Final General Management Plan/ Environmental Impact Statement

Home , Park Ranges

National Park Service Final General Management Plan/ U.S. Department of the Interior Environmental Impact Statement Crater Lake National Park May 2005 Oregon

Final General Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement

Crater Lake National Park Klamath, Jackson, and Douglas Counties, Oregon

Crater Lake National Park was authorized by an act of Congress on May 22, 1902 (Public Law 32 Stat. 20). The last comprehensive management plan for the park was completed in 1977. Much has changed since 1977 — visitor use patterns and demographics have changed, there are new demands for various recreational experiences and activities, and 22,400 acres were added to the park. Each of these changes has implications for how visitors access and use the national park and the facilities needed to support those uses, how resources are managed, and how the National Park Service manages its operations. A new plan is needed.

This document examines four alternatives for managing the national park for the next 15 to 20 years. It also analyzes the impacts of implementing each of the alternatives. The “no- action” alternative, alternative 1 describes the existing conditions and trends of park management and serves as a basis for comparison in evaluating the other alternatives. The emphasis of alternative 2 would be on increased opportunities in recreational diversity and resource education. Under alternative 3 visitors would experience a greater range of natural and cultural resources through recreational opportunities and education. The focus of alternative 4 would be on preservation and restoration of natural processes. Alternative 2 is the National Park Service’s preferred alternative.

Impacts resulting from the no- action alternative would be negligible to minor on natural resources, park operations, and concession operations, with no adverse impact on most cultural resources. Under alternative 2 there would generally be moderate to major beneficial impacts. Impacts from alternative 3 would be generally beneficial. Alternative 4 would offer moderate beneficial impacts to natural and cultural resources, with a moderate, adverse impact on visitor use.

For more information about this document, contact the Superintendent, Crater Lake National Park, P.O. Box 7, Hwy 62, Crater Lake, OR 97604, at (541) 594- 3002 or via email at [email protected].

SUMMARY

The purpose of this Final General Under the no- action alternative, Management Plan / Environmental Impact archeological and ethnographic resources Statement for Crater Lake National Park is in the park would continue to be surveyed, to present a direction for resource inventoried, and evaluated as National preservation and visitor use and a basic Park Service staff and funding permitted. foundation for decision making for the Natural resource management protection, park for the next 15 to 20 years. The preservation, and restoration activities general management plan provides a would also continue as staffing and comprehensive direction for managing funding allowed. resource activities, visitor activities, and development that would be appropriate at Existing buildings and facilities in the park the park in the future. would remain; some historic structures would be adaptively used. Munson Valley An important element in determining the would continue to serve as the center of desired resource and visitor experience NPS administration, maintenance, and conditions for the park has been public housing. participation. Many issues and concerns were identified by the general public and The existing road access and circulation NPS staff as part of the initial planning system within the park would continue, efforts, and comments were solicited at and visitor recreational opportunities and public meetings, in planning newsletters, interpretive programs in the park would and on the internet. continue.

Once public input was received the Impacts planning team identified four alternatives for managing the park —a no- action and Impacts resulting from the no- action three action alternatives, including the alternative would be negligible to minor preferred alternative. The plan also on natural resources, park operations, and analyzes and presents the environmental concession operations. Most cultural and socioeconomic impacts or conse- resources, archeological sites, cultural quences of implementing each of those landscapes, ethnographic resources, or alternatives ⎯ the environmental impact museum collections would have no statement part of this document. A adverse impacts. Rehabilitation of the summary of the alternatives and the superintendent’s residence would result in important impacts is given below. minor adverse impacts due to some loss of historic fabric. However, adaptive use of ALTERNATIVE 1 – NO ACTION the structure as a science and learning center would ensure its long- term Description preservation and therefore provide a moderate beneficial impact. The no- action alternative represents continuation of the current management Visitor access, recreational and educa- direction and approach at the park. It is a tional opportunities, and visitor facilities way of evaluating the proposed actions of and services would remain relatively the other three alternatives. unchanged, and the park would continue

iii SUMMARY to be an important visitor attraction, scientists, and educational groups. The contributing to the tourism industry in the information gathered would be dissemi- region. However, potential increases in nated throughout the park to rangers, visitation over the life of the plan could interpretive staff, and visitors. As a result, impact the ability to access some areas of special in- depth tours would be available the park and enjoy those areas in relative to interest groups such as birdwatchers or solitude and tranquility. geology clubs.

ALTERNATIVE 2 (PREFERRED) – As described under the no- action EMPHASIS ON INCREASED alternative, existing buildings and facilities OPPORTUNITIES in the park would remain, but some structures would be adaptively used. Description Current and future needs for office and Management of the park would emphasize administrative space would be increased opportunities for recreational accommodated without additional diversity and research and education. construction. Administrative and other Most recreational opportunities would organizational functions, which are not by remain, but new opportunities along Rim necessity park- based, would be moved to Drive would allow visitors to directly surrounding communities as demand for experience the primary resource of Crater space within the park increased. Lake in ways other than driving. Any new uses around the rim would be nonmotor- Parking and road congestion at the park ized and low impact. Opportunities to would be managed by improving existing experience the lake by hiking and biking in pullouts, parking areas, and overlooks. If, a quieter setting would be explored by in the future, crowding conditions devel- experimental seasonal road closures of oped, shuttles and other alternative trans- East Rim Drive. Other frontcountry portation systems would be used to solve opportunities, such as short trails and the problems, rather than expanding road picnic areas, would be along the roadways. and parking capacities. These new opportunities would provide transitional experiences between the Impacts developed areas (or transportations corridors) and the backcountry and also This alternative increases visitor provide for enhanced interpretation, new opportunities for recreation, education research, and access to the backcountry. and interpretation, and access to park The Grayback Road would change from facilities and services, creating major motorized use to a non paved trail for beneficial impacts on the visitor hikers, bicyclists, and stock use. Winter experience. snowmobile and snowcoach access would remain along North Junction to the rim. Impacts on cultural resources, including the superintendent’s house, would be the Research and educational opportunities same as the no- action alternative, with the would be enhanced. A new science and exception of museum collections, which learning center would form the core of the would have minor to moderate, long- term new research. The park would expand and benefits. encourage partnerships with universities,

iv Summary

Greater emphasis on research, partnering, provide the focus for interpretation and and visitor education would enhance the education. quality and quantity of resource information. The information gained Resources would be managed to permit would allow for better management of on- recreation while protecting the resources. going resource programs and, therefore, Opportunities for recreation would be would indirectly promote moderate viewed in a regional context, where the beneficial effects on biotic communities. park could serve as a source of informa- Resource management programs could tion for regional recreational oppor- result in some direct short- term adverse tunities. Winter access would be improved impacts, but would result in long- term by grooming along North Junction Road. beneficial impacts on some threatened and During the summer season use of a shuttle endangered species. bus system would be explored.

As in alternative 1, some benefits would Use of most current facilities would result from reconfiguration of Rim Village continue. Treatment of historic structures and adaptive reuse of existing buildings. and cultural landscapes would be similar However, under alternative 2, increasing to the no- action alternative, although such staffing and moving some functions out of resources could be affected by the park to nearby communities would construction of additional trails, result in beneficial impacts on park opera- installation of new interpretive signs and tions and on the local economy. Although other media, and expanded tour programs the impact regionally would be negligible, under alternative 3. the park would continue to be an important visitor attraction and contribute Adequate space in an onsite facility would to the tourism industry in the three- be provided for the curation and storage county region. Alternative 2 is the of the park’s museum collections . environmentally preferred alternative as evaluated according to the National Impacts Environmental Policy Act. This alternative’s emphasis on increasing ALTERNATIVE 3 – EMPHASIS ON the diversity of visitor experience would ENJOYMENT OF THE NATURAL create major beneficial impacts on the ENVIRONMENT visitor experience. The shift toward a diverse visitor program also would Description decrease the range of interpretive programs, resulting in a moderate adverse The emphasis of this alternative would be impact on those preferring interpretive to allow visitors to experience a greater programs over experience. range of natural and cultural resources significant and unique to the park through Impacts on cultural resources would be recreational opportunities and education. the same as alternative 2. A wider range of visitor experiences would reach out to greater diversity of visitor Actions resulting from this alternative groups. Recreational programs, which would result in some adverse impacts on would focus on minimizing impact, would some threatened and endangered species or biotic communities.

v SUMMARY

As described under alternative 2, the Vehicular transportation would be altered reconfiguration of Rim Village, adaptive to reinforce the visitor experience. The reuse of existing buildings, increased Rim Road would be closed between staffing, and moving some functions Cleetwood Cove and Kerr Notch. Winter outside the park would result in beneficial use of the park would change to allow impacts. The park also would continue to natural processes to proceed with less be an important visitor attraction and disturbance than current management contribute to the tourism industry in the practices allow. Winter plowing of the three- county region. road to the rim would stop, except for spring opening. Snowmobiling along ALTERNATIVE 4 – EMPHASIS ON North Junction Road would no longer be PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION allowed. OF NATURAL RESOURCES Facilities that are not historic and not Description essential to park functions would be removed and the area rehabilitated. Park management would be focused on Functions that are, by necessity park- the preservation of native species and based, would be retained in the park. natural processes and the restoration of biodiversity and natural processes where Impacts altered. The park would be an active partner in a regional conservation strategy Impacts resulting from this alternative that would include other agencies and would include overall beneficial impacts to environmental groups. Most park natural and cultural resources. The operations and visitor contact facilities decrease in diversity of opportunities, would be outside the park and shared with accessibility, and number of interpretive other agencies and communities. programs would have a moderate adverse impact on the visitor experience. Resource preservation and restoration would be the overriding consideration in A decrease in buildings and facilities in the the park. Areas that have been altered park, along with reduced winter opera- would be restored to their natural tions, would have moderate beneficial conditions. Cultural resources would be impacts on park operations. The addition preserved at the highest level possible. of a shuttle and snowcoach would result in Museum collections would be increased moderate, long- term, adverse impacts on but would be stored in an offsite facility concession operations. that met professional and National Park Service museum standards. Moving operations out of the park would have a beneficial impact on the local The visitor experience would stress economy. Although the impact regionally activities that have low environmental would be negligible, the park would impacts on and are harmonious with the continue to be an important visitor resources. More emphasis would be place attraction and contribute to the tourism on self- guided and discover y education, industry in the three- county region. and interpretive programs would focus on stewardship.

CONTENTS

PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN 1 Purpose, Need, and Scoping 3 Introduction 3 Brief Description of the Park 3 Purpose and Need 7 The Scoping Process 8 Planning Direction and Guidance 9 Purpose, Significance, Mission, and Interpretive Themes 9 Servicewide Laws and Policies 11 Special Mandates and Administrative Commitments 17 Planning Issues 21 Impact Topics – Resources And Values at Stake in the Planning Process 23 Impacts Topics 23 Impact Topics Eliminated from Further Evaluation 24

ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 31 The Alternatives 33 Actions Common to All Alternatives 33 Development of the Alterantives 34 Management Zones 34 Alternative 1 — No Action 39 Alternative 2: Preferred Alternative — Emphasis on Increased Opportunities 43 Alternative 3 — Emphasis on Enjoyment of the Natural Environment 51 Alternative 4 — Emphasis on Preservation and Restoration of Natural Processes 57 Mitigating Measures 63 Alternatives or Actions Considered but Eliminated from Further Study 67 Identification of the Preferred Alternative 68 Environmentally Preferred Alternative 70

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 79 Cultural Resources 81 Natural Resources 89 Visitors and the Park 95 Operations 101 Socioeconomic Environment 105

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 109 Introduction 111 Methodology for Analyzing Impacts 112 Impacts to Cultural Resources and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act 112 Cultural Resources 113 Natural Resources 116 Visitor Use 118 Park and Concession Operations 119 Socioeconomic Environment 119 Cumulative Impacts 121 Impairment of Park Resources or Values 123

vii CONTENTS

Impacts of Implementing Alternative 1 – No Action 124 Cultural Resources 124 Natural Resources 129 Visitor Use 135 Operations 138 Socioeconomic Environment 139 Unavoidable Adverse Effects 140 Relationship of Short- Term Uses of the Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long- Term Productivity 140 Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitment of Resources 141

Impacts of Implementing Alternative 2 – Preferred Alternative 142 Cultural Resources 142 Natural Resources 145 Visitor Use 153 Operations 157 Socioeconomic Environment 158 Unavoidable Adverse Effects 160 Relationship of Short- Term Uses of the Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long- Term Productivity 160 Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitment of Resources 160

Impacts of Implementing Alternative 3 161 Cultural Resources 161 Natural Resources 164 Visitor Use 170 Operations 173 Socioeconomic Environment 175 Unavoidable Adverse Effects 176 Relationship of Short- Term Uses of the Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long- Term Productivity 176 Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitment of Resources 176

Impacts of Implementing Alternative 4 177 Cultural Resources 177 Natural Resources 180 Visitor Use 185 Operations 188 Socioeconomic Environment 189 Unavoidable Adverse Effects 191 Relationship of Short- Term Uses of the Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long- Term Productivity 191 Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitment of Resources 191

CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION 193

APPENDIXES, BIBLIOGRAPHY, PREPARERS, INDEX 247

viii Contents

MAPS

Vicinity 5 Alternative 1 41 Alternative 2 47, 49 Alternative 3 53, 55 Alternative 4 59, 61

TABLES

1: Management Zones 35 2: Summary of Comparison Costs 69 3: Summary of Alternative Actions 72 4: Summary Comparison of Impacts of Implementing Alternatives 74 5: Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species 90 6: Affected Area Population for Counties and Selected Towns 106 7: Unemployment Rates for Selected Years 108 8: Percent of People Living in Poverty 108

PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

PURPOSE, NEED, AND SCOPING

INTRODUCTION park ranges in elevation from about 3,800 feet in the southwest corner of the park to General management plans are intended just over 8,900 feet at Mount Scott. The to be long- term documents that establish flora of Crater Lake National Park is and articulate a management philosophy typical of the vegetation found throughout and framework for decision making and the Southern Cascades. Generally, the problem solving in the parks. General vegetation reflects a mosaic of forested management plans usually provide and open nonforested areas. Vegetation guidance during a 15- to 20- year period ranges from a mixed conifer forest dominated by ponderosa pine at the south to This Final General Management Plan / high elevation mountain hemlock and Environmental Impact Statement presents whitebark pine forest at the rim. The park four alternative future directions for the is regarded by many as a sanctuary for management and use of Crater Lake native forest and meadow communities. National Park. The plan also analyzes and presents the environmental and socioeco- Near the center of the park is the park’s nomic impacts or consequences of imple- most spectacular resource, Crater Lake. It menting each of those alternatives – the is 1,943 feet deep, the deepest lake in the environmental impact statement part of United States. The lake is in a caldera the document. An important element in which was formed when the top of the determining the future directions is public 12,000- foot volcano erupted and col- participation throughout the planning lapsed. Over the centuries, the caldera has process. One of the alternatives, alterna- collected water from rain and snow to tive 2, is the National Park Service’s form the lake. It is about 5 miles in diam- preferred alternative. The potential eter and is surrounded by the jagged, environmental impacts of all alternatives steep- walled cliffs of the caldera left by have been identified and assessed. the climatic eruption and collapse of Mt. Actions directed by general management Mazama about 7,700 years ago. The cliffs plans or in subsequent implementation surrounding the lake rise from 500 to plans are accomplished over time. Budget 2,000 feet above the lake’s surface. restrictions, requirements for additional data or regulatory compliance, and From the rimmed summit, the land slopes competing national park system priorities gradually downward in all directions. prevent immediate implementation of There are no inlets or outlets to the lake. many actions. Major or especially costly Evaporation and seepage prevent the lake actions could be implemented 10 or more from becoming deeper. Due to the topog- years into the future. raphy, Crater Lake has no influent or effluent streams to provide continuing BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PARK supplies of oxygen, nutrients, and fresh water. Crater Lake is considered a youth- Crater Lake National Park is in southwest ful lake with a high level of purity. The Oregon in the south- central portion of the purity can be attributed to the absence of Cascade Range (see Vicinity map). The inflowing streams introducing minerals and other debris. The lack of dissolved minerals greatly restricts the growth of

3 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN aquatic plants and the absence of sufficient it is an outstanding example of rustic carbonates inhibits the development of architectural design. large shelled animals. The result is a high level of light penetration that exceeds Crater Lake National Park is a vital ele- other alpine lakes. Crater Lake holds the ment in a diverse regional recreation world record for clarity among lakes. complex. Many visitors stop at the park as part of a north- south trip to various parks Visitors primarily come to Crater Lake and scenic areas in Oregon and northern National Park to view the lake. The inherit California. In southern Oregon, Crater qualities of the lake and its setting provide Lake has historically been the leading breathtaking views from the rim of the visitor draw. caldera. The quality of the lake’s water enables sunlight to penetrate and create The park’s southern entrance station at the reknown blue coloration. The steep Mazama Village is 76 miles from Medford caldera wells and mirror- like reflections and 56 miles from Klamath Falls and can tinted in subtle shades. At times brilliantly be reached by Oregon State Route (OR) blue; at other times buried in a mass of 62. During summer the park can also be brooding clouds, Crater Lake has a mystic reached from the north by OR 138. Both and inspiring quality. the south and north access roads lead to Rim Drive, a 33- mile roadway that circles The park encompasses approximately the caldera rim. Pullouts along Rim Drive 182,304 acres and is heavily forested, provide scenic lake views. Rim Drive is in except for a number of treeless and the process of being nominated to the pumice- covered flats. The topography National Register of Historic Places and ranges in elevation from about 3,800 feet has been designated as part of an All- in the southwest corner of the park to American Road ( as are south Highway 62, 8,900 feet at Mount Scott, which is the Munson Valley Road, and the North highest point in the park. Streams origi- Entrance Road). Winter access is main- nating on the slopes of the caldera form tained only from the south and west on headwaters of the Rogue River to the west OR 62 through the Munson Valley head- or join the Klamath Basin to the south and quarters area and up to Rim Village. Road east. Steep- walled canyons cut in pumice, closures, particularly between head- such as at Annie, Castle, and Sun Creeks, quarters and the rim, are common during contribute to the ruggedness of the terrain. the winter because of frequent snow- storms. Some of the nation’s best examples of blending rustic architecture and other Rim Village, at an elevation of 7,100 feet built features within a national park setting on the south edge of the Crater Lake cal- can be seen in the park at Rim Village and dera, has functioned as a year- round at park headquarters in Munson Valley. operation since 1948, although services are This designed landscape was constructed limited in the winter. Summer interpretive over 15 years, beginning in 1926. Most of activities are provided from a small visitor the features in these two areas are listed on contact facility near the rim and at the the National Register of Historic Places. Sinnott Memorial overlook. The Sinnott The Crater Lake superintendent’s resi- Memorial is 25 feet below the rim on a dence at Munson Valley was designated a precipitous cliff overlooking the lake. It national historic landmark (NHL) because has architectural significance as an

4 138 DIAMOND LAKE CHEMULT

Portland Salem OREGON 97 Eugene CRATER LAKE NATIONAL 138 PARK Medford 14 CRATER LAKE NATIONAL PARK

UNION CREEK

PROSPECT

FORT KLAMATH 12 62

KLAMATH AGENCY

CHILOQUIN

EAGLE POINT

97 MEDFORD

KLAMATH FALLS NORTH

Vicinity Crater Lake National Park United States Department of the Interior . National Park Service DSC / MAR 05 / 106 / 20114A

Purpose, Need, and Scoping expression of park rustic style in which the at the visitor information center. Primary use of materials and siting blends park administrative services are in the seamlessly into the rim of the caldera. The administration building. Storage and Sinnott Memorial offers visitors a maintenance facilities are also in the park spectacular view of Crater Lake and is an headquarters area. ideal place to interpret the lake and caldera. Seasonal hotel accommodations PURPOSE AND NEED are available at Crater Lake Lodge. Food services, gift sales, a picnic area, geology The purpose of this Final General Man- talks (summer only), and interpretive agement Plan / Environmental Impact exhibits are also available at Rim Village. Statement is to clearly define a direction for resource preservation and visitor Mazama Village is about 7 miles south of experience at Crater Lake National Park Rim Village and is the primary overnight over the next 15 to 20 years. The approved visitor use area in the summer. A camp- plan would provide a framework for pro- ground, motel accommodations, a camper active decision- making, including deci- services store, shower and laundry facili- sions on visitor use, natural and cultural ties, a gas station, interpretive walks, and resource management, park development, evening campfire programs are all avail- and addressing future opportunities and able during the summer. The nearby Annie problems. Spring entrance station is the first contact station where visitors arriving by way of This document will not describe how OR 62 might encounter NPS staff during particular programs or projects will be the summer. implemented or prioritized. Those decisions will be deferred to more detailed Cleetwood is on the north shore of Crater implementation planning, which will Lake and is accessed from Rim Drive. It is follow the broad, long- range decision about 6 miles east of the north junction making presented in this document. where Rim Drive intersects the North Entrance Road. Cleetwood contains a The National Parks and Recreation Act of parking area, a nonpermanent ticket sales 1978 (PL 95- 625) requires the preparation structure, and a portable restroom at the and timely revision of general management rim. A trail descends the side of the caldera plans for each unit of the national park to the lake. The concessioner offers com- system. The previous Master Plan for Cra- mercial boat tours of the lake, accom- ter Lake was approved in 1977. A number panied by NPS interpreters. of subsequent planning efforts were initiated, each undertaken to enhance the visi- Park headquarters is about 3 miles south tor experience and resource protection at of Rim Village and serves as the center of the developed areas of Crater Lake Na- NPS administration, maintenance, and tional Park. The park has implemented housing. It also serves as the year- round significant portions of the plans for visitor interpretation and orientation specific developed areas. For example, point. Park headquarters is in a historic Crater Lake Lodge has been rehabilitated complex of buildings at the central portion and reopened in May 1995. A new dormi- of the Munson Valley development area. tory for concession employees has been Visitor information services and interpre- built near Mazama Village. This General tive exhibits are provided in this complex Management Plan will provide an

7 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN opportunity to consolidate these past described the planning effort. Public decisions that are spread throughout meetings were held during April 2001 in several documents into a single document. Klamath Falls, Medford, Roseburg, and The Final General Management Plan / Salem and were attended by 96 people. A Environmental Impact Statement takes a total of 72 written comments were new look at the management of the park received in response to that newsletter. A based on the changes that have occurred second newsletter issued in July 2001 since 1977 and current issues and summarized the comments received in the concerns confronting the park, with the meetings and in response to newsletter 1. intent of building on the park’s previous These comments were used to complete planning accomplishments. Visitor use the park purpose and significance patterns and demographics have changed, statements that serve as the foundation for there are new demands for recreational the rest of the planning. Comments on experiences and activities, and 22,400 various issues facing the park were acres were added to the park. Each of referred to during development of the these changes has implications for how General Management Plan. visitors access and use the national park and the facilities needed to support those In spring of 2002 a total of 95 comments uses, how resources are managed, and were received in response to a third how the National Park Service manages its newsletter describing draft alternative operations. concepts and managing zoning. In general opinions were fairly divided in support of THE SCOPING PROCESS individual alternatives and how to address the issues. A number of letters favored Public meetings and newsletters were used continued snowmobile use while other to keep the public informed and involved people favored elimination of snowmo- in the planning process for Crater Lake biles in the park. Opinions were divided National Park. A mailing list was compiled on managing traffic along Rim Drive — that consisted of members of government maintaining current two- way traffic, agencies, nongovernmental groups, converting part of the road to one- way businesses, legislators, local governments, traffic, or closing the road to traffic. Most and interested citizens. respondents favored use of shuttles. A number of people who opposed partner- The notice of intent to prepare an ing with private industry were concerned environmental impact statement was with large- scale commercialization within published in the Federal Register on May the park. 25, 2001. A newsletter issued January 2001

PLANNING DIRECTION AND GUIDANCE

PURPOSE, SIGNIFICANCE, MISSION, Based on Crater Lake National Park’s AND INTERPRETIVE THEMES enabling legislation, legislative history, agency management policies, public input, The purposes, significance, and mission and the knowledge and insights of park goals of Crater Lake National Park are staff, the planning team identified the three of the key elements that shaped the following purpose and significance development of the General Management statements, mission, and interpretive Plan. These elements underlie how the themes for Crater Lake National Park. park is managed. Park purpose statements are based on park legislation and legisla- Park Purpose tive history, other special designations, and NPS policies. The statements reaffirm The NPS Organic Act of 1916 directs that the reasons Crater Lake National Park was the fundamental purpose of all parks is "to established as part of the national park provide for the enjoyment of the same in system and provide the foundation for such manner and by such means as will park management and use. leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations." Crater Lake Significance statements identify the National Park was established in 1902, resources and values that are central to dedicated and set apart forever as a public managing the area and express the park or pleasure ground for the benefit importance of the park to our natural and and enjoyment of the people of the United cultural heritage. Understanding the States. In managing this park, the Park park’s significance helps managers make Service was originally charged with “the decisions that preserve the resources and protection and preservation of the game, values necessary to accomplish the area’s fish, timber, and all other natural objects purposes. Crater Lake’s mission goals therein.” In 1980, Congress updated the articulate the ideal future conditions the park purpose “to preserve for the benefit, National Park Service is striving to attain. education, and inspiration of the people of All of the alternatives and management the United States certain unique and prescriptions in this management plan are ancient volcanic features, including Crater consistent with and support the park’s Lake, together with significant forest and purpose and significance statements and fish and wildlife resources” (Public Law the park’s mission. 96- 553).

Interpretive themes are the key stories or Park Significance concepts that every visitor to the park should have the opportunity to learn. They Crater Lake is one of the most include the ideas that are critical to a renowned lakes on earth, visitor’s understanding of the park’s principally because of the beauty purpose and significance. These themes imparted by its large size, blue provide the foundation for the park’s color, mountain setting, and ever- interpretation and education programs changing character. and direction for interpretive media (e.g., exhibits, films, brochures, etc.) at the park. Crater Lake lies in a caldera that was left by the climactic eruption

9 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

and collapse of Mount Mazama site. The park is part of a larger more than 7,700 years ago. The cultural landscape that extends circular lake, which formed in the well beyond park boundaries. caldera is considered by scientists to be a unique model for how small Crater Lake has been the object of calderas evolve in geologic time. At scientific study for more than a a depth of 1,943 feet, Crater Lake is century, and is unique for the the 7th deepest lake in the world, scientific research related to its and holds the world record for pristine waters, associated clarity among lakes. geothermal activities, and unusual aquatic organisms. In addition to the lake, most of the forests that surround Crater Lake The unique natural and cultural have never been logged and are resources of Crater Lake National largely preserved in their pristine Park provide exemplary condition. These mature forests opportunities for students and harbor a variety of plant and educators. animal life which are characteristic of higher elevations in the Cascade Mission Range. Because extensive alteration of forestland has taken Crater Lake National Park’s mission is place elsewhere in the Cascade Range, some of these plants and to forever preserve the beauty of Crater animals are rare. Those forests Lake National Park, its unique within the park boundary add ecological and cultural heritage, and to unique opportunities for solitary foster understanding and appreciation and wilderness experiences. through enjoyment, education, and inspiration Some of the nation's best examples of blending rustic architecture and Interpretive Themes other built features within a national park setting can be seen at Cultural: Evidence left behind by a Rim Village, park headquarters in continuum of different land uses for Munson Valley, and along Rim thousands of years helps us imagine Drive. Much of Rim Village, park past human interaction with these headquarters, and Rim Drive are resources and instills appreciation for within districts listed on the the continuing challenge of balancing National Register of Historic human use with preservation. Places. Research and Education: For more Crater Lake is of enduring import- than 100 years, Crater Lake has been a ance to contemporary members of landscape of exploration and dis- American Indian tribes because of covery. Today scientists are studying its centrality to long- standing the lake and surrounding resources to cultural traditions and resource better understand natural systems and harvesting activities, as well as its improve future management of the symbolic significance as a sacred

10 Planning Direction and Guidance

national park and the quality of life in management of the national park system), this country and the world. and other applicable federal laws and regulations, such as the Endangered Geology. Geologic processes, Species Act and the National Historic primarily vulcanism, that created the Preservation Act. The National Park Crater Lake caldera and the Cascade Service has also established management Mountains provides important lessons policies for all units under its stewardship. about the evolution of our planet. These are identified and explained in NPS Management Policies (2001). Plant / Animal Diversity. The Cascades ecosystem at and around These legal mandates and policies Crater Lake National Park supports an prescribe many resource conditions and extraordinarily rich biological some aspects of the visitor experience. diversity. This plan is not needed to decide, for instance, whether or not it is appropriate Recreation and Visitor Experience. to protect endangered species, control The serenity and beauty of Crater Lake exotic species, protect archeological sites, National Park offers its visitors a wide or provide access for visitors with dis- range of recreational activities and abilities. Although attaining some of these opportunities to experience natural conditions set forth in these laws and beauty, quiet, solitude, reflection, and policies has been temporarily deferred in inspiration. the park because of funding or staffing limitations, the National Park Service will SERVICEWIDE LAWS AND POLICIES continue to strive to implement these requirements with or without a new As with all units of the National Park general management plan. Service, the management of Crater Lake National Park is guided by a number of The conditions prescribed by laws, legal mandates and park policies in regulations, and policies most pertinent to addition to the enabling legislation. These the planning and management of the park include the 1916 Organic Act (which are summarized below. created the National Park Service), the General Authorities Act of 1970, the act of March 27, 1978 (relating to the

11 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

Natural Resources

Desired Condition Source Vegetation The preservation of the natural objects…the protection Crater Lake National Park enabling legislation of the timber, and …the preservation of all kinds of game and fish. The preservation of the park’s unique ecological and cultural heritage NPS- managed natural systems, and the human NPS Management Policies influences upon them, will be monitored to detect any significant changes. Action will be taken in the case of such changes, based on the type and extent of change. Maintain all the components and processes of naturally evolving park ecosystems. The National Park Service will re- establish natural functions and processes in human- disturbed natural systems in parks unless otherwise directed by Congress. The Park Service will, within park boundaries, identify, Endangered Species Act (16 USC 1531, et seq.); conserve, and attempt to recover all federally listed NPS Management Policies threatened, endangered, or special- concern species and their essential habitats. As necessary, the Service will control visitor access to and use of essential habitats, and may close such areas to entry for other than official purposes. Active management programs (such as monitoring, surveying populations, restorations, exotic species control) will be conducted as necessary to perpetuate, to the extent possible, the natural distribution and abundance of threatened or endangered species, and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The Park Service will identify all state and locally listed NPS Management Policies threatened, endangered, rare, declining, sensitive, or special concern species and their essential habitats that are native to and present in the parks. These species and their essential habitats will be considered in NPS planning and management activities. Plant and animal species considered to be rare or unique to a park will be identified, and their distributions within the park will be mapped. Management of populations of exotic plant and animal species, up to and including eradication, will be undertaken whenever such species threaten park resources or public health and wherever control is prudent and feasible. Revegetation efforts will use seeds, cuttings, or transplants representing species and gene pools native to the ecological portion of the park in which the restoration project is occurring. Water Resources and Aquatic Ecosystems Surface and ground waters are restored or enhanced; Clean Water Act; Executive order 11514; NPS water quality meets as a minimum the standard for Management Policies contact recreation. NPS and NPS- permitted programs and facilities are Clean Water Act; Executive Order 12088; NPS maintained and operated to avoid pollution of surface Management Policies and ground waters

12 Planning Direction and Guidance

Desired Condition Source Natural floodplain values are preserved or restored. Executive order 11988; Rivers and Harbors Act; Clean Water Act; NPS Management Policies; Director’s Order 77- 1 The natural and beneficial values of wetlands are Executive order 11990; Rivers and Harbors Act; preserved and enhanced. Clean Water Act; NPS Management Policies; Director’s Order 77- 2 Protection of stream features will primarily be NPS Management Policies accomplished by avoiding impacts to watershed and riparian vegetation, and by allowing natural fluvial processes to proceed unimpeded. Wildlife Federal- and state- listed threatened and endangered Endangered Species Act; NPS Management species and their habitat are sustained. Policies Populations of native plant and animal species function NPS Management Policies in as natural condition as possible except where special management considerations are warranted. Native species populations that have been severally reduced or extirpated from the park are restored where feasible and sustainable. Management of populations of exotic plant and animal species, up to and including eradication, will be undertaken whenever such species threaten park resources or public health and when control is prudent and feasible. Air Resources, Soundscapes, and Lightscapes Air quality in the parks meets national ambient air Clean Air Act; NPS Management Policies quality standards (NAAQS) for specified pollutants. Park activities do not contribute to deterioration in air quality. The National Park Service will preserve the natural NPS Management Policies ambient soundscapes of parks, which exist in the absence of human- caused sound. The Park Service will protect natural darkness and NPS Management Policies other components of the natural lightscape in parks. Geological, Soils, and Paleontological Resources Management of significant thermal features, including Geothermal Steam Act Amendment of 1988 assessment, monitoring, data collection and protection from significant adverse effects due to geothermal development. Natural geologic processes proceed unimpeded. NPS Management Policies Paleontological resources, including both organic and mineralized remains in body or trace form, will be protected, preserved, and managed for public education , interpretation, and scientific research. Natural soil resources and processes function in as natural condition as possible, except where special management considerations are allowable under policy. The Park Service will actively seek to understand and preserve the soil resources of parks, and to prevent, to the extent possible, the unnatural erosion, physical removal, or contamination of the soil, or its contamination of other resources.

13 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

Research, Resource Inventory and Monitoring Management of the resources will be enhanced by the National Park Omnibus Management Act of 1998, availability and utilization of a broad program of the Title II National Park System Resource highest quality science and research. The Park Service Inventory and Management will undertake a program of inventory and monitoring to provide baseline and long- term trends in the condition of resources. The Park Service will encourage publication and dissemination of information derived from studies. Wilderness The Park Service seeks to retain wilderness potential in NPS Management Policies ; Wilderness Act of 1964; areas proposed as wilderness until enacted or Director’s Order #41 rejected. The administration of wilderness meets the standards within the Wilderness Act: Protection of these areas in an unimpaired state for future use and enjoyment as wilderness Preservation of the wilderness character of these areas Wilderness is protected and managed so as to preserve Wilderness Act of 1964; Director’s Order #41 its natural conditions and which • generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man’s work substantially unnoticeable. • has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation. Fire Management Each park is required to have a fire management plan / NPS Management Policies; Director’s Order #18 environmental assessment that addresses wildland and prescribed fires. Wildland fires are naturally ignited and part of natural systems that are being sustained by parks. Prescribed fires are human ignited to achieve resource management or fuel treatment objectives. Fire suppression within proposed wilderness will be consistent with the “minimum requirement” concept. (minimum tool or administrative practice to successfully and safely accomplish the objective with the least adverse impact on wilderness character or values)

14 Planning Direction and Guidance

Cultural Resources

Desired Condition Source Prehistoric and Historic Archeological Sites Archeological sites are identified and inventoried, National Historic Preservation Act and their significance is determined and documented. Archeological sites are protected in an undisturbed Archeological and Historic Preservation Act condition unless it is determined through formal Archeological Resources Protection Act processes that disturbance or natural deterioration is unavoidable. In cases where disturbance or deterioration is Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines unavoidable, the site is professionally documented for Archeology and Historic Preservation (1992) and salvaged. Programmatic Memorandum of Agreement among the National Park Service, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and national Council of State Historic Preservation Officers (1995) NPS Management Policies Historic Structures and Cultural Landscapes Historic structures and cultural landscapes are National Historic Preservation Act inventoried and their significance and integrity are Archeological and Historic Preservation Act evaluated under national register criteria. The qualities of historic structures and cultural Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines landscapes that contribute to their actual listing or for Archeology and Historic Preservation (1992) their eligibility for listing on the National Register Programmatic Memorandum of Agreement among of Historic Places are protected in accordance with the National Park Service, Advisory Council on the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, unless it is Historic Preservation, and national Council of State determined through a formal process that Historic Preservation Officers (1995) disturbance or natural deterioration is unavoidable. NPS Management Policies Objects and Archival Manuscripts Collections Manage parks to provide for the protection of The Antiquities Act of 1906. historic, prehistoric, and scientific features. Manage parks to “maintain historic or prehistoric The Historic Sites Act of 1935. sites, buildings, objects, and properties of national historical or archaeological significance and… establish and maintain museums in connection therewith.” All museum objects and manuscripts are identified American Indian Religious Freedom Act and inventoried, and their significance is Archeological Resources Protection Act determined and documented. Native American Graves Protection and The qualities that contribute to the significance of Repatriation Act collections are protected in accordance with NPS Management Policies established standards. NPS Museum Handbook Ensure that objects housed in Director’s Order #24 repositories/institutions outside the park are preserved, protected, and documented according to NPS standards and guidelines. Ethnographic Resources Manage parks to provide for the protection of Antiquities Act of 1906 historic, prehistoric and scientific features.

15 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

Desired Condition Source Continue to recognize the past and present existence American Indian Religious Freedom Act (1978 and of peoples in the region and the traces of their use as amended in 1994) as an important part of the cultural environment to be preserved and interpreted. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (1990) Consult with associated American Indian tribes to develop and accomplish the programs of Crater Presidential Memorandum of April 29, 1994, Lake National Park in a way that respects the Government- to- Government Relations With beliefs, traditions, and other cultural values of the Native American Tribal Governments American Indians who have ancestral ties to park lands. Executive Order 13007 of May 24, 1996, Indian Sacred Sites Accommodate access to and ceremonial use of traditional use areas in a manner that is consistent with park purposes and avoid adversely affecting the physical integrity of these sites and resources.

American Indians linked by ties of kinship or culture to ethnically identifiable human remains would be consulted when remains may be disturbed or are encountered on park lands.

Visitor Management Requirements

Desired Condition Source Visitor Experience and Park Use Requirements Visitor and employee safety and health are NPS Management Policies protected. Visitors understand and appreciate park values and NPS Organic Act resources and have the information necessary to Crater Lake National Park enabling legislation adapt to the park environments. Visitors have NPS Management Policies opportunities to enjoy the park in ways that leave park resources unimpaired for future generations. Park recreational uses are promoted and regulated. NPS Organic Act Basic visitor needs are met in keeping with park Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations purposes. NPS Management Policies New and remodeled buildings, outdoor developed Americans with Disabilities Act areas, and features are accessible to all visitors, Architectural Barriers Act including those with disabilities, in compliance with Rehabilitation Act federal standards. However, it may not be possible NPS Management Policies to make all sites or historic buildings accessible because the required changes would affect the integrity of the feature or the historic structure. In these cases interpretive brochures or programs could help convey an experience to visitors.

Development and Sustainability

Desired Condition Source New and remodeled buildings and facilities reflect Executive Order 12873 the NPS commitment to energy and resource Executive Order 12902 conservation, as well as durability. Guiding Principles of Sustainable Design (NPS 1993)

16 Planning Direction and Guidance

SPECIAL MANDATES AND their wilderness character. Wilderness ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITMENTS characteristics are defined in the Wilderness Act as: Special mandates and administrative commitments refer to park- specific The earth and its community of life requirements. Those most directly related are untrammeled by humans, to the General Management Plan or that where humans are visitors and do may potentially affect it are listed below. not remain. The area is undeveloped and Proposed Wilderness retains its primeval character and influence, without permanent The Wilderness Act of 1964 “established a improvements or human National Wilderness Preservation System habitation. to be composed of federally owned areas The area generally appears to have designated by Congress as ‘wilderness been affected primarily by the areas,’ and these shall be administered for forces of nature, with the imprint the use and enjoyment of the American of humans’ work substantially people in such manner as will leave them unnoticeable. unimpaired for future use and enjoyment The area is protected and managed as wilderness.” The 1974 National Park so as to preserve its natural Service wilderness proposal recom- conditions. mended wilderness designation for The area offers outstanding approximately 122,400 acres of lands opportunities for solitude or a within the park. This recommendation primitive and unconfined type of was transmitted to Congress by the recreation. president. Threatened and Endangered The legislative process has not been Species Management completed for the Crater Lake National Park Wilderness Designation proposal. The federal Endangered Species Act and However, it is the policy of the National NPS policy provide special protection to Park Service (2001 NPS Management all federally listed and threatened and Policies, Chapter 6: Wilderness Preserva- endangered species. Species appearing on tion and Management) to “take no action state lists of endangered, threatened, and that would diminish the wilderness special concern are also considered in suitability of an area possessing wilderness planning and management activities. The characteristics until the legislative process park supports and provides habitat for a has been completed. Until that time, number of federal or state listed species. management decisions pertaining to lands The Park Service would continue to qualifying as wilderness will be made in prepare and periodically update specific expectation of eventual wilderness management plans and programs (e.g., fire designation. This policy also applies to management plan; bull trout restoration potential wilderness, requiring it to be program; threatened and endangered managed as wilderness…” species inventory, monitoring, and research programs). These initiatives are Among other mandates are the protection directed by servicewide laws and policies, of wilderness areas and the preservation of

17 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN and the General Management Plan will not data and recommendations on a number explore alternatives to these plans and of other management issues. programs. Nothing in this General Management Plan would conflict with In 1994 the National Park Service received these initiatives. Congressional funding to continue a long- term monitoring program as part of park Although these plans and programs would base operations. The purpose of the long- benefit threatened and endangered species term program is to develop a limnological and their habitat within the park, it should database to evaluate long- term trends; to be noted that some adverse effects, develop an understanding of the including “taking” of individuals, such as interrelationships among ecosystem loss of some individual fish during bull components to evaluate change, and; to trout restoration operations, have and contribute to the preservation and would likely continue to occur. The Park management of Crater Lake, and other Service would continue to consult the U.S. international aquatic resources through Fish and Wildlife Service as these plans publication of peer reviewed program and programs are prepared and updated to results. ensure the conservation of these species. While these beneficial and adverse effects Title II – National Park System Resources would not result from the implementation Inventory and Management of the of any of the General Management Plan National Parks Omnibus Management Act alternatives, they are considered in the of 1998 had the following purposes: cumulative impacts analysis (see • More effectively achieve the “Environmental Consequences, mission of the National Park Cumulative Impacts” section). Service • Enhance management and Research and Monitoring protection of park resources by providing clear authority and The Crater Lake Long- Term direction for scientific study Limnological Monitoring Program • Ensure appropriate documentation (LTLMP) began with a congressionally of resource conditions mandated (Public Law 97- 250) 10- year • Encourage use of the national park study (1982 - 1992). The 10- year program system for the benefit of park was established to determine whether the management as well as broader lake was undergoing what appeared to be a scientific value long- term decline in water clarity. The • Encourage the publication and National Park Service did not have an dissemination of information adequate limnological data base to derived from studies in the interpret the apparent changes in clarity national park system for managing this nationally and internationally treasured resource. During The act directs that management of park the 10- year program scientists and park units is enhanced by the highest quality managers built a high quality limnology science and information. It further program. The program documented that establishes a program of inventory and the lake clarity was within normal inter- monitoring resources to establish baseline annual variation, it also provided valuable information and provide information on

18 Planning Direction and Guidance the long- term trends in the conditions of transportation, and service centers in their national park resources. respective counties. Klamath Falls is the closest of these, located 50 miles south of Klamath Basin General Stream the park. A number of smaller Adjudication unincorporated communities — Beaver Marsh, Diamond Lake, Fort Klamath, The State of Oregon, Klamath Basin Prospect and Union Creek — are much General Stream Adjudication, is currently closer to the park. These provide some active and includes Crater Lake National visitor services, not all of which are year- Park. The adjudication is a legal process round. that will determine the quantities and relative priorities associated with the Overall guidance for actions at the major park’s use of water from Crater Lake and developed areas is provided as part of the the streams flowing within the park. The 1999 Crater Lake National Park Visitor United States of America, National Park Services Plan. The plan is a blend of Service, has filed twenty- one federal actions intended to improve the protec- reserved water rights claims (Claim Nos. tion of park resources while providing 591 – 611) on behalf of Crater Lake enjoyable visitor experiences. The Visitor National Park for instream, lake level, and Services Plan analyzed the appropriate out- of- stream uses. On August 2, 2001, level and location of interpretive and the hearing officer ordered Claim Nos. 591 visitor services in the park, considering – 601, for instream and lake level uses, both National Park Service and referred back to the adjudicator for final commercial services. It stated that NPS disposition. On February 28, 2002, the interpretive services would be hearing officer signed a Final Proposed emphasized. Commercial services, Order and recommended that the considered to be necessary and Adjudicator enter a Final Order for Claim appropriate due to the park’s distance Nos. 602 – 611, for out- of- stream uses. from sizable communities, would be Final adjudication of the park’s federal modified to better serve visitors. reserved water rights claims will occur when the claims of the other federal The Visitor Services Plan identifies the agencies included in the adjudication are appropriate and necessary levels and kinds settled. Acquisition of the federal reserved of NPS and concession services desired at water rights would not eliminate the risk Rim Village as well as the other major of Crater Lake’s administrative uses being developed areas within the park. This called out by downstream senior water General Management Plan builds on the rights holders during dry years. The previous planning effort. Elements of the National Park Service is negotiating with Visitor Services Plan include the following: local water users for senior water rights that would augment the park’s federal Rim Village reserved water rights during dry years. • Rehabilitate historic cafeteria building • Relocate parking and road to area Visitor Services Plan behind cafeteria building • Convert existing parking lot to Klamath Falls, Medford, and Roseburg are pedestrian open space the gateways to Crater Lake National Park providing the primary business,

19 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

• Construct new visitor contact station Munson Valley for year- round information and • Retain park administration, interpretation maintenance and housing facilities • Remove Rim Village dormitory • Provide interpretive services • Provide backup of winter visitor Mazama Village contact station and post office • Retain Mazama Village Motor Inn • Construct new restaurant and expand Cleetwood Cove parking lot • Rehabilitate Trail and add wayside • Remove public laundries exhibits • Increase space for sale of gift and • Replace dock and improve bulkhead sundry items and camping supplies • Construct seasonal shade structure • Retain gasoline sales • Construct storage structure for • Retain limited food service supplies and equipment • Retain public showers • Retain vault toilets • Retain amphitheater • Define trail entry and crosswalk • Develop two group campsites • Construct concession maintenance facility

PLANNING ISSUES

INTRODUCTION in the preceding section, “Servicewide Laws and Policies.” The key issues The general public, NPS staff, and other addressed in this plan are identified below agencies and organizations identified along with the underlying questions and issues and concerns during scoping for concerns identified during scoping. this General Management Plan (see “Scoping Issues” in the “Purpose, Need, Resource Protection: To what extent and Scoping” section). Resource can visitor uses and visitor, administra- protection, visitor expectations, tolerance tive, and support facilities be provided for greater crowding, the amount of park while protecting natural and cultural resources devoted to snowplowing, and resources? the current limitations on staff and budget Should historic structures in the park to provide interpretive presentations and be adapted for administrative use or outreach activities were the starting point educational or interpretive purposes? of issues for this General Management Is the park adequately addressing the Plan. Comments received during scoping potential resource protection demonstrated that snowmobile use, concerns associated with visitor use boundary enlargement, impacts on (e.g., disturbance to wildlife; surrounding communities and the region, trampling of soils and vegetation; the and use were important to visitors, effects of vehicle emissions on air and organization, and other agencies. water quality), including winter use within the park? This General Management Plan provides a To what extent can visitor framework or strategy for addressing the opportunities be provided without issues within the context of Crater adverse impacts to resources? National Park’s mission, purpose, and significance goals; it also proposes Interpretation, Education, and Recrea- resource conditions for summer and tion: What is the appropriate balance winter use on the land within the park between interpretation, education, and boundary and desired visitor experiences. recreation within the park? What types of access are needed to support the ISSUES appropriate mix of visitor experiences? Should the park expand its A variety of issues that the National Park educational program and educational Service currently faces were identified. outreach? In what ways should this be The issues were identified and refined done? through discussions with park staff, Is the park providing an adequate interested agencies and organizations, and range of visitor information services? the general public. Is the park currently providing an appropriate range of visitor Some of the issues, such as modifying fees, experiences? Should the park are outside the scope of this plan. Some consider increased bicycle, hiking, concerns identified during the planning stock use, camping, and pedestrian process are already prescribed by law, access? Should any of these activities regulation, or policy and were addressed be decreased?

21 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

Should alternative means of Staff and budget levels limit onsite transportation be considered for interpretive presentations and visitor access at Crater Lake? If so, outreach activities. Should the park what type? Should parts of Rim Drive develop and expand its partnerships be closed to vehicular access to with other agencies or commercial improve bicycle and pedestrian operators to enhance orientation and access? education opportunities? What types of winter access and use should be accommodated within the Park Operations: To what extent should park? Should winter lake- viewing be park facilities and operations be main- limited? Expanded? tained, expanded, or relocated to provide for park operational needs and Partnerships: To what extent should the efficiencies? park partner with and support other Existing facilities have inadequate agencies, organizations, and researchers space for administrative and support to further common needs and fulfill the functions. They lack adequate NPS mission? employee workspace and collections The clear waters of Crater Lake and storage. Should these functions remain the pristine surrounding forest areas in the park or be relocated outside the in the park offer unique opportunities park? for scientific research and education. A substantial portion of park resources As a part of its mission, the park is devoted to plowing the road to the promotes and encourages research. Rim Village each winter. Are there Should the park emphasize and other ways to accommodate winter encourage research activities and lake- viewing? partnerships that facilitate research and learning?

IMPACT TOPICS – RESOURCES AND VALUES AT STAKE IN THE PLANNING PROCESS

IMPACTS TOPICS Natural Resources

Impact topics allow comparison of the Natural resource impact topics were environmental consequences of selected for analysis based on the major implementing each alternative. These values identified in the park’s enabling impact topics were identified based on legislation, values or issues identified in federal laws and other legal requirements, the planning process, NPS knowledge of NPS subject- matter expertise and limited or easily impacted resources, as knowledge of limited or easily impacted well as applicable laws and regulations resources, and concerns expressed by (e.g., Endangered Species Act of 1973, as other agencies or members of the public amended, and NPS Management Policies during scoping. A brief rationale for the 2001). The topics are biotic communities selection of each impact topic is given (includes the interrelated components of below, as well as the rationale for dis- vegetation, wildlife and their habitat, and missing specific topics from further soils), threatened, endangered, and sensi- consideration. tive species (selected species), water resources, and air quality. To focus the environmental impact analysis, and to ensure that the alternatives Visitor Use and Experience were evaluated against relevant topics, the planning team selected the following The planning team identified visitor specific impact topics for further analysis experience as an important issue that and eliminated others from evaluation. could be appreciably affected under the These topics are described in the subse- alternatives. The Organic Act and NPS quent “Affected Environment” section Management Policies 2001 both direct the and analyzed in the “Environmental Park Service to provide enjoyment Consequences” section. opportunities for visitors that are uniquely suited and appropriate to the superlative Cultural Resources resources found within the park. The different aspects of visitation and Cultural resource impact topics were enjoyment that are evaluated include selected on the basis of major values orientation, interpretation, education, identified in the park’s enabling legislation, soundscapes, scenic quality, and access values identified in the scoping process, and circulation and applicable laws and executive orders pertaining to cultural resources (e.g., the Park and Concession Operation 1966 National Historic Preservation Act and the National Environmental Policy Actions proposed in the alternatives could Act). The topics are archeological adversely or beneficially affect both park resources, historic buildings/structures, and concession operations. For example, cultural landscapes, ethnographic eliminating winter snow plowing to the resources, and museum collections. rim and implementation of a snowcoach operation would affect operations for both the park and concessioner.

23 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

Socioeconomic Environment be wet only seasonally. Plants and animals found in these areas are uniquely adapted The planning team selected the socio- to wet conditions. Crater Lake National economic environment as an impact topic Park wetlands include Sphagnum Bog, because the park plays an important role Thousand Springs, Boundary Springs, in recreation in the region, which in turn seeps, and creeks. contributes to the economy of the surrounding communities. Analyzing the Facilities proposed for development under regional economic impacts provides the the alternatives would be sited to avoid context for evaluating the possible impacts floodplains and wetlands. Based on the the alternatives may have on the prevalence of upland sites both within the surrounding area. park and nearby communities, it is expected that wetlands and floodplains IMPACT TOPICS ELIMINATED would be avoided. Mitigation measures FROM FURTHER EVALUATION would be required as part of construction to minimize any potential indirect effects. The following topics were dismissed from For example, erosion control measures further analysis because the alternatives would be used to minimize siltation or being considered would have no sedimentation of nearby waters or wet- discernable effect on the resource or topic, lands from construction site runoff. Before or the resource does not occur in the park. initiating any ground- disturbing projects, further investigation would be conducted Floodplains and Wetlands to ensure that these resources would not be appreciably affected. Floodplains and Executive Orders 11988 (Floodplain wetlands will be addressed at the project Management) and 11990 (Protection of level to ensure that projects are consistent Wetlands) require an examination of with NPS policy and EO 11988 and EO impacts to floodplains and wetlands, of 11990, and any potential impacts would be potential risk involved in placing facilities negligible. within floodplains, and protecting wetlands. The 2001 NPS Management Ecologically Critical Areas, Wild and Policies , DO 77- 1 (Wetland Protection), Scenic Rivers, or Other Unique Natural DO 77- 2 (Floodplain Management), and Resources DO- 12 (Conservation Planning, Environ- mental Impact Analysis, and Decision Four distinct natural areas within the Making) provide direction for develop- boundaries of Crater Lake National Park ment proposed in floodplains and have been designated as research natural wetlands. It is NPS policy to avoid areas: Sphagnum Bog, Llao Rock, Pumice affecting floodplains and wetlands and to Desert, and Desert Creek. These four minimize impacts when they are areas illustrate unique ecosystems and unavoidable. Permanent streams in the represent outstanding habitats of the park generally have steep- sided channels, Oregon Cascades Province, as defined in and associated floodplains and riparian the Oregon Natural Heritage Plan (1981). areas are narrow. The term wetlands include wet environments such as marsh- Several other areas within the park contain es, swamps, and bogs. They may be cov- important ecological communities. ered in shallow water most of the year, or Boundary Springs is in the northwest

24 Impact Topics — Resources and Values at Stake in the Planning Process corner of the park and is one of the headwater sources of the Rogue River. The spring produces a reliable, year- round flow in an otherwise arid area, resulting in a lush moss and herb flora (Applegate 1939). Thousand Springs is approximately 1 mile south of the west entrance (OR 62) of Crater Lake National Park. The Thousand Springs site is a complex of freshwater springs that flow west into Union Creek and eventually into the Rogue River.

These research natural areas and important ecological communities would continue to be preserved and managed to minimize human disturbance under all of the alternatives. Negligible disturbance to these areas has occurred or is expected to occur under any of the alternatives.

No actions proposed in the alternatives would affect the eligibility or designation of a wild and scenic river. southeast corner of the park is a site of Geologic Resources unique geological importance. The canyon formed by Sand Creek has sloping walls of Crater Lake National Park lies within a scoria and pumice. Along the walls are north- south chain of large volcanic cones numerous pinnacle formations, many 50 built during the last few hundred thousand feet or taller. years along the crest of the Cascade Range (Schaffer 1983). The current landscape No actions proposed in the alternatives was formed after the eruption and collapse would affect these geologic resources. of Mt. Mazama. The park landscape displays a large range of volcanic rocks Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive and remnant glacial material as well as a Species (Select Species) variety of geologic features. The steep- walled cliffs of the caldera left by the There are a number of species that are eruption of Mt. Mazama display the considered threatened or endangered in geologic layering of lava flows over time. Oregon, according to lists maintained by Wizard Island is an example of a cinder the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon cone and lava flows that erupted soon Department of Agriculture, and the after the one which formed the caldera. Oregon Natural Heritage Program Several more post caldera volcanoes are (ONHP) that inhabit, or for which hidden by the lake. Studies of the lake potential habitat exists in the park. The bottom have shown the presence of alternatives would have no effect on some hydrothermal activity on the lake floor. of these species as discussed below. The Sand Creek/Pinnacles area in the Surveys would be conducted and potential 25 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

new development or trails proposed under any of the alternatives would be sited to avoid disturbing sensitive species.

Lost River sucker (Deltistes luxatus) and shortnose sucker (Chasmistes brevirostris) are federal and state endangered species. Both species are primarily lake residents that spawn in rivers, streams, or springs associated with lake habitats. Wood River, which flows south of the park in the upper Klamath Lake watershed, provides spawning habitat for these species. Neither species is known to inhabit the park at present, and it is not known if they have historically inhabited the park. The alternatives would have negligible effects on water use from Annie Spring, which joins with the Wood River south of the park. There would be no measurable effect on Wood River flows; and, therefore, may affect, but would not be likely to adversely affect spawning habitat for these species would occur. Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa) is a federal candidate and listed by ONHP Yellow- billed cuckoo (Coccyzus ameri- under species threatened or endangered canus) is a federal candidate and listed by throughout their range. The tailed frog ONHP under species threatened or en- (Ascaphcs truei) and Cascade frog (Rana dangered or possibly extirpated from cascadae) are both federal species of Oregon but secure elsewhere. Populations concern and listed by the state under of this species have declined in portions of species threatened or endangered or their range in the United States, particu- possibly extirpated from Oregon but larly west of the Continental Divide. secure elsewhere. Spotted frogs are highly Western yellow- billed cuckoos appear to aquatic and live in or near permanent require large blocks of riparian habitat for bodies of water, including lakes, ponds, nesting. Loss and degradation of western slow streams and marshes. Tailed frogs are riparian habitats appears to be a primary stream dwellers that do not inhabit ponds factor in their decline. A survey in eastern or lakes. The Cascade frog is found in Oregon and Klamath County located no small pools adjacent to streams flowing birds but identified potential breeding through subalpine meadows. They can habitat along the lower Owyhee River also be found in sphagnum bogs and fens, (Littlefield 1988). This species is not seasonally- flooded, forested swamps, known to inhabit the park, nor would the small lakes, ponds, and marshy areas alternatives adversely affect large blocks of adjacent to streams. These species are not riparian habitat. No effect on this species known to inhabit the park, nor are the is anticipated under any of the alternatives.

