Waco Mammoth Site • Special Resource Study / Environmental Assessment • Texas Waco Mammoth Site Special Resource Study / Environmental Assessment

Home , Columbian Mammoth, Ice Age Giants, The Mammoth Site

National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior

National Park Service • United States Department of the Interior Special Resource Study/Environmental Assessment Texas July • 2008

As the nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has

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 This report has been prepared to provide Congress and the public with information about parks and historical places; and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor the resources in the study area and how they relate to criteria for inclusion within the recreation. The department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to ensure national park system. Publication and transmittal of this report should not be considered an that their development is in the best interests of all our people by encouraging stewardship endorsement or a commitment by the National Park Service to seek or support either and citizen participation in their care. The department also has a major responsibility for specific legislative authorization for the project or appropriation for its implementation. American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under Authorization and funding for any new commitments by the National Park Service will have U.S. administration. to be considered in light of competing priorities for existing units of the national park system and other programs. NPS D-80D-70 August _____ 2008 2008 This document was printed on recycled paper.

This document was printed on recycled paper. Cover illustration by Joe Taylor.

Summary

PURPOSE AND NEED are currently housed in Baylor University's Mayborn Museum Complex, while in situ This special resource study is investigating, for specimens remain at the discovery site owned possible designation as a new unit of the by the city of Waco. national park system, the site within the city limits of Waco, Texas, where the remains of a Currently, visitor access to the Waco Mam- Pleistocene Columbian Mammoth herd were moth Site is restricted and would continue to discovered. be so until the current actions already underway by the Waco community to erect an Special resource studies are initiated at the excavation shelter and provide for visitor direction of Congress. On December 16, 2002, access are completed. This would be the first Public Law 107-341 was enacted, directing the time that public access would be accommo- secretary of the interior, in consultation with dated at the site and mark a very special the state of Texas, the city of Waco, and other milestone for members of the Waco appropriate organizations, to conduct a community who have been actively involved special resource study. The study would in preservation efforts there for almost 30 determine the national significance, years. suitability, and feasibility of designating the Waco Mammoth Site as a unit of the national park system, and the need for direct SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY PROCESS management by the National Park Service. To receive a favorable recommendation from the National Park Service, a proposed addi- RESOURCE DESCRIPTION tion to the national park system must meet four criteria: The Waco Mammoth Site is located 4.5 miles north of Waco’s city center. The study area (1) Possess nationally significant resources includes over 109 combined acres under the (2) Be a suitable addition to the system ownership of the city of Waco and Baylor (3) Be a feasible addition to the system University. (4) Require direct management by the National Park Service instead of protection by another public agency or the private sector

National Significance The paleontological resources of the Waco Mammoth Site meet the National Park Service’s established criteria for national significance. The combination of both in situ articulated skeletal remains and the excavated specimens from the site represents the nation’s first and only recorded discovery of a

Both entities have formed a partnership for nursery herd of Pleistocene mammoths. The the purpose of providing preservation and resource possesses exceptional interpretive interpretation of the site’s paleontological value and provides superlative opportunities resources. A number of collected specimens for visitor enjoyment and scientific study. The i SUMMARY resource retains a high degree of integrity as significant roles that the National Park Service many of the remains represent fully could have in site operation and management. articulated specimens of varying age groups. Their location and position have been recorded; the stratigraphy of the site has been MANAGEMENT OPTIONS studied in detail; and collected specimens have been placed under the curatorial care of The methodology adopted to assist in the a single institution. evaluation of the need for direct management by the National Park Service included Suitability developing a range of management options or alternatives, analyzing the environmental The resources of the Waco Mammoth Site consequences of each, and providing a meet the National Park Service’s established comparison of the attributes of each suitability criteria for consideration as a new alternative. unit of the national park system. Including this site would expand and enhance the diversity Alternative A – Continuation of of paleontological resources already Current Management Trend represented by other parks in the system.

Alternative A is the no-action alternative, Feasibility which represents the continuation of current The Waco Mammoth Site is considered a management trends at the Waco Mammoth feasible candidate for consideration as a new Site and serves as a base-line measurement for unit of the national park system. There are comparing three proposed alternative opportunities for efficient administration by management strategies. The existing the National Park Service at a reasonable cost, cooperative management arrangement especially if existing partnership support between the city of Waco and Baylor could be maintained and enhanced. University would continue. The local community would continue to play a key Need for Direct Management partnership role in supporting current by the National Park Service preservation and public access initiatives. Additional staffing, new programs, activities, The fourth and final criterion in the special or site development beyond the efforts resource study process is the determination of currently underway by the Waco community the need for direct management by the are not considered in this alternative. National Park Service. With the resources of the Waco Mammoth Site having met the Alternative B – Partnerships criteria for national significance, suitability, Led by the City of Waco and feasibility, it was deemed appropriate to investigate the potential for inclusion of the The existing cooperative management site in the national park system and for the arrangement between the city of Waco and National Park Service to take on key roles in a Baylor University would be expanded with partnership arrangement. Comments received additional partners, with the city taking a lead during the initial public scoping phase of the role. National natural landmark status would study project supported expanding the exist- be actively pursued, allowing the city to seek ing partnership between Baylor University technical assistance from the National Park and the city of Waco to include the National Service for site resource preservation, Park Service. It was found that direct NPS interpretation, and educational research. management is not the only practicable means Additional partnerships, such as local com- for meeting the goals of protecting resources munity initiatives, land trusts, foundations, and furthering public use; however, to meet federal, state, and local governments, and these goals to the fullest extent, there are nongovernmental organizations, would also

ii Summary be sought to assist with developing and The matrix on the following page compares managing the site. This alternative would and contrasts the major components of each protect, provide opportunities for research, alternative. and interpret core paleontological resources. It also would give the city freedom to pursue Environmental Assessment possible broader ideas such as providing environmental education and recreational In order to comply with the National Environ- opportunities. An option under this mental Policy Act, an environmental assess- alternative could include pursuing designation ment accompanies this special resource study. as a “National Park Service affiliated area” to The analysis of potential environmental con- further strengthen National Park Service sequences to the resources resulting from involvement. implementation of the alternatives found that there is no potential for significant environ- Alternative C – Partnerships Led mental effects. For all action alternatives, it is by the National Park Service anticipated that there would be moderate, long-term, beneficial impacts to the funda- Waco Mammoth Site would be a new unit of mental resources of the Waco Mammoth Site, the national park system, in partnership with the visitor experience, and the socioeconomic the city of Waco, Baylor University, and environment. Minor, long-term, adverse others. The National Park Service would take impacts are anticipated to the other resources lead responsibility for ensuring the protection, of the site (soils and prime farmland; flood- scientific study, and visitor enjoyment of plains and wetlands; vegetation, wildlife, and paleontological resources, enlisting the help of wildlife habitat) to accommodate future partners for this mission. Partners would also development to enhance the visitor experi- take the lead for initiating additional ence and to provide for management support recreational and educational opportunities at the site. The effect on special status species within the lands surrounding the core cannot be determined for any of the action paleontological resource. alternatives until more definitive implementation plans are developed for the Alternative D – Managed as a Focused site. There would be moderate, long-term, Unit of the National Park System beneficial to moderate, long-term, adverse impacts to the city of Waco, Baylor University, Waco Mammoth Site would be a new unit of or the National Park Service, depending on the national park system. Ownership of all the management alternative. paleontological resources (in situ fossils and the collection of fossils currently housed at The environmental assessment contributed to Baylor University) and their associated the finding that direct management by the documentation would be transferred to the National Park Service is not the only federal government and management would practicable means for meeting the goals of be by the National Park Service. The National protecting resources and furthering public Park Service would focus on a core mission of use. However, to meet these goals to the protection, scientific study, and interpretation fullest extent, there are significant roles that of paleontological resources. The National the National Park Service could have in Park Service would not likely expand beyond guiding the preservation efforts of the this core focus to initiate other projects such paleontological collection, enhancing the as environmental education or other interpretive and educational outreach recreational opportunities. Partners would programs, and enabling an expanded level of still play a role in educational outreach, scientific research and study of this special interpretive programs, and site security to resource. assist the National Park Service with achieving its core mission.

iii SUMMARY

Most Effective and greater range of visitor enjoyment Efficient Alternative opportunities without compromising resource integrity. While the range of visitor The 1998 Omnibus Parks Management Act opportunities are similar under alternatives B (Public Law 105-391 §303) and NPS policy and C, alternative C provides a greater level of mandate that each special resource study assurance for maintaining long-term resource identify the alternative or combination of protection. Alternative C assumes a full time, alternatives which would, in the professional onsite commitment of NPS specialists with judgment of the director of the National Park experience in the management and Service, be most effective and efficient in interpretation of paleontological resources. protecting significant resources and providing The day to day efforts of NPS resource opportunities for appropriate public managers and interpreters under this enjoyment. For the purposes of this study, alternative has the potential to provide a more effectiveness and efficiency are defined as the stable and consistent approach for protecting capability to produce desired results with a and enhancing the conditions of minimum expenditure of energy, time, money, paleontological collection, enhancing or materials. interpretive and educational programs, and

enabling an expanded level of scientific A comparison of costs associated with each research and study related to the special alternative indicates that alternative A, the no- resource in comparison to the periodic NPS action alternative, which continues current technical assistance provided under management trends, would require the least alternative B. Assuming initial and continued expenditure of energy, time, money, and funding is made available to support this level materials. However, alternative A does not of resource stewardship, alternative C is the include increases in staffing or operational most effective and efficient management funding; consequently accommodating visitor alternative. access to the site is limited in this alternative to only monthly scheduled events. This is not a The National Park Service’s preferred reasonable level of public enjoyment for such alternative has not been identified in the study a nationally significant treasure, and as such, report; a recommendation will be prepared alternative A is the least effective of all the after considering public comments on the alternatives. study.

Of the three action alternatives, alternative D After public review, comments will be requires the least expenditures of energy, collected, analyzed, and summarized. A final time, money, and materials, although the compliance document will be prepared to range of visitor opportunities is limited to just accompany the study. those associated with the core paleontological resources. Alternatives B and C provide a

iv Summary of Alternatives Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D Continuation of Partnerships led by Partnerships led by Managed as a focused unit of current management trends the city of Waco the National Park Service the National Park System Overall The existing cooperative The existing cooperative Waco Mammoth Site would be a Waco Mammoth Site would be a Management management arrangement between management arrangement between new unit of the national park new unit of the national park Framework the city of Waco and Baylor the city of Waco and Baylor system, in partnership with the city system, with the entire University is continued. University is expanded with of Waco, Baylor University, and paleontological resource managed additional partners, with the city others. onsite by the National Park Service assuming the lead responsibility for (in situ specimens and the managing the site as a city park. paleontological collection currently housed at Baylor University).

Concept for Managed for the continuing Same as alternative A, plus… Same as alternative A. Management preservation and protection of the paleontological resources, An expanded range of recreational and environmental educational conducting scientific study, and opportunities could be provided by the city. providing for onsite visitor enjoyment and understanding.

Site Potential The city pursues National Natural New unit of the national park system Recognition National Natural Landmark Landmark designation. National Park Service affiliated area status Eligible for NPS Affiliated area may be considered by Congress to status further strengthen NPS involvement.

Waco Community $8.1 million Initial Costs (1) Waco Community $8.1 million NPS $2.6 million NPS $0.6 million

City of Waco $300,000 City of Waco $300,000 Annual Costs (2) Mayborn Museum $45,000 Mayborn Museum (2) NPS $768,500 NPS (for 5 years) $25,000 NPS $345,000

(1) It is assumed that the Waco community efforts to erect a protection shelter over the excavation area and to provide for controlled visitor access to the site are already underway. Funding for additional staffing, programs, or facilities is not included under the no-action alternative. (2) Annual costs for managing the Waco Mammoth Site are difficult to quantify as staff support from the city of Waco and/or the Mayborn Museum Complex is an assigned collateral duty among a range of other responsibilities.

CONTENTS

Chapter One: Purpose and Background 1 Chapter Overview 1 Purpose and Need 1 Background 1 Study Methodology 2 Study Limitations 3 Cost Feasibility and Cost Estimates 4 Congressional Legislation 4

Chapter Two: Resource Description 7 Chapter Overview 7 Pleistocene Mammoths (Mammuthus) 7 Geologic Context of the Discovery Site 8 In Situ Specimens 10 Collected Specimens 11 Archival Records 11 Chronology of Events Associated with the Waco Mammoth Site 13

Chapter Three: Resource Evaluation 17 Chapter Overview 17 Evaluation of National Significance 17 National Significance Findings 21 Evaluation of Suitability 22 Similar Resource Types Found Within the National Park System 22 Similar Resource Types Found Within Related Areas 24 Similar Resources Outside the National Park System and Related Areas 25 Suitability Findings 26 Evaluation of Feasibility 33 Access 33 Size and Landownership Patterns 33 Boundary Configurations 34 Local Planning and Zoning 34 Current and Potential Uses of the Study Area and Surrounding Lands 35 Existing Degradation of Resources 38 Current and Potential Threats to the Resource 39 Potential for Public Enjoyment or Scientific Study 40 Costs Associated with Acquisition, Development, Restoration, and Operation 41 Socioeconomic Impacts of a New Unit Designation 44 Level of Local and General Public Support 44 Feasibility Findings 45

vii CONTENTS

Chapter Four: Alternatives for Management 47 Chapter Overview 47 Issues and Public Concerns 47 Visitor Access 47 Research 47 Education 47 Resource Protection 48 Supporting Comments 48 Alternatives Development 48 Elements Common to All Alternatives 49 Mitigation Measures 49 Alternative A: Continue Current Management Trends (no-action) 50 Overview 50 Concept for Management 50 Overall Management Framework 50 Resource Management 50 Scientific Study 51 Level of Development 51 Visitor Experience 51 Facility Management 51 Site Administration and Security 51 Potential Site Recognition 51 Ownership 52 Cost Estimate 52 Partnership Opportunities 52 Alternative B: Partnerships Led by the City of Waco 54 Concept for Management 54 Overall Management Framework 54 Resource Management 54 Scientific Study 55 Level of Development 55 Visitor Experience 55 Facility Management 56 Site Administration and Security 56 Site Recognition 56 Ownership 56 Cost Estimate 56 Partnership Opportunities 57 Alternative C: Partnerships Led by the National Park Service 58 Concept for Management 58 Overall Management Framework 58 Resource Management 59 Scientific Study 59 Level of Development 59 Visitor Experience 60 Facility Management 61 Site Administration and Security 61 Site Recognition 61 Ownership 61 Cost Estimate 61 Partnership Opportunities 62

viii

Contents

Alternative D: Managed as a Focused Unit of the National Park System 63 Concept for Management 63 Overall Management Framework 63 Resource Management 64 Scientific Study 64 Level of Development 64 Visitor Experience 65 Facility Management 65 Site Administration and Security 65 Site Recognition 65 Ownership 65 Cost Estimate 65 Partnership Opportunities 66 Alternatives Considered But Dismissed 67 Summary and Comparison of Alternatives 67 Alternative Highlights 67 Environmentally Preferred Alternative 67 Most Effective and Efficient Alternative 68 Determination of Need for Direct NPS Management 69

Chapter Five: Affected Environment 77 Chapter Overview 77 Impact Topics 77 Impact Topics Dismissed 77 Possible Conflicts between the Proposal and Land Use Plans, Policies, or Controls for the Area Concerned 77 Environmental Justice 77 Energy Requirements and Conservation Potential 78 Indian Trust Resources 78 Indian Sacred Sites 78 Archeological Resources 78 Cultural Landscapes 79 Historic Structures 80 Ethnographic Resources 80 Hazardous Materials 80 Impact Topics Considered 81 Description of Existing Conditions 81 Regional Context 81 Soils, Including Prime Farmlands 82 Floodplains and Wetlands 83 Vegetation, Wildlife, Habitat, and Special Status Species 83 Visitor Experience 85 Management and Operations 85 Socioeconomic Environment 86

ix CONTENTS

Chapter Six: Environmental Consequences 91 Chapter Overview 91 Methods and Assumptions for Analyzing Impacts 91 Methodology 91 Context and Type 92 Intensity and Duration 92 Direct and Indirect Impacts 92 Cumulative Impacts 92 Impact Analysis 92 Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios 96 Fundamental Resources of the Waco Mammoth Site 96 Other Resources of the Waco Mammoth Site 97 Visitor Experience 99 Management and Operations 100 Socioeconomic Environment 100 Environmental Consequences of Alternative A 103 Impacts on Fundamental Resources of the Waco Mammoth Site 103 Impacts on Other Resources 103 Impacts on Visitor Experience 104 Impacts on Management and Operations 105 Impacts on Socioeconomic Environment 105 Environmental Consequences of Alternative B 107 Impacts on Fundamental Resources of the Waco Mammoth Site 107 Impacts on Other Resources 108 Impacts on Visitor Experience 109 Impacts on Management and Operations 110 Impacts on Socioeconomic Environment 111 Environmental Consequences of Alternative C 113 Impacts on the Fundamental Resources of the Waco Mammoth Site 113 Impacts on Other Resources 114 Impacts on Visitor Experience 116 Impacts on Management and Operations 116 Impacts on Socioeconomic Environment 117 Environmental Consequences of Alternative D 119 Impacts on the Fundamental Resources of the Waco Mammoth Site 119 Impacts on Other Resources 120 Impacts on Visitor Experience 121 Impacts on Management and Operations 122 Impacts on Socioeconomic Environment 123

Chapter Seven: Public Involvement, Consultation, and Coordination 125 Chapter Overview 125 Agency and Public Scoping Activities 125

Contents

Appendixes, Selected References, Preparers and Participants 129 Appendix A: Public Law 107-341 131 Appendix B: Collection and Archive Assessment of the Waco Mammoth Site 133 Appendix C: Waco Mammoth Site Tract Map 137 Appendix D: Warranty Deeds City of Waco Tract 139 Appendix E: Consultation Correspondence 153 Selected References 159 Preparers and Participants 171

FIGURES

Figure 1: Waco Mammoth Site Plan Map 12 Figure 2: North American Mammoth Locations 27 Figure 3: Known Sites in North America Yielding Multiple Mammoths 30 Figure 4: Waco Community’s Phase I Plan for the Waco Mammoth Site 38

TABLES

Table 1: Comparison of Mammoth Records for Selected States 28 Table 2: Recorded Sites in the United States Yielding Multiple Columbian Mammoths 29 Table 3: Comparative Analysis of Similar Resource Areas 31 Table 4: Summary Table of Alternative Highlights 70 Table 5: Summary Table of Potential Environmental Consequences 74 Table 6: Central Texas Region Employment 87 Table 7: Impact Intensity Threshold Definitions 93

Chapter One: Purpose and Background

CHAPTER OVERVIEW BACKGROUND Chapter one describes why and how the Waco The Waco Mammoth Site is located 4.5 miles Mammoth Site Special Resource Study was north of Waco’s city center. Situated in a conducted. The chapter concludes with a partially excavated wooded ravine between brief discussion of study limitations, cost two upland river terraces between the Bosque feasibility, and legislative processes. and Brazos Rivers, the study area includes over 109 combined acres under the ownership of the city of Waco and Baylor University. PURPOSE AND NEED Both entities have formed a partnership for the purpose of providing preservation and New areas are typically added to the national interpretation of the paleontological resources park system by an act of Congress. However, discovered there. The site is being studied before Congress decides to create a new park because it has yielded a nursery herd of it needs to know whether the area’s resources Columbian mammoths ranging from 3 to 55 meet established criteria for designation. The years of age, which appear to have died National Park Service (NPS) is often tasked to approximately 68,000 years ago. The Waco evaluate potential new areas for compliance Mammoth Site is the largest concentration in with these criteria and document its findings North America of extinct proboscideans in a special resource study. dying from the same event; as such it provides

a unique opportunity to understand and On December 16, 2002, Public Law 107-341 interpret the behavior and ecology of an directed the secretary of the interior, in extinct species. The discoveries have received consultation with the state of Texas, the city international attention, with archeologists, of Waco, and other appropriate organizations, geologists, and paleontologists from United to conduct a special resource study to deter- States, Sweden, and Great Britain visiting the mine the national significance, suitability, and site. feasibility of designating the Waco Mammoth

Site area located in the city of Waco, Texas, as Baylor University has been actively investi- a unit of the national park system. The gating the site since its discovery in 1978 by legislation further requires that the study Paul Barron and Eddie Bufkin. To date, the process follow Section 8(c) of Public Law 91- skeletons of 24 mammoths and 1camel have 383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-5(c)). been discovered. Additional remains found at

the site indicate the presence of an extinct The purpose of this special resource study is saber tooth cat, dwarf antelope, and giant to provide Congress with information about tortoise. Three quarters of the mammoth the quality and condition of the Waco specimens have been removed and are Mammoth Site and its relationship to criteria currently being stored in Baylor University’s for parklands applied by the National Park Mayborn Museum Complex. The in situ Service. remains, under a 40'×100' tent structure in the

upper part of the site, include an almost This report summarizes NPS findings from its complete skeleton of an adult bull mammoth, preliminary investigations and, in combi- parts of a juvenile skeleton, the exposed skull nation with additional analysis, provides a of a female mammoth and its skeleton which comprehensive assessment of the Waco has not been fully exposed, parts of other Mammoth Site as a potential addition to the mammoth skeletons, and the camel skeleton. national park system. 1 CHAPTER ONE: PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND

Since 1978, local citizenry, Baylor University, • The area must offer superlative and the city of Waco have been actively opportunities for recreation, public use working together to protect the Waco and enjoyment, or scientific study. Mammoth Site in a number of ways. Collec- • The area must retain a high degree of tively they have acquired over 109 acres of integrity as a true, accurate, and relatively land in and around the discovery site. Grants unspoiled example of the resource. secured through the Cooper Foundation have supported a majority of the excavations and research since 1984. A fiberglass cast made To be suitable as a new unit, an area must from a series of latex molds of the in situ bull represent a natural or cultural theme or type and juvenile has been incorporated into the of recreational resource that is not already Waco Mammoth Site Experience exhibit at adequately represented in the national park the Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum system or is not comparably represented or Complex. protected for public enjoyment by another entity.

