From Jane Clark at [log in to unmask]
The workshop in Des Moines will be the only opportunity where Iowans
outside of the Loess Hills corridor can have input on the future of the
Loess Hills. The six alternatives to be considered are listed in this
message.
Comments will also be accepted by e-mail, and I believe they will accept
comments until early December.
They will serve light snacks over the lunch hour.
If you are interested in receiving the newsletter, contact Sue Jennings at
the end of this message.
*****
LOESS HILLS PUBLIC WORKSHOPS
** November 16: Embassy Suites on the River, Des Moines, IA
101 E Locust St.
*11:30am-1:00pm
Management Options
Consideration was given to a full range of likely management scenarios,
which could ensure the long-term preservation of the Loess Hills landform
region. Presently, six management options (alternatives) have been crafted
for the Loess Hills area that are sympathetic to the concerns of private
property owners in the region and compatible with ongoing efforts of public
land managers. The draft management options presented below include a full
spectrum of alternatives, from locally controlled preservation, to the
establishment of a national reserve, managed jointly by a state and federal
partnership.
Alternative 1:
Local Government Units
Under this management alternative, local government units (LGUs) would
provide the cornerstone for efforts to preserve the Loess Hills. LGUs would
be accountable for preservation of the Hills through the development and
implementation of comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances that are
structured to provide protection to the resources. LGUs also would be
accountable for working with the State of Iowa to ensure that state
regulations, statutes, and programs that contribute to protection of the
Hills are effectively applied. The Loess Hills Alliance would support LGUs
in their efforts by implementing education, outreach, and grants programs.
Federal agencies such as the National Park Service (through its Rivers,
Trails and Conservation Assistance Program) and the Natural Resources
Conservation Service would provide technical assistance on various
conservation and education topics.
Alternative 2:
Joint Powers Board
This alternative could be modeled after the successful Mississippi
Headwaters Board, where a joint powers board has been established to
provide protection to the resources of the upper Mississippi River
(Minnesota). In the Loess Hills, the board would consist of representatives
from the seven counties located within the Loess Hills landform region. The
Board could be supported by a small staff (or by staff from one or more of
the member counties), and would be charged with preparing a comprehensive
management plan for the entire area. The Board also would develop a model
ordinance designed to protect the various resources of the Loess Hills.
Member counties could adopt this model ordinance as part of their
individual zoning codes. The Board would have review (but not veto)
authority over land use decisions within the landform region. It also could
provide member counties with assistance with education and outreach
programs for the purpose of increasing understanding and apprec!
iation of the Loess Hills landform and its resources, and to assist
landowners in developing best management practices to protect the Loess
Hills. An advisory committee would provide support to the Board. Members
of the committee could include various non-governmental organizations,
landowners, developers, etc. Federal agencies such as the National Park
Service (through its Rivers Trails and Conservation Assistance Program) and
the Natural Resources Conservation Service could provide technical
assistance on various conservation and education topics.
Alternative 3:
Entire Landform Region A National Reserve
This alternative is similar in character to the Pinelands National Reserve
(New Jersey). Under this alternative Congress would designate the entire
Loess Hills landform region as a National Reserve (and, thereby, become an
affiliated area of the National Park System) with land ownership remaining
a blend of state, local and private entities. Protection of the Loess Hills
as a National Reserve would be accomplished through a dynamic
state/local-federal partnership. Management of the Reserve would be led by
a special entity, identified as part of the legislation that would
establish the Reserve. This "management entity" could be authorized as a
special unit of state government, or it could be a unique organization
defined by parameters specified by Congress. Federal involvement also could
be specified as part of the authorizing legislation, and could likely
include some combination of National Park Service technical assistance,
funding assistance, planning leadership, and/or re!
source assessment. The Loess Hills Scenic Byway could evolve as the
"thread" that winds its way through the landform, tying the Reserve
together.