26 Impact Topics — Resources and Values at Stake in the Planning Process alternatives expected to affect potentially alternatives would not affect habitat where suitable habitat. these species are found.

Crater Lake newt (Taricha granulosa ssp. Prime and Unique Farmlands mazamae) is listed by ONHP under species threatened or endangered throughout In 1980 the Council on Environmental their range. This species is endemic to Quality (CEQ) directed that federal Crater Lake and is found in the shoreline agencies assess the effects of their actions ecosystem of the lake. None of the actions on farmland soils classified as prime or within the alternatives would affect areas unique by the Natural Resources Conser- of known populations. The Park Service vation Service, U.S. Department of would continue to take management Agriculture. Prime or unique farmland is actions as necessary to avoid impacts from defined as soil that particularly produces continuing visitor and research activities general crops such as common foods, that occur within the caldera. forage, fiber, and oil seed; unique farmland produces specialty crops such as fruits, Mt. Mazama collomia, (Collomia mazama) vegetables, and nuts. There are no prime is listed by the ONHP under taxa that are or unique farmlands associated within the endangered or threatened throughout park, and this impact topic was dismissed their range or which are presumed extinct. from further analysis. This species inhabits high elevation (4,800' - 6,300') forest- meadow ecotones in the Lightscape red fir/mountain hemlock and lodgepole pine forest zones and occasionally along NPS Management Policies (2001) state that riparian areas. Within the park it is found the National Park Service will preserve, to north of Sphagnum Bog, along Pacific the greatest extent possible, the natural Crest Trail and Dutton Creek, and in scat- lightscapes of parks, including natural tered open woods and meadows of the darkness. The agency strives to minimize lodgepole pine and true fir forest zones the intrusion of artificial light into the along the west side of park. None of the night scene by limiting the use of artificial actions under the alternatives would affect outdoor lighting to basic safety require- areas of known populations within the ments, shielding the lights when possible, park. The Park Service would continue to and using minimal- impact lighting tech- take management actions as necessary to niques. The actions proposed in the avoid impacts by backcountry visitors. alternatives could result in new facilities, Crawford's sedge (Carex crafordii), some of which could necessitate some abrupt- beaked sedge (Carex abrupta), and night- time lighting. However, the effects lesser bladderwort (Utricularia minor) are of this lighting would be localized and listed by the ONHP under species that are minimized by the mitigation techniques threatened, endangered, or possibly described above. Only a small area would extirpated from Oregon, but are stable or be affected by the facilities. It is expected more common elsewhere. These species that these few developments would have a occur within the park and are associated negligible impact on the night sky. There- with wetlands and/or springs. The fore, lightscape was dismissed as an impact topic.

27 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

would negligibly affect energy Natural or Depletable Resource consumption compared to current Requirements and Conservation conditions. Potential Land Use None of the alternatives being considered would result in the extraction of resources There are no anticipated conflicts with from the park. Under all of the alternatives local land use planning. The proposed ecological principles would be applied to management zones and creation of ensure that the park’s natural resources additional recreation and visitor service were maintained and not impaired. opportunities in the park as proposed under certain alternatives would not be Energy Requirements and Conservation inconsistent with local land use plans. Potential Potential development of NPS facilities in local communities outside the park would The National Park Service would pursue conform with any local land use plans such sustainable practices whenever possible in as the Klamath County Comprehensive all decisions regarding national park Plan. None of the alternatives would be operations, facilities management, and expected to induce changes in land use development in Crater Lake National outside the park, and there are no private Park. Whenever possible, the Park Service in holdings within the park. would use energy conservation technologies and renewable energy sources. Consequently, the alternatives

28 Impact Topics — Resources and Values at Stake in the Planning Process

Environmental Justice Wilderness Resources and Values

Executive Order 12898, “General Actions The alternatives place all lands within the to Address Environmental Justice in 1974 wilderness proposal within the Minority Populations and Low- Income backcountry zone and would allow only Populations,” requires all federal agencies uses and development compatible with the to incorporate environmental justice into protection of wilderness characteristics their missions by identifying and addres- and values. All new development pro- sing disproportionately high and adverse posed under any of the alternatives would human health or environmental effects of occur within the exclusions, and proposed their programs and policies on minorities wilderness lands would be avoided during and low- income populations and com- construction activities. Backcountry munities. No alternative would have opportunities for visitors to experience health or environmental effects on solitude and unconfined recreation in the minorities (including American Indian backcountry would remain unchanged. tribes) or low- income populations or Opportunities for primitive recreation, communities as defined in the Environ- hiking, backpacking and stock use in the mental Protection Agency’s Environmental wilderness would remain. In most Justice Guidance (1998). Therefore, this wilderness areas of the park, visitors impact topic has been dismissed as an would continue to find what they perceive impact topic in this document. as pristine natural conditions. For example, visitors would continue to find a Indian Trust Resources landscape generally untrammeled by people with few signs of disturbance or The lands comprising Crater Lake alteration. Relatively few visitors use the National Park are not held in trust by the backcountry in the park, and although this secretary of the interior for the benefit of number is expected to increase, negligible Indians due to their status. Therefore, this impacts to backcountry visitor experiences topic was dismissed. are anticipated under alternative 1 (no- action alternative).

ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

THE ALTERNATIVES

This Final General Management Plan / within NPS legal mandates and park Environmental Impact Statement presents policies. four alternatives, including the National Park Service’s preferred alternative, for At Crater Lake National Park the lake and future management of Crater Lake the surrounding environment led to the National Park. Alternative 1, the no- initial creation of the park. Research and action alternative, describes the information since the legislation creating continuation of current management and the park have highlighted the unique and trends and serves as a basis for comparing scientific aspects of the lake. In addition to the other alternatives. Alternative 2 is the the beauty of its large size, blue color, and National Park Service’s preferred mountain setting, the lake holds the world alternative. It would provide additional record for clarity among lakes and has opportunities while providing for the been the object of scientific study for more research and protection of resources. than a century due to its pristine waters, Alternative 3 would allow visitors to associated geothermal activities, and experience the entire range of natural and unusual aquatic organisms. The ongoing cultural resources significant and unique Crater Lake Long- Term Limnological to the park through recreational Program has indicated that the chemical opportunities and education. Alternative 4 and physical parameters measured in the would have a greater emphasis on lake are within their expected range of resource preservation and restoration than variation. the other alternatives. All alternatives in this General Manage- The preferred alternative was developed ment Plan would provide for resource following an initial assessment of the protection and visitor use. The park would impacts of the preliminary alternatives. An manage its ecosystems for the sustain- evaluation process, called “Choosing by ability of the resources found in the park. Advantages (CBA),” was then used to Protection, preservation, and monitoring evaluate and compare the alternatives and of the primary and most unique resource to develop a preliminary preferred in the park, Crater Lake, would occur in all alternative. As part of the CBA process, the alternatives. planning team looked at comparative costs of the alternatives (see appendix C for All alternatives in this General these comparative costs). Management Plan discuss resource condition, the visitor experience, and ACTIONS COMMON TO ALL appropriate activities and facilities. Prior ALTERNATIVES to this plan, the 1999 Crater Lake National Park Visitor Services Plan established the All alternatives to be considered in the basis for a new concession contract. This General Management Plan must be consis- new 10- year contract went into effect in tent with and contribute to sideboards 2003. The concession projects proposed in within which all management actions must the Visitor Services Plan are consistent fall. These sideboards are the purpose and with the alternatives. Any future significance statements, along with the commercial actions or operations would mission goal. All alternatives must also be need to be within the defined visitor

33 ALTERNATIVES, INCLUSING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE experience, level of activity, and facilities resources. These zones form the basis of as defined in the preferred alternative. the alternatives and reflect the range of ideas proposed by the Park Service and DEVELOPMENT OF THE public. ALTERNATIVES MANAGEMENT ZONES Before the alternatives were developed, information on park resources, visitor use, An important tool in planning and man- and visitor preferences was gathered and agement is the establishment of manage- analyzed. Information about the issues and ment zones for various areas in the park. scope of the project was solicited from the These zones identify how different areas public, other agencies, special interest could be managed to achieve a variety of groups, and park staff through newsletters, resource conditions and visitor experi- meetings, and personal contacts. This ences. Each zone specifies a particular information helped with developing the combination of resource, social, and man- preliminary alternatives. The alternatives agement conditions (see the following were further refined based on public chart). Under the action alternatives, the comments on an alternatives newsletter. National Park Service would take different Each of the alternatives support the park’s actions in different zones concerning uses purpose, significance, and mission; and facilities. address issues; avoid unacceptable resource impacts; and respond to differing Summer and winter scenarios and maps public desires and concerns. follow each alternative description because the park landscape changes so Using the information described above, dramatically from winter to summer. the planning team developed eight man- These scenarios help distinguish when agement zones for guiding preservation, visitor activities and access are possible use, understanding, and development of and allowed. Crater Lake National Park and its

Table 1: Management Zones

ZONE RESOURCE CONDITION OR VISTOR EXPERIENCE APPROPRIATE ACTIVITIES OR CHARACTER FACILITIES

Biological diversity and ecological Immersed in nature, away from comforts Minimal integrity and conveniences • Primitive trails • Managed for wilderness character • Opportunities for solitude • Small designated campsites and values • Few other visitors • Small facilities, including antennas • Moderate level of management for • High level of independence, challenge, • No motorized vehicles (except to attain resource protection and visitor adventure and application of outdoor management objectives when safety skills determined necessary) • Minimal evidence of modern • Longer time commitment • If any, facilities in the zone would avoid civilization • Low tolerance for noise and visual sensitive resources • Subtle onsite controls and intrusions • Hiking and stock use restrictions • Generally requires higher level of • Resource modifications would physical exertion harmonize with the natural environment. Tolerance for resource degradation in this zone would be very low BACKCOUNTRY Transition between developed areas In contact with nature, close to modern Support facilities and those managed for natural values conveniences • Trails, possibly paved • Managed predominately for natural • Common to encounter other visitors • Facilities for visitor comfort and values • Some physical exertion required convenience — may include restrooms, • Subtle site modifications to • Short to moderate time commitment trash cans, benches, tables, kiosks, accommodate use that harmonizes • Moderate tolerance for noise and visual signage or drinking fountains with natural environment intrusions • Facilities necessary for park operations • Moderate level of management for • Bicycling and other nonmotorized resource protection recreation Tolerance for resource degradation would be low to moderate NATURAL HERITAGE ZONES HERITAGE NATURAL FRONT COUNTRY

ZONE RESOURCE CONDITION OR VISTOR EXPERIENCE APPROPRIATE ACTIVITIES OR CHARACTER FACILITIES

Pristine Fully immersed in nature in a unique Minimal facilities to accommodate boat • Highest level of resource protection environment operations, research, and visitor needs • Low levels of management for • Access would require a moderate to • Boat touring with a guide would be the access, resource protection and high level of challenge predominant activity visitor safety would be appropriate in • Visitors would access the resource as • Swimming, fishing, and scuba diving are these areas part of a guided boat tour permitted. Any other activities would • Any resource modifications would • Intimacy with resources, learning, and require park approval be minimal and would harmonize access to a large portion of the lake • Comfort stations, boat dock and with the natural environment would be key elements of this storage, and access trail experience • Hiking would be necessary to access the • Probability of encountering other boats area would be low, and there would be some opportunities for individual solitude LAKE AND AND LAKE CALDERA Protection for unique habitats and Resource Oriented Minimal and probably temporary extraordinary ecological values • Visitors may or may not be allowed, facilities required to meet the resource • Managed to allow natural processes depending on specific resource goals. objectives to occur without disturbance or • If allowed, visitation would be • Research, observation, and other impacts from humans education- oriented and an NPS guide activities which would not impact the • Tolerance for resource degradation could be required zone's specific objectives in this zone would be very low RESEARCH NATURAL

ZONE RESOURCE CONDITION OR VISTOR EXPERIENCE APPROPRIATE ACTIVITIES OR CHARACTER FACILITIES

Maintaining and protecting cultural Immersed in a built environment Learning about the park’s natural and resources and providing for quality • Rich in architectural and cultural human history and its ecological and visitor experiences history historical significance • Evidence of management activity • Interpretive and educational services • Viewing Crater Lake, birdwatching, and resource preservation could be and media would be greatest photography, walking, and picnicking visible to visitors. • Opportunities to understand and • A range of interpretive, educational, • Setting would be predominantly appreciate resources and orientation programs would be historic • Visitor activities would occur in both provided, with orientation and • National register- listed (or eligible) structured (such as interpretive talks) interpretation of resources taking place properties would be managed to and unstructured ways (self- guided mostly onsite preserve their documented values. tours and waysides) • Facilities could include visitor contact, • Historic scene and the landscape • Probability of encountering other restrooms, exhibits, and facilities would be managed to maximize people and NPS staff would be high related to park administration and their integrity and to support visitor • Opportunities for physical challenge operations use would be low • Trails and picnic areas • Some minor aspects of the natural • Moderate intrusions on the natural and cultural landscape could be soundscape by cars and other people modified to protect resources and accommodate use CULTURAL HERITAGE ZONE HERITAGE CULTURAL Resources modified to accommodate Touring the park, enjoying scenic Substantially developed area roads and road construction overlooks and interpretive media, and • Paved roads, pullouts, overlooks, and • Minimize impacts to resources gaining access into other park areas associated short trails and picnic areas, • Minimize landscape and visual • Visitor attractions would be parking areas and other facilities (such impacts convenient and easily accessible as restrooms, picnic tables, kiosks, • Resources modified for essential • Visitors would have little need to exert wayside exhibits) that support visitor visitor and park operational needs themselves, apply outdoor skills, or touring spend a long time in the area • Most facilities and some trails would • Probability of encountering other be accessible in this area visitors and NPS staff would be high • Road realignment could occur within a road corridor measuring 200 feet from the centerline of the road TRANSPORTATION ZONE TRANSPORTATION ZONE

ZONE RESOURCE CONDITION OR VISTOR EXPERIENCE APPROPRIATE ACTIVITIES OR CHARACTER FACILITIES

Resources modified for visitor and Convenient and accessible Visitor and administrative facilities park operational needs • Opportunities for adventure would be • Visitor centers, lodges, administrative • Not in designated wilderness nor relatively unimportant offices, maintenance areas, and near sensitive resources • Promotes social experiences residences • Visitors and facilities would be • Probability of encountering other • Paved paths, roads, parking, and other intensively managed visitors or NPS staff would be high walkways connecting facilities could be • Signs of human activity would be appropriate fairly obvious • Campground DEVELOPED DEVELOPED ZONE

ALTERNATIVE 1 – NO ACTION

The no- action alternative represents Existing buildings and facilities in the park continuation of the current management would remain. Preservation and mainte- direction and approach currently used at nance of existing historic structures would the park. This alternative is presented as a continue based on available staff and way of evaluating the proposed actions of funding. Some historic structures would the other three alternatives and is useful in be adaptively used for visitor use and understanding why the National Park administrative functions. The super- Service or the public may believe that intendent’s residence, a national historic future changes are necessary. landmark, would be rehabilitated for use as a science and learning center. Munson Ongoing and planned actions and projects Valley would continue to serve as the cen- in the park are included under projects ter of NPS administration, maintenance, that make up the cumulative impact sce- and housing. It would also serve as the nario and are not included as part of this year- round visitor interpretation and alternative. The impacts of these actions orientation point. There would continue are analyzed as part of the cumulative to be inadequate storage and workspace impact analysis. for park collections that meets NPS museum standards. Due to limited staffing, The existing road access and circulation the cataloging backlog would continue to system within the park would continue. increase. Two- way traffic and existing pullouts along Rim Drive that provide scenic lake Existing visitor recreational opportunities views would be maintained. Several and interpretive programs in the park pullouts that are heavily used would likely would continue. Rim Village would con- continue to have crowding problems tinue to function as a year- round opera- during peak times and problems with tion with limited services in the winter. newer, larger vehicles and RVs. Grayback Seasonal interpretive activities would be Road would remain unpaved and open to provided at the rim. Mazama Village one- way traffic. During winter, private would be the primary overnight visitor use vehicular access would be maintained area in the summer. Development at from the south and west on OR 62 through Cleetwood would continue to provide park headquarters and up to Rim Village. access to Crater Lake and the commercial Winter snowmobile and snowcoach access boat tours of the lake. would continue from the North Entrance along Crater Lake Entrance Road to the Cultural resources in the national park rim. Other winter visitor activities in the would continue to be surveyed, inven- park, including cross- country skiing and toried, and evaluated under National snow play on unplowed roads, would also Register of Historic Places criteria of continue. The Park Service would initiate a evaluation to determine their eligibility for data collection and monitoring program to listing in the national register as NPS staff gather information on winter use and and funding permitted. resource conditions to ensure long- term protection and sustainable use of park Natural resource management protection, resources. preservation, and restoration activities would also continue as staffing and

39 ALTERNATIVES, IN CLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE funding allowed. The following protection The Crater Lake Long- term Limnological measures to protect the lake would also Program would continue to research and continue: monitor Crater Lake as well as determine periodic recommendations for resource • minimal development would be preservation. Partnerships with academia allowed within the caldera and lake and other outside research interests would drainage area continue in support of inventorying and • operations would be managed to monitoring of resources. prevent contaminants from draining into the lake • only essential visitor service would be provided at Rim Village • the number and types of boats would be controlled • a single access trail would be provided to the lake

40 North Entrance

CRATER

LAKE

NATIONAL

PARK

Cleetwood Rim Drive

West Lake/Caldera Rim Drive Wizard Island

East Rim Village Kerr Notch Rim Visitor Information Center/ Drive Park Headquarters Sun Notch West Entrance Munson Valley Mazama Village Greyback Motor Nature Trial Entrance Station Annie Creek Canyon Trail The Pinnacles

NORTH

South Entrance Legend

Park Boundary

Lake/Caldera

Transportation Development Alternative 1 Back Country No Action Crater Lake National Park United States Department of the Interior . National Park Service DSC / MAR 04 / 106 / 20147

ALTERNATIVE 2: PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE— EMPHASIS ON INCREASED OPPORTUNITIES

CONCEPT AND RELATED ACTIONS frontcountry opportunities would be in areas along the rim and along the Management of the park would emphasize roadways. Transitional experiences (such increased opportunities for visitors in both as short trails and picnic areas) would be recreational diversity and learning about provided between the developed areas or park resources. Most visitor recreational transportations corridors and the back- opportunities would remain. country. Areas for enhanced interpretation, new research, and access to the This alternative would explore a greater backcountry would also be provided. diversity of uses along Rim Drive. New opportunities would allow visitors to Opportunities would be added for directly experience the primary resource research, learning, and conveying of of Crater Lake in ways other than driving. information to park visitors. The goal Any new uses would be nonmotorized and would be to facilitate research that was low impact and be limited to areas that focused, purposeful, and significant to the would have space to accommodate them; resources of Crater Lake National Park or new trails could be included. Additional that would further basic natural, cultural, opportunities may be provided by seasonal and social science understanding. A new closures of sections of east Rim Drive to science and learning center would form allow hiking and biking along Rim Drive. the core of the new research. The park These closures would also provide would expand and encourage partnerships opportunities to experience the lake in a with universities, scientists, and educa- quieter setting without requiring physical tional groups. Research would provide changes to the historic Rim Drive. Closure information that is relative to and could be of Rim Drive would be experimental to compared to larger regional and global determine how well this approach worked, contexts, which would then form the basis and the road may be reopened if war- of a more substantive interpretive and ranted. The Grayback Road would no educational experience for visitors. longer be used for motorized transportation. It would function as a nonpaved The park, through its partnerships, would trail to accommodate hikers, bicyclists, invite scientists, educators, students, and and stock use. Winter snowmobile and researchers to study mutually beneficial snowcoach access would remain along subjects at Crater Lake. Joint conferences North Junction to the rim. Winter access and seminars could be held on related in private vehicles to Rim Village would topics with partnering universities or with continue via plowing the road. The Park other agencies or at the park’s science and Service would initiate a data collection and learning center. The information gathered monitoring program to gather information would be disseminated throughout the on winter use and resource conditions to park to rangers, interpretive staff, and ensure long- term protection and visitors. Park staff would use new and sustainable use of park resources. expanding sources of information to Other current opportunities would still be manage resources and to analyze impacts available but with a greater depth and to the resources and incorporate the range of information. Some additional newest research into their interpretive

43 ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE talks. Researchers would interpret their encouraged to visit and stay in the park, it research through field trips, seminars, and is anticipated to be small numbers and workshops. Visitors would have the relatively short term — a few days to a opportunity to participate in extended month. Space would be provided within workshops to support research and existing facilities for educational groups — resource management. Special in- depth classes, clubs, and tour groups. Current tours would be available to interest and future needs for office and adminis- groups, such as bird groups or geology trative space would be accommodated clubs. An underlying theme would be the without additional construction. Adminis- environment, especially its connection trative and other organizational functions, beyond park boundaries. Methods for which were not by necessity park- based, disseminating information about park would be moved to surrounding com- resources would go beyond the current munities as demand for space within the level. Radio information would be park increased. Community- based provided for visitors in private cars, and employees would strengthen ties to nearby interpreters would provide research- communities as well as provide greater based programs for buses and tour boats. choices of living situations for employees, New technology would be used to provide thereby improving recruitment and information to "virtual" visitors who may retention. Functions could be dispersed to never step within the boundary of the more than one community in the area, park. locating close to institutions partnering with the park to strengthen and solidify The park’s museum collections would be those relationships. increased as a result of the expanded research activities. Pertinent park- related A greater emphasis on research, education, collection materials not currently owned and interpretation would require an or managed by the National Park Service increase in staffing in those areas. would be acquired and stored in onsite and offsite facilities that met professional Parking and road congestion at the park and National Park Service museum would be managed by improving existing standards. Thus, adequate storage and pullouts, parking areas, and overlooks. workspace would be provided for Minor changes could include signing, improvement of curation, protection, and marking parking spaces, and minor access to the collections, and staffing pavement alterations. If, in the future, would be upgraded to reduce the crowding conditions developed, shuttles cataloging backlog. and other alternative transportation systems would be used to solve the Existing buildings and facilities in the park problems, rather than expanding road and would remain, but some structures would parking capacities. At that time, a be adaptively used for new functions and feasibility analysis would determine uses, including the rehabilitation of the whether the alternative transportation superintendent’s residence as a science would be a concession, Park Service and learning center. While researchers, operated, or a service contract. scientists, and artists may be invited and

44 Alternative 2 —Emphasis on Increased Opportunities

MANAGEMENT ZONING protection and the learning opportunities associated with this unique environment. Summer The developed zone would include visitor and administrative facilities at Rim Village, Most of the lands within the park would Munson Valley, Mazama Village, North be managed under the backcountry Junction, and Lost Creek. The transpor- management zone, which includes most tation zone would include corridors along lands contained in the 1974 wilderness the park road system. The frontcountry recommendation. This zone would zone would be in a number of areas along preserve the park’s pristine landscape and the Rim Drive and other park roadways to provide visitor opportunities for solitude support expanded frontcountry oppor- and a primitive experience. The research tunities. The Grayback Road, which would natural zone would be applied to the four become a nonpaved trail, would also be research natural areas (shown on the included in this zone. Alternative 2 — Summer map) in the park that posses unique habitats and extra- Winter ordinary ecological values. This zone includes the remaining lands contained in In the winter, the backcountry zone would the 1974 wilderness recommendation not be expanded to include those portions of zoned as backcountry. Crater Lake would the park’s road system and visitor facilities be zoned lake and caldera. Management that would be closed in the winter. would emphasize continued resource

Desert Pumice Creek Desert

Sphagnum Bog

Llao Rock CRATER

LAKE

NATIONAL

PARK

NORTH

Legend

Park Boundary Lake/Caldera Alternative 2 - Preferred Transportation

Development Summer

Frontcountry Emphasis on Increased Research Visitor Opportunities Backcountry (Summer) Crater Lake National Park United States Department of the Interior . National Park Service DSC / FEB 05 / 106 / 20141

Desert Pumice Creek Desert

Sphagnum Bog

Llao Rock CRATER

LAKE

NATIONAL

PARK

NORTH

Legend

Park Boundary Lake/Caldera Alternative 2 - Preferred Transportation

Development Winter

Frontcountry Emphasis on Increased Research Visitor Opportunities Backcountry (Winter) Crater Lake National Park United States Department of the Interior . National Park Service DSC / FEB 05 / 106 / 20142

ALTERNATIVE 3 — EMPHASIS ON ENJOYMENT OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

CONCEPT AND RELATED ACTIONS While not all recreational activities are appropriate for, nor would be allowed The emphasis of this alternative would be within the boundaries, the park could to allow visitors to experience a greater serve as a source of information for range of natural and cultural resources regional recreational opportunities. significant and unique to the park through Winter access would be improved by recreational opportunities and education. grooming along North Junction Road to The park would be managed to provide a accommodate both snowmobiling and wider range of visitor experiences and snowcoaches. Plowed vehicle access would reach out to a greater diversity of would continue from Mazama Village to visitor groups — different ages, abilities, Rim Village. Increases in numbers or economic, and ethnic groups. Recreational impacts to resources or visitors could opportunities would provide the base for warrant changes in management actions. interpretation and education. These programs would focus on minimizing In addition to reaching out to groups in impact, leaving no trace and acquisition of nearby communities and those on tours, skills for outdoor recreation. Programs use of a shuttle bus system would be would include a broader range to provide explored. The shuttle would be integrated appropriate levels of education and with recreational opportunities to create a interpretation for a variety of groups. wide range of visitor opportunities. The Trails would be located to introduce shuttle would also be integrated with the visitors to a diverse range of ecosystems interpretive program to expand the park and terrain and to accommodate ability experience. For example, visitors could and experience levels. park at Mazama and take a shuttle to and around Rim Drive. The shuttle stops could Resources would be managed to permit be connected with the trail system, recreation while protecting resources. The allowing visitors to have short stops, short park would partner with a range of hikes, or successively longer outings, as tourism, hospitality, and recreation clubs, they chose. The road section between along with private contractors and related Cleetwood Cove and Kerr Notch could be agencies, to provide orientation and one way for private vehicles. This could education. Some orientation and create an area where visitors could ride education efforts could occur offsite in bikes in one lane with a high degree of local hotels and/or on tours to prepare safety. visitors for and teach stewardship to groups before getting to the park. Partner- Increases in visitor contact and contact ing with commercial operators to provide with the resource would stimulate a shift interpretation on guided van tours would toward increased interpretive and ranger be encouraged. Interpretive programs for services. Some interpretive functions less physically fit visitors would be pro- could be based in nearby communities vided; possibly on tours or in community where partnerships with the tourism facilities. Opportunities for recreation industry have established off site would be viewed in a regional context. interpretive programs For example,

51 ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE interpretive programs could be presented MANAGEMENT ZONING in local hotel meeting rooms, schools, or community buildings. Use of most current Summer facilities would continue. Treatment of historic structures and cultural landscapes The zone allocation would be similar to under this alternative would be similar to alternative 2, with the following excep- the no- action alternative, although such tions. The Grayback Road would be resources could be affected by construc- included in the transportation zone to tion of additional trails, installation of new accommodate continued motorized interpretive signs and other media, and recreational opportunities. In addition, a expanded tour programs. corridor along the park’s road system would be zoned frontcountry to allow for Adequate space would be provided for the increased visitor opportunities, such as curation and storage of the park’s museum hiking and picnicking, in these corridors. collections, which would be stored in an (Please see the Alternative 3 — Summer onsite facility that met professional and map.) National Park Service museum standards. Although adequate storage and workspace Winter would be provided to improve curation and protection of the collections, and The zone allocation would be similar to staffing would be upgraded to reduce the alternative 2, where the backcountry zone cataloging backlog, park- related would be expanded to include those collection materials not currently owned portions of the park’s road system and or managed by the National Park Service visitor facilities that would be closed in the would generally not be acquired. Access to winter. However, the frontcountry zone the collections, both for NPS and non- would be applied along the entire OR62 NPS researchers, would be limited by and south access road corridors to support availability of museum staff to assist in use increased winter use opportunities. of the collections.

52 Desert Pumice Creek Desert

Sphagnum Bog

Llao Rock CRATER

LAKE

NATIONAL

PARK

NORTH

Legend

Park Boundary Lake/Caldera Alternative 3 Transportation

Development Summer

Frontcountry Emphasis on Enjoyment of Research the Natural Environment Backcountry (Summer) Crater Lake National Park United States Department of the Interior . National Park Service DSC / FEB 05 / 106 / 20143

Desert Pumice Creek Desert

Sphagnum Bog

Llao Rock CRATER

LAKE

NATIONAL

PARK

NORTH

Legend

Park Boundary Lake/Caldera Alternative 3 Transportation

Development Winter Frontcountry Emphasis on Enjoyment of Research the Natural Environment Backcountry (Winter) Crater Lake National Park United States Department of the Interior . National Park Service DSC / FEB 05 / 106 / 20144

ALTERNATIVE 4 — EMPHASIS ON PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES

CONCEPT AND RELATED ACTIONS museum standards. Thus, provision for adequate storage and workspace would be Park management would be focused on provided to improve curation, protection, the preservation of native species and and access to the collections, and staffing natural processes and the restoration of would be increased to reduce the biodiversity and natural processes where cataloging backlog. altered. The park would be an active partner in a regional conservation strategy The visitor experience would stress that would include other agencies and activities that have low environmental environmental groups. Most park impact on and are harmonious with the operations and visitor contact facilities resources. Existing trails would be routed could be outside the park and shared with away from sensitive areas. The trail system other agencies and communities. would be reviewed and new trails may be provided (e.g., low elevation nature trails). Resource preservation and restoration Some trails could be eliminated and the would be the overriding consideration in area rehabilitated. If not eligible for the the park. Evaluations, surveys, and National Register of Historic Places, the monitoring would be conducted to ensure Grayback Road would be closed and protection of park resources. Areas that restored to natural conditions. Existing have been altered would be restored to services would continue, however, there their natural conditions. Research within would be more emphasis on self- guided the park would be nonmanipulative. and discovery education. Environmental Cultural resources would be preserved at sensitivity would serve as a strong theme. the highest level possible. Preservation of Interpretive programs would focus on historic fabric would be an overriding stewardship within the park and on the factor. Adaptive reuse, which permits protection of resources, while incorpor- additions or alterations to a historic ating this philosophy into everyday life. structure to accommodate a compatible contemporary use, would occur only Vehicular transportation would be altered where it can be accomplished in accord- to reinforce the visitor experience. The ance with the Secretary of Interior’s Rim Road would be closed between Standards and Guidelines for Archeology Cleetwood Cove and Kerr Notch. The and Historic Preservation. area between the two sides would provide visitors with opportunities for hiking and The volume of the park’s museum solitude along the rim. collections would be increased as a result of the expanded park research activities as To reduce the human presence on the well as acquisition of pertinent park- natural landscape, the trend would be related collection materials not currently toward fewer buildings and facilities. owned or managed by the National Park Facilities that are not historic and not Service. The museum collections would be essential to park functions would be stored in an offsite facility that met removed and the area rehabilitated. professional and National Park Service Functions that are by necessity park- based, such as maintenance and law

57 ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE enforcement, would be retained in the also be zoned backcountry. The research park. The composition of the staff would natural zone would be applied to the four increase in the areas of resource areas in the park that posses unique preservation, restoration, protection, and habitats and extraordinary ecological education activities. values. This management zone would include the remaining lands contained in Winter use of the park would change to the 1974 wilderness recommendation not allow natural processes to proceed with zoned as backcountry. Crater Lake would less disturbance than current management be zoned lake and caldera. practices allows. Winter plowing of the road to the rim would stop, except for To preserve cultural resources at a higher spring opening. Winter access to the rim level, Rim Drive, Rim Village, and the would begin from the Mazama parking lot Munson Valley Historic District would be and would be via snowcoach. Grooming of included in the cultural heritage zone. The the road would probably be needed to developed zone would include visitor and ensure access by snowcoach. Snowmo- administrative facilities at Munson Valley, biling along North Junction Road would Mazama Village, and Lost Creek. The no longer be allowed. transportation zone would include corridors along the park road system, MANAGEMENT ZONING excluding Rim Drive.

Summer Winter

As under alternatives 2 and 3, most of the The backcountry zone would be expanded lands within the park would be managed to include those portions of the park’s under the backcountry management zone, road system and visitor facilities that which would include most lands con- would be closed in the winter, including tained in the 1974 wilderness recom- the North Junction road. The south access mendation (see the Alternative 4 — road, between OR 62 and the rim, would Summer map). The Grayback Road, which be zoned cultural and would restrict would be closed and restored if not motorized access to snowcoach only. eligible for the national register, would

58 Desert Pumice Creek Desert

Sphagnum Bog

Llao Rock CRATER

LAKE

NATIONAL

PARK

NORTH

Legend

Park Boundary Lake/Caldera Alternative 4 Transportation

Development Summer

Cultural Emphasis on Preservation & Cultural/Nonmotorized Restoration of Natural Processes Backcountry (Summer) Crater Lake National Park United States Department of the Interior . National Park Service DSC / FEB 05 / 106 / 20145

Desert Pumice Creek Desert

Sphagnum Bog

Llao Rock CRATER

LAKE

NATIONAL

PARK

NORTH

Legend

Park Boundary Lake/Caldera Alternative 4 Transportation

Development Winter

Cultural/Nonmotorized Emphasis on Preservation & Backcountry (Summer) Restoration of Natural Processes Crater Lake National Park United States Department of the Interior . National Park Service DSC / MAR 04 / 106 / 20146

MITIGATING MEASURES

The General Management Plan provides a interested parties to recover information management framework for the park. that makes sites eligible for inclusion in the Within this broad context, the alternatives National Register of Historic Places. include the following practicable measures to minimize environmental harm. These Archeologists would monitor ground- measures are common to all alternatives disturbing construction in areas where and are based on the analysis of impacts of subsurface remains might be present. If the alternatives presented in the previously unknown archeological “Environmental Consequences” section. resources were discovered during However, additional appropriate mitiga- construction, work in the immediate tion would be identified as part of imple- vicinity of the discovery would be halted mentation planning and for individual until the resources could be identified, construction projects to further minimize evaluated, and documented and an resource impacts. appropriate mitigation strategy was developed, if necessary, in consultation CULTURAL RESOURCES with the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office and any associated Adverse impacts on properties listed in, or Indian tribes. In the unlikely event that determined eligible for listing in, the human remains, funerary objects, or National Register of Historic Places, objects of cultural patrimony were discov- would be avoided if possible. If adverse ered during construction, applicable pro- impacts could not be avoided, these visions of the Native American Graves impacts would be mitigated through a Protection and Repatriation Act would be consultation process with all interested implemented. parties. Historic Structures/Buildings Mitigation includes the avoidance of adverse effects to cultural resources. All project work relating to historic Avoidance strategies may include the structures/buildings would be conducted application of the Secretary of the Interior’s in accordance with the guidelines and Standards and Guidelines for Archeology recommendations of the Secretary of the and Historic Preservation. Presented below Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of is a description of typical mitigation Historic Properties with Guidelines for measures. Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings. Typical Archeological Resources mitigation measures for historic structures/buildings include measures to avoid Wherever possible, projects and facilities impacts, such as rehabilitation and adap- would be located in previously disturbed tive reuse, designing new development to or existing developed areas. Facilities be compatible with surrounding historic would be designed to avoid known or properties, and screening new develop- suspected archeological resources. If ment from surrounding historic resources avoidance of archeological sites was not to minimize impacts on cultural land- possible, mitigation strategies would be scapes and ethnographic resources. developed in consultation with all

63 ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Cultural Landscape NATURAL RESOURCES

All project work relating to cultural General landscapes would be conducted in accordance with the guidelines and New facilities would be built in previously recommendations of the Secretary of the disturbed areas or in carefully selected Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of sites with as small a construction footprint Historic Properties With Guidelines for the as possible. Treatment of Cultural Landscapes. Typical mitigation measures for cultural New facilities would be built on soils that landscapes include measures to avoid are suitable for development. Soil erosion adverse impacts, such as designing new would be minimized by limiting the time development to be compatible with that soil is left exposed and by the use of surrounding historic properties and various erosion control measures, such as screening new development from erosion matting or silt fencing. Once work surrounding cultural landscapes to is completed, construction areas would be minimize impacts on those landscapes. revegetated with native plants in a timely period Ethnographic Resources Interpretive displays and programs, ranger The National Park Service would continue patrols, and regulations on visitor use to consult with park associated American would be used to minimize impacts caused Indian tribes to develop appropriate by visitors. strategies to mitigate impacts on ethnographic resources. Such strategies could Areas used by visitors (e.g., trails) would be include identification of and assistance in monitored for signs of native vegetation providing access to alternative resource disturbance. Public education, revege- gathering areas, continuing to provide tation of disturbed areas with native access to traditional use or spiritual areas, plants, erosion control measures, and and screening new development from barriers would be used to control potential traditional use areas to minimize impacts impacts on plants from trail erosion or on ethnographic resources. social trailing.

Museum Collections A long- term data gathering and monitoring program to evaluate winter use and Mitigation measures related to museum associated impacts would be implemented collections consist of preventative to ensure long- term protection of park conservation of a collection through resources. Management actions, such as proper storage, handling, and exhibit of restrictions on off- trail use, specific area objects as specified in the NPS Museum closures, or limits on party sizes, would be Handbook and NPS Director’s Order No. taken as necessary to address impacts. 24, Standards for NPS Museum Collections Management. Water Resources

Best management practices such as the use of silt fences, would be followed to ensure that construction related effects were

64 Mitigating Measures minimal and to prevent long- term impacts Areas used by visitors would be monitored on water quality, wetland, and aquatic for signs of native vegetation disturbance species. and the introduction of non- native species. Public education, revegetation of Equipment would be regularly inspected disturbed areas with native plants, erosion for leakage of petroleum and other control measures, and barriers would be chemicals. used to control potential impacts from visitors along roads, trails, or social Revegetation plans would be developed trailing. for areas impacted by construction activities or other human disturbance and A variety of techniques would be would include the use of native species, as employed to minimize or avoid impacts to well as salvaging of plant and topsoil. native vegetation and wildlife, including visitor education programs, ranger patrols, Air Quality and use restrictions (permitted activities, locations, and times) in areas with rare The best available clean fuel technology plants, vegetative communities, and/or for boat operations would be applied (as it sensitive wildlife populations and habitats. becomes available) to the extent feasible. Wetlands would be delineated by qualified Dust abatement measures such as watering NPS staff or certified wetland specialists and revegetation of disturbed areas, as well and marked if construction of new as requiring machinery to meet emission facilities were to occur near them. standards, would be employed. New developments would not be built in Native Vegetation and Wildlife wetlands if feasible. If avoiding wetlands is not feasible, other actions would be taken Facilities would be designed and sited to to comply with Executive Order 11990 use previously disturbed sites and to avoid (“Protection of Wetlands”), the Clean sensitive resources such as wetlands or Water Act, and Director’s Order 77- 1 whitebark pine stands to the extent (“Wetland Protection”). practicable. Other individual management actions to avoid or minimize the extent Special precautions would be taken to and severity of impacts would also be protect wetlands from damage caused by implemented, such as localized area or construction equipment, erosion, siltation, seasonal use restrictions and confining or and other activities with the potential to directing use through use of barriers, trails, affect wetlands. Construction materials and designated camping sites. would be kept in work areas, especially if the construction takes place near natural Restoration of native vegetative com- drainages. munities would rely on natural regeneration and succession as well as active Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive measures. The principle goal is to assist Species natural regeneration in reestablishing a sustainable native plant community. These species include those listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife as threatened or species of concern, and by the state of

65 ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Washington as threatened, endangered, or and park operations. Sustainability can be sensitive. Also included are species on the described as the result achieved by doing Oregon Natural Heritage Program List 1 things in ways that do not compromise the or 2. environment or its capacity to provide for present and future generations. Surveys would be conducted for special Sustainable practices minimize the short- status species before implementing any and long- term environmental impacts of action that might affect these species. developments and other activities through Facilities would be designed and sited to resource conservation, recycling, waste avoid or minimize adverse impacts. In minimization, and the use of energy consultation with the U.S. Fish and efficient and ecologically responsible Wildlife Service and Oregon Department materials and techniques. of Natural Resources, measures would be taken to protect any sensitive species and The National Park Service’s Guiding their habitats. Principles of Sustainable Design (1993), which provides a basis for achieving Management practices to protect, restore, sustainability in facility planning and and monitor special status species would design, emphasizes the importance of continue to be implemented, such as biodiversity, and encourages responsible closing areas of the park near nest sites, decisions. The guidebook describes restoring bull trout populations, and principles to be used in the design and monitoring species status. The National management of visitor facilities that Park Service would continue to work emphasize environmental sensitivity in cooperatively with the U.S. Fish and construction, use of nontoxic materials, Wildlife Service to identify and implement resource conservation, recycling, and appropriate mitigation measures to protect integration of visitors with natural and nesting areas within the park. cultural settings. Crater Lake National Park would adhere to these principles and Where visitor use near rare plant popu- especially strive to reduce energy costs, lations would occur such as along the rim, eliminate waste, and conserve energy and there is the likelihood of disturbance resources by using energy efficient and to plants, visitors would be alerted about cost effective technology whenever the need to stay on trails. If necessary, possible. Energy efficiency would also be populations would be protected by incorporated into any decision- making placement of signs and fencing. New process during the design or analysis and developments, including trails, would be value engineering, including life cycle cost sited to avoid disturbing or providing analysis, would be performed to examine access to rare plant populations. energy, environmental, and economic implications of proposed development. In SUSTAINABLE DESIGN addition, the park would encourage suppliers, permittees, and contractors to Crater Lake National Park would strive to follow sustainable practices. incorporate the principles of sustainable design and development into all facilities

ALTERNATIVES OR ACTIONS CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER STUDY

Some comments received during public snowmobile use along the Rim Road scoping suggested that the Park Service would result in conflicts with other users. should consider increasing the number of Snowmobilers also have a substantial roads in the park that are open to network of roads and trails available for snowmobile use. Currently, snowmobiles recreational use outside of the park. are allowed along the North Entrance Consequently, increasing the extent of Road to North Junction to accommodate roads open to snowmobile use in the park winter lake- viewing access. Other park was dropped from further consideration. visitors also enjoy being able to cross- The alternatives do examine the possibility country ski and snowshoe along the rim of improving access along the North without encountering motorized vehicles Entrance Road to accommodate both and to enjoy the solitude and quiet of snowmobiling and snowcoaches. winter lake viewing. Expanding

IDENTIFICATION OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

EVALUATION threatened and endangered species, water resources and, air In order to develop the preferred alterna- quality) tive, all of the alternatives were evaluated. To minimize the influence of individual • provide visitor experience (diversity biases and opinions, the planning team of visitor activities, interpretation used an objective analysis process called and orientation, visitor facilities and “Choosing by Advantages” (CBA). This services and visitor experience process, which has been used extensively values) by government agencies and the private sector, evaluates different alternatives by • limit effects on neighbors (park identifying and comparing the relative neighbors; local, state, and advantages of each according to a set of land/resource managing agencies) criteria. • improve operational efficiency One of the greatest strengths of the CBA (staffing, infrastructure, visitor system is its fundamental philosophy: facilities and services, and the role decisions must be anchored in relevant of commercial operators) facts. For example, the question “Is it more important to protect natural resources or Alternatives were rated on the attributes cultural resources?” is “unanchored,” relating to each of the factors just listed. because it has no relevant facts on which Then the advantages of the attributes were to make a decision. Without such facts, it compared. Alternative 2 served as the basis is impossible to make a defensible for the preferred alternative. It was modi- decision. fied to add aspects of alternatives 3 that provided the greatest advantages. The CBA process instead asks which alternative gives the greatest advantage. To answer this question, relevant facts were COSTS used to determine the advantages the Costs are also a consideration in the alternatives provide. To ensure a logical selection of a preferred alternative. A and trackable process, the criteria used to GMP provides a framework for proactive evaluate the alternatives were derived decision making, including decisions on from the impact topics in the EIS. visitor use, natural and cultural resource Alternatives were evaluated to see how management, and park development. The well they would plan prescribes resource conditions and visitor experiences that are to be achieved • maximize protection of cultural and maintained over time. Park develop- resources (archeological resources, ment is considered in general needs rather ethnographic resources, historic than in specifics. For the purposes of cost structures/buildings, cultural estimating, general assumptions were landscapes, and museum made regarding amounts and sizes of collections) development. These assumptions are then • maximize protection of natural carried across to all alternatives so that resources (biotic communities,

68 Identification of the Preferred Alternative comparable costs can be considered for costs are the estimated construction costs each alternative. of the alternatives. Demolition, labor, and materials for buildings, roads, trails, Costs identified in the GMP are not exhibits, and parking are included. intended to replace more detailed Estimated costs are based on costs for consideration of needs, sizes, and amounts similar types of development in other of future development. They should not be parks from the Denver Service Center used as a basis for money requests until Class “C” Estimating Guide. Life- cycle further analysis has been completed. Costs costs consider the costs of each alternative and items considered are shown in over a period of time. Life- cycle costs appendix C. include the costs of operating buildings, the staffing required, maintenance, and Comparative costs for the alternatives replacement costs of alternative elements. include both initial development costs and The life- cycle costs below are for a 25- total life- cycle costs. Initial development year period.

Table 2: Summary of Comparative Costs (FY 2002 Dollars) (Summarized from Appendix C) Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 (Preferred) Ongoing Actions $7,906,900 $7,906,900 $7,906,900 $7,906,900 and Projects Initial Development $ 3,800,000 $4,743,000 $3,934,000 $3,941,000 Costs Total Life Cycle Costs $ 3,800,000 $12,905,000 $21,495,000 $8,479,000 (Present Worth)

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

The environmentally preferable 6. enhance the quality of renewable alternative is the alternative that will resources and approach the promote the national environmental maximum attainable recycling of policy as expressed in section 101 of the depletable resources.” (Criteria 6 National Environmental Policy Act. In the was determined to be not National Park Service, the environ- applicable to this planning effort.) mentally preferred alternative is identified by (1) determining how each alternative Taken as a whole, the preferred alternative would meet the criteria set forth in section (alternative 2) would best satisfy the five 101(b) and (2) considering any remaining goals and is the environmentally inconsistencies between the alternatives preferred alternative. The preferred analyzed and other environmental laws alternative would enhance the park’s and policies (DO 12, 2.7E). Section 101 ability to carry out its mission through states that “… it is the continuing developmental and programmatic responsibility of the Federal Government activities while limiting the amount of new to … environmental impacts from development and use. Current visitor experiences 1. fulfill the responsibilities of each would still be available but with a greater generation as trustee of the depth and range, and there would be environment for succeeding increased opportunities for both generations recreational diversity and learning about park resources. Buildings would be 2. assure for all Americans safe, adaptively used for new functions thus healthful, productive, and maximizing visitor opportunities without esthetically and culturally pleasing expanding the developed areas. Thus the surroundings preferred alternative would satisfy national goals 2, 3, 4, and 5 to a high 3. attain the widest range of beneficial degree, ensuring for the long- term that uses of the environment without visitors coming to the park see an esthet- degradation, risk of health or ically and culturally pleasing area, provid- safety, or other undesirable and ing a wide range of opportunities for unintended consequences visitors to learn and enjoy the area with minimal adverse impacts, while preserving 4. preserve important historic, and enhancing the understanding and cultural, and natural aspects of our preservation of the park’s important national heritage, and, wherever natural and cultural resources and possible, maintain an environment fulfilling the Park Service’s responsibilities that supports diversity and variety as trustee of the environment (goals 1 and of individual choice 4).

5. achieve a balance between Alternative 1, the no- action alternative, population and resource use that would continue to preserve important will permit high standards of living cultural and natural resources (goals 1 and and a wide sharing of life’s 4), although it would not enhance the Park amenities Service’s ability to achieve these goals to

70 Environmentally Preferred Alternative the same degree as under the preferred Alternative 4 would provide the highest alternative. Educational, informational, degree of protection for the park’s natural and research opportunities would remain and cultural resources, primarily by limited by lack of facilities and programs removing nonhistoric facilities and and would thus not fulfill goals 2, 3, 4, and restoring areas to more natural conditions, 5 as well as the preferred alternative. expanding resource management programs and data collection, and Alternative 3 would provide the greatest generally preserving cultural resources at range and flexibility in visitor recreational the highest level possible, with opportunities, thus meeting goals 2, 3, 4, preservation of historic fabric a priority. and 5. However, alternative 3 would not Thus goals 1 and 4 would be best served by have the emphasis on both research based this alternative. Although some visitor educational opportunities and recreational opportunities would be enhanced, diversity that the preferred alternative particularly nonmotorized opportunities, would offer. Providing these opportunities overall there would be a narrower range and associated new facilities would also and fewer opportunities for all visitors to result in more extensive and dispersed fully enjoy the park and its resources resource impacts and a greater likelihood (goals 2, 3, 4, and 5) compared to the other that resource management would become alternatives. more reactive rather than proactive in addressing issues. Thus this alternative would not provide as great a degree of protection for resources (goals 1 and 4) compared to the preferred alternative.

TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 No- Action Preferred Alternative Emphasis on Enjoyment Emphasis on Preservation Emphasis on of the Natural and Restoration of Increased Opportunities Environment Natural Resources Concept Continuation of existing Education, research, and Visitors would experience Park management would be management learning about park re- the park resources through focused on preservation sources and the park’s recreational opportunities and restoration of natural national and international and education. processes. context would be emphasized. Recreational opportunities would be increased. Visitor Opportunities Existing visitor recrea- Provide additional ways to Recreational opportunities Environmental sensitivity tional opportunities and experience the park – form the basis for would serve as the primary interpretive programs in nonmotorized and low interpretation and interpretive theme. More the park would continue. impact Additional education. Experiences emphasis would be placed frontcountry areas would would provide a wider on self- guided and dis- provide enhanced range of visitor experiences covery education. interpretation and access to and reach out to a greater the backcountry. Additional diversity of visitors. A broad interpretive experiences range of programs would would offer a greater depth accommodate all ages and and range of information abilities and economic and based on new research. ethnic groups. Transportation/Access Grayback Road would Grayback Road would A shuttle around Rim Rim Road would be closed remain unpaved and open become a nonpaved trail to Village would integrate with between Cleetwood Cove to one- way traffic accommodate hikers and recreational opportunities and Kerr Notch. The Gray- bicyclists. Sections of East and interpretive programs. back Road would be re- Rim Drive would be closed An additional shuttle would stored to natural condi- in the fall. connect Mazama and Rim tions, if not eligible for the Village. East Rim Drive National Register of could be converted to one Historic Places. way.

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 No- Action Preferred Alternative Emphasis on Enjoyment Emphasis on Preservation Emphasis on of the Natural and Restoration of Increased Opportunities Environment Natural Resources Winter Access Winter access to Rim Same as no- action Winter access for Winter access to Rim Village in private vehicles alternative snowmobiles and Village would be via snow- would be on plowed road. snowcoaches would be coach from Mazama Winter snowmobile and enhanced by improved Village. Snowmobile and snowcoach access along grooming. snowcoach access along North Junction to the Rim North Junction to the Rim would continue. would not be allowed. Facilities Existing buildings and Same as no- action Same as no- action Facilities that are not facilities would be alternative. alternative. historic and not essential to adaptively used. park functions would be removed and the area rehabilitated. Administrative Park functions would Administrative and other Some interpretive functions Park- based functions remain in existing facilities functions that are not park- would be based in sur- would be retained in the inside the park. based, would be moved to rounding communities. park. Other functions surrounding communities would be moved to as needed. surrounding communities. Partnerships Partnerships with Partnerships would be Partnerships would be Partnerships would be academia and other targeted toward universi- formed with the tourism developed with other outside research interests ties, scientists, and educa- and hospitality industry. agencies and environmental would continue. tional groups. groups. Staffing Existing staff would Staffing increases in Staffing increases in Staffing increases would remain. research, education and interpretation and ranger increase in resource interpretation services. preservation, restoration, protection and education. Research Research activities would Facilitate research that is Same as no- action Research would be non- continue. focused, purposeful and alternative manipulative. significant to resources. New research would form the basis of a more substantive interpretive and educational experience for visitors.

TABLE 4: SUMMARY COMPARISON OF IMPACTS OF IMPLEMENTING THE ALTERNATIVES

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 No- Action Preferred Alternative Emphasis on Enjoyment Emphasis on Preservation Emphasis on Increased of the Natural and Restoration of Opportunities Environment Natural Resources Cultural Resources There would be no adverse Same as alternative 1, ex- Same as alternative 1, ex- There would be no adverse effects on archeological cept for museum collec- cept for museum collec- effect on archeological or resources, cultural land- tions. Increased volume due tions. Improved storage ethnographic resources. scapes, ethnographic to research and acquisition would have minor to mod- Overall, this alternative resources, or museum along with improved stor- erate benefits on the would have minor to collections. Rehabilitation age and workspace would curation and protection of moderate, long- term, of the superintendent’s have beneficial, minor to the collections. beneficial impacts on residence would result in moderate, long- term historic structures/ adverse, minor, permanent impacts on museum buildings. Impacts to the impacts due to some loss of collections. superintendent’s residence historic fabric. Adaptive use would be the same as of the structure would en- alternative 1. Increased sure its long- term volume due to acquisition, preservation and thus along with improved moderate, beneficial impact storage and workspace, on the building. would have beneficial, minor to moderate, long- term impacts on museum collections. Natural Resources The no- action alternative Greater emphasis on This alternative would The greater emphasis on would have a minor, long- research, partnering, and result in some adverse reduction in development term, adverse impact on visitor education under this impacts on some threat- restoration would con- biotic communities, alternative would indirectly ened and endangered tribute to improved re- primarily in existing areas contribute to moderate species or biotic commun- source conditions within of concentrated use and long- term beneficial effects ities. Long- term adverse the park, potentially having development. It would not on biotic communities and impacts from construction localized minor to more adversely affect and could could result in some and use of new facilities widespread moderate long- beneficially affect threat- adverse impacts on some would be localized and term beneficial effects on ened or endangered species threatened and endangered minor. Actions in this biotic communities. It if additional protection species. Long- term adverse alternative would have would also have positive

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 No- Action Preferred Alternative Emphasis on Enjoyment Emphasis on Preservation Emphasis on Increased of the Natural and Restoration of Opportunities Environment Natural Resources measures were imple- impacts from construction negligible, long- term effects on threatened and mented. The water quality and use of new facilities impacts on water quantity, endangered species and within the park would would be localized and water quality, and air their habitat. remain good; there would minor. Actions in this quality. be a negligible adverse alternative would have effect on water quality and negligible, long- term quantity due to continuing impacts on water quantity, maintenance activities and water quality, and air a slight increase in visita- quality. tion, but there would be no impairment to water resources. This alternative would have a negligible, long- term adverse effect on air quality from a small increase in vehicle use within the park. Visitor Experience Visitor access, recreational Increased visitor opportun- Alternative 3 would have a Alternative 4 would have a opportunities, education, ities for recreation, educa- major beneficial impact on moderate long- term ad- and visitor facilities and tional, and interpretive the diversity of visitor verse impact on the services would continue programs, and access to experience. There would be diversity of visitor oppor- unchanged in this alterna- park facilities and services a reduction in the range of tunities, visitor accessibility, tive. Potential increases in would provide major interpretive programs and on the ability of visitors visitation over the life of the beneficial impacts. Some resulting in moderate long to participate in educational plan could have moderate, visitors would experience term adverse impacts to and interpretive programs. long- term impacts on the minor long- term adverse visitor enjoyment of There would be moderate visitor’s ability to access impacts due to the seasonal interpretive programs. long term adverse impacts some areas of the park and closure of Rim Drive. The Access to park facilities and on visitor enjoyment of enjoy scenic vistas in quiet, same action would create services would increase park facilities and services. uncrowded conditions. major beneficial impacts for resulting in a major bene- a small number of visitors to ficial impact to visitors’ enjoy scenic views. The enjoyment of park facilities.

