NEPA_EA.pdf

National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior

Buffalo National River Arkansas

Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Environmental Assessment

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page i

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT for the LOST VALLEY ROAD AND PARKING RELOCATION at BUFFALO NATIONAL RIVER

Arkansas

SUMMARY

The National Park Service (NPS), in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), proposes to remove and relocate a portion of Lost Valley Road, parking area, and trailhead, located in Newton County, Arkansas. The existing parking area and road are repeatedly damaged during storms due to their proximity to Clark Creek. This Environmental Assessment (EA) examines the No Action Alternative and the Action Alternative. The Action Alternative would relocate the parking area, trailhead, and a portion of the entrance road. The Architectural Barriers Act (ABA)-accessible portion of the existing Lost Valley Trail would also be repaired. The Action Alternative is the Preferred Alternative. The Action Alternative would have a beneficial impact on water quality and species of special concern due to the reduction in the sedimentation of Clark Creek and restoration of riparian area. The Action Alternative would also have a beneficial impact on visitor use and experience due to the more sustainable access and parking. The Action Alternative would have impacts on the cultural landscape due to the changes to circulation patterns within the Lost Valley area; however, there would not be any adverse effect on the contributing elements that make the Big Buffalo Valley Historic District eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.

This plan fulfills a park priority for facility asset management, resource management, and visitor experience at Buffalo National River and serves as a component of the park’s planning portfolio.

This follows the NPS’s “Planning Portfolio” construct, consisting of a compilation of individual plans, studies, and inventories, which together guide park decision making. The planning portfolio enables the use of targeted planning products (such as this one) to meet a broad range of park planning needs, a change from the previous NPS focus on standalone general management plans. The general management plan remains a critical piece of the planning framework and will be revised in a timely manner through the park’s planning portfolio.

PUBLIC COMMENT

This EA will be on public review from November 24, 2017 through January 10, 2018. During this time, copies of the EA will be available for review at the Buffalo National River Visitor Center, and the Boone County Library located at 221 W. Stephenson Avenue, Harrison, AR 72601. An electronic version of this document can be found on the NPS’s Planning Environment and Public Comment (PEPC) website at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/buff. This site provides access to current plans, environmental impact analyses, and related documents on public review. An electronic version may also be found at the Federal Highway Administration, Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division’s website at https://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/projects/ar/lost-valley/.

http://parkplanning.nps.gov/buff https://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/projects/ar/lost-valley/

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page ii

If you wish to comment on the EA, you may submit comments through the PEPC website or mail comments to: Kevin G. Cheri, Superintendent Buffalo National River 402 N. Walnut, Suite 136, Harrison, AR 72601. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment – including your personal identifying information – may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will make all submissions from organizations, businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page iii

Table of Contents

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT for the LOST VALLEY ROAD AND PARKING RELOCATION at BUFFALO NATIONAL RIVER ............................................................................... i

SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................... i PUBLIC COMMENT ........................................................................................................................ i

CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND NEED

INTRODUCTION

Applicable Laws and Regulations Project Site Description

PURPOSE AND NEED

Project Background Scoping

ISSUES AND IMPACT TOPICS

Impact Topics Retained for Further Analysis Impact Topics Dismissed From Further Analysis

CHAPTER 2: DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

ACTION ALTERNATIVE: RELOCATE EXISTING ROAD AND PARKING AREA

Mitigation Measures

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT DISMISSED

Repair of Existing Roadway, Parking Area, and Trailhead

CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 20

IMPACT ANALYSIS

Past Actions Present and Future Actions

SPECIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN

Affected Environment Environmental Consequences

WATER QUALITY

Affected Environment Environmental Consequences

CULTURAL LANDSCAPES

Affected Environment Environmental Consequences

VISITOR USE AND EXPERIENCE

Affected Environment Environmental Consequences

CHAPTER 4: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND COORDINATION

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

AGENCY COORDINATION AND PERMITS

Agency Coordination Permits

LIST OF PREPARERS AND REVIEWERS

CHAPTER 5: REFERENCES

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page iv

APPENDIX A: Applicable Executive Orders, Regulations and Policies APPENDIX B: Agency Coordination Letters APPENDIX C: Floodplain Map APPENDIX D: Typical Sections

List of Figures and Table

Figure 1. Map of Buffalo National River Figure 2. Project Site Figure 3. Lost Valley Road Figure 4. Layout of Existing Parking Area Figure 5. Clark Creek Runs Alongside Lost Valley Road Figure 6. Lost Valley Road Damage from May 2015 Storm Figure 7. Proposed Action Figure 8. Lost Valley Traffic Data (NPStats, 2017) Figure 9. Buffalo National River Recreational Visits (NPStats, 2017) Table 2.1 Comparison of Alternatives…………………………………………………………..19 file://fhfl15fileserve.flhd.fhwa.dot.gov/data/PROJECTS/buff/2015-1(1)/P&P/Environ/NEPA/Decision%20Document/BUFF%202015-1(1)%20draft%20EA%205%2019%202017.docx#_Toc483207964