Alternative 4:
Special Landscape Areas as a National Reserve, Balance of Landform
Protected by Local Units of Government
This alternative would be a hybrid of Alternatives 1 and 3, and includes 12
Special Landscape Areas (SLA). These SLAs string along the western edge of
the landform where the loess is deepest and the topographic relief is
greatest (see map), and are scattered throughout seven counties in the
Loess Hills. The present land ownership would remain. Any federal
acquisition would be from a willing seller.
The 12 landscape areas are clusters of exemplary geologic/topographic
features that best characterize the loess hills landform. The sites include
expansive, interconnected ridge tops, high bluffs, deep valley cuts, and
steep-sloped ravines. These landscapes also contain significant amounts of
remnant prairie communities, rare plants and animals, and important
archaeological sites. Under this alternative, the 12 landscapes would be
designated as a National Reserve. Some locations within the 12 landscapes
have some form of existing protection, being owned by either state or
county governments or by The Nature Conservancy; the remainder of the
acreage is in private ownership.
This "string of pearls" concept would be similar in structure to the Ice
Age National Scientific Reserve (Wisconsin). Protection of the 12 SLAs
that make-up the Reserve could be accomplished through a dynamic
state/local/federal partnership. Management could be led by a special
entity, identified as part of the Reserve's authorizing legislation. This
"management entity" could be authorized as a special unit of state
government, or it could be a unique organization defined by parameters
specified by Congress. Federal involvement would be specified as part of
the authorizing legislation, and could likely include some combination of
National Park Service technical assistance, funding assistance, planning
leadership, and/or resource assessment. The Loess Hills National Scenic
Byway would be the "thread" that ties the Reserve together. The balance of
the landform region would be protected primarily through the efforts of
local and state government as described under Alternative 1.
Alternative 5:
National Monument /Joint Powers Board Combination
Under this alternative the Loess Hills National Natural Landmark (including
both the Turin and Little Sioux/Smith Lake sites) would be designated as a
National Monument (a unit of the national park system). An additional
National Landmark study would be conducted on the archeological complex
centered near Glenwood, Iowa. If the study determined the archeological
resources of the complex deserved National Historic Landmark (NHL) status
the complex would be added to the Monument upon NHL designation.
Acquisition of private property within Monument boundaries would be
strictly on a willing-seller basis. Federal acquisition of property already
in the public domain would be by donation only. This alternative would
include a visitor center, which would serve as a central point of contact
and orientation to the Hills. The possibility of creating a multi-agency
center (to include the presence of the National Park Service, Western Iowa
Tourism, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and other!
s) could be explored. A joint powers board as described in Alternative 2
would protect land within the landform region located outside the Monument
boundaries by coordinating land use decisions with member counties. Federal
agencies such as the National Park Service (through its Rivers Trails and
Conservation Assistance Program) and Natural Resources Conservation Service
would provide technical assistance on various conservation and education
topics in the area served by the joint powers board.
Alternative 6:
National Monument/National Reserve Combination
This alternative would be a hybrid of Alternatives 3 and 5. Congress would
designate a National Monument consisting of the lands described in
Alternative 5. The balance of the landform (outside of National Monument
boundaries) would be managed as a National Reserve as described in
Alternative 3.
***
What's Next?
November 13-16, 2000: Public Workshops to Explore Management Options
January, 2001: Draft Special Resource Study
(Public Review of Draft.)
March, 2001: Finalize Special Resource Study, transmit to Congress
***
How to Contact Us
Please feel free to contact the National Park Service for further
information, copies of previous newsletters, or for any other reason
concerning the Loess Hills Special Resource Study. You may contact the new
Study Team Coordinator at the following address:
Sue Jennings
National Park Service
Loess Hills Study Team Coordinator
1709 Jackson Street
Omaha, NE 68102
Phone: (402) 221-3493
FAX: (402) 221-3465
Email: [log in to unmask]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
For SC email list T-and-C, send: GET TERMS-AND-CONDITIONS.CURRENT
to [log in to unmask]
|