STUDY METHODOLOGY To be feasible as a new unit, an area’s natural systems or historic settings must be of By law (Public Law 91-383 §8 as amended by sufficient size and appropriate configuration §303 of the National Parks Omnibus Manage- to ensure long-term protection of the ment Act (Public Law 105-391)) and NPS resources and to accommodate public use. It policy, potential new units of the national must have potential for efficient admini- park system must 1) possess nationally stration at reasonable cost. Important significant resources, 2) be a suitable addition feasibility factors include landownership, to the system, 3) be a feasible addition to the acquisition costs, access, threats to the system, and 4) require direct NPS resource, and staff or development management or administration instead of requirements. alternative protection by other agencies or the private sector. A seven step study A complete discussion of national methodology was used to determine if the significance, suitability, and feasibility is Waco Mammoth Site satisfied the required presented in chapter three of this document. conditions. Step 2: Initiate an Evaluation of Need for Step 1: Evaluate National Significance, Direct National Park Service Management Suitability, and Feasibility If the resources meet the criteria for national To be eligible for designation, potential new significance, suitability, and feasibility, the areas must be nationally significant, a suitable special resource study process continues with addition to the national park system, and a series of steps to assist in the determination feasible to manage and operate. of need for direct National Park Service management instead of alternative protection To be considered nationally significant, an by another group. area must satisfy all four of the following standards: Step 3: Assess Public Opinion and Ideas • The area must be an outstanding example about Managing the Site of a particular resource type. During a process called “scoping,” informa- • The area must possess exceptional value tion was obtained about the broad range of or quality in illustrating or interpreting the potential ideas, goals, and objectives that natural or cultural themes of our nation’s future visitors, park neighbors, local and state heritage. government agencies, regional residents, and the general public would like to see achieved at the Waco Mammoth Site. Scoping occurred 2 Study Limitations continuously throughout the planning special resource study will follow the require- process. A summary of stakeholder ideas and ments of the National Environmental Policy concerns is presented in chapter four. Act (NEPA). Comments are considered a critical aid in helping the National Park Step 4: Develop Management Alternatives Service refine and reshape, if necessary, its As might be expected, some of the desires, recommendations so that they best represent future visions, and development ideas existing and potential future conditions at the expressed by stakeholders were mutually site. After public review, comments on the compatible and others were not. Working in study will be collected, analyzed, summarized. conjunction with its many planning partners, the planning team drew upon the full range of Step 7: Transmit Study Report to Congress stakeholder input to formulate a range of The study report and summary of public management alternatives, each reflecting a comments will be transmitted by the region to different combination of site development, the Washington Office of the National Park interpretation, management responsibility, Service, an agency within the Department of and cost variables. When considered together, the Interior. The Department of the Interior the range of ideas is intended to express the will transmit the study and a recommendation broad diversity of public comments and to Congress. suggestions received during scoping. A complete description of each management alternative is included in chapter four. STUDY LIMITATIONS

A special resource study serves as one of many Step 5: Analyze Potential Environmental reference sources for members of Congress, Consequences Associated with each the National Park Service, and other persons Management Alternatives interested in the potential designation of an An analysis of the consequences of each area as a new unit of the national park system. alternative on the fundamental resources of The reader should be aware that the analysis the Waco Mammoth Site, other resources, and findings contained in this report do not visitor experience, management operations, guarantee the future funding, support, or and socioeconomic environment was any subsequent action by Congress, the prepared. The impact analysis focused on Department of the Interior, or the National those resources and values that would be Park Service. Because a special resource study affected by one or more of the alternatives. is not a decision-making document, it does The analysis included a description of the not identify a preferred NPS course of action. context, duration, and intensity of impacts on all the major resources and values affected by NEPA regulations and NPS policy require that one or more of the alternatives. Direct and the study identify an environmentally indirect impacts were described, as well as preferred alternative. This is determined by consideration of the effects of connected, applying criteria set forth in NEPA, as guided similar, and cumulative actions. by direction from the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). The CEQ has The environmental review contributed to the stated that the environmentally preferred evaluation of the need for direct National alternative is the alternative that will promote Park Service management. the national environmental policy as expressed in NEPA, Section 101 by Step 6: Publish Study Report and Distribute accomplishing the following objectives: for Public Review and Comment • Fulfill the responsibilities of each As part of the overall effort to encourage generation as trustee of the environment public involvement in the decision-making for succeeding generations. process, solicitation of public comment on the

3 CHAPTER ONE: PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND

• Assure for all generations safe, healthful, Legislation to create new parks may be intro- productive, and esthetically and culturally duced in either the House of Representatives pleasing surroundings. or the Senate. • Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, Once introduced, a new bill is assigned to the risk of health or safety, or other Committee having jurisdiction over the area undesirable and unintended affected by the measure. If introduced in the consequences. House, national parks legislation is generally referred to the Natural Resources Committee, • Preserve important historic, cultural, and Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and natural aspects of our national heritage Public Lands. Park legislation introduced in and maintain, wherever possible, an the Senate is referred to the Energy and environment that supports diversity and Natural Resources Committee, Subcommittee variety of individual choice. on National Parks. • Achieve a balance between population and resource use that will permit high The most intense discussions about a standards of living and a wide sharing of proposed new park generally occur during life’s amenities. committee action. Public hearings are • Enhance the quality of renewable sometimes conducted so committee members resources and approach the maximum can hear witnesses representing various attainable recycling of depletable viewpoints on the measure. The secretary of resources. the interior may be asked to present the position of the Department of the Interior or Cost Feasibility and Cost Estimates the National Park Service on the bill to the committee during public hearings. Many projects that are technically possible to accomplish may not be feasible in light of After hearings are completed, members of the current budgetary constraints and other NPS committee study the information and priorities. This is especially likely where viewpoints presented in detail. Amendments acquisition and development costs are high, may be offered and committee members vote the resource may lose its significant values to accept or reject these changes. At the before acquisition by the National Park conclusion of deliberations, a vote of the Service, or other protection action is possible. committee members is taken to determine what action to take. The committee can Preliminary cost estimates are provided for decide to report (which means endorse or each management alternative for comparison recommend) the bill for consideration by the purposes only. It is recommended that a more full House, with or without amendment, or comprehensive cost estimate be prepared table it (which means no further action will prior to initiating any of the proposed occur). Congressional committees may table a planning, design, or construction bill for a variety of reasons including, but recommendations proposed in this study. certainly not limited to, the legislative priorities of committee members or because Congressional Legislation the bill is not supported by the administration. During scoping, many stakeholders had a Generally, if the committee feels another number of questions regarding the special agency or organization is better suited to resource study process once the report is manage the site, or alternative preservation submitted to Congress. They also requested actions can recognize and protect important that the special resource study include a resources outside of the national park system, synopsis of the legislative process typically the proposed bill is not supported. Likewise, used to create a new unit of the national park the committee may not support a bill over system. concerns for higher priority government-wide

4 Study Limitations obligations or sensitivity to adding additional forth negotiation may be conducted by a management responsibilities to the National conference committee that includes both Park Service at a time of limited funding or House and Senate members. The goal of a personnel shortages. conference committee is to resolve any differences and report (resubmit) an identical Consideration by the full House or Senate can measure back to both bodies for a vote. be a simple or complex operation depending on how much discussion is necessary and the After a bill has been passed in identical form numbers of amendments members wish to by both the House and Senate, it is sent to the consider. president who may sign the measure into law, veto it and return it to Congress, let it become When all debate is concluded, the full House law without a signature, or at the end of a ses- or Senate is ready to vote on the final bill. sion, pocket veto it. If the bill becomes law, a After a bill has passed in one house it goes to new unit of the national park system is the other house for consideration. A bill must authorized. The language in the new law is pass both the Senate and House of Represen- often referred to as the park’s enabling tatives in the same language before it can be legislation. Enabling legislation defines the presented to the president for signature. purpose of the park and may specify any standards, limits, or actions that Congress If the Senate changes the language of the bill, wants taken related to planning, land it must be returned to the House for concur- acquisition, resource management, park rence or additional changes. This back-and- operations, or funding.

Chapter Two: Resource Description

CHAPTER OVERVIEW The woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) is smaller (10 feet at shoulder Chapter two describes the special resources of height) than the Columbian mammoth and is the Waco Mammoth Site. A summary the most commonly recognized mammoth description of Pleistocene mammoths (genus species by the general public. Similar to the Mammuthus) is presented to provide context Columbian mammoth, the woolly mammoth for the resource type, followed by a is a descendant of the southern mammoth, description of each of the four fundamental although the woolly mammoth evolved in resource components that together constitute Eurasia. Paleontologists theorize the woolly the special resources of the Waco Mammoth mammoth migrated to North America from Site. Eurasia much later than the Columbian

mammoth, approximately 35,000 and 18,000

years ago during the latter stages of the late PLEISTOCENE MAMMOTHS Pleistocene. (MAMMUTHUS) Mammoths are members of the order Woolly mammoths typically inhabited the Proboscidea, and are related to the modern northern, colder regions of the continent, elephant, especially the Asiatic elephant with a distribution mainly restricted to Alaska (Elephas maximus). Mammoths lived in North and Canada; however, remains have been America during the Pleistocene Epoch, a time discovered as far south as Kansas. period about 2,000,000 years in length that ended roughly 10,000 years ago. References can be found to yet another New Paleontologists theorize that representatives World mammoth species, Jefferson's of the southern mammoth (Mammuthus mammoth (Mammuthus jeffersonii), which has meridionalis), which originated in Eurasia, been found mostly around the Great Lakes migrated to North America from northeastern region, although some paleontologists Siberia by way of the Bering Land Bridge theorize this species to be synonymous with during the early Pleistocene (at least 1.7 Mammuthus columbi. million years ago). In North America, the southern mammoth evolved into the imperial The smallest of the New World mammoth mammoth (Mammuthus imperator) during the species is the island dwelling pygmy middle Pleistocene. By the end of the middle mammoth (Mammuthus exilis). The remains Pleistocene, the Columbian mammoth of this creature have been found exclusively (Mammuthus columbi) had evolved from the on San Miguel, Santa Rosa, and Santa Cruz imperial mammoth. It became the largest of Islands of Channel Islands National Park. the three species, with a shoulder height Columbian mammoths originally inhabited reaching 12 to 14 feet. The Columbian the islands, but paleontologists theorize that mammoth preferred the more temperate to over time and through a series of environ- subtropical regions of the United States, mental stresses—such as shrinking habitat Mexico, and Central America; fossils are from rising sea levels during the end of the last found distributed across most of the North Ice Age, overcrowding, and drought—natural American continent. The Columbian selection favored smaller individuals, mammoth is the species of mammoth found at ultimately producing Mammuthus exilis. the Waco Mammoth Site. Evolving from Columbian mammoths, pygmy mammoths were considerably smaller (4 –8

7 CHAPTER TWO: RESOURCE DESCRIPTION feet at shoulder height) than their contrast, the Brazos River drains some black predecessors. land prairie soils but mostly siliceous based sediments containing quartzite and chert. All New World mammoths became extinct Documenting the sequence of terrace deposits about 11,000 years ago. There is much debate may potentially reveal an earlier confluence on the cause of the late Pleistocene position of the Brazos and Bosque Rivers. mammalian extinction, theories range from disease or Paleo-Indian predation, to climatic or environmental change. Study Area

To date, 24 Columbian mammoths have been discovered at the Waco Mammoth Site. Eighteen specimens have been excavated and removed, four have been partially excavated and remain in situ, one was encountered while taking soil core samples for a geologic study, while another was recently found within the northwest wall of the excavation pit after a Aerial view looking SW over the Waco Mammoth Site storm event eroded a portion of the wall. The resources of the Waco Mammoth Site include Initial dating efforts of the Waco Mammoth four fundamental resource components: the Site were attempted during the mid-1980s. geologic context of the discovery site, the in Baylor University staff working with situ specimens, the collected specimens, and geochemist Dr. Herb Hass, Southern the associated archival records. Methodist University, Texas, attempted radiocarbon dating on two samples; one sample was sent to Stafford Research GEOLOGIC CONTEXT OF Laboratories, Boulder, Colorado. The results THE DISCOVERY SITE of one sample came up inconclusive because it required the preservation of collagen, which The current understanding of the site’s unfortunately was not found. The second geological context, as presented by Baylor indicated a date of 28,000 years before present University’s Dr. Lee Nordt during the study (BP); this then became the de facto date of the team’s initial site visit in July 2005, is mammoth event. Pollen records for the area summarized as follows: only go back 18,000 BP.

The site is located on the second and third The estimated time of accumulation (28,000 terrace level above the Bosque River within a BP) seemed too early based on the location of partially excavated wooded ravine containing the mammoth herd within the terrace highly erodible silt/clay soils. It appears the sequence. Another testing method was tried paleosols are 4 –5 meters thick before utilizing uranium series dating of the tooth encountering bedrock. The site is a freely enamel. The results of this test were not drained environment, without a high water initially considered accurate because they table. The site is unusual in that it is at the were much older than the expected age of the contact or border between two ecosystems site. Dr. Steve Foreman, University of Illinois, represented on each side of the drainage. Chicago, was then contacted to attempt There are two terraces straddling the site that optically stimulated luminescence testing, a are composed of different sediments, derived fairly new technique which dates the last time from two different sources: The Bosque River quartz deposits in the alluvial sediments were and the Brazos River. The Bosque River only exposed to daylight. Samples were taken drains black land prairie soils, which are clay around, above, and below the mammoth rich and contain mostly calcareous alluvium bones. The technique indicated that it had exclusively from a limestone source. In 8 Geologic Context of the Discovery Site been 58,000 –73,000 years since the deposits University’s Department of Geology has had been exposed. This additional testing led provided valuable additional information and to a change in the interpretation of the age of interpretation of the soil stratigraphy and the site to approximately 68,000 BP rather geologic context of the site. During the initial than 28,000 BP. This older date is what is visit to the site by the study team, Mr. Bongino currently presented in the Waco Mammoth presented an overview of the research he was Site exhibit in the Mayborn Museum conducting to more accurately map the Complex. microstratigraphy of the site. He was attempting to provide a time line for the death In an effort to determine the extent of the of the mammoths, and confirm whether it was resource still buried at the site, ground- a single catastrophic event. His work has penetrating radar was attempted but proved resulted in a refinement of the understanding unsuccessful primarily due to the lack of of the circumstances surrounding the contrast between the densities of the soil and concentration of mammoths discovered there. the mammoth bones. His findings indicate that a herd of at least 19 adult female and juvenile mammoths The recent research conducted by John succumbed in a single event, while also Bongino as a part of his masters’ thesis suggesting there were subsequent completed in August 2007 through Baylor accumulations later in time.

9 CHAPTER TWO: RESOURCE DESCRIPTION

IN SITU SPECIMENS Museum. The initial excavation efforts took an archeological approach to the work based on a × Under a 40' 100' tent structure that covers potential association with Paleo-Indians. Soil the upper part of the excavation area, the pillars in the upper portion of the site were left partially uncovered in situ material in place to retain a reference sample of the soil represents the remains of four Columbian stratigraphy. All sediments removed were mammoths (Mammuthus columbi): an almost screened as part of the excavation process. complete skeleton of an adult bull, parts of a Evidence of human activity was not found, juvenile skeleton, the exposed skull of a shaping the current theory of the site as a female and its skeleton which has not been natural event and not a kill site. The site is now fully exposed, plus parts of other mammoth known to predate the entrance of humans into skeletons. In addition, there is a western North America. camel (Camelops hesternus) skeleton, minus the skull, which was removed as a protective measure by Baylor University in 2005. Also, a deciduous canine tooth from a juvenile saber tooth cat (cf. Smilodon) was found in association with the remains of an unidentified animal whose bones are too small to be mammoth. Another mammoth was discovered 11 feet below the ground surface during subsurface coring 75 feet northeast of the covered, upper excavation area of the site, while another was recently found within the northwest wall of the upper excavation pit after a storm event eroded a portion of the wall.

Upper excavation area, in situ prehistoric camel

Waco Mammoth Site upper excavation area, overlooking the in situ bull mammoth

The excavation pit retains a soil profile wall on three sides with a 9- to 10-foot depth to the pit floor on the upper end. On the open end, the pit connects with the initial discovery area or lower excavation area. Excavation efforts have been ongoing since 1978, when the bones were first discovered by Paul Barron and Eddie Bufkin who Dr. Greg McDonald, paleontologist and NPS Senior brought the find to the attention of David Curator of Natural History providing guidance on in situ Lintz of Baylor University’s Strecker specimen preservation. 10 Archival Records

COLLECTED SPECIMENS Collected specimens are currently being stored in Baylor University’s recently opened (May 2004) Mayborn Museum Complex. A majority of the specimens are from the lower, southwest section of the excavation area where 16 mammoth skeletons were collected during a mass removal in the 1990s as the exposed specimens were being threatened by stormwater runoff.

Collection storage in Mayborn Museum Complex

Preparation efforts remain to be completed that would include establishing protocols and documentation methods; removing specimens from field jackets; removing sediment from the bones; hardening the bones by impregnating with plastic if needed; reassembling broken pieces; re-associating separated material with original specimens; documenting, cataloging, and placing prepared specimens in cabinets or on shelving; and making them available for study or for casting for interpretive exhibits. There are also 137 boxes of collected material from the site, 11 of which contain soil samples. Approximately 30%–40% of the boxes contain mammoth bones that were washed from the exposed skeletons during storm events in 1978, 1981, 1984, and 1986. Staff from the Mayborn Museum Complex are currently sorting specimens and attempting to associate them

with specific skeletons. Waco Mammoth Site lower excavation area

Parts of a juvenile skeleton (specimen #18 in ARCHIVAL RECORDS figure #1) over the bull’s tusk were removed as part of the casting effort during the mid The archival records include slides and 1990s. The lower female (specimen #21) photographs of the excavation efforts, field from the upper concentration was removed notes, field maps, stratigraphic cross sections, later after erosion threatened its integrity. research files, correspondence, grant proposals, The collection includes 18 articulated or and other records pertaining to the site. semi-articulated remains of Columbian mammoths, a Western camel skull, a molar A condition assessment of the collections and from a dwarf antelope (cf. Capromeryx), and archives was conducted in February 2006 by Dr. a giant tortoise shell (Geochelone sp.). A Greg McDonald, NPS senior curator of natural majority of the larger parts of the specimens history. A copy is included in appendix B. are encased in 93 plaster field jackets and have not been prepared.

11 CHAPTER TWO: RESOURCE DESCRIPTION

Figure 1: Waco Mammoth Site #23 & #24 Plan Map

Camel skull removed in 2005.

#25

Parts of the juvenile (#18) removed in 1994.

Bull Mammoth (#17)

Lower female (#21) removed.

Specimens #1 - #16 removed en masse in 1990.

Figure 1 illustrates the original positions of 21 of the 24 known mammoth specimens and camel mapped by Ralph Vinson. Specimens #23, #24, and #25 have not as yet been recorded on the map. The female mammoth specimen #23 is only partially uncovered and located just north of the camel specimen #22. The 23rd mammoth (specimen #24) is approximately 75 feet northeast of the upper concentration and was encountered 11 feet below the ground surface during soil core sampling in 1996. This specimen has not been excavated. Bones from what appears to be the 24th mammoth (specimen #25) were partially revealed along the west wall after a storm event in 2007.

12 Chronology of Events Associated with the Waco Mammoth Site

CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE WACO MAMMOTH SITE Calvin Smith, who was the director of Baylor University’s Strecker Museum from 1984 until his retirement in 2003, graciously provided a majority of the information regarding the years from 1978 through 2002 presented below.

1978 –1980 The remains of five Columbian mammoths were discovered by Eddie Bufkin and Paul Barron and excavated by David Lintz from the Strecker Museum and George Naryshkin of the Department of Geology at Baylor University.

1981 –1983 No excavation activities during this time.

1984 In February, three additional specimens were found eroding out of the bank.

Under the direction of Calvin Smith, the newly appointed director of the Strecker Museum, excavations were begun in May expanding the discovery to a total of eleven mammoths by July.

The first of many grants was received from the Cooper Foundation, $2,500 to explore the size and scope of the site.

A 5" rainfall inundated the site in October resulting in more animals being exposed.

Another grant was received from the Cooper Foundation, $26,800 to build a diversion dam, purchase and erect a tent over the excavated area, and to hire Ralph Vinson as the chief excavator and coordinator of the volunteer efforts.

By December a total of 15 mammoths had been identified including a 45 year old female with a juvenile lying across her tusks.

Dr. Gary Haynes visited the site for the first time and stated that it was "the largest concentration of extinct proboscideans to die from the same event known to science."

1985 –1986 Excavations of the specimens continued with only one additional mammoth discovered.

1987 At the request and encouragement of Dr. Haynes and with a $10,500 grant from the Cooper Foundation, the Strecker Museum and Baylor University in conjunction with the Annual Meeting of the Texas Archaeological Society hosted the symposium, "Mammoths, Mastodons and Human Interaction" which had 500 attendees from across the country.

1990 Baylor initiated a mass removal of 16 specimens from the site, utilizing the assistance of numerous volunteers including the Dallas Paleontological Society and the Central Texas Archaeological Society, many students from Baylor University, and another grant from the Cooper Foundation of

13 CHAPTER TWO: RESOURCE DESCRIPTION

$16,975. The bones were placed in storage in Baylor University’s Strecker Museum.

1991 Baylor University initiated additional explorations of the upper portion of the site. The herd bull that Dr. Haynes had predicted might be in the area was discovered with a juvenile over his right tusk. The Cooper Foundation provided additional grants of $7,975, $9,000, and $17,800 during this period of time.

1992 Proboscidean and Paleoindian Interactions edited by J.W. Fox, C. B. Smith, and K.T. Wilkins, was published by Baylor University Press. The book is a compilation of papers presented at the 1987 symposium "Mammoths, Mastodons and Human Interaction" held in Waco, Texas. Included in this publication under chapter four is Herd Bunching at the Waco Mammoth Site: Preliminary Investigations, 1978-1987.

1994 Calvin Smith contacted Joe Taylor of Mt. Blanco Casting Company from Crosbyton, Texas to cast the bull and juvenile in situ so their relative positions could be recorded. After receiving another grant for $14,300 from the Cooper Foundation, the largest field latex mold of an in situ specimen made to date was achieved between April 1st and June 3rd. This resulted in over 40 "mother molds" that could be separated and reassembled in the lab for the final process of pouring a fiberglass cast of the two specimens. The cast is currently exhibited in Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum Complex, successor to the Strecker Museum.

The camel, the deciduous tooth from a saber-toothed cat, and the 22nd mammoth were discovered.

1996 Ground penetrating radar was attempted on areas surrounding the excavation site without success.

Sam Jack McGlasson donated 4.93 acres to the city of Waco (an area surrounding and including the excavation site). Conditions of the conveyance require the city to use the property for research, educational, and/or tourism purposes and for the city to enter into an agreement with Baylor University concerning the maintenance of the property as an educational resource for the citizens of Waco, visitors and researchers.

The 23rd Mammoth was discovered when a student doing soil core samples encountered what was believed to be a mammoth pelvis. This specimen is 75 feet from the upper excavation area and has not been excavated.

1997 Calvin Smith presented a paper on the site and its importance, to the 30th International Geological Congress in Beijing, China making it known to the global scientific community.

1999 The first development proposal for the site was commissioned by the city of Waco. The proposal recommended developing the site as a 200-acre regional park with recreational amenities, and included a master plan illustration for the site, building program, and cost estimates.