Park Operations Continuation of existing Benefits of reconfiguration Same as alternative 1 with Alternative 4 would result management would result of Rim Village and adaptive small additional amounts of in moderate beneficial in minor, long- term reuse of historic structures maintenance resulting from impacts to park operations. impacts to park operations. would be the same as new frontcountry trails and Reconfiguration of Rim alternative 1. More func- closure of a portion of Rim Village and adaptive reuse tions would be accomp- Drive to two- way traffic. of historic structures would lished outside the park, result in overall moderate, resulting in increased long- term beneficial difficulties in communi- cumulative impacts. cation and coordination. This would be offset by increased efficiencies in developing partnerships. Overall, this alternative would result in moderate, beneficial impacts on park operations. Concession Alternative 1 would have Same as Alternative 1. Increased partnering with Winter access to the rim Operations negligible impacts to commercial operators would be via snowcoach concession operations. would provide for rather than private vehicles, Reconfiguration of Rim increased opportunities for resulting in a moderate, Village, Mazama Village, concession/commercial long- term adverse impact . and Cleetwood Cove would operations, which would

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 No- Action Preferred Alternative Emphasis on Enjoyment Emphasis on Preservation Emphasis on Increased of the Natural and Restoration of Opportunities Environment Natural Resources have moderate, long- term, result in a moderate, long- beneficial, cumulative term beneficial impact. impacts.

Socioeconomic The no- action alternative Increased staff levels and Same as alternative 2. Moving some functions to would continue to have a moving some functions to nearby communities would minor to moderate, short- nearby communities would have a moderate impact on term, beneficial impact on have a moderate impact on the local economy and a the socioeconomic climate the local economy and a negligible impact on the of the gateway communities negligible impact on the regional economy. Ongoing and regional area due to regional economy. Ongoing and approved projects development projects. In and approved projects could result in moderate to the long term, the park could result in moderate to major, short- term, bene- would continue to be an major, short- term, beneficial impacts on individual important visitor attraction ficial impacts to individual firms and employees with and contributor to the firms and employees with some beneficial effects on tourism industry in the some beneficial effects on the region and adjacent three- county region. the region and adjacent communities. communities.

77 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

CULTURAL RESOURCES

ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES During 2001 a new archeological resource property type — grades and artifacts Prehistoric occupation of the Crater Lake associated with railroad logging was area could date to more than 10,000 years discovered and recorded during a ago, when extensive mountain glaciers contracted survey of prospective burn began to recede and hunters followed big units in the park’s northeast quadrant. game into present- day southeastern That area of the park was transferred from Oregon. The great eruption of Mount Winema National Forest to Crater Lake Mazama, more than 7,700 years ago, left National Park in 1980 and is part of a the area around it temporarily uninhabit- much larger logging railroad “network” able. Until Euro- Americans arrived in the developed during the 1920s. area, prehistoric populations from the eastern and western sides of the Cascade Although only a small portion of the park Mountains intermittently used the area. has been surveyed for archeological Prehistoric uses included hunting, resources, an archeologist working for the traveling to trade materials such as National Park Service has made some obsidian (volcanic glass used to make predictions about where archeological some stone tools), gathering resources sites are likely to occur. These sites include such as huckleberries, and practicing small base camps near water resources that traditional spiritual activities in the higher are indicated by scatters of stone tools; elevations and around Crater Lake. rock features, such as cairns or piles, stacks, and rings on mountain peaks and Archeological survey work has been high ridges (probably associated with conducted in the national park since the spiritual activities); and hunting sites mid- 1960s, and to date less than 1% of the throughout the park that are indicated by land area has been examined. Until 2001 isolated tools such as projectile points. To only ten archeological sites in the park had date, the archeological finds in the park been officially recorded. These consisted conform to the hypotheses set forth in this of one lithic scatter, five “vision quest” predictive model. rock feature sites, three rock feature sites constructed within the last ten to thirty None of the archeological sites in the park years, and one obsidian source area. have been evaluated for listing in the Complementing these sites were 18 National Register of Historic Places. isolated finds, most of which have been curated by park personnel. These isolates ETHNOGRAPHIC RESOURCES included two finds of obsidian raw materials (chunks or nodule); one isolated Three Native American groups bordered obsidian flake; a find of two crytocrys- the Crater Lake area on the west – Molala, talline (CCS) flakes; 11 obsidian tools or Upper Umpqua, and Takelma − while the tool fragments; and three CCS tools. The Klamath Tribes lived to the east. The tools are mainly hunting related imple- Klamath Tribes are a confederated tribe ments, consisting of ten point and point that includes people of Klamath, Modoc, fragments (projectiles or knives), with one and Yahooskin Paiute ancestry as well as utilized flake, two bifaces, and one descendents of the southern Molalas. unifacially modified flake. Indian lifeways, before disruption by

81 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Euro- American contact, involved seasonal traditional use activities. Some plant movements from lower- elevation winter collection and harvesting probably villages to hunt and gather a variety of fish, occurred as a tribal use within park plant, and animal resources throughout boundaries. Tribal staff have not yet their territories. Use of the Cascade Range, formalized a request to further evaluate such as the present- day Crater Lake these sites as traditional cultural properties National Park area, included the under National Register criteria, with the establishment of warmer season camps to exception of Huckleberry Mountain. The hunt animals, gather plant products such request was transmitted to Rogue River as huckleberries, and conduct traditional National Forest, although an ongoing spiritual activities. Raiding by various traditional use/ethnographic study Native American groups also occurred in indicates tribal activities associated with the park area. Huckleberry Mountain, the most significant harvesting area on the Spirit quests took Indian people to isolated immediate western edge of present- day places that were believed to possess the Crater Lake National Park, also included powers of certain physical forces and portions of the national park within the animals that, when acquired, brought Union Creek drainage. The ongoing success in activities such as gambling, traditional use/ethnographic study has romance, and healing. Those on quests several related components — an retreated alone to particular places to fast, appendix funded by the U.S. Forest stay awake for long periods, undertake Service for interviews with tribal members certain physical activities, and pray, while on Huckleberry Mountain, a separate waiting for an answering vision. Some study of anthropogenic fire regimes along activities included running, stacking rocks the park’s western boundary underwritten into high piles, and swimming in water by the Crater Lake Natural History bodies thought to possess a sought- after Association, and a separately contracted power. exhibit plan focusing on traditional use through consulting with park- associated An ethnological overview of the park tribes. found Crater Lake to have been an important place of power and danger, The National Park Service will continue to highly regarded as a spirit quest site. This consult with concerned Indian tribes to study referred to the lake as an important learn about possible traditional cultural sacred place or landscape; such sites are property sites and how to avoid them. called “traditional cultural properties” by Consultation with the Klamath Tribes will cultural resource managers, although the be extended to include National Park boundaries of Crater Lake as a traditional Service activities affecting “ceded lands” cultural property have yet to be defined — areas of the park within the boundaries and documented. Parts of the lake are established by a treaty negotiated in 1864 associated with mythical events and with the Klamath and Modoc and a group characters, and parts may be used for of the Northern Paiutes that ceded vast contemporary spirit quest rituals. territories to the federal government and created in compensation a reservation of Members of the Klamath Tribes have approximately 1.1 million acres. The treaty identified Mount Scott, Crater Lake, and established the federally recognized Huckleberry Mountain as important to Klamath Tribes and delineated “peak to

82 Cultural Resources peak” — Thielson to Scott and Scott to Community House, and a crenelated stone Pelican Butte — boundaries that include masonry wall that delineates the prome- most of the park’s southeast quadrant. nade and creates a parapet with three observaion bays of varying configurations HISTORIC STRUCTURES/ that extend into the caldera. BUILDINGS Individual features that are historically The documented historic structures/ important to the rustic character of the buildings in Crater Lake National Park are designed landscape at Rim Village are primarily associated with development of listed by category. The features listed the area as a national park. Most of the under the circulation category include historic structures and districts in the park roads and parking areas (vehicular represent the activities of the National circulation) and walkways and four hiking Park Service or the park’s concessioners. trails (pedestrian circulation) which begin These resources, which include some of at various points in the district. A prome- the nation’s best examples of blending nade extending 3,450 linear feet along the rustic architecture and other built features edge of the caldera is the primary pedes- with a national park setting, are located at trian circulation system for Rim Village. Rim Village and at park headquarters in The features listed under vegetation Munson Valley. include planting concepts, which illustrate the philosophy behind all plantings in the Historic Structures/Buildings Listed in district, and plant materials, which are the the National Register of Historic Places material forms of that philosophy. Small scale features include a variety of detail Rim Village. Rim Village Historic District elements — free standing boulders, stone was listed in the National Register of benches, and masonry details, such as Historic Places in 1997. The historic steps and curbing. district, which includes seven contributing structures and other individual features Munson Valley. The Crater Lake that comprise a designed historic land- superintendent’s residence at Munson scape in terms of form and function, are Valley was designated a national historic listed under Criterion A for their associa- landmark (NHL) in 1987 because it is an tion with the historical development of outstanding example of rustic architec- Crater Lake National Park and Criterion C tural design. According to the National for their association with site planning and Park Service’s Architecture in the Parks design by NPS landscape architects and as National Historic Landmark Theme Study outstanding examples of rustic naturalistic (1986), the superintendent’s residence design in the areas of architecture and “remains an architectural gem – a remnant landscape architecture. The structures and of an ambitious development project that features were constructed over a 15- year gave a strong architectural identity to a period beginning in 1921. large park.”

The seven historic structures in Rim The Munson Valley Historic District, Village are: Crater Lake Lodge, Sinnott which contains the park headquarters Memorial Building, Plaza Comfort Station, area, was listed in the National Register of Comfort Station behind the Cafeteria Historic Places in 1988 under criteria A (Comfort Station No. 4), Kiser Studio, and C. This nomination designated 18

83 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT buildings that contribute to the signifi- Historic Structures/Buildings cance of the district. The structures, which Considered/Determined Eligible for represent prime examples of rustic Listing in the National Register of architecture, were built between 1926 and Historic Places 1949, although most were designed and constructed between 1928 and 1933. Rim Drive. In June 2003 the Oregon state Subsequent landscape analyses have historic preservation officer determined expanded on the significance of this that Rim Drive was eligible for listing in district as a designed landscape and have the National Register of Historic Places. established its historical significance under More specifics concerning contributing national register criteria A, B (for its and non- contributing features will be association with significant persons), C, available as work on the current Rim Drive and D (for the significant information it cultural landscape report and a related has yielded or may be likely to yield). corridor management plan for the Volcanic Legacy Scenic Byway continues. The 18 historic structures that contribute Structures and features that contribute to to the significance of the historic district Rim Drive’s significance include the include: administrative building, ranger roadway’s width and right- of- way, dorm building, mess hall, warehouse, embankments, slopes, associated turnouts, machine shop, meat house, superin- and stone retaining and parapet walls. tendent’s residence (national historic Contributing features included several landmark), naturalist’s house, six trails (Castle Crest Wildflower, The employees’ residences, stone woodshed/ Watchman, Mount Scott, Sentinel Point, garage, hospital, transformer building, and and Discovery Point) already listed in the comfort station. cultural landscape inventory.

Watchman Lookout Station. The Jacksonville- to- Fort Klamath Military Watchman Lookout Station, located on an Wagon Road. In June 2003 the Oregon 8,000- foot peak on the west side of Crater state historic preservation officer deter- Lake, was listed in the National Register of mined that the Jacksonville- to- Fort Historic Places in 1988 under criteria A Klamath Military Wagon Road was eligible and C. Constructed during 1932 and for listing in the National Register of designed as both a museum and fire Historic Places. The Jacksonville- to- Fort lookout, the building is a unique example Klamath Military Wagon Road was con- of rustic architecture as applied to a structed in 1865 to improve transportation specialized building type. The National routes in the region. An intermittent, but Register boundary extends 200 feet away still ongoing, archeological survey is aimed from the lookout and trailside museum in at documenting features of the main route all directions. and spurs totaling some 22 miles in the national park. The main route of the military wagon road parallels State Highway 62 in places, but some segments veer some distance away from the highway, especially the spurs to Rim Village and Thousand Springs. Segments of the historic road are observable in or near various developed areas of the park,

84 Cultural Resources including Rim Village, Munson Valley, the Of these landscapes, Munson Valley, Rim abandoned Annie Spring campground, Drive, The Watchman, Castle Crest and Mazama Village. Potential character- Wildflower Trail, and Rim Village have defining features include roadbed been documented with a preliminary segments, retaining or embankment walls, statement of significance and an existing blazed trees, campsites, and artifacts conditions site plan. The superintendent’s associated with use of the road between residence has been documented with a 1865 and 1915. history narrative, full statement of significance, analysis and evaluation, and a Munson Valley Road. In June 2003 the consensus determination of eligibility by Oregon state historic preservation officer the Oregon state historic preservation informed the National Park Service that it officer. The aforementioned landscapes appears likely that the Munson Valley are in fair condition with the exception of Road is eligible for listing in the National the Castle Crest Wildflower Trail that is Register of Historic Places as a linear considered to be in good condition and historic district and that bridges associated the Lost Creek Campground and Rim with the road should be evaluated as Village landscapes which are considered to contributing or non- contributing within be in poor condition. that district. The Munson Valley Road extends from Annie Spring to Rim Village MUSEUM COLLECTIONS and is the same road described as the South Entrance Road in this document. The Crater Lake National Park museum collection consists of more than 200,000 CULTURAL LANDSCAPES objects divided into two major components — the natural history To date the National Park Service has collection and the cultural collection. The identified 13 cultural landscapes in Crater natural history collection consists of Lake National Park that are considered biological and geological objects, while the potentially eligible for listing in the cultural collection consists of National Register of Historic Places. These archeological, ethnological, historical, and landscapes include what are referred to as archival objects. “parent” landscapes and “component” landscapes: Lack of storage and workspace meeting National Park Service museum standards Parent/Component continues to frustrate efforts to improve Annie Spring care of and access to the collections. Due Lost Creek Campground to limited staffing, the cataloging backlog Munson Valley/Castle Crest continues to increase. Wildflower Trail, Munson Valley (Bridle) Trail, Superintendent’s Natural History Collection Residence Rim Drive/Grayback Road, Mount Collection and maintenance of Scott Trail, The Watchman documented natural history specimens Rim Village/Garfield Peak Trails and all associated records in the museum Wizard Island collection are designed to support the park’s research/resource management and interpretive programs. The natural history

85 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT collection includes representative contains about 1,500 insect and arachnid specimens of taxa found in the park, specimens representing approximately 750 voucher specimens, and environmental taxa. In addition, the museum collection monitoring samples. Currently, no contains some 340 zooplankton samples paleontological resources have been and about 40 specimens of other identified. Hence, the natural history invertebrates. collection is comprised of biological and geological specimens. Geological Objects. The park’s museum collection stores some 420 geological Biological Objects. The biological specimens onsite. These consist of collections include Monera and Protista, representative samples of rock types and plants and fungi, and animals. Collections formations exposed in the park. The U.S. made of the Monera and Protista, such as Geological Survey (USGS) office in Menlo phytoplankton samples obtained in Park, California, currently maintains the association with the park’s lake research, samples collected by and for Dr. Charles comprise a significant part of the park’s Bacon’s continuing research on the museum collection. national park’s geologic history. Due to the size of the collection, it will continue to The Applegate Collection, the core of the be stored and used outside the park unless park’s vascular plant herbarium, a more suitable facility is found. Evidence represents the baseline for the park’s indicates that other USGS research has vascular plants. In addition, the park’s resulted in the collection of geological museum collection includes ecosystem specimens, in particular collecting done by collections of plants and fungi from Dr. Hiroki Kamata of the Vancouver, research projects in the park’s Sphagnum Washington, office. An estimated 2,000- Bog and Pumice Desert areas and mosses plus, uncataloged geological specimens collected during lake research projects collected under previous collection since the 1930s. The museum collection permits are housed by USGS in offsite contains more than 2,000 herbarium repositories. sheets containing some 6,000 botanical specimens. Cultural Collection

The animal collection contains more than The purpose of the cultural collection is to 220 specimens of mammals, representing preserve a portion of the national park’s approximately 70% of the 52 mammal cultural heritage and to increase species known to occur in the park. The knowledge and appreciation of that bird collection contains more than 215 heritage through park research, exhibits, specimens, representing approximately and interpretive programs. This collection 70% of the 112 bird species known to contains materials from the disciplines of occur in the park. The reptile and archeology, ethnology, and history (which amphibian collection contains more than includes archival/documentary material, 375 specimens, representing all of the 14 photographs and negatives, decorative and reptiles and amphibians known to occur in fine arts, and historic objects). the park. The fish collection contains more than 60 specimens, representing all of the Archeological Objects. The museum five fish species known to occur in the collection contains more than 20 park. The insect and arachnid collection archeological objects, all occasional finds,

86 Cultural Resources which are primarily prehistoric and of institutions to record information on mineral composition. cultural and natural resources for the purposes of reference or exhibition) that Ethnographic Objects. The museum should become part of the museum collection contains several ethnographic archives is stored elsewhere in the park as objects — baskets of unconfirmed tribal well as at offsite locations. The museum origin, possibly from the Rogue River collection contains some subofficial region. records (defined as copies or duplicates of documents that are useful for reference, Historical Objects. Museum archival and administrative histories, interpretation, manuscript collections include personal and research) as a portion of the collec- papers, organizational archives, assembled tions of past NPS employees. The museum manuscript collections, resource collection contains 13 paintings and 20 management records, and subofficial framed photographs relating to historical records. figures and scenic views associated with the park’s history. The museum collection The national park’s museum collection contains some 30 historic objects, contains the assembled collection and includeing Steel’s signature stamp, personal papers of William Gladstone wooden benches constructed by the Steel, generally considered to be the park’s Civilian Conservation Corps, conference founder. This collection forms the core of table, and parts of the “Cleetwood,” the the archival materials already in the first boat used by explorers on the lake. museum collection. The Francis G. Lange Collection contains blueprints, tracings, LIST OF CLASSIFIED STRUCTURES drawings, sketches, correspondence, and photographs that highlight the rustic The List of Classified Structures (LCS) is a architecture at Crater Lake and other computerized, evaluated inventory of all parks. While the museum collection historic and prehistoric structures having currently does not contain any historical, architectural, or engineering organizational records, the archival significance in which the National Park collections of the Crater Lake Natural Service has or plans to acquire any legal History Association, Crater Lake interest. Included are structures that Community Club, or Mazamas would be individually meet the criteria of the appropriate collections to consider for national register or are contributing inclusion. The museum collection resources of sites and districts that meet currently contains more than 500 national register evaluation criteria. Also photographs and negatives, some 170 included are other structures — moved, lantern slides, and more than 100 reconstructed, and commemorative booklets/handbills/reports compiled by structures as well as structures achieving various collectors. The museum collection significance within the last 50 years — that also contains the theses of several are managed as cultural resources, because individuals who completed research in the of management decisions that have been park. A large quantity of resource made pursuant to the planning process. management records (defined as vital non- official records generated by NPS The following structures (with the employees, volunteers, contractors, exception of the Stone Walls Around cooperating associations, and other Reservoir, Garfield Peak, all of these

87 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT structures are individually listed in, or Naturalist’s Residence determined eligible for listing in, the Comfort Station national register or they are listed as Machine Shop contributing resources of national Transformer Building register- listed sites and districts) are listed Garage and Woodshed in the park’s LCS. These include Hospital Warehouse

Rim Village Rim Village and Munson Valley Sinnott Memorial and Sinnott 5 Drinking Fountains Memorial Plaque Kiser Studio Rim Drive Crater Lake Lodge Stone Retaining Walls and Pull- Mather Memorial outs Stone Guard Rail Behind Lodge Stone Curbs and Parapet Walls Watchman Peak Stone Stairs in Auto Parking Area Watchman Fire Lookout Walls and Stairs to Sinnott Stone Parapet Walls and Trail Memorial (Watchman Lookout) Plaza Comfort Station Comfort Station behind the Garfield Peak Cafeteria (Comfort Station No. 4) Stone Walls Around Reservoir Community House As a result of recently conducted Munson Valley condition assessments, possible additions Administration Building to the LCS include the Wineglass Patrol Ranger Dormitory Cabin (constructed in 1934) and the 6 Employee’s Residences Mount Scott Lookout (constructed in Superintendent’s Residence 1952). Because the Goodbye Bridge Meat House (constructed in 1954) has been identified Mess Hall by personnel of the Historic American Road Culvert Head Walls Engineering Record as the earliest glue- Trail Bridge lam bridge in the national park system, it is Rock Walls likely that this structure will be added to Lady of The Woods the LCS in the future.

NATURAL RESOURCES

BIOTIC COMMUNITIES at meadow edges where cold air tends to have a large ecological effect, lodgepole The flora of Crater Lake National Park is pine may be found in association with typical of the vegetation found throughout ponderosa pine. The white fir forest is the Southern Cascades. Generally, the concentrated in the southern portion of vegetation of the region reflects a mosaic the Park and has a major component of of forested areas and open nonforested ponderosa pine, as well as sugar pine. areas. Climate, topography, soil develop- Historic fires favored the survival of pines ment, and fire history all affect the over white fir, and most of these stands, composition and distribution of existing concentrated in the southern portion of plant communities. Because of this natural the park, were historically dominated by species diversity, the park is regarded by ponderosa pine. The Douglas- fir type is many as a sanctuary for native forest and not a common type in the park and occurs meadow communities, with limited intro- in relatively inaccessible areas in the ductions of non- native species. Approxi- southwestern portion of the Park, where it mately 20,250 hectares (50,000 acres) of occurs in a complex mixture with red fir, late seral forest exist throughout the park. climax lodgepole, and white fir forests. Fire suppression and historic logging Increasing in elevation, lodgepole pine activities have altered forest structure and forest type sometimes covers vast areas species composition throughout portions and is found from 5,000- 6,500 feet and is of the park and surrounding areas. associated with shasta red fir and mountain hemlock. Crater Lake National Park ranges in elevation from about 3,800 feet in the southwest Climbing still higher, to the very rim of corner of the park to just over 8,900 feet at Crater Lake, and up the slopes of the Mount Scott. Most of the rim area is situ- surrounding peaks, the forest becomes ated near the 7,000 foot elevation level, more scattered and the trees smaller and although, the Watchman and Hillman more stunted. Only a few species endure Peak areas on the western side of the lake the low temperature, high winds, and deep are slightly in excess of 8,100 feet. Vegeta- snows at these altitudes, the principal ones tion grades from a mixed conifer forest being mountain hemlock, and whitebark dominated by ponderosa pine at the south pine. Mountain hemlock stands are the entrance to high elevation mountain hem- highest elevation continuous forests at lock and whitebark pine forest at the rim. Crater Lake and become dominant at Other forest types include lodgepole pine, about 6000 feet. Whitebark pine extends white fir, Douglas fir, and shasta red fir. from about 7500 ft to the top of Mt. Scott, the highest point in the park (8,929 ft) and Ponderosa pine forest principally occurs is more an open woodland than a forest. on the southeastern edge and northeastern Whitebark pine is uncommon in the park corner of the park, up to elevations of and is in decline throughout its range due 5,500 feet. The ponderosa pine is to a non- native pathogen that causes commonly associated with white fir and in white pine blister rust in five- needle pines. the lower elevations with sugar pine and Information is being collected throughout some Douglas fir. Along the margin of the Cascades Range that will help land ponderosa pine communities, particularly managers to develop appropriate

89 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT management plans to provide for are: 1) soils on uplands, formed in air- fall preservation of this species. deposited ash and pumice; 2) soils on uplands, formed in air- fall deposited ash The abundant and diverse vegetation of and pumice over glacial deposits; 3) soils in the park constitutes a large block of valleys, formed in ash flow deposits relatively undisturbed habitat that consisting of ash, pumice and cinders; 4) supports various populations of native soils on cinder cones; 5) soils on upland wildlife species. The park has significant meadows with intermingled forests; and 6) populations of Roosevelt elk, black tail soils in seeps and on stream terraces. In deer, pronghorn, coyote, and porcupine. general, the soils have a low water holding Periodic sightings of black bear, pine capacity and nutrient levels. These soil marten, weasel, and mountain lion are conditions combined with a short, reported in the summer months. A variety relatively dry growing season make of other small animal species are seen in reestablishment of vegetation very the backcountry of the Park. difficult. Soils are in general not highly erodible. Soil properties are integral components of determining the species diversity, THREATENED, ENDANGERED, productivity, and regenerative capacity of AND SENSITIVE SPECIES vegetation types. Therefore soil resources are also included in this impact topic. The A number of species may be affected by Natural Resources Conservation Service the alternatives that are considered (NRCS) completed inventory and threatened or endangered in Oregon, that mapping of the soils of Crater Lake inhabit, or for which potential habitat National Park in 2001. Twelve soil types exists in the park. that fall into six general categories were identified within the park. The categories

Table 5: Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species Oregon Natural Federal Status State Status Heritage Species Program List*

Canada lynx Threatened Threatened Lynx canadensis California Wolverine Species of Threatened List 2 Gulo gulo luteus Concern Pacific Fisher Species of Sensitive Species List 2 Martes pennanti pacifica Concern Bald eagle Threatened Threatened List 2 Haliaeetus leucocephalus Northern spotted owl Threatened Threatened List 1 Strix occidentalis caurina Peregrine falcon Endangered List 2 Falco peregrinus Northern Goshawk Species of Sensitive Species List 2 Accipiter gentilis Concern Bull Trout Threatened Sensitive Species List 1

90 Natural Resources

Oregon Natural Federal Status State Status Heritage Species Program List*

Salvelinus confluentus (Klamath River and Columbia River population segments) Crater Lake rockcress Species of Candidate List 1 Arabis suffrutescens var. horizontalis Concern Shasta arnica List 2 Arnica vicosa Pumice grapefern Botrychium pumicola Threatened List 1 *List 1 contains taxa that are endangered or threatened throughout their range or which are presumed extinct. The status of taxa on this list represents its status throughout its range. List 2 contains species that are threatened, endangered or possibly extirpated from Oregon, but are stable or more common elsewhere.

Canada Lynx coniferous forests of Crater Lake that provide forage, denning, and travel habitat The park has over 34,000 acres of potential for these small carnivores park may be Canada lynx habitat, consisting of a important to their distribution and mosaic of old growth stands providing abundance in Oregon. Although denning sites and lodgepole forest and information on these species is limited, old meadow foraging habitat. Although the forest structure, including large woody park has conducted three years of debris for denning (both logs and snags), is extensive surveys for Canada lynx in the an important structural characteristic of park, none have been detected. There is habitat for these animals. Ongoing surveys evidence from the past suggesting that initiated over the past 5 years to determine lynx previously foraged in the park. The if wolverines are present in the park have Smithsonian Institute has a Canada lynx only detected pine martens, although a pelt in its collection that dates back to reliable siting of a wolverine was made in 1898. It was trapped along the Wood River 2000 by a state biologist visiting the park. just south of the park. Lynx sightings have been reported in the Klamath Basin as Bald Eagle recent as 2000, but have not been verified with other substantive evidence such as There is a historic nest site on Wizard photos, tracks, or hair. Island, and one currently active nest site along the shoreline of Crater Lake. Tour California Wolverine and Pacific Fisher boats are restricted from areas on the lake that are near the nest site. The Klamath These species all have large home ranges, Basin has over 70 eagle nest sites and these are capable of moving long distances, tend birds forage in the park. Bald eagles are to avoid areas with human activity or observed in the Park from early spring, development, and require relatively April or May, to fall, usually sometime in undisturbed habitats that are uncommon October. None are present during the outside of the park. Because of large- scale winter months. loss of natural habitats throughout both species’ ranges, the high- elevation

91 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Northern Spotted Owl areas on the lake that are near the nest site. There are many potential nest sites This old- growth dependent species is at available on the cliffs in the caldera. The the eastern end of its range in Crater Lake park conducts annual monitoring of falcon National Park. There are approximately habitat, to determine relative abundance 32,260 acres of lower elevation mixed within the park. conifer forests that are considered suitable spotted owl habitat in the Park. This Bull Trout habitat is found in patches throughout the park, with higher density of patches and The bull trout is the only known fish larger patch sizes southwest of a diagonal species native to Crater Lake National line connecting the northwest and Park. Bull trout are located only in Sun and southeast corners of the park. All currently Lost Creeks. Annie Creek is also within known nest locations have been found this species range and is considered bull within areas identified as potential habitat trout habitat, although bull trout do not on the west and south sides of the park, currently occur there. The park has an but occasional sightings have been active restoration program in progress. documented outside of these areas. The This program has resulted in elimination park conducts an annual monitoring of non- native brook trout from Sun Creek program to assess the nesting and 2000. Follow- up surveys indicate that bull reproductive status of owl pairs living in trout are responding well in the wake of the park. Since 1992, 17 owl pairs have their restoration in the creek. been tracked. Pumice Grapefern, Shasta Arnica, and Northern Goshawk Crater Lake Rockcress

This hawk is rare in Crater Lake National All three plants occur in isolated Park. Little is known of the specific habitat populations along the rim. Pumice requirements for goshawks in Crater Lake grapefern is endemic to raw pumice- National Park but the following general gravel substrates which are subject to forest management activities are helpful in harsh climatic extremes (intense sunlight, conserving habitat for Northern dessicating winds, cold nights, etc.). Shasta Goshawks: (1) retain the upper canopy arnica occurs on dry talus slopes of the trees at known or suspected nest sites; (2) rim, often with an eastern aspect. Crater retain down wood and logs for prey, Lake rockcress is found in dry, rocky particularly squirrel species; and (3) pumice and intermixed with sparse, open, manage stands for understory removal and mountain hemlock forest. canopy retention. WATER RESOURCES Peregrine Falcon Crater Lake is near the midpoint of the Peregrines nest on cliffs, often near water Sierra Cascade Mountain province of the and forage on a diverse avian prey base. Pacific mountain system. The park is Most habitat and reported activity in the influenced by Pacific Ocean weather. The park are from within the caldera. One majority of storm fronts that pass the active peregrine nest site exists within the north Pacific Coast each winter will result caldera. Tour boats are restricted from in moisture at Crater Lake. Summer

92 Natural Resources weather is generally mild with clear skies Crater Lake except for occasional thunderstorms, Crater Lake lies inside the caldera of which seldom occur with enough force or Mount Mazama and is surrounded by volume to produce damaging rains or hail. steep- walled cliffs that range from 500 to Daytime summer high temperatures 2,000 feet above the lake’s surface. At usually range from 60°F (15°C) to 70°F 1,943 feet, it is the seventh deepest lake in (21°C) and seldom exceed 85°F (29.4°C). the world and the deepest in the United Approximately 70% of the annual States and noted for its extreme water precipitation falls from November clarity and deep blue color. The lake has through March, with less than 6% from no surface outflows and only minor June through August. During the dry surface groundwater inflows as springs months — June, July, and August — an along the caldera walls. The main source average of only five days will have precip- of water for the lake is precipitation, itation greater than 0.10 inch. Snow has averaging 70 inches per year. fallen every month of the year. Annual snowfalls can total over 800 inches, and Results of the ongoing Crater Lake Long- long- lasting snow depths of 100 to 200 Term Limnological Program indicate that inches accumulate. Crater Lake is a complex and dynamic system. No unidirectional change in the Waters from the slopes of Mt. Mazama parameters monitored (lake and spring flow into the Klamath, Rogue, and Ump- water chemistry, nutrients, chlorophyll, qua River Systems. Runoff channels are primary productivity, phytoplankton, broad and poorly defined with rounded zooplankton, fish, water clarity, light contours. This is because surface runoff in penetration, and temperature) has been the Park from rain and melting snow is detected. The monitoring program has negligible. Water sinks almost immediately also provided valuable data and into the porous volcanic soils and glacial recommendations on a number of other debris and is released only slowly through management issues including the extent evaporation, plant use, seeps, and a few and significance of submerged springs, some of which emerge within the hydrothermal resources (relative to a caldera and flow directly into the lake. proposed geothermal power development along the park boundary), boat and Annie Spring, near the Mazama camp- automobile petroleum hydrocarbon inputs ground, has been the park’s water supply to the lake, water quality of springs since 1976. Water is pumped from the entering the lake below developed areas spring to storage facilities at Rim Village, along the caldera rim, and the potential Mazama Village, and Munson Valley. The impact of introduced fishes. source of water for Annie Spring is shallow groundwater originating as snowmelt; the AIR QUALITY spring’s output is reduced during years when the winter snowpack is low (Century Crater Lake National Park is a class I air West Engineering Corporation 1994). The shed designated by the 1977 Clean Air Act average low flow is about 1,565,000 gpd, or amendments. As a class I area, the park is 2.4 cfs. Annie Creek joins with the Wood subject to the most stringent regulations of River and eventually flows into the Kla- any designation. Results from the park’s math River system south of the park. air quality monitoring indicate that the

93 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

condition of the park’s airshed is good, surrounding Cascades and Klamath Basin. one of the cleanest airsheds in the U. S. A major air quality concern is the pollu- There is relatively little impact from fine tants from industrial areas introduced at particulates and visibility is high. The ele- Crater Lake in the form of acid rain and vation and geography make the park sus- snow. These pollutants threaten both land ceptible to winds, which tend to disperse and water resources, particularly the lake particulates and other pollutants. The clarity. clean air allows spectacular views of the

VISITORS AND THE PARK

OVERVIEW completely around the lake beginning in 1918 and visitors did so while the Rim Visitors primarily come to Crater Lake Drive was being built. In the winter of National Park to view the lake. As one of 1935 1936, the highway into the park from the first national parks, Crater Lake was Medford and Klamath Falls was kept the focus of early NPS publicity efforts to open, making the park accessible to promote visitation. Since the establish- motorists the entire year for the first time ment of the park in 1902, Crater Lake has in the park’s history. In the late 1930s, the been accessible by automobile, and the Rim Road was extended and improved park’s road system has enabled visitors to enhancing the visitors’ drive around the drive to scenic destinations within the lake during the summer months. Weather park, including Annie Spring, Munson continues to play a role in determining the Valley, and parts of the crater rim. In 1917 extent of park visitation and shaping the the Park Service issued an automobile visitor experience. guide map to the park’s features and successfully promoted visitation to the The number of park visits continued to park in combination with travel on the increase in the years before World War II, Southern Pacific Railroad. Early 20th and visitor use of the park expanded to century visitation to the park was also include winter snow play as well as encouraged by the National Parks summer season activities of nature- Highway Association with the viewing, camping, hiking, and auto- development of an automobile tour path touring. Following the war, as visitation to linking western national parks in a route the park returned to pre- war numbers, that became known as the Park Highway. improvements were made to the park’s In combination with road accessibility the roads and to visitor accommodations. park also offered visitor accommodations Annual park visitation reached a plateau of at campgrounds and concessioner lodging 500,000 in the early 1960s but can fluctuate which supported travel to Crater Lake as much as 25% from year to year. National Park. Visitation did reach a high near 700,000 in the 1970s. In 2000 park visitation was Visitation to Crater Lake National Park in 432,993. the early years was restricted by the relative isolation of the park and the long Based on a continuation of existing trends snowy winters that limited the travel in visitation, the number of visitors to the season to a few short months in the park is expected to increase slightly over summer. Due to heavy snow loads, roads the long term and continue to fluctuate into the park were often not in condition from year to year. It is anticipated that the for regular travel until July or August and bulk of visitation to the park will continue were frequently closed by October. With to occur in June, July, and August and that the development of Rim Village at the most visits would continue to be less than crater in the 1920s, visitation to the park four hours in duration. Any increase in steadily increased. It was possible to drive annual visitation would likely result in more visitors during peak- use days within the peak period, and would continue to be concentrated between 10:00 A.M. and 4:00

95 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

P.M. Developed areas in the park, survey, and 484 questionnaires were including Mazama Village, Munson completed and returned for a response Valley, and Rim Village, would continue to rate of 80.7%. The study found that a be popular and could see increased use. majority of visitors (71%) were from the Increases in annual visitation could also states of Oregon, California, and Wash- result in more visitor use on off- peak days. ington. International visitors represent 3% There could also be more visitation during of the total park visitation. Slightly over the limited spring and fall shoulder one- third (36%) of international visitors seasons. to the park are from Canada. The majority of visitors surveyed (65%) indicated that Crater Lake National Pak is a vital element they were either first- time visitors to the in the regional recreational environment. park or had not visited the park within the Many high quality recreational oppor- past two to five years. Over half of all tunities are available in or near the park visitors to the park (59%) are older than 36 and many visitors stop at the park as part years of age. Children, ages 15 or younger, of a north- south automobile trip. representing a fifth (20%) of the visiting Seventy- five percent of visitors polled in public. At least 70% of visitors to the park the 2001 visitor survey said their primary identified themselves as family groups, reason for visiting the area was to visit 14% as friends, and 8% as being by Crater Lake National Park (Crater Lake themselves. Less than 2% of park visitors National Park Visitor Study, 2001). The indicated that they were with a guided tour most common sources of information group. visitors use to plan a visit to Crater Lake National Park are travel guides and tour The 2001 survey found that Crater Lake books as well as word of mouth. Three National Park is principally a day use area. major rivers, the Rogue, Klamath, and Eighty- one percent of visitors to the park Umpqua Rivers, flow through the region. spend less than a day. For most visitors, To the east of the park seven wildlife the park is a stopover rather than a refuges are located in the Klamath Basin. terminal destination area, however, 75% The area offers summer and winter of visitors indicated that Crater Lake attractions, including cultural events, National Park was the primary reason for boating and rafting, hiking, fishing, their visit to the region and 39% of hunting, and skiing. Regional visitors tend respondents stay at least one night outside to visit other areas for specific activities, the park. Visitation to the park is highest but include Crater Lake in their itinerary. between Memorial Day and Labor Day. Fifty- six percent of visitors spend four or WHO VISITS THE PARK AND more hours in the park and 75% of all WHEN THEY COME visits occur during a five- hour period in the middle of the day (10:00 A.M. to 3:00 In the summer of 2001, the University of P.M.). Weather restricts access to the park Idaho Cooperative Park Studies Unit during the winter months. Rim Drive is gathered demographic information about closed by snow usually from mid- October visitors to Crater Lake National Park. The to early July. Vehicle access during the survey was conducted August 3rd through winter is maintained only from the south the 9th in the summer of 2001. A total of and west on Route 62 to Rim Village. Road 656 visitor groups were contacted, 600 of closures, particularly between Munson these groups agreed to participate in the Valley and the rim, are common during the

96 Visitors and the Park winter and closures of up to three days are VISITOR ACCESS AND not unusual. CIRCULATION

For the majority of visitors park roads DIVERSITY OF RECREATIONAL mold and define the visitor experience. OPPORTUNITIES The 2001 visitor use survey indicates that Crater Lake National Park is primarily a The 2001 visitor survey profiled Crater day use area for approximately 81% of its Lake National Park visitors to better annual visitors and that a stop at Crater understand the experiences that visitors Lake is a part of a north- south auto trip. sought and attained. Information was Most visitors arrive at the park during the gathered on what activities visitors summer months and auto touring remains engaged in, places visited, areas of the park the predominant visitor activity. In the visited, the use and importance of summer, automobile access to Crater Lake interpretation and park orientation, visitor National Park from the north is via facilities and services, and the importance Oregon Route 138, from the south the of selected visitor experience values. park is reached via Oregon Route 62 from Medford and Klamath Falls. The 2001 survey found that the most common visitor activities are scenic The park entrance at Annie Spring is 76 driving (94%), viewing Crater Lake (71%), miles from Medford and 56 miles from and photography (63%). The least Klamath Falls. The most used entrance common activity is overnight backpacking. into the park is the South Entrance Road Other visitor activities included swimming, from Highway 62, followed by the North shopping, watching the orientation film at Entrance from Highway 97. The most used the visitor center, and hiking down to the exit from the park is the North Entrance to lake at Cleetwood Cove. The most Highway 97. Both the south and north common activity during the winter is access roads lead to Rim Drive, a 33- mile cross- country skiing and the least road encircling the caldera rim. Numerous common winter activity is snowshoeing. pullouts and/or parking areas along Rim The most visited places in the park are Rim Drive provide scenic lake views. The Village (85%), West Rim Drive (70%), and Pinnacles Road is a 6- mile spur road from Rim Village Visitor Center (61%). East Rim Drive that leads to an area of volcanic Rim Drive receives about 25% less use spires known as The Pinnacles. The 10- than the West Rim Drive. Grayback Motor mile North Entrance Road crosses the Nature Trail is the least used road. During Pumice Desert. The 4- mile South the summer, there is moderate use of the Entrance Road follows Annie Creek short interpretive trails along the crater Canyon. The 3.5- mile gravel surfaced rim. Hiking, taking the boat tour, viewing Grayback Drive diverges from East Rim the lake, picnicking, attending ranger- lead Drive at Vidae Falls, crosses Grayback activities, nature study, and overnight Ridge, and connects with the Pinnacles backpacking were identified as less Road at Lost Creek Campground. important, but desired activities for future visits to the park. Rim Drive at Crater Lake National Park is linked to other Cascade Mountain volcanic areas by its 1997 designation by the Oregon Department of Transportation

97 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT as part of the Volcanic Legacy Scenic Rim Drive. Crater rim trails ascend Byway. The Volcanic Legacy Scenic Byway Garfield Peak, the Watchman, and Mount joins the Shasta Volcanic Scenic Byway at Scott, which is the highest point in the Highway 97 at the Oregon border. These park. There is moderate use of these scenic byways connect Crater Lake frontcountry trails. The 1- mile National Park with Lassen Volcanic Cleetwood Trail receives more use than National Park in Shasta County, California other rim trails because it provides the and extend the “volcano to volcano” only access to the near Mazama Village at connection. In 1998, the Federal Highway Godfrey Glen and Annie Creek. A short Administration named Rim Drive an All- trail at Munson Valley, the Castle Crest American Road. Rim Drive receives one of Trail, introduces visitors to park flora. the highest visitor uses in the park. During There is also a park headquarters historic the summer months scenic pullouts and walking tour available that involves a loop parking areas along Rim Drive can become trail that goes past the Lady of the Woods. crowded. Parking areas subject to Twenty- six miles of the Pacific Crest Trail crowding include Cleetwood, Phantom traverse the park. The Pacific Crest Trail Ship Overlook, and the Watchman. and the Bald Crater Loop Trail are the two Because it is located at the only access trails in the park designated for stock use. point to the lakeshore, Cleetwood Trail Backcountry trails, most originally built in parking is especially prone to congestion the 1930s, crisscross the backcountry because boat tour participants and hikers connecting with the Pacific Crest Trail. compete for parking spaces. Parking at The most commonly hiked trails in the Rim Village and Mazama Village is also park are Cleetwood Cove Lake Trail, congested during the summer months. Watchman Peak, and Castle Crest Wildflower Trail. The least hiked trail is Almost one- half of visitors (48%) the Munson Valley Historical Trail. Other participating in the 2001 survey said it was trails receiving moderate use are Wizard unlikely that they would be willing to ride Island, Rim Trail, Sun Notch, and a shuttle bus rather than drive their own Pinnacles Trail (NPS, Crater Lake NP vehicle on Rim Drive. Forty- six percent of Visitor Study 2001). Park facilities the visitors said they would be willing to accessible to visitors with disabilities ride a shuttle bus around Rim Drive if it include road scenic pullouts, the visitor included a park interpreter to inform them information building, and some as they traveled around the lake. Although frontcountry trails, primarily at Rim most visitors indicated they had not visited Village. Crater Lake in the winter, 51% said they would be willing to pay a modest fee to Boat tours on the lake were initiated in take an over- snow vehicle to the rim in 1907 to provide an opportunity for visitors winter. to better experience the lake and caldera. The boat tour operation was moved from Visitors can access a minimally altered the Rim Village area to Cleetwood Cove in environment from frontcountry trails. The 1960 to take advantage of a less steep grade main access to the backcountry is from the and a southern exposure for the access Pacific Crest Trail that bisects the park trail to the lake. The Cleetwood Trail is north to south. The park has approxi- about a mile long and provides the only mately 20 miles of frontcountry hiking access to the lake. From mid to late June trails, most of which are accessed from through September the concessioner

98 Visitors and the Park offers 1 ½- hour commercial boat tours of EDUCATION/INTERPRETATION the lake accompanied by an NPS inter- AND ORIENTATION preter. The boat tour begins at Cleetwood Cove and circles the inside of the caldera Education/interpretation and orientation with a stop at Wizard Island and a close- to the park are provided throughout the up look at a rock formation in the lake year, however most interpretative known as Phantom Ship. The concession- activities occur during the summer. During owned tour boats accommodate 48 the summer passive interpretation is passengers. There are seven boat tours a provided at observation areas along the day. Limited parking for the tours is rim. Sinnott Memorial, on a precipitous available at the rim, however the cliff overlooking the lake, provides visitors Cleetwood parking lot is often congested with unobstructed views of Crater Lake. and many visitors park along Rim Drive Interpretive talks are presented here when spaces in the parking lot are during the summer. Two visitor centers, unavailable. one at Munson Valley and one at Rim Village, provide orientation to the park Access to winter recreational oppor- during the summer. Interpretive activities tunities at the rim, including cross- also take place on boat tours operated by country skiing and snow play on the park concessioner, and on ranger- led unplowed roads, occurs during the winter walks and talks on frontcountry trails and months. The Munson Valley Road to Rim at a campground amphitheater. Village is kept open during the winter months. Rim Village remains the focal Education/interpretation and orientation point of visitor activity; however snow opportunities at the park are reduced levels usually reduce lake- viewing during the winter. Winter orientation to opportunities. Viewing the lake from Rim the park is provided at the Visitor Village in winter can be difficult because of Information Building at Munson Valley. snow levels and accumulated snow from The only visitor facility open year- round plowing operations. Currently a large at Rim Village is the concessioner - metal pipe culvert is placed on supports at operated cafeteria. Interpretative outreach the edge of the rim to create a tunnel programs are conducted throughout the through the snow bank allowing visitors a year, with a primary focus during the view of the lake. In heavy snowfalls the winter when programs are made available viewing window on the culvert can to schools. become obstructed. Snowmobiles are permitted on the North Entrance Road. A SOUNDSCAPES AND snowmobile study conducted at the park SCENIC QUALITY in 1997 estimated that about 3,500 snowmobile visitors entered the park from The 2001 visitor survey asked respondents November to April that year. The park to rate the importance of ten selected park issues incidental business permits for attributes. Attributes that received a high snowmobile and snow- cat tours along the importance rating include natural quiet / North Entrance Road, as well as for cross- sounds of nature and solitude. Eighty- country skiing operations within the park. nine percent of respondents to the 2001 visitor survey indicated that natural quiet and sounds of nature were either very or extremely important park attributes that

99 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT should be considered in preservation traffic lanes and parking areas to reach planning for Crater Lake National Park. lake viewpoints and scattered facilities. Seventy- five percent of participants stated Rim Drive hugs the caldera rim for much that solitude was either a very or an of its length although there are quite a few extremely important park attribute. The stretches where a view of the lake is not predominant visitor activity at Crater Lake possible from the road. Development of National Park is lake viewing. Ninety- four the Rim Drive and its associated overlooks percent of respondents reporting and pullouts at The Watchman, North sightseeing and scenic driving as very Junction, Steel Bay, Cleetwood Cove, important activities during their visit. In Grotto Cove, Skell Head, Cloudcap addition, 63% of visitors indicated that Overlook, Cottage Rocks, Sentinel Point, sightseeing and scenic driving would be Reflection Point, Kerr Notch, Phantom important parts of any future visits to the Ship Overlook, and Discovery Point has park. concentrated lake- viewing opportunities and trail access to a few areas. Excellent Expansion of parking at Rim Village has opportunities to experience natural resulted in an expanse of asphalt and a soundscapes and scenic views are concentration of visitors at the rim. During abundant in the backcountry, but a view of the summer pedestrians at Rim Village are the lake is always shared with the sight and constantly exposed to the sight, sound, sounds of motor vehicle traffic. and smell of vehicle traffic and must cross

100

OPERATIONS

PARK OPERATIONS support the work of this division throughout the year. Crater Lake National Park is managed by a park superintendent headquartered at The Resource Preservation and Research Munson Valley. The superintendent is Division is responsible for preserving and responsible for the day- to- day operations managing the natural resources of the park of the park and is supported by a and coordinating scientific research. They concessions manager and secretary. are responsible for resource inventory, Management of the park is organized into monitoring and evaluation, impacts miti- the following divisions: administration, gation, restoration, and wildlife manage- resource and visitor protection, resource ment. Facilities necessary to support preservation and research, maintenance, resources management activities and and interpretation / cultural resources. programs include office and storage space, Staff in each division is stationed at park vehicle parking, and employee housing. headquarters. Satellite offices are also Eight permanent or term and approxi- maintained by some divisions at Klamath mately 10 seasonal Crater Lake employees Falls and at Ashland. are currently assigned to the Resource Preservation and Research Division. Administrative functions, including Several of the natural resource manage- payroll, budget and finance, procurement, ment staff also work at offices in Klamath contracting, property management, Falls and Ashland, Oregon. information technology services, and human resources, are accomplished at Maintenance staff conducts preventive park headquarters. There are eight and corrective maintenance on park infra- administrative personnel. structure and equipment. Park infrastructure includes water, wastewater treatment The Resource and Visitor Protection facilities, electric utilities, roads, parking, Division manages for resource protection campgrounds, administrative and public and visitor safety and experience. Respon- buildings and structures within the park, sibilities include various visitor manage- and employee housing. All maintenance ment and resource protection duties, operations are based in Munson Valley. including enforcing laws, resolving disputes, providing emergency medical The Maintenance Division includes the services, fighting structural fires, managing following functions: visitor use in the park, building and main- Buildings and utilities function taining trails, educating visitors about park maintains structures, housing, resources, and performing search- and- campgrounds, and park utility rescue activities. Staff in this division also infrastructure. participate in resource management Roads function has responsibility for activities, including fire and wilderness preventive and corrective maintenance management. There are 12 permanent on NPS administered roads. An resource and visitor protection staff important function of this branch is employees. Another 35 seasonal employ- snow removal on park roads and ees work for the division during the sum- responsibility for equipment mer months, and about 50 volunteers maintenance.

101 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

led walks, talks, boat tours, and children’s activities. Snowshoe walks are conducted for the public and school groups during the winter.

Facilities associated with interpretive programs include two visitor centers, one public museum with interpretive exhibits, one building for hosting programs and exhibits, and one amphitheatre. Other facilities include the park library and the museum and archives collection. One

employee provides division management and is split between the disciplines of interpretation and education and cultural resources. Two full- time employees are currently assigned to interpretation and education, while the park historian and museum curator focus on cultural resource functions. Typically this division hires approximately 12 seasonal Facilities that support the needs of the interpretive employees. A seasonal maintenance staff include equipment and archeologist is hired when project funding replacement parts storage, vehicle main- is available. tenance and repair shops, parts and supplies storage, warehouse facilities, CONCESSION OPERATIONS boneyards, and office space. Approxi- mately 20 permanent and 20 seasonal All concession facilities and services at employees are currently assigned to the Crater Lake National Park take place at Facilities Management Division. Rim Village, Mazama Village, and Cleetwood and are operated by a private Interpretation and Cultural Resources concessioner. The park’s concessioner is Management staff facilitates connections Xanterra Parks and Resorts. Snacks, meals, between the public and park resources and gifts are sold daily in Rim Village. through programs, exhibits, written During the summer season at Mazama material, and the park’s website. This staff Village, camper supplies, gifts, and snacks also provides for the preservation and are sold. The summer season concession management of the park’s cultural operations is generally from mid- May resources, including historic structures, through mid- October. Depending on cultural landscapes, museum and archives snow conditions, the concessioner may collection, and archeological sites. open earlier in the spring or stay open later in the fall. Traditionally, the concessioner Interpretive programs are presented in the generates more than 90% of its total sales park on a regular schedule during the during the summer season. In the winter, summer months, and educational outreach most concessioner facilities are closed by programs are conducted throughout the heavy snow. Although the road to Rim year. Summer programs include ranger- Village is maintained and plowed by the

102 Operations park, the low visitation and frequent parking area, a nonpermanent ticket sales weather closures necessitate the reduction structure, and a portable restroom at the in the level of service at the rim. The rim. A trail descends the side of the caldera cafeteria and gift shop, located in one to the lake. The concessioner offers multipurpose building, offer limited food commercial boat tours of the lake and gift shop services, and also serve as the accompanied by NPS interpreters. The concessioner warehouse and storage concessioner owns and operates three 48- facility. Winter hours at the Rim Village passenger boats from mid- to late June cafeteria and gift shop are 10:00 A.M. to through mid- September. There are seven 4:30 P.M. snow conditions permitting. No scheduled boat tours, plus one trip to concessioner- provided lodging is Wizard Island for passenger pickup. available in the park during the winter. During the winter months the boats and other equipment are stored at docking Crater Lake Lodge, located at the crater facilities on Wizard Island. rim, offers summer season accommodation and dining from mid- May to PARK INFRASTRUCTURE late September or mid- October. The AND FACILITIES lodge has 71 guestrooms and a 78- seat restaurant and bar. The concessioner Crater Lake National Park’s List of employs approximately 240 staff, many of Classified Structures (LCS) includes 38 whom are housed in an employee structures ranging from comfort stations dormitory on the east side of Rim Village. to the Crater Lake Lodge. The LCS is an The concession operation at Mazama evaluated inventory of all historic and Village includes operation of the 213- site prehistoric structures that have historical, Mazama Campground and a camper architectural and/or engineering services building providing a grocery and significance within the park. Twelve listed sundries store for camper supplies, coin- structures are located at Rim Village. operated public showers and laundry, a These include Kiser Studio Building, commercial laundry, and limited snack Sinnott Memorial, Comfort Station, Walls food services. The store at Mazama Village and Stairs to Sinnott Memorial, Sinnott is open from early June to mid- October. Plaque, Stone Curbs and Parapet Walls, The camper services building serves as the Stone Guard Rail behind Lodge, Mather concessioner’s only laundry facility for the Memorial Drinking Fountains, and Crater lodge and the concessioner- constructed Lake Lodge. Twenty- two of the listed 40- unit Mazama Village Motor Inn. Other structures are located in the Munson concession- operated visitor services at Valley Historic District. These include the Mazama Village include a gasoline station. Administration Building, Ranger Like Rim Village, Mazama Village is open Dormitory (Steel Information Center), only in the summer . Lodging at the motel Mess Hall, Warehouse, Machine Shop, is available from early June to mid- Meat House, superintendent’s residence, October. Naturalist’s Residence, six employee residences, garage and woodshed, Cleetwood is on the north shore of Crater hospital, Transformer Building, Comfort Lake and is accessed from Rim Drive. It is Station, and Lady of the Woods. Also about 6 miles east of the North Junction located in Munson Valley is the main where Rim Drive intersects the North maintenance facility containing vehicle Entrance Road. Cleetwood includes a repair and parking bays, shops, and

103 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT equipment storage. Permanent housing is septic system near Lost Creek Camp- located at Steel Circle near the Munson ground to serve Lost Creek Campground. Valley Historic District. There are seven duplex housing structures representing a Crater Lake National Park has approxi- total of 14 residences along Steel Circle as mately 84 miles of roads. The road system well as a community building. Across the within the park is generally in fair South Entrance Road from Steel Circle is a condition. The system has some safety and group of eight duplexes with 16 residential operational issues, including areas that are units built in the 1970s and currently used difficult to clear of snow. Seventy miles of primarily for seasonal housing known as primary roads, of which the circuit around Sleepy Hollow. Structures located on or the rim accounts for a little over 32 miles, near Rim Drive include Watchman Fire comprise the bulk of the road system. Lookout, Stone Parapet Walls and Trail at Secondary and paved service roads in the Watchman, and Stone Retaining Walls and park amount to about 14 miles. The Pull Outs along Rim Drive. primary roads in the park were designed and constructed to provide visitor access Annie Spring, located near the Mazama to the park’s scenic features which are campground, has supplied high- quality mostly concentrated along the rim of water to the park since the 1870s. Water is Crater Lake. In the winter snowplowing pumped from the spring to storage operations keep access to the rim open via facilities at Rim Village, Mazama Village Oregon Route 62 and the Munson Valley and Munson Valley. The park operates road to the rim. three water treatment facilities. Two are located under the bridge near the Annie There are 97 miles of maintained hiking Spring water intake and one is located at trails in the park. Of this total, 77 trail Lost Creek Campground. The two Annie miles are designated backcountry trails, Springs water treatment facilities serve including 33 miles of the Pacific Crest Trail Mazama Village, Munson Valley, and Rim (PCT) which bisects the park from north Village. The Lost Creek Campground to south. The remaining 20 miles of water treatment facility serves only Lost maintained trails are frontcountry trails. Creek Campground. The park operates In addition to the maintained trails, there two sewage treatment systems. One is are also 63 miles of unmaintained south of Steel Circle and serves Park backcountry trails. Trails are only Headquarters and Rim Village. This maintained during the summer months. In system has four lagoons. The second the winter, when Rim Drive is covered sewage treatment system is located with snow, it is used for cross- country southeast of the Mazama Dormitory skiing and in effect becomes a designated Complex and serves all of Mazama Village. winter- use trail. This system has three lagoons. There is a

104

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

INTRODUCTION impacts from the action alternatives would have the most impact on these counties. Crater Lake National Park is located in Such impacts are marginalized farther southwest Oregon astride the Cascade from the park, Mountain Range. This rectangular shaped park is completely bordered by state and Klamath Falls is the county seat of national forests. Rouge River National Klamath County and is about 50 miles Forest abuts the park on the west and south of the park via route 62 and US 97. parts of the north and south sides. Medford (county seat of Jackson County) Umpqua National Forest forms the middle is about 75 miles southwest of the park, third of the park’s northern boundary. traveling west and then southwest on Winema National Forest borders the park route 62. Visitors traveling north and then on part of the north, almost all the east, west about 100 miles on route 138 reach and middle part of the south border. Sun Roseburg, also a county seat. These three Pass State Forest on southeast completes cities are primary business, transportation, the public forest encirclement. Sky Lakes and service centers in their respective Wilderness (part of the Rouge River and counties. Winema National Forests) is on the southern edge of the park and Mount A number of smaller unincorporated Thielsen Wilderness (part of the Umpqua communities — Beaver Marsh, Diamond and Winema National Forests) lies to the Lake, Fort Klamath, Prospect, and Union north. Creek — are much closer to the park. Beaver Marsh is northeast of the park Access to the park is via State Route 138 about 19 miles from the north entrance.1 through the north entrance or by State The store and gas station have been closed Route 62 from the west or south. The road for over three years. Less that 150 people from the north entrance and the crater rim live in Beaver Marsh. Diamond Lake is a road are open only during the summer resort community about 5 miles north of season due to heavy snows. Highway 62 is the north entrance. The resort structures open year round. The Pacific Crest and summer homes are within the National Scenic Trail runs north and south Umpqua National Forest on land leased through the park with side trails leading to from the U.S. Forest Service. Year- round Crater Lake. residents are estimated to be less that 20. Fort Klamath is approximately six miles Most of the park is contained in west- south of the park astride Highway 62. central Klamath County with small areas There is a store and gas station. The 60 spilling over into Douglas and Jackson permanent residents are joined by summer Counties. The communities in these folks to increase the population to about counties are closest to the park’s 200. Prospect is 12 miles south of Union boundaries and serve as gateways to the Creek and about 20 miles from the park’s park, providing a variety of goods and services for visitors to the park. The park’s 1 Mark, Steve. May 2003. E- mail communication location makes the three- county area the forwarded on May 27, 2003. Most of the economic region under consideration for information in this paragraph represents his this planning effort. Any socioeconomic personal knowledge of the area surrounding the park.

