Kawishiwi Field Laboratory Building Disposition Public Scoping Meeting
Agenda n Introduction - Northern Research Station (NRS) q q n n n Meeting Purpose USDA-FS and the Kawishiwi Field Lab Buildings on Site History of Site Historic Importance of Buildings – Superior National Forest Current Use of Lab – USGS NEPA Process - Mangi Environmental 2
Meeting Purpose Solicit Public Input to Help Determine the Alternative Courses of Action for Disposition of the Kawishiwi Field Laboratory Buildings 3
USDA-Forest Service Organization n n The Forest Service is an agency within the US Department of Agriculture, charged with managing public lands in National Forests and National Grasslands. USDA-FS has 4 divisions: q q National Forest System (NFS) Forest Service Research and Development (R&D) State & Private Forestry (S&PF) International Institute of Tropical Forestry (IITF) 4
USDA-FS Research & Development R&D Mission n Responsible for research on the forests’ effects on social, biological, and physical processes Research Focused in 4 Major Areas n Resource Valuation and Use n Science Policy, Planning, Inventory and Information n Vegetation Management and Protection n Wildlife, Fish, Water, and Air 5
NRS & the Kawishiwi Field Lab n n USDA-FS manages National Forest lands for public use Kawishiwi Field Laboratory is an administrative site on Superior National Forest Superior NF manages the land The Northern Research Station (NRS) manages the administrative site and the Kawishiwi Field Laboratory buildings 6
Kawishiwi Field Lab Buildings n n n Currently 12 structures at Kawishiwi site 9 structures constructed by Civilian Conservation Corps in the 1930’s currently under consideration for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places 3 other buildings constructed between 1940’s-1960’s, include an office, insectary, and an additional outhouse 7
Early History of the Site 1909 – Theodore Roosevelt established the Superior National Forest and other national forests 1910 – Superior National Forest Halfway Ranger District administrative site is established 1924 – Forest Service Research begins to occupy space in the buildings at the administrative site 1949 – Superior National Forest vacates site 1955 – Management of Kawishiwi administrative site transferred to FS Research & Development: Northern Research Station 8
History of Occupants at the Site n n n Since 1968 – lab has been used primarily for wildlife research by teams from the U of M, International Wolf Center, and USGS In 1980’s USDA-FS Research discontinued research activity at site but retained management of the buildings Current sole tenant of lab is the US Geological Survey 9
Why Dispose of the Kawishiwi Field Lab Buildings? n n Buildings managed by NRS, but have not been used by the NRS in over 20 years. NRS has no need for the buildings -- No new NRS uses are planned or foreseeable. Buildings have high annual utility and maintenance costs, are deteriorating due to lack of adequate maintenance funding, and need rehabilitation. NRS has no current plans to rehabilitate the buildings -Rehabilitating the buildings would be prohibitively expensive for the NRS considering NRS would not use them. 10
Historic Importance of Buildings Superior National Forest 11
Halfway Ranger Station Historic District (HRSHD) Historic Context, National Register Eligibility & Architectural Summary. 12
Determining Eligibility for Listing on the National Register of Historic Places • Criteria of Significance – A historic property must meet one of these to be eligible for listing on the NRHP. • CRITERION A: The property must be associated with a historic event at a local, state, or national level. • CRITERION B: The property must be associated with a person of historic significance. • CRITERION C: The property must be an example of an architectural style, period, a method of construction or the work of a known master craft-person or designer. • CRITERION D: The property must possess data useful for historic/archaeological research. • Integrity – A historic property must possess several of the seven aspects of integrity to be eligible for listing on the NRHP. • • Integrity of LOCATION Integrity of DESIGN Integrity of SETTING Integrity of MATERIALS Integrity of WORKMANSHIP Integrity of FEELING Integrity of ASSOCIATION 13