14 Chronology of Events Associated with the Waco Mammoth Site

2000 A second development plan was produced and presented by Calvin Smith which included a modified program for the park, planning and funding goals, budget, time table, maps, and a proposal for a cooperative venture.

With gifts from Buddy Bostick and Don and Pam Moes to Baylor University, 55 acres of land connecting the site with the Bosque River was purchased by Baylor University.

2001 With a major reduction by Liz McGlasson in the asking price for an additional 50 acres bordering Steinbeck Bend Road and with an additional gift from Buddy Bostick, Baylor University purchased the remaining land encompassing the site to extend the buffer around the excavated area.

Congressman Chet Edwards introduced legislation to direct the secretary of the interior to conduct a special resource study of the Waco Mammoth Site.

2002 During the spring of 2002, the city commissioned a feasibility study of the resource by Lord Cultural Resources Planning and Management Inc. The effort included an analysis of conservation and preservation needs; potential visitor experience; space, facilities, and capital costs; governance and staffing; and market/financial analysis. Based on the recommendations of the study completed in June 2003, excavation efforts were discontinued and public access to the site was restricted to avoid resource degradation.

On December 16, Public Law 107-341 authorized the special resource study for the Waco Mammoth Site.

2004 In May, Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum Complex (former Strecker Museum) was opened to the public. The collection and archives from the Waco Mammoth Site were moved from the Strecker Museum into the geology/paleontology collections room of the new museum. A full room interpretive exhibit of the Waco Mammoth Site was presented in the Hall of Natural History. A dynamic walk-in diorama featuring a cast of the skeletal remains of the herd’s bull with a juvenile cradled in its tusks can be viewed through a thick glass floor over the exhibit. A continuous loop film depicts what is believed to be the last moments of the herd’s survival before they perished. Static and interactive interpretive displays on mammoths were presented as well, and remain to interpret the site.

2005 The camel skull was removed as a protective measure due to emerging drainage channels forming in the excavation pit from stormwater runoff.

Baylor University graduate student John Bongino initiated research into the site’s microstratigraphy. The goal of the study was to attempt to establish a timeline for the deaths of the mammoths, reconstruct the depositional history of the site, terrace formation, and the prehistoric relationship of the two river systems.

Funding to initiate the special resource study was first made available.

15 CHAPTER TWO: RESOURCE DESCRIPTION

2006 Congressman Edwards secured a $200,000 grant through Save America’s Treasures Program administered by the National Park Service for the purpose of replacing the tent and erecting a more durable shelter over the in situ specimens, enhancing site security, and making the site accessible to the public.

Waco Mammoth Foundation chartered by the city of Waco and Baylor University. The foundation initiated a major fundraising campaign to support resource protection efforts and visitor access accommodations for the site.

Design contract awarded to Coterra-Reed for the design of an excavation shelter to protect the in situ specimens and to provide for controlled public access to the Waco Mammoth Site.

2007 John Bongino completed his master thesis in August. His work has resulted in a refinement of the understanding of the circumstances surrounding the concentration of mammoths discovered there. His findings indicate that a herd of at least 19 adult female and juvenile mammoths succumbed in a single event, while also suggesting there were subsequent accumulations later in time.

2008 The Waco Mammoth Foundation succeeded in their fundraising efforts and collected over $3 million dollars to support the construction of an excavation shelter and to accommodate visitor access to the site. The city of Waco’s Department of Parks and Recreation is planning to contract for the construction in 2008.

Chapter Three: Resource Evaluation

CHAPTER OVERVIEW questionnaires were distributed to the group for their input. In subsequent rounds, each Proposals for new parks are carefully analyzed participant received a composite of the in a special resource study to ensure only the feedback received from the entire panel in the most outstanding resources are considered for previous round and was then asked to provide addition to the national park system. In additional comment on the consolidated list. chapter three, the special resources of the The process was repeated as necessary to help Waco Mammoth Site are evaluated to inform the documentation of the resource’s determine if they are of national significance, significance. and how suitable and feasible the resource may be for NPS designation, using criteria The first round of the process included established by law and National Park Service sending information on the Waco Mammoth policy. Site to 32 individuals with an invitation to

participate. This was initiated on November

22, 2005. We received positive responses to EVALUATION OF participate from 17 individuals. NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE For the resources of the Waco Mammoth Site The second round of the process was initiated to be considered nationally significant, they on January 31, 2006, and included sending the must meet all four of the following standards: following five questions to each of the 17 participants who had responded to the first • Resource Quality - It is an outstanding round:

example of a particular resource type. 1. What do you think are the top three fossil • Interpretive Value - It possesses sites, Pleistocene sites, and mammoth sites in exceptional value or quality in illustrating the nation?

or interpreting the natural or cultural 2. What criteria did you use to determine your ’ themes of our nation s heritage. choices? • Potential for Use - It offers superlative 3. What criteria would you use to classify a opportunities for recreation, public use site as an exceptional example of and enjoyment, or scientific study. paleontological resources in the United States? • Integrity - It retains a high degree of 4. What values do you believe a site should integrity as a true, accurate, and relatively possess to further the understanding of unspoiled example of the resource. paleontology in the United States?

The study team used the Delphi process in the 5. What degree of integrity should a development of draft significance statements paleontological site retain to be considered a for the Waco Mammoth Site. The Delphi true, accurate, and relatively unspoiled technique, originally developed by the Rand example of a paleontological resource? Please explain. Corporation, is a structured process for collecting and distilling knowledge from a 6. Can the degree of integrity at a site be group of experts through a series of re- improved? iterative questionnaires. This included identifying and inviting a panel of paleon- Five participants responded to the second tological and other scientific experts to round. The third round of the Delphi process participate in the process. A series of was initiated on March 13, 2006, and included 17 CHAPTER THREE: RESOURCE EVALUATION sending the composite results of the input John Day Fossil Beds National Monument, received from round two and asking for any Oregon – Eocene, Oligocene, Miocene additional input. Two participants transmitted Petrified Forest National Park, Arizona – additional comments to the composite. Triassic

The results of the third round provided the These parks are complemented by other parks team with the parameters needed to craft an that were not established specifically to initial list of draft significance statements for protect fossil resources but are, nonetheless, the Waco Mammoth Site. equally important for the fossils they protect. These parks include the following NPS units: The fourth round of the Delphi process included transmitting this list on May 1, 2006, Big Bend National Park, Texas – Cretaceous to all participants for their consideration and Channel Islands National Park, California – review. Pleistocene

Based on the input received throughout the Death Valley National Park, California— process and further deliberation among the Nevada – Paleozoic, Miocene study team, the draft significance statements Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona – were refined and currently include the Paleozoic, Pleistocene following findings regarding the four significance standards: Guadalupe Mountains National Park, Texas – Permian, Pleistocene Resource Quality – Is the site an outstanding example of a resource type? While Pleistocene fossils occur in numerous parks, interpretation in these parks does not Fossil resources are found in over 180 units of focus on the Pleistocene biota. In this respect, the national park system and span the entire the Waco Mammoth Site is a distinctive type range of geological time from the Precambrian of fossil resource that represents a portion of to the Pleistocene. Among these are parks geological time that completes the story told specifically established because of their by these other parks and complements and important fossil resources and include the enhances the story told by the small number following NPS units: of parks with Pleistocene fossils.

Agate Fossil Beds National Monument, Even though mammoth remains are known Nebraska – Miocene from other NPS units, they—like most records Badlands National Park, South Dakota – of mammoths in North America—consist Cretaceous, Eocene, Oligocene mostly of isolated remains. The combination

Dinosaur National Monument, Colorado – of both in situ articulated skeletal remains and Utah – Jurassic the excavated specimens from the Waco Mammoth Site represent the only recorded Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument, instance in the United States of a nursery herd Colorado – Eocene of Pleistocene mammoths. It is further unique Fossil Butte National Monument, Wyoming in that the nature of the herd’s preservation – Eocene suggests evidence of group behavior and

Hagerman Fossil Beds National Monument, survival instincts during a naturally occurring Idaho – Pliocene catastrophic event.

18 Evaluation of National Significance

Interpretive Value – Is the site an Ongoing research at the site is suggesting that exceptional value/quality in not all of the mammoths found there had died illustrating/interpreting the natural or during this single event but the remains may cultural themes of our nation’s heritage? include individuals that died earlier or later.

The Waco Mammoth Site possesses This raises an interesting aspect as to site exceptional value and quality for interpreting fidelity by Columbian mammoths; the site may the geological and paleontological history of have been used frequently over time and the nation, with a special focus on the late during one of these visits the catastrophic Pleistocene conditions and events occurring demise of a nursery herd occurred. Both 68,000 years ago along the interface of two components of the site add to its importance physiographic provinces: the Great Plains and as a keystone to understanding the natural Gulf Coastal Plains. In addition to the history of this extinct species. It can serve as a Columbian mammoth herd, other associated reference point to which previous discoveries faunal remains provide additional can be reexamined and new discoveries opportunities for enhancing our compared. understanding of a broader representation of life forms present during the later phases of The site represents an excellent, modern day the Pleistocene Epoch. (National Park example of how the power of community Service’s Natural History Theme #19 commitment can foster preservation of our Geologic History, subtheme: Oligocene – nation’s natural heritage. Local citizens, Recent epochs as described in Natural History Baylor University, and the city of Waco have in the National Park System and on the been actively involved as a group to promote National Registry of Natural Landmarks 1990) the national recognition of this site, to initiate and continue to provide protective measures Columbian mammoths are one of the iconic for the resource, to pursue fund raising species of the Ice Age in North America, activities to support continued resource having been found at multiple localities in the preservation efforts, and to provide volunteer United States (see figure 2). They are efforts with excavation activities at the site. displayed in museums as whole skeletons or isolated bones and teeth; often the displayed Potential for Use – Does the site provide skeletons are composites from multiple superlative opportunities for public enjoyment or scientific study? individuals—rarely are complete associated skeletons known. Sites in which the remains The Waco Mammoth Site provides of more then one individual have been superlative opportunities for public recovered are even rarer (see table #2) and are enjoyment and scientific study. Effective often the result of accumulation of individual interpretative programs could be developed animals over long periods of time such as for various educational levels. Such an effort those found at the tar pits at Rancho La Brea could include programs for school groups at in Los Angeles, California, or the Mammoth all levels: elementary, middle, and high school. Site at Hot Springs, South Dakota. Many sites It could offer programs for the public at a containing this extinct species are the result of general adult level of education. It could also human hunting activities; they cannot be include scientifically detailed programs for considered indicative of the mammoth’s students in college and graduate school. natural history but rather of human history. Baylor University has established a precedent The Waco Mammoth Site is the first recorded for taking school groups to the site. The discovery in North America that contains the university has already involved undergraduate remains of multiple individuals of different and graduate students with the site through its ages that died during a restricted period of museum studies and geology programs. The time, apparently due to a catastrophic event. site has the scientific potential to directly engage other disciplines besides paleontology such as botany, zoology, and geology. 19 CHAPTER THREE: RESOURCE EVALUATION

The catastrophic event that resulted in the sequence of events that led to the collective death and preservation of the herd of death of the mammoth herd at Waco. Columbian mammoths at the Waco Mammoth Site provides a rare opportunity to The Waco Mammoth Site affords exceptional study a social group in the fossil record and opportunities not only for public enjoyment infer group behavior in an extinct species. As or scientific study, but also for the public such the site provides an opportunity to enjoyment of scientific study. These contribute to modern zoology by allowing a opportunities amount to fostering an comparison between the herd dynamics and understanding, appreciation, and respect for behavior patterns in an extinct elephant the science of paleontology. The preservation species with those of modern elephants. The of a portion of the bones of the mammoth study of the transition of the living biota into herd in situ provides opportunities to teach the fossil record and the potential biases that about the scientific method in general and may be introduced is called taphonomy. about paleontology in particular as a historical Recognition of these biases is critical to better science. Along with geology and archeology, understanding the ecology of an extinct paleontology’s goal is to reconstruct events species and how it can provide insight into that have already taken place by attempting to understanding the historical origins of the find out what happened and why. Historical ecology of its living relatives. The Waco scientific methodologies and techniques are Mammoth Site provides an opportunity to essentially different from those employed in demonstrate and explain to the public this the experimental sciences of biology, sub-discipline of paleoecology and the chemistry, and physics. The Waco Mammoth methodologies involved in understanding the Site provides opportunities to demonstrate ecology of an extinct species as well as provide how knowledge of the experimental sciences opportunities for future research. plays a critical role in collecting information to reconstruct past events of the Earth’s The Waco Mammoth Site provides history. Specifically, such knowledge is useful scientifically valuable study opportunities to when applied to questions at Waco, compare mammoth specimens found in a particularly as to when, how, and why most if natural accumulation with mammoth not all of the mammoths found there died, specimens found elsewhere in Paleo-Indian herded together some 68,000 years ago. kill or butcher sites. The Waco Mammoth Site offers excellent taphonomic comparison Integrity – Does the site retain a high degree opportunities with sites similar to the of integrity as a true, accurate, and Lubbock Lake Landmark site where Paleo- relatively unspoiled example of a resource?

Indians hunted mammoths. The Waco Mammoth Site retains a high degree of integrity as many of the in situ and Opportunities present themselves for excavated skeletons represent fully articulated conducting research and teaching about the specimens. Their location and position have contribution of the Waco Mammoth Site to been recorded; removed specimens have been the science of paleontology because encased in plaster jackets and placed in approximately 30% of the known Waco storage at the nearby Baylor University’s mammoth specimens are still in situ. This Mayborn Museum Complex. There are situation provides researchers and visitor sufficient undisturbed deposits to provide opportunities to examine firsthand the material for future study as approximately physical conditions governing the site, how 30% of the known specimens are still in situ. the fossil site was formed, and how it was Soil pillars have been retained within the initially excavated by archeologists and excavated pit to provide a reference for future paleontologists. Additional research would sediment studies. help further our scientific understanding to interpret to the public the conditions and

20 Evaluation of National Significance

As a paleontological site, the Waco Mammoth herd of Pleistocene mammoths. It is Site is unusual in that it has only been further unique in that the nature of the excavated by a single institution; this means all herd’s preservation suggests evidence of specimens and the associated documentation group behavior and survival instincts are maintained by a single entity. Many sites, during a naturally occurring catastrophic such as the Tar Pits at Rancho La Brea in Los event. Angeles, California, were excavated by • The site preserves at least two separate multiple institutions and the specimens and mammoth death events and provides an data are housed in different places resulting in exceptional opportunity for scientific a logistical challenge to researchers. In other study, such as the opportunity to cases such as the Dent Mammoth site, in investigate Columbian mammoth herd Colorado, while only a single institution dynamics. The matriarchal herd is excavated the site, some specimens were represented by at least 19 of the exchanged with other museums for exhibits; mammoths uncovered so far which are this requires an investigator to travel to from a single geomorphic surface and died multiple sites to examine the complete sample. during a single catastrophic event, while At the Waco Mammoth Site, the housing of the presence of the other individuals not the excavated specimens and associated data associated with this event indicates site together, along with the in situ material, fidelity by the mammoth. This site could creates a distinct advantage for researchers serve as a keystone upon which previous wishing to examine the entire sample. discoveries of mammoths in other contexts can be re-examined and new While the actual paleontological resources at discoveries compared. Future scientific the site are finite, and at some point in the studies will continue to inform the future all specimens will be uncovered, this is interpretation of the site for the benefit of true for all fossil sites. It is merely a matter of the scientific community as well as the scale. With regard to the Waco Mammoth visiting public. Site, the point of complete discovery has not been attained; new material is still being • The mammoth herd, together with the ’ discovered and could include additional site s other recorded Pleistocene faunal individual mammoths. As these specimens are remains provide an important opportunity uncovered they also will presumably be left in for enhancing the interpretation and situ which will add to the value of the site for public understanding of a snapshot both scientific research and educational representation of biota existing along the opportunities. While other vertebrate species interface of two physiographic provinces are not as well represented at the site as the (Great Plains and Gulf Coastal Plains) mammoths, the presence of camel, tortoise, during the late Pleistocene, better known saber tooth cat, and antelope suggest that as the Ice Age. there is the potential for the recovery of The site also provides an exceptional additional taxa. opportunity to foster a public understanding of the science of paleontology. National Significance Findings The in situ remains provide an opportunity to teach visitors about the The paleontological resources of the Waco scientific method and that paleontology, Mammoth Site meet the National Park like geology and archeology, is a science in Service’s established criteria for national which researchers reconstruct events that significance based on the following findings: have already taken place. Their • The combination of both in situ methodologies are different from those in articulated skeletal remains and the the experimental sciences such as excavated specimens from the Waco chemistry, physics, and aspects of biology. Mammoth Site represents the nation’s first and only recorded discovery of a nursery 21 CHAPTER THREE: RESOURCE EVALUATION

However, knowledge of the experimental protection or visitor use opportunities found sciences is critical to collecting the in other comparably managed areas. information needed to reconstruct an understanding of the earth’s history and as Similar Resource Types Found Within such, the site provides a unique the National Park System opportunity to link these two areas of The study team first examined whether or not science and provides a focal point to teach this resource type is already adequately about all of the major sciences and how represented at other units of the national park one discipline can contribute to another. system. Many national park system units • The site retains a high degree of integrity. contain fossil concentrations representing a Many of the remains represent fully broad range of geologic history. When asked articulated specimens of varying age “What criteria would you use to classify a site groups. Their location and position have as an exceptional example of paleontological been recorded; the stratigraphy of the site resources in the United States?” one of the has been studied in detail; and removed Delphi participants noted… specimens have been encased in plaster “I would like to add that the National Park jackets and placed under the curatorial Service of the United States has identified care of a single institution. Undisturbed over 180 units which have documented deposits provide material for future study, paleontological resources. Some of these as approximately 30% of the known were set aside specifically for the fossils such specimens are still in situ. as Petrified Forest National Park or Dinosaur National Monument. Many are parks that fossils are contained in the EVALUATION OF SUITABILITY geologic formations: Grand Canyon National Park, Big Bend National Park, etc. An area that is nationally significant must also Collectively, these 180+ units of the national meet criteria for suitability to qualify as a park system tell one great story about the potential addition to the national park system. history of life in the United States. From some To be determined suitable, the Waco very primitive blue green algae and bacteria Mammoth Site must represent a natural or preserved high in the mountains of Glacier cultural theme or type of recreational National Park, to Pleistocene / Holocene resource that is not already adequately wolves from caves in Yellowstone –fossils represented in the national park system or is found in units of the national park system not comparably represented and protected for provide opportunities for science and public enjoyment by another agency. education. Interestingly, we have parks that Adequacy of representation is determined on were set aside specifically to preserve fossils a case-by-case basis by comparing the from many time periods within the Geologic potential addition to other comparably Time Scale (i.e., Permian –Guadalupe managed areas representing the same resource Mountains NP; Triassic –Petrified Forest type, while considering differences or NP; Jurassic –Dinosaur NM; Cretaceous – similarities in the character, quality, quantity, Badlands NP; Eocene –Fossil Butte NM, John or combination of resource values. The Day Fossil Beds NM; Oligocene –Florissant comparative analysis also addresses rarity of Fossil Beds NM; Miocene –Agate Fossil Beds the resources, interpretive and educational NM; Pliocene –Hagerman Fossil Beds NM), potential, and similar resources already however—and of real interest to this protected within the national park system or discussion—we do not have a park in other public or private ownership. The specifically set aside to tell the paleontological comparison results in a determination of story of the Pleistocene. This is a real gap in whether the proposed new area would terms of representation in the NPS.” expand, enhance, or duplicate resource The search was further refined to examine national park system units containing 22 Evaluation of Suitability paleontological resources representing skeletons: Channel Islands National Park and Pleistocene mammoths. When consulting Nez Perce National Historical Park. scientific literature and the National Park Service’s museum catalog system, 14 national In Channel Islands National Park, a nearly park system units have recorded Pleistocene complete pygmy mammoth (Mammuthus mammoth remains found within their exilis) fossil skeleton was discovered in 1994 boundaries: on Santa Rosa Island. This was the first time Arches National Park an articulated specimen of this species was Isolated Columbian mammoth molars discovered. Previous to this find, descriptions and bones of the pygmy mammoth were inferred from isolated bones recovered from park islands. Bents Old Fort National Historic Site The recovered specimen was determined to Columbian mammoth tusk fragments be an approximately 57-year-old bull that Bering Land Bridge National Preserve stood five and a half feet tall. He apparently Isolated woolly mammoth remains died 13,000 years ago and was quickly covered by sand, accounting for the excellent Channel Islands National Park articulation of the bones. The specimen was Pygmy mammoth skeleton removed, fiberglass casts were made, and the Isolated pygmy and Columbian replicas were placed on exhibit at the Santa mammoth bones Barbara Museum of Natural History and the Colorado National Monument Channel Islands National Park Visitor Center Columbian mammoth tooth in Ventura, California.

Craters of the Moon Nat’l Monument Isolated Columbian mammoth bones

Death Valley National Park Isolated Columbian mammoth molars and bones

Florissant Fossil Beds Nat’l Monument Columbian mammoth bone fragments

Glen Canyon Nat’l Recreation Area Columbian mammoth dung

Great Sand Dunes National Park Columbian mammoth bone

Lake Mead Nat’l Recreation Area Channel Islands National Park fully grown adult male Columbian mammoth bones pygmy mammoth.