105 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT west entrance. A high school, several (managed by the U.S. Forest Service). This churches, a gas station, a store, and three three- county area had a combined restaurants are found here. This is the population of more than 345,000 persons largest of the local gateway communities; in the year 2000 (table 6). The three county having a population estimated at between seats accounted for 102,633 of these 200 and 250 persons. Union Creek is also a residents. The rest are scattered among resort and summer home community many smaller communities. The located within Rogue River National population of the state of Oregon in 2000 Forest on leased federal land managed by was more than 3.4 million, which ranked it the U.S. Forest Service. The historic resort 27th in the nation. The affected three- complex contains a store and there is also county area contains about 10.1% of the a restaurant nearby. Some government state’s population. This area grew at a housing is found within this community. much lower rate (15.6% compared to Approximately 50 permanent residents 20.4%) than the state as a whole during the live here. 1990s. Only Jackson County, with an annual growth rate of 2.2%, led by Population Medford growing 34.5% over the decade, outpaced the state average (1.9%) for The three counties in the affected region growth. Klamath and Douglas Counties for socioeconomics are predominantly had annual growth rates of only 1.0% and rural, with large areas in federal ownership 0.6%. as a national park and national forests

TABLE 6: AFFECTED AREA POPULATION FOR COUNTIES AND SELECTED TOWNS

% Change Annual rate Counties/Cities 1990 2000 1990 to 2000 of growth

Douglas County 94,649 100,399 6.1% 0.6% Roseburg 17,032 20,017 17.5 1.6 Jackson County 146,389 181,269 23.8 2.2 Medford 46,951 63,154 34.5 3.0 Klamath County 57,702 63,775 10.5 1.0 Klamath Falls 17,737 19,462 9.7 0.9 Three- County Region 298,740 345,443 15.6 1.5 Oregon 2,842,321 3,421,399 20.4% 1.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2000a and 1990a.

106 Socioeconomic Environment

MAJOR INDUSTRIES BY EARNINGS were the sectors employing the most workers (about 43% of the total) in the Earnings are the sum of wage or salary region. Retail trade accounted for the most income and the net income from self- positions in Klamath and Jackson employment. A person’s earnings Counties (12.1% and 15.9% of the total). represent the amount of income received Retail trade was a close second in Douglas regularly before deductions for income County providing 6,365 jobs (11.9% of the taxes, social security, etc. In 2001, the most total) verses manufacturing’s 6,365 (12.3% important industries for earnings in of the total). Over 55% of the region’s jobs Douglas County were Manufacturing, were in Jackson County; less than 18% Local Government, and Health Care and were in Klamath County. Social Assistance. These industries accounted for 44.2% of the total of $1.34 UNEMPLOYMENT billion in earnings by county residents. Earnings for Klamath County were Oregon had an unemployment rate in 1990 concentrated to a somewhat lesser degree that matched the national average (34.4% of the total of $0.79 billion) in unemployment rate of 5.6 % (see table 7). these same three industry sectors. Jackson Unfortunately, each county had County had the most earnings at $2.82 significantly higher unemployment rates. billion; which represented 57% of all In fact, all three counties have had higher earnings in the three- county region. The unemployment rates than the state and largest sectors in Jackson County were national averages for the selected years. health care and social assistance, retail The national average fell to 4.0% in 2000. trade, and manufacturing. The regional However the next year it rose to 4.8%. total earnings were $4.95 billion. Douglas County contributed $1.34 billion or 27% Unemployment rose and fell for the three and Klamath County accounted for about counties and Oregon during the 1990s and 16%, or $0.79 billion. continued this pattern in 2000 and 2001. In 2001 the state average and that of Jackson Regionally, the top industry sectors were County both rose to 6.3%. Statewide, this health care and social assistance (12.6% of unemployment rate represented about the total), manufacturing (12.3% of the 115,300 persons being out of work. For total), local government (11.5% of the Jackson County, out of a workforce of total), and close behind is retail trade (at 91,900, nearly 5,800 people were looking 11.0% of the total). This region accounted for work but not finding suitable for nearly 7.2% of Oregon’s employment. Douglas and Jackson $69,035,322,000 total earnings in 2001. Counties’ unemployment figures rose to 9.0% (almost 4,000 people) and 9.5% MAJOR INDUSTRIES BY (nearly 2,700 people). With over 12,000 EMPLOYMENT persons out of work, the regional unemployment rate for 2001 was over The affected region provided nearly 7.5%, significantly higher than the state or 187,000 full- and part- time jobs in 2001. national averages. This figure represented about 9% of the state total of 2.1 million jobs. Retail trade, health care and social assistance, manufacturing, and local government

107 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

TABLE 7: UNEMPLOYMENT RATES FOR SELECTED YEARS Area 1990 1993 1995 1997 2000 2001 Douglas County 10.2% 11.8% 8.0% 8.8% 7.8% 9.0% Jackson County 6.8 8.6 6.5 7.6 5.3 6.3 Klamath County 9.1 10.9 7.4 9.8 8.1 9.5 Oregon 5.6 7.3 4.8 5.8 4.9 6.3 United States 5.6% 6.9% 5.6% 4.9% 4.0% 4.8% Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics 2003

POVERTY three counties were all higher than the state rates. For the most part the poverty The national average for persons living in rates in the counties were also higher than poverty in 1989 was 13.1% (table 8.). This the national figures. In 1999 poverty in the figure represented 31.7 million people out three counties ranged from one person in of a population of 242.0 million. The eight in Jackson County to one person in poverty rate for Oregon was more than six in Klamath County. These figures seven- tenths of a percentage point lower, represented more than 47,500 people at 12.4%. Over the years shown, the living in poverty in the region. This region poverty rate for Oregon was consistently accounted for more than 12.5% of all lower than the national rates. For the people living in poverty in Oregon in 1999. selected years, the poverty rates in the

TABLE 8: PERCENT OF PEOPLE LIVING IN POVERTY

Area 1989* 1993** 1995** 1997** 1999* Douglas County 14.9% 15.6% 16.0% 14.6% 13.1% Jackson County 13.2 14.4 14.6 13.8 12.5 Klamath County 16.7 17.1 17.2 15.9 16.8 Oregon 12.4 13.2 12.5 11.6 11.6 United States 13.1% 15.1% 13.8% 13.3% 12.4% * = Census Data ** = Census Estimates Source: US Census Bureau

108

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

INTRODUCTION

The National Environmental Policy Act assessed for each alternative. For each (NEPA) mandates that environmental impact topic, there is a description of the impact statements disclose the environ- positive (beneficial) and negative (adverse) mental effects of proposed federal actions. effects of the alternative, a discussion of In this case, the proposed federal action the cumulative effects when this project is would be the adoption of a general considered in conjunction with other management plan for Crater Lake actions occurring in the region, and a brief National Park. This “Environmental conclusion. Consequences” chapter analyzes the potential effects of four management The no- action alternative (continue alternatives on cultural resources, natural current management) sets the baseline of resources, the visitor experience, park and existing impacts continued into the future concession operations, and the socioeco- against which to compare impacts of nomic environment. By examining the action alternatives. The three action environmental consequences of all alternatives were then compared to the alternatives on a relative basis, decision- no- action alternative to identify the makers can decide which approach creates relative magnitude and intensity of the most desirable combination of the potential impacts that would occur as a greatest beneficial results with the fewest result of changes in park facilities and adverse effects on the park. management. At the end of each alternative there is a brief discussion of The alternatives provide broad manage- unavoidable adverse impacts; irreversible ment directions. Because of the general and irretrievable commitments of nature of the alternatives, the potential resources; and the relationship of short- consequences of the alternatives are term uses of the environment and the analyzed in similarly general terms using maintenance and enhancement of long- qualitative analyses. Thus, this environ- term productivity. A brief summary of the mental impact statement should be impacts of each alternative was provided considered a programmatic analysis. in table 6 at the end of the “Alternatives, Consistent with the National Environ- Including the Preferred Alternative” mental Policy Act, the National Park chapter. Service would conduct additional environmental analyses with appropriate documentation before implementing site- specific actions.

The existing conditions for all of the impact topics analyzed here were identified in the “Affected Environment” chapter. All of the impact topics are

111

METHODOLOGY FOR ANALYZING IMPACTS

The planning team based the impact Context refers to the setting or area within analysis and the conclusions in this which an impact would occur, such as the chapter largely on information provided affected region or locality. In this docu- by experts in the National Park Service, ment most impacts are either localized park staff insights and professional (site- specific) or parkwide. Cumulative judgments, and on the review of existing impacts are either parkwide or regional literature and studies. The team’s method (e.g., biotic community impacts). of analyzing impacts is further explained below. It is important to remember that it Impact duration refers to how long an is assumed in the analyses that the impact would last. The planning horizon mitigation measures described in the for this General Management Plan is “Alternatives, Including the Preferred approximately 20 years. Unless otherwise Alternative” chapter would be applied to specified, in this document the following minimize or avoid impacts. If these terms are used to describe the duration of measures were not applied, the potential the impacts: for resource impacts and the magnitude of those impacts would increase over those Short term: The impact would be described here. temporary in nature, lasting a year or less, such as impacts associated with The environmental consequences for each construction impact topic were defined based on impact type, intensity, context, and duration. Long term: The impact would last more Cumulative effects also were identified, than one year and could be permanent but are discussed later in this section. in nature, such as the loss of soil due to the construction of a new facility Effects can be either adverse or beneficial for the topic being analyzed and are referred to as impact type. The effects also IMPACTS TO CULTURAL can be direct or indirect. Direct effects are RESOURCES AND SECTION caused by an action and occur at the same 106 OF THE NATIONAL time and place as the action. Indirect HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT effects are caused by the action and occur later or farther away, but are still In this environmental impact statement, reasonably foreseeable. impacts to archeological and ethnographic resources, historic structures/buildings, Impact intensity refers to the degree or cultural landscapes, and museum magnitude to which a resource would be collections are described in terms of type, positively or negatively affected. Each context, duration, and intensity which is impact was identified as negligible, minor, consistent with the regulations of the CEQ moderate, or major in conformance with that implement the provisions of the the criteria for these classifications National Environmental Policy Act. These provided below by impact topic. Because impact analyses are intended, however, to this is a programmatic document, the comply with the requirements of both intensities were expressed qualitatively. NEPA and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). In

112 Methodology for Analyzing Impacts accordance with the Advisory Council on appropriateness of mitigation, as well as an Historic Preservation’s (ACHP) analysis of how effective the mitigation regulations implementing Section 106 of would be in reducing the intensity of a the NHPA (36 CFR Part 800, Protection of potential impact, e.g., reducing the Historic Properties), impacts were intensity of an impact from major to identified and evaluated by (1) moderate or minor. Any resultant determining the area of potential effects; reduction in intensity of impact due to (2) identifying cultural resources present mitigation, however, is an estimate of the in the area of potential effects that are effectiveness of mitigation under NEPA either listed in or determined eligible for only. It does not suggest that the level of listing in the National Register of Historic effect as defined by Section 106 is similarly Places (NRHP); (3) applying the criteria of reduced. Although adverse effects under adverse effect to affected cultural Section 106 may be mitigated, the effect resources either listed in or determined remains adverse. eligible for listing in the national register; and (4) considering ways to avoid, A Section 106 summary is included in the minimize, or mitigate adverse effects. impact analysis sections for archeological and ethnographic resources, historic Under the Advisory Council’s regulations structures/ buildings, and cultural a determination of either adverse effect or landscapes (Section 106 determinations of no adverse effect must also be made for effect are not provided for museum affected national register- listed or collections because such resources are determined eligible cultural resources. An generally ineligible for listing in the adverse effect occurs whenever an impact national register). The Section 106 alters, directly or indirectly, any summary is intended to meet the characteristic of a cultural resource that requirements of Section 106 and is an qualifies it for inclusion in the national assessment of the effect of the undertaking register, e.g., diminishing the integrity of (implementation of the alternative) on the resource’s location, design, setting, cultural resources, based on the criterion materials, workmanship, feeling, or of effect and criteria of adverse effect association. Adverse effects also include found in the Advisory Council’s reasonably foreseeable effects caused by regulations. Future Section 106 actions of an alternative that would occur compliance would be completed as later in time, be farther removed in warranted as individual actions are distance or be cumulative (36 CFR Part implemented. 800.5, Assessment of Adverse Effects). A determination of no adverse effect means CULTURAL RESOURCES there is an effect, but the effect would not diminish in any way the characteristics of Archeological Resources the cultural resource that qualify it for inclusion in the national register. Negligible − Impact is at the lowest levels of detection – Barely measurable with no CEQ regulations and the National Park perceptible consequences, either adverse Service’s Conservation Planning, or beneficial, to archeological resources. Environmental Impact Analysis and For purposes of Section 106, the Decision- making (Director’s Order No. determination of effect would be no 12) also call for a discussion of the adverse effect.

113 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Minor − Adverse impact: Disturbance of purposes of Section 106, the determi- a site(s) results in little, if any, loss of nation of effect would be no adverse significance or integrity and the national effect. Beneficial impact: Stabiliza- register eligibility of the site(s) is tion/preservation of character defining unaffected. For purposes of Section 106, features in accordance with the Secretary the determination of effect would be no of the Interior’s Standards for the adverse effect. Beneficial impact: Treatment of Historic Properties. For Maintenance and preservation of a site(s). purposes of Section 106, the For purposes of Section 106, the determination of effect would be no determination of effect would be no adverse effect. adverse effect. Moderate − Adverse impact: Impact Moderate − Adverse impact: Disturbance would alter a character defining feature(s) of a site(s) does not diminish the of the structure or building but would not significance or integrity of the site(s) to the diminish the integrity of the resource to extent that its national register eligibility is the extent that its National Register jeopardized. For purposes of Section 106, eligibility is jeopardized. For purposes of the determination of effect would be Section 106, the determination of effect adverse effect. Beneficial impact: would be no adverse effect. Beneficial Stabilization of a site(s). For purposes of impact: Rehabilitation of a structure or Section 106, the determination of effect building in accordance with the Secretary would be no adverse effect. of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. For Major − Adverse impact: Disturbance of a purposes of Section 106, the site(s) diminishes the significance and determination of effect would be no integrity of the site(s) to the extent that it is adverse effect. no longer eligible to be listed in the national register. For purposes of Section Major − Adverse impact: Impact would 106, the determination of effect would be alter a character defining feature(s) of the adverse effect. Beneficial impact: Active structure or building, diminishing the intervention to preserve a site(s). For integrity of the resource to the extent that purposes of Section 106, the it is no longer eligible to be listed in the determination of effect would be no national register. For purposes of Section adverse effect. 106, the determination of effect would be adverse effect. Beneficial impact: Historic Structures/Buildings Restoration of a structure or building in accordance with the Secretary of the Negligible − Impact(s) is at the lowest Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of levels of detection, barely perceptible and Historic Properties. For purposes of not measurable. For purposes of Section Section 106, the determination of effect 106, the determination of effect would be would be no adverse effect. no adverse effect.

Minor − Adverse impact: Impact would not affect the character defining features of a National Register of Historic Places- eligible or listed structure or building. For

114 Methodology for Analyzing Impacts

Cultural Landscapes be listed in the national register. For purposes of Section 106, the Negligible − Impact(s) is at the lowest determination of effect would be adverse levels of detection – barely perceptible and effect. Beneficial impact: Restoration of a not measurable. For purposes of Section landscape or its patterns and features in 106, the determination of effect would be accordance with the Secretary of the no adverse effect. Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties With Guidelines for the Minor − Adverse impact: Impact(s) Treatment of Cultural Landscapes. For would not affect the character defining purposes of Section 106, the patterns and features of a National determination of effect would be no Register of Historic Places- eligible or adverse effect. listed cultural landscape. For purposes of Section 106, the determination of effect Ethnographic Resources would be no adverse effect. Beneficial impact: Preservation of character defining Negligible − Impact(s) would be barely patterns and features in accordance with perceptible and would neither alter the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for resource conditions, such as traditional the Treatment of Historic Properties With access or site preservation, nor alter the Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural relationship between the resource and the Landscapes. For purposes of Section 106, affiliated group’s body of practices and the determination of effect would be no beliefs. For purposes of Section 106, the adverse effect. determination of effect on Traditional Cultural Properties or TCPs (ethnographic Moderate − Adverse impact: Impact(s) resources eligible for listing in the national would alter a character defining pattern(s) register) would be no adverse effect. or feature(s) of the cultural landscape but would not diminish the integrity of the Minor − Adverse impact: Impact(s) landscape to the extent that its national would be slight but noticeable but would register eligibility is jeopardized. For neither appreciably alter resource purposes of Section 106, the conditions, such as traditional access or determination of effect would be no site preservation, nor alter the relationship adverse effect. Beneficial impact: between the resource and the affiliated Rehabilitation of a landscape or its group’s body of practices and beliefs. For patterns and features in accordance with purposes of Section 106, the determina- the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for tion of effect on TCPs would be no the Treatment of Historic Properties With adverse effect. Beneficial impact: Would Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural allow access to and/or accommodate a Landscapes. For purposes of Section 106, group’s traditional practices or beliefs. For the determination of effect would be no purposes of Section 106, the adverse effect. determination of effect on TCPs would be no adverse impact. Major − Adverse impact: Impact(s) would alter a character defining pattern(s) Moderate − Adverse impact: Impact(s) or feature(s) of the cultural landscape, would be apparent and would alter diminishing the integrity of the landscape resource conditions. Something would to the extent that it is no longer eligible to interfere with traditional access, site

115 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES preservation, or the relationship between Moderate – Adverse impact: Would the resource and the affiliated group’s affect the integrity of many items in the practices and beliefs, even though the museum collection and diminish the group’s practices and beliefs would usefulness of the collection for future survive. For purposes of Section 106, the research and interpretation. Beneficial determination of effect on TCPs would be impact: Would improve the condition of adverse effect. Beneficial impact: Would the collection or protect its constituent facilitate traditional access and/or parts from the threat of degradation. accommodate a group’s practices or beliefs. For purposes of Section 106, the Major – Adverse impact: Would affect determination of effect on TCPs would be the integrity of most items in the museum no adverse effect. collection and destroy the usefulness of the collection for future research and Major − Adverse impact: Impact(s) interpretation. Beneficial impact: Would would alter resource conditions. secure the condition of the collection as a Something would block or greatly affect whole or its constituent components from traditional access, site preservation, or the the threat of further degradation. relationship between the resource and the affiliated group’s body of practices and NATURAL RESOURCES beliefs, to the extent that the survival of a group’s practices and/or beliefs would be The natural resource impact topics that jeopardized. For purposes of Section 106, are analyzed in this document include the determination of effect on TCPs would biotic communities, water resources, air be adverse effect. Beneficial impact: quality, and threatened and endangered Would encourage traditional access species. Information on known resources and/or accommodate a group’s practices was compiled and compared with the or beliefs. For purposes of Section 106, the locations of proposed developments and determination of effect on TCPs would be other actions. The impact analysis was no adverse effect. based on the knowledge and best professional judgment of planners, Museum Collections resource specialists, data from park records, and studies of similar actions and Negligible – Impact(s) is at the lowest impacts when applicable. The planning levels of detection – barely measurable team qualitatively evaluated the impact with no perceptible consequences, either intensities for all of the natural resource adverse or beneficial, to museum impact topics. collection. Biotic Communities(vegetation, Minor – Adverse impact: Would affect wildlife, soils) the integrity of a few items in the museum collection but would not degrade the Negligible – The impact on biological usefulness of the collection for future communities, natural processes, soils, or research and interpretation. Beneficial species would be at the lower levels of impact: Would stabilize the current detection or not measurable. condition of the collection or its constituent components to minimize Minor – The impact would be detectable degradation. and could affect the abundance or

116 Methodology for Analyzing Impacts distribution of individuals in a localized Crater Lake and Water Resources area, but would not affect the viability of the local population or overall community Negligible – The impact on water quality size, structure, or composition. Changes to or the timing or intensity of flows would natural processes would be limited and be at the lower levels of detection or not affect only a localized area. For soils, the measurable. impact would change soil characteristics (e.g., soil profile, productivity) in a Minor – The impact would have relatively small area and would not detectable effects on water quality or the increase the potential for erosion of timing or intensity of flows. additional soil. Moderate – The impact would have Moderate – The impact would be clearly clearly detectable effects on water quality detectable and could have appreciable or the timing or intensity of flows and effect on the resource. This would include potentially would affect stream species. impacts that effect the abundance or distribution of local populations, but Major – The impact would have severely would not affect the viability of the adverse or exceptionally beneficial effects regional population. Changes to on water quality or the timing or intensity community size, structure, or composition of flows and potentially would affect and ecological processes could be stream species on a regional or watershed substantial and occur over a larger area. scale. For soils, the impact would appreciably change soil characteristics (e.g., soil Air Quality profile, productivity) in specific area and would increase the potential for erosion of Negligible – The impact would be at the additional soil. lower levels of detection or not measurable. Major – The impact would be severely adverse or exceptionally beneficial. Minor – The impact would have a slight, Impacts would have a substantial, highly localized effect on air quality or visibility. noticeable, or widespread influence, affecting the abundance or distribution of Moderate – The impact would have a local or regional population to the extent clearly detectable effects on air quality or that the population would not be likely to visibility over a more widespread area of recover (adverse) or would return to a the park. sustainable level (beneficial). Community size, structure, or composition and Major – The impact would have severely ecological processes would be highly adverse or exceptionally beneficial effects altered and landscape level changes could on air quality or visibility and potentially be expected. For soils, the impact would would affect the regional air shed. appreciably change soil characteristics (e.g., soil profile, productivity) over an Threatened, Endangered, extensive area and would greatly increase and Sensitive Species the potential for erosion of additional soil. For federally and state- listed species the following impact intensities apply. These

117 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES definitions are consistent with the 2. Analysis of interpretation and language used to determine effects on orientation is based on whether there threatened and endangered species under would be a change in the availability of the federal Endangered Species Act: interpretive and educational information and education programs no effect – when the proposed actions resulting from management zone would not affect special status species or application or other action. critical habitat 3. Analysis of visitor facilities and services discusses impacts on access to not likely to adversely affect – when effects visitor facilities and services provided on special status species are discountable by the Park Service and commercial (i.e., extremely unlikely to occur) and or services in relation to management insignificant (not able to be meaningfully zone application and other actions. measured, detected, or evaluated) or 4. Analysis on visitor experience values is completely beneficial associated with visitor experience values based on whether there would likely to adversely affect – when any be a change in opportunities for adverse effect to special status species may solitude, tranquility, challenge, occur as a direct or indirect result of adventure and the freedom to travel proposed actions and the effect is not throughout the park to experience discountable, insignificant or completely primary resources and their natural beneficial and cultural settings, including scenic quality, natural sounds, views, and night skies. VISITOR USE For impacts to visitor use the following The discussions of visitor use in this thresholds apply: document evaluate four aspects: (1) diversity of activities, (2) interpretation Negligible: Visitors would not be affected and orientation, (3) facilities and services, or there would be no noticeable change in and (4) soundscapes and scenic quality. visitor experience or safety. Changes in the Analysis is conducted in terms of how the natural sound environment would be so visitor experience might vary by applying slight they would not be of any measurable different management zones in the or perceptible consequence to visitor alternatives. Analysis is qualitative rather experiences. than quantitative because of the Minor: Changes in visitor experience or conceptual nature of the alternatives. safety would be detectable, although the changes would be slight. The changes 1. Analysis of effects on the diversity on would affect a relatively small number of visitor activities is based on whether visitors, be localized in area, or have barely there was a complete loss, addition, perceptible consequences to the majority expansion, or a change in the number of visitors. A detectable change would and range or availability of a occur to the natural sound environment, recreational opportunity and how the although the effects would be small, application of management zones localized and of little consequence to would affect group and individual visitor experiences. opportunities.

118 Methodology for Analyzing Impacts

Moderate: Changes in visitor experience Minor Changes in park and/or or safety would be readily apparent and concession operations would affect a relatively large number of would be perceptible, visitors. A change in the natural sound although the changes would environment would be readily detectable, be slight and localized, and affecting the experience of a large number would not be expected to of visitors. have an overall effect on the Major: Changes in visitor experience or ability of the park or safety would be severely adverse or concessioner to provide exceptionally beneficial, highly noticeable, desired services and and would affect relatively large numbers facilities. of visitors. A change in the natural sound environment would be obvious, be Moderate Changes in park and/or severely adverse or exceptionally concession operations beneficial, and affect the health of visitors, would be readily apparent, or cause a substantial, highly noticeable would have appreciable effect on the experience of large numbers effects on park or of visitors. concession operations, and could have an effect on the PARK AND CONCESSION ability of the park to OPERATIONS provide some desired services and facilities. The impact evaluation was based on a Major Changes in park and/or qualitative evaluation of the effects on concession operations park and concession operations from would be readily apparent changes in providing visitor and and would highly reduce or administrative facilities, services, or increase the ability of the programs under the alternatives. Impacts park or concessioner to were determined by examining the affects provide desired services of changes on staffing, infrastructure, and facilities. visitor facilities and services and the role of commercial operators in providing SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT services. The intensity of the impact considers whether the impact would be Crater Lake National Park is a part of the negligible, minor, moderate, or major. socioeconomic environment of Douglas, Impact intensities for the park and Jackson, and Klamath Counties. concession operations impact topic have Socioeconomic impacts for the three- been defined as follows: county area were determined based on applied logic, professional expertise, and Negligible Park and/or concession professional judgment. Economic data, operations would not be historic visitor use data, expected future affected or there would be visitor use, and future developments no measurable or within the park were all considered in perceptible change in identifying and discussing potential operations. impacts. A mostly qualitative analysis is sufficient to compare the effects of alternatives for decision- making

119 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES purposes. However, the estimated costs of A recent study of the tourism spending by various projects do provide basic visitors to Crater Lake National Park quantitative measures of the direct provides some measure of the impact such economic impacts of each of the spending has had on the three- county alternatives on the region. region. In 2001, visitors were found to have spent some $30.7 million within- in Changes in the three- county regional 100 miles of the park. 2 The multiplier economy would include impacts on the effects resulted in $34.3 million in direct regional socioeconomic base due to sales; $11.5 million in personal income, changes in park operations and other $18.3 in value added and supported 863 management or development actions. The jobs. 3 To put these figures in perspective, socioeconomic base includes such factors visitor spending ($30.7 million) related to as population, income, employment, the park visits accounted for about 6% of earnings, etc. Park development and total tourism spending in the three- county removal projects during the life of the region in 2001.4 During the same year, general management plan would benefit total personal income for the region the regional construction industry. amounted to over $8.4 billion, and the Programmatic initiatives may require three- county work force consisted of additional funding and/or personnel. 164,225 persons of which 12,387 were unemployed. The economic impacts Changes at the park may also affect the related to park visitors vary from year to socioeconomic conditions of any of the year and are dependent upon the numbers local gateway communities. The size, of visitors coming to the park, their configuration, and relative isolation of the participation in various activities, their park has led to only three separate and expenditure patterns, prices of goods and dispersed entrances being developed to services, and changes in the park and provide automobile access to the park. surrounding communities that may affect Several small local communities are visitor use of the park. associated with each of the travel corridors to these access points. These communities Context, Intensity, provide some resort opportunities as well and Duration as limited range of goods and services for the visiting public. Impacts on concession Context, intensity, and duration of operations within the park could occur impacts compare the action alternatives to and would probably be considered local the no- action alternative. Context refers to impacts. the relative area within which impacts would occur. For the most part, impacts Each alternative would have different would affect the regional area (Douglas, staffing and budget needs, which could affect the adjacent communities and/or the 2 Stynes, Daniel and Ya- Yen Sun. November 2002. region as a whole. For example, adding Impacts of Visitor Spending on Local Economy: new staff positions at a particular location Crater Lake National Park, 2001. Department of may lead to new hires seeking goods and Park, Recreation and Tourism Resources, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824- 1222. services including housing in an associated 3 Stynes, Daniel and Ya- Yen Sun. Multiplier effects community, these new expenditures are the result of money spent by tourists being re- provide limited benefits for the local circulated within the local economy multiplying the economy. effect of the direct expenditures. 4 Stynes, Daniel and Ya- Yen Sun. November 2002.

120 Methodology for Analyzing Impacts

Jackson, and Klamath Counties) or the Measurable changes in social or economic local area (e.g., the Fort Klamath gateway conditions at the county or three- county community). regional level would occur. The impact is severely adverse or exceptionally Impact intensity is the degree to which a beneficial within the affected area. topic is positively or negatively affected (see impact thresholds below). Impacts on CUMULATIVE IMPACTS the socioeconomic environment were qualitatively evaluated and described for The Council on Environmental Quality this analysis. However, cost estimates for regulations implementing NEPA define a additional development and increased cumulative impact as “…the impact on the staffing levels do provide a measure of the environment which results from the direct fiscal impact of each alternative. incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and The duration of an impact is described as reasonably foreseeable future actions, either short- term or long- term. Short- regardless of what agency (federal or non- term impacts would last less than three federal) or person undertakes such other years. Long- term impacts last more than actions. Cumulative impacts can result three years (and some result in a from individually minor, but collectively permanent change in conditions). significant, actions taking place over a period of time.” Each cumulative impact Socioeconomic Impact Thresholds analysis is additive, considering the overall impact of the alternative when combined The following four levels of description with effects of other actions (inside and are used to evaluate and describe impacts outside the park) that have occurred or on the socioeconomic environment. would occur in the foreseeable future.

Negligible — No effects occur or the These include ongoing and planned effects on socioeconomic conditions are actions and projects in the park and below or at the level of detection. surrounding lands: Cumulative impacts were determined by combining the Minor — The effects on socioeconomic impacts of each alternative with other past, conditions are small but detectable, and present, and reasonably foreseeable future only affect a small number of firms and/or actions. Therefore, it was necessary to a small portion of the population. The identify other ongoing or reasonably impact is slight and not detectable outside foreseeable future projects at Crater Lake the affected area. National Park and, if applicable, the surrounding region. The primary projects Moderate — The effects on and actions that could contribute to socioeconomic conditions are readily cumulative effects are summarized below. apparent. Any effects result in changes to socioeconomic conditions on a local scale The combination of widespread (e.g., a gateway community or a single logging and suppression of natural county) within the affected area. fires has affected the natural forest stands throughout portions of the park Major — The effects on socioeconomic and surrounding areas. Such changes conditions are readily apparent. may also have altered wildlife

121 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

distribution, frequency, and use of catastrophic fire. Some adverse effects habitat from that which existed prior to wildlife such as loss of individuals or to the Park's establishment. food sources may occur. Appropriate Beneficial effects to late- successional mitigation for sensitive species is forest species are expected from included as part of that plan. implementation of the President's NW Forest Plan (NFP). The plan includes Ongoing trails rehabilitation and development of a network of forest relocation would reduce localized reserves across the Pacific Northwest resource impacts such as soil and to protect late- successional forest vegetation loss and trampling and species where habitat conditions are erosion. relatively intact and provide for the regeneration of late- successional Planned construction projects include forest habitat where habitat is replacement of the waterline from extremely limited and the associated Munson Springs to Garfield, plant and wildlife populations are low. improvement of the lagoon at Munson Valley, rehabilitation of Highway 62 Past introduction of various non- West, and rehabilitation of native fish species into Crater Lake and superintendent’s residence. the park’s streams has altered the aquatic ecology and adversely affected Other planned construction associated bull trout, the only known fish species with implementation of the 1999 native to the park. Although Crater Crater Lake National Park Visitor Lake was originally barren of fish, fish Services Plan (e.g., rehabilitate stocking took place between 1888 and cafeteria building, relocate parking and 1941. Of the number of species that road to area behind cafeteria building, were stocked, only kokanee salmon convert existing parking lot to and rainbow trout still exist in the lake. pedestrian open space, construct new Brook trout were introduced in park visitor contact station for year- round streams and persist where they have information and interpretation). The not been eliminated by park 1999 plan identifies the levels and management. The park’s bull trout kinds of NPS and concession visitor restoration program has recently services and facilities within the culminated in the elimination of non- developed areas of the park. These native brook trout and reestablishment projects would have would have both of bull trout in Sun and Lost Creeks. adverse and beneficial localized Some adverse effects to bull trout such effects. For instance, rehabilitation of as loss of individuals would likely the cafeteria building and relocation of occur. Appropriate mitigation is rim parking would result in some included as part of the restoration disturbance to soils and vegetation program to minimize the potential for within a previously impacted area, but adverse effects would also restore historic visitor- use Implementation of prescribed fire as patterns on the rim. part of the park’s recently approved Fire Management Plan would increase • Designation of Rim Drive as a Scenic landscape and habitat diversity relative Byway and All American Road and the to fire and reduce the potential for potential nomination of the Rim Drive

122 Methodology for Analyzing Impacts

as a cultural landscape would likely provides otherwise. The prohibited enhance treatment of Rim Drive. impairment is an impact that, in the professional judgment of the responsible IMPAIRMENT OF PARK NPS manager, would harm the integrity of RESOURCES OR VALUES park resources or values, including opportunities that otherwise would be In addition to determining the present for the enjoyment of those environmental consequences of the resources or values. An impact to any park preferred and other alternatives, NPS resource or value may constitute an policy (NPS 2001: Management Policies, impairment. However, an impact would section 4.1) requires analysis of potential more likely constitute an impairment to effects to determine whether or not the extent it affects a resource or value actions would impair resources of the unit. whose conservation is:

The fundamental purpose of the National necessary to fulfill specific Park System, established by the Organic purposes identified in the Act and reaffirmed by the General establishing legislation or Authorities Act, as amended, begins with a proclamation of the park; mandate to conserve park resources and key to the natural or cultural values. NPS managers must always seek integrity of the park or to ways to avoid or minimize to the greatest opportunities for enjoyment of the degree practicable adverse impacts on park; or park resources and values. However, the identified as a goal in the Park’s laws do give the NPS management General Management Plan or other discretion to allow impacts to park relevant NPS planning documents. resources and values when necessary and appropriate to fulfill the purposes of a Impairment may result from NPS park, as long as the impact does not activities in managing the park, visitor constitute impairment of the affected activities, or activities undertaken by resources and values. Although Congress concessionaires, contractors, and has given the NPS management discretion others operating in the park. A to allow certain impacts within parks, that determination of impairment is made discretion is limited by the statutory in the “Environmental Consequences” requirement that the NPS must leave park section in the conclusion section for resources and values unimpaired, unless a each resource impact topic. particular law directly and specifically

123

IMPACTS OF IMPLEMENTING ALTERNATIVE 1 – NO ACTION

CULTURAL RESOURCES not been surveyed and inventoried for archeological resources, decisions about Archeological Resources site development have been made that, in hindsight, may not have been best for Under alternative 1 archeological sites archeological resources. Such decisions would be surveyed, inventoried, and included the placement and location of evaluated under National Register of campgrounds, trails, roads, and other Historic Places criteria of evaluation to visitor use facilities, which may have been determine their eligibility for listing in the constructed on top of or near archeo- national register as staff and funding logical resources. Current and ongoing permit. All ground- disturbing activities National Park Service activities, such as would be preceded by site- specific prescribed burns, trails rehabilitation and archeological surveys, and, where relocation, replacement of a waterline appropriate, subsurface testing to from Munson Springs to Garfield Peak, a determine the existence of archeological lagoon project at Munson Valley, and resources and how best to preserve them. rehabilitation of State Highway 62 West, Known archeological resources would be could potentially result in minor to avoided whenever possible. moderate impacts to archeological resources. Although impacts to archeological sites would be monitored and efforts would be Actions under this alternative, when undertaken to minimize or mitigate combined with other past, present, and potential impacts from National Park reasonably foreseeable future under- Service actions, visitor activities, and takings in the park and surrounding natural causes, an unknown number of region, would contribute to cumulative archeological sites would continue to be negligible to moderate, long- term and subject to negligible to minor long- term permanent adverse effects to any overall and permanent adverse impacts from cumulative impact on archeological current and ongoing visitor activities, such resources. as unintentional disturbance, vandalism, and looting, erosion as a result of wildfire, Conclusion. Archeological investigations wind, heavy snowmelt and runoff, and would be undertaken before development other climatic conditions to ensure that archeological resources were understood and that they would not Cumulative Effects. In the past, the be damaged or lost as a result of National relative isolation of the national park and Park Service actions. However, an the lack of sufficient monitoring have unknown number of archeological provided opportunities for looters and resources would be subject to negligible to vandals to engage in pot- hunting and minor, long- term and permanent adverse intentional pilfering, and visitors, as well as impacts under this alternative as a result of natural erosion from fire, wind, heavy various National Park Service operations snowmelt and runoff, and other climatic and actions, visitor activities, and natural conditions, have contributed to causes. inadvertent disturbance of archeological resources. Because much of the park has

124 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 1– No Action

There would be no adverse impacts on learning center would result in adverse resources or values whose conservation is minor permanent impacts to the structure (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes because some historic fabric (both exterior identified in the national park’s and interior) would be lost. However, establishing legislation, (2) key to the rehabilitation and adaptive use of the cultural integrity or opportunities for structure would ensure its long- term enjoyment of the national park, or (3) preservation and thus have a moderate identified as a goal in this General beneficial impact on the building. Management Plan or other relevant National Park Service planning Cumulative Effects. In the past lack of documents. Consequently, there would be appropriate preservation treatment, no impairment of resources or values impacts of weathering and other natural associated with archeological resources. phenomena, and adaptive use have resulted in the loss of some historic fabric Section 106 Summary. For purposes of to historic structures/buildings in the Section 106, the determination of effect of national park. Thus, the documented actions under this alternative on values of some historic structures/ archeological resources would be no buildings have resulted in cumulative adverse effect. minor to moderate adverse long- term and permanent effects. Historic Structures/Buildings Actions under this alternative such as the Historic structures/buildings in the rehabilitation of the superintendent’s national park would continue to be residence and comfort station no. 4, when surveyed, inventoried, and evaluated combined with the impacts of imple- under National Register of Historic Places menting the recommendations of the 1999 criteria of evaluation to determine their Visitor Services Plan, Crater Lake National eligibility for listing in the national register Park (including among other things the as National Park Service staff and funding rehabilitation of the Sinnott Memorial, permit. Historic structures/buildings listed Community House, Plaza Comfort in, or determined eligible for listing in, the Station, Kiser Studio, and Promenade at national register would continue to be Rim Village) would contribute beneficial managed to preserve their documented minor to moderate long- term effects and values in accordance with the Secretary of an adverse minor permanent impact to any the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment overall cumulative effect on historic of Historic Properties and to support structures/buildings. National Park Service activities or visitor use. As a result, actions under alternative 1 Conclusion. Actions under alternative 1 would generally have negligible to would generally have negligible to moderate long- term beneficial impacts on moderate, long- term beneficial impacts national register eligible structures and on historic structures/buildings in the park buildings. because they would continue to surveyed, inventoried, and evaluated for their Rehabilitation of the superintendent’s eligibility for listing in the National residence, a national historic landmark Register of Historic Places, and listed, as located in Munson Valley, and its well as determined eligible, structures/ conversion for use as a science and buildings would be managed to preserve

125 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES their documented values in accordance listing in the national register as National with the Secretary of the Interior’s Park Service staff and funding permit. Standards for the Treatment of Historic Multiple property national register Properties. nomination forms for cultural landscapes, including (but not exclusively limited to) Rehabilitation of the superintendent’s Munson Valley, Rim Drive, and Rim residence, a national historic landmark Village, would be prepared, and the located in Munson Valley, and its National Park Service would recommend conversion for use as a science and listing of these cultural landscapes in the learning center would result in adverse national register. The National Park minor permanent impacts to the structure Service would implement resource because some historic fabric (both exterior management policies that preserve the and interior) would be lost. However, natural resource values of these landscapes rehabilitation and adaptive use of the as well as their culturally significant structure would ensure its long- term character defining patterns and features in preservation and thus have a moderate accordance with the Secretary of the beneficial impact on the building. Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties With Guidelines for the There would be no adverse impacts on Treatment of Cultural Landscapes. Thus, resources or values whose conservation is the overall impacts to cultural landscapes (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes under this alternative would be minor to identified in the national park’s moderate, long- term, and beneficial. establishing legislation, (2) key to the cultural integrity or opportunities for Cumulative Effects. In the past, lack of enjoyment of the national park, or (3) concern for the preservation of cultural identified as a goal in this General landscapes in the national park has Management Plan or other relevant resulted in decisions about site National Park Service planning development and resource management documents. Consequently, there would be that, in hindsight, may not have been best no impairment of resources or values for cultural landscape values and associated with historic preservation. Such decisions include the structures/buildings. placement and location of campgrounds, trails, parking lots, and other visitor use Section 106 Summary. For purposes of and administrative facilities (such as those Section 106, the determination of effect of at Rim Village) that have compromised actions under this alternative on historic some of the character defining patterns structures/buildings would be no adverse and features of the cultural landscapes in effect. the national park.

Cultural Landscapes Actions under this alternative such as the recommendation that the Rim Village, Rim Cultural landscapes in the national park Drive, and Munson Valley cultural land- would continue to be surveyed, scapes be listed in the national register and inventoried, and evaluated under National managed to preserve their documented Register of Historic Places criteria of values, when combined with the impacts evaluation to determine their eligibility for of implementing the recommendations of the 1999 Visitor Services Plan, Crater Lake

126 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 1– No Action

National Park (including among other Ethnographic Resources things the rehabilitation of the Sinnott Memorial, Community House, Plaza Native American groups regard Crater Comfort Station, Kiser Studio, and Lake and Mount Scott, as well as other Promenade and redesign of the picnic area sites in the park, as significant sacred sites in Rim Village) would have cumulative or landscapes and important traditional beneficial minor to moderate long- term use activity areas. National Park Service effects on cultural landscapes. development and administrative/ maintenance operations, as well as Conclusion. Actions under alternative 1 increasing visitor use of the national park, would generally have minor to moderate, have interrupted and are continuing to long- term, beneficial impacts on cultural interrupt access to ceremonial or gathering landscapes in the national park because areas, thus generally having negligible to they would continue to be surveyed, minor long- term adverse impacts on inventoried, and evaluated for their ethnographic resources in the park. eligibility for listing in the National However, the National Park Service is Register of Historic Places and listed, as currently undertaking consultation and well as determined eligible, cultural coordination with the Klamath Tribes and landscapes would be managed to preserve other Native American groups to address their documented values in accordance these matters of mutual concern on with the Secretary of the Interior’s parklands and encourage tribal members Standards for the Treatment of Historic to participate in the preparation of Properties With Guidelines for the programs, exhibits, replica artifacts, and Treatment of Cultural Landscapes. literature to assist the park staff in accurately interpreting the cultural history There would be no adverse impacts on of the early inhabitants of the park area. resources or values whose conservation is The National Park Service would continue (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes to allow access to and/or accommodate identified in the national park’s the groups’ traditional practices and establishing legislation, (2) key to the beliefs and facilitate reburial of ancestral cultural integrity or opportunities for remains, both those exposed by natural enjoyment of the national park, or (3) weathering and those recovered from pot- identified as a goal in this General hunters, under the provisions of the Management Plan or other relevant Native American Graves Protection and National Park Service planning docu- Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). An ongoing ments. Consequently, there would be no traditional use/ethnographic study would impairment of resources or values enable the Park Service to carry out associated with cultural landscapes. consultations more effectively to preserve and protect ethnographic resources in the Section 106 Summary. For purposes of national park. Therefore, actions under Section 106, the determination of effect of this alternative would generally have actions under this alternative on cultural negligible to minor, long- term, beneficial landscapes would be no adverse effect. impacts on ethnographic resources in the park because of the ongoing consultation and coordination activities between the National Park Service and the Klamath Tribes and other Native American groups.

127 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Cumulative Effects. National Park Section 106 Summary. No Traditional Service development and administrative/ Cultural Properties are affected by actions aintenance operations, as well as under this alternative. Thus, Section 106 increasing visitor use of the national park determinations are not necessary. since its establishment, have had and are continuing to have cumulative adverse Museum Collections negligible to minor long- term effects on ethnographic resources. As sacred sites in Alternative 1 would not provide additional south- central Oregon have been lost over storage and workspace meeting time, those remaining in the park have professional and National Park Service become more significant to the Klamath museum standards for the preservation Tribes and other affiliated Native and curation of, as well as access to, the American groups. Actions under this park’s museum collections. Thus, this alternative such as ongoing consultations alternative would generally have minor with the Klamath Tribes and other long- term adverse impacts on the park’s affiliated Native American groups to museum collections. Some park- related address matters of mutual concern would museum collection materials would contribute negligible to minor, long- term, continue to be housed and managed by beneficial effects to any overall cumulative other organizational entities in offsite impact on ethnographic resources. facilities where their condition is unknown and their ownership obscured. Conclusion. Actions under alternative 1 would generally have negligible to minor, Cumulative Effects. Since the park was long- term, beneficial impacts on ethno- established the combination of limited raphic resources in the national park staffing and lack of storage and workspace because the National Park Service would meeting professional and National Park continue ongoing consultation and Service museum standards have frustrated, coordination with the Klamath Tribes and and are continuing to hinder, endeavors to other Native American groups to address improve care of and access to the museum matters of mutual concern in the national collections and address the ever- increas- park and allow access to and/or accom- ing cataloging backlog. Thus, the park’s modate the groups’ traditional practices museum collections have been subjected and beliefs. to minor to moderate long- term adverse effects. Because existing condiions would There would be no adverse impacts on not change, actions under this alternative resources or values whose conservation is would not contribute to the impacts of the (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes aforementioned actions; thus, there would identified in the national park’s estab- not be cumulative effects on museum ishing legislation; (2) key to the cultural collections under this alternative. integrity or opportunities for enjoyment of the national park, or (3) identified as a goal Conclusion. Actions under alternative 1 in this General Management Plan or other would generally have negligible to minor relevant National Park Service planning long- term adverse impacts on museum documents. Consequently, there would be collections because of the lack of storage no impairment of resources or values and workspace meeting professional and associated with ethnographic resources. National Park Service museum standards

128 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 1– No Action and limited staffing to address the ever- address invasive non- native plants. increasing cataloging backlog. Consequently, additional long- term adverse impacts would be minor. There would be no adverse impacts on resources or values whose conservation is Winter recreational activities occur during (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes the time when wildlife is stressed by cold identified in the national park’s establish- weather and food shortages. Disturbance ing legislation, (2) key to the cultural or harassment of wildlife during this integrity or opportunities for enjoyment of sensitive time can have negative effects on the national park, or (3) identified as a goal individual animals, and in some cases in this General Management Plan or other populations, particularly when popula- relevant National Park Service planning tions are low. Winter recreation such as documents. Consequently, there would be snowmobiling and skiing can create added no impairment of resources or values energetic stress in winter when most associated with museum collections. wildlife species are already stressed (NPS 1999d). The effects of winter recreational NATURAL RESOURCES activities in the park are unknown, although, disturbance would likely be Biotic Communities limited because visitor use levels are Continued maintenance of existing roads, expected to remain relatively low and trails, and structures and increasing visitor would continue to occur within very use could result in additional disturbance limited areas within the park. The Park to vegetation and soils, such as soil Service would initiate a long- term data compaction and erosion, trampling and gathering and monitoring program to loss of vegetative cover, and introduction evaluate winter use and associated impacts and spread of non- native species. Wildlife to ensure long- term protection of park populations and habitat could also be resources. Management actions, such as affected to varying degrees by continuing restrictions on off- trail use, specific area maintenance activities and visitor use that closures, increased patrols, visitor could affect natural movements of wildlife, education, or limits on use or party sizes, habitat, and food sources. Most mainte- would be taken as necessary to address nance and visitor activities would continue impacts. Consequently, long- term impacts to occur along existing trails, roads, and in from continuing or increasing winter the developed areas. These areas have activities would be offset by increased been previously disturbed. Visitation is not protection measures that would benefit expected to increase appreciably and wildlife, although the extent of potential would likely have little additional effect on beneficial effects would likely be localized the extent of impacts. The low incidence and minor. of collisions between vehicles and wildlife would not likely increase. Also, manage- Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative actions ment actions to avoid or minimize the would contribute to both beneficial and extent and severity of impacts would adverse impacts to biotic communities. continue to be employed, such as localized Some ongoing and future site- specific restoration efforts, confining or directing restoration work (e.g., trail relocation and use through use of signs, trails, and desig- rehabilitation and rim restoration follow- nated parking areas, and continued ing removal of the employee dorm on the monitoring and early corrective action to rim) would have long- term benefits to

129 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES resources by restoring vegetation and action alternative would contribute a wildlife habitat. The fire management minor adverse increment to the overall program may have short- term impacts on cumulative impact. animal populations in the vicinity of any fire by eliminating cover, food sources, Conclusion. The no- action alternative and habitat. However, in the long term, would have a minor, long- term, adverse reintroducing fire would provide for impact on biotic communities, primarily in greater habitat diversity and less catas- existing areas of concentrated use and trophic habitat loss. Fisheries management development. Increased protection has reestablished the native fishery in Sun measures could result in minor benefits to Creek. Other cumulative beneficial effects wildlife during the winter. The past, would occur outside the park from present, and reasonably foreseeable implementation of the NFP which is actions in combination with the no action expected to provide for smaller, yet more alternative would have both long- term, stable and better distributed populations major adverse and beneficial impacts. The of late- successional forest species. no- action alternative would contribute a Overall, these programs would result in minor, adverse, and beneficial increment major, long- term benefits. to the overall cumulative impact.