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 1

CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND NEED

INTRODUCTION

The Lost Valley area of Buffalo National River near Ponca, Arkansas was damaged by rain and subsequent flooding in 2015. The potential for future flooding presents a serious challenge to the maintenance of Lost Valley Road and to the safety of visitors. This Environmental Assessment (EA) presents the analysis of the proposed action and the no action alternatives. In addition to presenting the alternatives, this EA also discloses the potential impacts of the implementation of those alternatives and documents the agency’s decision-making process.

Chapter 1 presents the purpose and need for the action, discusses the location and background of the project, identifies related plans and planning, and provides information regarding the scoping completed as a part of the project development process. Chapter 2 presents the alternatives proposed to meet the purpose and need of the action, and discusses alternatives that were dismissed from further consideration. Chapter 3 provides information regarding the resources present in the study area that would be impacted by the proposed action, and also discloses the impacts of each alternative to the resources. Chapter 4 documents the public involvement process throughout this project and provides a list of agencies and persons consulted. Chapter 5 presents the list of references.

The preparation of an EA by a Federal agency taking an action, and the contents of an EA are the result of legislation and implementing regulations issued to date. In 1969, the United States Congress passed the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) to establish a national policy, “…which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment; to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man; to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the Nation; …”

NEPA also established the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) as an agency of the Executive Office of the President. In enacting NEPA, Congress recognized that nearly all Federal activities affect the environment in some way. Section 102 of NEPA mandates that before Federal agencies make decisions, they must consider the effects of their actions on the quality of the human and natural environment. NEPA assigns CEQ the task of ensuring that Federal agencies meet their obligations under the Act.

The CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508) describe the means for Federal agencies to develop the Environmental Impact Statements (EIS’s) mandated by NEPA in Section 102. The CEQ regulations developed the EA to be used when there is not enough information to decide whether a proposed action may have significant impacts. If an EA concludes that a Federal action will result in significant impacts, the Agency is required to prepare an EIS or alter the action proposed. Otherwise, the Agency is directed to issue a Finding of No Significant Impact

(FONSI).

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 2

Section 1508.09 of the CEQ regulations states that the purposes of an EA are to:

• Briefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an

EIS or a FONSI.

• Aid an Agency's compliance with the Act when no environmental impact statement is necessary.

• Facilitate preparation of a statement when one is necessary.

Preparation of an EA is also used to aid in an Agency’s compliance with Section 102(2)E of NEPA, which requires an Agency to “study, develop, and describe appropriate alternatives to recommended courses of action in any proposal which involves unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources.”

This EA was prepared to meet the NEPA requirements of both the National Park Service (NPS) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The Department of the Interior (of which the NPS is part) issued its NEPA regulations as Part 516 of its Departmental Manual (516 DM), last revised in March 2004. In January 2011, the NPS updated the 2001 edition of Director’s Order #12: Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision-Making and the accompanying Handbook 12. The NPS NEPA handbook was released in 2015. The FHWA’s NEPA regulations are codified at 23 CFR Part 771.

Applicable Laws and Regulations

Coordination or consultation, as appropriate, in accordance with other laws and regulations was been completed during the development of the EA to help guide the development of the proposed action, determine impacts of the proposed action, and identify mitigation measures.

Applicable laws include the Clean Water Act of 1972 (33 USC 1251), Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC 35), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 USC 470), National Park Service Organic Act (54 USC 1), and Buffalo National River Establishing Act (P.L. 92-237), as codified in the Code of Federal Regulations. A detailed list of applicable Executive Orders, Regulations and policies are provided in Appendix A.

NPS Management Policies 2006, Section 1.4: The Prohibition on Impairment of Park Resources and Values

By enacting the NPS Organic Act of 1916 (Organic Act), Congress directed the U.S. Department of Interior and the NPS to manage units “to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such a manner and by such a means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations” (16 USC § 1). Congress reiterated this mandate in the Redwood National Park Expansion Act of 1978 by stating that NPS must conduct its actions in a manner that will ensure no “derogation of the values and purposes for which these various areas have been established, except as may have been or shall be directly and specifically provided by Congress” (16 USC 1a-1).