Nez Perce Nat’l Historical Park Multiple Columbian mammoth skeletons The second national park system unit yielding complete skeletal remains of Pleistocene Wupatki National Monument mammoths is Nez Perce National Historical Isolated Columbian mammoth molars Park’s Tolo Lake unit. The park’s purpose is Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve to facilitate protection and offer interpre- Isolated woolly mammoth remains tation of Nez Perce Indian sites in Idaho, Oregon, Washington, Montana, and These sites, containing resources relating to Wyoming. The National Park Service owns Pleistocene mammoths, represent less than nine of the thirty-eight sites included in the 4% of the 390 units comprising the national park. park system. Even more interesting, there are only two units yielding articulated mammoth 23 CHAPTER THREE: RESOURCE EVALUATION

The Tolo Lake unit is owned and managed by national park system, as they all preserve the state of Idaho. In 1994, a mammoth bone important elements of our nation’s heritage. was discovered when the Idaho Department (The National Parks: Index 2005 –2007) of Fish and Game lowered the level of the lake to initiate dredging for wildlife habitat Affiliated areas comprise a variety of locations enhancement. The Idaho State Historical in the United States and Canada that preserve Society, the University of Idaho, and the significant properties outside the national Idaho Museum of Natural History were park system. Some of these have been subsequently involved in a cooperative recognized by acts of Congress, others have excavation project that revealed a number of been designated national historic sites by the mammoth skeletons. While funding for secretary of the interior under the authority of investigative work did not allow for the full the Historic Sites Act of 1935. They represent excavation of the find, approximately 400 properties that are neither federally owned bones of various animals including Columbian nor directly administered by the National mammoths were recovered before the lake Park Service; however, the National Park was refilled to its previous operational level. Service is authorized to provide technical and/or financial assistance. The collection is currently housed in the Idaho Museum of Natural History, Pocatello, One affiliated area with related resources is Idaho (460 miles southeast of Tolo Lake) Ice Age National Scientific Reserve. It where an exhibit of the reconstructed dig with includes nine nonfederal sites in Wisconsin interpretation of excavation methods and containing nationally significant features of research findings is presented. Currently North American continental glaciations. onsite interpretation of the discovery is not While the focus of the interpretation is with provided, although a resin replica of a the natural features shaped by glacial Columbian mammoth is on display with processes, there is limited interpretation of interpretive information at nearby Eimers Pleistocene fauna. Park, managed by the Grangeville, Idaho, Chamber of Commerce. The national trail system is the network of scenic, historic, and recreation trails created Similar Resource Types Found Within by the National Trails System Act of 1968. Related Areas These trails provide for outdoor recreation needs, and promote the enjoyment, In the General Authorities Act of 1970, an act appreciation, and preservation of open-air, to improve the administration of the national outdoor areas and historic resources. The park system, a unit of the national park system National Park Service administers 19 of the was defined by law as any area of land and currently 24 designated national trails; three water administered by the secretary of the are classified as units of the national park interior through the National Park Service for system. park, monument, historic, parkway, recreational or other purposes. The same law A unit of the national trail system, the Ice Age specifically excludes those properties that are National Scenic Trail is a 1,200-mile-long trail neither federally owned nor directly connecting six of the nine sites of the Ice Age administered by the National Park Service but National Scientific Reserve; it also has a are areas where the National Park Service similar interpretive focus. provides assistance. These areas include four categories and are referred to as related areas. Another Ice Age-related trail, located across They include affiliated areas, national heritage Western Montana, the Idaho Panhandle, areas, the national wild and scenic rivers eastern and central Washington, and northern system, and the national trails system. These Oregon, is currently being considered for areas and systems are closely linked in national trail designation by Congress. The Ice importance and purpose to units of the 24 Evaluation of Suitability

Age Floods National Geologic Trail is being went to the National Museum of Natural proposed as an auto tour route following the History in Paris, to the Academy of Natural pathways of the Glacial Lake Missoula Floods. Sciences in Philadelphia, and to Jefferson’s Even though the primary focus of interpre- personal collection (The Academy of Natural tation is on the outstanding geological features Sciences 2006). created by this catastrophic event occurring some 12,000-17,000 years ago, there is poten- Similar Resources outside the tial for integrating the interpretation of National Park System and Related Pleistocene fauna. Areas

Located within one of the national trail system Sites outside the national park system and units, a site has been identified as yielding related areas that have yielded Pleistocene Columbian mammoth skeletal remains. Big mammoth remains include thousands of Bone Lick State Park, owned and managed by recorded sites found throughout North the state of Kentucky, is a nonfederal certified America. An illustration of this distribution, site along the Lewis and Clark National compiled by the Mammoth Site in Hot Historic Trail. Certified sites are places where Springs, South Dakota, is shown in figure 2. visitors can learn about or experience the 1804 –1806 Lewis and Clark Expedition. The trail, The sites in 31 states were further compared established in 1978, includes water routes, to identify sites with skeletons, sites with hiking trails, and marked highways that follow multiple individuals, sites of natural the explorer’s outbound and return routes. accumulation and sites with a cultural Among the more than 120 certified sites along association (sites associated with Paleo-Indian the trail, only 5 are owned and managed by the activities).Table 1 presents this information. National Park Service. The information is based on a review of available scientific literature with Lewis and Clark each conducted their own supplemental information from different excavations of material from the Big Bone researchers. It is not meant to be comprehen- Lick site during the early 19th century. In 1803 sive or exhaustive, as review or summary when Captain Meriwether Lewis was traveling papers have not been done for many states. to join Captain William Clark and the men assembling in Louisville for the Corps of It is interesting to note that of the 2,083 Discovery, he stopped at Big Bone Lick and mammoth records for the 31 states listed; only sent a box of specimens back to President 3.3% of the recorded sites have yielded Thomas Jefferson, along with an extremely skeletal remains, i.e., more than just an detailed letter describing the finds. In 1807, isolated tooth, bone fragments, or trace Captain William Clark was commissioned by fossils. Sites that contain multiple individuals the President to excavate bones from Big Bone are rarer yet, representing less than 1.6% of Lick for scientific study. This was the nation’s the total sites recorded, while only 1.0%, or 21 first organized vertebrate paleontology sites, represents multiple individuals found as expedition establishing the site as the first a natural accumulation without a cultural official paleontological collecting site in North association, such as the Waco Site. America (Kentucky Geological Survey, 2006 and National Park Service’s Lewis and Clark Table 2 represents a more refined comparison Expedition: A National Register of Historic of just those sites containing multiple Places Travel Itinerary website 2006). individuals similar to the Waco Mammoth Site. These sites were then further Specimens collected from this expedition differentiated to identify only those sites included woolly and Columbian mammoths as currently under protection by another entity well as other Pleistocene mega fauna. The providing onsite interpretation as shown in collection was divided, and various sections figure 3.

25 CHAPTER THREE: RESOURCE EVALUATION

Table 3 compares some of the attributes of Suitability Findings these seven sites. The size of the comparison The national park system does not currently sites range between 8 to 546 acres. There does include a unit specifically set aside to tell the not appear to be a correlation between size paleontological story of Pleistocene mammoths. and abundance of fossil concentrations. All While 14 park units have yielded mammoth comparison sites include an ancient water remains, there are only two sites within the source; in some cases, the water source is in national park system that have yielded combination with another geological feature articulated skeletal remains: Channel Islands that apparently attracted mammoths and National Park (pygmy mammoth) and Nez other Pleistocene fauna. Some were trapped in Perce National Historical Park (Tolo Lake the natural feature or they were killed and Columbian mammoths). butchered by Paleo-Indian hunters. Of the three sites reflecting natural accumulations, Looking at comparable resources found outside mammoths accumulated over an extended of the national park system, there are thousands period of time, in some cases over thousands of recorded sites within North America yielding of years. This is unlike the Waco Mammoth fossil resources related to the mammoth species, Site where a majority of the mammoth however only 21 known sites represent natural specimens appear to have died in a single accumulations of multiple, articulated natural event capturing a life assemblage. With Columbian mammoth remains. Many of these the exception of the Waco Mammoth site, all sites have accumulated over an extended period comparison sites have been recognized as of time; in some cases over thousands of years. either a national natural landmark or national Many sites have been fully excavated and the historic landmark, or are in the National specimens removed from their initial location. Register of Historic Places. Site ownership Few sites still contain in situ specimens. Only the ranges from governmental (city, county, Waco Mammoth Site has yielded a represen- state), university, to a nonprofit organization. tative herd of Columbian mammoths, making Site management is the responsibility of a the site unique in this regard. single entity, with the exception of the Waco

Mammoth Site, which is jointly managed and The resources of the Waco Mammoth Site meet owned partly by Baylor University and partly the National Park Service’s established by the city of Waco. Sites with national suitability criteria for consideration as a new landmark designation have dedicated science unit of the national park system. Including this and technical staff assigned to the site, have an site would expand and enhance the diversity of active on-going research program, and have paleontological resources already represented highly developed educational outreach by parks in the system. While Pleistocene fossils, programs. The two sites discovered prior to including isolated remains of Columbian 1900s are currently designated state parks. All mammoth, are present in other parks, they are locations examined provide onsite incidental to the criteria for the park’s creation. interpretative experiences for the public. The nursery herd of Columbian mammoths

preserved at the Waco Mammoth Site is unique in North America and as such has high intrinsic scientific and educational values.

26 Suitability Findings Figure 2: North American Mammoth Locations

Map compiled by the Mammoth Site, Hot Springs, South Dakota. The known site distribution includes southern mammoth, Columbian mammoth, woolly mammoth and pygmy mammoth records. The range of discoveries represent sites yielding a single isolated tooth or bone fragment to fully articulated specimens of individual or multiple mammoths. To further refine the focus, a comparison of mammoth records for selected states was compiled in table 1.

Table 1: Comparison of Mammoth Records for Selected States

# of % of Sites Sites w/ % of Sites Sites w/ Multiple % Sites w/ Multiple Sites w/ % of Sites w/ Sites w/ STATE Mammoth w/ Multiple w/ Multiple Individuals Natural Individuals Natural Cultural Cultural Reference/Source Skeletons Sites Skeletons Individuals Individuals Accumulation Accumulation Association Association Arizona 76 8 10.5% 2 2.6% 0 0.0% 6 7.9% Mead et al, 2005 California 194 4 2.1% 4 2.1% 4 2.1% 0 0.0% Jefferson, 1991 Colorado 94 1 1.1% 4 4.3% 1 1.1% 2 2.1% Graham et al, 2003 Florida 84 3 3.6% 1 1.2% 1 1.2% 1 1.2% FL Museum of Nat’l History Idaho 48 2 4.2% 2 4.2% 1 2.1% 1 2.1% Jefferson et al, 2002 Illinois 53 5 9.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Saunders et al, 2006 Indiana 10 1 10.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Richards 1984 Iowa 109 2 1.8% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Agenbroad, 2002 Kansas 225 5 2.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.4% 0 0.0% Kost 1987 Kentucky 6 0 0.0% 1 16.7% 1 16.7% 0 0.0% Davis pers. communication Michigan 49 2 4.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Skeels 1962; Abraczinskas 2002 Minnesota 58 1 1.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Agenbroad, 2002 Missouri 14 0 0.0% 2 14.3% 2 14.3% 0 0.0% Saunders pers com 2006 Montana 36 1 2.8% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Agenbroad, 2002; Hill, 2006 Nebraska 109 4 3.7% 1 0.9% 1 0.9% 0 0.0% Agenbroad, 2002 Nevada 54 1 1.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 1.9% Jefferson et al, 2004 New Mexico 73 1 1.4% 2 2.7% 1 1.4% 2 2.7% Lucas & Morgan, 2005 New York 15 0 0.0% 1 6.7% 1 6.7% 0 0.0% Hartnagel & Bishop 1922 North Dakota 17 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Agenbroad, 2002; Hoganson 2006 Ohio 57 1 1.8% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% McDonald, 1994 Oklahoma 40 2 5.0% 1 2.5% 0 0.0% 3 7.5% Smith/Cifelli, Wyckoff & Czaplewski, 1997 Oregon 28 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Jefferson et al, in prep A South Carolina 3 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 10.7% Fields, personal communication, 2006 South Dakota 34 2 5.9% 2 5.9% 1 2.9% 1 2.9% Agenbroad, 2002 Tennessee 4 0 0% 0 0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Corgan and Breitburg, 1996 Texas 90 2 2.2% 6 6.7% 4 4.4% 4 4.4% Fox et al, 1992 Utah 35 2 5.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Jefferson et al, 1994 Virginia 3 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 33.3% Eshelman and Grady 1986 Washington 400 12 3.0% 2 0.5% 2 0.5% 0 0.0% Jefferson et al, in prep B; Barton 1999, Wisconsin 32 2 6.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% West and Dallman 1980; Johnson 2006 Wyoming 33 5 15.2% 1 3.0% 0 0.0% 2 6.1% Agenbroad, 2002 TOTAL 2,083 69 3.3% 33 1.6% 21 1.0% 27 1.3%

Table 2. Recorded Sites in the United States Yielding Multiple Columbian Mammoths

Potential for Number of Cultural Articulated Bones Still On-Site Status of State Locality Site Ownership Comments Future Mammoth Reference Individuals Association Skeletons In Situ Interpretation Research Discoveries 13 Clovis points found with 13 young mammoths, thought Arizona Lehner Private 13 Yes Yes No No Completed Low Haury et al. 1959 to indicate killing of family group. Animals may have been scavenged by Clovis people rather Arizona Murray Springs Private 2 Yes Yes No No Completed Low Haynes, 1999 than hunted. Has mammoth footprints preserved. Pit 9 is only tar pit at RLB in which mammoths were found. California Rancho La Brea, Pit 9 City Park 29 No No Yes Yes Ongoing High Harris and Cox, 1993 Long term accumulation. First site in North America to provide unequivocal evidence Colorado Dent Private of projectile points with mammoths. Skeletons exchanged 14 Yes Yes No No Completed Low Saunders, 1999 to other museums by the Denver Museum.

Colorado Dutton Private Isolated bones. >5 No No No Completed Low Agenbroad, 1984

Colorado Lamb Spring County Property Associated stone tool and cobblestone brought into site. 30 No No Yes No Ongoing Medium Stanford et al, 1981

Colorado Selby Private Isolated bones. >5 No No No No Completed Low Agenbroad, 1984

American Falls Bureau of Age of site is about 100,000 years. Isolated bones Idaho 8 No No No No Ongoing Yes Pinsof, 1998 Reservoir Reclamation recovered. Idaho Dep’t of Site is only partially studied but appears to be a long term Idaho Tolo Lake 10 No Yes Yes No Hiatus High Miller et al. 1998 Fish & Game accumulation at a water hole.

Kansas Penndennis Private Number of individuals based on count of isolated molars. >50 No No No No Ongoing Low Agenbroad, 1984

29 Schultz et al, 1963 & Kentucky Big Bone Lick State Park One of the first. Unknown No No No Yes Hiatus Medium 1967

Missouri Kimmswick State Park Adult and juvenile based on isolated teeth. >2 Yes No No Yes Completed Medium Haynes, 1999

Remains of two bull mammoths whose tusks became Nebraska Crawford Private 2 No Yes No No Completed Low Unpublished interlocked during a fight. Series of mammoth sites, other species associated w/ New Mexico Blackwater Draw State Park 13 Yes No Yes Yes Completed Low Haynes, 1999 extensive Paleo-Indian remains. While the site contains multiple individuals no complete New Mexico Mesa Redonda Private skeletons were recovered. The mammoth skeleton on 6 No Yes No No Completed Low Morgan et al. 2001 display at NM Museum of Natural History is a composite.

Pennsylvania Frankstown Cave Private Isolated bones. 7 No No No No Completed Low Agenbroad, 1984

All individuals at site are young male mammoths. Long South Dakota Hot Springs Private 49 No Yes Yes Yes Ongoing High Agenbroad, 1990 term accumulation. Adult and juvenile mammoth were butchered using tools South Dakota Lange/Ferguson Private 2 Yes No No No Completed Low Martin, 1987 made from a mammoth shoulder blade. Mammoth remains are of juvenile mammoths killed by the Texas Friesenhahn Cave Private >100 No No No No Completed Low Haynes, 1991 dirk tooth cat, Homotherium, and brought to den site. State, managed Multiple cultural layers, small family units of three to five Johnson and Holiday, Texas Lubbock Lake 2 Yes No Yes Ongoing Medium by Texas Tech U. animals appeared to have been killed at different times. 1985

Texas Miami Private Mammoths found in association with Clovis artifacts. 5 Yes No No No Completed Low Sellards, 1938

There is no good age estimate of the Slaton Quarry. The Texas Slaton Private mammoth has been identified as Mammuthus imperator 4 No No No No Completed Low Agenbroad, 1984 suggesting it is much older than WMS. Isolated bones of mammoths recovered from river channel Texas Trinity River, Dallas Private >28 No No No No Completed Medium Agenbroad, 1984 deposits. Matriarchal herd killed in single catastrophic event, possibly Texas Waco City 24 No Yes Yes No Ongoing High Haynes, 1992 other individuals after. An old stream channels where parts of mammoths were Frison, 1978; Frison and Wyoming Colby Private found stacked into piles, associated with stone points and a 7 Yes No No No Completed Low Todd, 1986; Madden, chopper. 1978 Note: The Waco Mammoth Site is highlighted in yellow. Characteristics of other locations similar to the Waco Mammoth Site are highlighted in gray, and locations that provide on-site interpretation are highlighted in red. CHAPTER 3: RESOURCE EVALUATION Figure 3: Known Sites in North America Yielding Multiple Mammoths

A comparative analysis was developed in table format between the Waco Mammoth Site and the protected sites yielding multiple mammoth remains with interpretation. The range of attributes compared include type, size, significance, site characteristics, ownership, management, science and technical staff, research activities, excavation efforts, specimens collected, education/outreach, and interpretation (see table 3).

Table 3. Comparative Analysis of Similar Resource Areas

htommaM ocaW htommaM giB enoB kciL nodotsaM aerB aL ohcnaR aL aerB retawkcalB warD ehT htommaM etiS etiS etatS kraP etatS cirotsiH etiS AC ,selegnA soL ,selegnA AC ,silatroP MN toH ,sgnirpS DS XT ,ocaW XT enooB ,ytnuoC YK ,lairepmI OM

etiS fo etaD fo etiS 000,86~ PB 000,83~ erofeB tneserP )PB( 000,81~ PB 000,41-000,01~ PB ,8~ 000,21-000 PB 000,62~ PB

dnif fo epyT fo dnif larutaN ne essam larutaN egareva-emit noitalumucca larutaN it egareva-em noitalumucca )?( sivolC r ehctub etis sivolC ot ciahcrA rehctub etis utaN lar degareva-emit noitalumucca noitalumucca

eziS 901~ serca 32 serca 645 serca 524 serca 751 serca 8 serca

ecnacifingiS ehT ylno nwonk etis ni enO fo eht ,tsehcir tsom ,esrevid tseb tsriF rojam weN dlroW lissof ytilacol nwonk o t enO fo eht tsrif setis gnilaever dilos ehT etis sah dedleiy ecnedive fo eht detulf stniop ehT s’dlrow tsegral naibmuloC h tommam t aciremA htroN aciremA o t ,devreserp dna tseb deiduts segalbmessa fo snaeporuE ,)9371( ehT tsrif laiciffo ecnedive fo eht ecnetsixeoc fo dna rehto enots dna enob ,snopaew ,sloot dna tibihxe dna hcraeser retnec rof enecotsielP enecotsielP a niatnoc a enecotsielP enecotsielP slissof ecI( egA arolf dna )anuaf lacigolotnoelap gnitcelloc etis ni htroN cirotsiherp selpoep dna agem gnissecorp stnemelpmi dnuof ni noitaicossa htiw .seiduts naibmuloC fo dreh fo naibmuloC reve .dnuof .aciremA siweL dna kralC hcae detcudnoc .anuaf tcnitxe enecotsielP agem anuaf hcus sa .shtommam rieht nwo snoitavacxe fo lairetam morf eht etis naibmuloC ,htommam tneicna ,nosib egral 91 ylrae eht gnirud eht ylrae 91 ht .yrutnec sesroh dna egral .seltrut

lanoitaN laitnetoP lanoitaN lanoitaN larutaN kramdnaL laitnetoP lanoitaN larutaN kramdnaL l’taN retsigeR fo cirotsiH secalP lanoitaN cirotsiH kramdnaL lanoitaN larutaN kramdnaL kramdnaL larutaN kramdnaL -non( liarT cirotsiH lanoitaN kralC & siweL & kralC lanoitaN cirotsiH liarT -non( l’taN retsigeR fo cirotsiH secalP )etis deifitrec laredef deifitrec )etis secalP cirotsiH fo retsigeR l’taN retsigeR fo cirotsiH secalP

noitacoL nrehtroN egde fo nwotnwoD soL ,selegnA ainrofilaC enooB ,ytnuoC ykcutneK 02 selim htuos fo .tS ,siuoL 8 selim htron fo ,selatroP weN ocixeM toH ,sgnirpS htuoS atokaD saxeT ,ocaW saxeT iruossiM

etiS worraN yellav tesni ot raT stip erehw lio detaropave gniwolla retaw ,tfoS ypmaws aera gnidnuorrus tlas dna ruflus ehT aera saw ecno ypmaws dna llamS gnirps def ekal snisab emaceb ralupop elohkniS demrof 000,62 sraey oga mraw scitsiretcarahC a egral deriap laivulla ot loop pota eht rat gnitcartta ytsriht slamina .sgnirps slaminA erew detcartta ot eht t las deniatnoc larenim .sgnirps slaminA gnitnuh dna gnitser stops rof ylrae htroN naisetra gnirps a dedis-ylpeets .dnop .ecarret dna gnirim meht ni eht ykcits .hctip .ecruos erew detcartta ot eht r etaw snaciremA dna eht agem anuaf taht detsixeoc slaminA erew detcartta ot eht retaw .ecruos .ecruos htiw .meht 31 pihsrenwO ytiC fo ocaW & rolyaB soL selegnA ytnuoC etatS fo ykcutneK etatS fo iruossiM nretsaE weN ocixeM ytisrevinU ehT htommaM etiS ))3()c(105( ytisrevinU

tnemeganaM ytiC fo ocaW & rolyaB AL s’ytnuoC larutaN yrotsiH muesuM ykcutneK tnemtrapeD fo skraP iruossiM etatS skraP nretsaE weN ocixeM ytisrevinU UMNE( ehT M htomma etiS ))3()c(105( ytisrevinU

hcraeseR rolyaB ytisrevinU egaP muesuM ffats tcelloc eht tnemides .rD nelG ,srrotS rotcerid fo ecneics hcraeser hcraeseR seitivitca era ton gniognO hcraeser si detcudnoc yb nretsaE weN ehT s’dlrow tsegral naibmuloC h tommam seitivitcA etaudarg tneduts tsuj )xirtam( dnuora eht slissof ot nrael tuoba eht dna rotaruc fo etarbetrev ygolotnoelap rof eht deludehcs ta siht .emit ocixeM ytisrevinU ,stsigoloeahcra htiw cidoirep hcraeser retnec rof enecotsielP .seiduts retsam sih detelpmoc sih retsam sdees—slissoforcim dna ,nellop stcesni dna itannicniC muesuM retneC dna draob snoitubirtnoc morf rehto .snoitutitsni )7002 tsuguA( siseht tsuguA( )7002 ,sksullom ,hsif snaibihpma dna llams sdrib dna rebmem fo eht sdneirF fo giB enoB ,kciL si srosnopS eht gnitisiV“ ”tsitneicS margorp eht detagitsevni hcihw detagitsevni eht taht—stnedor edivorp stsigolotnoelap htiw gnitomorp a pihsrentrap neewteb eht ehT nainoshtimS noitutitsnI detcudnoc lacigoloeg yreve ,yluJ erehw a rehcraeser si detivni ot dna yhpargitartsorcim dna deliated noitamrofni tuoba eht statibah dna muesum ,retnec nrehtroN ykcutneK ,ytisrevinU hcraeser rednu eht noitcerid fo .rD sinneD yduts ta eht etis gnirud eht .htnom fo yrotsih lanoitisoped yrotsih fo etamilc tneserp ni soL selegnA gnirud eht ytisrevinU fo ,itannicniC dna eht ytisrevinU fo ,drofnatS htiw eht lpicnirp e rotagitsevni gnieb .rD .etis eht .etis gninaw sesahp fo eht tsal ecI .egA ykcutneK ot eraperp a evisneherpmoc yduts fo ecnaV senyaH morf eht ytisrevinU fo .anozirA .etis eht .etis seunitnoc slissof detavacxe fo noitaraperP fo detavacxe slissof seunitnoc srehcraeseR morf lla revo eht dlrow tisiv eht etis yb hcraeser rof elbaliava edam era hcihw yadot hcihw era edam elbaliava rof hcraeser yb ot weiv eht lacigoloeahcra snoitavacxe dna eht dnuora morf stneduts dna slanoisseforp dna stneduts morf dnuora eht rehtruf etaicerppa eht ecnatropmi fo naidnI-oelaP .dlrow .seidutS Table 3. Comparative Analysis of Similar Resource Areas (continued)