Fire suppression and historic timber In accordance with the criteria for harvest have adversely impacted lands determining impairment, there would be surrounding the park. Impacts on biotic no major adverse impacts on resources or communities have been long term, major, values, and there would be no impairment and adverse primarily because of wide- of resources or values associated with pread alteration of forest structure, biotic communities, including vegetation, wildlife habitat, species composition and soils, and wildlife resources. fragmentation of habitats. Proposed development projects within the park (e.g., Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive replacement of the waterline from Species Munson Springs to Garfield, rehabilitation of Highway 62 West) would have minor, Most maintenance and visitor activities site- specific, construction- related would continue to occur along existing impacts based on implementation of best trails, roads, and in the developed areas. management practices such as erosion and These areas have been previously sediment controls and revegetation. disturbed. Visitation is not expected to increase appreciably and there would be Overall the past, present, and reasonably no new development under this alter- foreseeable actions in combination with native. Also, NPS actions to manage and the no- action alternative would have both protect special status species would long- term, major adverse and beneficial continue to be employed, such as moni- effects. Adverse impacts would be toring and restoration programs and primarily because of the widespread restrictions on visitor use near nest sites. logging and fire suppression on lands Consequently, there would be no change surrounding the park and beneficial in the habitat or disturbance to special impacts would be from restoration and status species within the park as a result of protection programs affecting lands both the no action alternative. within and outside of the park. The no-

130 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 1– No Action

As discussed under the biotic communities had short- term adverse impacts due to the impact topic, the Park Service would loss of some individual fish, the program initiate a long- term data gathering and has lead to the elimination of non- native monitoring program to evaluate winter use brook trout and reestablishment of bull and associated impacts to ensure long- trout in Sun Creek. The NFP is expected term protection of threatened and to provide for smaller, yet more stable and endangered species. Because of a number better distributed populations of threat- of factors such as limited occurrence, ened and endangered late- successional small populations, low densities, and/or forest species such as the northern spotted low birth rates, these species are more owl, which would also contribute vulnerable to impacts than general wildlife beneficial effects. Overall, these programs populations. Some species (lynx, would adversely affect some individuals or wolverine, fisher) could benefit from habitat in the short- term, but would not increased protection measures, although likely adversely affect threatened and the extent of potential beneficial effects is endangered species in the long- term unknown. Greater beneficial effects would because long- term effects would be occur if for example, den sites were beneficial. located and measures were taken to protect them from disturbance. None of the threatened or endangered animal species are endemic to Crater Lake Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative actions National Park, and the "threats" to their would contribute to both beneficial and existence have largely occurred due to adverse impacts to threatened and land management activities elsewhere, endangered species. Within the park, the such as old growth forest loss affecting fire management program would northern spotted owls. Fire suppression perpetuate the natural role of fire in and historic timber harvest have adversely preserving threatened and endangered affected habitat and threatened and species habitat and would reduce the endangered species populations on lands threat of catastrophic habitat loss. For surrounding the park primarily due to instance, prescribed natural fires at Crater widespread alteration and fragmentation Lake tend to be patchy in terms of fire of forests. Park construction and severity. This patchiness historically was rehabilitation proposals would not affect associated with habitat improvement for most special status species because there small carnivores, and would likely be would be no disturbance within known associated with habitat maintenance for areas of occurrence or suitable habitat. them in the future. Some species would be Some inconsequential impacts such as negatively influenced by fire management localized disturbance to vegetation within activities in the short term, due the suitable habitat could occur, but would possible loss of individuals or short- term not likely adversely affect any threatened alteration of suitable habitat, such as and endangered species. Site- specific elimination of a multilayered understory in surveys would be conducted to determine some locations that may result in subop- if special status species were present and timal spotted owl habitat. However, spe- the Park Service would consult with the cies specific mitigation strategies would be U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Oregon implemented for sensitive species to Department of Natural Resources to minimize these effects. Although the determine mitigation. park’s bull trout restoration program has

131 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Impacts of the above actions in conjunct- phytoplankton, zooplankton, and fish. tion with the no- action alternative would Long- term special studies would include result in both long- and short term global climate change, nutrient dynamics, adverse and beneficial effects. The no- and lake mixing. Most of the sample and action alternative would not likely data collection would continue to occur in contribute to adverse effects on the summer months when the lake is easily threatened or endingered species and accessible. Occasional winter studies are could contribute beneficial long- term also conducted. The program would effects to the overall cumulative impacts. continue to add devices capable of year- round sample and data collection to gain a Conclusion. The no- action alternative better understanding of processes occur- would not adversely affect and could ring during the winter months. Sample and beneficially affect threatened or data processing, along with data analysis endangered species. Thus this alternative and trend monitoring, would occur on a may affect, but would not likely adversely regular basis. Periodic program review by affect or result in impairment to any scientists from universities, the NPS, and threatened or endangered species. Impacts other state or federal agencies has been of other actions in conjunction with the incorporated into the long- term program. no- action alternative would result in both The latest review of the LTLMP was con- long- and short- term, adverse and ducted by a panel of professional aquatic beneficial effects. The no- action alter- ecologists in 2000. Continued monitoring native would not likely contribute to would result in long- term, negligible, adverse effects on threatened or beneficial impacts on water quality. endangered species and could contribute beneficial long- term effects to the overall Cumulative Impacts . Cumulative actions cumulative impacts. would contribute both adverse and beneficial impacts to water quality. Crater Lake As called for in the Visitor Services Plan, Minimizing development within the only essential services would be provided caldera and lake drainage would prevent at the rim. Included in this plan is the addition of sediments, minerals, or proposal to relocate the cafeteria parking contaminants that could reduce water behind the cafeteria. This would decrease quality. Current restrictions on access and the snow blown into the caldera during boating would continue to minimize snowplowing and thereby decrease pos- contaminants that could reduce water sible hydro carbons and vehicle related quality. contaminants. The plan also calls for a reduction in the number of daily The long- term limnological program concession boat tours. would continue to monitor a diverse array of chemical, physical, and biological In 2003 the park’s new concessioner properties of the lake and springs, replaced the aging tour boat fleet. This including water chemistry, nutrients, resulted in a major technological upgrade secchi clarity, light transmission, with conversion to improved fuel- injected temperature, light penetration, lake level, 4- stroke engines, which will operate more meteorological conditions, chlorophyll efficiently and cleanly. The new boats also concentration, primary productivity, incorporated a number of other design

132 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 1– No Action features to prevent accidental fuel leakage on the quantity of water in Annie Creek or spills into the lake environment. The would be negligible. Snowmobiles use park is also closely tracking the develop- along the North Entrance Road would ments in alternative fuels technology, i.e., continue. Snowmobiles raise concerns fuel cell, to eventually enable a conversion about long- term impacts from high pollu- to engines not reliant on fossil fuels. The tion emissions. Emissions from 2- stroke fuel system servicing the boat dock has engine exhaust include monoxide, hydro- recently been upgraded to provide carbons, nitrous oxides, and particulate increased protection from fuel leaks and matter (NPS 1999e). These concerns in- contamination to the lake. Access to the clude the possibility that accumulations of lake would continue to be provided by a pollutants in the snowpack and resultant single access. Water quality could benefit snowpack runoff may be having adverse from these increased protection measures, impacts on water quality and associated although the extent of potential beneficial aquatic systems, although impacts from effects is unknown, but would likely be snowpack runoff that is contaminated localized and minor. with snowmobile pollutants have not been found. Impacts on water quality are likely Conclusion. The no- action alternative short term and localized along travel would have a negligible, long- term, routes because of the low volume of use beneficial effect on water quality within and because snowmobiles are restricted to Crater Lake. In accordance with the the North Entrance Road, which does not criteria for determining impairment, there follow near any streams. Although snow- would be no major adverse impacts on mobile use is not expected to appreciably water quality, and therefore no increase, the Park Service would initiate a impairment of water quality. long- term data gathering and monitoring program to evaluate use and associated Water Resources impacts as part of an overall winter recreational use study. Management Continued maintenance of existing roads, actions to mitigate nonpoint source trails, and structures and a slight increase pollution would be implemented if in visitor use would result in little new necessary. Water quality could benefit disturbance to vegetation and soils that from increased protecttion measures, could potentially contribute to increased although the extent of potential beneficial turbidity or sedimentation of park waters. effects is unknown, but would likely be Increased visitation would lead to only a localized and minor. minimal increase in vehicles in the park and associated increase in deposition of Cumulative Impacts. The geographical petroleum products routed into drainages area included in the cumulative analysis that could affect water quality. Effects on for water resources is the park. All streams water quality would be negligible. within the park, including Annie Spring, originate within the park. Effects on water A minimal increase in water use could quality and quantity outside the park from occur from some increased visitation, actions associated with this alternative although overnight accommodations, would be negligible and likely not which utilize more water, would not measurable. increase. Water conservation efforts within the park would continue. Impacts

133 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

The park’s fire management program may minor, adverse and beneficial impacts on adversely impact water quality (e.g., sedi- water quality and quantity. The no- action mentation, erosion) due to the effects of alternative could contribute a negligible fires, particularly high intensity fires. Park adverse impact on water quality and construction and rehabilitation proposals negligible increase in water use within the would also contribute to adverse impacts park to the overall cumulative impact. from increased surface runoff and erosion. Best management practices such as Air Quality erosion and sediment controls would be employed to minimize these impacts. Slight increases in visitation would lead to Impacts would be localized, short- term, only a small increase in vehicles in the park and minor. Minor, localized, beneficial and associated increase in vehicle emis- cumulative actions would include ongoing sions. The increase in emissions would be trails rehabilitation and relocation within small and would not measurably change the park that would reduce localized the air quality. Snowmobile use along the erosion and runoff. North Entrance Road would continue. Snowmobiles raise concerns about long- The replacement of the waterline from term impacts from high pollution emis- Munson Springs to Garfield would likely sions. Impacts on air quality are believed reduce water loss by the system. to be short term and localized along travel Implementation of actions within the routes because of the low volume of use Visitor Services Plan would also reduce and lack of large congregation sites water use within the park. Reductions in coupled with winds which tend to disperse water use would have a minor beneficial particulates and other pollutants. The Park effect on water quantity in Annie Creek. Service would initiate a long- term data gathering and monitoring program to Impacts of the above other actions in evaluate use and associated impacts. conjunction with the no- action alternative Management practices to mitigate would result in localized, minor, adverse nonpoint source pollution would be and beneficial impacts on water quality implemented as necessary. Air quality and minor, beneficial effects on water could benefit from increased protection quantity in Annie Creek. The no- action measures, although the extent of potential alternative could contribute a negligible beneficial effects would likely be localized adverse impact on water quality and and negligible. negligible decrease in Annie Creek water flow to the overall cumulative impact. Cumulative Impacts. The park’s air quality is good with negligible effects from Conclusion. The water quality within the regional pollution sources outside of the park would remain good and the no- park. Forest fires on surrounding lands action alternative would have a negligible could contribute particulates for limited adverse affect on water quality and periods of time. Degradation of air quality quantity due to continuing maintenance from the park’s Fire Management program activities and slight increase in visitation, could result in moderate short- term but would not result in impairment to impacts, but the program would be in water resources. The impacts of other conformance with the Clean Air Act, actions in conjunction with the no- action Oregon State Smoke Management Plan, and alternative would result in localized, the Oregon Visibility Protection Plan. Park

134 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 1– No Action construction and rehabilitation proposals continue along the North Junction road in would cause localized increases in dust the winter. There would be no noticeable and emissions from construction vehicles change in visitor experience or safety, and equipment, resulting in localized, therefore there would be no or negligible short- term effects on air quality. The impacts on the diversity of visitor cumulative actions in conjunction with the experience. no- action alternative would result in short- term, moderate, adverse impacts on Visitor Access and Circulation air quality. The no- action alternative would contribute a negligible, adverse and Access to and within the park would be possibly negligible, beneficial increment to unchanged. There would be no change in the cumulative effect. management practices to control or manage visitor access. The operation or Conclusion. The no- action alternative the location of visitor entrances to the would have a negligible, long- term, park or the road system used by visitors adverse effect on air quality from a small within the park would not change. Visitors increase in vehicle use within the park. In would continue to enter the park from the accordance with the criteria for deter- north and south on Highways 62 and 138. mining impairment, there would be no Two- way traffic would continue on Rim major adverse impacts on air quality, and Drive and on the Pinnacles Road. The therefore no impairment of air quality. Grayback Drive would remain open to motorized traffic. Scenic driving on the The cumulative actions in conjunction park’s road system, particularly year- with the no- action alternative would round private vehicle access to caldera result in short- term, moderate, adverse views of Crater Lake at Rim Village, would impacts on air quality. The no- action continue. Visitors would be able to drive alternative would contribute a negligible from one area in the park to another adverse and possibly negligible beneficial during the late spring and early fall and increment to the cumulative effect. would usually be able to be accommodated in existing parking areas. Munson VISITOR USE Valley Road to Rim Village would continue to be cleared of snow in the Diversity of Recreational Opportunity winter. The amount of parking within the park would remain approximately the The existing range of visitor experiences same as current availability. The number would continue unchanged. Activities of visitors at peak periods currently causes identified by visitors as important, such as parking congestion at popular Rim Drive sightseeing, driving, camping, boat tours, overlooks, particularly Cleetwood Cove, and picnicking would continue to be the Watchman, and Phantom Ship. Traffic available. Existing hiking opportunities on and parking congestion is also apparent at front and back country trails would Rim Village and Mazama Village during continue during the summer months. the summer months. During congested Opportunities for winter activities (i.e., periods, some visitors are deterred from cross country skiing, snowshoeing) would stopping due to the inconvenient parking continue unchanged at Rim Village and and choose to pass by rim pullouts and along Rim Drive in the winter months. parking areas, particularly at Cleetwood Snowmobile opportunities would Cove and the Watchman. Any increase in

135 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES congestion would detract from the visitor including internet information would experience. Perceptions of full parking continue to be upgraded. A science and lots, many vehicles traveling park roads, learning center would be developed at and traffic noise are important factors in Munson Valley. Learning center oppor- determining the quality of visitors’ tunities would expand the range of experiences. Access to trailheads and interpretive opportunities but would likely opportunities for day hikes on front- affect a relatively small number of visitors, country trails along the rim, at Munson resulting in a minor, beneficial impact to Valley, and at Mazama Village would not the diversity of visitor experiences. During change. Frontcountry hiking experiences the winter, information and orientation to could become crowded during the peak the park would continue at the visitor use summer months and change the information building at Munson Valley. character of this activity. Visitor surveys Access to interpretive and educational indicate that short trails are extremely opportunities is important. Sixty- four important to most visitors. Any increase in percent of visitors to Crater Lake use the the use of frontcountry trails during peak visitor centers, and 75% of visitors periods, particularly along Cleetwood indicated that the availability of informa- Cove, would contribute to congestion and tion and orientation at the visitor centers detract from the visitor experience. Boat was very important to their park experi- tours would continue at the same levels on ence (Visitor Survey 2001). Over the long the lake and some visitors may not be term, increased visitation to the park is accommodated due to sold- out tours. anticipated during peak periods. Increased Due to anticipated increases in visitor visitation could make it more difficult for numbers, the change in the visitor some visitors to readily obtain park experience and safety in the way visitors information or to participate in interpre- access the park’s resources would be tive programs. Changes in visitor experi- readily apparent. This increase would ence would be detectable, although the affect a relatively large number of visitors, changes would be slight or have barely resulting in moderate long- term adverse perceptible consequences to the majority impacts to visitor access. of visitors, resulting in long- term, minor, adverse impacts to visitor interpretive and Education and Orientation educational opportunities.

Current opportunities for information, Visitor Facilities and Services interpretation, and education would continue at existing levels and locations. Visitor facilities and services would con- Visitor information would continue to be tinue unchanged. Visitors would continue available throughout the year via personal to camp at Mazama Campground and at contact, printed material, and the park’s Lost Creek Campground. Park roads and web site. During the summer, visitors their associated pullouts and overlooks would continue to receive information would be maintained and traffic circula- about the park at two visitor centers. tion would be unchanged. Visitors would Visitor opportunities to learn about park continue to receive park orientation and resources would also continue through information at visitor contact centers at NPS interpretive programs on the Munson Valley and at Rim Village and concessioner- operated Crater Lake boat would continue to hike both front and tours. Interpretive outreach programs back country trails. There would be no

136 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 1– No Action loss, addition, expansion, or change in the Cumulative Impacts. Past and ongoing number of park facilities. If visitor facilities projects, including development of front- were not reconfigured or expanded, some country trails, reconfiguration of Rim crowding along frontcountry trails or in Village, and adaptive reuse of historic developed areas might occur. Changes in structures in Munson Valley and Rim use would be detectable, although the Village, have had long- term, major, changes would be slight and localized, beneficial impacts on visitor experience. resulting in minor, long- term, adverse Reconfiguration of Rim Village would impacts to the visitor’s experience of park change the way visitors access views of the facilities. lake. A walk along the promenade would be possible without having to compete Soundscapes and Scenic Quality with vehicular traffic. A year- round visitor contact station at the rim would enable With any potential increases in visitation winter views of the lake for people of all the contribution of vehicle noise levels abilities. Overall these projects have the along park roads and at areas of concen- potential to increase the diversity, of trated visitor use, such as Rim Village, visitor experience, enhance the range of Mazama Village, and Cleetwood, would be interpretative programs, expand access to expected to increase. Any increase in park facilities, and to improve the quality visitation and traffic along Rim Drive of visitor experience values such as sounds would further degrade the opportunity to of nature and scenic views. The major experience solitude and tranquility while long- term beneficial impacts of the above viewing the lake. other actions, when combined with the impacts of the no- action alternative would A change in the natural sound environ- result in an overall major, long- term, ment would be readily detectable along beneficial impacts. The no- action alter- transportation corridors and at popular native would contribute a minor to overlooks, viewpoints and trailheads. The moderate adverse increment as well as a changes would affect a relatively large minor beneficial increment to the number of visitors but would be localized, cumulative impacts to visitor experience. resulting in minor long- term adverse impact on soundscapes along park roads. Conclusion. Overall, under alternative 1 There would be no change in outstanding there would be minor to moderate long- opportunities for visitors to experience the term, adverse impacts to the visitor park’s primary resources in their natural experience. There would also be minor, and cultural settings. As crowding along long- term, beneficial impacts to visitors’ Rim Drive escalates, there would be a educational opportunities. The cumulative change in the way many visitors perceive actions in conjunction with the no- action lake views. Because there would be readily alternative would result in major beneficial apparent changes in viewing the lake impacts on visitor experience. The no- under crowded conditions and the change action alternative would contribute a would affect a relatively large number of minor to moderate adverse and minor visitors, a moderate long term adverse beneficial increment to the cumulative impact to the experience of enjoying effect. scenic vistas at the caldera rim is expected under this alternative.

137

OPERATIONS Village, adaptive reuse of historic structures in Munson Valley and Rim Park Operations Village, upgrading the infrastructure at Cleetwood Cove, and highway road Under the no action alternative, no improvement projects on Highway 62, staffing increase is anticipated. Park have had long- term moderate beneficial infrastructure, visitor facilities and services impacts on park operations. Overall these would remain unchanged. Park functions projects have the potential to have an currently stationed in the park would appreciable effect on park operations and remain in existing park facilities. Some improve the ability of the park to provide office functions currently conducted in desired services and facilities. Impacts of surrounding communities would the above other actions in conjunction continue. The relative distribution of with the no- action alternative would disciplines across divisions would remain result in moderate long- term beneficial the same. cumulative impacts. The no- action alternative would contribute a minor The level of effort to protect park adverse increment to cumulative impacts resources, maintain park facilities, and to to park operations. provide for visitor enjoyment is anticipated to slightly increase. Park structures Conclusion. Overall, under alternative 1 and infrastructure would continue to be there would be minor long term adverse supported from the central maintenance impacts to park operations. The cumula- facility located at Munson Valley. Munson tive actions in conjunction with the no- Valley Road to Rim Village would con- action alternative would result in tinue to be cleared of snow during the moderate, long- term beneficial winter months and Rim Drive would cumulative impacts. The no- action continue to be plowed to allow summer alternative would contribute a minor season access as early in the spring as adverse increment to cumulative impacts weather dictates. The park would continue to park operations. to maintain year- round employee residences at Steel Circle and summer Concession Operations season residences at Sleepy Hollow at Munson Valley. Over the long term, the Under the no- action alternative, existing level of resource protection, visitor commercial activities would continue protection and safety, and the level of unchanged, although the primary area of education and interpretive effort are commercial activity would shift from Rim expected to slightly increase. The level of Village to Mazama Village. Necessary and staffing as well as the use of facilities and appropriate commercial services to meet infrastructure would remain unchanged, the needs of visitors and to enhance their resulting in a perceptible change in the enjoyment of the park would continue to ability of the park to provide desired be provided at Rim Village, Mazama services. These changes would be slight Village and at Cleetwood Cove. There but detectable, resulting in minor, long- would be no change in the number or term, adverse impacts in park operations. frequency of boat tours on the lake. Because commercial activities would not Cumulative Impacts. Past and ongoing be affected and there would be no projects, including reconfiguration of Rim measurable change in operations under

138 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 1– No Action alternative 1, there would be new impacts Additional funding for specific currently on concession operations. authorized projects would amount to $7,906,900 ($6,402,900 federal dollars + Cumulative Impacts. Past actions $1,504,000 private dollars, see appendix including restoration of the Crater Lake C). These projects do not occur all at the Lodge, reconfiguration of facilities at Rim same time but are phased in over a number Village, Mazama Village, and Cleetwood of years. The impacts (e.g., increase in Cove have had moderate, long- term income, creation of jobs, etc.) on indi- beneficial impacts on concessioner vidual firms and employees could be short operations. The no- action alternative term, moderate to major, and beneficial would not contribute to cumulative for individuals and affected firms. How- impacts on concession operations. ever, impacts on the regional economy (with nearly $5.0 billion in earnings and Conclusion. Overall, under alternative 1 about 187,000 jobs in 2001) as measured there would be negligible long term by economic indictors (e.g., a substantial adverse impacts to concession operations. increase in income or a decrease in The no- action alternative would not unemployment or poverty, etc.) would be contribute to cumulative impacts on negligible. concession operations. Crater Lake National Park would continue SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT to be a substantial contributor to the regional economy and some local gateway Park staffing remains relatively constant at communities’ economies as a result of jobs 75 full- time equivalent positions (FTEs). provided, and wages and operational The park’s annual budget also remains the expenditures by the National Park Service. same ($4,027,000 in 2003) except for small In addition, the park serves as a key increases due to inflation and the rising attraction for the local and regional costs of goods and services utilized by the tourism industry. The visiting public park. Facilities, park operations, and would continue to generate tourism recreational uses are maintained. Current related spending within the regional and conditions and trends continue. Most local economies, which benefits businesses facilities and services within the park by generating income and providing would remain essentially the same as now. employment opportunities. Without a long- term, comprehensive management plan, park managers would However, the three- county region would accommodate changing visitor use pat- not be affected due to the size and divers- terns, uses, and volumes, and changes in ity of the regional economy. Individual resource conditions, as they occurred or in gateway communities may be affected by response to pressure from various interest specific projects occurring in the park. groups. The current upward trend in However, the number and types of visitation continues. While visitation can businesses located in the local gateway and does fluctuate from year to year, the travel corridors are small. Since there are historic growth rate of approximately few local businesses that can be affected by 1.4% is assumed to continue for the life of the continuing operations of the park, and this plan. the park would continue to operate and be open to the public, and this alternative continues current policies and programs,

139 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES no changes in the types or amounts of opportunities to the local and regional impacts would occur as the result of this economy. alternative. The no- action alternative would continue Cumulative Impacts. Additional changes to have a minor to moderate short- term or shocks (either positive or negative) to beneficial impact on the socioeconomic the local and regional socioeconomic climate of the gateway communities and environment within which the park exists regional area, primarily because of are not expected. No other actions that ongoing maintenance of facilities and could have cumulative effects when programs and some limited development combined with the impacts of the no- projects. The overall current level and action Alterative have been identified types of impacts would remain the same. during this planning process, which has In the long- term, the park would continue included public participation and input. to be an important visitor attraction and The park continues to be an important contributor to the tourism industry in the visitor attraction bringing visitors to the three- county region. region resulting in tourism related expenditures in the area. Expenditures by UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS the Park Service to operate and maintain the park continue to contribute positive There would be no unavoidable adverse direct benefits to the local and regional impacts of major intensity that would economies. In conjunction with other past, result from implementing alternative 1. present, and reasonably foreseeable Alternative 1 would result in moderate actions, no additional cumulative impacts adverse impacts to visitor access along Rim are expected. Drive and Mazama Village. The negligible and minor impacts are described in the Conclusion. The park’s staff levels and foregoing analysis. base budget would not change under the no- action alternative other than as a result of adjustments for inflation and rising RELATIONSHIP OF SHORT- TERM labor and materials costs. Approved USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND projects over and above regular operations THE MAINTENANCE AND of the park, which would be funded under ENHANCEMENT OF LONG- TERM the no- action alternative, would amount PRODUCTIVITY to about $7,906,900 in direct expenditures. These projects would be phased- in over a The vast majority of the park would be number of years, so impacts on individual protected in a natural state and would firms and employees could be moderate to maintain its long- term productivity. major, short term, and beneficial, but Adverse impacts on the park’s soils, water impacts on the regional economy would quality, and wildlife from continuing be negligible. The current range and level visitor activities could reduce the of impacts (tourism spending and park productivity of the park’s natural spending) on adjacent communities would resources in localized areas over time. continue to be beneficial providing income, employment, and business

140 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 1– No Action

IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE commitment of resources in terms of COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES funds expended on both labor and construction materials. Because it takes so Construction materials and energy used long for soils to form, the loss of soils due would be irretrievably lost. There would to visitor use in localized areas would be also be an irretrievable and irreversible an irreversible commitment of resources.

141

IMPACTS OF IMPLEMENTING ALTERNATIVE 2 – PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

CULTURAL RESOURCES cultural integrity or opportunities for enjoyment of the national park, or (3) Archeological Resources identified as a goal in this General Management Plan or other relevant Implementation of this alternative would National Park Service planning docu- generally have the same impacts on arche- ments. Consequently, there would be no ological resources as those listed under impairment of resources or values alternative 1, although provision of more associated with archeological resources. diversified visitor experiences along the Rim Drive corridor, including develop- Section 106 Summary. For purposes of ment of new trails, picnic areas, and Section 106, the determination of effect of improved pullouts, parking areas, and actions under this alternative on overlooks, could have additional minor, archeological resources would be no long- term and permanent adverse impacts adverse effect. on archeological sites. Development of the new science learning center in the super- Historic Structures/Buildings intendent’s residence would also result in additional minor, long- term, and perma- Although implementation of alternative 2 nent adverse impacts on archeological would generally have the same impacts on sites. historic structures/buildings as those listed under alternative 1, rehabilitation and Cumulative Effects. Implementation of adaptive use of some historic structures/ this alternative would generally have the buildings for new functions would have same cumulative effects on archeological moderate, long- term, beneficial impacts resources as those listed under alternative on those structures/ buildings. 1, although development projects and improvements along the Rim Drive Cumulative Effects. Implementation of corridor, as well as development of the this alternative would have the same new science learning center in the cumulative effects on historic structures/ superintendent’s residence, would buildings as those listed under alternative contribute minor, long- term, and 1, although rehabilitation and adaptive use permanent adverse effects to any overall of some historic structures/buildings for cumulative impact on archeological new functions would contribute moderate, resources. long- term, beneficial effects to any overall cumulative impact on historic structures/ Conclusion. Implementation of this buildings. alternative would generally have the same impacts on archeological resources as Conclusion. Implementation of this those listed under alternative 1. alternative would have the same impacts on historic structures/buildings as those There would be no adverse impacts on listed under alternative 1, although resources or values whose conservation is rehabilitation and adaptive use of some (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes historic structures/buildings for new identified in the national park’s functions would have moderate, long- establishing legislation, (2) key to the

142 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 2– Preferred Alternative term, beneficial impacts on those same effects on cultural landscapes as structures/ buildings. those listed under alternative 1. Develop- ment projects and improvements along the There would be no adverse impacts on Rim Drive corridor would contribute resources or values whose conservation is minor, long- term, adverse effects to any (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes overall cumulative impact on the Rim identified in the national park’s Drive cultural landscape. However, establishing legislation, (2) key to the improvements along the road to manage cultural integrity or opportunities for parking and road congestion would be enjoyment of the national park, or (3) expected to contribute minor, long- term, identified as a goal in this General beneficial impacts to preservation of the Management Plan or other relevant historic character and general design National Park Service planning features of the road corridor. documents. Consequently, there would be no impairment of resources or values Conclusion. Implementation of associated with historic structures/ alternative 2 would generally have the buildings. same impacts on cultural landscapes as those listed under alternative 1. Although Section 106 Summary. For purposes of development projects and improvements Section 106, the determination of effect of along the Rim Drive corridor would actions under this alternative on historic contribute additional minor, long- term, structures/buildings would be no adverse adverse effects on the Rim Drive cultural effect. landscape, improvement along the road to manage parking and road congestion Cultural Landscapes would be expected to have minor, long- term, beneficial impacts on preservation of Implementation of this alternative would the historic character and general design generally have the same impacts on features of the road corridor. cultural landscapes as those listed under alternative 1. Although development of There would be no adverse impacts on new trails, picnic areas, and improved resources or values whose conservation is pullouts, parking areas, and overlooks in (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes the Rim Drive corridor would have some identified in the national park’s additional minor, long- term, adverse establishing legislation, (2) key to the impacts on the Rim Drive cultural cultural integrity or opportunities for landscape. However, management of enjoyment of the national park, or (3) parking and road congestion along the identified as a goal in this General road by defining and formalizing existing Management Plan or other relevant pullouts, parking areas, and overlooks National Park Service planning would be expected to have minor, long- documents. Consequently, there would be term, beneficial impacts on the Rim Drive no impairment of resources or values cultural landscape because the historic associated with cultural landscapes. character and general design features of the road corridor would be preserved. Section 106 Summary. For purposes of Section 106, the determination of effect of Cumulative Effects. Implementation of actions under this alternative on cultural this alternative would generally have the landscapes would be no adverse effect.

143 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Ethnographic Resources integrity or opportunities for enjoyment of the national park, or (3) identified as a goal Implementation of this alternative would in this General Management Plan or other generally have the same impacts on relevant National Park Service planning ethnographic resources as those listed documents. Consequently, there would be under alternative 1, although emphasis on no impairment of resources or values expanded and diverse recreational and associated with ethnographic resources. educational opportunities in the national park for visitors would have minor, long- Section 106 Summary. No Traditional term, adverse impacts on such resources. Cultural Properties are affected by actions Although expanded visitor activities could under this alternative. Thus, Section 106 result in intrusion on significant sacred determinations are unnecessary. sites or landscapes, important traditional use activity areas, and ceremonial prac- Museum Collections tices, these impacts would be generally slight but noticeable. However, educa- Implementation of this alternative would tional opportunities would be provided to have beneficial, minor to moderate, long- park visitors to heighten their awareness of term impacts on the park’s museum the importance of ethnographic resources collections because the increased volume and the need to respect tribal access to of the collections that would result from such sites as well as a group’s ceremonial expanded park research activities, as well practices. as acquisition of pertinent park- related collection materials not currently owned Cumulative Effects. Implementation of or managed by the National Park Service, alternative 2 would have the same cumu- would be stored in both onsite and offsite lative effects on ethnographic resources as facilities that meet professional and those listed under alternative 1. Emphasis National Park Service museum standards. on expanded and diverse recreational and Thus, provision for adequate storage and educational opportunities for visitors, workspace would be provided to improve however, would contribute minor, long- curation, protection, and access to the term, adverse effects to any overall collections, and staffing would be cumulative impacts on ethnographic upgraded to reduce the cataloging resources. backlog.

Conclusion. Implementation of this Cumulative Effects. Since the national alternative would generally have the same park was established the combination of impacts on ethnographic resources as limited staffing and lack of storage and those listed under alternative 1, although workspace meeting professional and emphasis on expanded recreational National Park Service museum standards opportunities would have minor, long- have hindered endeavors to improve care term, adverse impacts on such resources. of and access to the park’s museum collections and address the ever- There would no adverse impacts on increasing cataloging backlog, thus having resources or values whose conservation is minor to moderate, long- term, adverse (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes impacts on such resources. Actions under identified in the national park’s estab- this alternative, such as expansion of the lishing legislation, (2) key to the cultural collections and their storage in both onsite

144 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 2– Preferred Alternative and offsite facilities, would contribute of the scientific community would provide beneficial, minor to moderate, long- term valuable information and working effects to any overall cumulative impacts relationships relevant to managing and on the park’s museum collections. preserving the park’s resources. The quality and quantity of information would Conclusion. Implementation of be enhanced, as would integration of alternative 2 would have beneficial minor research and data collection with to moderate long- term impacts on the resources management, which would park’s museum collections. contribute to more informed and better management decisions. Park management There would be no adverse impacts on could become more proactive in resources or values whose conservation is determining desired resource conditions (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes and identifying and addressing potential identified in the national park’s impacts or threats. Research and the establishing legislation, (2) key to the information gained would allow for not cultural integrity or opportunities for only better management of resources enjoyment of the national park, or (3) within the context of the park, but within a identified as a goal in this General broader regional and global ecological Management Plan or other relevant context as well. All these actions would National Park Service planning indirectly contribute to improved resource documents. Consequently, there would be conditions by enhancing the Park Service’s no impairment of resources or values knowledge and capabilities for restoring associated with museum collections. and maintaining native species, communities, and processes. Some adverse impacts NATURAL RESOURCES to resources from research activities such as vegetation and soil trampling could Biotic Communities occur but would be localized and negligible. The greater emphasis on research, partnering, and visitor education would Increased partnerships with the scientific greatly enhance the opportunities for community and others would provide a positive effects on resources within the wider base of expertise to draw upon in park. The following actions would making management decisions. Increased potentially have localized minor to more monitoring and restoration programs widespread moderate, long- term, would also be possible through beneficial effects on biotic communities. partnerships. The intensity of the effects would likely be greater over time as more knowledge of Enhanced visitor education opportunities the resources is accumulated, partnerships could also indirectly benefit native species, expanded, and resource management communities, and processes. Improved actions were implemented that further education and interpretation would preserved and restored native species, increase the public’s appreciation, communities, and processes. understanding, and stewardship for these resources, which may reduce the potential Expanded opportunities for research and for visitor- related impacts. This broader greater collaboration and communication base of public support and advocacy between park resource staff and members would also aid in accomplishing the park’s

145 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES resource protection and preservation facilities have not been identified; programs and initiatives. however, siting them primarily in or adjacent to previously developed or Conversion of the Grayback Trail to non- disturbed sites within the park and motorized use would have localized long- avoiding sensitive resources such as term benefits because of reduced noise wetlands or whitebark pine stands, would along the trail corridor that may reduce minimize additional loss of vegetation, disturbance of nearby wildlife species. soils, and habitat and disruption to Beneficial effects would likely be minor wildlife. Long- term adverse impacts because of the relatively low levels of would be localized and minor. Mitigation motorized use that would be eliminated measures such as topsoil salvage, erosion and the continued presence of hikers and control, and revegetation would minimize bikers along the corridor. Seasonal closure construction impacts. of a section of the Rim Drive to motorized use would have similar effects. Administrative and office functions relocated from the park to nearby Possible future implementation of communities would be housed in existing alternative transportation systems would structures if possible. However, if new reduce or eliminate localized effects on buildings were necessary, construction vegetation, soils, and wildlife habitat such activities would have short- term effects as trampling and erosion that were on soils and vegetation. Depending on described under the no action alternative. whether of not facilities were built on This would result in long- term, negligible previously disturbed sites, the long- term to minor benefits. adverse effects with mitigation would be negligible to minor. Adaptive use of existing buildings is expected to result in negligible new Winter recreational activities occur during resource impacts. These buildings are the time when wildlife are stressed by cold located in existing, previously disturbed weather and food shortages. Disturbance developed areas. Construction and use of or harassment of wildlife during this new facilities (i.e., picnic areas, short trails) sensitive time could have negative effects and minor improvements of existing on individuals animals, and in some cases pullouts, parking areas, and overlooks in populations, particularly when frontcountry zones along the Rim Drive populations are low. Winter recreation, and other park roads would result in site- such as snowmobiling and skiing, could specific loss of soils, vegetation, and create added energetic stress in winter wildlife habitat. There would also be when most wildlife species are already increased human disturbance to wildlife. stressed (NPS 1999d). The effects of Individuals, populations, and species vary winter recreational activities in the park in their sensitivity to disturbance and are unknown, although, disturbance visitor use might disturb or displace some would likely be limited because visitor use individual animals, particularly those levels are expected to remain relatively low species more sensitive to human and would continue to occur within disturbance. Certain wildlife may also limited areas within the park. The Park become habituated to human presence or Service would initiate a long- term data attracted to the increased food source gathering and monitoring program to visitors provide. Specific locations for new evaluate winter use and associated impacts

146 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 2– Preferred Alternative

In addition the Park Service would identify effects on biotic communities. Long- term a methodology to evaluate changes and adverse impacts from construction and establish limits to the visitor experience. use of new facilities would be localized Changes in resource conditions and visitor and minor. Biotic communities would not experience would result in management be impaired by the actions proposed under actions, such as restrictions on off- trail this alternative. use, specific area closures, increased patrols, visitor education, or limits on use Cumulative impacts would be long term, or party sizes, would be taken as necessary major, adverse, and beneficial. Adverse to address impacts. Wildlife could benefit impacts would occur primarily because of from increased protection measures, the widespread logging and fire although the extent of potential beneficial suppression on lands surrounding the impacts would likely be localized and park, and beneficial impacts would be minor. from restoration and protection programs affecting lands both within and outside the Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts park. Alternative 2’s contribution to on biotic communities from land uses and adverse impacts would be minor and its activities in the park and surrounding contribution to beneficial effects minor to lands would be similar to those described moderate. for alternative 1 (no- action alternative). Overall cumulative impacts would be Threatened, Endangered, long- term, and both major adverse and and Sensitive Species beneficial. Adverse impacts would be primarily because of the widespread Similar to impacts discussed under biotic logging and fire suppression on lands communities, greater emphasis on surrounding the park and beneficial research, partnering, and visitor education impacts would be from restoration and under this alternative would also enhance protection programs affecting lands both the opportunities for positive effects on within and outside of the park. The threatened and endangered species and preferred alternative’s contribution to their habitat within the park through adverse cumulative impacts would be increased knowledge and better informed minor. However, actions under alternative management. Any research proposals 2, particularly increased research, partner- would be reviewed on a case- by- case ing, and visitor education, would promote basis so that potential adverse effects to the further protection, maintenance, and these species or their habitats could be restoration of native communities. There- avoided. fore, alternative 2 would also contribute a minor to moderate, beneficial effect to the Some inconsequential changes to habitat overall cumulative impacts. or loss of individual sensitive plant species might occur from new development or use Conclusion. The greater emphasis on as described below. New facilities would research, partnering, and visitor education be limited and small in scale. They would under this alternative would indirectly primarily be placed within currently contribute to improved resource developed or previously impacted areas or conditions within the park, potentially corridors, or where human use is already having localized minor to more wide- occurring, thus minimizing the potential spread moderate, long- term, beneficial for adverse effects. Site- specific surveys

147 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES would be conducted before implementing Canada lynx, California Wolverine, and specific actions to determine if special Pacific Fisher. Although the park has status species existed in any proposed conducted extensive surveys for Canada project area. If any were located or if an lynx and wolverine in the park, none have action occurred within suitable habitat, the been detected. All these species require National Park Service would consult with large expanses of land relatively free from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and human use. Because of the extent of Oregon Department of Natural Resources suitable habitat within the park, new to determine mitigation measures to avoid development and associated visitor use or minimize adverse impacts on the would likely occur within or near suitable species. habitat, which would incrementally contribute to habitat loss and fragmenta- As discussed under the biotic communities tion. Increased human noise and activity impact topic, the Park Service would could disturb and displace these species. initiate a long- term data gathering and However, development would be located monitoring program to evaluate winter use primarily in nonwilderness areas in or and associated impacts to ensure long- adjacent to existing developed areas and term protection of threatened and roadways. Because of the existing endangered species. Because of a number development and use in these areas, of factors, such as limited occurrence, adjacent habitat would not be readily used small populations, low densities, and/or and would probably be avoided by these low birth rates, these species are more species. Some new backcountry trail links vulnerable to impacts than general wildlife would be established to connect into the populations. Some species (lynx, wolver- park’s backcountry network of trails. ine, fisher) could benefit from increased These new trails would be zoned for low protection measures, although the extent levels of use, would require only minimal of potential beneficial effects is unknown. clearing of vegetation and, would impact a Greater beneficial effects would occur if relatively small area, potentially affecting for example, den sites were located and only a small fraction of these species’ measures were taken to protect them from territory or the extent of suitable habitat. disturbance. Bald Eagle. There would be little if any Based on the nature of the actions being adverse impact on the primary food proposed along with a commitment to sources (fish and carrion) of the bald eagle. conduct surveys, consultation with the No new development or use would occur U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Oregon near the existing nest site along the Crater Department of Natural Resources, and Lake shoreline. Tour boats would con- implementation of appropriate mitigation tinue to be restricted from areas on the measures, this alternative would avoid or lake that are near the nest site. The pri- minimize adverse effects on threatened mary area for potential nest sites for this and endangered species. However, species would likely be within the caldera. alternative 2 could result in some adverse Potential new development along the rim, effects on some threatened or endangered such as trails and picnic areas, could affect species. (Further rationale is provided potential nest site habitat. However, new below by individual species.) development would affect little of the overall amount of suitable habitat along the rim or within the caldera. Prior to new

148 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 2– Preferred Alternative development, surveys would be completed lake that are near the nest site. New to identify suitable habitat and locate nest development such as trails or picnic areas sites. New development would be sited along the rim could result in visitor use and designed to avoid impacts to nesting above some caldera cliff faces that could eagles. provide potential nest sites. However, new development would affect very little of the Northern Spotted Owl. Current man- overall amount of suitable habitat along agement practices that would continue the rim or within the caldera. Prior to new under alternative 2 include protecting development, surveys would be completed identified nest sites from human activities. to identify suitable habitat and locate nest Although new development and asso- sites. New development would be sited ciated use could be located within patches and designed to avoid impacts to nesting of old growth stands identified as suitable falcons. habitat, no development would occur near known nest sites or within associated Bull Trout. Some frontcountry develop- protective buffer zones. Most development could occur within the Sun and Lost ment would be in or adjacent to existing Creek drainage basins near the Grayback developed areas and roadways, thus and Rim Drive Road intersection and the minimizing the likelihood of disturbance. Lost Creek campground. Runoff from Conversion of the Grayback Trail to non- areas disturbed by construction could lead motorized use could reduce disturbance to to increased sedimentation that could a known owl nest site because of reduced affect bull trout habitat in Sun Creek. noise along the trail corridor, although the Design and location of facilities would nest is located over 1.2 miles away from take into consideration such parameters as the road. soil types, slopes, and vegetative cover in order to minimize disturbance and Northern Goshawk. Development of potential runoff. A vegetative buffer would frontcountry facilities along roadways be maintained between facilities and creek (e.g., picnic and parking areas, trails) could headwaters. Best management practices result in the loss of goshawk habitat, such as erosion and sediment controls and primarily where facilities were located in revegetation would be implemented to forested habitats. These developments eliminate or reduce both short- and long- would impact a relatively small area and term impacts. would potentially affect only a small fraction of any nesting pair’s much larger Conversion of the Grayback Trail to territory or the extent of suitable habitat. nonmotorized use could have localized Surveys to locate nest sites would be long- term benefits because the completed prior to facility construction elimination of vehicles would reduce and those sites avoided. erosion that could affect bull trout habitat in Sun Creek. Beneficial effects would Peregrine Falcon. Peregrines are known likely be negligible because of the to be sensitive to disturbances such as relatively low levels of motorized use and human presence above their nest site. No associated impacts that would be new development would be located in or eliminated. The park would continue to above the area of the one known nest site take actions to stabilize and minimize within the caldera. Tour boats would also areas of erosion along this trail. continue to be restricted from areas on the

149 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Pumice Grapefern, Shasta Arnica, and that the Park Service would take would Crater Lake Rockcress. The location of help ensure that this alternative would these plants would continue to be pro- avoid or minimize adverse effects on tected and the populations monitored. threatened and endangered species. Because of the limited new development Alternative 2 could result in some adverse and use along the rim that would occur, effects on threatened or endangered disturbance to populations of these plants species but would not result in impairment would be negligible. For example, some to these species. Alternative 2 could small loss of habitat or individual plants contribute some adverse effects on might occur where new picnic areas or threatened or endangered species but trails along the rim were developed. How- could also contribute beneficial long- term ever, locations for any new development effects to the overall cumulative impacts. or trails would be surveyed for the presence of these species, and measures to Crater Lake avoid or minimize adverse impacts would be implemented. Impacts to Crater Lake, as in alternative 1, would be minimized by proactive manage- Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts ment actions to prevent contamination to on threatened and endangered species the lake. Development within the caldera from land uses and activities in the park and lake drainage would be minimal, and surrounding lands would be similar to preventing the addition of sentiments, those described for alternative 1 (no- minerals or contaminants that could action alternative). Overall cumulative reduce water quality. Park operations such impacts would be both adverse and as snowplowing would continue to be beneficial. Adverse impacts would be managed to minimize addition of primarily due to land management contaminants to the lake ecosystem. activities in the region. Park programs Current restrictions on access and boating would adversely affect some individuals or would continue. habitat in the short term, but would not likely adversely affect threatened and The Crater Lake Long- Term endangered species in the long term Limnological Program would continue its because long- term effects would be interdisciplinary monitoring and research beneficial. Alternative 2 could contribute program. The program would continue to some adverse effects on threatened or inform management of the lake’s status, endangered species but could also variability, and trends. And contributes to contribute beneficial long- term effects to the scientific understanding of Crater Lake the overall cumulative impacts. and other large- lake and ocean ecosystems. This alternative expands the Conclusion. Greater emphasis on research and monitoring programs of the research, partnering, and visitor education park through expanded partnerships and under this alternative would enhance the the establishment of the new science and opportunities for positive effects on learning center. Expanded research efforts threatened and endangered species and would include their habitat within the park. New devel- • modeling ecosystem components and opment could result in small, localized interactions among biological, reductions in habitat. The survey, avoid- physical, and chemical processes, ance, mitigation, and consultation actions

150 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 2– Preferred Alternative

including food web interactions and water quality, and therefore no the impacts of introduced fish impairment of water quality. • optical studies of the lake to include the effects of abiotic and biotic Water Resources particles lake clarity • paleo- limnological studies The construction or rehabilitation of • studies of benthic and nearshore facilities would have the potential to communities impact water quality through ground disturbance, which would result in Expanded research and monitoring would increased surface runoff and erosion. result in long- term beneficial impacts to However, due to the limited extent of the water quality of Crater Lake. proposed developments and implementation of mitigation measures, such as silt Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative actions fences, erosion control blankets, mulch, would contribute both adverse and and revegetation to control impacts, beneficial impacts to water quality. increased sedimentation and turbidity would be temporary and negligible. As called for in the Visitor Services Plan, only essential services would be provided Relocation of some park administration at the rim. Included in this plan is the functions outside the park would likely proposal to relocate the cafeteria parking have little effect on water use in the park behind the cafeteria. This would decrease because the existing building would be the snow blown into the caldera during used for other functions. Adaptive use of snowplowing and thereby decrease existing buildings is expected to have a possible hydro carbons and vehicle related negligible effect on water use within the contaminants. park. New overnight use by a small number of visiting researchers, scientists, and Improvements in boating technology by artists would be accommodated in existing conversion of research and tourboats to facilities. This is expected to result in a 4- stroke motor or direct fuel injection negligible, if any, increase in overall water would also prevent contaminants that demand. Incorporation of water saving could reduce water quality. Personal features into facilities would be expected watercraft would continue to not be to offset most of the increased use. allowed on the lake, and access to the lake would continue to be provided by a single Under this alternative, snowmobile use access. Water quality could benefit from would be restricted to existing use levels. these increased protection measures, Similar to alternative 1 (no- action alterna- although the extent of potential beneficial tive), because snowmobiles raise concerns effects is unknown, but would likely be about long- term impacts from high localized and minor. pollution emissions, the Park Service would initiate a long- term data gathering Conclusion. The no- action alternative and monitoring program to evaluate use would have a negligible, long- term, and associated impacts as part of an beneficial effect on water quality within overall winter recreational use study. Crater Lake. In accordance with the Management actions to mitigate nonpoint criteria for determining impairment, there source pollution would be implemented if would be no major adverse impacts on necessary. Water quality could benefit

151 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES from increased protection measures, Conclusion. Alternative 2 would have a although the extent of potential beneficial negligible adverse effect on water quality effects would likely be localized and due to construction activities and a minor. negligible effect on Annie Creek water quantity. Water quality could benefit from Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts increased protection measures, although on water resources from land uses and the extent of potential beneficial impacts activities in the park and surrounding would likely be localized and minor. Water lands would be similar to those described resources would not be impaired by the for alternative 1 (no- action alternative). actions proposed under this alternative. The park’s fire management program The cumulative actions in conjunction might adversely impact water quality (e.g., with alternative 2 would result in short- sedimentation, erosion) due to the effects and long- term negligible to localized, of fires, particularly high intensity fires. minor adverse and beneficial impacts on Park construction and rehabilitation water quality and quantity. Alternative 2 proposals would also contribute to would contribute a negligible, adverse adverse impacts from increased surface impact on water quality and a negligible runoff and erosion. Best management decrease in water quantity in Annie Creek practices such as erosion and sediment to the overall cumulative impact. controls would be employed to minimize these impacts. Impacts would be localized, Air Quality short- term, and minor. Minor beneficial cumulative actions would include ongoing Seasonal closure of a portion of the Rim trails rehabilitation and relocation within Drive and closure of the Grayback Trail to the park that would reduce localized motorized use would benefit air quality erosion and runoff. because of reduced vehicular emissions in these areas. Beneficial effects would be The replacement of the waterline from localized and negligible because of the Munson Springs to Garfield would likely relatively low levels of motorized use that reduce water loss by the system. Imple- would be eliminated. mentation of actions within the Visitor Services Plan would also reduce water use There would be some short- term, within the park. Reductions in water use localized impacts on air quality resulting would have a minor beneficial effect on from particulates or machinery fumes water quantity in Annie Creek. generated during construction, removal, or rehabilitation of facilities under some The impacts of other actions described alternatives. Mitigation measures such as above in conjunction with the impacts of watering and revegetation of disturbed alternative 2 would result in localized, areas, requiring machinery to meet minor, adverse, and beneficial impacts on emission standards, would be employed. water quality and minor beneficial effects Effects would be short term and negligible, on water quantity in Annie Creek. Alter- lasting only during the construction native 2 would contribute a negligible ad- period. verse impact on water quality and negligible decrease in water quantity in Under this alternative, snowmobile use Annie Creek to the overall cumulative would be restricted to existing use levels. impact. Similar to alternative 1 (no- action

152 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 2– Preferred Alternative alternative), because snowmobiles raise construction- related impacts would be concerns about long- term impacts from negligible. Air quality would not be high pollution emissions, the Park Service impaired by the actions proposed under would initiate a long- term data gathering this alternative. The cumulative actions in and monitoring program to evaluate use conjunction with alternative 2 would and associated impacts as part of an result in short- term moderate adverse overall winter recreational use study. impacts on air quality. Alternative 2 would Management practices to mitigate contribute a negligible, short- term, nonpoint source pollution would be adverse, and negligible, long- term, implemented as necessary. Air quality beneficial increment to the cumulative could benefit from increased protection effect. measures, although the extent of potential beneficial impacts would likely be VISITOR USE localized and negligible. Diversity of Recreational Opportunity Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts on air quality from actions in the park and Under alternative 2 there would be a surrounding lands would be similar to focused range of visitor experiences those described for the no- action alterna- emphasizing research, learning, and more tive. The park’s air quality is very good in- depth experience of park resources. with negligible effects from regional Visitors would have opportunities to pollution sources outside the park. Forest participate in guided field trips, seminars, fires on surrounding lands could contrib- and workshops. This focused learning ute particulates for limited periods of time. environment would enable park Degradation of air quality from the park’s interpreters and partnering researchers to fire management program could result in convey a broader range of information and moderate short- term impacts, but the involve park visitors in hands- on learning program would be in conformance with experiences about both natural and the Clean Air Act, Oregon State Smoke cultural park resources. In frontcountry Management Plan, and the Oregon areas at Munson Valley, Rim Village, and Visibility Protection Plan. Park construc- along Rim Drive, there would be tion and rehabilitation proposals would expanded opportunities to experience the cause localized increases in dust and rustic designed architecture of park emissions from construction vehicles and buildings and roads in their cultural equipment, resulting in localized short- settings. term effects on air quality. The cumulative actions in conjunction with the no- action Existing recreational opportunities would alternative would result in short- term, remain, including scenic driving, front- negligible to moderate, adverse impacts on country and backcountry hiking, air quality. Alternative 2 would contribute picnicking, stock use, and nature viewing. a negligible, short- term adverse and Winter activities, including snow- negligible, long- term, beneficial increment camping, cross- country skiing, and to the cumulative effect. snowshoeing would continue as would snowmobile access along the North Conclusion. Long- term, beneficial Entrance Road to North Junction. Use of impacts to air quality within the park snowcoach access would be encouraged would be minor. Short- term on the North Entrance Road. Greater

153 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES diversity of visitor use along Rim Drive resulting in reduced motorized access. would be provided by seasonal closures of Grayback Drive would be closed to sections of East Rim Drive during the motorized traffic throughout the year. autumn shoulder season, allowing visitors Private vehicle access to the rim in the an opportunity to experience the primary winter would continue. Snowmobile resource of the park in ways other than access and permits for snowcoach tours driving, as new (nonmotorized) uses would continue on the North Entrance would be encouraged in areas that have Road to North Junction. Because there space to accommodate them. would be no noticeable change in the way Nonmotorized recreational opportunities visitors experience the park in the winter, would be available along Grayback Drive. there would be negligible impacts to visitor accessibility to park resources Because there would be an addition in during the winter season. Overall, changes recreational opportunities (seasonal non- in motorized accessibility in the park motorized use along Rim Drive) and an would be detectable, localized in area, and expansion of existing educational / of short duration affecting a relatively interpretive programs (in- depth, focused small number of visitors resulting in educational field trips and seminars), the minor, long- term, adverse impacts to change in the diversity of visitor experi- motorized accessibility. ence would be noticeable, beneficial, and would affect relatively large numbers of New trails would be developed in local- visitors, resulting in a moderate beneficial ized frontcountry areas along the park’s impact on the diversity of visitor road system. There would be new hiking opportunity. and biking opportunities along East Rim Drive during the autumn. Improvements Visitor Access and Circulation to existing front country hiking trails and development of new front country trails Under alternative 2 the road system would would result in greater trail accessibility. continue to be accessible during peak Visitor surveys indicate that short trails are visitor use times in the summer months. extremely important to a majority of Traffic congestion, especially along Rim visitors. Expansion of frontcountry trails, Drive during the summer season, would be the addition of seasonal nonmotorized managed by improving existing pullouts, hiking and biking opportunities along East parking areas, and overlooks. If warranted Rim Drive, and the addition of year- round by future crowding, shuttles and other hiking and/or skiing, snowshoeing, and alternative transportation systems would biking opportunities along Grayback be used to alleviate congestion along Rim Drive would be readily apparent. Ninety- Drive between Cleetwood Cove and Rim three percent of visitors responding to the Village. A feasibility analysis would 2001 Visitor Survey indicated that short, determine whether the shuttle would be a frontcountry trails were either very concession, Park Service operated, or a important or extremely important. service contract. There would be some Because front country trail access would change to motor vehicle accessibility to be expanded and new front country non- portions of East Rim Drive during the motorized trail opportunities would be shoulder autumn season when portions of added an exceptionally beneficial impact East Rim Drive would be closed to on trail accessibility would normally be motorized traffic on an experimental basis expected, however because visitation to

154 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 2– Preferred Alternative the park during the fall shoulder season is visitors, resulting in a major, long- term, considerably reduced from peak use these beneficial impact on visitors’ opportunities additions and expansions of nonmotor- to participate in interpretive programs. ized trail opportunities would affect a Visitor Facilities and Services relatively small number of visitors resulting in minor to moderate, long- term, Opportunities for visitors to access and beneficial impacts on trail accessibility. use park facilities and services would increase. New and expanded uses of park Education and Orientation facilities would open some park buildings and structures for visitor use and Under alternative 2 existing passive enjoyment. Visitors would gain new interpretive opportunities would continue opportunities to experience East Rim and interpretive programs and educational Drive and its associated pullouts and services would increase in number and in overlooks without vehicular traffic during depth of information. Opportunities to the fall. Grayback Drive would provide participate in educational programs would nonmotorized opportunities year- increase with the development of a science round. Participation in workshops and and learning center at Munson Valley. seminars conducted in park buildings and Partnerships with universities, museums, other structures would expand and change other agencies, and researchers would visitor use of park facilities. These changes expand the breadth and depth of would be highly noticeable, a relatively knowledge of park resources and enrich large numbers of visitors would be interpretive programs. Visitors would have affected, and the changes would be the opportunity to participate in a wide exceptionally beneficial. Therefore variety of educational programs such as alternative 2 would have a major, focused guided field trips, workshops, and beneficial, long- term impact on the seminars. Interpretation of park resources visitor’s experience of park facilities and would be provided by researchers guiding services. special in- depth tours, participatory field trips, and seminars. Park interpreters Soundscapes and Scenic Quality would provide research- based programs. Guided hikes and interpretation on Development of frontcountry trails would concession- operated boat tours would occur in localized areas along the park’s focus on participatory, learning transportation corridor resulting in experiences for visitors. New and detectable, localized, but small changes to expanding sources of information about the natural sound environment in these park resources would be available to park areas. This would result in negligible long- visitors and would be conveyed in a term, adverse impacts to soundscapes at broader context as technology advanced park trailheads. Closing portions of East and new educational venues developed. Rim Drive to vehicular traffic in the Because the variety and range of interpre- autumn shoulder season would enhance tive programs would increase and expand, the natural soundscape along this portion the change to visitor opportunities to of the lake caldera. This change would be participate in educational and interpretive detectable, although the change would programs would be highly noticeable. affect a relatively small number of visitors These changes in the interpretive program and would be localized in area resulting in would affect relatively large numbers of resulting in minor beneficial long- term

155 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES impacts to soundscapes along East Rim the above other actions, when combined Drive. with the impacts of the no- action alternative would result in a major, long- With the seasonal closure of East Rim term, beneficial impact. Alternative 2 Drive in the fall, visitor opportunities to would contribute a minor to major, sightsee in the park would experience a beneficial increment to cumulative change during that season. Scenic views of impacts to the visitor experience, because the lake without the intrusion of vehicular alternative 2 would add new and expand- traffic would be possible. During peak use ing existing visitor opportunities. Alterna- periods in the summer opportunities for tive 2 would also contribute minor, long- visitors to sightsee in the park, including term adverse increment to cumulative motorized sightseeing along Rim Drive, impacts due to the seasonal closure of East would remain unchanged. There would be Rim Drive. a noticeable change in visitor experience in viewing the lake in the autumn. This Conclusion. Alternative 2 would have a change would be highly noticeable, but major beneficial impact on the diversity of would affect a relatively small number of visitor experience. Under this alternative visitors and be localized in area, resulting visitors would experience minor, long- in a minor, beneficial impact on visitor term, adverse impacts on vehicular access opportunities to sightsee and enjoy the with the seasonal closure of East Rim park’s scenic views. Drive but would gain minor to moderate, long- term, beneficial impacts on Cumulative Impacts. Past and ongoing frontcountry trails accessibility. There projects, including development of front- would be major beneficial impacts to country trails, reconfiguration of Rim visitor enjoyment of educational and Village, and adaptive reuse of historic interpretive programs and access to park structures in Munson Valley and Rim facilities and services. Opportunities for Village, have had long- term, major, visitors to enjoy scenic views would be beneficial impacts on the visitor expanded along the caldera rim resulting experience. Reconfiguration of Rim in minor beneficial impacts to scenic Village would change the way visitors viewing opportunities. The cumulative access views of the lake at Rim Village. A actions in conjunction with the no- action walk along the promenade would be alternative would result in an overall possible without having to compete with major, long- term, beneficial impact. vehicular traffic. A year- round visitor Alternative 2 would contribute a minor to contact station at the rim would enable major beneficial increment to cumulative winter views of the lake for people of all impacts to the visitor experience, because abilities. Overall these projects have the this alternative would add new and potential to increase the diversity, of expanding existing visitor opportunities. visitor experience, enhance the range of Alternative 2 would also contribute a interpretative programs, expand access to minor, long- term, adverse increment to park facilities, and to improve the quality cumulative impacts due to the seasonal of visitor experience values such as sounds closure of East Rim Drive. of nature and scenic views. The impacts of

156 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 2– Preferred Alternative

OPERATIONS efficiency and reliability. Locating staff in surrounding communities would also Park Operations contribute to increased efficiencies in developing partnerships and would Under alternative 2 existing buildings and contribute a moderate beneficial impact facilities would be adaptively used for new on park operations. Different options for functions and uses. Researchers and accommodating operations outside the scientists would stay in the park year- park would be studied before implement- round increasing all season use of park ing any actions. Actions that propose buildings. Use of park facilities is expected purchasing additional property outside the to be constant but short term with boundary would require additional frequent turnover, necessitating increased authorization. Staff functions would shift maintenance responsibilities in preparing to a greater emphasis on research, and maintaining park buildings for and in education, and interpretation. There use. Maintenance of year- round would also be an increased need for residences at Steel Circle and summer maintenance operations to maintain year- season residences at Sleepy Hollow in round use of park facilities and to manage Munson Valley would continue. Park frequent turnover of park residential maintenance staff would continue to spaces. Because changes in park opera- support park operations from the central tions would be readily apparent and would maintenance facility located at Munson have an appreciable effect on the ability of Valley. Munson Valley Road to Rim the park to provide new services and Village would continue to be cleared of facilities, there would be moderate, snow during the winter months and Rim beneficial impacts on park operations. Drive would continue to be plowed to allow summer season access as early in the Cumulative Impacts. Past and ongoing spring as weather dictates. Because projects including reconfiguration of Rim changes in the ability of the park to Village, adaptive reuse of historic struc- provide desired services and facilities tures in Munson Valley and Rim Village, would be small but perceptible, minor, upgrading infrastructure at Cleetwood long- term, adverse impacts to park Cove, and highway road improvement operations would be expected under projects on Highway 62, have had long- alternative 2. term moderate beneficial impacts on park operations. Overall these projects have the To accommodate new and expanded potential to have an appreciable effect on visitor use, some park functions that are park operations and improve the ability of not, of necessity, park resource- based, the park to provide desired services and would be relocated outside the park in facilities. Impacts of the above other surrounding communities. Fewer actions in conjunction with the no- action employees would reside in the park and alternative would result in moderate, more staff functions would be accomp- long- term, beneficial cumulative impacts. lished outside the park boundary. This The no action alternative would action would disperse the staff and contribute a moderate, beneficial, and associated inconveniences in communi- minor adverse increment to cumulative cation and coordination among employees impacts to park operations. would be expected to occur. This would be offset by increased telecommunication

157 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Conclusion. Alternative 2 would result in to experience diverse recreational, moderate, beneficial impacts on park educational, and research opportunities. operations. Cumulative actions in con- Some additional staff persons (5.5 FTE) junction with the no- action alternative would be hired. Changes to the park’s would result in a moderate, long- term, infrastructure are called for to support this beneficial cumulative impact. Alternative 2 shift in park emphasis. The park’s base would contribute a moderate, beneficial budget would be increased by $700,380. and minor, adverse increment to Development projects (such as building cumulative impacts to park operations. new trails and backcountry camping sites, improving roadways, pullouts, parking Concession Operations areas, etc.) require the expenditure of additional funds for development in the Under alternative 2 impacts on concession amount of $4,743,000 – which is $943,000 activities would be similar to alternative 1. more than the no - action alternative. Relative to the no- action alternative, there These monies spent over the life of the would be no measurable or perceptible plan for various projects would provide change to concession operations under some impacts (e.g., increase in income, alternative 2, resulting in no new impacts creation of jobs, etc.) to individual firms on concession operations. and workers which would be moderate to major, short term, and beneficial. Impacts Cumulative Impacts. Past actions, on the economic indicators within the including restoration of the Crater Lake affected area described in the “Affected Lodge, and ongoing actions, such as Environment” chapter would be negligible reconfiguration of park facilities at the rim because of the relative size of the regional and at Mazama Village, have had a economy (approximately $5.0 billion in beneficial impact on concessioner activity. earnings and about 187,000 jobs in 2001) Consolidation of concession activity at and the phasing of the projects over the Mazama and the closeness of Mazama next 15 to 20 years. Village to Oregon State Highway 62 facilitate concession operations and The pattern of increasing visitation is inventory staging. These actions would expected to continue. Concession services result in moderate, long- term, beneficial may be expanded to cover additional tours impacts. Alternative 2 would not contribute or research partnerships. Providing to cumulative impacts on concession additional facilities and programs would operations. encourage more visitor use at the parks. The amount of additional use is indeter- Conclusion. Alternative 2 would have minate at this time. However, this negligible, long- term adverse impacts and increased use could result in some would not contribute to cumulative additional spending within the gateway impacts on concession operations. communities or region, which would benefit some retail establishments, restaurants, or motels in the travel SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT corridors.