NPS Management Policies 2006, Section 1.4.4, explains the prohibition on impairment of park resources and values:

While Congress has given the Service the management discretion to allow impacts within parks, that discretion is limited by the statutory requirements (generally enforceable by

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 3 the federal courts) that the Park Service must leave park resources and values unimpaired unless a particular law directly and specifically provides otherwise. This, the cornerstone of the Organic Act, establishes the primary responsibility of the NPS. It ensures that park resources and values will continue to exist in a condition that will allow the American people to have present and future opportunities for enjoyment of them.

The NPS has discretion to allow impacts on park resources and values when necessary and appropriate to fulfill the purposes of a park (NPS 2006 sec. 1.4.3). However, the NPS cannot allow an adverse impact that would constitute impairment of the affected resources and values (NPS 2006 sec.1.4.3). An action constitutes an impairment when its impacts “harm the integrity of park resources or values, including the opportunities that otherwise would be present for the enjoyment of those resources or values” (NPS 2006 sec.1.4.5). To determine impairment, the NPS must evaluate “the particular resources and values that would be affected; the severity, duration, and timing of the impact; the direct and indirect effects of the impact; and the cumulative effects of the impact in question and other impacts” (NPS 2006 sec 1.4.5). A determination of impairment will be made only for the selected alternative, and will be appended to the decision document.

Project Site Description

Buffalo National River contains 95,730 acres within its established boundary (NPS Stats, 2011) and is located in Baxter, Marion, Newton, and Searcy Counties in northern Arkansas (Figure 2).

It is one of the few rivers in the continental United States that is undammed and was declared the first national river by the U.S. Congress in 1972 (Public Law 92-237, March 1, 1972) for the purposes of “…conserving and interpreting an area containing unique scenic and scientific features, and preserving as a free-flowing stream an important segment of the Buffalo River in Arkansas for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations…” Buffalo National River is managed by the NPS and provides many types of recreation, including hiking, boating, camping and fishing. Buffalo National River is significant for its free-flowing river, karst geology, cultural landscape, unique ecosystem and exceptional recreation setting.

Lost Valley is a point of interest located at the western end of the Buffalo National River (Figure 1). The Lost Valley area is one of the most popular destinations for visitors of the Buffalo National River, receiving approximately 77,000 visitors per year. The Lost Valley Trail is a 6-foot wide aggregate surfaced trail that starts at the Lost Valley parking area, and continues for approximately 1.2 miles. The trail ends at Eden Falls Cave, which is a popular destination for hikers. The Lost Valley area also features a pavilion, vault and flush toilets, and drinking water from March to October (Figure 2).

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 4

Page Intentionally Left Blank

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 5

Figure 1. Map of Buffalo National River

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 6

Page Intentionally Left Blank

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 7

Figure 2. Project Site

Access to the trailhead is provided via Newton County Road 1015 (Lost Valley Road). Lost Valley Road is a two-lane road located west of State Highway 43. The road is bordered by Clark Creek to the south, and by a narrow floodplain and hilly terrain to the north.

The first 0.10 miles of the road is paved; however, the remaining 0.45 mile is a gravel road. The road is approximately 16 feet wide, with little to no shoulders (Figure 3). The annual average daily traffic (AADT) on the road between 2011 and 2016 was 73 vehicles. The AADT is exceeded during the months of

Figure 3. Lost Valley Road

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 8

March, May, June, August, September and October. The months of March and October have the highest average daily traffic (ADT) with 125 and 119, respectively, according to NPStats traffic counts for Lost Valley Road from 2011 through 2016 (National Park Service n.d.).

The existing parking area is 21,600 square feet in size, and provides informal parking for approximately 70 vehicles. The trailhead is located in the southwest corner of the parking area (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Layout of Existing Parking Area

PURPOSE AND NEED

The purpose of this project is to provide safe vehicular access to the Lost Valley Trailhead while minimizing adverse impacts to Clark Creek, the Buffalo River, and the surrounding environment.

The proposed action is needed because a section of Lost Valley Road and the parking area are located within the floodplain of Clark Creek, which causes the road and parking area to be repeatedly damaged during storm events. Lost Valley Road runs adjacent and parallel to Clark Creek for a distance of approximately 1,500 feet (Figure 5).

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 9

Figure 5. Clark Creek Runs Alongside Lost Valley Road

Storm events frequently result in flash flooding and the discharge of vehicle contaminants, silt, sand, gravel and clay roadway material directly into Clark Creek, where it is transported a short distance downstream to the Buffalo River. The rapidly fluctuating water levels of Clark Creek present serious challenges to the maintenance of the road and the safety of visitors. During the spring and summer, frequent heavy rain and flooding overwhelms drainage areas, causing widespread issues with the road and ditch lines, which are frequently washed out. Most recently, a storm in May of 2015 caused significant damage to the roadway, parking area, and trail (Figure 6). Damage to the road and parking area makes the trail and facilities inaccessible to visitors during flood events, and difficult to access afterwards until repairs can be made.