fo sthgilhgiH fo evitcA noitavacxe ehT tsrif rojam snoitavacxe erew detcudnoc yb noraB selrahC eD ,lieugnoL eht rednammoc fo gninnigeB ni 9381 .rD treblA hcoK ecniS sti ,yrevocsid eht retawkcalB ytilacoL 1# etiS evitcA etis-no snoitavacxe hcihw nac eb noitavacxE seitivitca erew eht ytisrevinU fo ,ainrofilaC yelekreB ni 1091 – a hcnerF yratilim noitidepxe ni ,9371 detcelloc dehtraenu lateleks sniamer hcihw sah neeb a lacof tniop rof cifitneics snoitagitsevni devresbo yb .srotisiv .4991 ni deunitnocsid ni .4991 2191 emos nodotsam slissof dna tnes meht ot siraP yb cimedaca snoitutitsni dna snoitazinagro morf stroffE erew retal deifitnedi sa tummaM .yduts rehtruf rof rehtruf .yduts munacirema dna retal dlos ot eht ssorca eht .noitaN ehT eigenraC ,etutitsnI htraE hctaW etutitsnI sedivorp rof a margorp deludehcs era 19 tiP ni seitivitca noitavacxE seitivitca ni tiP 19 era deludehcs hsitirB muesuM fo larutaN yrotsiH nainoshtimS ,noitutitsnI ymedacA fo larutaN rof nemyal tnatsissa srotavacxe gnirud eht owt a revo raey yreve raey revo a owt htnom- yllausu( -yluJ citametsyS snoitavacxe erew detcudnoc yb eht ni 4481 erehw yeht era llits no ,secneicS lanoitaN ecneicS ,noitadnuoF detinU remmus shtnom etavacxe dna yfitnedi dna .nosaes remmus )tsuguA remmus .nosaes ytisrevinU fo aksarbeN ni eht .s’0691 tsoM fo .yalpsid setatS lanoitaN ,muesuM lanoitaN cihpargoeG yduts .slissof era noitidepxe siht morf detcelloc senob eht senob detcelloc morf siht noitidepxe era ,yteicoS dna erom naht a nezod r ojam lacigolotnoelap aksarbeN a ni derots ni a aksarbeN lacigolotnoelap noitavacxE seitivitca erew seitisrevinu rehtie evah dednuf ro detapicitrap ni desuoh era senob emos hguohtla esuoheraw hguohtla emos senob era desuoh deunitnocsid ni 4891 ot tcetorp hcraeser ta retawkcalB .warD .muesum s’krap eht ni eht s’krap .muesum eht enob .deb

snemicepS 81 naibmuloC ylraeN 000,005,3 snemiceps evah neeb slaminA edulcni ,nodotsam ylooW dna senoB morf erom naht 06 enecotsielP agem anuaf hcus sa naibmuloC ytirojaM fo slissof dnuof era gnuoy ,tluda detcelloC htommam ,snemiceps ,detcelloc revo 056 seiceps fo enecotsielP naibmuloC ,htommam ,xo-ksum gats ,esoom snodotsam yldetroper erew nekat ,htommam tneicna ,nosib egral ,sesroh dna egral elam naibmuloC .shtommam ecnedivE fo ,esiotrot tnaig ,esiotrot stnalp dna slamina itnedi .deif slissoF derevocer dnuorg ,htols tcnitxe ,nosib tcnitxe ,esroh reed morf eht tip ni noitidda ot s’nalraH .seltrut rehtO enecotsielP ega slamina gnitisiv eht eerht ylloow shtommaM sah osla neeb lluks lemac cirotsiherp lemac lluks tneserper naibmuloC ,htommam ,nodotsam dna .uobirac dnuorg htols dna naibmuloC etis rof doof dna retaw erew ,ripat ,lemac -ruof derevocsid ,ereh eht tsrif emit htob seiceps nrobyaM ta derots ta nrobyaM erid ,flow dehtoot-rebas ,tac decaf-trohs ,raeb .shtommam gnorp ,epoletna ,amall ,amalupmat ,reed erid evah neeb dnuof .rehtegot slissoF fo rehto .muesuM naciremA ,noil ,tacbob ,etoyoc ,lesaew dnuorg ,flow dnuorg ,htols ohs decaf-tr ,raeb h toot-rebas ecI egA slamina evah osla neeb ;derevocsid ,lemac tcnitxe ,nrohgnorp frawd ,htols frawd ,nrohgnorp tcnitxe ,lemac ,tac dehtoot-levohs ,nodelebema ,revaeb ,lemac ,amall tnaig decaf-trohs ,raeb ,flow ,tcesni ,nosib ,esroh ,amall ,ripat ,yraccep ,ripat ,amall ,esroh ,nosib ,tcesni ,sollidamra dna .yraccep etoyoc dna eiriarp god ot eman a .wef .hsif dna ,naibihpma ,elitper ,drib ,dees ,tnalp ,dees ,drib ,elitper ,naibihpma dna .hsif tnirpmI slissof fo drib ,srehtaef etelpmoc h sif larutluc dna PB 000,9~ noteleks namuh enO namuh noteleks 000,9~ PB dna larutluc ,snoteleks dna sdnasuoht fo ksullom sllehs .stcafitra evah osla neeb .derevocer

,noitacudE noitaterpretnI etis-ffo lanoitacudE seitivitca era gniogno noitamrofnI elbaliava hguorht eht htraE muesuM noissimda dna smargorp nA htped-ni noitatneserp fo eht etis dna sti ffatS elbaliava rof hcaertuo ,stisiv dna ,hcaertuO dna ta eht rolyaB srotisiV nac nrael tuoba soL selegnA sa ti saw ecneicS noitacudE krowteN .)NESE( etisbew era eerf ot tneduts spuorg dna ecnacifingis si .enil-no htommaM" nI A "knurT stik ,elbaliava noitaterpretnI s’ytisrevinU nrobyaM neewteb 000,01 dna 0,04 00 sraey ,oga gnirud rieht .sredael/srehcaet lanosrep level-edarg dediug .sruot ecneicS .xelpmoC muesuM .xelpmoC eht tsal ecI .egA roodtuO muesum stneserp eht etis yrotsih A fles dediug ¼ elim eviterpretni liart si dedivorp ralucirruC seitivitcA stelkooB elbaliava rof stcafitra dna senob dezilissof fo syalpsid htiw syalpsid fo dezilissof senob dna stcafitra A yteirav fo lanoitacude slairetam .etis-no moorssalc ro emoh gniloohcs ,esu ro 32 ni kcuts emaceb slamina woh setaercer knat A knat setaercer woh slamina emaceb kcuts ni morf eht tsal 000,81 .sraey era eerf ot .srehcaet evitcaretni DC nac eb .desahcrup .tlahpsa eht .tlahpsa ehT retawkcalB warD muesuM syalpsid stcafitra eht fo espmilg a srotisiv sevig liarT yrevocsiD A yrevocsiD liarT sevig srotisiv a espmilg fo eht eviterpretnI gorp :smar edils ,wohs derevocsid ta eht etis dna sterpretni efil ta eht dediuG sruot otni eht elohknis erehw eht na fo enob gel evissam a hcuot nac srotisiV nac hcuot a evissam gel enob fo na amard taht dedlofnu ta eht .sgnirps detaerceR del-reterpretni ,noitatneserp etis morf sivolC semit ht hguor tnecer cirotsih senob evah neeb tfel ni utis , stibihxe ni eht a ekam ro htols dnuorg tnaig tcnitxe tnaig dnuorg htols ro ekam a ,sdnalssarg sdnaltew dna dedoow sannavas eil muesum ruot dna ekih ot eht .doirep ecI egA tibihxE ,llaH keep ni eht swodniw fo yb htommam dna nodotsam fo nosirapmoc fo nodotsam dna htommam yb gnola eht liart gnidael ot a "gob" amaroid remrof noitavacxe .etis ehT a gnikrow ygolotnoelap ,yrotarobal weiv .teid dna ,ezis ,hteet ,ezis dna .teid gniwohs a ylloow ,htommaM ,nodotsam tnaig margorp sesucof no eci ega suoremun trohs lanoitacude smlif no dna ,sniamer lateleks suoirav ,nosib ,htols ,nosib suoirav lateleks ,sniamer dna slammam dna ylrae .nam rehtO ,ygoloeg htommaM etiS ,yrotsih gnitnuH ega eci tcnitxe lareves fo sacilper ezis-efiL sacilper fo lareves tcnitxe eci ega sregnevacs gnideef no eht .sessacrac ehT lanif scipot :edulcni cirotsiherP efiL shtommaM htiw .rD yrraL ,daorbnegA t nilf .derutaef era slammam era .derutaef noitrop fo eht ,pool eht nosiB ,ecarT sgnirb a ;sllikS ylraE naM dna ;ygolonhceT gnippank ,seuqinhcet dna muesum .weiv otni dreh olaffub evil olaffub dreh otni .weiv dna .slissoF yrotarobal .serudecorp .yllaunna dleh era stneve laicepS stneve era dleh .yllaunna .yllaunna dleh era stneve laicepS stneve era dleh .yllaunna A trohs liart sessecca eht enob .deb

.yllaunna dleh era stneve laicepS stneve era dleh .yllaunna Evaluation of Feasibility

EVALUATION OF FEASIBILITY the state’s population, and is located less than 12 miles from Interstate 35, a well-traveled, An area that is nationally significant and meets primary north/south transportation corridor suitability criteria must also meet feasibility traversing the Midwest section of the country. criteria to qualify as a potential addition to the In 2003, average daily traffic travelling on I-35 national park system. To be considered through the Waco area was 46,512 vehicles. feasible, an area’s natural systems or historic The site is also located within a few miles of settings must be of sufficient size and shape to the Waco Regional Airport which primarily ensure long-term protection of resources and provides commuter service to the Dallas-Fort accommodate public use. The area must also Worth International Airport and Houston’s have potential for efficient administration at a Bush Intercontinental Airport. reasonable cost.

The property includes 952 feet of frontage In evaluating feasibility, the Park Service along New Steinbeck Bend Road, a local considers a variety of factors, including the arterial collector road. The site also includes following: 461 feet of frontage along Bogey Lane, a • Access residential collector street that provides • Size access to a residential area just east of the site.

• Landownership patterns It is anticipated that there would be limited • Boundary configurations impacts to existing transportation systems and • Local planning and zoning adjacent neighborhoods as additional traffic could easily be accommodated on existing • Current and potential uses of the study arterial roads without reducing the level of area and surrounding lands service or introducing additional traffic • Existing degradation of resources volumes into residential areas. • Current and potential threats to the resources The location of the site provides not only convenient access from existing major • Public enjoyment potential transportation corridors, but it also provides • Staffing requirements for easy access by a large number of visitors • Costs associated with acquisition, traveling from outside the region. development, restoration, and operation • Socioeconomic impacts of designation as Size and Landownership Patterns a unit of the national park system Collectively, the city of Waco and Baylor • Level of local and general public support University have acquired 109.34 acres of land (including landowners) referred to as the Waco Mammoth Site. On October 4, 1996, Sam Jack and Liz McGlasson The feasibility evaluation also considers the donated 4.93 acres to the city, which included ability of the National Park Service to the excavation area that covers less than 5% of undertake new management responsibilities the tract. Conditions of conveyance require in light of current and projected availability of the city to use the property for research, funding and personnel. educational, or tourism purposes, and require the city to enter into an agreement with Baylor Access University concerning the maintenance of the property as an educational resource for the The Waco Mammoth Site is centrally located citizens of Waco, visitors, and researchers. within the state of Texas; it is located 90 miles south of Dallas/Fort Worth, 90 miles north of Prior to the McGlasson land conveyance to Austin, and 180 miles northwest of Houston. the city of Waco, it appears Dr. James The site is located within 200 miles of 80% of Hetjmancik was the previous landowner 33 CHAPTER THREE: RESOURCE EVALUATION during the period of initial discovery in 1978 purposes of this study, it is assumed that the through the en masse excavation and current boundary configuration provides an collection effort in 1990. He is credited with adequate protection and buffering capability donating the collected specimens to the for the special resource. Strecker Museum (Fox et al. 1992). Baylor University is currently researching their Local Planning and Zoning museum records to confirm the chain of The Waco Mammoth Site and the lands collection agreements with landowners prior surrounding the site lie with the R-1B Zone to the conveyance of the property to the city which allows for single family residential of Waco. development, agriculture use, and public uses

such as parks. It is anticipated that existing Between 2000 and 2001, Baylor University land use patterns surrounding the site would acquired three additional tracts through remain fairly stable. private donor support, totaling 104.41 acres surrounding the site and extending along New The site is also within the Brazos River Steinbeck Bend Road and the Bosque River. Corridor overlay district. The City

Comprehensive Plan (2000) designates the Both the city and university have expressed Brazos River corridor as mixed use. The full support for establishing the Waco corridor, because it is an overlay district, takes Mammoth Site as a new unit of the national precedence over the underlying zoning. The park system, as well as their willingness to purpose of the overlay district is to ensure the transfer their properties, the paleontological development of the Brazos River Corridor as a collections, and archives without cost to the center for quality recreation, convention, National Park Service for this purpose. tourism, housing, commercial, retail, and

office facilities. The regulations are designed Boundary Configurations to protect the special environmental character The boundary configuration would follow the of the corridor and to promote continued outline of the combined properties owned by private and public investment. Some of the the city of Waco and Baylor University goals contained in the mission statement for described above. Copies of the warranty the corridor include: deeds and tract map are included in the • Preserve, protect, and enhance the appendix D. historically, culturally, architecturally, and archeologically significant sites and The current boundary provides ample structures which impact a distinct aspect buffering between the excavation site and of the city and serve as visible reminders adjacent properties on the north, west and of the city’s culture and history. south sides of the property. Maintaining the existing vegetation found along the northeast • Recognize and protect the special edge of the property would continue to distinctive qualities and ecosystems of provide a visual screen of the excavation area both the Brazos River and the Bosque located 180 feet from the northeast boundary River and their tributaries. of the site that follows the southwest side of • Encourage developments that Bogey Lane and an adjacent residential interconnect for pedestrian access and neighborhood. circulation.

If excavation activities are reinitiated at the The city of Waco has recognized the site at some time in the future, the full extent significance of the Waco Mammoth Site by of the resource could be confirmed. This may including the site within the boundaries of the require a re-evaluation of the boundary Brazos River Corridor. By connecting the configuration needed to ensure long-term Waco Mammoth Site to the rest of the protection of the special resource. For the corridor, the city has made a commitment to 34 Evaluation of Feasibility encouraging compatible land uses in the Over the course of the last eight years, there vicinity of the site. In addition, the city owns have been a number of development the parcel to the southeast of the Waco proposals prepared for the site. In 1999, the Mammoth Site as well as parcels south of city of Waco commissioned the first West Lake Shore Drive. It is the intent of the development proposal, which was prepared city to provide continuous pedestrian access by Beth Francell of Rebloom Design. The plan through these parcels to the Waco Mammoth recommended the acquisition of four adjacent Site. properties totaling an additional 195 acres of land (including the 104 acres eventually Current and Potential Uses of the acquired by Baylor University in 2000 and Study Area and Surrounding Lands 2001) and the development of the site as a 200-acre regional park with recreational Lands surrounding the study area are amenities. The development program primarily undeveloped, agricultural lands included a 7,500-square-foot visitor center occasionally used for cattle grazing, although with gift shop, food service, and exhibits, a there is an adjacent residential development 35,000-square-foot pavilion over the just northeast of the site. A public golf course mammoth excavation area, access and service operates just to the east of the site. It is roads, 800 parking spaces, site utilities, four anticipated that privately owned agricultural comfort stations, prairie restoration for a lands would continue to be converted to bison and longhorn pasture, an arboretum residential use. City property borders the and nature trail, a Pleistocene themed southeast corner of the site along the Bosque playground, 26-site picnic area, a campground River, and it is anticipated that future with 42 tent sites and 57 travel trailer (RV) development would be for recreational sites, and boat/canoe and fishing access to the purposes. Bosque River. It was anticipated that

providing a full spectrum of recreational The moratorium on excavation activities in activities would qualify the site for matching 2003 also included restricting visitor access. grants from Texas Parks and Wildlife’s Texas Current uses of the site include scientific Recreation and Parks Account Program. investigation, preservation, and maintenance activities by the city staff, university staff, and Using visitation rates (+100,000 visits per year) students. recorded at the Mammoth Site at Hot Springs,

South Dakota, as an indicator of the potential Potential uses of the 4.93-acre city parcel are interest in the Waco Mammoth Site, the restricted by the conveyance conditions that proposal anticipated and annual attendance of require the site be used for research, between 75,000 and 150,000 visitors. Total educational, or tourism purposes. However, revenues were projected between $250,000 to successfully achieve this requirement, the and $400,000 generated through gate receipts, primary use of the study area should focus on gift shop sales, food service, and camping fees, the long-term preservation and security of the and were anticipated to partially offset the in situ specimens and geologic context. Public projected $560,000 in annual operational access to this feature and facility development expenses. The total initial cost of the proposal for enhanced interpretation and administra- was estimated at $6.6 million (1999 dollars). tive space must be secondary to the long-term The Waco City Council expressed concerns preservation and security needs of the site. with the initial and operational costs of the Once protection and security can be assured, proposal and decided not to pursue there are a number of opportunities for development of the site at that time, but introducing the public to the excavation area remained committed to maintaining and and the interpretation of how these features securing the site. contribute to our understanding of the nation’s natural history.

35 CHAPTER THREE: RESOURCE EVALUATION

In 2000, a second development plan, prepared The study analyzed conservation and by Calvin Smith and others, was presented as a preservation needs, visitor experience cooperative venture offering a modified, opportunities, space and facility needs, capital small-scaled version of the first proposal. This investment cost estimates, staffing, and plan recommended the acquisition of the 104 governance. Baylor University provided acres which was eventually acquired by Baylor assistance on the governance and staffing University in 2000 and 2001 and proposed portion of the report. In this proposal, it was utilizing 75 of the 109 acres for development assumed that the Mayborn Museum Complex of the Waco Mammoth Site, while reserving would serve as the primary gateway visitor the balance of the acreage for a future nature center for the Waco Mammoth Site and center and preserve to be funded by a local would feature orientation, ticketing, transpor- philanthropist and Texas Parks and Wildlife tation, retail and information services, grants. Amenities included a 35,000-square- enhanced exhibits, and an introductory film foot, climate-controlled pavilion over the of the catastrophe and ongoing scientific mammoth excavation area with interpretive investigations. Amenities developed at the exhibits, gift shop, limited food service, and Waco Mammoth Site would include a 6,900- restrooms; site utilities; access and service square-foot visitor center covering and roads; 250 parking spaces; 2 comfort stations; featuring an exhibit of the bones that remain prairie restoration; interpretive trails; in situ, additional exhibit space, museum shop, playground; 15-site picnic area; canoe launch; multipurpose room, restrooms, office space, and fishing pier. site utilities, access and service roads, 60 parking spaces, and a covered walkway with Attendance was projected to range between interpretive waysides that would surround the 100,000 to 200,000 visitors per year. Total original discovery area and feature a forensic revenues from admission fees, gift shop, and outline, etched in stone or terrazzo, of the concessions were projected to fully offset the original position of the mammoth bones projected $362,160 in annual operational removed from the site. expenses. The total initial cost of the modified proposal was estimated at $3 million (2000 Projections for the attendance rate at the dollars). The proposal also anticipated a $3 Waco Mammoth Site were re-evaluated based million endowment to meet future on market analysis, a more modest approach maintenance/operations expenses, staff to the onsite development, and restricted, research, and programming needs. controlled access to the site to ensure resource protection and security. The study A third proposal, developed by students from projected an attendance rate of 30,000 visitors Baylor, included a narrative of the visitor per year after the third year of operation. experience potential and facility program They also projected annual operational which outlined space requirements for expenses would range between $360,000 and exhibits, theater, gift shop, restrooms, $380,000, with anticipated revenue in the snack/vending area, classrooms, library, range of $131,000 to $196,000 from collections storage, preparation lab, exhibit admissions, retail sales, and other self- fabrication workshop, administrative offices, generated revenue sources. Almost 60% of the storage, and mechanical equipment. The team operational expense would need to be projected a total need of 44,820 square feet for subsidized to break even on operations. the facility; however, estimates of the implementation costs were not included in the Options to consider include securing an proposal. endowment, fundraising, grants, or contributed income. The total initial cost of In 2003, a feasibility study was commissioned the proposal was estimated at $5.5 million by the city and submitted by Lord Cultural (2003 dollars). Resources Planning and Management, Inc.