The emphasis of this alternative is to Moving some administrative or manage the park and its resources to operational functions to areas outside the provide greater opportunities for visitors park as the need for space increased would

158 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 2– Preferred Alternative result in the purchase or long- term lease long- term, beneficial impacts on the of land and building(s) and/or the socioeconomic climate of the local construction of new buildings in gateway gateway communities, but these benefits areas. New facility construction would would be negligible at the three- county result in a short- term, positive impact on regional level. the regional economy, mostly affecting the construction sector of the economy. The Cumulative Impacts. Additional changes purchase of privately owned land on a or shocks (either positive or negative) to willing- buyer/willing- seller basis would the local and regional socioeconomic benefit both the private landowner and the environment are not expected. No other Park Service. Land or real estate actions that could have cumulative effects acquisition by the federal government when combined with the impacts of would result in some long- term loss of alternative 2 have been identified during local real- estate tax revenue. However, this planning process. In conjunction with the amount of property tax revenue lost to other past, present, and reasonably the three counties would be minor foreseeable actions, no additional compared to the tax revenues collected by cumulative impacts are expected. Douglas County (tax revenues $ 58.2 million in 2002/03), Jackson County (tax Conclusion. An increase in park staffing revenues $148.1 million in 2002), and levels by 5.5 full- time FTE’s, along with a Klamath County (tax revenues of about budget increase to $4,727,380 (current + $37 million, 2002). Acquisition of other leasing + staffing) would have a moderate federally owned land for these purposes impact on the local gateway communities’ would not result in any change in real economies and a negligible impact on the estate taxes. regional economy. Additional employees would likely purchase some goods and Improving facilities within the parks services from within the gateway would further contribute positive communities. economic benefits – in the form of direct spending – to the growing regional Approximately $4,743,000 would be spent economy. More visitors might result in over the life of the plan on various additional tourism- related spending projects, an increase of only $943,000 within the region and gateway towns compared to the no- action alternative. ,increasing business opportunities, These expenditures could result in income, and employment. The need for moderate to major, short- term, beneficial housing for additional park staff combined impacts on individual firms and employees with the increasing desirability of living in (increased business and profits, increased the gateway communities might add to the employment opportunities, increased demand for local housing and other locally income, etc.). Overall impacts on the provided goods. Hiring additional staff regional economy (effects on the econom- would result in a small increase in the local ic indicators of income, unemployment population that would contribute to the rate, poverty rate, etc.), however, would be overall growth in the gateway communi- negligible because of the size and the ties. As described above, in conjunction phasing of the projects over the next 15 to with other past, present, and reasonably 20 years. These projects might encourage foreseeable actions, the preferred some increased visitation to the parks, alternative would have minor to moderate, with beneficial effects on the region and

159 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES adjacent communities in terms of RELATIONSHIP OF SHORT- TERM increased visitor expenditures for locally USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND provided goods and services. THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG- TERM Moving some administrative functions and PRODUCTIVITY park employee housing outside the parks as space requirements dictate would result The vast majority of the park would be in the purchase or long- term lease of land protected in a natural state and would and the construction of buildings in local maintain its long- term productivity. gateway areas, with short- term, beneficial Disturbance of soils, vegetation, and impacts on the local economy, mostly wildlife habitat from visitor use and affecting the construction sector and a few constructing facilities would reduce the landowners. The purchase of privately long- term productivity of the owned land (on a willing- buyer/willing- environment in localized areas. Greater seller basis) by the federal government emphasis on research, partnering, and would result in some long- term loss of visitor education would indirectly local real- estate tax revenue. However, contribute to improved resource the amount of property tax revenue lost to conditions and the long- term productivity the three counties would be minor of the environment. compared to the tax revenues collected by the three counties. Acquisition of other IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE federally owned land for these purposes COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES would not result in any change in real estate taxes. Construction materials and energy used would be irretrievably lost. There would UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS also be an irretrievable and irreversible commitment of resources in terms of There would be no unavoidable adverse funds expended on both labor and impacts of major intensity that would construction materials. Because it takes so result from implementing alternative 2. long for soils to form, the loss of soils due Moderate adverse effects on park to development and visitor use in localized operations would occur due to increased areas would be an irreversible maintenance and management operations. commitment of resources. The negligible and minor impacts are described in the foregoing analysis.

160

IMPACTS OF IMPLEMENTING ALTERNATIVE 3

CULTURAL RESOURCES identified as a goal in this General Management Plan or other relevant Archeological Resources National Park Service planning documents. Consequently, there would be no Implementation of alternative 3 on impairment of resources or values archeological resources would generally associated with archeological resources. be the same as those listed under alternative 1, although the additional Section 106 Summary. For purposes of construction of trails to introduce visitors Section 106, the determination of effect of to a diverse range of ecosystems and actions under this alternative on terrain, could have some additional archeological resources would be no impacts on archeological sites. If known adverse effect. archeological resources could not be avoided, the range of potential adverse Historic Structures/Buildings effects to archeological resources would be negligible to moderate depending upon Implementation of this alternative would the extent to which the resources were have the same impacts on historic affected. structures/buildings as those listed under alternative 1. Cumulative Effects. Implementation of this alternative would generally have the Cumulative Effects. Implementation of same cumulative effects on archeological this alternative would have the same resources as those listed under alternative cumulative effects on historic 1. structures/buildings as those listed under alternative 1. Conclusion. Implementation of this alternative would generally have the same Conclusion. Implementation of impacts on archeological resources as alternative 3 would have the same impacts those listed under alternative 1, although on historic structures/buildings as those the additional construction of trails could listed under alternative 1. have some additional impacts on archeological sites. If known archeological There would be no adverse impacts on resources could not be avoided, the range resources or values whose conservation is of potential adverse effects to archeo- (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes logical resources would be negligible to identified in the national park’s moderate depending upon the extent to establishing legislation, (2) key to the which the resources were affected. cultural integrity or opportunities for enjoyment of the national park, or (3) There would be no adverse impacts on identified as a goal in this General resources or values whose conservation is Management Plan or other relevant (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes National Park Service planning identified in the national park’s documents. Consequently, there would be establishing legislation, (2) key to the no impairment of resources or values cultural integrity or opportunities for associated with historic structures/ enjoyment of the national park, or (3) buildings.

161 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Section 106 Summary. For purposes of the extent to which the resources were Section 106, the determination of effect of affected. actions under this alternative on historic structures/buildings would be no adverse There would be no adverse impacts on effect. resources or values whose conservation is (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes Cultural Landscapes identified in the national park’s establishing legislation, (2) key to the Implementation of this alternative would cultural integrity or opportunities for generally have the same impacts on enjoyment of the national park, or (3) cultural landscapes as those listed under identified as a goal in this General alternative 1, although provision for Management Plan or other relevant dispersed and expanded recreational National Park Service planning opportunities and development of new documents. Consequently, there would be trails to introduce visitors to a diverse no impairment of resources or values range of ecosystems could result in associated with cultural landscapes. additional impacts on the park’s cultural landscapes. If known resources could not Section 106 Summary. For purposes of be avoided, the range of potential adverse Section 106, the determination of effect of impacts to cultural landscapes would be actions under this alternative on cultural negligible to moderate depending upon landscapes would be no adverse effect. the extent to which the resources were affected. Ethnographic Resources

Cumulative Effects. Implementation of Implementation of alternative 3 would this alternative would generally have the generally have the same impacts on same cumulative effects on cultural ethnographic resources as those listed landscapes as those listed under under alternative 1, although emphasis on alternative 1, although provision for visitor enjoyment of the diverse and decentralized recreational opportunities unique natural environment of the and development of new trails could result national park could have some barely in additional cumulative effects on the perceptible or measurable, and hence park’s cultural landscapes. negligible, impacts on such resources. Provision for a wider range of visitor Conclusion. Implementation of this experiences could result in some intrusion alternative would generally have the same on sacred sites or landscapes and impacts on cultural landscapes as those important traditional use activity areas and listed under alternative 1, although thus have minor adverse impacts on provision for decentralized recreational ethnographic resources., because the opportunities and development of new impacts would be noticeable but would trails to introduce visitors to a diverse neither appreciably alter resource range of ecosystems could result in conditions nor alter the relationship additional impacts on the park’s cultural between the resource and the affiliated landscapes. If known resources could not group’s body of practices and beliefs. be avoided, the range of potential adverse impacts to cultural landscapes would be Cumulative Effects. The cumulative negligible to moderate depending upon effects to ethnographic resources resulting

162 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 3 from implementation of this alternative availability of museum staff to assist in use would be similar to those described for of the collections. alternative 1, with the addition of minor adverse impacts associated with provisions Cumulative Effects. Since the national for wider ranges of visitor experience. park was established the combination of However, the minor adverse impacts limited staffing and lack of storage and associated with such provisions would workspace meeting professional and NPS represent a very small incremental museum standards have hindered endeav- increase in any overall adverse cumulative ors to improve care of and access to the effect. museum collections and address the ever- increasing cataloging backlog. Thus, the Conclusion. Implementation of this park’s museum collections have been alternative generally have the same subjected to minor to moderate long- term impacts on ethnographic resources as adverse impacts. Actions under this those listed under alternative 1, although alternative, such as provision of adequate emphasis on a wider range of visitor space to curate and store the park’s experiences to enjoy the diverse and museum collections in an onsite facility unique natural environment of the that met professional and NPS museum national park could have some minor standards and adequate staffing to reduce adverse impacts on such resources. the cataloging backlog, would contribute beneficial minor to moderate long- term Section 106 Summary. No traditional effects to any overall cumulative impacts cultural properties are affected by actions on the park’s museum collections. under this alternative. Thus, Section 106 determinations are unnecessary. Conclusion. Implementation of alternative 3 would have beneficial minor Museum Collections to moderate long- term impacts on the curation and protection of the park’s Implementation of this alternative would museum collections because adequate have beneficial minor to moderate long- space would be provided for their curation term impacts on the park’s museum and storage in an onsite facility that met collections because adequate staffing and professional and NPS museum standards. space would be provided for their curation and storage and they would be stored in an There would be no adverse impacts on onsite facility that met professional and resources or values whose conservation is NPS museum standards. Although (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes adequate storage and workspace would be identified in the national park’s estab- provided to improve curation and lishing legislation, (2) key to the cultural protection of the collections, and staffing integrity or opportunities for enjoyment of would be upgraded to reduce the the national park, or (3) identified as a goal cataloging backlog, park- related in this General Management Plan or other collection materials not currently owned relevant National Park Service planning or managed by the National Park Service documents. Consequently, there would be would generally not be acquired. Access to no impairment of resources or values the collections, both for NPS and non- associated with museum collections. NPS researchers, would be limited by

163 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

NATURAL RESOURCES impacts. This broader base of public support and advocacy would also aid in Biotic Communities accomplishing the park’s resource protection and preservation programs and Construction and use of new facilities (i.e., initiatives. Beneficial effects would likely picnic areas, short trails) in frontcountry be localized and minor. zones along the Rim Drive and other park roads would result in site- specific loss of Winter recreational activities occur when soils, vegetation, and wildlife habitat. wildlife are stressed by cold weather and There would also be increased human food shortages. Disturbance or haras- disturbance to wildlife. Individuals, sment of wildlife during this sensitive time populations, and species that vary in their can have negative effects on individual sensitivity to disturbance and visitor use animals, and in some cases populations, might disturb or displace some individual particularly when populations are low. animals, particularly those species more Winter recreation such as snowmobiling sensitive to human disturbance. Certain and skiing can create added energetic wildlife may also become habituated to stress in winter when most wildlife species human presence or attracted to the are already stressed (NPS 1999d). The increased food source visitors provide. effects of winter recreational activities in Specific locations for new facilities have the park are unknown, although, not been identified; however, siting them disturbance would likely be limited primarily in or adjacent to previously because visitor use levels are expected to developed or disturbed sites within the remain relatively low and would continue park and avoiding sensitive resources such to occur within very limited areas within as wetlands or whitebark pine stands, the park. However, some increase in would minimize additional loss of snowmachine use could occur due to vegetation, soils, and habitat and grooming of the North Entrance Road. disruption to wildlife. Long- term adverse The Park Service would initiate a long- impacts would be localized and minor. term data gathering and monitoring Mitigation measures such as topsoil program to evaluate winter use and salvage, erosion control, and revegetation associated impacts. In addition the Park would minimize construction impacts. Service would identify a methodology to Increased monitoring and restoration evaluate changes and establish limits to programs would be implemented to changes in resource conditions and the ensure that impacts from additional visitor experience. Changes in resource frontcountry development and more conditions and the visitor experience dispersed visitor use would be minimized would result in management actions, such and sensitive resources such as whitebark as restrictions on off- trail use, specific pine stands protected. area closures, increased patrols, visitor education, or limits on use or party sizes, Increased contact with visitors could would be taken as necessary to address indirectly benefit native species, com- impacts. Consequently, long- term impacts munities, and processes. There would be from continuing or increasing winter greater opportunity to enhance the activities would be offset by increased public’s appreciation, understanding, and protection measures that would benefit stewardship for these resources, which wildlife, although the extent of potential may reduce the potential for visitor related

164 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 3 beneficial effects would likely be localized Threatened, Endangered, and minor. and Sensitive Species

Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts Similar to impacts discussed under biotic on biotic communities from land uses and communities, increased monitoring and activities in the park and surrounding restoration programs and increased lands would be similar to those described contact with visitors would enhance the for alternative 1 (no- action alternative). opportunities for positive effects on Overall cumulative impacts would be threatened and endangered species. Some long- term, and both major adverse and inconsequential changes to habitat or loss beneficial. Adverse impacts would be of individuals might occur from new primarily because of the widespread development or use as described below. logging and fire suppression on lands New frontcountry facilities would be surrounding the park and beneficial relatively small in scale, but would be impacts would be from restoration and constructed in more locations under this protection programs affecting lands both alternative. They would primarily be within and outside of the park. Alternative placed within currently developed or 3’s contribution to both adverse and previously impacted areas or road beneficial cumulative impacts would be corridors, where human use is already localized and minor. occurring, thus minimizing the potential for adverse effects. Site- specific surveys Conclusion. Long- term adverse impacts would be conducted before implementing from construction and use of new facilities specific actions to determine if special would be localized and minor. Increased status species existed in any proposed contact and education of visitors and project area. If any were located, or if an possible implementation of protection action occurred within suitable habitat, the measures to mitigate winter use impacts National Park Service would consult with could have minor benefits to resources. the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Biotic communities would not be impaired Oregon Department of Natural resources by the actions proposed under this to determine mitigation measures to avoid alternative. or minimize adverse impacts on the species. Cumulative impacts would be long- term, and both major adverse and beneficial. As discussed under the biotic communities Adverse impacts would be primarily impact topic, the Park Service would because of the widespread logging and fire initiate a long- term data gathering and suppression on lands surrounding the monitoring program to evaluate winter use park and beneficial impacts would be from and associated impacts to ensure long- restoration and protection programs term protection of threatened and affecting lands both within and outside of endangered species. Because of a number the park. Alternative 3’s contribution to of factors such as limited occurrence, both adverse and beneficial cumulative small populations, low densities, and/or impacts would be localized and minor. low birth rates, these species are more vulnerable to impacts than general wildlife populations. Some species (lynx, wolverine, fisher) could benefit from increased protection measures, although

165 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES the extent of potential beneficial effects is lake that are near the nest site. The unknown. Greater beneficial effects would primary area for potential nest sites for this occur if for example, den sites were species would likely be within the caldera. located and measures were taken to Potential new development along the rim, protect them from disturbance. such as trails and picnic areas, could affect potential nest site habitat. However, new Similar to alternative 2, development development would affect very little of the proposed under alternative 3 may affect, overall amount of suitable habitat along but would not be likely to adversely affect the rim or within the caldera. Prior to new special status species for the following development, surveys would be completed reasons: to identify suitable habitat and locate nest sites. New development would be sited Canada lynx, California Wolverine, and and designed to avoid impacts to nesting Pacific Fisher. Although the park has eagles. conducted extensive surveys for Canada lynx and wolverine in the park, none have Northern Spotted Owl. Current been detected. All these species require management practices that would large expanses of land relatively free from continue under alternative 2 include human use. Because of the extent of protecting identified nest sites from suitable habitat within the park, new human activities. Although new development and associated visitor use development and associated use could be would likely occur within or near suitable located within patches of old growth habitat, which would incrementally stands identified as suitable habitat, no contribute to habitat loss and frag- development would occur near known mentation. New frontcountry develop- nest sites or within associated protective ment and trails would result in more buffer zones. Most development would be dispersed use. This increased human noise located in or adjacent to existing devel- and activity could disturb and displace oped areas and roadways, thus minimizing these species. However, development and the likelihood of disturbance. trails would be located in nonwilderness areas, primarily in or adjacent to existing Northern Goshawk. Development of developed areas and road corridors. frontcountry facilities along roadways Because of the existing development and (e.g., picnic and parking areas, trails) could use in these areas, adjacent habitat would result in the loss of goshawk habitat, not be readily used and would probably be primarily where facilities were located in avoided by these species. New develop- forested habitats. These developments ment and use would affect only a very would be impact a relatively small area and small portion of suitable habitat within the would potentially affect only a small park. fraction of any nesting pair’s much larger territory or the extent of suitable habitat. Bald Eagle. There would have little if any Surveys to locate nest sites would be adverse impact on the primary food completed prior to facility construction sources (fish and carrion) of the bald eagle. and those sites avoided. No new development or use would occur near the existing nest site along the Crater Peregrine Falcon. Peregrines are known Lake shoreline. Tour boats would to be sensitive to disturbances such as continue to be restricted from areas on the human presence above their nest site. No

166 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 3 new development would be located in or individual plants could occur. These plants above the area of the one known nest site exist in distinct locations and locations for within the caldera. Tour boats would also any new development or trails would be continue to be restricted from areas on the surveyed for the presence of these species lake that are near the nest site. New and measures to avoid or minimize development such as trails or picnic areas adverse impacts would be implemented. along the rim could result in visitor use above some caldera cliff faces that could Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts provide potential nest sites. However, new on threatened and endangered species development would affect very little of the from land uses and activities in the park overall amount of suitable habitat along and surrounding lands would be similar to the rim or within the caldera. Prior to new those described for alternative 1 (no- development, surveys would be completed action alternative). Overall cumulative to identify suitable habitat and locate nest impacts would be both adverse and sites. New development would be sited beneficial. Adverse impacts would be and designed to avoid impacts to nesting primarily due to land management falcons. activities in the region. Park programs would adversely affect some individuals or Bull Trout. Some frontcountry develop- habitat in the short- term, but would not ment could occur within the Sun Creek likely adversely affect threatened and drainage basin along Grayback Trail and endangered species in the long- term Rim Drive. Runoff from areas disturbed by because long- term effects would be construction could lead to increased beneficial. Alternative 3 could contribute sedimentation that could affect bull trout some adverse effects on threatened or habitat in Sun Creek. Design and location endangered species but could also of facilities would take into consideration contribute beneficial long- term effects to such parameters as soil types, slopes, and the overall cumulative impacts. vegetative cover in order to minimize disturbance and potential runoff. A Conclusion. New development and more vegetative buffer would be maintained dispersed use could result in small, between facilities and creek headwaters. localized reductions in habitat and Best management practices such as disturbance to individuals. The survey, erosion and sediment controls and avoidance, mitigation, and consultation revegetation would be implemented to actions that the Park Service would take eliminate or reduce both short- and long- would help ensure that this alternative term impacts. Use of the Grayback Trail would avoid or minimize adverse effects would not change and the park would on threatened and endangered species. continue to take actions to stabilize and Alternative 3 could result in some adverse minimize areas of erosion along this trail. effects on threatened or endangered species but would not result in impairment Pumice Grapefern, Shasta Arnica, and to these species. Alternative 3 could Crater Lake Rockcress. The location of contribute some adverse effects on these plants would continue to be pro- threatened or endangered species but tected and the populations monitored. could also contribute beneficial long- term Because of the greater potential for new effects to the overall cumulative impacts. development and use along the rim under this alternative, loss of habitat or

167 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Crater Lake and implementation of mitigation measures such as silt fences, erosion Alternative 3 seeks to allow a greater range control measures, designated trails, and of visitor opportunities to the extent that revegetation to control impacts, increased resources continue to be protected. sedimentation and turbidity would be Impacts on Crater Lake would generally temporary and negligible. be the same as those listed under alternative 1 (no- action alternative). Minimizing Under this alternative, grooming the development within the caldera and lake North Entrance Road to accommodate drainage would prevent addition of snowcoaches could increase use of both sentiments, minerals, or contaminants that snowcoaches and snowmobiles, although, could reduce water quality. Current use volumes would not be expected to restrictions on access and boating would increase appreciably. Similar to alternative continue to minimize contaminants that 1 (no- action alternative), because snow- could reduce water quality. mobiles raise concerns about long- term impacts from high pollution emissions, the The long- term research and monitoring Park Service would initiate a long- term program would continue. Continued data gathering and monitoring program to monitoring would result in long- term evaluate use and associated impacts as part beneficial impacts on water quality. of an overall winter recreational use study. Management actions to mitigate nonpoint Cumulative Impacts. Implementation of source pollution would be implemented if this alternative would generally have the necessary. Additional impacts from some same cumulative effects on Crater Lake as increased use would be mitigated by those listed under alternative 1. increased protection measures. Water quality could benefit from increased Conclusion. Implementation of this protection measures, although the extent alternative would generally have the same of potential beneficial effects would likely impacts on Crater Lake as those listed be localized and minor. under alternative 1. This alternative would have a negligible, long- term, beneficial Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts effect on water quality within Crater Lake. on water resources from land uses and In accordance with the criteria for deter- activities in the park and surrounding mining impairment, there would be no lands would be similar to those described major adverse impacts on water quality, for alternative 1 (no- action alternative). and therefore no impairment of water The park’s fire management program may quality. adversely impact water quality (e.g. sedimentation, erosion) due to the effects Water Resources of fires, particularly high intensity fires. Park construction and rehabilitation The construction or rehabilitation of proposals would also contribute to facilities and more dispersed visitor use adverse impacts from increased surface would have the potential to impact water runoff and erosion. Best management quality through ground disturbance, practices such as erosion and sediment which would result in increased surface controls would be employed to minimize runoff and erosion. However, due to the these impacts. Impacts would be localized, limited extent of proposed developments short- term and minor. Minor beneficial

168 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 3 cumulative actions would include ongoing Air Quality trails rehabilitation and relocation within the park that would reduce localized Implementation of a shuttle system would erosion and runoff. result in an incremental reduction in traffic and thus emissions along the Rim The replacement of the waterline from Drive and the roadway between the rim Munson Springs to Garfield would likely and Mazama. This would likely result in reduce water loss by the system. Imple- localized, negligible beneficial effects on mentation of actions within the visitor air quality. services plan would also reduce water use within the park. Reductions in water use There would be some short- term, local- would have a minor beneficial effect on ized impacts on air quality resulting from water quantity in Annie Creek . particulates or machinery fumes generated during construction, removal, or rehabili- The impacts of other actions described tation of facilities under some alternatives. above in conjunction with the impacts of Mitigation measures such as watering and alternative 3 would result in localized, revegetation of disturbed areas, requiring minor adverse and beneficial impacts on machinery to meet emission standards, water quality and minor to moderate would be employed. Effects would be beneficial effects on water quantity in short- term and negligible, lasting only Annie Creek. Alternative 3 would during the construction period. contribute a negligible adverse impact on water quality and negligible decrease in Under this alternative, grooming the water quantity in Annie Creek to the North Entrance Road to accommodate overall cumulative impact. snowcoaches could increase use of both snowcoaches and snowmobiles, although, Conclusion. Alternative 3 would have a use volumes would not be expected to negligible adverse effect on water quality increase appreciably. Similar to alternative due to construction activities and a 1 (no- action alternative), because snow- negligible effect on Annie Creek water mobiles raise concerns about long- term quantity. Water quality could benefit from impacts from high pollution emissions, the increased protection measures, although Park Service would initiate a long- term the extent of potential beneficial would data gathering and monitoring program to likely be localized and minor. Water evaluate use and associated impacts as part resources would not be impaired by the of an overall winter recreational use study. actions proposed under this alternative. Management actions to mitigate nonpoint The cumulative actions in conjunction source pollution would be implemented if with alternative 3 would result in short- necessary. Additional impacts from some and long- term negligible to minor adverse increased use would be mitigated by and beneficial impacts on water quality increased protection measures. Air quality and quantity. Alternative 3 would could benefit from increased protection contribute a negligible adverse impact on measures, although the extent of potential water quality and negligible decrease in beneficial would likely be localized and water quantity in Annie Creek to the negligible. overall cumulative impact. Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts on air quality from actions in the park and

169 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES surrounding lands would be similar to VISITOR USE those described for the no- action alternative. The park’s air quality is good Diversity of Recreational Opportunity with negligible effects from regional pollution sources outside the park. Forest Under alternative 3 visitors would fires on surrounding lands could contrib- experience the entire range of visitor ute particulates for limited periods of time. experiences through recreational Degradation of air quality from the park’s opportunities and educational programs. fire management program could result in Scenic driving, front and back country moderate short- term impacts, but the hiking, camping, and picnicking, nature program would be in conformance with viewing, and boat tours would be available the Clean Air Act, Oregon State Smoke to a greater diversity of user groups. Management Plan, and the Oregon Visitor use would be dispersed in an Visibility Protection Plan. Park construc- expanded front country and park visitors tion and rehabilitation proposals would would find increased opportunities for cause localized increases in dust and high- quality recreation activities and emissions from construction vehicles and experiences. Additional hiking and equipment, resulting in localized, short- picnicking opportunities would be term effects on air quality. The cumulative developed in frontcountry areas along the actions in conjunction with the no- action park’s road system and new hiking and alternative would result in short- term, biking opportunities would be available moderate, adverse impacts on air quality. along East Rim Drive between Cleetwood Alternative 3 would contribute a negligible Cove and Kerr Notch. More park facilities short- term, adverse, and negligible, long- would be open to use enabling visitors to term, beneficial increment to the experience the park’s cultural resources in cumulative effect. their rustic setting. Additional backcountry trails and camping opportunities Conclusion. Long- term beneficial would be explored. Winter access to Rim impacts to air quality within the park Village and winter activities including under this alternative would be negligible. snow camping, cross- country skiing, and Short- term construction related impacts snowshoeing would continue as would would be negligible. Air quality would not snowmobile access along the North be impaired by the actions proposed under Entrance Road to North Junction. Use of this alternative. The cumulative actions in snowcoach access would be encouraged conjunction with alternative 3 would on the North Entrance Road. Motorized result in short- term moderate adverse recreational opportunities would be impacts on air quality. Alternative 3 would available along Grayback Drive. Because contribute a negligible, short- term, the change in the diversity of visitor adverse, and negligible, long- term, experience would be highly noticeable, beneficial increment to the cumulative exceptionally beneficial, and would affect effect. relatively large numbers of visitors, alternative 3 would have a major, beneficial impact on the diversity of visitor opportunity.

170 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 3

Visitor Access and Circulation negligible impacts to winter vehicular access to the park. Under alternative 3 motorized accessibility would change with the closure of Access to trailheads and opportunities for one lane of Rim Drive between Cleetwood day hikes on front country trails along the Cove and Kerr Notch to vehicular traffic. park’s road system would be expanded. Rim Drive would accommodate one- way New trails would be developed in traffic between these points. Road access localized front country areas along the to Rim Village during the winter would be park’s road system. These trails would be maintained. Traffic congestion during the located to introduce visitors to a diverse summer season, particularly along Rim range of ecosystems and terrain and to Drive, would be managed by improving accommodate ability and experience existing pullouts, parking areas, overlooks levels. In addition, one- lane of Rim Drive and by the addition of a transportation between Cleetwood Cove and Kerr Notch shuttles. A feasibility analysis would would be closed to private vehicles to offer determine whether the shuttle would be a new opportunities for nonmotorized concession, Park Service operated, or a activities. Closure of sections of East Rim service contract. These rider- optional Drive would improve front country shuttles would operate between Rim caldera rim hiking opportunities. There Village and Cleetwood Cove and between would be an associated and detectable Mazama Village and Rim Village. At peak change in visitor safety resulting from visitor periods, interpretive and multiple use of East Rim Drive between educational information and orientation Cleetwood Cove and Kerr Notch where to the park would be provided for shuttle the roadway would be shared by vehicles, riders. Other roads in the park, including hikers, and bicyclists. Overall, improve- Grayback Drive, would remain accessible ments to existing frontcountry hiking trails for motorized travel. Loss of two- way and development of new frontcountry motorized access to East Rim Drive would trails would result in greater trail be readily apparent, but would accessibility, and visitor surveys indicate inconvenience a relatively small number of that short trails are important to most visitors desiring to travel in both directions visitors. along East Rim Drive between Cleetwood Cove and Kerr Notch, resulting in Because frontcountry trail access would be negligible to minor, long- term, adverse expanded, there would be detectable impacts to the motorized visitor changes in visitor hiking and biking experience of the park. experiences. These changes would affect a relatively large number of visitors but Relative to the no- action alternative there would be localized in areas, resulting in would be no change in winter access to the minor, beneficial impacts to visitor park. Visitors would continue to have experience of trails accessibility. Overall private vehicle access to Rim Village in the changes in visitor access and circulation winter, and snowmobile access would would be readily apparent and would continue on the North Entrance Road. affect a relatively large number of visitors, Snowcoach use would also be encouraged resulting in a moderate, beneficial impact on the North Entrance Road. No change on visitor access and circulation. in winter access would result in no to

171 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Education and Orientation relatively large numbers of visitors, resulting in a major beneficial impact on Relative to the no- action alternative, visitor experience of park facilities and alternative 3 would result in changes in the structures. availability and focus of interpretive and educational information and education Soundscapes and Scenic Quality programs. Education and interpretation would focus on minimizing impacts, Development of frontcountry trails would leaving no trace, and acquisition of skills occur along the park’s transportation, for outdoor recreation. Educational corridor resulting in detectable changes to programs would be in suites to provide the natural sound environment in these appropriate levels of education and areas which would result in minor, long- interpretation for a variety of groups. term, adverse impacts to soundscapes at Some orientation and education efforts park trailheads. could occur offsite in local hotels and/or on tours to prepare visitors for and foster Relative to the no- action alternative, there stewardship to groups on their way to and would be no change in views of the lake. within the park. Interpretive programs Scenic views from the caldera rim would would stress the natural and cultural continue to be shared with vehicular resources of the park in a regional traffic. There would be small but recreational setting. Many interpretive detectable changes in visitor ability to opportunities at the park would be self- enjoy scenic views of the park’s natural directed or self- serve and contact with and cultural resources. Increases in front- park interpretive staff would necessitate country areas along the park’s transporta- visitors stopping at Visitor Information tion corridors would open more front- Building or at Rim Village. Changes in country opportunities for visitors to enjoy interpretive programs would be detectable scenic views. This change would affect a and would affect a relatively large number relatively small number of visitors and be of visitors resulting in moderate, long- localized in nature, resulting in minor, term, adverse impacts on visitor long- term beneficial impacts to oppor- opportunities to participate in interpretive tunities to enjoy scenic views in the park. programs. Cumulative Impacts. Past and ongoing Visitor Facilities and Services projects, including development of frontcountry trails, reconfiguration of Rim Opportunities for visitors to access and Village, and adaptive use of historic use park facilities and services would structures in Munson Valley and Rim increase. New and expanded uses of park Village have long- term, major, beneficial facilities would open some park buildings impacts on the visitor experience. Past and structures for visitor use and enjoy- actions, such as the completion of the ment. Visitors would gain opportunities to Cleetwood Trail and the development of enjoy a hiking or biking experience on the Castle Crest and Godfrey Glen Trails, East Rim Drive. Grayback Drive would have increased visitor access to front continue to provide motorized opportuni- country trails. Reconfiguration of Rim ties year- round. These changes in visitor Village would change the way visitors experience of park facilities would be access views of the lake at Rim Village. A highly noticeable and would affect a walk along the promenade would be

172 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 3 possible without having to compete with services would increase, resulting in a vehicular traffic. Opportunities to major beneficial impact to visitor’s participate in interpretive programs would enjoyment of park facilities. There would expand with the use of historic structures be minor long term adverse impacts to at Munson Valley, and a year- round visitors’ perceptions of soundscapes. visitor contact station at the rim that Opportunities for visitors to enjoy scenic would enable winter views of the lake for views would be expanded resulting in people of all abilities. Overall these minor beneficial impacts to scenic viewing projects have the potential to increase the opportunities. diversity of visitor experience, enhance the range of interpretative programs, expand Cumulative actions in conjunction with access to park facilities, and improve the alternative 3 would have an overall major quality of visitor experience values such as long- term beneficial impact. Alternative 3 sounds of nature and scenic views. The would contribute a moderate beneficial impacts of the above other actions, when increment to cumulative impacts to visitor combined with the impacts of the no- experience, because alternative 3 would action alternative would result in an increase and expanding existing visitor overall major, long- term beneficial opportunities. Alternative 3 would also impact. Alternative 3 would contribute a contribute minor to a moderate, long- moderate to major beneficial increment to term, adverse increment to cumulative cumulative impacts to visitor experience, impacts due to a reduction in the range of because alternative 3 would increase and interpretive programs and impacts on expand existing visitor opportunities. soundscapes at some park trailheads. Alternative 3 would also contribute minor to moderate, long- term adverse increment OPERATIONS to cumulative impacts due to a reduction in the range of interpretive programs and Park Operations impacts on soundscapes at some park trailheads. Under alternative 3 existing buildings and facilities would remain and some may be Conclusion. Alternative 3 would have a adaptively used for new functions and major beneficial impact on the diversity of uses. Development of new frontcountry the visitor experience. Under alternative 3 trails, closure of a portion of Rim Drive to visitors would experience minor, long- two- way traffic, and adaptive use of term, adverse impacts on vehicular access historic structures for visitor use would with the closure of East Rim Drive to two- increase the level of maintenance required way traffic, but would gain minor, long- to support these new visitor activities. term, beneficial impacts with frontcountry Year- round residences at Steel Circle and trails accessibility. Because interpretative summer season residences at Sleepy programs would primarily focus on “leave Hollow at Munson Valley would continue no trace” ethics and there would be less to be maintained. Park maintenance staff emphasis on educational programs, there would continue to maintain park roads, would be a reduction in the range of utilities, and structures. The Munson interpretive programs, resulting in Valley Road to Rim Village would moderate, long- term, adverse impacts to continue to be cleared of snow during the visitor enjoyment of interpretive winter months, and Rim Drive would programs. Access to park facilities and continue to be plowed to allow summer

173 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES access as early in the spring as weather Concession Operations dictates. Relative to the no- action alternative, there Most park functions would remain in the would be a change to concessioner park. Staff functions would shift to a activities under alternative 3. There would greater emphasis on resource protection be a moderate, long- term, beneficial and interpretation. There would also be an impact on concession operations. increased need for maintenance opera- Increased partnering with commercial tions to maintain expanded front country operators would provide for additional trails and visitor services. Changes in park opportunities. operations would be perceptible but would not be expected to have an overall Cumulative Impacts. Past actions, detrimental effect on the ability of the park including restoration of the Crater Lake to provide desired services and facilities, Lodge, and ongoing actions, such as resulting in minor, adverse impacts to park reconfiguration of park facilities at the rim operations. and at Mazama Village have had an impact on concessioner activity. Consolidation of Cumulative Impacts. Past facility devel- concession activity at Mazama and the opment, particularly at the rim, has closeness of Mazama Village to Oregon affected park operations. Ongoing actions, State Highway 62 would facilitate including scaling back development at Rim concession operations and inventory Village and improving parking and staging, resulting in readily apparent circulation, have impacted park changes in concession operations that operations. Overall these projects have the would have a long- term, moderate, potential to have a moderate long- term beneficial impact on concessioner beneficial effect on park operations and operations. Impacts of the above other improvement in the ability of the park to actions in conjunction with alternative 3 provide desired services and facilities. would result in an overall moderate, long- Impacts of the above other actions in term beneficial cumulative impact. conjunction with alternative 3 would Alternative 3 would contribute a result in moderate long- term beneficial moderate, beneficial increment to cumulative impacts. Alternative 3 would cumulative impacts on concession contribute a minor adverse increment to operations. cumulative impacts to park operations. Conclusion. Alternative 3 would result in Conclusion. Alternative 3 would result in a moderate, long- term beneficial impact minor, adverse impacts to park operations. on concession operations. Cumulative Cumulative actions in conjunction with actions in conjunction with alternative 3 alternative 3 would result in moderate would result in an overall moderate, long- long- term beneficial cumulative impacts. term, beneficial cumulative impact. Alternative 3 would contribute a minor, Alternative 3 would contribute a moderate adverse increment to cumulative impacts beneficial increment to cumulative to park operations. impacts on concession operations.

174 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 3

SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT Commercial businesses/concessions, such as tours, would continue within the park This alternative emphasizes that the full and such businesses would be encouraged range of recreational opportunities and to provide interpretative information and educational experiences be offered to a services to park visitors. Any expansion of most diverse public. The widest possible these businesses would provide additional range of visitor groups is sought out to employment opportunities. acquaint, educate, and foster an appreciation of the natural environment in a more The pattern of increasing visitation is diverse park clientele. Most current expected to continue. Providing additional facilities continue to be used and main- programs, services, and outreach would tained. Historic structures and fabric are encourage more visitor use at the parks. preserved without adaptive reuse. Trails The amount of additional use is indeter- are developed to provide access to a broad minate at this time. Also, attracting more range of the park’s ecosystems and visitors and offering visitor programs environments. Partnerships with other outside the park may result in additional public and private entities are fostered to tourism- related spending within the provide a wide range of educational and region and gateway towns, increasing interpretative services to the public. Some business opportunities, income, and interpretative activities and opportunities employment which would benefit some occur outside the park. Staffing levels retail establishments, restaurants, or increase for ranger and interpretative motels in the travel corridors. activities adding 5.5 full- time FTE’s. A transit system is evaluated and possibly The need for additional staff may increase developed to provide access for the public the need for housing. Combined with this, to some areas of the park. A base operating the increasing desirability of living in the budget of $5,454,900 is needed to fund this gateway communities adds to the demand alternative. for local housing and other locally provided goods. Hiring additional staff Achieving these changes in park results in a small increase in the local operations requires the expenditure of population that contributes to the overall additional funds in the amount of growth in the gateway communities. As $3,934,000 – which is $134,000 less than described above, in conjunction with the no- action alternative. These funds are other past, present and reasonably spent over the life of the plan for various foreseeable actions, alternative 3 would projects provide some impacts (e.g., have minor to moderate long- term increase in income, creation of jobs, etc.) beneficial impacts on the socioeconomic to individual firms and workers which climate of the local gateway communities would be moderate to major, short term, but these changes in benefits are negligible and beneficial. Impacts on the economic at the three- county regional level. indictors within the affected area would be negligible because of the relative size of the Cumulative Impacts. Additional changes regional economy (approximately $5.0 or shocks (either positive or negative) to billion in earnings and about 187,000 jobs the local and regional socioeconomic in 2001) and the phasing of the projects environment are not expected. No other over the next 15 to 20 years. actions that could have cumulative effects when combined with the impacts of

175

alterative 3 have been identified during this result from implementing alternative 3. A planning process, which has included reduction in the range of interpretive public participation and input. In conjunc- programs would result in moderate long tion with other past, present, and reason- term adverse impacts to visitor enjoyment ably foreseeable actions, no additional of interpretive programs. An increase in cumulative impacts are expected. concessioner staffing to maintain and operate the shuttle system would result in Conclusion. An increase in park staffing moderate long- term adverse impacts on levels by 5.5 full- time employees would concession operations. have a moderate impact on the local gateway communities’ economies and a RELATIONSHIP OF SHORT- TERM negligible impact on the regional economy. USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND Additional employees would likely THE MAINTENANCE AND purchase some goods and services from ENHANCEMENT OF LONG- TERM within the gateway communities. PRODUCTIVITY

Approximately $3,934,000 (in addition to The vast majority of the park would be ongoing actions and projects) would be protected in a natural state and would spent over the life of the plan on various maintain its long- term productivity. projects, and an increase of only $134,000 Disturbance of soils, vegetation, and compared to the no- action alternative. wildlife habitat from visitor use and These expenditures could result in constructing facilities would reduce the moderate to major, short- term, beneficial long- term productivity of the environment impacts on individual firms and employees in localized areas. Increased contact with (increased business and profits, increased visitors could indirectly contribute to employment opportunities, increased improved resource conditions and the income, etc.). Overall impacts on the long- term productivity of the regional economy (effects on the economic environment. indicators of income, unemployment rate, poverty rate, etc.), however, would be IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE negligible because of the size and the COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES implementation (timing) of the projects over the next 15 to 20 years. The actions of Construction materials and energy used this alternative may encourage some would be irretrievably lost. There would increased visitation to the parks, with also be an irretrievable and irreversible beneficial effects on the region and commitment of resources in terms of adjacent communities in terms of funds expended on both labor and increased visitor expenditures for locally construction materials. Because it takes so provided goods and services. long for soils to form, the loss of soils due to development and visitor use in localized UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS areas would be an irreversible commitment of resources. There would be no unavoidable adverse impacts of major intensity that would

176

IMPACTS OF IMPLEMENTING ALTERNATIVE 4

CULTURAL RESOURCES (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes identified in the national park’s estab- Archeological Resources lishing legislation, (2) key to the cultural integrity or opportunities for enjoyment of Implementation of this alternative would the national park, or (3) identified as a goal generally have the same impacts on in this General Management Plan or other archeological resources as those listed relevant National Park Service planning under alternative 1. Although the resource documents. Consequently, there would be preservation emphasis of this alternative no impairment of resources or values could be expected to have some negligible associated with archeological resources. to minor, long- term, beneficial impacts on archeological sites, removal of non- Section 106 Summary. For purposes of essential buildings could have some Section 106, the determination of effect of negligible to minor, long- term and actions under this alternative on archeo- permanent, adverse impacts on such logical resources would be no adverse resources. effect.

Cumulative Effects. The cumulative Historic Structures/Buildings effects to archeological resources would be similar to those described for alterna- Implementation of this alternative would tive 1, with the addition of minor have impacts on historic structures/ beneficial impacts resulting from the buildings that are similar to those listed resource preservation emphasis of this under alternative 1. Alternative 4 would alternative and some negligible to minor, have minor to moderate, long- term, long- term and permanent, adverse beneficial impacts on historic structures/ impacts on such resources resulting from buildings because they would be subjected removal of nonessential buildings. The to less wear and tear as a result of reduced minor beneficial impacts, as well as the adaptive use, modifications, and winter negligible to minor, long- term and use and appropriate preservation permanent adverse impacts associated treatments would be determined for all with implementation of this alternative historic structures in accordance with the would, however, be a small component of Secretary of the Interior’s Standards in any overall cumulative effect. consultation with the Oregon state historic preservation officer and the historic Conclusion. Implementation of this preservation community. alternative would generally have the same impacts on archeological resources as Cumulative Effects. In the past, those listed under alternative 1, although documented values of some historic resource preservation emphasis could be structures/buildings in the park have been expected to have some negligible to minor subjected to cumulative adverse, minor to long- term beneficial impacts on moderate, long- term, and permanent archeological sites. impacts. Actions under this alternative would have impacts on historic structures/ There would be no adverse impacts on buildings that are similar to those listed resources or values whose conservation is under alternative 1 (including, among

177 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES other things, application of appropriate of the road, rehabilitation of most pull- preservation treatments for all historic offs, parking areas, and overlooks along structures, would contribute beneficial, the roadway to their original designed minor to moderate, long- term effects to appearance would have minor to any overall cumulative impact on historic moderate, long- term, beneficial impacts structures/buildings. on the Rim Drive cultural landscape. Removal of nonhistoric structures and Conclusion. Implementation of facilities throughout the park would alternative 4 would have minor to generally have minor to moderate, long- moderate, long- term, beneficial impacts term, beneficial impacts on cultural on historic structures/buildings. landscapes in the park.

There would be no adverse impacts on Cumulative Effects. In the past lack of resources or values whose conservation is concern for the preservation of cultural (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes landscapes in the park has resulted in identified in the national park’s estab- minor to moderate long- term adverse lishing legislation, (2) key to the cultural impacts on such resources because integrity or opportunities for enjoyment of decisions about site development and the national park, or (3) identified as a goal resource management have compromised in this General Management Plan or other some of the character- defining patterns relevant National Park Service planning and features as well as the documented documents. Consequently, there would be values of cultural landscapes. Actions no impairment of resources or values under alternative 4, such as management associated with historic structures/ of the Munson Valley, Rim Village, and buildings. Rim Drive cultural landscapes as cultural heritage zones, and removal of nonhistoric Section 106 Summary. For purposes of structures and features, would contribute Section 106, the determination of effect of beneficial minor to moderate long- term actions under this alternative on historic effects to any overall cumulative effect on structures/buildings would be no adverse cultural landscapes. effect. Conclusion. Implementation of this Cultural Landscapes alternative would have minor to moderate, long- term, beneficial impacts on cultural Implementation of this alternative would landscapes in the park because the have minor to moderate, long- term, Munson Valley, Rim Village, and Rim beneficial impacts on cultural landscapes Drive cultural landscapes would be in the park because the Munson Valley, managed as cultural heritage zones to Rim Village, and Rim Drive cultural preserve their documented values, and landscapes would be managed as cultural nonhistoric structures and facilities would heritage zones to maximize preservation of be removed throughout the park. their significant documented values and features. Although this alternative would There would be no adverse impacts on have a minor to moderate, long- term, resources or values whose conservation is adverse effect on Rim Drive, because a (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes portion of the road would be closed to identified in the national park’s establish- vehicular traffic and thus alter historic use ing legislation, (2) key to the cultural

178 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 4 integrity or opportunities for enjoyment of become more significant to the Klamath the national park, or (3) identified as a goal Tribes and other affiliated Native in this General Management Plan or other American groups. Actions under this relevant National Park Service planning alternative such as natural resource documents. Consequently, there would be preservation and restoration and no impairment of resources or values reduction of human presence on the associated with cultural landscapes. natural landscape would contribute negligible to minor long- term beneficial Section 106 Summary. For purposes of effects to any overall cumulative effect on Section 106, the determination of effect of ethnographic resources. actions under this alternative on cultural landscapes would be no adverse effect. Conclusion. Implementation of this alternative would generally have the same Ethnographic Resources impacts on ethnographic resources as those listed under alternative 1. However, Implementation of this alternative would emphasis on natural resource preserva- generally have the same impacts on tion/restoration and reduction of human ethnographic resources as those listed presence on the natural landscape could under alternative 1. However, emphasis on be expected have negligible to minor natural resource preservation and beneficial long- term impacts on such restoration and reduction of human resources. presence on the natural landscape could be expected to have negligible to minor, There would be no adverse impacts on beneficial, long- term impacts on such resources or values whose conservation is resources. Emphasis on natural resource (1) necessary to fulfill specific purposes preservation/restoration and reduction of identified in the national park’s establish- human presence on the natural landscape ing legislation, (2) key to the cultural could be expected to reduce intrusion on integrity or opportunities for enjoyment of sacred sites or landscapes and important the national park, or (3) identified as a goal traditional use activity areas, thus resulting in this General Management Plan or other in some negligible to minor, beneficial, relevant National Park Service planning long- term improvement in ethnographic documents. Consequently, there would be resource conditions and access to and/or no impairment of resources or values accommodation of various groups’ associated with ethnographic resources. traditional practices or beliefs relating to such sites. Section 106 Summary. No Traditional Cultural Properties are affected by actions Cumulative Effects. National Park under this alternative. Thus Section 106 Service development and administrative/ determinations are unnecessary. maintenance operations, as well as increasing visitor use of the national park Museum Collections since its establishment, have had and are continuing to have cumulative adverse, Implementation of this alternative would negligible to minor effects on ethno- have beneficial minor to moderate long- graphic resources. As sacred sites in term impacts on the park’s museum south- central Oregon have been lost over collections because the increased volume time, those remaining in the park have of the collections that would result from

179 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES expanded park research activities, as well ments. Consequently, there would be no as acquisition of pertinent park- related impairment of resources or values collection materials not currently owned associated with the park’s museum or managed by the National Park Service, collections. would be stored in an offsite facility that met professional and NPS museum NATURAL RESOURCES standards. Thus, provision for adequate storage and workspace would be provided Biotic Communities to improve curation, protection, and access to the collections, and staffing The following actions would potentially would be increased to reduce the have localized minor to more widespread cataloging backlog. moderate long- term beneficial effects on biotic communities. The intensity of the Cumulative Effects. Since the national effects would likely be greater over time as park was established, the combination of more knowledge of the resources is limited staffing and lack of storage and accumulated, partnerships expand, and workspace that meets professional and resource management and restoration NPS museum standards have hindered actions are implemented that further the endeavors to improve care of and access to preservation and restoration of native the museum collections and address the species, communities, and processes. ever- increasing cataloging backlog, thus having minor to moderate long- term Removing facilities and restoring areas to adverse effects on such resources. Actions more natural conditions and routing trails under this alternative such as expansion of away from sensitive areas such as wetlands the collections and their storage in an would reduce impacts to biotic offsite facility that meets professional and communities. NPS museum standards and provision for adequate storage, workspace, and staffing Expanding resource management to improve curation, protection, and programs, data collection, resource staff, access to the collections would contribute and partnering would indirectly con- to beneficial, minor to moderate, long- tribute to improved resource conditions term effects to any overall cumulative by enhancing the Park Service’s know- effect on the park’s museum collections. ledge and capabilities for restoring and maintaining native species, communities, Conclusion. Implementation of alterna- and processes. tive 4 would have beneficial, minor to moderate, long- term impacts on the Emphasizing visitor activities that have park’s museum collections. There would low environmental impact and focusing be no adverse impacts on resources or interpretive programs on resource values whose conservation is (1) necessary stewardship would also indirectly to fulfill specific purposes identified in the contribute to improved resource national park’s establishing legislation, (2) conditions by reducing the potential for key to the cultural integrity or opportuni- visitor related impacts. ties for enjoyment of the national park, or (3) identified as a goal in this General Closing roads (i.e., portion of Rim Drive, Management Plan or other relevant Grayback Road) could reduce road kills, National Park Service planning docu- disturbance to wildlife, and off- road

180 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 4 driving and associated impacts to roadside for the no- action alternative. Overall resources (e.g., soils, vegetation). cumulative impacts would be both long term, minor to major, adverse, and Eliminating snowmobiling along the beneficial. Adverse impacts would be North Entrance Road and winter plowing primarily because of the widespread to the rim would seasonally reduce use logging and fire suppression on lands and disturbance to wildlife in these areas surrounding the park and beneficial and could enhance wildlife migration impacts would be from restoration and patterns. The plowed road corridor would protection programs affecting lands both be less of an impediment to wildlife within and outside the park. Alternative 4’s movement (e.g., elk, deer, bear). contribution to these adverse impacts would be negligible to minor. However, Although snowmobiling would no longer actions under alternative 4, particularly be allowed, other winter recreational reduced development and enhanced activities can create added energetic stress resource management programs, would in winter when most wildlife species are promote the further protection, already stressed. The Park Service would maintenance, and restoration of native initiate a long- term data gathering and biological communities. Therefore, monitoring program to evaluate winter use alternative 4 would also contribute a and associated impacts to ensure long- minor to moderate beneficial effect to the term protection of park resources. overall cumulative impacts. Management actions, such as restrictions on off- trail use, specific area closures, Conclusion. The greater emphasis on increased patrols, visitor education, or reduction in development and expanded limits on use or party sizes, would be taken resource management programs and as necessary to address impacts. restoration in the park along with increased visitor education under this Adaptive use or removal of existing alternative would contribute to improved buildings is not expected to result in new resource conditions within the park, resource impacts. These buildings are potentially having localized minor to more located in existing, previously disturbed widespread moderate, long- term, developed areas. Park functions relocated beneficial effects on biotic communities. from the park to nearby communities Biotic communities would not be impaired would be housed in existing structures if by the actions proposed under this possible. However, if new buildings were alternative. necessary, construction activities would have short- term effects on soils and Cumulative impacts would be long- term, vegetation. Depending on whether of not and both major adverse and beneficial. facilities were built on previously Adverse impacts would be primarily disturbed sites, the long- term, adverse because of the widespread logging and fire effects with mitigation would be negligible suppression on lands surrounding the to minor. park and beneficial impacts would be from restoration and protection programs, Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts affecting lands both within and outside the on biotic communities from land uses and park. Alternative 4’s contribution to activities in the park and surrounding adverse impacts would be minor and its lands would be similar to those described

181 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES contribution to beneficial effects minor to long- term effects to the overall cumulative moderate. impacts.