Figure 6. Lost Valley Road Damage from May 2015 Storm

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 10

Project Background

The improvement of the Lost Valley Area to better serve visitors has been an ongoing process. A section of the Lost Valley Trail was upgraded in 2012 to make it barrier-free to comply with standards set by the Architectural Barriers Act (ABA). The upgraded section did not include the first 720 feet of the trail (measured from Clark Creek). The Lost Valley Trail & Campground EA for additional improvements to the Lost Valley Trail was completed in 2013. Under this project, a new pedestrian bridge over Clark Creek would be installed and the first 720 feet of the trail from the new bridge would be realigned and upgraded to make it barrier-free. Also included in the EA was the permanent closure of the campground at Lost Valley and upgrading the amphitheater to make it barrier-free (National Park Service 2013). The new bridge over Clark Creek has not yet been constructed.

Abnormally high rain events occurred in May of 2015. The average rainfall for Newton County in May was exceeded by over six inches (National Weather Service 2015). A disaster declaration was issued by the Arkansas State Governor for Newton County on May 11, 2015. The repairs for the damage at Lost Valley were determined to be eligible for funding by the Emergency Relief for Federally Owned Roads (ERFO) program. The ERFO program was established to assist federal agencies with the repair or reconstruction of federal lands transportation facilities that are open to public travel and are found to have suffered serious damage by a natural disaster occurring over a wide area. Recurring damage to the trail, road and parking area since its initial construction has led the NPS to propose moving the facilities from their current location to minimize future damage.

The Boxley Valley Comprehensive Area Plan is also underway at this time to look at recreational use of the Boxley Valley area. The Boxley Valley is a 12.34 square mile area that follows the Buffalo River and Highway 43 from the Ponca area south for a distance of approximately 4.3 miles. Lost Valley is located within Boxley Valley. This EA will focus only on the ERFO-eligible repairs of the road, parking area, and trail in Lost Valley.

Scoping

The CEQ guidelines (1978) for implementing the NEPA and the NPS’s NEPA guidelines contained in Director’s Order # 12: Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis and Decision Making Handbook (National Park Service 2015) provide the framework for scoping.

Scoping is an early and open process to: determine important issues; eliminate issues that are not important or relevant; identify relationships to other planning efforts or documents; define a time schedule for document preparation and decision-making; and, define purpose and need, agency objectives and constraints, and the range of alternatives. Information about the proposed project was made available to the public on the NPS’s Planning, Environment, and Public Comment (PEPC) website during the public scoping comment period, from August 8, 2016 to September 9, 2016. No comments were received from the public. Scoping letters were also sent to local, State and Federal stakeholders, including the Arkansas Department of Parks & Tourism, Arkansas Game & Fish Commission, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. Responses were received from the USFWS, the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program and the Arkansas Department of Parks & Tourism. For further scoping and public participation information, see Chapter 4: Public Involvement and Coordination and Appendix B: Agency Coordination Letters.

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 11

ISSUES AND IMPACT TOPICS

Issues as discussed in NEPA can be problems, concerns, conflicts, obstacles, or benefits that would result if the proposed action or alternatives, including the no-action alternative, are implemented. Issue statements describe the relationship between the potential impacts of an action and the specific resource that would be affected. Internal and external scoping was conducted for this EA to determine the extent and nature of issues and alternatives that should be considered during the NEPA review.

NEPA identifies issues as either “significant” or “insignificant.” Significant issues are explained as pivotal, or of critical importance. Insignificant issues were discussed, but are not explicitly dismissed. Significant issues identified through the scoping process were:

• Tree clearing for the relocation of the road and parking area could impact potential roost trees and foraging habitat used by Federally-listed bat species.

• Rain events repeatedly wash sediment and debris from the road and parking area into Clark Creek, which is a tributary of the Buffalo River. This results in sedimentation of the Buffalo River which impacts water quality. The Buffalo River provides critical habitat for the Federally-listed rabbitsfoot mussel.

• Reconfiguring the access to Lost Valley would change the circulation pattern and the appearance of the cultural landscape.

• Relocation of the parking area further away from the trailhead would change how visitors access the Lost Valley Trail.

Impact Topics Retained for Further Analysis

Species of Special Concern

In addition to NPS policies and management guidelines, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, provides for the protection of rare, threatened, and endangered species (floral and faunal). Federally-listed species regulated by the USFWS are found in Newton County, Arkansas, especially within the project area. The proposed action would require tree and vegetation clearing and ground disturbance that could potentially impact species of special concern. Therefore, Species of Special Concern was retained for further analysis in this EA.