Criterion A: HRSHD is significant under A, at the national level, because it is a associated with two historically significant initiatives of the U. S. Federal Government: 1) Management of public lands, 2) New Deal Era programs. • U. S. Forest Service – Halfway Ranger Station – Lake States Forest Experiment Station • Civilian Conservation Corps – Constructed seven log buildings and one poured concrete root cellar. – Conducted numerous forest management and research tasks for the USFS out of Halfway Ranger Station. CCC crew constructing Lac La. Croix Cabin FS Garage in Ely, ca. 1940’s 14
Criterion C: HRSHD is significant under C because 7 of it’s buildings are intact examples of the Rustic/Adirondack design used by gov’t land management agencies for the construction of their administrative buildings during the first half of the 20 th Century. • Inspired by log building folk traditions found throughout the U. S. and Europe. • Also inspired by the rustic resort camps used by the wealthy in the Adirondack region of New York (1880 s – 1890 s). • Utilized as a design motif for National and State Park buildings from the 1890 s-1910 s. • Adopted by USFS in the 1930 s. • Common attributes: – Round log construction – Saddle-notching Old Faithful Inn, Yellowstone NP, 1905 Club House, Itasca SP, 1911 15
• • • • 1909: SNF established by presidential proclamation. 1909 -1910: First guard-station built on SNF 1910: Halfway Ranger district awards first SNF timber-sale. 1920: Halfway Ranger Station established (? ). 1931: SNF allocates part of HRS to LSFES to build a station. 1931: LSFES builds LSFES Dwelling for a bachelor’s quarters, office and lab to a tune of $2, 626. 00. 1933: CCC camps established on SNF 1934: CCC builds Kawishiwi Pavilion and at least 9 buildings at or near HRS 1949: Halfway RD staff are relocated to Ely. 1949 -1950: HRS is utilized as a summer camp. 1957: Insectory and Lab building built at HRS. 1950 s-1960 s: Robert Beam and Miron (Bud) Heinselman conduct pioneering fire history and forest ecology studies out of LSFES. 1968 -1971: David Mech conducts first radiotelemetry studies of wolves out of LSFES. 1974: SNF consolidation reverts management of HRS to LSFES/North. Central. 1974 -Present: USGS conducts large mammal research out of HRSHD Historical Summary HRS bunkhouse, removed Halfway District Ranger, Frank Jacobs in 1937 16
Ranger Dwelling • Built ca. 1934 by the CCC • Original purpose: dwelling for district ranger and family • Design: Rustic/Craftsman • Construction: chinkless round log w/ saddle notching • Current Condition: Excellent; needs routine maintenance and some rehabilitation work. 17
Ranger Dwelling design detail: Craftsman-style bungalow 18
Warehouse • Built ca. 1934 by the CCC • Original purpose: warehouse garage • Design: Rustic • Construction: chinkless round log w/ saddle notching • Current condition: Fair, needs routine maintenance and some rehabilitation work, doors need to be replaced with historically sympathetic materials; powderpost beetle infestation needs addressing. 19
Common design detail at HRS: geometric pattern on all or most of the doors 20
Halfway District Office Building • Built ca. 1934 by the CCC • Original purpose: Office space for Halfway RD • Design: Rustic • Construction: chinkless round log w/ saddle notching • Current condition: Fair; needs routine maintenance and some rehabilitation work; powder-post beetle infestation needs addressing. 21
Oil House • Built ca. 1934 by the CCC • Original purpose: fuel storage • Design: Rustic/USFS standardized • Construction: chinkless round log w/ saddle notching • Current condition: Fair; needs routine maintenance and some rehabilitation work; powder-post beetle infestation needs addressing. 22
Boathouse • Built ca. 1934 by the CCC • Original purpose: watercraft storage • Design: Rustic • Construction: chinkless round log w/ saddle notching • Current condition: Fair; needs routine maintenance and some rehabilitation work; powder-post beetle infestation needs addressing. 23
Pump House • Built ca. 1934 by the CCC • Original purpose: to house water pumping equipment • Design: Rustic • Construction: chinkless round log w/ saddle notching • Current condition: Fair; needs routine maintenance and some rehabilitation work; powder-post beetle infestation needs addressing. 24