36 Evaluation of Feasibility

In 2006, the city of Waco was awarded a Once the master plan was completed by $200,000 matching grant through the Save EDAW and accepted by the city’s Department America’s Treasures Program, a federal grant of Parks and Recreation, Phase I schematic program administered by the National Park designs were developed for the shelter Service. The program was established to help structure. Provisions for accommodating preserve and protect nationally significant controlled visitor access into the shelter were features. The grant was made for the purposes developed. In order to more fully protect the of providing protective measures for the in situ specimens from the extremes of resources of the Waco Mammoth Site. These temperature and humidity, a climate control measures include replacing the existing fabric system was included. The expanded scope tent that now covers the in situ specimens with increased the total costs for Phase I to $3.2 a more durable shelter, redirecting site million, which required a more intense drainage away from the excavation area, fundraising effort by the Waco Mammoth providing for enhanced site security, and Foundation. The local community rose to the accommodating public access. challenge and from a variety of sources pledged an additional $2.5 million dollars, As part of the requirements for receiving allowing the city to contract for construction grant-in-aid funds from the Save America’s of Phase I in 2008. Treasures Program, the city entered into a 50- year conservation easement agreement with The development includes an 8,400-square- the Texas Historical Commission on July 17, foot shelter, with limited air-conditioned 2007, for the purposes of assuring interior space over the excavation area and in preservation of the property. The easement situ specimens. The development will also agreement further requires that the city include interpretive exhibits, an access road, a provide public access to view the grant- small parking area with overflow parking that assisted work or features no less than 12 days can accommodate bus and recreational a year on an equitably spaced basis. vehicles, connecting trails to the excavation shelter, a small visitor contact station with The city and Baylor University immediately restrooms, utility extensions, and enhanced pledged $100,000 each to match the grant and security systems. then chartered the Waco Mammoth Foundation to pursue additional fundraising The Waco community’s initiative ensures the to support the initiative. The city issued a excavation area will be protected from further request for proposals for the design of the erosion during storm events and other structure and selected Cotera-Reed, an environmental threats, will protect the architectural firm based out of Austin, Texas, exposed in situ specimens from potential acts as the prime consultant for the work. Their of vandalism; and for the first time, will allow design team included the landscape for controlled public access into the area so architectural firm EDAW office in Fort that the resource can be shared with the local Collins, Colorado, as well as a number of community as well as visitors to the area. engineering consultants. Part of the design services included the preparation of a master plan for the entire site so that the shelter could be developed within the context of the community’s long-range vision for developing the site as a public park.

37 CHAPTER THREE: RESOURCE EVALUATION Figure 4: Waco Community’s Phase I Plan for the Waco Mammoth Site

Existing Degradation of Resources resulted in the erosion and collapse of the sides of the excavation, deposition of An assessment of the current condition of the sediments in the bottom of the excavation, site is based on two criteria: integrity of the and pools of standing water that have geology and integrity of the fossil specimens. contributed to the deterioration of bone and Both are critical to the long-term preservation the growth of algae. of the in situ remains and the ability to conduct ongoing research critical to the Despite the damage to the sides of the interpretation of the site. Currently the site is excavation, sediment columns left in place for covered by a large tent, which has provided reference have remained intact and there are some protection to the exposed geology and major sections of the excavation walls that still fossils. Unfortunately, while the tent has retain sufficient detail to permit an analysis of prevented direct impact to the fossils and the microstratigraphy of the site. If further geology from rain, it has not been completely water is prevented from flowing into the effective. During the many years that the site excavation, there should be no additional has been exposed, it has suffered from water damage to the remaining exposed geology and damage resulting from surface runoff; some of bones. the runoff channeled by the tent. This has

38 Evaluation of Feasibility

Mammoth skeletons in the lowest part of the considered to be in stable condition, although excavation, where water has collected and prior to their current storage they were kept in pooled, exhibit the most serious damage, a warehouse lacking environmental controls. primarily in the fragmentation of bones. Many of the bone fragments are still in their relative During part of the time in the warehouse, positions and repair should be possible many of the jackets were open on top but have although challenging. The primary concern is since been closed with plaster and burlap. that they may become moved out of position Because they are currently sealed, it is not making it more difficult to determine their possible to assess if any damage has occurred original location and re-associate them with to the bones during this time. Since it is the source. Two mammoth skeletons, anticipated that some of the jackets will be primarily a bull and a cow located at a higher opened in order for sediment samples to be level, have not been as severely damaged from removed, it may be possible to conduct a surface runoff of water. The bull skeleton was preliminary condition assessment after they molded with latex and it appears that most of are opened. Some of the individual the damage seen in this specimen, e.g. the bones/fragments stored in boxes and bags fragmentation of individual bones, is the result may fit with bones in jackets. It is critical that of the molding process. The Mayborn all field identification numbers and other data Museum has initiated remedial action on the remain associated with these specimens in bull and is gluing bone fragments back order to facilitate their reattachment to these together to ensure that pieces are not lost. specimens.

Once work has been completed on the bull Given the age of some of the original mammoth, it should be followed by work on cardboard boxes and paper bags, Baylor the other mammoths, preferably the two University is currently repacking some of the lowest ones. The upper female seems to be the specimens and placing them in recently least damaged and can be stabilized last. The purchased cabinets. In order for the scientific camel skeleton appears to be in the best value of the site to be fully appreciated, all condition, although the skull was considered jacketed bones will eventually need to be vulnerable and was removed. It is currently prepared and this will be a multiyear project stored in a field jacket at the Mayborn given the volume of material. Preparation is Museum Complex. All repairs are being made also needed in order for these specimens to be with adhesives that are reversible and will used in exhibits associated with the site. Based allow for more permanent stabilization in the on a preliminary examination of material in future. boxes and bags, the bones appear to be in good shape, but the large number of fragments Other forms of remediation that should be indicates the need for major efforts in the programmed include spraying all algae with a reassembly of broken specimens. dilute bleach solution; this would reduce the growth of algae and would not negatively Current and Potential impact the bone. Threats to the Resource

Of primary concern is the current condition Currently all collected fossil specimens and and continued protection of the exposed in associated geological samples are stored in the situ specimens. Resource protection measures geology/paleontology collections room at the have been initiated by Baylor University by Mayborn Museum Complex on the Baylor grants secured from the Cooper Foundation. University campus. The mammoth fossils are In 1984, on the upper end of the drainage, a primarily contained in their original field diversion dam was constructed to catch and jackets with some individual bones and divert storm water runoff. Additional fill has fragments stored in plastic bags or cardboard been placed at the upper end of the site to boxes. All specimens in field jackets are divert drainage. Spoil piles from the upper 39 CHAPTER THREE: RESOURCE EVALUATION excavation have been stockpiled downstream on the sediment pedestals on which bones sit in the original discovery area. To enhance and in sediment filled cracks in larger bones. security, the city has erected a chain link fence The incremental loss of the supporting soil with a locking gate completely around the structure continues to be a threat to exposed excavation site. The site is patrolled by the features. Since the site is open on the sides, it Waco police to protect it from vandalism and is regularly visited by skunks and raccoons unauthorized collecting, which have not which walk across specimens and cause minor proven to be a problem so far. Baylor damage. As long as the site remains open, it University’s Mayborn Museum personnel will not be possible to mitigate this problem. maintain the site and conduct site surveillance at least once a month in addition to Both from the standpoint of future scientific reconnaissance after each rainfall event. study and interpretation it is important that the current collection of specimens and their The 2003 feasibility study conducted by Lord associated data remain intact as one unit and Cultural Resources Planning and under single ownership/stewardship tied to Management, Inc., outlined a number of the ownership and management of the site protective actions to ensure long-term with material left in situ. Separation of these protection of the resource. These included specimens will make their utilization more stabilization and repair of all exposed difficult and diminish their usefulness for specimens still in the ground, completion of future research. There are multiple options documentation of the site, development of with regard to the curation and storage of proper drainage away from the excavated these specimens. However, prior to curation, area, and replacement of the existing all specimens removed from the site will need temporary tent shelter with a more permanent to be prepared. Given the volume of material, shelter. this will be a lengthy and time-consuming process and will require a physical facility and Following the completion of the report, support system to permit their proper and excavation activities have been restricted to professional preparation. only those actions necessary to protect threatened resources such as the removal of Potential for Public the lower female mammoth and camel skull Enjoyment or Scientific Study threatened by drainage patterns through the The Waco Mammoth Site affords exceptional excavation pit. opportunities not only for public enjoyment

or scientific study, but also for the public The city of Waco, Baylor University, and the enjoyment of scientific study. These community are currently planning to contract opportunities amount to fostering an for the installation of an 8,400-square-foot appreciation and understanding of the science climate controlled excavation shelter to of paleontology. If access to the resource can replace the existing tent over the exposed be sensitively integrated with the needs for specimens. In addition, visitor access into the resource protection and security, the public shelter will be accommodated. These efforts could be provided a rare glimpse of a will protect the in situ remains from the effects paleontological site like no other in the of further erosion and weathering, as well as country. The preservation of a portion of the the potential for future vandalism. bones of the mammoth herd in situ provides

opportunities to examine first hand the Until the excavation shelter is completed, physical conditions governing the site, how there is still potential damage resulting from the fossil site was formed, and how it was animal activity. This includes mud dabber initially excavated by archeologists and wasps that excavate wet mud in the vicinity of paleontologists. It also affords opportunities the bones. Their burrows were observed both to teach visitors about the scientific method and about how paleontology, along with 40 Evaluation of Feasibility geology and archeology, is a historical science the method of controlled comparison in both in which researchers are attempting to historic and modern contexts would be the reconstruct events that have already taken aspect of the overall scientific method to be place. Their methodologies are different from researched and taught. the experimental sciences such as chemistry, physics, and biology, although knowledge of Additional research would help further our the experimental sciences is critical to understanding of the conditions and sequence collecting the information needed to of events that led to the conditions of the reconstruct an understanding of earth history. mammoth herd found at Waco. As additional As such, the site provides a focal point to research is conducted, findings can be teach about all of the major sciences and how continuously integrated into the interpretive one discipline can contribute to another. messages as another opportunity to enhance public enjoyment. Effective interpretative programs could be developed at various educational levels, The site has great potential for public including programs for school groups at the enjoyment and scientific study. It provides elementary through high school levels, many opportunities for the interpretation of a programs for the general public, and variety of scientific disciplines and an scientifically detailed programs for students in opportunity to encourage visitors to get college and graduate school. Baylor University excited by science. has established a precedent for utilizing the site for their museum studies and geology Costs Associated with Acquisition, programs. The site has the potential to directly Development, Restoration, and engage multiple scientific disciplines as well. Operation

The Waco Mammoth Site provides Acquisition scientifically valuable opportunities to The costs associated with land acquisition are compare mammoth specimens found in a not anticipated to include the purchase of the natural state of death repose with mammoth properties as both the city of Waco and Baylor specimens found elsewhere in Paleo-Indian University have stated a willingness to transfer kill or butcher sites. Questions related to such their lands without cost to the National Park comparative research would be pertinent to Service. However, based on conversations paleontology because it is a historical science with staff of the Land Resources Program that deals with broad questions of evolution as Center for the National Park Service well as detailed site-specific questions of Intermountain Region, there would be costs taxonomy and how the arrangement of associated with conducting a full title search/ specimens like bones in the ground are insurance, completing a hazardous material influenced by ground disturbing events. survey, and preparing a legislative map for the properties (estimated at $30,000), which The Waco Mammoth Site also affords would only occur if Congress decides to opportunities to study the behavior of a designate the Waco Mammoth Site as a new mammoth herd under duress. This provides unit of the national park system. opportunities to design research projects to compare past mammoth behavior with the The National Park Service may also need to present-day behavioral patterns and herd pursue a waiver from the Department of dynamics of modern elephants. Special Justice with regards to the specific language in opportunities exist at the Waco Mammoth the city of Waco tract due to the conveyance Site to utilize this fossilized social behavior in stipulation regarding land use (to be used for studying a mammoth community’s floral and research, educational, and/or tourism faunal interactions. Past and present habitat purposes) and the requirement of the Grantee ecology would be relevant here. Scientifically, (city of Waco) to enter into an agreement with

41 CHAPTER THREE: RESOURCE EVALUATION

Baylor University concerning maintenance of providing for administrative and maintenance the property as an educational resource. The support facilities. National Park Service may also consider entering into a cooperative agreement with Storage of the collected specimens does not Baylor University for the same. necessarily have to occur onsite as Baylor University has provided this service since the Development resource was first discovered. It is anticipated The extent of facility development and the that this could continue through a partnership associated cost is dependent on the long-term arrangement outlined in a cooperative vision and direction for managing the agreement between the National Park Service resource and the visitor experience. If the and Baylor University. As there is a volume of Waco Mammoth Site were to become a new preparation work required prior to specimen unit of the national park system, the long-term curation, the potential exists for providing a vision would be determined through the small paleo-lab that could be integrated with National Park Service’s general management the onsite interpretive facility. Visitors could planning process. have the opportunity to observe scientists and volunteers at work preparing specimens for Some major management decisions need to be further study and curation. made regarding whether or not to re-engage the excavation effort to determine the full The space requirements for administrative extent of the resource. If the decision is made and management support should include to investigate the limits of the find, a provisions for office areas, storage of office systematic approach under the direction of a supplies and interpretive materials, and paleontologist would be initiated. Once the mechanical equipment. Space requirements limits have been determined, appropriate for maintenance support should include facility configuration designs could be workshop area, storage of maintenance developed and evaluated to determine the supplies, and storage of equipment. best method for insuring protection of the full extent of the resource, while also allowing for Collection Preparation continued research, public access, and The collected specimens will require the interpretation. dedicated effort of a professional fossil preparator over an extended period of time. A more conservative approach would be to The preparation effort would include defer additional excavations and focus on the establishing protocols and documentation protection and preservation of the existing in methods; removing specimens from field situ remains and to initiate the preparation jackets; removing sediment from the bones; effort of the collected specimens. At some hardening the bones with plastic, if needed; time in the future, once the park is fully reassembling broken pieces; re-associating staffed, management could then re-evaluate separated material with original specimens; the option to extend the excavation or to documenting, cataloging, and placing remain focused on the existing excavation prepared specimens in cabinets or on area. shelving; and making them available for study or for casting for interpretive exhibits. Assuming site development for enhanced security, an access road, parking facilities, and There are 93 plaster field jackets with utilities is accomplished through the Waco specimens. Currently many jackets occupy 18- community effort currently underway, the 4’x8’ shelves on open shelving. Others are on remaining development needs would include pallets with multiple jackets on some pallets.

42 Evaluation of Feasibility

Estimate of preparation effort (for a single Each function does not necessarily require a person): full time allocation of staffing resources; some

12 jackets: 12.0 months/jacket = 144 months responsibilities could be combined under one 30 jackets: 3.0 months/jacket = 90 months position if qualified candidates could be 51 jackets: 0.5 months/jacket = 26 months assigned. It is anticipated that 9 –11 FTE (full time equivalent) positions would be needed; Total preparation time: 260 months this estimate includes multiple seasonal (over 21 person years) positions for interpretation and maintenance.

Based on field photos the bones tend to be The Waco Mammoth Site is located in close highly fragmented; reassembly and gluing of proximity to Lyndon B. Johnson National pieces could add to the estimated time for Historical Park (LBJ NHP), which is located preparation. Preparation protocols also need 50 miles west of Austin, Texas, and 144 miles to be established to ensure that potential southwest of Waco, Texas. This suggests that information, such as dermestid beetle marks a mentoring relationship between the two and bone weathering, are not lost during the park staffs would be feasible in that the latter preparation process. could handle certain administrative and oversight functions of the former. Such a Approximately 30 to 40% of the 137 boxes relationship would help to reduce the initial contain bones washed out from skeletons operational expenditures and provide during 1978, 1981, 1984, and 1986. The guidance to the site manager of the Waco museum is sorting these specimens and trying Mammoth Site and his or her presumed small to associate them with specific skeletons. At staff. this time, specimens are not being reassembled but are bagged together. The One potential management scenario for the time required for the reassembly of these Waco Mammoth Site could include staffing bones cannot be calculated and has not been support from LBJ NHP for contracting, included in the estimate of required purchasing, and hiring. At the Waco preparation time. Mammoth Site, a superintendent would be assigned with overall management Staffing responsibility for the site. Key support staff The level of staffing required for proper would include a facility manager, who would management and maintenance of the resource be assigned the management responsibilities is influenced by the need to provide for the for site operations, maintenance, and security. following functions: Overall management responsibility The facility manager would supervise a small staff, supplemented with limited contracted Paleontological expertise services. It is anticipated that law enforcement Resource and visitor protection would be managed through a concurrent Research coordination jurisdiction arrangement with the city of Waco. If additional support is needed for Collections preparation, curation, and special events or criminal investigations, law management enforcement rangers could be dispatched Interpretation from LBJ NHP. Complementing the role of Educational outreach facility manager, a resource manager would guide the scientific, educational, and Volunteer coordination interpretive component of the site. Preferably, Facility management and maintenance this assignment would be made to a Administrative support professional paleontologist who would supervise a small staff. Other duties envisioned would include site investigations,

43 CHAPTER THREE: RESOURCE EVALUATION monitoring, and research coordination. Staff $3.2 million, the estimated annual operational assigned to the resource manager would costs of $380,000 (Lord Report), and the same include a collections manager/preparator, multipliers used by Dr. Kelly in his 2001 interpretation/education specialist/volunteer report. In this scenario, the adjusted economic coordinator, and seasonal interpreters. impact from the construction phase would be a onetime impact of $7.44 million, staff and Socioeconomic Impacts of operations would be an ongoing annual a New Unit Designation beneficial economic impact of $1.07 million, and visitation would be an ongoing annual In 2001, a report entitled The Economic Impact beneficial economic impact of $0.68 million. of the Waco Mammoth Park on the Central The combined economic impact would Texas Region was prepared by Dr. Tom Kelly, amount to a one time beneficial impact of economist and Director of Baylor Center for $9.19 million with a continuing annual benefit Business and Economic Research. In this of $1.75 million added to the central Texas study, Dr. Kelly projected that basic income regional economy. would come from two sources: 1) from the construction, operations, and maintenance of If the Waco Mammoth Site were to become a the facilities and 2) from visitors traveling new unit of the national park system or a new from outside the region and spending within municipal park, the economic impact would the local economy. Dr. Kelly applied the be beneficial and long term to the community central Texas region’s expenditure multiplier in the form of enhanced tourism and for construction of new educational facilities increased revenue generated by this influx and (2.325) and the expenditure multiplier for the addition of new employment opportu- tourism visitors (2.827) according to an input- nities for managing and maintaining the site. output model estimated by the Ray Perryman The greatest socioeconomic impact is Group. He also projected that 10% of the projected to be beneficial and long term to the visitors to the site would spend at least one general public, local and regional school additional day in the central Texas region. Dr. groups, and the scientific community. This Kelly used initial construction costs of $1.94 would be realized through enhancing onsite million and anticipated attendance between access and interpretation of the Waco 100,000 to 200,000 visitors per year. He Mammoth Site, encouraging research projected that the construction phase would activities to help broaden the understanding add $4.5 million to the central Texas region. of what occurred here, and enhancing Staff and operation spending ($347,000) educational opportunities for local school would have an on-going beneficial economic groups as well as other groups that may travel impact of $980,000. The economic impact of to the site. There would also be beneficial and other visitor spending would be between long-term socioeconomic impacts resulting $2.25 and $4.5 million each year. The total from the intangible value of collective economic impact of the Waco Mammoth Site, community pride for the citizens of Waco not including other benefits in the form of who have supported the notion of establishing setting aside additional open space, would the Waco Mammoth Site as a new unit of the amount to a one time impact of between $8 national park system for the entire nation to and $10 million, with a continuing annual enjoy. impact of between $3.23 and $5.48 million to the central Texas region. Level of Local and

Another scenario uses the more modest General Public Support attendance projections outlined in the 2003 Both of the landowners, the city of Waco and Lord Report (30,000 visitors per year by the Baylor University, as well as the local commu- third year of operation versus 100,000 to nity, the paleontological community, members 200,000 cited above), the total costs for the of Congress, and others who know of this site Waco community’s Phase I construction of have expressed overwhelming support for 44 Evaluation of Feasibility designating the Waco Mammoth Site as a new and operate the resources of the site. The city unit of the national park system. of Waco and Baylor University have stated a willingness to transfer the lands without cost Feasibility Findings to the National Park Service. There are opportunities for efficient administration by The total acreage of the Waco Mammoth Site the National Park Service at a reasonable cost, includes 109.34 acres that appear to be of especially if existing partnership support sufficient size and appropriate configuration could be maintained and enhanced through to ensure long-term, sustainable resource the use of cooperative agreements. protection and visitor enjoyment. Cooperative agreements identify the roles and

responsibilities of each partner and are Surrounding land uses are likely to remain instruments not only for role definition but stable and compatible with park values. The also for transferring funds, if that should be site is well situated for public access and appropriate. The city of Waco and Baylor protection. There is an abundance of University have already established a untapped potential for providing public partnership to manage the site, and such enjoyment. The scientific community, general arrangements could be developed, main- public, members of Congress, and existing tained, and enhanced for the future. The landowners have expressed unflagging National Park Service could also enter into support of the site’s consideration for partnerships with either or both of these inclusion into the national park system. entities or with others who wish to support

the Waco Mammoth Site. It may be feasible, even under current and anticipated NPS budget constraints, for the

National Park Service to manage, maintain,

Chapter Four: Alternatives for Management

CHAPTER OVERVIEW provide visitor access to the site, promote scientific research, maximize the educational The fourth criterion in the special resource potential, and balance resource protection study process includes an evaluation of with these activities. whether the site requires direct management by the National Park Service instead of Visitor Access protection by another public agency or the private sector. Unless direct NPS management Convenient and meaningful access should be is identified as the clearly superior alternative, provided to the Waco Mammoth Site so that it the National Park Service will recommend becomes a destination point as a genuine that others assume the lead management role, national treasure to be popularly shared. The and that the area not be included in the accommodations desired would be for people national park system. of all ages, interests, and abilities. Access should be available to individuals and to To complete the evaluation of this last groups of varying sizes who might visit the site requirement in the special resource study, the as a bonus to conventions or other businesses team initiated the following steps: in Waco, or as an aspect of special events there. The Waco Mammoth Site should not • Encouraged public opinion and ideas only draw visitors from a national base, but about managing the Waco Mammoth Site also from a regional base that includes the through a project website, press releases, relatively nearby population centers along the scoping newsletter, and public meetings. Interstate Highway I-35. Regional residents • Outlined a range of management could easily become repeat visitors, coming to alternatives and tested their viability with learn about the latest scientific findings from NPS leadership, with representatives from ongoing research as well as to bring family the city of Waco and Baylor University, members and friends who have not yet seen and then with the public. the site. • Refined and more fully developed the range of management alternatives based Research on this input and identified potential The excavation history of the site provides a environmental consequences associated context for research. Ongoing research should with each alternative. be a regular feature of the site. A multi- disciplinary approach should guide scientific research. ISSUES AND PUBLIC CONCERNS During the initial phases of the scoping Education process, stakeholders and the general public The resource provides a wonderful raised a number of ideas and recommen- opportunity for engaging and stimulating the dations for managing the resources of the imagination of children as well as adults. The Waco Mammoth Site. A summary of public site’s educational potential is extraordinary input collected is presented below. The actual and provides opportunities for interested words of the members of the public who people of all ages to contemplate the life forms responded are paraphrased and condensed and habitats that existed in the Waco area into overall categories of the different ideas during the Pleistocene Epoch. Educational expressed. Common threads of concern programs also can be directed towards how focused on the following primary themes: 47 CHAPTER FOUR: ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGEMENT science is carried out and how it contributes • Promote understanding and stewardship to the discovery process. of resources by providing interpretive and educational opportunities. Resource Protection • Provide opportunities to experience, Proper provisions for the physical protection understand, and enjoy the resource and of the site are vital for its long-term preser- surrounding area in a manner that is vation. Resource protection should be under- compatible with the preservation of taken to allow for ongoing research and the resources. possibility of discovering more mammoth specimens as well as to allow for effective Drawing from stakeholder and public input, onsite interpretation for education and public the study team developed a range of enjoyment. management alternatives and tested their viability with current managers of the Supporting Comments resource within the city of Waco and Baylor University and NPS leadership. Differences Other categories of comment from the public among alternatives related primarily as to who show tremendous community support for would manage the area and the approach or preserving the site and for making it available method to which the site’s purpose would be for public access. Various possibilities for achieved. Four potential management partnering were suggested so that scientific alternatives evolved and were outlined in a research, visitor education, and community newsletter that was distributed for public integration can be achieved in balanced review and comment during September 2007. harmony. Integrating the site effectively with Almost all of the public comments indicated Waco’s other attractions such as the Cameron that the alternatives presented in the Park Zoo and the Mayborn Museum Complex newsletter represented a reasonable range of of Baylor University is a desire. Some options to further develop and analyze in the supporting comments cite socioeconomic special resource study. It was also interesting data and population figures for Waco to to note that a majority of the public comments become a major tourist attraction with the submitted supported expanding the existing Waco Mammoth Site as a feature important to partnership between Baylor University and that desired result. the city of Waco to include the National Park

Service.

ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT In accordance with the National Environ- In order to provide a philosophical mental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), one of the foundation for future decision making alternatives is a “no-action” alternative. This regarding the management framework and alternative represents continuing current range of potential uses appropriate for this management trends; it is alternative A in this special resource, the study team met with document. This alternative also serves as the representatives of the city of Waco and Baylor basis for comparing the environmental conse- University and developed the following list of quences of three other “action” alternative guiding principles or purpose statements for management scenarios. Two charts are the Waco Mammoth Site: provided at the end of this chapter to provide a quick comparison among alternatives. The • Preserve and protect the outstanding first matrix provides a summary comparison paleontological site, collected specimens, of the components of each management and associated data known as the Waco alternative and the second matrix provides a Mammoth Site for present and future summary comparison of the environmental generations. consequences. • Provide for the facilitation of orderly, regulated, and continuing research. 48 Mitigation Measures

Elements Common to All Alternatives Park Boundary There are a number of elements that are The boundary of the potential park includes assumed to be common to all alternatives. the 4.93-acre parcel containing the discovery They include a baseline level of development site owned by the city of Waco and the already underway by the Waco community to surrounding three parcels totaling 104.41 provide for resource protection and visitor acres owned by Baylor University. Acquisition access, accessibility, and the extent of the of additional property beyond the collective potential park boundary. 109.34 acres does not appear necessary at this time to ensure long-term protection of the Level of Development special resource.

For the purposes of this study, it is assumed that Phase I construction initiated by the Waco community is underway and serves as MITIGATION MEASURES the baseline level of park development for the Mitigation measures are specific actions site. The development includes an 8,400- designed to minimize, reduce, or eliminate square-foot shelter, with limited air- impacts of alternatives and to protect conditioned interior space over the resources and visitors. The purpose of this excavation area and in situ specimens. The special resource study is to evaluate the Waco development will also include interpretive Mammoth Site’s potential for consideration as exhibits, an access road, a small parking area a new unit of the national park system. This with overflow parking that can accommodate phase of the study focuses on the evaluation of bus and recreational vehicles, connecting alternative management scenarios. If this site trails to the excavation shelter, a small visitor were to become a new unit of the national contact station with restrooms, utility park system, additional planning and extensions, and enhanced security systems. implementation proposals would be fully vetted through additional NEPA and NHPA Accessibility compliance activities. This is where specific Any additional facility development would be actions would be outlined to minimize, accessible in accordance with the reduce, or eliminate impacts of alternatives Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility and to protect resources and visitors, as well Standards (ABAAS, May 8, 2006). as also ensuring full compliance with the NEPA, NHPA, and NPS policy.

49 CHAPTER FOUR: ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGEMENT

ALTERNATIVE A: CONTINUE CURRENT MANAGEMENT TRENDS (NO-ACTION)

Overview Overall Management Framework The no-action alternative represents the The existing cooperative management continuation of current management trends at arrangement between the city of Waco and the Waco Mammoth Site and serves as a base- Baylor University is continued. The city of line measurement for comparing three Waco manages the security and maintenance proposed alternative management strategies. of the 4.93-acre property containing the core New programs, activities, or site development paleontological site. Baylor University beyond the efforts currently underway by the manages the surrounding 104.41 acres and Waco community are not considered in this provides preservation of the in situ and alternative. For the purposes of this study, the collected specimens, preservation of the following conditions and trends are presumed archives, scientific research involving the site to continue. and the collections, and educational expertise supporting the interpretive program for the Concept for Management core paleontological site.

The Waco Mammoth Site is managed for the continuing preservation and protection of the Resource Management paleontological resources, conducting Resources continue to be monitored and scientific study, working towards enhancing protected by the city of Waco and Baylor resource protection of the in situ specimens, University. and providing for onsite visitor enjoyment and understanding through local community Baylor University would continue to ensure efforts. the in situ paleontological resources are 50 Alternative A stabilized and preserved. The current throughout the year to accommodate visitors moratorium on excavation activities would into the excavation shelter as required by the continue. Save America’s Treasures grant. It is anticipated that existing staff from the city and The larger specimens collected from the site Mayborn Museum would manage these would remain in plaster jackets while the events. Educational outreach programming smaller bone fragments and soil samples for local schools or other groups would be would remain in cataloged cardboard boxes very limited. and stored within Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum Complex. Research Facility Management reports and documentation of the site and When the excavation shelter is completed, the excavation activities would continue to be city will be responsible for maintaining and archived at the Mayborn Museum Complex. operating the onsite facilities that provide for

the protection of the in situ specimens and the Scientific Study accommodation of visitors. The university would continue to conduct scientific study of the resource to further the The collection storage area housing the Waco understanding of the circumstances of the Mammoth Site’s paleontological collection site. and archives would continue to be maintained off-site within the geology/paleontology Level of Development collections room of Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum Complex. For the purposes of this study, it is assumed that the Waco community efforts to erect a protective shelter over the excavation area Site Administration and Security and to provide for controlled visitor access to The city of Waco and Baylor University would the site are underway. Under this alternative, continue to share site administration there would be no expansion of development responsibilities. The city would continue to beyond this effort. provide security, police, fire, and emergency medical services for the site. Visitor Experience Visitor understanding and appreciation of the Potential Site Recognition resource continues to be provided off-site by a Based on the initial findings of the special dedicated exhibit room within the museum resource study, the Waco Mammoth Site is a setting of Baylor University’s Mayborn potential candidate for two categories of site Museum Complex. recognition. The first category is based on the resource evaluation and initial findings of Once the excavation shelter and site national significance, which indicate that the improvements are completed, visitor access Waco Mammoth Site is a potential candidate would be accommodated. Opportunities for for national natural landmark status. The visitor understanding and appreciation of the second category is based on the resource paleontological resources would be greatly evaluation and initial findings of national enhanced through onsite interpretive significance and suitability, which indicate waysides and through controlled visitor access that the Waco Mammoth Site is potentially into the excavation shelter where views of the eligible for Congressional designation as a in situ specimens would be provided. National Park Service affiliated area. A brief However, as additional operational funding outline of each of these two designations is has not been allocated to accommodate daily presented below. visitation, there would not be any permanent onsite staff. Visitor access would be on a National Natural Landmarks: National limited basis, with at least 12 events scheduled natural landmark designation is a process by 51 CHAPTER FOUR: ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGEMENT which natural areas, in both public and private protection and preservation. Congress may ownership, are recognized as outstanding appropriate financial assistance for one-time examples of our nation’s natural heritage. The studies or preservation projects, or it may secretary of the interior, with the landowner’s appropriate annual funds to help manage the consent, designates national natural affiliated area. Affiliated areas are permitted to landmarks. Nationwide, nearly 600 sites have display the NPS arrowhead symbol in tandem received this special designation. Two sites with the partner’s symbol and may use it in were designated national natural landmarks in their printed and online literature and other 2006: Ashfall Fossil Beds National Natural interpretive media about the site. Landmark in Nebraska, and Irvine Ranch National Natural Landmark in California. Under this alternative, it is assumed that these Prior to 2006, it had been almost 18 years options represent potential site recognition since a site was designated. The National only, as neither of these designations is Natural Landmarks Program encourages actively being pursued by the city of Waco, conservation of these outstanding natural Baylor University, or Congress at this time. features. The National Park Service administers the program, and if requested, can Ownership assist national natural landmark owners and The core paleontological site remains under managers with the conservation of these the ownership of the city of Waco, while the important sites. These services may include surrounding lands continue under the any of the following: ownership of Baylor University. 1) Assisting national natural landmark owners with grant applications to fund site Ownership of the collected specimens and conservation and interpretive projects. archives continues under shared ownership 2) Providing or brokering technical between the city of Waco and Baylor assistance to national natural landmark University. owners. Cost Estimate 3) Building partnerships by coordinating for research and other purposes with the The current costs for managing the Waco National Park Service Rivers, Trails, and Mammoth Site are difficult to quantify. Staff Conservation Assistance Program and the support for the site is an assigned collateral network of Cooperative Ecosystems Study duty among other responsibilities. Under this Units and collaborating with academic alternative, it is assumed that no new funding institutions in various aspects of achieving for staffing, maintenance, and operations the National Natural Landmarks Program’s beyond what is currently being provided by objectives. Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum Complex and the city of Waco’s Department National Park Service Affiliated Areas: of Parks and Recreation would be provided. Affiliated areas include a variety of locations The costs to provide continued stewardship of in the United States and Canada that preserve the resource, as well as the added responsibili- nationally significant properties outside the ties for facility maintenance, utilities, security, national park system. Congress designates and staffing when the site is open to visitors affiliated status through legislation, which may during the 12 scheduled events per year, also authorize the secretary of the interior, would be covered by the city and the through the National Park Service, to provide Mayborn Museum’s existing funding levels. technical and/or financial assistance. Partnership Opportunities Technical assistance may include access to The Waco Mammoth Foundation and the training and/or services such as interpretation, local community continue to play a key historic preservation, and other resource partnership role in supporting preservation 52 Alternative A and public access initiatives for the Waco Treasures initiative. Major donors include Mammoth Site. Baylor University, the city of Waco, McLennan County, the Cooper Foundation, The Waco Mammoth Foundation has the Waco Foundation, as well as a host of spearheaded an energetic effort to seek public other foundations and private individuals. and private support for the Save America’s

53 CHAPTER FOUR: ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGEMENT

ALTERNATIVE B: PARTNERSHIPS LED BY THE CITY OF WACO

Concept for Management Service for paleontological resource preservation, interpretation, and educational The Waco Mammoth Site would be managed outreach. Additional partnerships, such as for the continuing preservation and local community initiatives, land trusts, protection of the paleontological resources, foundations, nongovernmental organizations, conducting scientific study, providing for and federal, state, and local governments, onsite visitor enjoyment and understanding of would also be sought to assist with developing the paleontological resources, and providing a and managing the site. range of environmental educational and recreational opportunities within the This alternative would protect and interpret surrounding lands. the site, and provide opportunities for

Overall Management Framework research of the core paleontological resources. It would also give the city freedom The existing cooperative management to pursue possible broader ideas such as arrangement between the city of Waco and providing environmental education and Baylor University would be expanded with recreational opportunities. additional partners, with the city assuming the lead responsibility for managing the site as a Resource Management municipal park. Resources would be monitored and protected

by the city of Waco and Baylor University. National natural landmark status would be Baylor University, with technical assistance actively pursued, allowing the city to seek and guidance provided by National Park technical assistance from the National Park Service paleontologists and museum 54 Alternative B specialists, would continue to ensure the in expanded parking, expanded restrooms, situ paleontological resources are stabilized administration/ maintenance support and preserved. With the protection from the structure, interpretive nature trails and elements provided by the excavation shelter, connecting trails to the Bosque River and the current moratorium on excavation Brazos River Corridor, boat dock, and picnic activities could be lifted to allow for and informal play areas. controlled investigations. Visitor Experience Technical assistance by the National Park Similar to the visitor experience described in Service could also be provided to Baylor alternative A, visitor understanding and University to develop protocols and appreciation of the resource would continue methodologies for initiating preparation and to be provided off-site by a dedicated exhibit cataloging of the specimens currently housed room within the museum setting of Baylor in plaster jackets and the smaller fragments University’s Mayborn Museum Complex. and soil samples in cardboard boxes. However, visitors would be able to participate Dedicated space for establishing a specimen in a wider range of interpretation programs in preparation laboratory may be accommodated alternative B than in alternative A. within the museum or within the onsite facilities developed by the city. The collection Once the excavation shelter and site would continue to be housed within Baylor improvements are completed, visitor access to University’s Mayborn Museum Complex. the core paleontological area and surrounding Research reports, documentation of the site lands would be made available to the visiting and excavation activities would also continue public on a daily basis. Opportunities for to be archived there. visitor understanding and appreciation of the

paleontological resources would be greatly Scientific Study enhanced through onsite interpretive Baylor University would continue to conduct waysides and through controlled visitor access scientific study of the site. The university into the excavation shelter where views of the would also actively network with and in situ specimens would be provided. coordinate scientific study by other scientific entities. Opportunities would be pursued to After development of a comprehensive establish an endowment to support continued interpretive plan to guide interpretive scientific study of the resource. programming for the resource, visitor understanding and appreciation of the Level of Development paleontological resources would be enhanced through additional onsite interpretive The Waco community efforts to erect a mechanisms. Guided tours and interpretive protective shelter over the excavation area programs for school groups, and special and to provide for controlled visitor access to events would be provided. the site are currently underway. However, under this alternative the level of development In addition, the environmental education could be expanded to accommodate a broader center would provide enhanced visitor range of onsite visitor opportunities. The city understanding and appreciation of the could pursue their long-range vision for mammoth site as well as the unique developing a city park at the site. As funding environment found along the interface of the permits, additional facilities may be provided Texas Hill Country and Gulf Coastal Plain. that could include an environmental The city of Waco, Baylor University, and the education center, research and specimen National Park Service could collaborate on preparation laboratory (either onsite or within the development of the interpretive plan, the Mayborn Museum Complex), interpretive program, and media. They could also plaza, expanded interpretive waysides, collaborate on educational outreach programs 55 CHAPTER FOUR: ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGEMENT targeting school groups at the elementary the National Park Service’s NNL program. through high school level, programs for the Another option under this alternative could general public to promote life-long learning, include Congressional designation as a and scientifically detailed programs for National Park Service “affiliated area” to students at the post secondary education level. further strengthen the possibility of National Park Service involvement. An interactive website could be established to provide a “Portal to the Pleistocene” with an Ownership in-depth presentation of the site and its The core paleontological site would remain relationship to the Pleistocene, updates on the under the ownership of the city of Waco; progress of ongoing scientific study however, the surrounding lands currently conducted at the site and on the collected under the ownership of Baylor University specimens, and links to other mammoth sites could be transferred to the city of Waco for found throughout the country and potentially the purposes of allowing the city to more fully other locations around the world. develop the site as a city park.

Recreational opportunities could be Ownership of the collected specimens and developed by the city by providing access to archives would continue as shared ownership the Bosque Riverfront and Brazos River between the city of Waco and Baylor Corridor by way of connecting trails. Water University. taxis could be accommodated along the site’s

Bosque riverfront, which could extend Cost Estimate additional connections to other community attractions. Capital improvement cost estimates for this alternative are based on the recent master Facility Management planning effort commissioned by the city. It is anticipated that $8.1 million would be needed The city would be responsible for maintaining to implement the city’s long-range vision for and operating the onsite facilities that shelter creating a municipal park at the Waco the in situ specimens and provide visitor Mammoth Site. access as well as the expanded site infrastructure described above. The city projects that a staff increase of

approximately 5.5 FTE (full-time equivalent) As is described in alternative A, the collection positions would be needed to provide entry storage area housing the Waco Mammoth control, schedule group tours, provide general Site’s paleontological collection would information, and maintain facilities. continue to be maintained off-site within the Additional assistance for large ground geology/paleontology collections room of maintenance could be provided by existing Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum crews from the city’s Department of Parks and Complex. Recreation. Their annual operational costs are

estimated to be approximately $300,000. Site Administration and Security Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum staff The city of Waco would be responsible for site anticipates a need to provide a full time administration and would continue to provide coordinator of volunteers to recruit, schedule city services such as security, police and oversee volunteers at the site. The training protection, fire suppression, and emergency of volunteers could be conducted by the medical response for the entire site. existing education staff of the Mayborn Museum as part of their assigned duties. The Site Recognition annual estimated cost is projected to be $45,000. Existing museum staff and/or trained The city would actively pursue national natural landmark (NNL) designation through 56 Alternative B volunteers could participate in the fossil Technical assistance from the National Park preparation efforts. Service could be provided if the city were to successfully pursue National Natural Technical assistance could be provided to Landmark designation for the site. If Congress Mayborn Museum and city of Waco staff by were to designate the Waco Mammoth Site as National Park Service paleontologists, a National Park Service affiliated area, museum curators, fossil preparators, and technical and potentially financial assistance interpretive planners to help guide could also be provided. preservation and interpretive/educational outreach programming efforts. It is A number of other opportunities could be anticipated that $10,000 to $25,000 per year in pursued to help support management of the additional NPS funding would be needed for a site, including the following: five-year period to support NPS staff time and • donations or grants from government, travel expenses. corporate, and/or private sources

Partnership Opportunities • community volunteers and student interns • volunteer scholar and student led research As in alternative A, the Waco Mammoth activities Foundation and the local community would continue to play key partnership roles in • entry fees could be charged to help offset supporting preservation and public access operational expenses initiatives for the site.

57 CHAPTER FOUR: ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGEMENT

ALTERNATIVE C: PARTNERSHIPS LED BY THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

Concept for Management Overall Management Framework Similar to the management described in The Waco Mammoth Site would be managed alternative B, in alternative C the Waco as a new unit of the national park system, in Mammoth Site would be managed for the partnership with the city of Waco, Baylor continuing preservation and protection of the University, and others. paleontological resources, conducting scientific study, providing for onsite visitor The National Park Service would prepare a enjoyment and understanding of the general management plan to guide future paleontological resources, and providing a managers of the site by clearly defining what range of recreational and environmental level of resource conditions and visitor educational opportunities. Alternative C is experiences should be achieved and different from alternative B in that maintained over time. Developed in management responsibilities for fulfilling this consultation with local governments, park purpose would be delegated among the stakeholders, and the general public, the plan National Park Service, the city of Waco, and would establish overarching resource Baylor University, and there would be an management goals and provide guidance expansion of partnership opportunities with concerning the overall level and intensity of others. development appropriate for the site. A partnership development strategy would be included as an integral component of the plan. Under this alternative the National Park

58 Alternative C

Service would take the lead responsibility for environmental education center at the site with ensuring the protection, scientific study, and the National Park Service operating the lab. The visitor enjoyment of paleontological collection would continue to be housed within resources, enlisting the help of partners to Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum accomplish this mission. The city of Waco or Complex, except that select portions of the other partners would take the lead for collection may be housed onsite within the initiating additional recreational, interpretive, education center for the purposes of exhibiting and environmental educational opportunities prepared specimens and/or exhibiting the on the site. For example, the National Park specimen preparation process to the public. Service would make sure that in situ Research reports and documentation of the site paleontological resources are protected and and excavation activities would be maintained would provide opportunities for visitor onsite by the National Park Service. Similar to enjoyment, but would not likely initiate major alternative B, this would benefit future capital improvements for expanded visitor researchers as access to prepared specimens services or administrative facilities. Any major would be made possible for the first time. It investments to provide a full service visitor would also provide a benefit for the public as center or environmental education facility, select fossils could be cast for exhibit purposes. administrative facilities, and regional trail However, under this alternative, it would connections could be pursued by the city and provide an added benefit of integrating the other partners. specimen preparation activities into the interpretive experience at the site. Resource Management The National Park Service would develop a Scientific Study resource stewardship strategy including a To further the understanding of the site and collections management plan to guide its circumstances, the National Park Service resource management activities. For the would support and coordinate the scientific purposes of this study, it is assumed that study of the core paleontological resources future resource management strategies would and geologic context. Opportunities would be include the following recommendations: pursued to establish an endowment to support continued scientific study of the The National Park Service would assume resource. The National Park Service would responsibilities for the core paleontological consult with the Cooperative Ecosystem resources of the site. This would include Studies Units (CESU) national network to monitoring the conditions of the in situ help facilitate expanded research specimens and perhaps exploring other areas opportunities through other scientific within the excavation shelter to acquire institutions. Each CESU is structured as a additional information about the working collaborative among federal agencies circumstances of the site. Other site resources and universities that are focused on specific in the surrounding lands would be managed biogeographic regions of the country. The by the city of Waco. Waco Mammoth Site falls within the interface of three biographic regions: the Gulf Coast, The paleontological collections management Desert Southwest, and Great Plains. Baylor would be divided between the National Park University could apply for inclusion in either Service and Baylor University. The National of these units to expand their opportunities to Park Service would develop protocols and apply for potential federal funding of future methodologies for initiating preparation and research initiatives for the site. cataloging of the specimens currently housed in plaster jackets and the smaller fragments and Level of Development soil samples in cardboard boxes. It is assumed The National Park Service would initiate a that a specimen preparation laboratory could be general management planning effort to incorporated into the city’s proposed 59 CHAPTER FOUR: ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGEMENT provide guidance concerning the overall level to the core paleontological area and and intensity of development appropriate for surrounding lands would be made available to the site. For the purposes of this study, it is the visiting public on a daily basis. assumed that the level of development would be as follows. Interpretive programs and media provided through the Waco community’s Phase I park Similar to alternative A, the Waco community development efforts would be expanded efforts to erect a protective shelter over the through the collaborative efforts of the excavation area and to provide for controlled National Park Service, the city of Waco, and visitor access to the site are underway. How- Baylor University. A comprehensive ever, under this alternative the National Park interpretive plan would be prepared to guide Service would provide for enhanced the development of enhanced interpretive interpretive mechanisms of the paleontologi- mechanisms and programs for the resource. cal resources and would partner with others Guided tours and interpretation programs for to initiate a broader range of other onsite school groups and special events would be visitor opportunities. For example, the city of provided. Opportunities to allow the visiting Waco could pursue their long-range vision for public to observe the specimen preparation developing a city park at the site that may work would be developed. include, as future funding permits, an environmental education center with The partners would also collaborate on expanded indoor and outdoor interpretive educational outreach programs targeting opportunities, interpretive nature trails school groups at the elementary through high connecting to the Bosque Riverfront and school level, programs for the general public other regional trailways along the Brazos to promote life-long learning, and River corridor, boat access along the Bosque scientifically detailed programs for students at Riverfront, and picnic and informal play areas. the post-secondary education level. It is also assumed that NPS staff could be accommodated within the administrative In addition, an environmental education facilities developed by the city. center would provide enhanced visitor understanding and appreciation of the Visitor Experience mammoth site as well as of the distinctive environment found along the interface of the Visitors would be able to participate in a Texas Hill Country and Gulf Coastal Plain. similar range of interpretation programs as outlined under alternative B. The specimen preparation laboratory with

strategically placed viewing windows could be Similar to that described in alternative A, integrated into the city’s environmental visitors’ understanding and appreciation of education center to provide opportunities for the resource would continue to be provided visitors to observe the fossil preparation off-site by a dedicated exhibit room within the process. museum setting of Baylor University’s

Mayborn Museum Complex. An interactive website could be established to

provide a “Portal to the Pleistocene” with an Once the excavation shelter and site in-depth presentation of the site and its improvements are completed, visitor access relationship to the Pleistocene, updates on the would be accommodated. Opportunities for progress of ongoing scientific study efforts, visitor understanding and appreciation of the and links to other mammoth sites found paleontological resources would be greatly throughout the country and potentially other enhanced through onsite interpretive locations around the world. waysides and through controlled visitor access into the excavation shelter where views of the in situ specimens would be provided. Access 60 Alternative C

Recreational opportunities could be Ownership developed by the city by providing access to Enabling legislation would allow flexibility for the Bosque Riverfront and Brazos River a mixture of land ownership and management corridor by way of connecting trails. Water among the key entities that would best fulfill taxis could be accommodated along the site’s the mission. For example, while a National Bosque riverfront, which would extend the Park Service boundary may be authorized for additional connections to other community the entire site, some or all of the land may attractions. remain with the city of Waco and Baylor

University. It is assumed for the purposes of Facility Management this study, that the federal government would The facilities constructed through the Waco acquire ownership of the core paleontological community initiative providing protection of site, the collected specimens, and archives. the in situ specimens and providing visitor The lands owned by Baylor University would access to the excavation area would be be transferred to the city of Waco for the operated and maintained by the National Park purpose of allowing the city to more fully Service. develop the surrounding lands as a city park.