Water Quality

The 2006 NPS Management Policies (National Park Service 2006), NPS Director’s Order #77:

Natural Resources Management, along with the Clean Water Act and other Federal, State, and local regulations, provide general direction for the protection of surface and groundwaters. The existing road runs immediately adjacent to Clark Creek, which results in the washing of aggregate, soil, and vehicle pollutants directly into the creek. Ground disturbing activities during construction also have the potential to impact water quality. In order to relocate the existing road and parking area, construction work would be completed adjacent to Clark Creek. Three small tributaries to Clark Creek along the new sections of the entrance road and trail have the potential to be impacted by the project. Therefore, Water Quality was retained for further analysis in this EA.

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 12

Cultural Landscapes

As described in DO #28, a cultural landscape is “a geographic area, including both cultural and natural resources and the wildlife or domestic animals therein, associated with a historic event, activity, or person, or exhibiting other cultural or aesthetic values” (DO #28, 87). Cultural landscapes are expressed in the way land is organized and divided, patterns of settlement, land use, systems of circulation, and the types of structures that are built. The Buffalo National River is a cultural landscape associated with the settlement of the Ozarks from the first prehistoric inhabitants to today’s living rural communities. Redevelopment of Lost Valley would impact the cultural landscape. Therefore, Cultural Landscapes was retained for further analysis in this EA.

Visitor Use and Experience

Enjoyment of park resources and values by the people of the United States is part of the fundamental purpose of all parks (National Park Service 2006). The NPS strives to provide opportunities for forms of enjoyment that are uniquely suited and appropriate to the natural and cultural resources found in parks. Relocation of the road, parking area, and trail would impact visitor access and their experience in Lost Valley. Therefore, Visitor Use and Experience was retained for further analysis in this EA.

Impact Topics Dismissed From Further Analysis

The following impact topics were initially considered but were dismissed from further analysis because the resource is not present in the project site or because the proposed action would have no impact, have a negligible impact, or have a minor impact. A brief rationale for the dismissal of each impact topic is provided below.

Archeological Resources

The NPS defines an archeological resource as any material remains or physical evidence of past human life or activities that are of archeological interest, including the record of the effects of human activities on the environment. Archeological resources are capable of revealing scientific or humanistic information through archeological research (DO #28, 67). A Phase I Archeological Inventory of the area of potential effect was completed. No National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) archeological resources or NRHP-eligible resources were identified.

Therefore, Archaeological Resources was dismissed for further analysis in this EA.

Historic Structures, Districts, and Landmarks

A historic structure is defined by the NPS as “a constructed work, usually immovable by nature or design, consciously created to serve some human act” (DO #28, 113). For a structure to be listed on or eligible for listing on the NRHP, it must possess historic integrity of those features necessary to convey its significance, particularly with respect to location, setting, design, feeling, association, workmanship, and materials. The study area is located within the Big Buffalo Valley Historic District (also referred to as the Boxley Valley Historic District); however, the NPS development of the facilities at Lost Valley is noted as being modern structures that do not contribute to the district’s historic scene. The Keeton/Clark House, listed in the List of Classified Structures and Cultural Landscape Inventory being in poor condition, is located in Lost Valley; however, it would not be impacted by the project actions (Thomason and

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 13

Associates 2004).Therefore, Historic Structures, Districts, and Landmarks was dismissed as an impact topic for further analysis in this EA.

Indian Trust Resources Secretarial Order 3175 requires that any anticipated effects to Indian trust resources from a proposed project or action by the Department of Interior agencies be explicitly addressed in environmental documents. The Federal Indian trust responsibility is a legally enforceable fiduciary obligation on the part of the United States to protect tribal lands, assets, resources, and treaty rights. It also represents a duty to carry out the mandates of Federal law with respect to American Indian and Alaska Native tribes. There are no Indian trust resources at Buffalo National River. The lands comprising the river are not held in trust by the Secretary of the Interior for the benefit of Indians due to their status as Indians. Therefore, Indian Trust Resources was dismissed as an impact topic for further analysis in this EA.

Vegetation

The NPS policy is to protect the natural abundance and diversity of all naturally occurring communities. The 2006 NPS Management Policies (National Park Service 2006), NPS DO #77:

Natural Resources Management, and other NPS and park policies, provide general direction for the protection of vegetation. Plant communities in the study area are comprised of cultivated fields (consisting of hay) and mixed hardwood forests. Tree species found in the project area include hickory (Carya), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), box elder (Acer negundo), American elm (Ulmus americana), umbrella magnolia (Magnolia tripetala), redbud (Cercis canadensis), and black gum (Nyssa sylvatica). The relocation of the existing road, parking area, and trailhead would impact approximately 2.61 acres of cultivated fields and 0.33 acre of mixed hardwood communities. Approximately 1.19 acres of the existing road and parking area would be revegetated with native species. An annual cover crop would be used in the seed mix to improve permanent stabilization of the disturbed area.