LSFES Dwelling • Built for $2, 626 in 1931. • Original purpose: bachelor’s quarters, office and lab space. Historic Context • Design: National style, gable front type • Construction: framing • Current condition: Good; needs routine maintenance and some rehabilitation work. 25
Outhouse • Built ca. 1934 by the CCC • Original purpose: RS les lieuxd’ainsances • Design: Rustic • Construction: chinkless round log w/ saddle notching • Current condition: Poor; needs routine maintenance and serious rehabilitation work; powder-post beetle infestation needs addressing. 26
Root Cellar • Built ca. 1934 by the CCC • Original purpose: unknown, possible food storage or seedling storage • Construction: poured concrete • Current condition: Fair; needs major clean-up and some rehabilitation work 27
Thank You… 28
Current Use of Site USGS 29
History of U. S. Department of the Interior Use of Kawishiwi Lab • Began in 1968 for wolf research. • Has continued uninterrupted since. 30
Background • Wolf was placed on federal Endangered Species List in 1967. • • Federal agencies are obligated to contribute to wolf recovery. • USDI began wolf study in cooperation with Superior National Forest (SNF) and USDA North Central Forest Experiment Station, now Northern Research Station (NRS), in 1968. 31
Background (continued) • SNF contributed flight time, and NRS contributed funding and Kawishiwi Lab use, through late 1980 s. • SNF still contributes flight time and NRS contributes Kawishiwi Lab use. • USDI must monitor wolf recovery at least through 2011. 32
Value of Kawishiwi Lab for Wildlife Research • Only suitable field research HQ north of Duluth and east of Grand Rapids. • Close to Ely and BWCAW. • Close to airport and seaplane base. 33
Past and Present Field Research Use of Kawishiwi Lab • Plant ecology studies – Ohmann et al. • Forest fire history studies – Heinselman et al. • Social science and human dimension studies of wilderness use – Lime et al. • Moose studies – Peek et al. ; Lenarz et al. • Black bear studies – Rogers • Beaver – Buech • Loon studies – Cuthbert et al. • Environmental impact of mining studies – Huemphner et al. • Wolf deer, lynx – Mech, Nelson et al. 34
Institutional Collaborators with Research at Kawishiwi Field Lab • • • University of Minnesota International Wolf Center Natural Resources Research Institute Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Vermilion Community College USDA Wildlife Services Superior National Forest North Central Forest Experiment Station Macalester College 35
Students whose Master’s Research was Headquartered out of Kawishiwi Lab • • • Irwin Van Ballenberghe Hoskinson Nelson Kunkel Rothman Demma Hertel Groebner 36
Students whose Ph. D. Research was Headquartered out of Kawishiwi Lab • • Peek Rogers Bruggers Nelson Peters Harrington Del. Giudice Buech 37
Countries Which Have Sent Trainees to Kawishiwi Lab • • • Italy Israel Norway Poland Sweden India Russia Australia Turkey South Africa Austria Spain Mexico Portugal Canada Croatia Great Britain Netherlands Argentina Denmark 38
Hundreds of Scientific Publications from field work in the Boundary Water Canoe Area Wilderness based out of Kawishiwi Lab have resulted on wolves, deer, bears, moose, Canadian lynx, martens, beavers, ravens, wildfire, plant ecology, soils, and recreation. 39
Thus the value of Kawishiwi Lab to research on wildlife and wilderness and to numerous local and regional research and educational institutions is clear. 40
USDI Thanks the USDA Northern Research Station for its long and valuable use of Kawishiwi Lab AND hopes to continue using the facility through at least 2007. 41
National Environmental Policy Act Process Mangi Environmental 42
NEPA and USDA-FS n n n NEPA requires Federal Agencies to consider the impacts of their actions on the human environment before taking such actions– focus is on major Federal actions significantly affecting the human environment NEPA requires Federal Agencies, to the fullest extent possible, to encourage and facilitate public participation in agency decisions that affect the quality of the human environment The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) implementing regulations on NEPA are in the Code of Federal Regulations at 40 CFR 1500 -1508. 43
