabilitated for park staff housing. Raspberry Island light station; part of the
A few new visitor facilities would be provided Long Island light station would be
on Sand, Basswood, and Oak islands including rehabilitated for park staff housing.
interpretive trails and new group campsites,
but there would be no new day-use facilities. A few new visitor facilities would be provided
on Sand, Basswood, and Oak islands including
Existing transportation opportunities would interpretive trails and new group campsites,
be maintained; no new ones would be but no new day-use facilities would be
developed. developed.

There would be no change in the public docks Existing transportation opportunities would
with the exception of improvements to be maintained; no new ones would be
Michigan Island dock. developed.

The park headquarters would remain in the Some docks, including the Michigan Island
Old Bayfield County Courthouse. The dock, would be improved or expanded for
Bayfield visitor center would be expanded in boaters; more docks possibly could be
the old courthouse and serve as the park’s installed.
primary visitor contact facility. The Little
Sand Bay Visitor Center would be replaced The park headquarters would remain at the
with a kiosk. A new ranger station would be Old Bayfield County Courthouse and a new
built at Meyers Beach. A new park operational visitor center would be built in a new location
facility would be built at a location to be closer to the water in Bayfield. The Little Sand
determined. Bay Visitor Center would be replaced with a
new visitor contact station with improved
Alternative 3 would have largely the same services. A new ranger/visitor contact station
effects as described under alternative 2. One and accessible beach ramp would be built at
difference is that, compared to alternative 1, Meyers Beach, and a new park operations
alternative 3 would have a minor to moderate, facility would be built at a location to be
long-term, beneficial impact on visitor use and determined.
experience due to slight improvements in
access to the islands, the continuation of With a few exceptions, alternative 4 would
existing recreational opportunities, and have largely the same effects as alternative 2.
increased interpretive opportunities on the One difference is that, compared to alternative
mainland. None of the impacts of alternative 3 1, alternative 4 would have a minor to
would be considered unacceptable or would moderate, long-term, adverse effect on
result in the impairment of park resources and vegetation in localized areas due to the
values. development of new facilities and increased
visitor use on some islands. The development
of additional dispersed campsites in the
Alternative 4 wilderness area would have a minor, long-
term, adverse impact on the wilderness
Under alternative 4, the emphasis would be on
character due to some visitors likely
providing a greater variety of structured
perceiving a loss of solitude and apparent
recreation opportunities for visitors. More
naturalness. None of the impacts of
visitor facilities would be provided in island
alternative 4 would be considered
nonwilderness areas, and mainland visitor
unacceptable or would result in the
opportunities would be expanded.
impairment of park resources and values.

v
SUMMARY
Next Steps and implemented over 15–20 years. It is important
Implementation of the Plan to note that not all of the actions in the
alternative will necessarily be implemented
Following distribution of the Final General
immediately.
Management Plan / Wilderness Management

Plan / Environmental Impact Statement and a
The implementation of the approved plan will
30-day no-action period, a record of decision
depend on future NPS funding levels and
approving a final plan will be signed by the
servicewide priorities, and on partnership
NPS regional director. The record of decision
funds, time, and effort. The approval of a
documents the NPS selection of an alternative
general management plan does not guarantee
for implementation. With the signing of the
that funding and staffing needed to implement
record of decision, the plan can then be
the plan will be forthcoming. Full
implemented.
implementation of the plan could be many

years in the future.
The selected alternative will become the new

management plan for the park and will be

vi
CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND
A GUIDE TO THIS DOCUMENT 3
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PLAN 5
Brief Description of the Park 6
Purpose of the Plan 6
Need For the Plan 11
FOUNDATION FOR PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT 12
Park Purpose 12
Park Significance 12
Fundamental Resources and Values 13
Primary Interpretive Themes 14
SPECIAL MANDATES AND ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITMENTS 15
Treaty Rights and Other Reserved Tribal Rights 15
Wilderness 15
Hunting, Fishing, and Trapping 15
Use of Snowmobiles and Off-Road Vehicles in the Park 15
Navigational Aids 16
Bayfield Visitor Center GSA Lease 16
Roys Point GSA Lease 16
Apostle Islands CruiseS Contract 16
Agreement with the Town of Russell Regarding Operation of Little Sand Bay 16
Agreement with the State of Wisconsin Regarding the Protection of Submerged Cultural Resources and
Bottomlands 16
Interagency Agreement on the Northern Great Lakes Visitor Center 17
Memorandum of Understanding with the Ojibwe Bands 17
Other Valid Rights 17
DESIRED CONDITIONS AND RELATED SERVICEWIDE LEGAL AND POLICY REQUIREMENTS 18
SCOPE OF THE GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN / WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT PLAN / ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT 46
Planning Issues / Concerns to be Addressed 46
Planning Issues/Concerns Not Being Addressed 52
Identification of Impact Topics 52
Relationship of Other Planning Efforts to this General Management Plan / Wilderness Management Plan
67
Next Steps and Implementation of the Plan 69
CHAPTER 2: FRAMEWORK FOR MANAGEMENT, USE, AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE GAYLORD NELSON
WILDERNESS
INTRODUCTION 73
Wilderness Character 73
History of Wilderness at Apostle Islands National Lakeshore 74
Wilderness Management Goals and Philosophy 75

vii