Therefore, Vegetation was dismissed as an impact topic for further analysis in this EA.

Floodplains

Executive Order 13690, “Floodplain Management,” and NPS Director’s Order #77-2:

Floodplain Management, require an examination of impacts to floodplains and potential risk involved in placing facilities within floodplains (National Park Service 2003). The proposed action would require construction within the floodplain. The new location further away from Clark Creek would help to reduce the potential for damage from future flood events. A map of the Clark Creek floodplain in relation to the proposed action is provided in Appendix C.

Impacts to the floodplain from the proposed action would be temporary in nature, and there would be no long-term permanent impacts. The proposed action would result in a higher quality floodplain. Restoration projects are exempt from the requirement to prepare a Statement of Findings. Therefore, Floodplains was dismissed as an impact topic for further analysis in this EA.

Visual Resources

The NPS 2006 Management Policies (National Park Service 2006) notes that the enjoyment of park resources and values by the people of the Unites States is part of the fundamental purpose of all parks. The Organic Act also states that units of the National Park System are charged with conserving park scenery, along with all the natural and cultural resources which contribute to

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 14 important views. In the evaluation of visual resources, both the visual character of the site and the quality of the viewshed are analyzed. A viewshed comprises the limits of the visual environment associated with the proposed action including the viewsheds within, into, and out of the site. The proposed action alternative does not propose any vertical construction that would significantly affect the Lost Valley viewshed. Therefore, Visual Resources was dismissed as an impact topic for further analysis in this EA.

Soils

The NPS policy is to protect the abundance and diversity of all naturally occurring soils. The 2006 NPS Management Policies (National Park Service 2006), NPS DO #77: Natural Resources Management and other NPS policies provide general direction for the protection of soils. The new portion of the entrance road is on previously undisturbed land, but would not include any action to significantly impact the soil. Further, the revegetation of the existing roadway and parking area would improve soil condition and drainage within the project area. Therefore, Soils was dismissed as an impact topic for further analysis in this EA.

Wetlands

Executive Order 13690, “Protection of Wetlands,” and NPS Director’s Order #77-1: Wetland Protection defines the NPS goal to maintain and preserve wetland areas (National Park Service 2008). National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping was obtained for the study area. NWI maps show reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of wetlands and deepwater habitat and are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. No wetlands were shown as being present in the project area. Soil survey maps show that the study area is comprised primarily of Razort loam, occasionally flooded, and Ceda cobbly fine sandy loam, zero to three percent slopes, frequently flooded. These soils have hydrologic soil group ratings of B and A, respectively. Hydrologic soil group A has a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet and consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands and gravelly soils. Group B has a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet, and consist of moderately deep and well drained soils. A survey for wetlands confirmed that no wetlands are present in the study area. Therefore, Wetlands was dismissed as an impact topic for further analysis in this EA.

Air Quality

The 1963 Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended, requires land managers to protect air quality.

Section 118 of the CAA further requires parks to meet all Federal, State, and local air pollution standards, and NPS 2006 Management Policies (National Park Service 2006) addresses the need to analyze potential impacts to air quality during park planning. Although construction and demolition activities proposed would have some impacts to air quality, they would be short-term and negligible. Therefore, Air Quality was dismissed as an impact topic for further analysis in this EA.

Soundscape

The NPS Management Policies 2006 state that the NPS will preserve, to the greatest extent possible, the natural soundscapes of parks. Park natural soundscape resources encompass all the natural sounds that occur in parks, including the physical capacity for transmitting those natural sounds and the interrelationships among park natural sounds of different frequencies and

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 15 volumes. This is the basis for determining the "affected environment" and impacts on a park soundscape. Traffic capacity would not increase as a result of this project, but there would be short-term minor impact to the soundscape from the presence of heavy equipment during construction. Therefore, Soundscape was dismissed as an impact topic for further analysis in this

EA.

Environmental Justice

Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” requires all federal agencies to incorporate environmental justice into their missions by identifying and addressing the disproportionately high and/or adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs and policies on minorities and low-income populations and communities (Clinton 1994).

Within a five-mile radius of the project, 94.9% of the persons were white based on the data from the 2010 U.S. Census of Population and Housing compared to 96% for Newton County and 78.4% for Arkansas (US Census Bureau 2015). Per EPA/CEQ Guidance (Final Guidance for Incorporating Environmental Justice Concerns in the EPA’s NEPA Compliance Analysis and the CEQ’s Environment Justice: Guidance under NEPA), a community minority population is greater than 50% or “meaningfully greater” than minority population percentage in the general population or other appropriate geographic area. The study area is therefore not a minority community.