National Historic Preservation Act, Endangered Species Act & NEPA n NEPA requires evaluation of the effects of a project on the human environment and “the degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or may cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources” (CEQ 40 CFR 1508. 27, 8). n NEPA also requires evaluation of the effects of a project on “The degree to which the action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened species or its habitat that has been determined to be critical under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. ” (CEQ 40 CFR 1508. 27, 9). 44
NHPA & Kawishiwi Field Lab Buildings Nine buildings at the Kawishiwi Field Lab are under consideration for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places; these buildings are considered contributing resources to a historic district Potential Impacts recognized by NHPA & NEPA q q Changes to buildings, structures, or landscapes Ground disturbance of buried artifacts Change in noise levels or visual impacts Changes in traffic patterns or land use 45
Environmental Assessment Process The purposes of an EA are to: q q Assist federal agencies in planning and decision-making Determine whether or not significant impacts to the environment could be caused by an alternative n Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) n Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) 46
The EA Process Purpose and Need Established Project Proposed Where we currently are in the process Public Involvement Solicited Alternatives Development Public Involvement Solicited Agency Consultations Analysis of Alternatives Significant Impacts? No FONSI Yes EIS 47
The Range of Alternatives n n n EAs must fully describe the proposal, no action, and a range of reasonable alternatives that meet project purpose and that reduce or eliminate impacts to environmental resources. An EA should clearly state which alternative has the least adverse impacts on the environment. The purpose of NEPA is to ensure that accurate environmental studies are performed, that they are done with public involvement, and that decisions are based on an understanding of environmental consequences. 48
Reasonable Alternatives q q are technically and economically feasible meet project objectives resolve need alleviate potentially significant impacts to important resources 49
No Action Alternative n n n This alternative must be fully analyzed in all EAs, even if another law prohibits the adoption of the No Action alternative or the forest is under legislative or other command to act. No Action is usually a viable alternative, but when not, it sets a baseline for comparing the impacts of existing actions with those proposed. For ongoing actions or programs it usually connotes continuing to manage as is currently being done 50
Alternatives Eliminated from Further Study Alternatives initially thought to be viable or suggested by agencies or the public, but dismissed because they: n are determined after consideration to be unreasonable n duplicative of less damaging or less expensive alternatives n conflict with an up-to-date and valid agency plan or policy n cause an environmental impact that would be difficult to adequately mitigate Note: In this case, Superior NF will retain management of the land the experimental forest regardless of what alternatives for building disposition are considered. Land disposal is not an alternative. 51
NEPA Steps Taken to Date n n March 2006 –Superior NF agrees to conduct a formal historic evaluation of the site May 2006 – Representatives of the Northern Research Station and Superior NF meet with the State Historic Preservation Officer q Identified the NEPA process as the tool to use to evaluate future alternatives for the buildings at the site September 2006 –Mangi Environmental Group contracted to assist NRS in conducting the NEPA process Nov 29, 2006 –public scoping begins 52
Public participation in the Kawishiwi Project Scoping n n Gives the public an opportunity to learn about the project and share issues and concerns People who wish to submit additional comments, or request to receive a copy of the scoping plan, may contact: Mailing Address: Rick Sindt Engineering & Facility Services USDA Forest Service - Northern Research Station 1992 Folwell Ave. , St. Paul, MN 55108 Phone: 651 -649 -5120 E-mail comments to: rsindt@fs. fed. us 53
Questions and Comments
Скачать презентацию Kawishiwi Field Laboratory Building Disposition Public Scoping Meeting
caf992f12caaec26e2b01aa79ee28040.ppt