Threatened, Endangered, Conclusion. Greater emphasis on and Sensitive Species resource evaluations, surveys, monitoring, and facility removal and restoration would Alternative 4 emphasizes preservation of enhance the opportunities for positive native species and restoration of disturbed effects on threatened and endangered areas. A number of actions would reduce species and their habitat within the park. the extent of impacts from development Thus, alternative 4 would not be likely to and human presence in the park. There adversely affect and would not result in would be fewer buildings and facilities in impairment to these species. Alternative 4 the park. Grayback Trail could be would contribute beneficial long- term removed and a large section of Rim Drive effects to the overall cumulative impacts. would be closed to motorized use. Eliminating snowmobiling along the Crater Lake North Entrance Road and winter plowing to the rim would seasonally reduce use Alternative 4 emphasizes the preservation and disturbance to wildlife in these areas of natural resources. In addition to the and could enhance wildlife migration current preservation actions – minimizing patterns and habitat for winter carnivores development with the caldera and lake (e.g., wolverine, fisher, lynx). A long- term drainage, and restricting access and data gathering and monitoring program boating as in alternative 1 – the park would would evaluate winter use and associated seek to restore the natural systems of impacts to ensure long- term protection of Crater Lake. Winter plowing to the rim threatened and endangered species. would stop, except for spring opening. Overall, alternative 4 would have a Vehicular access to the rim would be via beneficial effect on threatened and snowcoach. Minimizing snow plowing to endangered species and their habitat. the rim would begin to restore natural deposition processes and would minimize Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts potential hydrocarbons and other vehicle on special status species and their habitat caused pollutants. from land uses and activities in the park and surrounding lands would be similar to Snowmobile access along North Junction those described for alternative 1 (no- Road would be stopped. Snowmobiles action alternative). Adverse impacts would raise concerns about long- term impacts occur primarily because of the alteration from high pollution emissions. Emissions and fragmentation of forests surrounding from 2- stroke engine exhaust include the park due to the persisting impacts of monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrous oxides, logging and fire suppression. Restoration and particulate matter (NPS 1999e). These and protection programs affecting lands concerns include the possibility that both within and outside of the park may accumulations of pollutants in the snow have adverse short- term effects, but pack and resultant snow pack runoff may would not be likely to adversely affect be having adverse impacts on water quality special status species over the long- term. and associated aquatic systems, although Alternative 4 would contribute beneficial impacts from snow pack runoff that is contaminated with snowmobile pollutants

182 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 4 have not been found. Impacts on water Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative actions quality are likely short term and localized would contribute both adverse and along travel routes because of the low beneficial impacts to water quality. volume of use and because snowmobiles Implementation of this alternative would are restricted to the North Entrance Road, generally have the same cumulative effects which does not follow near any streams. on Crater Lake as those listed under Although snowmobile use is not expected alternative 1. to appreciably increase, the Park Service would initiate a long- term data gathering Conclusion. Implementation of this and monitoring program to evaluate use alternative would generally have the same and associated impacts as part of an impacts on Crater Lake as those listed overall winter recreational use study. under alternative 1. This alternative would have a negligible, long- term, beneficial Management actions to mitigate no point effect on water quality within Crater Lake. source pollution would be implemented if In accordance with the criteria for necessary. Water quality could benefit determining impairment, there would be from increased protection measures, no major adverse impacts on water quality, although the extent of potential beneficial and therefore no impairment of water effects is unknown, but would likely be quality. localized and minor. Water Resources The long- term program would expand to monitor a diverse array of chemical, phys- The removal or adaptive use of facilities ical, and biological properties beyond would have the potential to impact water those in alternative 1. Most of the sample quality through ground disturbance, and data collection would continue to which would result in increased surface occur in the summer months when the runoff and erosion. However, due to the lake is easily accessible. Occasional winter limited extent of potential ground dis- studies are also conducted. The program turbance and implementation of miti- would continue to add devices capable of gation measures such as silt fences, erosion year- round sample and data collection to control blankets, mulch, and revegetation gain a better understanding of processes to control impacts, increased sedimenta- occurring during the winter months. tion and turbidity would be temporary and Emphasis would be on ensuring that all negligible. research is as nonmanipulative as possible. Sample and data processing, Reduction in the extent of facilities and along with data analysis and trend use in the park would reduce water use in monitoring, would occur on a regular the park. This would likely have a minor basis. Results of the monitoring studies are beneficial effect on water quantity in documented on an annual basis with Annie Creek because although overall special emphasis on long- term trend development would be reduced, the major analysis. Increased monitoring would developed areas in the park would remain. result in long- term beneficial impacts on Closure of the Grayback Trail and a water quality. section of the Rim Drive to traffic and elimination of winter access to the rim via private vehicles, including snowmobiles, could benefit water quality because

183 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES vehicular emissions or deposition of quantity in Annie Creek to the overall petroleum products would be eliminated, cumulative impact. at least seasonally, in these areas. Bene- ficial effects would be localized and minor. Conclusion. Alternative 4 would have a negligible adverse effect on water quality Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts due to construction activities and a minor on water resources from land uses and beneficial effect on Annie Creek water activities in the park and surrounding quantity. Water quality could benefit from lands would be similar to those described reduced vehicle use in some areas of the for alternative 1 (no- action alternative). park, although the extent of potential The park’s fire management program may beneficial would likely be localized and adversely impact water quality (e.g., minor. Water resources would not be sedimentation, erosion) due to the effects impaired by the actions proposed under of fires, particularly high intensity fires. this alternative. The cumulative actions in Park construction and rehabilitation conjunction with alternative 4 would proposals would also contribute to result in short- and long- term, negligible adverse impacts from increased surface to minor, adverse, and beneficial impacts runoff and erosion. Best management on water quality and quantity. Alternative practices such as erosion and sediment 4 would contribute a localized, negligible, controls would be employed to minimize adverse, and minor, beneficial impact on these impacts. Impacts would be localized, water quality, and a minor increase in short- term, and minor. Minor beneficial water quantity in Annie Creek to the cumulative actions would include ongoing overall cumulative impact. trails rehabilitation and relocation within the park that would reduce localized Air Quality erosion and runoff. Possible closure and restoration of the The replacement of the waterline from Grayback Trail would benefit air quality Munson Springs to Garfield would likely because of vehicular emissions would be reduce water loss by the system. Imple- eliminated in this area. Closure of a section mentation of actions within the visitor of the Rim Drive to traffic and elimination services plan would also reduce water use of winter access to the rim via private within the park. Reductions in water use vehicles, including snowmobiles, would would have a minor, beneficial effect on have similar seasonal effects. Beneficial water quantity in Annie Creek. effects would be localized and negligible because air stagnation that would allow The impacts of other actions described concentration of pollutants is rare and/or above in conjunction with the impacts of relatively low levels of use that would be alternative 4 would result in localized, eliminated. minor, adverse, and beneficial impacts on water quality and minor to moderate There would be some short- term, beneficial effects on water quantity in localized impacts on air quality resulting Annie Creek. Alternative 4 would from particulates or machinery fumes contribute a localized, negligible, adverse, generated during removal or rehabilitation and minor, beneficial impact on water of facilities. The elevation and geography quality, and a minor increase in water make the park susceptible to winds that tend to disperse particulates and other

184 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 4 pollutants. Mitigation measures, such as contribute a negligible, short- term, watering and revegetation of disturbed adverse, and negligible, long- term, areas, requiring machinery to meet emis- beneficial increment to the cumulative sion standards, would be employed. Ef- effect. fects would be short- term and negligible, lasting only during the construction VISITOR USE period. Diversity of Recreational Opportunity Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts on air quality from actions in the park and Relative to the no- action alternative, surrounding lands would be similar to alternative 4 would reduce the range of those described for the no- action alterna- visitor experience. Visitor experience tive. The park’s air quality is good with would stress low environmental impact on negligible effects from regional pollution and harmony with the park’s resources. sources outside the park. Forest fires on During the summer, many existing surrounding lands could contribute opportunities for scenic driving and back particulates for limited periods of time. country hiking and camping would Degradation of air quality from the park’s continue. Nature viewing and boat tours fire management program could result in would also continue to be available. New moderate short- term impacts, but the opportunities for hiking and solitude along program would be in conformance with the caldera rim would be added with the the Clean Air Act, Oregon State Smoke closure of a portion of Rim Drive between Management Plan, and the Oregon Cleetwood Cove and Kerr Notch to Visibility Protection Plan. Park construc- vehicular traffic. Visitors would be able to tion and rehabilitation proposals would experience the caldera rim and views of cause localized increases in dust and the lake without the intrusion of vehicular emissions from construction vehicles and traffic. There would be a reduction in equipment, resulting in localized, short- front country areas and a corresponding term effects on air quality. The cumulative decrease in the number of short actions in conjunction with the no- action interpretive hiking trails. Backcountry alternative would result in short- term, hiking and camping opportunities would moderate, adverse impacts on air quality. increase. Alternative 4 would contribute a negligible, short- term, adverse and Winter access to the park beyond Mazama negligible, long- term, beneficial increment Village would be by snowcoach only, to the cumulative effect. which would offer a new visitor experience. There would be no winter private Conclusion. Long- term beneficial vehicle access to Rim Village, which would impacts to air quality within the park eliminate the traditional visitor experience under this alternative would be negligible. of driving to the rim in the winter. Snow- Short- term construction related impacts mobile access along the North Entrance would be negligible. Air quality would not Road to North Junction would not be be impaired by the actions proposed under allowed, resulting in a loss of this winter this alternative. The cumulative actions in visitor experience. There would be no conjunction with alternative 4 would motorized access and no maintained trail result in short- term, moderate, adverse on Grayback Drive, which would be impacts on air quality. Alternative 4 would allowed to return to natural conditions.

185 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Visitors would gain a new winter impacts on Rim Drive as the centerpiece of snowcoach experience and the new the Volcanic Legacy Scenic Byway and All experience of hiking without vehicular American Road. traffic on a portion of Rim Drive. These new experiences would be offset by a loss Access to trailheads and opportunities for of the Rim Drive automobile experience day hikes on frontcountry trails along the which is very important to most visitors. park’s road system would be reduced and Overall, the change in the diversity of many front country short trail hiking visitor experience would be readily experiences would be lost. The entire trail apparent and would affect a relatively system would be reviewed and new back- large number of visitors, resulting in country trails might be provided (e.g. low moderate, adverse impacts on the diversity elevation nature trails). Some trails might of visitor opportunity. be eliminated and the area rehabilitated. Rim Drive between Cleetwood Cove and Visitor Access and Circulation Kerr Notch would be closed to private vehicles, and would thus offer new oppor- Relative to the no action alternative, under tunities for nonmotorized activities. Loss alternative 4 motor vehicle accessibility to of frontcountry trails is important because the park would be reduced. During peak visitor surveys indicate that short trails are use most of the park’s road system would extremely important to a majority of be accessible and visitors would be able to visitors. A reduction of frontcountry trail drive to many locations in the park. A access would affect a relatively large portion of Rim Drive between Cleetwood number of visitors. Overall, changes in the Cove and Kerr Notch would be closed to way visitors access the park would be motorized travel. The Grayback Drive readily apparent and would affect a would also be closed to motorized travel moderate number of visitors resulting in and the centerpiece of the automobile tour moderate, long- term, adverse impacts to experience in the park would be lost. park accessibility. During the winter months the park would not be accessible via private vehicle Education and Orientation beyond Mazama Village. To alleviate traffic congestion, especially along Rim Under alternative 4 interpretive and Drive during the summer season, use of a educational programs would focus on mandatory alternative transportation stewardship and resource protection of system would be explored. A feasibility the park’s natural and cultural resources. analysis would determine whether the Interpretive programs would offer in- shuttle would be concession, Park Service depth information on park resources. operated, or a service contract. Many orientation and education efforts would occur offsite to prepare visitors for Changes in motorized accessibility would and foster stewardship. Many interpretive be detectable and localized in area; opportunities at the park would be self- however modification to traffic flow on directed or self- serve, and contact with Rim Drive would affect a large number of park interpretive staff would necessitate visitors, resulting in moderate, long- term, visitors stopping at the Visitor Information adverse impacts to motorized accessibility. Building or at Rim Village. Changes in Closure of a portion of Rim Drive may interpretive programs would be detectable have moderate long- term, adverse, and would affect a relatively large number

186 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 4 of visitors resulting in moderate, long- Cumulative Impacts. Past and ongoing term, adverse impacts on visitor oppor- projects including development of front tunities to participate in interpretive country trails, reconfiguration of Rim programs. Village, and adaptive reuse of historic structures in Munson Valley and Rim Visitor Facilities and Services Village have long- term major beneficial impacts on visitor experience. Past actions, Opportunities for visitors to access and such as the relocation of the Cleetwood use park facilities and services would Trail and the development of the Castle decrease. Most existing visitor use Crest and Godfrey Trails, have increased facilities would remain, however during visitor access to front country trails. the winter months facilities beyond Reconfiguration of Rim Village would Mazama Village would not be available. change the way visitors view the lake at This decrease would be partially offset by Rim Village. Overall these projects have a slight increase in visitor use of facilities at the potential to increase the diversity, of Mazama Village associated with snow- visitor experience, enhance the range of coach operations. Portions of park roads interpretative programs, expand access to would be closed to private vehicles. park facilities, and to improve the quality Changes in visitor experience of park of visitor experience values such as sounds facilities would be readily apparent and of nature and scenic views. Cumulative would affect a relatively large number of actions in conjunction with alternative 4 visitors, resulting in a moderate, adverse would have an overall major long- term impact on visitor experience of park beneficial impact. Alternative 4 would facilities and structures. contribute a moderate, adverse increment to cumulative impacts to visitor Soundscapes and Scenic Quality experience. Alternative 4 would also contribute a moderate beneficial Opportunities to visit the backcountry to increment to cumulative impacts to scenic experience natural sounds and tranquility vistas. would increase. Frontcountry areas would be reduced and noise levels associated Conclusion. Alternative 4 would have a with trailheads and front country areas moderate, long- term adverse impact on would also be reduced. During the long the diversity of visitor opportunities, winter season, visitors would arrive at the visitor accessibility, and on the ability of caldera rim via snowcoach and would have visitors to participate in educational and the opportunity to experience what they interpretive programs. There would be perceive as a pristine winter landscape and moderate, long term adverse impacts on untrammeled lake views at the caldera rim. visitor enjoyment of park facilities and The number of frontcountry develop- services. There would also be a moderate, ments would be reduced resulting in a beneficial impact to winter scenic vistas at readily apparent change in the way visitors the rim. Cumulative actions in conjunction view and perceive the park’s natural with alternative 4 would have an overall resources. Therefore alternative 4 would major, long- term, beneficial impact. result in moderate, beneficial impacts to Alternative 4 would contribute a moderate scenic vistas. adverse increment to cumulative impacts to visitor experience.

187 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

OPERATIONS months. The Munson Valley Road would need some level of grooming to enable Park Operations operation of the winter snowcoach. Decreased winter maintenance needs Under alternative 4 the trend in the built would be partially offset by a concentrated environment would a reduction in need in the early spring to open park roads facilities. Buildings that are not historic to vehicular traffic. Changes in park and not essential to park functions would operations would be readily apparent and be removed and the area rehabilitated. would have appreciable effects on park Removal of some buildings and closing and concession abilities to provide most buildings during the winter months necessary services and facilities, resulting would reduce maintenance and utilities in a moderate, beneficial impact on park requirements. The park maintenance staff operations. would continue to support park operations from the central maintenance Cumulative Impacts. Past facility devel- facility located at Munson Valley. opment, particularly at the rim, has Maintenance staff would continue to affected park operations. Ongoing actions maintain park roads, utilities, and including scaling back development at Rim structures. The Munson Valley Road to Village and improving parking and Rim Village would not be plowed snow circulation have had a moderate, during the winter months. Spring snow beneficial, cumulative impact on park removal from Rim Drive would increase in operations. Alternative 4 in conjunction difficulty and complexity, because with past and ongoing activities would maintenance crews would first have to have a moderate to major, beneficial clear the park roads from Mazama Village cumulative effect. This alternative would up Munson Valley before tackling the contribute a moderate beneficial heavy snows on Rim Drive. This would increment to beneficial cumulative impact increase the time for spring snow- clearing to park operations. with the consequent increase in maintenance responsibility. Conclusion. Alternative 4 would result in moderate, beneficial impacts to park Many park functions would be located operations. Alternative 4, in conjunction outside of the park. Park functions that are with past and ongoing activities, would by necessity park- based, such as mainte- have a moderate to major beneficial nance and law enforcement would be cumulative effect. This alternative would retained in the park. Different options for contribute a moderate increment to accommodating operations outside the beneficial cumulative impact to park park boundary would be studied before operations. implementing any actions. Actions that propose purchasing property outside the Concession Operations boundary would require additional authorization. The composition of the During peak use in the summer concession staff would increase in the areas of activities would remain the same. Winter resource preservation, protection, access to the rim would be via snowcoach restoration, and education activities. rather than private vehicle. The change is There would be a decreased need for not predicted to have an impact on the maintenance operations during the winter small number of visitors to the rim in the

188

winter; however, the change in access These and other actions would require an could have a moderate, long- term, increased budget and an increased number adverse impact on operations at the rim of staff positions in the areas of resource due to changes in access for supplies and preservation, restoration, protection, and employees. education. Staffing would increase by 1 additional FTE to achieve preservation Cumulative Impacts. Past actions, and restoration goals. A base operating including restoration of the Crater Lake budget of $4,419,760 is needed to fund this Lodge, and ongoing actions, such as alternative. reconfiguration of park facilities at the rim and at Mazama Village, have had a In addition, approximately $3.9 million moderate, beneficial impact on would be spent over the life of the plan on concessioner activity. These actions, in various projects and services, an increase conjunction with alternative 4, would have of $140,000 compared to the no - action both moderate adverse and beneficial alternative. These expenditures could cumulative impacts on concession result in moderate to major, short- term, operations. Alternative 4 would contribute beneficial impacts on individual firms and a moderate, adverse impact to the employees (increased business and profits, cumulative effect. increased employment opportunities, increased income, etc.). Overall impacts on Conclusion. Alternative 4 would result in a the regional economy (effects on the moderate, long- term adverse impact on economic indicators of income, concessioner activities and would unemployment rate, poverty rate, etc.), contribute moderate, beneficial however, would be negligible because of cumulative impacts on concession the size and the phasing of the projects operations. over the next 15 to 20 years.

SOCIOECONOMIC Moving some administrative, operations, ENVIRONMENT and visitor contact functions to areas outside the park would result in the Natural resource preservation and purchase and/or long- term lease of land and building(s) and/or the construction of restoration are driving elements of new buildings in gateway areas. The need alternative 4. Low- impact visitor activities for additional staff may increase the need are emphasized. The built environment is for housing; this, combined with the reduced. Nonhistoric buildings that are increasing desirability of living in the not essential to park operations would be gateway communities adds to the demand removed and the land restored. Vehicle for local housing and other locally provided access to some parts of the park would be goods. Hiring additional staff results in a curtailed. Some trails and some roads may small increase in the local population that be removed and rehabilitated. Part of the contributes to the overall growth in the Rim Road becomes accessible to pedes- gateway communities. trians only. Winter access would be New facility construction would result in a limited to Route 62 and snowcoach from short- term, positive impact on the regional Mazama parking lot. This alternative calls economy, mostly affecting the construction for most park operations and visitor sector of the economy. The purchase of contact facilities to be relocated outside land (on a willing- buyer/willing- seller the park.

189 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES basis) by the federal government would participation and input. In conjunction result in some long- term loss of local real- with other past, present, and reasonably estate tax revenue. However, the amount foreseeable actions, no additional of property tax revenue lost to the three cumulative impacts are expected. counties would be minor compared to the tax revenues collected by Douglas County Conclusion. An increase in park staffing (tax revenues $ 58.2 million in 2002/03), levels by 1 full- time employee would have Jackson County (tax revenues $148.1 a moderate impact on the local gateway million in 2002), and Klamath County (tax communities’ economies and a negligible revenues of about $37 million, 2002). impact on the regional economy. Acquisition of other federally owned land Additional employees would likely for these purposes would not result in any purchase some goods and services from change in real estate taxes. within the gateway communities.

Visitor use of the park would be reduced. Approximately $3.9 million (in addition to Removal of facilities and services from the ongoing actions and projects) would be park and the shift to less use of motorized spent over the life of the plan on various vehicles and reduced accessibility for projects, an increase of $140,000 motorized vehicles would tend to reduce compared to the no- action alternative. the number of visitors to the park. Road These expenditures could result in closures and restoration, reduced winter moderate to major, short- term, beneficial snow plowing, and closing the north impacts for individual firms and employ- junction road to snowmobiling would also ees (increased business and profits, reduce access and use of some parts of the increased employment opportunities, park. Concession businesses may be increased income, etc.). Overall impacts on reduced or eliminated as incompatible the regional economy (effects on the with the new direction for this park. economic indicators of income, unemployment rate, poverty rate, etc.), The need for additional staff may increase however, would be negligible because of the need for housing; this, combined with the size and the phasing of the projects the increasing desirability of living in the over the next 15 to 20 years. gateway communities adds to the demand for local housing and other locally Moving park functions and visitor contact provided goods. Hiring additional staff facilities outside the park may increase the results in a small increase in the local numbers of visitors that stop in gateway population that contributes to the overall towns. This may result in additional growth in the gateway communities. tourism related spending for locally provided goods and services within the Cumulative Impacts. Additional changes region and gateway towns perhaps or shocks (either positive or negative) to increasing business opportunities, income, the local and regional socioeconomic and employment. On the other hand, environment within which the park exists reduced access to the park may reduce the are not expected. No other actions that numbers of visitors that come to the park, could have cumulative effects when perhaps negatively affecting the gateway combined with the impacts of alterative 4 communities and the regional tourism have been identified during this planning related businesses. process, which has included public

190 Impacts of Implementing Alternative 4

Moving administrative functions and park employee housing outside the parks would RELATIONSHIP OF SHORT- TERM result in the purchase or long- term lease USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND of land and the construction of buildings THE MAINTENANCE AND in local gateway areas, with short- term, ENHANCEMENT OF LONG- TERM beneficial impacts on the local economy, PRODUCTIVITY mostly affecting the construction sector and a few landowners. The vast majority of the park would be protected in a natural state and would The need for additional staff may increase maintain its long- term productivity. The the need for housing; this, combined with short- term disturbance of soils, the increasing desirability of living in the vegetation, and wildlife habitat from gateway communities adds to the demand removing facilities and rehabilitating for local housing and other locally disturbed areas would be offset by the provided goods. Hiring additional staff increased long- term protection of soils results in a small increase in the local and restoration of vegetation and wildlife population that contributes to the overall habitat. growth in the gateway communities. IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES

Concession activities would also change in Construction and restoration materials the winter to accommodate snowcoach and energy used would be irretrievably access to the park, requiring a year- round lost. There would also be an irretrievable maintenance responsibility. These changes and irreversible commitment of resources would result in a moderate adverse impact in terms of funds expended on both labor on concession operations. The negligible and materials. and minor impacts are described in the foregoing analysis.

191

192 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

Consultation and coordination among the A third newsletter distributed in the spring government agencies, organizations, and of 2002 described the draft alternative the public were an important part of the concepts and management zoning for planning process for the Final General managing the park. A total of 95 comments Management Plan / Environmental Impact were received in response to that news- Statement for Crater Lake National Park. letter. In general opinions were fairly The public had two primary avenues by divided in support of individual alterna- which it participated during the tives and how to address the issues. A development of the plan: participation in number of letters favored continued public meetings and response to snowmobile use while other people newsletters. favored elimination of snowmobiles in the park. Opinions were divided on managing PUBLIC MEETINGS AND traffic on Rim Drive — maintaining NEWSLETTERS current two- way traffic, converting part of the road to one- way traffic, or closure of Public meetings and newsletters were used the road to traffic. Most respondents to keep the public informed and involved favored use of shuttles. A number of in the planning process for Crater Lake people who opposed partnering with National Park. A mailing list was compiled private industry were concerned with that consisted of members of government large- scale commercialization within the agencies, nongovernmental groups, park. businesses, legislators, local governments, and interested citizens. CONSULTATION WITH THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE The notice of intent to prepare an AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON environmental impact statement was HISTORIC PRESERVATION published in the Federal Register on May 25, 2001. A newsletter issued January 2001 Agencies that have direct or indirect described the planning effort. Public jurisdiction over historic properties are meetings were held during April 2001 in required by section 106 of the National Klamath Falls, Medford, Roseburg, and Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as Salem and were attended by 96 people. A amended (16 USC 470, et seq.) to take into total of 72 written comments were account the effect of any undertaking on received in response to that newsletter. A properties eligible for the National second newsletter issued in July 2001 Register of Historic Places. To meet the summarized the comments received in the requirements of 36 CFR 800, the National meetings and in response to newsletter 1. Park Service sent letters to the Oregon These comments were used to complete Historic Preservation Office and the the park purpose and significance Advisory Council on Historic Preservation statements that serve as the foundation for on November 17, 2000, inviting their the rest of the planning. Comments on participation in the planning process. Both various issues facing the park were offices were sent all the newsletters with a referred to during development of the request for comments. general management plan.

195 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

CONSULTATION WITH NATIVE the following federally threatened species: AMERICANS bald eagle, northern spotted owl, and bull trout. The National Park Service will Letters were sent in November 2000 to the initiate formal consultation with the Cow Creek Band of the Umpqua Indian USFWS regarding the effects on bald Tribe and the Klamath Tribes to invite eagle, northern spotted owl, Canada lynx, their participation in the planning process. and bull trout. The USFWS was sent a The tribes were informed on the scope of copy of the public draft of this plan for the planning project and the preliminary their review and to serve as a biological alternatives by newsletter. The first official assessment for consultation. Comments government- to- government consultation and results of the consultation from with the Klamath Tribes in relation to park USFWS are included in the final environ- projects took place in November 2001 and mental impact statement. can be credited largely to a meeting with members of the tribal council in August. AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS Both meetings set some parameters for TO WHOM THIS DOCUMENT WAS consulting with tribal staff while a SENT cooperative agreement on conducting ongoing consultation was being negotiated. Federal Agencies The tribes were sent the draft plan for review and comment. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Forest Service CONSULTATION WITH THE U.S. Winema National Forest FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Rogue River National Forest Umpqua National Forest A list of federally threatened, endangered, USFS Toketee Ranger Station and proposed species that may be present, Chiloquin Ranger District or in the vicinity of Crater Lake National Department of the Interior Park dated June 28, 2002, was received Fish and Wildlife Service from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Park Service (USFWS) and is included in appendix B. A Office of Public Affairs meeting between the Park Service and the Oregon Caves National Monument USFWS Klamath Falls Field Office to Water Rights Branch discuss consultation responsibilities for EPA, Region 10 the general management plan and other park projects was held in May 2003. American Indian Tribes Additional discussions with the USFWS The Klamath Tribe concerning effects on federally listed Klamath Tribe Attorney species also occurred as part of the Klamath Tribe Planning Department preparation of the draft plan and Cow Creek Band of the Umpqua Tribe environmental impact statement. U.S. Senators and Representatives The National Park Service has determined the preferred alternative may affect, but Senator Ron Wyden would not be likely to adversely, the Lost Senator Gorden Smith River sucker, shortnose sucker, or Canada Congressman David Wu, 1st District lynx and may have some adverse effect on Congressman Greg Walden, 2nd District

196 Summary of Public Involvement

Congressman Earl Blumenauer, 3rd Backcountry Horsemen District Bay Area Economics Congressman Peter DeFazio, 4th District Blue Ribbon Coalition Congressman Darlene Hooley, 5th Broken Arrowhead Ranch District CC Riders Snowmobile Club Century West State Government Chiloquin Ridge Riders Coalition of Equestrians Club Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife College of Oceanography Oregon Department of Transportation Crater Lake Lodge, Inc. Oregon Historical Preservation Office Dain Bosworth, Inc. Oregon Natural Resources Council David Evans and Associates Jason Atkinson, Oregon Senate Delaware North Companies Lenn Hannon, Oregon Senate Denali National Park Concessions Office Steve Harper, Oregon House of Diamond Lake Homeowners Representatives District Ranger, Klamath Ranger District Tim Knopp, Oregon House of Ecology of Environment, Inc. Representatives Edelweiss Ski Club Oregon State Parks Estramade Ranch Fletcher Farr Ayotte Local Governments Friends of Crater Lake National Park GM, Paradise Inn, National Park Inn City of Chiloquin Goold's Sprague River Ranch, Inc. City of Klamath Falls Grants Pass Nordic Ski Club Planning Director Grants Pass Resource Area City of Medford Institute for Policy Research, Planning Director Northwestern U. City of Roseburg J & E Ranch Deschutes County Library Jack Owens Ranches Douglas County Library KAGO Eugene Library KDRV, Channel 12 Jackson County Comissioners Klamath Basin Snowdrifters Jackson County Planning Director Klamath Bow Hunters Josephine County Library Klamath Co Economic Development Assn. Klamath County Comissioners Klamath County Economic Development. Klamath County Planning Director Association Klamath County Library Klamath Motor Sports Klamath County Museum Knipe and Knipe, Inc. Multnomah County Library KOIN - TV Prospect Schools KOMO TV Roseburg Area Chamber of Commerce KOTI TV Salem Library KPIC, Channel 4 KS Wild Organizations / Businesses KTVL, Channel 10 Lake Quinault Lodge Alla Mage Ski Club Landau Associates, Inc. Audubon Magazine League of Women Voters

197 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

LMJ Cattle Company Oregon Tourism Commission Mail Tribune OSSA Medford District Office Ottaway News Service Medford Mail Tribune Robert Peccia & Associates Medford Visitors Convention Bureau Rogue Snowmobile Club Meyer and Glitzenstein Rogue Snowmobiling Mt. Hood Snowmobile Club S.W. Jeffries and Company Murase Associates Sierra Club National Parks Conservation Association Siskiyou Audubon Society Nature Conservancy Siskiyou Reg. Ed. Proj. News Review Umpqua Watersheds, Inc. Nordic Club Northwester Tours Individuals Oregon Historical Society Oregon Hunter's Association There are more than 250 individuals to Oregon Nordic Club whom copies of this EIS were sent. A Oregon Parks Foundation, Inc. complete listing of these names is available Oregon Snowmobile Association from the Superintendent, Crater Lake Oregon State University, College of National Park, Hwy. 62, Crater Lake, OR Forestry 97604.

198 Summary of Public Involvement

RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON five preferred alternative 3, and ten THE DRAFT PLAN preferred alternative 4.

The National Park Service received 646 The primary focus of comments was on comments on the Draft Crater Lake the use of snowmobiles in the park., which National Park General Management Plan / is discussed below. Road closure, shuttles, Environmental Impact Statement. Three and snowcoaches also received a number comments were received from agencies, of comments. Road closure received an one comment was received from an almost equal level of support (6) and American Indian Tribe, and 47 comments opposition (9). Those commenting on were received from individuals. Three shuttles (7) generally supported adding a form letters comprised the remaining 599 shuttle to Rim Drive. Those commenting comments. on snowcoaches (4) also expressed support. Other issues raised included stock The Council on Environmental Quality use, the Mazama laundry and other (1978) guidelines for implementing the facilities, partnerships, RVs, and support National Environmental Policy Act to retain the quiet tranquility of the park. require the National Park Service to respond to “substantive” comments. A Responses to Comments Concerning comment is substantive if it meets any of Snowmobiles the following criteria from Director’s Order 12, “Conservation Planning and The issue that received the majority of Environmental Impact Analysis” (NPS comments was snowmobiling. Letters 1999). from 24 individuals or organizations commented on snowmobile use in the • It questions, with reasonable basis, park. Six letters, including one from the the accuracy of information. Oregon State Snowmobile Association, • It questions, with reasonable basis, supported retaining existing snowmobile the adequacy of environmental access. Bluewater Network, Umpqua analysis. Watersheds, and The Wilderness Society • It presented reasonable alternatives along with 15 individuals supported other than those proposed in the eliminating snowmobiling from the park. plan. Three form letters, each with a number of • It would cause changes or revisions respondents, were received. in the preferred alternative. Two of the form letters supported snow- The comments received from the Klamath mobile use. One of those with 11 copies Tribes expressed support for alternatives supported alternative 3 due to Alternative 1, 2, and 4. The comment expressed 2’s restriction of snowmobile use to requested assurance that snowmobile use current levels. The second form letter, is not negatively impacting natural which had 28 copies, supported alternative resources. 2 and requested a loop route be added for snowmobiles. In addition, this letter did Twenty- nine of the individual comments not support the use of snowcoaches and expressed preference for one of the four felt there was no advantage to seasonal alternatives. Three individuals preferred closure of East Rim Drive. alternative 1, 11 preferred alternative 2,

199 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

The third form letter had the largest safety and enjoyment, or to meet park number of copies, 560. This letter management needs. It also states the supported alternative 4. The letter superintendent will develop and take supported a ban on snowmobiles, closure management actions, as appropriate, to of Rim Road, use of mass transit and ensure that recreational uses and activities shuttle buses, a ban on gas- powered with the park are consistent with motorboats, and the adoption of cleaner, authorizing legislation and do not cause greener fuels. unacceptable impacts to park resources or values. NPS management policies and regulations provide general direction for the use of Current snowmobile use in Crater Lake snowmobiles in areas of the national park National Park is permitted along the system. Executive Order 11644, “Use of North Entrance Road. Access to the rim of Off- Road Vehicles on Public Lands” as the caldera for viewing Crater Lake is amended by EO 11989) provides general consistent with the park’s purpose, direction for the use of snowmobiles and significance, and mission during summer ORVs. Under NPS implementing and winter seasons. Crater Lake National regulations (36 CFR 2.18 and 36 CFR 4.10) Park seeks to provide a variety of visitor the use of snowmobiles and ORVs within experiences while still protecting the areas of the national park system is visitor, employees, and the environment. prohibited, except on water surfaces and designated routes that are used by Comments supporting the elimination of motorboats and motor vehicles during snowmobile use in the park brought up other seasons. The snowmobile regulation questions regarding impacts to wildlife, further states that “snowmobiles are water quality, noise, air quality, and soil. At prohibited except where designated and present, studies have not been conducted only when their use is consistent with the nor data obtained demonstrating the park’s natural, cultural, scenic, and relationships between operation of aesthetic values, safety considerations, snowmobiles and natural resource park management objectives, and will not conditions in the park. NPS has made a disturb wildlife or damage park substantial effort to study snowmobile and resources.” Likewise, 2001 National Park other winter use at Yellowstone and Service Management Policies (8.2.3.1) states Grand Teton parks. One study considered that routes and areas may be designated new snowmobile technology and the for ORV use only when it would be possibility that the use of those technolo- consistent with the purposes for which the gies could reduce the impacts caused by park unit was established and only in snowmobiles. However, it has not been locations where there will be “no adverse determined whether those lessons are impacts on the area’s natural, cultural, applicable elsewhere. The effects of winter scenic and esthetic values, and in recreational activities in Crater Lake consideration of other visitor uses.” In National Park are unknown, although, addition to the above guidance, 2001 adverse impacts are anticipated to be National Park Service Management Policies limited because visitor use levels are (8.2.2.1) state that any restriction of expected to remain relatively low and appropriate recreational uses will be would continue to occur within limited limited to what is necessary to protect park areas within the park. The Park Service resources and values, to promote visitor would initiate a long- term data gathering

200 Summary of Public Involvement and monitoring program to evaluate General Management Plan / Environmental winter use and associated impacts. In Impact Statement. The National Park addition the Park Service would develop a Service values this input, and where methodology to evaluate changes and applicable it will be taken into account in establish limits to changes in resource future plans. However no response is conditions and visitor use and experience. provided to such comments in the Changes in resource conditions and visitor document. use and experience would be addressed through a variety of potential management Photocopies of the letters from agencies, actions. Development of the data the tribe, those having “substantive” gathering and monitoring plan would comments as defined previously, and a follow the GMP. sample of letters representing opinions on the use of snowmobiles are included in the LETTERS TO FOLLOW following section. Responses to the “substantive” comments are provided. Of the many letters received, some have ideas that were outside the scope of this

201

202 Summary of Public Involvement

203 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

204 Summary of Public Involvement

205 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

October 1, 2004

The Klamath Tribes’ Natural Resource Department would like to take this opportunity to provide comments on the Crater Lake National Park Draft Management Plan. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

The primary issues of concern for the Natural Resource Department with regards to Crater Lake National Park are aquatic and wildlife resources that originate within the Park and eventually make their way to the former Klamath Reservation. In addition, wildlife that migrate seasonally between the Park and the former Klamath Reservation are of concern.

With that in mind, the Natural Resource Department supports Alternatives 1, 2, or 4. Alternative 3, we believe, places too much emphasis on visitor services and not enough on protection and enhancement of natural resources. However, if Alternatives 1 or 2 are selected, we recommend that a thorough review of snowmobile compatibility be conducted to assure that snowmobile use is not negatively impacting natural resources. Wildlife is particularly susceptible to displacement and disturbance during the critical winter months.

Thank you for providing the opportunity to comment. Please feel free to contact the Natural Resource Department if you have any questions or comments. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Rick Ward Wildlife Biologist

206 Summary of Public Involvement

207 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

208 Summary of Public Involvement

Wording has been changed.

209 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

210 Summary of Public Involvement

Wording has been changed.

211 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

212 Summary of Public Involvement

213 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Terri Urbanowski, DSC- P National Park Service P.O. Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225- 0287

September 26, 2004

Dear Terri Urbanowski,

RE: Comments – Draft General Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement May 2004

I am Frank Purdy and I am submitting comments for High Desert Trail Riders Back Country Horsemen (HDTRBCHO) as Chairman of Public Lands and Legislation Committee. Moreover, these comments have been endorsed by Ilene Isbold, President Back Country Horsemen of Oregon.

Our concern is that the Draft General Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement MAY 2004 does not clearly recognize that stock use is a historical and legitimate use of the wilderness under the Wilderness Act of 1964. Consequently, the Draft does not respect stock use. Although, in Section PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN, in sub- section Wilderness, the Draft states, “The Park Service seeks to retain wilderness potential in areas proposed as wilderness until enacted or rejected.”, and “ The administration of the wilderness meets the standards within the Wilderness Act.”, the draft states a commitment to the standards of the Wilderness Act. However, we think that the following examples taken from the draft do not demonstrate a clear commitment by the planners to stock use in the back country:

1. On page 21 in the section Planning Issues, there is the question, “Is the park currently providing an appropriate range of visitor experiences.” The paragraph then mentions the question of increasing or decreasing bicycle, hiking, camping and pedestrian access but there is no mention of stock use. 2. On page 23 in section IMPACTS TOPICS – RESOURCES AND VALUES AT STAKE IN THE PLANNING PROCESS, sub- section Wilderness Resources and Values, page 29, there is no mention of stock use as a historical and legitimate use of the park even though its is mentioned that, “Relatively few visitors use the backcountry in the park…” 3. On page 35 in Table 1: Management Zones, in Section BACKCOUNTRY, sub- section APPORPRIATE ACTIVIES OR FACITLITES again there is no mention of stock use or facilities. 4. On page 43, in section ALTERNATIVE 2: PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE- EMPHASIS ON INCREASED OPPORTUNITIES, sub- section CONCEPT AND RELATED ACTIONS, the Draft states, “Management of the park would emphasize increased opportunities for visitors in both recreational diversity and learning about park resources.” In this sub- section is the first mention in the Draft of stock use in reference to closure of

214 Summary of Public Involvement

Wording has been changed.

215 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Grayback Road to motorized traffic. However, the section clearly does not perceive stock use as an opportunity to increase visitors to the Park. 5. On page 97 in Section DIVERSTIY OF RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITES it is obvious that the Park Service made no attempt to survey those who use the back country of the Park including hikers and stock users. 6. On page 98 in Section VISITOR ACCESS AND CIRCULATION is the second and final mention of stock use in the park. It is in reference to the Pacific Crest Trail, a Congressional mandated trail for hikers and stock users, and Bald Crater Loop as, “… the only two trails in park that allows stock use.” The use of the negative phrase, “that allows” demonstrates the plan’s inability to perceive stock use as a legitimate use of the park and its back country. 7. On page 153 the plan does not include stock use in the statement under Section - Impacts of Implementing Alternative 2- Preferred Alternative, “Existing recreational opportunities would remain, including scenic driving, front country and back country hiking, picnicking, and nature viewing.

In conclusion, a plan of over two hundred pages which plans for a diversity of use for a national park of 182,304 acres which only mentions stock use twice and never in the diversity of users, in our opinion, is not giving stock use its legitimate role in the recreational use of the park.

However, I would like to change the tone of this letter from the negative to the positive. A primary purpose of the Back Country Horsemen of Oregon and the High Desert Trail Riders Back Country Horsemen is to preserve the wilderness experience for future generations of stock users. We are most interested in meeting with the National Park Service planners to present our suggestions on how stock use can achieve its historical and legitimate role in the back country of the park. We would also like to meet with Superintendent Charles Lundy as soon as possible to present our specific recommendations on:

1. Changing the plan’s language to recognize the legitimate recreational role of stock use, 2. Connecting park trails such as Sun Creek with State of Oregon Lands and Anderson Bluffs with Cascade/Pothole Spring, 3. Finding another Pack Stock Camp in addition to the Bybee Creek Stock Camp which is the only stock camp in the park, 4. Opening the trails on the eastside of the park such as Cascade Spring and Pothole Spring, 5. Reopening Lighting Creek Trail, Stuart Falls Trail, the trail to the Bybee Creek Stock Camp and the Crater Springs Trail to the trailhead, 6. Implementing adequate facilities for stock use of Grayback Road, and

216 Summary of Public Involvement

Wording has been changed.

217 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

7. Finding stock uses of the areas closed to motor traffic in the winter.

We are looking forward to your response to these comments.

Sincerely,

Frank W. Purdy, Jr. Chairman Public Lands and Legislation Committee HDTRBCH

copies

Charles Lundy, Superintendent Crater Lake National Park Ilene Isbold, President BCHO Stella Fenstermacher, President HDTRBCHO Don Howard, Chairman Public Lands and Legislation BCHO

218 Summary of Public Involvement

To whom it concerns:

Please consider these comments in your Final EIS for the Crater Lake General Management Plan.

Choose Alternative 4 to eliminate snowmobile use and to use snow coaches up to the Rim Village. Otherwise, Alternative 2 is a good alternative.

The FEIS must consider all the impacts of snowmobiles on wildlife, including noise, if the ROD will allow snowmobile use to continue. The DEIS had a very poor, almost non-existent description and analysis of snowmobile impacts. For instance, the EIS should quantify how much unburned fuel (an estimation of how many gallons) is dumped into the snowpack by over 3,500 snowmobiles each winter. The FEIS should also disclose all the known health risks to people from snowmobiles.

Thank you

Thea Dykes 896 Raven Lane Roseburg, OR 97470

219 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

September 2, 2003

Superintendent Charles Lundy Crater Lake National Park P.O. Box 7 Crater Lake, OR 97604

RE: Comments on Crater Lake’s draft General Management Plan

Dear Superintendent Lundy:

The idea of the National Park is powerful and touches upon universal themes, hopes and beliefs such as wilderness, unity and tranquility. More than 200 nations have copied our model. Some say that the National Park idea is one of the greatest gifts America has given to world culture; Bluewater Network agrees.

On behalf of Bluewater Network and the thousands of concerned citizens we represent, I respectfully submit the following comments on the National Park Service’s (NPS) draft general management plan (GMP) for Crater Lake National Park.

To begin we appreciate all the hard work the NPS has put into preparing the draft GMP. We are encouraged by the NPS’ willingness to address the many critical issues that will confront the park over the next couple of decades.

National Park Service Mission Organic Act

“To conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife 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” (Organic Act 16 USC sec 1).

In 1916 Congress passed the Organic Act (16 USC sec. 1). This act contains the precedent setting idea that the United States would protect its national significant unique and irreplaceable resources in a National Park System. Furthermore, the act makes clear that one of the NPS highest priorities is to provide recreation opportunities; however that recreation is to be limited to those activities which leave the resources and values contained in the park system unimpaired for future generations. The mission statement contained in the Organic Act is not an easy task to accomplish. However, just because the NPS mission is difficult does not mean it is impossible.

Support for Alternative Four As stated above, the National Park Service’s primary mission is to leave the resources and wildlife under its care unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations. As the courts have made plainly

220 Summary of Public Involvement clear, all other considerations are secondary to this goal. Therefore, we believe alternative 4 with a few modifications best achieves the NPS mission and should be adopted by the agency.

Specifically, we support alternative 4 and its ban on snowmobiles, the seasonal closure of parts of the rim drive, the closure and reclamation of the Grayback road, and the use of mass transit shuttle buses and snowcoaches to access key park sites.

However, we have some concerns with alternative 4 and would ask that the following be addressed before it is adopted.

Proactive Leadership Partnerships In the draft GMP, the NPS states that one of its goals is to promote and foster partnerships with organizations connected to the park. While Bluewater Network encourages the NPS to reach out to all affected parties, we are deeply concerned about the establishment of formal partnerships. All too often, partnership agreements lead to misunderstandings at best and, at worst, an attempt by these outside interests to circumvent or prevent necessary management actions. Formal partnership agreements lead special interests groups to develop expectations that their desires will be fully accommodated. When they are not, the partnered group can paint the NPS as “non-cooperative” or lead the press and public to believe that the so-called partnership was a token political arrangement. The NPS’ troubles with so-called “cooperating agencies” in establishing winter rules for Yellowstone are a prime example of how problems can arise with partnership agreements.

Bluewater Network is also concerned with the disturbing trend by federal agencies to relinquish more control over resource management decisions to so-called partner local citizen advisory committees. While Bluewater Network certainly supports full citizen involvement in National Park management, the creation of an advisory committee and the potential recommendations of such do not release the NPS from its statutory and administrative mandates to protect and preserve park resources and wildlife. Judicial reviews of “local control” committees at units such as Niobrara National Scenic River have rendered similar opinions.

At a minimum, before the NPS enters into “partnership” with outside interests, we recommend that the final GMP include strong guidelines and policies regarding any partnership agreements. First, except where required by federal law, the NPS should make clear to any potential “partner” that the NPS alone has final say on all management decisions regarding park resources and wildlife. The agency should make expressly clear that “partnership” agreements do not release the agency from its legal mandates (in particular the Organic Act requirement) to leave park resources unimpaired. Next, the NPS should make clear that any partnership agreement will confer no right of control or decision making power over the management of park resources and wildlife, nor any control or decision making power over the development of park structures or facilities. The Park Service should also spell out that partnership agreements confer no right to advertise inside park boundaries. Finally, all partnership agreements should be made available for public review.

Ban gasoline powered engines We were surprised to learn that the NPS allows gasoline powered engines upon Crater Lake. Even with so-called advanced technologies, gasoline powered marine engines can emit significant amounts of air and water pollution. For more on these impacts, please see the 2001 California Air Resources Board study entitled Outboard Engine and Personal Watercraft Emissions to Air and Water: A Laboratory Study.

221 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

We urge the NPS to ban gasoline powered engines from the lake and replace them with electric motors. This simple step will eliminate all air and water pollution from the lake’s tour boats.

Guiding Management Principles Protection and Management of Natural Resources

• Inventory and Monitoring Executive Order 11644 and 11989 require the NPS to monitor the impacts of off-road vehicles (ORV) such as snowmobiles and sport utility vehicles on the resources under its jurisdiction and to close areas to ORV use if it is determined that ORV are causing impairments to park resources. ORV have been shown to cause lasting damage to air and water quality, visitor enjoyment, public health and safety, natural quiet, soil and soil stabilizers, native vegetation and wildlife. For more on these impacts please see the enclosed report “Off the Track.” At a minimum, we ask the NPS to amend the GMP to include more detail on a formal program to monitor ORV impacts upon the park resources listed above.

• Commercial Services Across the park system, there appears to be an alarming trend toward the privatization of services that, historically, have been provided by the NPS. Unfortunately, experience has shown that these privatization efforts do not always result in appropriate and/or high quality services that the public expects and requires. A permit to conduct jetski interpretive tours at Lake Mead National Recreation Area is a prime example of an inappropriate commercial service. We strongly encourage the NPS to privatize only those services related to automotive/gas, mass-transit, food, lodging, guide/outfitters (i.e. Mountaineering Guides) and sanitation. Since we believe the public expects the NPS to provide interpretive, visitor protection and resource management services, we strongly oppose any privatization of these programs.

• Public Shuttle and Snowcoach Systems Over the years, increasing public visitation to national parks has resulted in rising automobile traffic. The expanded traffic has resulted in road congestion, motor vehicle accidents and a stretching of parking and other automobile infrastructure to the breaking point. These problems have led some public officials such as Senator Larry Craig to support limits on the number of people who can visit the parks. We believe this approach is a totally backward and unnecessary, and it unfairly punishes the park-visiting public. Rather than place limits on citizens’ rights to visit their parks we suggest that limits be placed upon the number of automobiles and other machines allowed into the park. Placing limits on machines will better reduce these problems while ensuring that a maximum number of people are able to visit the parks. Only after the NPS has instituted strict limits upon motorized vehicles should it consider limiting park visitation.

Given this growing congestion we encourage the NPS at Crater Lake to follow the lead set by other parks such as Denali and Yosemite and phase out the individual use of motorized vehicles in favor of a cleaner and quieter mass transit system. We suggest following the example set by Yosemite and Grand Canyon and establishing mass transit systems for those areas that receive the most visitor traffic and contain the most fragile resources.

222 Summary of Public Involvement

Short of this, we support the NPS’ plan for partial closure of the rim drive to automobiles as well as the elimination of the Grayback road. These two steps will result in cleaner air and water, quieter landscapes, less congestion, and a deeper appreciation by park visitors for the park’s resources.

In addition, we support the use of snowcoaches as the only winter access method. Snowcoaches will insure that park visitation continues at historic levels while reducing the amount of air and water pollution from snowmobiles, automobiles, and trucks.

• Cleaner and Greener Fleets Executive Order 13148 and 13149 require federal agencies such as the NPS to provide leadership in environmental management through management actions such as using the most energy efficient vehicles available. Therefore, the NPS at Crater Lake should adopt a policy to replace its motor vehicle and motorized equipment fleets (including 4x4s, snowmobiles, motorcycles, boats, automobiles, trucks, lawn and garden equipment, etc) upon retirement, only with the most fuel- efficient and lowest-polluting equipment available. Fuel-efficient technologies are highly correlated with lower emission levels, causing less smog and even less global warming gases. Increased fuel- efficiency will also reduce the NPS gasoline budget, saving money for other important uses. We see no reason why the NPS shouldn’t move to cleaner and greener fleets, setting an important example for the public and encouraging manufacturers to offer further improvements. Moreover, this move helps the NPS better achieve its mission by helping to ensure that park resources, such as air and water quality are left unimpaired while increasing agency credibility with the public.

• Snowmachine Use of the Park On January 21, 1999 Bluewater Network and more than 60 additional environmental organizations petitioned the NPS to prohibit recreational snowmobile operation throughout the entire park system, including Crater Lake. (A list of the additional signatories is provided in appendix 1.) Numerous studies have shown that snowmobiles cause significant damage to air and water quality, visitor enjoyment, public health and safety, natural quiet and wildlife. (For more on these impacts please see the enclosed snowmobile petition and report.) Bluewater Network is deeply discouraged to read that that NPS is ignoring these impacts in its preferred alternative which calls for the continued snowmobile use. Several years ago the NPS at Yellowstone reached a similar conclusion. Unfortunately, today snowmobile numbers at Yellowstone have reached 60,000 annually and cause lasting damage to air and water quality, visitor enjoyment, public health and safety, natural soundscapes, and wildlife. Before this happens at Crater Lake, we strongly encourage the NPS to promulgate regulations banning snowmobiles for the entirety of the Crater Lake National Park.

• Appropriate Recreation Bluewater Network also suggests that the NPS make it a goal to provide park visitors opportunities to enjoy appropriate forms of recreation within Crater Lake National Park. To do this, we suggest that the NPS adopt the following definition of appropriate recreation for Crater Lake National Park:

Appropriate forms of recreation for Crater Lake National Park are ones that allow park visitors to become intimate with park resources and values but do not cause the derogation or destruction, directly or indirectly of those resources and values. Furthermore, appropriate recreation should provide a visitor the opportunity for inspiration and peaceful enjoyment that leads to a deepening of the visitor’s understanding of the natural and cultural resources contained in the park. In addition, appropriate recreation should foster within the visitor a greater appreciation for Crater

223 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Lake’s resources and values while stimulating further awareness of the need to preserve those resources and values.

We also urge the NPS to survey all recreational activities currently taking place at Crater Lake. At the completion of this survey, the NPS should conduct environment analyses of those forms of recreation that are believed to pose a potential threat to park resources and values. If the analysis determines that the activity is causing resource impairment, mitigation measures must be implemented immediately. We also suggest that the NPS place a prohibition on new activities until such time as the agency has determined that they will not cause impairment of park resources and values.

Conclusion

The draft version of Crater Lake’s General Management Plan is a step in the right direction. Bluewater Network applauds the NPS for all the time and energy that went into the drafting of this document. Specifically, we support Alternative four and its call for the elimination of snowmobiles, the seasonal closure of parts of the rim drive, the closure and reclamation of the Grayback road, and the use of mass transit shuttle buses and snowcoaches to access key park sites. However, before the NPS finalizes its GMP we believe more attention should be given to: 1) potential partnerships, 2) inventory and monitoring, 3) commercial services, 4) shuttle systems, 4) cleaner and greener fleets, 5) motor vehicle problems and 8) appropriate recreation.

In conclusion, park management decisions should always ensure that the resources and values of the park system are left unimpaired for future generations. If the NPS makes this simple suggestion the cornerstone of all management decisions, the agency will have achieved its Organic Act mandate.

Sincerely,

Sean Smith, MS Public Lands Director

224 Summary of Public Involvement

Appendix 1

Additional Organizations signing onto Bluewater Network’s call for a complete ban on recreational snowmobile operation in the National Park System.

Alaska Public Campaigns, Soren Wuerth, Organizer American Canoe Association, David Jenkins, Legislative Director American Land Conservancy, Harriett Burgess American Lands, Jim Jantz Animal Welfare Institute, Ben White Aspen Wilderness Workshop, Sloan Shoemaker Association Working Against Keweenaw Exploitation (AWAKE), VernSimula Audubon Council of Texas, Carole Wilmoth, VP Biodiversity Legal Foundation, Jasper Carlton, Executive Director Bluewater Network, Russell Long, Ph.D., Executive Director California Native Plant Society, Jake Sigg, President Campaign to Safeguard America's Waters, Gershon Cohen, Project Director Colorodo Environmental Coalition, Pete Kolberschlag Colorodo Wild, Inc., Lisa Philips Earth Island Institute, Sean Smith Environmental Defense Center, Marc Chytilo Environmental Media Services, Tom Lalley Florida Biodiversity Project, Brian Scherf Friends of the Earth, Erich Pica Global Service Corps, Rick Lathrop, Executive Director Greenpeace Foundation, Sue White, President GREEN, Roger Featherstone Hells Canyon Preservation Council, Brenda Schweitzer, Dev. Director High Sierra Hikers Association, Peter Browning, Coordinator Judy Boyce, Houston Audubon Society Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Andre Mele, Environmental Director Humane Society for Columbia, South Carolina, Henry Brzinsky International Marine Mammal Protection Project, Mark Berman Kentucky Citizens Accountability Project, J.W. Roberts, Exec. Dir. Keweenaw Bioregion Chapter of the Alliance for Democracy, Vern Simula Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Center, Spencer Lennard Lake Superior Greens, Jan Conley, Coordinator Massachussetts Audubon Society, Scott Hecker Minnesotans for Responsible Recreation, Jeff Brown, Director Mono County Mining Committee, Bill McNeill, Spokesperson Natural Resources Defense Council, Johanna H. Wald, Director, Land Program New Jersey Audubon New Jersey Conservation Foundation New Jersey Environmental Lobby, Marie A. Curtis, Executive Director Noise Pollution Clearinghouse, Les Blomberg Planning and Conservation League, Gerald Meral, Executive Director Public Media Center, Herbert Chao Gunther, President Ocean Advocates, Sally Ann Lentz, Executive Director Quiet Use Coalition, Kenneth Scott Restore the North Woods, Rachel Groen

225 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Safer Waters in Massachusetts (SWIM), Polly Bradley, Director Salmon Protection and Watershed Network (SPAWN), Peter Fugazzotto, Director Shubert and Associates, D.J. Shubert South Carolina Association for Marine Mammal Protection, Jim Burton Sky Island Alliance, Dod Mondt Southwest Center for Biological Diversity Southwest Montana Wildlands, Jim Kuipers South Yuba River Citizens League, Shaun Garvey Tides Foundation, Drummond Pike, Executive Director Turtle Island Restoration Network, Todd Steiner, President Wildland CPR, Bethany Jacob Wildlife Alive, Mark Palmer, Executive Director Wild Utah Forest Campaign, Susan Ash Wilderness Society, Bill Reffalt, Director National Parks and Alaska Wild Wilderness, Scott Silver

226 Summary of Public Involvement

September 30, 2004

Terri Urbanowski, DSC-P National Park Service P.O. Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225-0287

RE: Comments on DEIS for Crater Lake National Park GMP

Dear Superintendent Charles Lundy,

Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft General Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement of May 2004. Please consider the following comments in the Final EIS.

We see merits in both the (Preferred) Alternative 2 that places emphasis on increased opportunities and Alternative 4 that emphasizes preservation and restoration of natural resources. We support a decision choosing alternative 2 with at least two major changes: one concerning continued snowmobile use in the northern part of the park, and the other on continued plowing of the road to the rim in the winter.

In general, we are pleased with the Park’s general management plan, as well as the past management of the park. We appreciate that the preferred alternative will increase staff and resources in the park for research and public enjoyment. However, how likely is it that you will get the additional funds appropriated from congress? If your funding will, instead, be cut, the FEIS should list priorities of what projects will be dropped and which will stay.