The number of persons below the 2014 poverty level in Newton County was 20.1% and in Arkansas was 18.9% (US Census Bureau 2015). Per EPA/CEQ Guidance, a low-income community has a greater percentage of persons below poverty in the general population or other appropriate geographic area. The study area is therefore a low-income community.

However, the proposed project would not acquire any land from property owners and would not have any disproportionate or adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations.

Therefore, Environmental Justice was dismissed as an impact topic for further analysis in this EA.

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 16

CHAPTER 2: DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES

NEPA requires that Federal agencies conduct a careful, complete, and analytical study of the impacts resulting from proposals that have the potential to affect the environment, and to consider alternatives to those proposals, well before any decision is made. The two alternatives are the No Action Alternative, to continue current management, and the Action Alternative (NPS-preferred alternative). This chapter also includes mitigation measures which would be implemented under the Action Alternative and Alternatives Considered But Dismissed.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Under the No Action Alternative, no substantial improvements would be performed other than in accordance with routine maintenance operations. Routine road and trail maintenance operations include grading and brush removal. Emergency repairs and replacements may be necessary, particularly as the road and trail continue to degrade following extreme rain events.

Analysis of the No Action Alternative is required as part of the NEPA process in order to provide a benchmark to compare what would happen to the environment if current management were continued into the future with other feasible alternatives.

ACTION ALTERNATIVE: RELOCATE EXISTING ROAD AND PARKING AREA

Under the Action Alternative, the parking area, trailhead, and a portion of the entrance road would be relocated. From the intersection of Highway 43 at Lost Valley, the entrance road would continue straight after approximately 900 feet (instead of turning to the south) through the existing field for an additional 650 feet to a new parking area. The new road alignment, consisting of two 10-foot lanes, would be graded and embankment material would be placed as needed. The road would be surfaced with six inches of aggregate. The relocated parking area would be constructed approximately 850 feet southeast of its current location, moving it outside of the Clark Creek floodplain. The 10-foot wide ABA access road, with access limited to vehicles with disabled placards/license plates and other authorized vehicles, would extend to a separate accessible parking area located adjacent to the pavilion and toilets. A new section of six-foot wide trail would be constructed from the new parking area to the future Clark Creek crossing location, and would be approximately 960 feet in length. This new section of trail would be designed to be barrier-free to accommodate use by disabled visitors. A stabilized-aggregate surface would be constructed on the new section of trail, similar to the surface of the existing accessible section of the Lost Valley trail. A commercially available soil stabilized would be mixed with the aggregate to provide a solid, relatively smooth surface. The remaining length of the accessible trail (0.70 miles), from the opposite side of Clark Creek to the trail fork, would be repaired. Typical sections for the entrance road, ABA access road, and trail can be found in Appendix D.

After the new parking area, entrance road, and trail extension and repairs are completed, the old parking area and abandoned section of the entrance road would be removed. The Action Alternative would have a total of 6.3 acres of ground disturbance, of which 1.19 acres would be restored to natural conditions. The ground would be scarified to loosen the compacted soil.

Topsoil would be added to supplement the existing soils and the area would be seeded with a

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 17 native grass and plant mix. River cane (Arundinaria gigantea) would also be planted to aid in quickly stabilizing the riparian area with vegetation.

Construction for Alternative B would last approximately four to six months. The staging of equipment and materials would be done within the limits of disturbance for the new entrance road and parking area. No additional areas would need to be disturbed. The Lost Valley Trail would be closed for approximately four weeks in order to complete the repairs.

Figure 7. Proposed Action

Mitigation Measures

Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures and best management practices (BMPs) would prevent or minimize potential adverse effects associated with the implementation of the replacement alternatives. These measures and practices would be incorporated into the project design and construction plans.

• No trees would be removed between April 1 and October 15 in order to avoid impacts to Federally-listed bat species.

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 18

• Should construction unearth previously undiscovered archeological resources, work would be stopped in the area of any discovery and the park would consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer/Tribal Historic Preservation Officer and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, as necessary, according to §36 CFR 800.13, Post Review Discoveries. In the unlikely event that human remains are discovered during construction, provisions outlined in the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (1990) would be followed as appropriate.

BMPs

• Temporary BMPs would be utilized to minimize erosion and sedimentation from ground disturbing activities that expose bare soil, which would otherwise negatively impact water quality. The BMPs may include the use of silt-fence, sediment logs, erosion matting, or check dams. These BMPs would be used only during construction and would be removed once the disturbed area has been permanently stabilized.

• Reconstructed aggregate surface would be subject to Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality stormwater management requirements.

• To preserve the visual character of the site and the quality of the viewshed, locally available vegetation compatible with the area would be used to revegetate areas on the existing road and parking area, and may be used to screen the view of the parking area.

• Disturbed soil would be re-vegetated using specific native seed mixes that do not include invasive or exotic species.

• Any suitable soil excavated during construction would be stockpiled and reused as fill if needed. Any unsuitable or excess material would be removed from the project and disposed of legally off Government property.

• Topsoil would be obtained from an approved source that is weed-free to minimize the introduction of exotic and/or invasive species.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT DISMISSED

As mentioned previously, alternatives should be “reasonable.” Unreasonable alternatives may be those that are unreasonably expensive; that cannot be implemented for technical or logistic reasons; that do not meet park mandates; that are inconsistent with carefully considered, up-to-date park statements of purpose and significance or management objectives; or that have severe environmental impacts (National Park Service 2015).

Repair of Existing Roadway, Parking Area, and Trailhead

The existing roadway, parking lot and trailhead would be repaired in its current location. This alternative would temporarily address the deteriorated conditions but was deemed to be unsustainable in the event of another localized flood, which occurs often in the project area. It would require constant and costly maintenance as well as potential safety concerns for visitors to the park. Closures of the road and trail due to storm damage would impact the ability for visitors access the Lost Valley area. Sediment and vehicle contaminants would continue to wash into Clark Creek and downstream into the Buffalo River. Therefore, this alternative was dismissed from further consideration.

Environmental Assessment for the Lost Valley Road and Parking Relocation Page 19

Table 2.1 Comparison of Alternatives No Action Alternative Action Alternative Species of Special Concern

Direct and Indirect Impacts: The No Action Alternative would continue to impact some species of special concern by causing sedimentation of aquatic habitat.

Cumulative Impacts: The cumulative impacts on species on special concern would be adverse due to the continued sedimentation of the aquatic habitat. Tree clearing and ground disturbance would be necessary in order to complete the other planned actions in the Lost Valley area. Although BMPs would likely be in place, the potential for additional sedimentation would increase.

Direct and Indirect Impacts: The Action Alternative would have an overall beneficial impact on species of special concern due to the restoration of riparian area and reduction in the sedimentation of aquatic habitat.

Cumulative Impacts: The cumulative impacts on species of special concern would be minimally adverse, as other present and future actions would require tree clearing and ground disturbance.

While the increased riparian and improved aquatic habitat would be beneficial to species of special concern, the effects would be realized primarily in Clark Creek.

Water Quality

Direct and Indirect Impacts: The No Action Alternative would continue to adversely impact water quality by discharging pollutants into Clark Creek.

Cumulative Impacts: The cumulative impacts on water quality would be adverse because of the continued sedimentation and pollution of Clark Creek. The 1,850 feet of Lost Valley Road and parking area adjacent to Clark Creek represents about 0.4% of the gravel roads in riparian area in the watershed. It has a negligible contribution when compared to the total of 83 miles of gravel roads in riparian area within the watershed.

Direct and Indirect Impacts: The Action Alternative would improve water quality by reducing the discharge of pollutants into Clark Creek.

Cumulative Impacts: The cumulative impacts on water quality would be adverse. The Action Alternative would remove approximately 0.4% of the amount of roadway in riparian area within the watershed, and the other future actions would include BMPs to minimize erosion and sedimentation. There would be benefits to Clark Creek, and likely to the Buffalo River, but not enough to overcome the other 99.6% of impacts already present in the watershed.

Cultural Landscapes

The No Action Alternative would have no direct or cumulative impacts on cultural landscapes.

Direct and Indirect Impacts: The Action Alternative would have no adverse impacts on the cultural landscape because the overall look and feel of the Lost Valley area within the Boxley Valley would not change.

Cumulative Impact: The cumulative impacts on cultural landscapes would be negligibly adverse.

Other future improvements may also impact the aesthetics and circulation in the cultural landscape depending on the reconfiguration of the area. It is unlikely that the contributing elements to the Boxley Valley Historic District would be compromised.

Visitor Use and Experience

Direct and Indirect Impacts: The No Action Alternative would continue to impact visitor use and experience by limiting access to the Lost Valley area after large storm events which damage the existing access road and parking area.

Cumulative Impacts: The cumulative impacts on visitor use and experience would be adverse because while visitors would have improved recreational opportunities and facilities, visitors would have periods of time when access to them would be difficult.

Direct and Indirect Impacts: The Action Alternative would have a beneficial impact on…