1. Snowmobiles: Our scoping comments encouraged you to reconsider continued snowmobile use in the park. We were disappointed to see so little discussion of the actual impacts of snowmobiles to park resources. There was a mention of two stroke engines polluting water and air quality, but there was virtually no analysis of snowmobile noise impacts on wildlife.

NEPA requires that snowmobile use within the park be fully analyzed in the General Management Plan EIS: “NEPA procedures must insure that environmental information is available to public officials and citizens before decisions are made and before actions are taken. The information must be of high quality. Accurate scientific analysis, expert agency comments, and public scrutiny are essential to implementing NEPA.”5 You must include the impact of snowmobile noise on wildlife in the FEIS.

Wilderness Impacts: The 9 miles of designated snowmobile route cuts right through the middle of the largest block of other roadless wilderness in the park. For noise impacts, it couldn’t be in a more invasive place. The Parks administration of these wilderness areas must meet the standards within the Wilderness Act: “Protection of these areas in an unimpaired state for future use and enjoyment as wilderness”.6 The FEIS must consider if allowing the noise from snowmobiles to permeate far into the wilderness areas meets the wilderness protection requirements. It is the Park’s policy to “take no action that would

5 40 CFR 1500.1(b) 6 DEIS page 14. NPS Management Policies; Wilderness Act of 1964; Director’s Order #41

227 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION diminish the wilderness suitability of an area possessing wilderness characteristics… management decisions pertaining to lands qualifying as wilderness will be made in expectation of eventual wilderness designation.”7 Therefore, the GMP FEIS decision must consider the impacts of snowmobile noise on the wilderness characteristics in the northern part of the park. The Park cannot consider the impacts in the final decision unless the impacts are disclosed in the EIS.

The DEIS says: “The alternatives place all lands within the 1974 wilderness proposal within the backcountry zone and would allow only uses and development compatible with the protection of wilderness characteristics and values.”8 By not considering snowmobile noise impacts on wilderness characteristics and values, you have not fulfilled this promise. The FEIS must correct this mistake.

The area where snowmobile noise penetrates into is designated the “Backcountry” zone in the DEIS. The DEIS claims that all alternatives will manage this area for “Wilderness character and values… and resource protection”. “Tolerance for resource degradation in this zone would be very low”9. Allowing snowmobile noise to continue to penetrate the Backcountry in some alternatives does not meet these goals. The FEIS should make this clear for those alternatives.

Noise produced by snowmobiles, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, acts as a physiological stressor producing changes similar to those brought about by exposure to extreme heat, cold, or pain.10 During winter, when energy expenditure is extremely important to an animal's survival, an additional stressor such as noise can throw off an animal's energy balance. Excessive noise is a serious threat to predator-prey relationships, mating, reproduction, raising young, and staking out territories.11

Noise: In the National Parks, "natural quiet" is a protected resource defined as the "sounds produced by the natural and cultural components of the park."12 National Park Service policy mandates that the Park Service "strive to preserve the natural quiet and the natural sounds associated with the physical and biological resources of the parks."13 The Park Service must monitor, prevent or minimize unnatural sounds that adversely affect park resources or a Park's "scenic and aesthetic values," or which disturb Park users. To achieve these standards, "the operation of motorized equipment or sound devices that create unreasonable audio disturbances will be prohibited." Snowmobile noise research conducted at the Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore revealed the unique and disruptive sound characteristics of these machines.14 At Voyageurs National Park, noise from a single snowmobile could be detected from a distance of 400-600 feet depending on the terrain (flat or rolling), and from five snowmobiles noise could be detected at 800-1000 feet.15

In Crater Lake National Park, important wilderness areas are heavily impacted by snowmobile noise. 1,000 feet on either side of the north entrance road is almost over a third of a mile wide strip, from the rim to the north park boundary. The FEIS should calculate how many acres of the wilderness are being compromised by the continued use of snowmobiles. And that would only count the legal snowmobile

7 DEIS page 17. 8 DEIS Page 29. 9 DEIS Page 35. 10 Environmental Protection Agency. "Effects of Noise on Wildlife and Other Animals." Prepared by Memphis State University under Contract 68-04-0024, December 31, 1971. 11 Environmental Protection Agency. 1971. 12 64 FR 3969-3972. 13 U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. Management Policies. 1988. 14 Mestre Greve Associates, Inc.. "Noise Assessment for Beaver Basin Road, Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore." Prepared for the National Park Service. 1992 15 Mestre Greve Associates, Inc. 1992.

228 Summary of Public Involvement use.

Snowmobiles and Wolverine: One wilderness characteristic the Park should protect is having “all the pieces” of the ecosystem functioning to the greatest extent possible. This would include the pine martin and wolverine. The Crater Lake National Park is a potential den site for these species, as well as a corridor and home range for known denning habitat of these species to the south and north of the Park. The most critical time for wolverines is between January and March when females are establishing dens and giving birth. This exactly coincides with the highest snowmobile use near their habitat between Mt. Thielsen and the north entrance to the Park. The EIS should have disclosed and analyzed the impacts of continued and even increased snowmobile use. The average home range for the wolverine is 98,800 acres. Clearly, wolverines will be impacted by the Park’s snowmobiles. The FEIS must consider if the snowmobiles are inhibiting the wolverine’s recovery to a more abundant and viable population.

The wolverine in particular is very sensitive to human disturbance during nesting season. Snowmobile noise will prohibit wolverines and pine martins from using this important wilderness corridor during the winter months. This diminishes the wilderness characteristics during all times of the year.

Snowmobiles and Lynx Lynx are known to have populated this area before the county bounty program diminished their numbers decades ago. A search of Oregon county bounty records that was done by the USFWS turned up 19 lynx records from 1909-1919 in Douglas County. There are an additional 9 records from Jackson County (1953-1958). Lynx had a strong historical presence in the Park but were likely extirpated by predator control efforts. These predator control efforts would be considered shocking today -- decades of dropping large amounts of poisoned red meat along the Cascade crest. Since this practice has stopped, hopefully the lynx are now in a state of recovery. The lynx habitat is clearly here and its habitat must be protected in the Park. The General Management Plan EIS must consider how the noise of snowmobiles will affect Lynx recovery.

Other impacts: Indirect impacts are numerous and exert a considerable impact on wildlife, including birds, large and small mammals, and imperiled species. Groomed trails, like that proposed under alternative 3, alter the critical energy use patterns of animals in the winter, which can disrupt population dynamics, movement and distribution patterns, habitat use, and survival. Trails and roads allow species greater winter maneuverability.16 Wildlife utilizing groomed roads to save energy and hunt are at a tremendous advantage over those that do not, which disrupts predator-prey relationships.

Snowmobiles dump almost a third of their fuel, unburned, into the snow pack, to be released during spring thaw. The DEIS states that “impacts from snowpack runoff that is contaminated with snowmobile pollutants have not been found.”17 Could you please clarify, have pollutants not been found because you have not monitored for this, or, have you actually tested for pollutants and they are not there? If it is the case you have not looked, you should make this very clear, and explain when you will start to look.

Illegal snowmobile use You should also consider the impact of snowmobile off-trail violations in the FEIS. The Park should

16 Caslick, J.W. "Impacts of Winter Recreation on Wildlife in Yellowstone National Park: A Literature Review and Recommendations." Yellowstone National Park Branches of Planning and Compliance, Natural Resources, and Resources Management and Visitor Protection. 1997. 17 DEIS page 133.

229 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION document how many times snowmobiles have been caught riding over the Pumice Desert, instead of staying on the designated route. Excursions over the Pumice Desert increase the area where noise affects wildlife, and it could also increase negative impacts to the soils of the Pumice Desert itself. The FEIS must consider these impacts when considering weather or not to allow continued use of snowmobiles. For instance, when snowmobiles illegally trespass on the Pumice Desert, there could be serious adverse impacts on small mammals that live beneath the snow. Their habitat is compacted when one or more snowmobiles creates a packed trail. Compaction reduces the temperature of the interface between the snow and the soil and increases thermal conductivity.18 These temperature changes may significantly decrease the winter survival of small mammals, which may result in broader ecological impacts, including disruption of predator/prey interactions. The compaction might also cause suffocation and death of small mammal as well as habitat fragmentation.19

Snowmobiles already have enough Near the Parks north boundary is the Oregon Cascade Recreation Area (OCRA). This area was specifically not put in the Mt. Thielsen wilderness by the 1984 Wilderness Act as a concession to snowmobiles.20 In this pristine roadless area the snowmobiles are allowed to ride on 26,100 acres of the OCRA in the Umpqua National Forest21. The Forest Service charges hikers fee-demo prices to hike in the OCRA, but charges snowmobiles nothing to access the OCRA.

Nearby, the pristine 18,620 acre RARE II roadless area of Mt. Bailey is also open to, and well used by snowmobiles. Mt. Bailey is the highest point in Oregon one can legally ride a snowmobile.22

In addition to Mt. Bailey and the OCRA, 44,720 acres of snowmobile playgrounds right on the doorstep of Crater Lake National Park, there are 175 miles of groomed trails on the Diamond Lake District, and countless miles of ungroomed logging roads on the district. This is enough. The 9 miles allowed in alternative 2 of the Park’s proposed GMP is a tiny percentage of acres open to snowmobiles in the area, yet it is a huge area of impact. The Park’s GMP EIS should weigh the trade offs of allowing snowmobiles in 9 miles of the park. We believe this analysis would show the snowmobile use in the park has an unproportional level of negative impacts on hundreds acres of wilderness and numerous wildlife species.

Other legal mandates The Forest Service provides ample snowmobile opportunities all around Crater Lake National Park, not just in the Umpqua National Forest. The Forest Service’s mission covers broad multiple use of the public lands under their management. On the other hand, the Park Service has no such multiple use mandates. “The Park Service is to preserve and protect the natural environment and the fish and wildlife within the park. The Park Service is also committed to preserving the beauty of the park...”23

18 Wanek, W. J. and L.H. Schumacher. "A Continuing Study of the Ecological Impact of Snowmobiling in Northern Minnesota (Final Research Report for 1971-1972)." The Center for Environmental Studies. Bermidji State College, Bemidji, MN. 1974. Schmid, W.D. "Snowmobile Activity, Subnivean Microclimate and Winter Mortality of Small Mammals." Abstr. of Amer. Inst. of Biol. Scient. Bull. of the Ecological Society of America. 53(20):37. 1972. Wanek , W.J. "Observations On Snowmobile Impact." The Minnesota Volunteer. 34(109):1-9. 1971a. 19 Randolph, J.C. "Ecological Energetics of a Homeothermic Predator. " Ph.D. Thesis. Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario. 1971. Pruitt, W.O. Jr. Paper presented at conference on snowmobiles and all-terrain vehicles at the University of Western Ontario. October 1971. 20 Umpqua LRMP. Appendix E-2. “The purpose of the ... designation is to provide management options which are not permitted or feasible under the Wilderness Act.” “The area shall be managed in accordance with plans prepared to…Provide for use of motorized recreation vehicles.” E-3: “..the excellent potential and future demand for motorized recreation ... should be accommodated .... for snowmobiling use” Quotes are from the Oregon Wilderness Act of 1984 and Subcommittee Report. 21 Additional acres for snowmobiles in the OCRA are available in the Willamette and Deschutes N.F. 22 Umpqua NF LRMP. Appendix C-128. 23 Crater Lake enabling legislation (16 USC 121).

230 Summary of Public Involvement

If the FEIS ROD continues to allow motorized recreation whose noise and smell disturbs wildlife, the Park Service is not in compliance with their legal mandates24.

The Mission of Crater Lake National Park is “To forever preserve the beauty of Crater Lake National Park, its unique ecological and cultural heritage; and to foster understanding and appreciation through enjoyment, education and inspiration.” Allowing snowmobiles in the Park does not “foster understanding and appreciation” of Crater Lake’s “unique ecological and cultural heritage”. Snowmobiles only degrade it with noise and pollution.

The GMP DEIS concludes that snowmobile use will have no impact on park resources and elimination of snowmobiles would result in only “minor benefits to wildlife”. But there was absolutely no data in the DEIS to back this up. The Park has never done a NEPA analysis on current snowmobile impacts on wilderness values, wildlife, or air and water quality. In fact, the DEIS says: “The effects of winter recreational activities in the park are unknown…”25 And effects to “lynx, wolverine, fisher… is unknown.”26 It is impossible to conclude that there are no significant impacts when you don’t know the current effects, and therefore have done no analysis of current effects. In fact, we could not find in the DEIS how many miles of snowmobile grooming would be done under alternative 3, or how many miles of snowmobile use would be permitted under all alternatives except 4. This should be made clearer in the FEIS. There is plenty of data on effects of Snowmobiles, of which we have included only a small amount in these comments. The EIS is the place where these effects should be documented. The DEIS failed to include this important information. Please do the analysis in the FEIS. Include the effects to the connectivity the Park offers to the wildlife using the Cascade crest. You don’t have to say the effects are “unknown”. There is data you can, and should use.

Snowmobile use will continue to increase In 1997 3,500 snowmobile visitors entered the park from November to April.”27 That number could have doubled in the last seven years28. That means that well over 1,000 snowmobiles drive through the wilderness every month during the winter, assuring virtually NO peace and quiet in the wilderness during the winter months (except at night). The DEIS claims that “snowmobile use is not expected to appreciably increase…”29 The FEIS must either back up this claim, or replace it with an effect analysis on increased snowmobile use. Snowmobile use is increasing everywhere else. Why not in the Park?

Snowmobiles in Crater Lake National Park originate in the Diamond Lake Ranger District of the Umpqua National Forest. In just one year, snowmobile use increased 30% on the Diamond Lake ranger district.30 The Umpqua National Forest says that “Snowmobiling is an expanding winter sport with the Diamond Lake Recreation Area recognized as among the top 15 destinations in the western US for this activity.”31 With all this snowmobile activity expanding right on the staging area for Crater Lake National Park, clearly the Park snowmobile use is expanding also.

The DEIS says “Although snowmobile use is not expected to appreciably increase, the Park Service

24 Park Mission Goal I: The beauty of Crater Lake National Park and its full array of natural and cultural resources, heritage, processes, values, and wilderness character shall remain unimpaired for future generations. 25 DEIS page 129. 26 DEIS page 131. 27 DEIS page 99. 28 Snowmobiles Fact Sheet. Bluewater Network www.bluewaternetwork.org/snowfacts.shtml ”Approximately 2.5 million snowmobiles are in use today. Sales have doubled in the last 5 years.” 1999-2000. 29 DEIS page 99. 30 Windigo Snowmobile Winter Shelter EA. Umpqua NF. August 2001. Response to public comments. John Ouimet District Ranger. 6/12/02. page 2. There were an average of 99 snow machines per day in 00-01, increasing to an average of 139 snow machines per day in 01-02. 31 Windigo Shelter EA. Umpqua NF. August 2001. Appendix B, ID Team Scoping. May 3, 1999. I.D. Team #1. page 1.

231 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION would initiate a long-term data gathering and monitoring program to evaluate use and associated impacts as part of an overall winter recreational use study.”32 This is no comfort. The Park doesn’t have the money to do monitoring in a timely way, with no guarantees of congressional appropriations in the near future. Additionally, this monitoring reference was only associated with water and air quality monitoring. Snowmobile noise pollution was not included.

Crater Lake National Park has never put a speed limit on snowmobiles or required a muffler providing for wildlife friendly noise reduction. The Park could have mitigated some snowmobile impacts in the northern portion of the Park, but instead the EIS failed to address most impacts from snowmobiles.

2. Snowcoaches

The DEIS failed to define snowcoaches. The FEIS should correct this problem. What are they, what can they do or not do, and most importantly, what are their impacts? Are they as noisy and polluting as snowmobiles? Are they comparable to a SUV? How many people do they hold?

In general, we support more mass transportation and less personal transportation in the park. Therefore, we like the snowcoach idea from Mazama Village to the Rim Village in the winter, instead of plowing the road. We assume the snowcoaches will be better on the environment than plowing the road and allowing private vehicles to drive up. But we would rather the FEIS analyze and describe the impacts.

That analysis might find that a “snow coach” ride would entice more visitation to the park in the winter. It sounds like fun – more fun than worrying if your 2-wheel drive car can make it up there safely.

3. Rim Drive

The Park should initiate a shuttle service around the Rim Drive, now, before there is more traffic. The preferred alternative currently provides for shuttles ONLY “if, in the future, crowding conditions developed.”33 However, the Rim Drive is currently over crowded, especially during summer weekends. The shuttle should be initiated now, during those times. Drivers of large RVs would likely prefer to take a shuttle service. This would immediately, and drastically reduce traffic on the Rim Drive. After all, most respondents to your scoping request “favored use of shuttles”34.

We support closing off part of the Rim Drive during part of the year to facilitate a more enjoyable hiking or biking experience around the Rim Drive. There could also be times where motorcycles are the only motorized vehicles allowed.

At the least, the road section between Cleetwood Cove over and Kerr Notch should become one-way for private vehicles, like it was in the past. This makes a much more enjoyable drive around the Rim. We don’t understand why the one-way proposal was only in Alternative 3. It should have been considered in actions common to all alternatives.

32 DEIS page 133. 33 DEIS. Page 44. 34 DEIS. Page 8.

232 Summary of Public Involvement

4. Grayback Road

We support changing this road to non-motorized recreation use, or decommissioning it entirely. One concern about non-motorized use is equestrian impacts. Horses can have a heavy impact on a trail, especially in wet weather. Heavy equestrian use could contribute to erosion, rutting and compaction problems that, over time, equal those of ATVs. Horses also will introduce non-native species deep within the wilderness area that the Grayback road goes through. Weeds can either be carried in with their feed, or can be deposited in their manure.

The FEIS should address this problem and offer mitigations. We realize that equestrian use is already allowed in wilderness areas elsewhere in the park. However, this is the first time this impact will be introduced to the southeast half of the park.

Another problem with equestrian use is the impact to other users. Rutted and potmarked trails are difficult to walk on. Manure (and associated flies) is unpleasant to walk on and can build up in some of the best resting/camping areas, possibly making the best places unusable by people.

Has the Park ever monitored the impact of equestrian use on the Pacific Crest Trail that goes through the park? This type of recreation should not be expanded in the park unless this monitoring has been done and impacts considered.

5. Resource Protection

Only in Alternative 4, would the park “be an active partner in a regional conservation strategy that would include other agencies and environmental groups.”35 Why isn’t this included in actions common to all alternatives?

Other areas of Alternative 4 that should be included in all alternatives include re-routing existing trails away from sensitive areas, reviewing the trail system, and providing new trails. Also, why is this only in alternative 4: “Interpretive programs would focus on stewardship within the park and on the protection of resources, while incorporating this philosophy into everyday life.”36?

In “Actions Common to All Alternatives”, the DEIS defines “small facilities, including antennas”37 appropriate for the backcountry managed as wilderness. We disagree that antennas, especially cell phone antennas, are appropriate in an area managed for wilderness characteristics. Antennas should not even be put in front country areas where they can be seen in the backcountry.

The GMP DEIS never considered the environmental impacts of managing a park whose acres are too small for adequate resource protection. There have been several proposals to increase the size of Crater Lake National Park. The DEIS should have considered the merits of these proposals. The DEIS says: “The combination of widespread logging and suppression of natural fires has affected the natural forest stands throughout portions of the park and surrounding areas. Such changes may also have altered wildlife distribution, frequency, and use of habitat from that which existed prior to the Park's establishment.”38 But the DEIS never tells the public if these changes have been positive or negative or the cumulative effects to park resources. The FEIS should be clearer by including a discussion of the

35 DEIS page 57. 36 DEIS page 57. 37 DEIS page 35. 38 DEIS pages 121, 122.

233 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION problem of the small size of Crater Lake, the effects on natural resources due to the small size, and how this could be improved by expanding the Park boundaries. During scoping, the Park was given a proposal to include the Diamond Lake/ Mt. Bailey area (on the Park’s north boundary) into a national monument (the Medicine Mountain National Monument) to complement the resource protection goals of Crater Lake National Park. This is the type of expansion the GMP should weigh in on. At the least, the EIS should document a wish-list of how natural resources could be better protected in the future. (Similar to the expansion needs expressed in the Oregon Caves National Monument GMP).

The DEIS says: “Beneficial effects to late-successional forest species are expected from implementation of the President’s NW Forest Plan (NFP). The plan includes development of a network of forest reserves across the Pacific Northwest to protect late-succession forest species…”39 What the DEIS failed to disclose is what NFP land allocations border the park. True, the NFP includes some reserves, like Late Successional Reserves (LSRs) to protect late-successional forest species. But if LSRs don’t border the park, the park doesn’t get much benefit from them. If the Matrix land allocation borders the park, the park boundaries are scheduled for clearcutting within the next couple of decades. This would have a terrible effect on Park resources. The FEIS should clarify that, even though the Forest Service is managing land bordering the park under the NFP, this could or could not benefit the park, depending on what land allocation borders the park.

6. Monitoring

The DEIS failed to include a viable monitoring plan, as required by NEPA40. Several times the DEIS mentions that monitoring will happen, but no monitoring details were given, such as: what would be monitored, how often, and what benchmarks would need to be reached for adaptive management to kick in.

For instance, snowmobiles are being allowed to continue, because, in part, “The Park Service would initiate a long-term data gathering and monitoring program to evaluate winter use and associated impacts to ensure long-term protection of park resources.”41 When do you plan to begin this? What will you look for? How will this be paid for? Are monitoring funds guaranteed? If not, what priority will monitoring have in available funding? Who will do the work? What authority do you have to discontinue snowmobile use if pollutants are found?

7. Research

Our organization is in favor of increased research into the forested and desert ecosystems surrounding Crater Lake. However we have a concern that was not addressed in the DEIS. The DEIS says, “Research natural zone … includes the remaining lands contained in the 1974 wilderness recommendation not zoned as backcountry.”42 How many acres is this? Would it remove these areas from future wilderness consideration?

Only in Alternative 4 would “research within the park be nonmanipulative.”43 We assume this mean that in other alternatives, the research would be manipulative. If research is non manipulative only in

39 DEIS page 122. 40 40 CFRs 1505.2, 1505.3 41 DEIS 133. 42 DEIS page 45. 43 DEIS page 57.

234 Summary of Public Involvement alternative 4, how manipulative will the research be in other alternatives? This raises a concern that research in wilderness areas could negatively influence wilderness characteristics. If research will be manipulative for alternative 2 and 3, the DEIS should have described it better.

8. Recognition

The Vicinity Map on page 5 of the DEIS neglected to show Roseburg, even on the state map insert. This gives the impression that Crater Lake National Park is not an important component of Roseburg, even though Roseburg is considered a “gateway” community44. Please put us on the map in the FEIS.

On page 198 of the DEIS you list Organizations that were sent the DEIS. Umpqua Watersheds, Inc. submitted at least 2 detailed scoping comments, and was sent the DEIS. You forgot to include that name in the DEIS. Please include it in the FEIS.

In conclusion, we would like to thank the National Park service for protecting the natural resources in Crater Lake National Park and enhancing visitor enjoyment of the park. Please consider these comments in the FEIS. The final EIS would also be easier to follow if you included a table comparing the effects in the Environment Consequences section, especially comparing the costs of the different alternatives.

Sincerely

Francis Eatherington Umpqua Watersheds, Inc. P.O. Box 101 Roseburg, OR 97470

George Sexton Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Center PO Box 102 Ashland, OR 97520

Joseph Vaile Rogue Group Sierra Club 84 Fourth Street, Ashland, Or, 97520

Oregon Chapter Sierra Club 2950 SE Stark St., Suit 110 Portland, OR 97214.

44 DEIS page 19.

235 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

From: Nancy Stern

129 Swanie Lane

Glide, OR 97443

September 25, 2004

Dear National Park Service:

My husband and I recently returned from our annual fall pilgrimage to Crater Lake. Since we live nearby, we are fortunate in being able to visit the Park several times each year; it has become a treasured part of our interior lives, providing unsurpassed serenity and spiritual refreshment. Besides the awe-inspiring beauty of the Lake itself, the subtle features impressed us during this most recent visit: the scent of the pines and firs, the music of the wind through the trees, the birdcalls and squirrel-scamperings; the muted rumble of a rockslide somewhere on the rim.

We were delighted to learn that the plans for renovating the Rim Village include moving the parking lot back behind the buildings and converting what is now the parking lot into a pedestrian area planted with native species. That will be a terrific improvement; we noted how annoying it was when certain visitors let their diesel engines run at idle for protracted periods of time and, even in our car-obsessed culture, few of us think that the sight of vehicles enhances the Crater Lake vista.

In the winter, we cross-country ski on the North Entrance Road. The presence of snowmobiles is a jarring, ugly intrusion into that peaceful, wild world. There is absolutely no reason to continue to allow snowmobiles in Crater Lake National Park. There are many, many miles of snowmobile trails very nearby in the Diamond Lake and Mt. Bailey areas. Our National Forests are, for good or ill, designed for “multiple use”; our National Parks have a different mission: “The National park Service preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations.” I believe the noise, pollution, and intrusiveness of snowmobiles at Crater Lake impair the beauty and integrity of the Park. Surely, these machines disturb the sensitive animal species that have found refuge in the Park—the pine marten and the wolverine, driven out of their historic ranges by human impacts, may be making their “last stand” at Crater Lake.

While I would like to see more research done (as in Alternative 2), I do not support expanded recreational activities if these activities detract in any way from the tranquility, pristine purity, and timeless natural beauty of Crater Lake. If visitors want more “action” than gazing at the incredible grandeur of the Lake and filling their senses with the sounds, fragrances, and sights of this unique place, let them go elsewhere—into our numerous recreation areas and National Forests. I strongly encourage you to select Alternative 4. Snowmobiling is not an appropriate recreational activity at Crater Lake.

I also urge the Park Service to avoid expanding the Rim Drive to accommodate large RV’s. Funds would be better spent maintaining the existing Drive, restoring some of the beautiful, traditional rock walls (part of our cultural heritage), and providing some sort of mass transit for those who lumber up to the Lake in their huge vehicles. Would quiet, nonpolluting electric cars be possible? I am not sure what the policy on gasoline-driven boats is; these should be banned if they are now allowed. Closing the east part of the Drive for part of the year or

236 Summary of Public Involvement restoring one-way traffic is fine with me if it would reduce human-caused degradation of the resource.

As you can see, my number-one priority is preserving the natural resources of Crater Lake or restoring them where damaged. I urge the Park Service to choose Alternative 4 and provide a staunch defense for the perpetuity of our uncorrupted, priceless gem, Crater Lake.

I would appreciate a return receipt.

Sincerely,

Nancy Stern

237 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

September 30, 2004

Teri Urbanowski, DSC- p National Park Service PO Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225- 0287

Re: Draft General Management Plan/EIS Statement, May ‘04

I have read the draft Crater Lake National Park Management Plan and offer the following thoughts. I am a long time user and advocate for snowmobilers and past officer and president of the Oregon State Snowmobile Association.

The relationship between the CLNP and the snowmobilers has been a positive one. We have been concerned, however, that the furor over Yellowstone NP not carry over to CLNP. At first glance, Alternative #2 appeared to be an excellent option. After looking at it more closely however, I must endorse Alternative #3.

Alternative #2 causes some concern it that it reduces motorized traffic in favor of walking and bicycling, thereby excluding many elderly and handicapped users. It limits snowmobile access to current number, yet adds a snow coach. There is no justification for reducing snowmobile access to current numbers. If there is some perceived air or water pollution, and there is no evidence to support this, then considering a snow coach makes no sense.

Snowmobilers would like to be able to go in one entrance and out another and take advantage of Park Services. As regards the statement that snowmobilers have a network of roads and trails available outside the park, is this not true for other users? This has nothing to do with the park.

Alternative #3 is the more visitor friendly alternative. Many snowmobilers are senior citizens who want to have the opportunity to enjoy the park in winter. I endorse Alternative 3# for all the above reasons.

Howard Gieger PO Box 249 John Day, Oregon 97845 [email protected]

238 Summary of Public Involvement

September 29, 2004

Teri Urbanowski, DSC- P National Park Service P. O. Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225_0287

RE: Crater Lake National Park Draft General Management Plan/EIS, May, 2004

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am writing to comment of the discussion of alternatives presented in the above referenced draft. I am writing as a snowmobiler who appreciates the park in the winter and who has chosen a snowmobile as my means of transportation. I try to fit in a winter visit to the Park each season and I especially appreciate the opportunity to share this spectacular experience with new and out of state visitors.

I would first like to mention the “Alternatives or Actions Considered But Eliminated From Further Study” on page # 67. The section states that “Some comments received during public scoping suggested that the Park Service should consider increasing the number of roads in the park that are open to snowmobile use. Currently, snowmobiles are allowed along the North Entrance Road to North Junction to accommodate winter lake viewing access.” The section goes on to justify eliminating further study because others use the roads and wouldn’t like to encounter snowmobiles for various reasons. The section concludes snowmobiles don’t need more or different access because snowmobilers have a “substantial network of roads and trails available for recreational use outside the park.”

I strongly object to the bias and short sightedness reflected in the above conclusion. Enjoyment of the network of roads and trails on the National Forest outside the Park has no bearing on the desire or need that a snowmobiler has to use his or her form of transportation

To presume visitor expectations that the experience will be different in the winter than the summer,where paved roads are to be managed as front country, is a stretch.This means at times there will be a multitude of visitors using varying forms of transportation in the summer: why not in the winter? The snowmobile community has not requested they be allowed to ride off road or off trail in the Park. Their primary reason for visiting the Park is to view the lake and surrounding area. They simply would like to be able to enter the Park from one entrance, depart from another and perhaps access some services along the way.

Now to the alternatives presented. Alternative #2 is listed as the preferred alternative and is described as having an emphasis on Increased Visitor Opportunities. At first reading I was ready to support this alternative as it included continued snowmobile access and provided a good balance of scientific and research pursuits, educational activities and visitor access. As

239 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION time allowed and I studied the document further I find I must change my mind and side with Alternative #3.

Alternative #2 would close the Grayback Road and provides for seasonal closure (summer) of part of rim drive…this despite the statement on page 97 that “Auto touring remains the predominant visitor activity.” It appears there is an attempt to move this predominant activity from auto touring to bicycling and hiking. These later forms of visiting the Park are clearly for the young and the physically healthy. As the baby boom generation ages and retires with the resources and time to visit our National Parks, Alternative #2 would serve to limit and restrict their ability to appreciate these special places.

My second reading of the document also revealed in Alternative #2, hidden away under Air Quality on pages 152 and 153, a sentence that would restrict snowmobile use to existing use levels because snowmobiles raise concerns about long term impacts from high pollution emissions. This presumption cites no research to support the concern. Where did the concern come from? Please refer to a study conducted by Robert Musselman from the Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station in Ft. Collins, Colorado. His study of air quality (monitoring station) and snow chemistry (core samples along trail corridor) related to snowmobiling at and near the Green Rock Parking Area in the Snowy Range of the Medicine Bow- Routt National Forest seems a good analysis and his preliminary finding is that there are not really any affects from snowmobile use confirmed.

Another consideration regarding the “concern” about high pollution emissions should be given to the recent regulation process by the EPA for snowmobiles. While this regulation process is relatively recent, it is already producing profound changes in both 2- stroke and 4- stroke engine technology for snowmobiles. The EPA regulations are producing 30% reductions in snowmobile emissions almost overnight with targets over the next few years that will produce models of snowmobiles with 50 to 90% reductions in emissions. The “concern” about long term impacts from high pollution emissions is not well founded and should not be used as a reason to limit snowmobile access to current levels.

Though not stated outright as a reason to limit snowmobile access, the document contains statements in Alternative #1, page 133, and Alternative #3, pages 168 and 169 that snowmobiles raise concerns “about long term impacts from high pollution emissions. Emissions from 2- stroke engine exhaust include monoxide hydrocarbons, nitrous oxides and particulate matter. These concerns include the possibility that accumulations of pollutants in the snow pack and resultant snow pack run off may be having adverse impacts on water quality and associated aquatic systems although impacts from snow pack run off that is contaminated with snowmobile pollutants have not been found.” Again, where do the concerns come from? This reads like a classic in circular thinking. Again, please refer to Robert Musselman’s work. Please also read a U. S. Geological Survey Water- Resources Investigations Report 99- 4148 “Effects of Snowmobile Use on Snowpack Chemistry in Yellowstone National Park, 1998” by George Ingersoll that was released in 1999. Keep in mind, this research was conducted in Yellowstone National Park where there is exponentially greater snowmobile use than would ever be found in Crater Lake National Park. Some highlights of the Ingersoll report include:

240 Summary of Public Involvement

• Hydrocarbon levels in the snowpacks near snowmobile use were elevated relative to background snowpack chemistry in the study but were lower, in general, than concentrations at hundreds of locations nationwide representing a full spectrum of watershed settings ranging from sub alpine to urban. • Drinking- water standards for benzene, toluene and xylenes published by EPA far exceed any levels detected in either snow or snow melt runoff at Yellowstone in this study. • Even the highest detections of benzene or toluene in snow (at an in- road groomed road/trail site) or in snowmelt at Yellowstone are far less than the established standards for water consumed by humans (less than 4 percent and less than 1 percent respectively.) • Results indicate that snowmobile use along the routes (groomed roadways) may not be substantially affecting atmospheric deposition of ammonium, sulfate, and hydrocarbons related to gasoline combustion. • Analysis of snowmelt- runoff chemistry indicate that elevated emission levels in snow along highway corridors (groomed roadways) generally are dispersed into surrounding watersheds at concentrations below levels likely to threaten human or ecosystem health.

If there are no adverse impacts to the snowpack in Yellowstone National Park, then I believe it is safe to say there will absolutely be no affects to the snowpack in Crater Lake National Park where the annual snowmobile visit estimate is less than some daily visit numbers in Yellowstone. Alternative #3 on page 168 acknowledges snowmobile volume is not expected to increase appreciably.

On page 91 under Affected Environment, Natural Resources, there is a lengthy discussion about the 34,000 acres of “potential” Canada Lynx habitat with the implication that the decision may be influenced by the alternative’s affect on this potential habitat. The Park’s own studies have failed to produce any evidence of resident Lynx. The only evidence of historical Lynx presence is a pelt in a museum from 1898 alleged to have been trapped in an area south of the Park.

I would urge that Park officials study recent literature that describe the lynx as being generally tolerant of humans and “to date, most investigations of lynx have not shown human presence to influence how lynx use the landscape.” (Aubrey, 2000 and Staples, 1995), Further, I believe there is a recent 9th Circuit ruling that concludes designated habitat must have been or be inhabited by the species it is being designated for.

As stated before, I wanted to be able to endorse the preferred alternative as written, but further study makes that alternative not palatable. Assuming the no action alternative,

Alternative #1, will not be selected, given my growing concern with Alternative #2 and the fact that Alternative #4 would preserve the Park from the public, I find I must endorse Alternative #3.unless the decision makers are willing to consider substantial changes in Alternative #2.

241 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Finally, I am concerned about the cost. For the last few years Crater Lake Park has had to cut services because of funding shortages. A Eugene Register Guard Newspaper article dated August 7, 2004, speaks to making the plan flexible enough to deal with the whims of Congress and funding. Any plan that proposes additional expenditures is doomed to fail unless additional funding is secured either from Congress or from private sources.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft General Management Plan and I request you keep me informed as the decision process moves on.

Sincerely,

Joni Mogstad Oregon State Snowmobile Association 4797 Old Dillard Road Eugene, Oregon 974075

[email protected]

CC: Charles V. Lundy, Superintendent Crater Lake National Park P. O. Box 7 Crater Lake, Oregon 97604

John Bastion, O.S.S.A. President Representative Greg Walden Senator Gordon Smith

242 Summary of Public Involvement

243 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Superintendent Charles Lundy

244 Summary of Public Involvement

Crater Lake National Park P.O. Box 7 Crater Lake, OR 97604

RE: Comments on Crater Lake's draft General Management Plan

Dear Superintendent Lundy:

Crater Lake National Park is one of the park system’s most spectacular places. We owe it to ourselves and future generations of Americans to leave Crater Lake’s resources and wildlife unimpaired. I am therefore encouraged to learn that the Park Service’s draft general management plan appears to be a step in the right direction.

I support alternative four. Specifically, I support this alternative’s ban on snowmobiles, the seasonal closure of parts of the rim drive, the closure and reclamation of the Grayback road, and the use of mass transit shuttle buses and snowcoaches to access key park sites. However, alternative four should be strengthened to include safeguards such as a ban on gasoline powered boats, better monitoring of off-road vehicles as required under Executive Orders 11644 and 11989, and a ban on the privatization of interpretative, resource management and visitor protection services. I also urge the Park Service to adopt cleaner and greener fleets and better define appropriate recreation as called for in Bluewater Network’s comments on the draft management plan.

Crater Lake is a supreme jewel of the park system with irreplaceable resources and wildlife. I call upon the Park Service to ensure the full protection of these resources by adopting alternative four in the draft general management plan.

Sincerely,

J. W. & Mary Lee Milton 207 West Delaware Avenue Urbana, IL 61801 [email protected]

245

APPENDIXES, BIBLIOGRAPHY, PREPARERS, INDEX

APPENDIX A: LEGISLATION

249 APPENDIXES, BIBLIOGRAPHY, PREPARERS

250 Appendix A: Legislation

251 APPENDIXES, BIBLIOGRAPHY, PREPARERS

252 Appendix A: Legislation

253 APPENDIXES, BIBLIOGRAPHY, PREPARERS

254 Appendix A: Legislation

255 APPENDIXES, BIBLIOGRAPHY, PREPARERS

256 APPENDIX B: U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE LETTER ON THREATENED, ENDANGERED, AND PROPOSED SPECIES WITH ATTACHED LIST

257 APPENDIXES, BIBLIOGRAPHY, PREPARERS

258 Appendix B: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Letter on Threatened, Endangered, and Proposed Species

259 APPENDIXES, BIBLIOGRAPHY, PREPARERS

260

APPENDIX C: PROJECTED COSTS OF ALTERNATIVES

Ongoing and Planned Actions and Projects Visitor Services Plan Adapt historic 1928 building for visitor contact $ 4,432,000

Rehabilitate Rim Cultural Landscape 500,000

Remove Rim Village Dorm 350,000

Mazama Village Construct New Restaurant and Expand Parking Lot* 1,140,000 Construction Concession Maintenance Facility* 364,000 Develop group campsites 60,900

Cleetwood Cove Improve bulkhead 500,000

Construct seasonal shade structure 200,000 Improve Cleetwood Trail 360,000

Subtotal *(Private Dollars) $ 1,504,000 Subtotal (Federal Dollars) 6,402,900 TOTAL $ 7,906,900

Alternative One: No Action Area Description Net Cost Muson valley Rehabilitate Superintendent's /Chief Ranger’s Residences $1,800,000

Buildings Adapting Existing buildings 2,000,000

TOTAL $ 3,800,000

261 APPENDIXES, BIBILIOGRAPHY, PREPARERS

Alternative Two: Preferred Emphasis on Increased Visitor Opportunities Area Description Net Cost Munson Valley Rehabilitate Superintendent's /Chief Ranger’s Residences $ 1,800,000

East Rim Drive New trails 265,000

Frontcountry Sites New trails 265,000 Picnic Sites 25,000 Waysides 200,000

Buildings Adapting Existing buildings 2,000,000

Parking Improvements 100,000

Office Relocation 88,000 (out of park) TOTAL $ 4,743,000

Alternative Three: Emphasis on Enjoyment of Natural Environment Area Description Net Cost Munson Valley Rehabilitate Superintendent's/Chief Ranger’s Residences $1,800,000

Frontcountry Sites New trails 265,000 Picnic Sites 25,000 Waysides 200,000

Shuttle Bus Rim 750,000 Mazama to Rim 750,000 Shuttle stop/improvements 100,000

Office Relocation 44,000 (out of park)

TOTAL $ 3,934,000

262 Appendix C: Projected Costs of Alternatives

Alternative Four: Emphasis on Preservation and Restoration of Natural Resources Area Description Net Cost Rim Village Rehabilitate Superintendent's/Chief Ranger’s Residences $ 1,800,000

Frontcountry Sites New trails 265,000

Buildings Nonhistoric buildings removed, site restored 1,200,000

Winter Snowcoach Mazama to Rim 500,000

Office Relocation 176,000 (out of park)

TOTAL $3,941,000

263 LIFE CYCLE COSTS

264

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Century Engineering Corporation Bureau of Labor Statistics 1994 “Park Water System Study, 2003 Bureau of Labor Statistics Data, Crater Lake National Park.” Local Area Unemployment Prepared for Denver Service Statistics. Accessed May 9, 2003. Center, National Park Service. http://www.bls.gov/lau/

Duer, Doug Maines, Rachel P., and Garrel S. Pottinger 2002 “A Most Sacred Place: The 1998 Historical and Scientific Significance of Crater Lake Resources on Crater Lake Among the Indians of Southern National Park. Prepared by Oregon.” Oregon Historical Rachel P. Maines and Associates Quarterly, Vol. 103, No. 1 under contract for the National (Spring 2002), pp. 18- 49. Park Service. Ithaca, New York.

Harmon, Rick Mairs, J. K.R. Winthrop, and R.H. 2002 Crater Lake National Park: A 1994 Winthrop. Archaeological and History. Corvallis, Oregon: Ethnological Studies of Southwest Oregon State University Press. Oregon and Crater Lake National Park: An Overview and Bureau of Economic Analysis Assessment. 2 vols. Prepared by 2001a Regional Economic Information Winthrop Associates Cultural System. Bearfacts 1991 – 2001 Research under contract for the Accessed May 12, 2003. National Park Service. http://www.bea.doc. Ashland,Oregon. gov/bea/regional/reis/ Mark, Stephen R. 2001b Regional Economic Information 2001 “A National Park for Oregon: System The Crater Lake Reservation, Regional Accounts Data, Local 1886- 1902.” Journal of the Shaw Area Personal Income. CA05N Historical Library, Vol. 15 Personal Income by Major (2001), pp.35- 55. Source and Earnings by Industry. Accessed May 9, 2003. 2002a “A Study in the Appreciation of http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regi Nature: John C. Merriam and onal/reis/ the Educational Purpose of Crater Lake National Park.” 2001c Regional Economic Information Oregon Historical Quarterly, Vol. System. Regional Accounts Data, 103, No. 1 (Spring 2002), pp. 98- Local Area Personal Income. 123. CA25N Total Full- Time and Part Time Employment by 2002b Park Headquarters Historic Industry. Accessed May 9, 2003. Walking Tour. Crater Lake: http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regi Crater Lake Natural History onal/reis/ Association.

2002c “The Sinnott Memorial.”

Southern Oregon Heritage Today,Vol. 4, No. 5 (May 2002), pp. 4- 5.

265 Bibliography

Minor, Rick, and Robert R. Musil Mark, Crater Lake National 1989 Cultural Resource Survey of Rim Park. Village and Related Areas, Crater Lake National Park, Oregon. 1990b The Rustic Landscape of Rim Report 89. Prepared by Heritage Village, 1927- 1941: Crater Lake Research Associates, Inc., under National Park, Oregon, by Cathy contract for the National Park A. Gilbert and Gretchen A. Service. Eugene, Oregon. Luxenberg, Pacific Northwest Region. National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior 1990c Historic American Buildings Survey, Munson Valley’s Designed 1984 Historic Resource Study, Crater Landscapes, HABS No. OR- 144, Lake National Park, Oregon, by by Stephen R. Mark, Crater Lake Linda W. Greene, Denver National Park. Service Center. 1991 Cultural Landscape 1986a Architecture in the Parks National Recommendation: Park Historic Landmark Theme Study, Headquarters at Munson Valley, by Laura Soulliere Harrison. Crater Lake National Park, by Cathy Gilbert and Marsha 1986b “Memorandum of Agreement Tolon. Among the National Park Service, State Historic 1995a Collections Management Plan, Preservation Officer, and Crater Lake National Park, by Advisory Council on Historic Pacific Northwest Region. Preservation for the Rehabilitation of the Munson 1995b Scope of Collection Statement, Valley Historic District, Crater Crater Lake National Park, by Lake National Park.” Crater Lake National Park.

1988a Administrative History, Crater 1997a Draft Crater Lake Visitor Services Lake National Park, Oregon, by Plan / Environmental Impact Harlan D. Unrau, Denver Service Statement, Crater Lake National Center. 2 vols. Park. Oregon.

1988b National Register of Historic 1997b National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Places Inventory Nomination Form, “Historic Resources of Form, "Rim Village Historic Crater Lake National Park,” District," by Stephen R. Mark, 1988 Amendment, by Stephanie Crater Lake National Park. Toothman, Pacific Northwest Region. 1997c National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination 1990a Administrative History, Crater Form, "Munson Valley Historic Lake National Park, Oregon, District (Boundary Decrease)," Chapter Seventeen, “Planning by Stephen R. Mark, Crater Lake and Development at Rim Village: National Park. 1886- Present,” by Stephen R.

266 APPENDIXES, BIBLIOGRAPHY, PREPARERS

1998a “Programmatic Agreement 2000b Crater Lake National Park, Among National Park Service, Natural Resource Preservation Crater Lake National Park, State and Research, Annual Historic Preservation Officer, Accomplishments Report. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation regarding Draft 2001a Crater Lake National Park, Visitor Services Plan / Resource Preservation and Environmental Impact Research, Annual Statement, Crater Lake National Accomplishments Report. Park, Oregon.” 2001b Fire Management Plan. Crater 1998b Final Crater Lake Visitor Services Lake National Park. Plan / Environmental Impact Statement, Crater Lake National 2001c Management Policies. U.S. Park. Oregon. Department of the Interior. Washington, D.C. 1999a Record of Decision: Crater Lake Visitor Services Plan / Environ- 2003a Administrative History, Crater mental Impact Statement. Crater Lake National Park, Oregon, Lake National Park. Oregon. Chapter Eighteen, “Research,” by Stephen R. Mark, Crater Lake 1999b Crater Lake National Park, National Park. Resource Preservation and Research. Annual 2003b Historic American Engineering Accomplishments Report. Record: Crater Lake National Park Road System, HAER No. 1999c Crater Lake Visitor Services Plan. OR- 107, Stephen R. Mark, Crater Lake National Park. Crater Lake National Park. Oregon. Robert Peccia & Associates 1999d Winter Use Plan, Draft 2003 Technical Memorandum, Environmental Impact Statement, Vehicle & Visitor Use Study, Volume I. Yellowstone and Crater Lake National Park, Grand Teton National Parks and Oregon. John D. Rockefeller, Jr., Memorial Parkway. Tiller, Veronica E. Velarde 1995 American Indian Reservations 1999e Yellowstone National Park. The and Indian Trust Areas. Prepared effects of winter recreation on for the U.S. Department of wildlife: a literature review and Commerce, Economic Develop- assessment ment Administration. Accessed May 9, 2003. http://12.39.209/ 2000a Collections Management Report, ImageCache/EDA/Public/docum Crater Lake National Park, by ents/pdfdocs/35oregon_2epdf/v Mary Benterou, Crater Lake 1/35oregon.pdf National Park.

267 Bibliography

U.S. Census Bureau http://facfinder.census.gov/servl 2000a Table DP- 1. Profile of General et/DatasetMainPageServlet?_ds_ Demographic Characteristics: name=DEC_1990_STF3_&_prog 2000. Accessed on May 9, 2003. ram=DEC&_lang=en http://censtats.census.gov/pub/ Profiles.shtml 1990d DP- 4. Income and Poverty Status in 1989:1990. 1990 2000b Table DP- 2. Profile of Selected Summary Tape File 3 (STF- 3) Social Characteristics: 2000. Accessed on May 9, 2003. Accessed on May 9, 2003. http://factfunder. http://censtats/census.gov/pub/P census.gov/servlet/DatasetMain rofiles.shtml PageServlet?_ds_name=DEC_19 90_STF3_&_program=DEC&_la 2000c Table DP- 3. Profile of Selected ng=en Economic Characteristics: 2000. Accessed on May 9, 2003. 2001a County Estimates for People of http://censtats.census.gov/pub/P All Ages in Poverty for Oregon: rofiles.shtml Census 1989. Accessed on May 9, 2003. http://www.census. 2000d Table DP- 4. Profile of Selected gov/hhes/www/saipe/stcty/can_ Housing Characteristics: 2000. 41.htm Accessed on May 9, 2003. http:// censtats.census.gov/pub/Profiles. 2001b County Estimates for People of shtml All Ages in Poverty for Oregon: 1993. Accessed on May 9, 2003. 1990a DP- 1. General Population and http://www,census.gov/hhes/ww Housing Characteristics: 1990. w/saipe/stcty/a93_41.htm Data Set: 1990 Summary Tape File 1 (STF- 1) Accessed on May 2001c County Estimates for People of All 9, 2003. http://factfinder.census. Ages in Poverty for Oregon: gov/servlet/DatasetMainPageSer 1995. Accessed on May 9, 2003. vlet?_ds_name=DEC 1990 http://www.census.gov/hhes/ww STF3_&_ program=DEC& w/saipe/stct7y/a95_41.htm _lang=en 2001d County Estimates for People of 1990b DP- 2. Social Characteristics: All Ages in Poverty for Oregon: 1990. Data Set: 1990 Summary 1997. Accessed on May 9, 2003. Tape File 3 (STF- 3) Accessed on http://www/census/gov/hhes/w May 9, 2003. http://facfinder. ww/saipe/stcty/a97_41/htm census.gov/servlet/DatasetMain PageServlet?_ds_name=DEC_19 2001e County Estimates for People of 90_STF3_&_program=DEC&_la All Ages in Poverty for Oregon: ng=en 1999. Accessed on May 9, 2003. http://www/census/gov/hhes/w 1990c DP- 3. Labor Force Status and www/saipe/stcty/a99_41/htm Employment Characteristics: 1990. Data set: 1990 Summary U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Tape File 3 (STF- 3) Accessed on 2003 Memorandum dated October May 9, 2003. 16, 2003. Species list update.

268 APPENDIXES, BIBLIOGRAPHY, PREPARERS

Klamath Falls Fish and Wildlife Report RM- 254, Fort Collins, Office. Klamath Falls, Oregon. CO.

U.S. Forest Service 1998 “Forest Carnivore Conservation 1994 “The Scientific Basis for and Management in the Interior Conserving Forest Carnivores, Columbia Basin: Issues and American Marten, Fisher, Lynx, Environmental Correlates.” and Wolverine in the Western General Technical Report PNW- United States.” General Technical GTR- 420, Portland, OR.

269

PREPARERS AND CONSULTANTS

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

Crater Lake National Park Charles V. Lundy, Superintendent Kent Taylor, Chief of Administration Mac Brock, Supervisory General Biologist, Project Liaison Gordon Toso, Facilities Manager David Brennan, Supervisory Park Ranger Marsha McCabe, Supervisory Park Ranger Steve Mark, Historian Mark Buktenica, Aquatic Ecologist

Columbia Cascade Support Office Keith Dunbar, Team Leader Planning and Partnerships, Project Liaison

Denver Service Center Mark Matheny, Project Manager Elaine Rideout, Natural Resource Specialist Jane Sikoryak, Cultural Resource Specialist Sandy Schuster, Editor Phillip Thys, Visual Resource Specialist Harlan Unrau, Cultural Resource Specialist Terri Urbanowski, Team Captain, Landscape Architect and Planner

Harper Ferry Center Keith Morgan, Interpretive Planner

CONSULTANTS

National Park Service Greg Cody, Technical Specialist for Cultural Resources Debbie Campbell, former Project Manager, Denver Service Center David Kreger, Technical Specialist for Natural Resources Ray Todd, former Project Manager, Denver Service Center

Other Robert L. Abelin, Project Engineer,. Robert Peccia & Associates Richard Lichtkoppler, Ph.D, Natural Resource Economist, U. S. Bureau of Reclamation Douglas Widmayer, Transportation Division Manager, Robert Peccia & Associates

270

INDEX air quality, 13, 23, 68, 74, 93- 94, 116- 117, 134- museum collections, 23, 44, 57, 64, 68, 74, 112- 135, 152- 153, 169- 170, 184- 185 113, 128- 129, 144- 145, 163, 179- 180 All- American Road, 4, 98 national historic landmark, 4, 39, 83- 84, 125- archeological, 11, 23, 63, 68, 74, 81, 84- 86, 102, 126 112- 113, 124- 125, 142, 161, 177 North Junction, 39, 43, 45, 51, 58, 67, 73, 100, backcountry, 27, 29, 43, 45, 52, 58, 72, 90, 98, 103, 135, 153- 154, 170, 182, 185 100, 104, 148, 158, 170, 186- 187 Pacific Crest Trail, 27, 98, 104 boat tours, 7, 39, 99, 102- 103, 132, 135- 136, picnic area, 7, 37, 43, 127, 142- 143, 146, 148- 138, 155, 170, 185 150, 164, 166- 167 campground, 7, 85, 93, 99, 104, 149 Pinnacles Road, 97, 135 Cleetwood Cove, 20, 51, 57, 72, 76, 97, 98, 100, promenade, 83, 137, 156, 172 135, 138, 139, 154, 157, 170- 171, 185- 186, public input, 9 260 public meetings, 195 community facilities, 51 pumice, 4, 25, 90, 92 Community House, 83, 88, 125, 127 purpose, 7- 9, 18, 21, 33- 34, 86, 123, 195 Crater Lake Lodge, 7, 83, 88, 103, 139, 158, research, 10, 13- 14, 17, 22, 24- 25, 27, 33, 36, 174, 189, 197 40, 43- 45, 57, 58, 71- 74, 85- 87, 101, 116, cultural resources, 68 144- 145, 147, 150- 151, 153, 155, 157- 158, developed, 7, 16, 19, 33- 35, 37, 43- 45, 58, 63, 160, 168, 179, 183 65, 70, 73, 81, 84, 93, 120, 122, 129- 130, 136- research natural, 24- 25, 45, 58 137, 146- 150, 154- 155, 164- 166, 170- 171, Rim Village, 4, 7, 10, 19, 20, 22, 39, 40, 43, 45, 175, 181, 183 51, 58, 72, 73, 76, 83- 85, 88, 93, 95- 100, East Rim Drive, 72, 97, 154- 156, 171, 173, 261 102- 104, 125- 126, 135- 139, 153- 157, 170- ethnographic, 23, 63- 64, 68, 74, 82, 87, 112- 174, 178, 185, 186- 188, 260- 262, 265- 266 113, 115, 127- 128, 144, 162- 163, 179 rustic architecture, 4, 10, 83, 84, 87 food services, 103 shower, 7 frontcountry, 43, 45, 52, 72, 76, 98- 99, 137, shuttles, iv, 8, 44, 154, 171, 195 146, 149, 153- 156, 164- 167, 170- 173, 186- significance, 4, 8- 10, 15, 21, 33- 34, 37, 84- 85, 187 87, 93, 103, 114, 195 Garfield Peak, 85, 87- 88, 98, 124 Sinnott Memorial, 4, 83, 88, 99, 103, 125, 127, gas station, 7, 105 265 geologic resources, 25 snowcoach, 23, 39, 43, 58, 73, 76, 186- 189, 191 gift sales, 7 snowmobiling, 51, 67, 129, 146, 164, 181- 182, Grayback Drive, 97, 135, 154- 155, 170- 172, 190 185- 186 socioeconomic, 3, 24, 77, 105, 111, 119- 121, historic structures, 15, 21, 39, 63, 68, 74, 76, 140, 159, 175, 190 83- 84, 102, 112- 113, 125- 126, 137- 138, soundscapes, 13, 23, 75, 100, 118, 137, 155, 142- 143, 156- 157, 161- 162, 172- 173, 177- 172- 173 178, 187 sustainable design, 66 hotel accommodations, 7 threatened and endangered species, 13, 17- 18, interpretive exhibits, 7, 102 68, 74, 116, 118, 131, 147- 148, 150, 165, 167, interpretive themes, 9 182 issues, 8, 18, 21, 23, 34, 71, 93, 99, 104, 195 Visitor Services Plan, 19, 33, 122, 125- 126, 132, Kiser Studio, 83, 88, 103, 125, 127 134, 151- 152, 260, 265- 266 Klamath Basin, 4, 19, 91, 94, 96, 197 Watchman Peak, 88, 98 motel, 7, 103 water resources, 23, 68, 74, 81, 94, 116, 133- Munson Valley, 4, 7, 10, 20, 39, 45, 58, 83, 85, 134, 152, 168, 184 88, 93, 95- 96, 98- 99, 101, 103- 104, 122, West Rim Drive, 97 124- 126, 135, 136- 138, 153, 155- 157, 172- wilderness, 10, 14, 17, 29, 35, 38, 45, 58, 101 173, 178, 187- 188, 265- 266 Wizard Island, 25, 85, 91, 98- 99, 103

271

As the nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has the responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering sound use of our land and water resources; protecting our fish, wildlife, and biological diversity; preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places; and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to ensure that their development is in the best interests of all our people by encouraging stewardship and citizen participation in their care. The department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under U.S. administration.

NPS D-344A / May 2005 / Printed on recycled paper