Additional facilities developed by the city to Cost Estimate enhance the environmental educational and Similar to alternative B, capital improvement recreational opportunities of the site would be cost estimates for this alternative are based on operated and maintained by the city of Waco. the recent master planning effort

commissioned by the city. It is anticipated that Similar to alternative A, the collection storage $8.1 million would be needed to implement facility housing the Waco Mammoth Site’s the city’s long-range vision for creating a paleontological collection would continue to municipal park at the Waco Mammoth Site. be maintained off-site within Baylor

University’s Mayborn Museum Complex. The city projects a staff increase of

approximately 5.5 FTE (full-time equivalent) Site Administration and Security positions would be needed to provide entry The National Park Service would be the control, schedule group tours, provide general primary manager of the 4.93-acre core information, and maintain facilities. paleontological site, while the city of Waco Additional assistance for large ground would be the primary manager of the maintenance could be provided by existing surrounding 104-acre city park. The city crews from the city’s Department of Parks and would provide city services such as security, Recreation. Their annual operational costs are police protection, fire suppression, and estimated to be approximately $300,000. emergency medical response for the entire site. It is assumed that shared jurisdiction for There would be no projected increases in law enforcement would be established staffing or operational expenses beyond between the city of Waco and the National current levels already provided by Baylor Park Service for areas under NPS University’s Mayborn Museum. management. The National Park Service would program Site Recognition and develop enhanced interpretive Congress would designate the site as a new mechanisms for the site as well as within the unit of the national park system. The process excavation pavilion. The projected estimated for national natural landmark designation cost for enhanced interpretive media is could be pursued by the National Park $585,000. It is anticipated that NPS staff could Service. be accommodated within the administrative spaces of city-owned facilities, so there would 61 CHAPTER FOUR: ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGEMENT be no additional capital improvement costs lead regarding the resource protection and for NPS needs. visitor enjoyment of the fundamental paleontological resources. The estimated annual costs for NPS employees is based on the assumption that As in alternative A, the Waco Mammoth staff would be supervised and supported by Foundation and the local community would the Lyndon B. Johnson National Historical continue to play key partnership roles in Park located in Johnson City, 144 miles to the supporting preservation and public access southwest of the site. At the fully staffed level, initiatives for the site. A written agreement it is estimated that approximately 4 FTE (full- could be developed between the National time equivalent) positions would work at the Park Service and the Waco Mammoth Waco Mammoth Site with a focus on the core Foundation establishing the foundation as an paleontological area. Employees would NPS Friends Group. Additional partners include a paleontologist who would serve as would be invited to help support expanded the resource manager and research resource protection and visitor enjoyment coordinator for the site; a collections opportunities. manager/fossil preparator who would work with Mayborn Museum staff and trained Cooperative agreements could be developed volunteers to initiate specimen preparation with the city and/or other partners for taking efforts; an interpretive specialist who would the lead in funding and managing a more fully oversee the interpretive/educational outreach developed surrounding parkland for programs, supervise seasonal interpreters, and enhanced visitor opportunities. serve as the volunteer coordinator; and two to three seasonal interpreters. A number of other opportunities could be pursued to help support management of the Annual staffing costs including benefits are site, including the following: estimated to total $246,000. Annual • donations or grants from government, operational costs for supplies, materials, corporate, and/or private sources utilities, and equipment would be approximately $99,000 annually. • community volunteers and student interns • volunteer scholar and student led research Partnership Opportunities activities • entry fees could be charged to help offset The National Park Service would join the operational expenses existing management partnership between the city of Waco and Baylor University, taking the

62 Alternative D

ALTERNATIVE D: MANAGED AS A FOCUSED UNIT OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM

Concept for Management The National Park Service would prepare a general management plan to guide future As is in alternative A, in alternative D the managers of the site by clearly defining what Waco Mammoth Site is managed for the level of resource conditions and visitor continuing preservation and protection of the experiences should be achieved and paleontological resources, conducting maintained over time. In consultation with scientific study, and providing for onsite local governments, park stakeholders, and the visitor enjoyment and understanding. general public, the plan would establish Alternative D is different from alternative A in overarching resource management goals and that the management responsibility for provide guidance concerning the overall level fulfilling this purpose is transferred to the and intensity of development appropriate for National Park Service. the site. A partnership development strategy Overall Management Framework would be included as an integral component of the plan. Waco Mammoth Site would be managed as a new unit of the national park system; the Under this alternative, the National Park federal government would own and the Service would focus on the core mission of National Park Service would manage the protection, scientific study, and interpretation entire paleontological resource (in situ fossils of the fundamental paleontological resources. and the collection of fossils currently housed The National Park Service would not likely at Baylor University). expand beyond this core focus to initiate

63 CHAPTER FOUR: ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGEMENT other projects such as an environmental fundamental paleontological resource compo- education or other recreational opportunities. nents have been under the curatorial care of a single institution. This management Partners would still play a role in educational alternative strives to maintain this condition; outreach, interpretive programs, and site with a shift in resource stewardship from security to assist the National Park Service Baylor University to the National Park with achieving its core mission. Service. The intent would be to keep the fundamental resources onsite; however, other Resource Management collected specimens not related to the fundamental paleontological resources or The National Park Service would develop a geologic context may be housed in other resource stewardship strategy including a regional repositories. A collections manage- collections management plan to guide ment plan would be prepared to help guide resource management activities. For the this distinction. purposes of this study, it is assumed that the following resource management strategies would be included. Scientific Study As in alternative C, the National Park Service Paleontological resources would be would support and coordinate scientific inventoried, monitored, and protected by the research to further the understanding of the National Park Service. Other site resources in site and its circumstances. Opportunities the surrounding lands would be inventoried, would be pursued to establish an endowment monitored, and protected as well. Resource to support continued scientific study of the stewardship plans would be developed to resource. The National Park Service would guide future management of these resources. also consult with the Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Units (CESU) national network to The National Park Service would ensure the in help facilitate expanded research situ paleontological resources are stabilized opportunities through other scientific and preserved. With the protection from the institutions. elements provided by the excavation shelter, the current moratorium on excavation Level of Development activities could be lifted to allow for The National Park Service would prepare a controlled investigations. general management plan to provide guidance

concerning the overall level and intensities of The National Park Service would develop development appropriate for the site. For the protocols and methodologies for initiating purposes of this study, the following is preparation and cataloging of the specimens assumed. currently housed in plaster jackets and the smaller fragments and soil samples in As in alternative A, the Waco community cardboard boxes. The storage of collected efforts to erect a protective shelter over the specimens and archives would continue to be excavation area and to provide for controlled housed within Baylor University’s Mayborn visitor access to the site are underway. Museum Complex, until the collection could be accommodated in a new collection storage However, under this alternative, additional facility constructed onsite. This would require development could be pursued by the an exception from the NPS Intermountain National Park Service to house the entire Region museum collections strategic planning paleontological collection onsite within a new goal of moving management of museum collections storage facility that would include collections towards regional repositories. The a specimen preparation laboratory. primary reason for deviating from this Administrative office space and maintenance regional plan is that the integrity of the support facilities would also be required. resource is tied to the fact that all of the 64 Alternative D

Visitor Experience specimens, and links to other mammoth sites found throughout the country. As in alternative A, visitor understanding and appreciation of the resource would continue to be provided off-site by a dedicated exhibit Facility Management room within the museum setting of Baylor The National Park Service would be respon- University’s Mayborn Museum Complex. sible for maintaining and operating all facilities. Once the excavation shelter and site improvements are completed, visitor access Site Administration and Security would be accommodated. Opportunities for The National Park Service would be respon- visitor understanding and appreciation of the sible for site administration and security. It is paleontological resources would be greatly assumed that shared jurisdiction for law enhanced through onsite interpretive enforcement could be established between the waysides and through controlled visitor access city of Waco and the National Park Service. It into the excavation shelter where views of the is also assumed that the city would provide in situ specimens would be provided. Access fire suppression and emergency medical to the core paleontological area and sur- response to the site, as it would in the other rounding lands would be made available to alternatives. the visiting public on a daily basis.

Site Recognition Interpretive programs and media provided through the Waco community’s Phase I park Congress would designate the site as a new development efforts would be expanded unit of the national park system. The process through the collaborative efforts of the for national natural landmark designation National Park Service, the city of Waco, and could be pursued by the National Park Baylor University. A comprehensive Service. interpretive plan would be prepared to guide the development of enhanced interpretive Ownership mechanisms and programs for the resource. The Waco Mammoth Site land parcels and the Guided tours and live interpretation programs entire paleontological collection including for school groups and special events would be associated documentation and archives would provided. Opportunities to allow the visiting be transferred at no cost to the federal public to observe the specimen preparation government. work would be developed. Cost Estimate The partners would also collaborate on educational outreach programs targeting National Park Service estimated costs are school groups at the elementary through high based on very broad needs typically associated school level, programs for the general public with the development of a new unit of the to promote life-long learning, and national park system. If the site becomes a scientifically detailed programs for students at new unit of the national park system, the the post-secondary education level. National Park Service would develop a general management plan that would better An interactive website, linked to the National outline facility needs. For the purposes of this Park Service website, could be established to study, it is estimated that an additional $2.6 provide a “Portal to the Pleistocene” with an million in capital improvement costs would be in-depth presentation of the site and its needed to provide for enhanced interpretive relationship to the Pleistocene, updates on the mechanism, onsite administrative/ progress of ongoing scientific study maintenance support facilities, and collection conducted at the site and on the collected storage facility. It is also anticipated that staff would lease administrative support space off-

65 CHAPTER FOUR: ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGEMENT site for a number of years until general would allow the Waco Mammoth Foundation management planning, compliance, and to continue to play a key partnership role in development plans would be complete and supporting preservation and public access funding for capital improvements would be initiatives for the site. Additional partners available. It is projected that leasing costs of would be invited to help support expanded $27,000 per year for a period of five years resource protection and visitor enjoyment would be needed. opportunities.

At the fully staffed level, it is estimated that Opportunities to collaborate with the approximately 10 FTE (full-time equivalent) Mayborn Museum and the city of Waco positions would be needed at the Waco regarding interpretive and educational Mammoth Site. Employees would include outreach programs would be initiated. park superintendent and administrative staff, paleontologist/resource manager/research A number of other opportunities could be coordinator, collections manager/fossil pursued to help support management of the preparator, interpretive/ education site including the following: specialist/volunteer coordinator, seasonal • donations or grants from government, interpreters, maintenance personnel, and law corporate, and/or private sources enforcement rangers. Annual staffing costs including benefits are estimated to total • community volunteers and student interns $580,000. Annual operational costs for • volunteer scholar and student led research supplies, materials, utilities, and equipment activities will be approximately $188,500. • entry fees could be charged to help offset operational expenses Partnership Opportunities • security and fire protection services could A written agreement could be developed be substantially enhanced by partnerships between the National Park Service and the between the National Park Service and the Waco Mammoth Foundation establishing the city of Waco. foundation as an NPS friends group. This

66 Summary and Comparison of Alternatives

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The city of Waco and Baylor University do BUT DISMISSED not see any advantage in transferring the sole management responsibility to another During the study process, some additional scientific association or nonprofit group, as management alternatives were raised through they anticipate that a single entity would still public comment or National Park Service rely on the existing partners to function concerns that were considered but dismissed. successfully. However, the city and university These included a number of scenarios in did acknowledge the power of collaboration which the site would be managed by a single with other universities and scientific entity other than sole management by the institutions to conduct research and enhance National Park Service. This could include sole the understanding of the site, and that this management by Baylor University, sole type of partnership would always be an management by the city of Waco, sole available option. management by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, or sole management by another entity such as a scientific association or other SUMMARY AND COMPARISON nonprofit group. OF ALTERNATIVES

Both the city of Waco and Baylor University Alternative Highlights expressed concern that this approach would Table 4 summarizes the differences among the not be a viable management option. Transfer- alternatives by contrasting their major features ring the sole management responsibilities to and highlights. Table 5 summarizes the either the city or the university would com- differences between the alternatives by promise the effectiveness of maintaining the contrasting their potential environmental current level of resource stewardship. Both impacts. the city of Waco and Baylor University view their existing partnership as utilizing the Environmentally Preferred Alternative strengths of each institution’s expertise. With the recently chartered Waco Mammoth NEPA regulations and NPS policy require that Foundation, a nonprofit organization and this study identify the environmentally community advisory board for the site, the preferred alternative. The reader is reminded partnership has grown. The city and university that the environmentally preferred view this expanded partnership as a strong alternative should not be viewed as the one, which has made great strides in National Park Service preferred alternative advancing protective measures for the site as or as a positive or negative recommendation well as in developing opportunities for public by the National Park Service or the access and appreciation. Department of the Interior for any future management strategy or action. Conversations with personnel at the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TP&W) The environmentally preferred alternative is revealed that they are currently downsizing determined by applying criteria set forth in personnel and decommissioning a significant NEPA, as guided by direction from the number of state park units due to fiscal Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). constraints. At this time, it does not appear to The CEQ has stated that the environmentally be economically feasible for TP&W to assume preferred alternative is the alternative that will the sole management responsibility for the site promote the national environmental policy as given the department’s current financial expressed in NEPA, Section 101, by meeting challenges with maintaining the existing state the following objectives: park system. • Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations.

67 CHAPTER FOUR: ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGEMENT

• Assure for all generations safe, healthful, Therefore, alternatives B and C are considered productive, and esthetically and culturally the environmentally preferred alternatives. pleasing surroundings. • Attain the widest range of beneficial uses Most Effective and of the environment without degradation, Efficient Alternative risk of health or safety, or other undesir- The 1998 Omnibus Parks Management Act able and unintended consequences. (Public Law 105-391 §303) and NPS policy • Preserve important historic, cultural, and mandates that each special resource study natural aspects of our national heritage identify the alternative or combination of and maintain, wherever possible, an alternatives which would, in the professional environment that supports diversity and judgment of the director of the National Park variety of individual choice. Service, be most effective and efficient in protecting significant resources and providing • Achieve a balance between population and resource use that will permit high opportunities for appropriate public standards of living and a wide sharing of enjoyment. For the purposes of this study, life’s amenities. effectiveness and efficiency are defined as the capability to produce desired results with a • Enhance the quality of renewable minimum expenditure of energy, time, money, resources and approach the maximum or materials. attainable recycling of depletable resources. While all of the alternatives provide for protection and public enjoyment of the This special resource study evaluates special resources of the Waco Mammoth Site, management options and not detailed there are distinct differences between the development proposals; therefore, the last alternatives with regard to the degree of objective, “Enhance the quality of renewable management effectiveness and efficiency. resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources” A comparison of costs associated with each would be more appropriately evaluated when alternative indicates that alternative A, the no- subsequent implementation planning is action alternative that continues current developed, although all alternatives could management trends, would require the least incorporate this as a goal for future expenditure of energy, time, money, and development proposals. materials. However, alternative A does not include increases in staffing or operational As the site is already under the stewardship of funding; consequently accommodating visitor the city of Waco and Baylor University and is access to the site is limited under this being protected from incompatible uses, each alternative to only monthly scheduled events. of the alternatives would fulfill the responsi- This is not a reasonable level of public bilities of this generation as trustee of the site enjoyment for such a nationally significant for succeeding generations. Similarly, the treasure, and as such, alternative A is the least other goals listed above would be satisfied, effective of all the alternatives. only to a slightly greater or lesser degree, by each of the alternatives. However, alternatives Of the three action alternatives, alternative D B and C attain the widest range of beneficial requires the least expenditures of energy, uses of the environment without degradation, time, money, and materials, although the risk of health or safety, or other undesirable range of visitor opportunities is limited to just and unintended consequences. Under these those associated with the core paleontological alternatives, the lands surrounding the core resources. Alternatives B and C provide a paleontological resources accommodate greater range of visitor enjoyment expanded opportunities for enhanced visitor opportunities without compromising resource enjoyment of the other resources of the site. integrity. Under both alternatives, the lands 68 Summary and Comparison of Alternatives surrounding the core paleontological alternative has the potential to provide a more resources are used to accommodate expanded stable and consistent approach for protecting opportunities for visitor understanding of the and enhancing the conditions of geological context of the site, establishing paleontological collection, enhancing environmental education programs, and interpretive and educational programs, and providing recreational access along the enabling an expanded level of scientific Bosque River. Alternatives B and C are more research and study related to the special effective in providing a greater range of resource in comparison to the periodic NPS appropriate public enjoyment opportunities at technical assistance provided under the Waco Mammoth Site than alternative D. alternative B. Assuming initial and continued funding is made available to support this level When comparing the projected costs of of resource stewardship, alternative C is the alternatives B and C, alternative B requires a most effective and efficient management lower expenditure of energy, time, money, alternative. and materials, which would be supported from a number of funding sources: federal, DETERMINATION OF NEED FOR municipal, and private. Under this city of DIRECT NPS MANAGEMENT Waco led partnership approach, NPS expertise is leveraged by providing technical The review of the existing partnership assistance and guidance from NPS specialists between the city of Waco and Baylor to the existing managers of the site. This University demonstrates that this partnership arrangement results in a very effective and is currently providing adequate protection of efficient approach for protecting and the special resources of the Waco Mammoth enhancing the conditions of paleontological Site and is working toward providing for collection, enhancing interpretive and visitor enjoyment. These were key factors in educational programs, and enabling an the finding that direct NPS management expanded level of scientific research and would not be the only practicable means for study related to the special resource. meeting the goals of protecting resources and furthering public use. However, to meet these While the range of visitor opportunities are goals to the fullest extent, there are significant similar under alternatives B and C, alternative roles that the National Park Service could C provides a greater level of assurance for have in guiding the preservation efforts of the maintaining long-term resource protection. paleontological collection, enhancing the Alternative C assumes a full time, onsite interpretive and educational outreach commitment of NPS specialists with programs, and enabling an expanded level of experience in the management and scientific research and study of this special interpretation of paleontological resources. resource. The day-to-day efforts of NPS resource managers and interpreters under this

Table 4: Summary Table of Alternative Highlights

Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D Continuation of Partnerships led by Partnerships led by Managed as a focused unit of current management trends the city of Waco the National Park Service the National Park System Overall The existing cooperative The existing cooperative Waco Mammoth Site would be a Waco Mammoth Site would be a Management management arrangement between management arrangement between new unit of the national park new unit of the national park Framework the city of Waco and Baylor the city of Waco and Baylor system, in partnership with the city system, with the entire University is continued. University is expanded with of Waco, Baylor University, and paleontological resource managed additional partners, with the city others. onsite by the National Park Service assuming the lead responsibility for (in situ specimens and the managing the site as a city park. paleontological collection currently housed at Baylor University).

Concept for Managed for the continuing Same as alternative A, plus… Same as alternative A. Management preservation and protection of the paleontological resources, A range of recreational and environmental educational opportunities conducting scientific study, and could be provided by the city. providing for onsite visitor enjoyment and understanding.

Paleontological Discovery Site & Geologic Discovery Site & Geologic Discovery Site & Geologic Discovery Site & Geologic Resource Context Context Context Context Protection Moratorium on excavation activities Controlled excavation activities may Controlled excavation activities may Controlled excavation activities may continues. resume. resume. resume.

In Situ Specimens In Situ Specimens In Situ Specimens In Situ Specimens Stabilized and preserved Stabilized and preserved Stabilized and preserved Stabilized and preserved

Collected Specimens Collected Specimens Collected Specimens Collected Specimens Storage at Baylor University’s (BU) Storage at Mayborn Museum Storage at Mayborn Museum Storage, specimen preparation, and Mayborn Museum Complex. Complex, specimen preparation and Complex and onsite by NPS. cataloging onsite by NPS. cataloging by BU with technical Specimen preparation and assistance provided by NPS. cataloging by NPS.

Archives Archives Archives Archives Maintained by BU Cataloged and maintained by BU Cataloged and maintained by NPS Cataloged and maintained by NPS

Table 4: Summary Table of Alternative Highlights

Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D Continuation of Partnerships led by Partnerships led by Managed as a focused unit of current management trends the city of Waco the National Park Service the National Park System Scientific Study Scientific study continues to be Scientific study conducted by Scientific study conducted by BU, Scientific study conducted by NPS conducted by Baylor University. Baylor University and other NPS, and other scientific entities. and other scientific entities. scientific entities. Cooperative Educational Study Cooperative Educational Study Units assist in networking with the Units assist in networking with the scientific community. scientific community.

Interpretive The Waco community effort to Same as alternative A, except… Same as alternative A, except… Opportunities construct an excavation shelter and provide for visitor access and Access to the core paleontological area and surrounding lands are made Access to the core paleontological interpretation are assumed to be available to the visiting public on a daily basis. area is made available to the complete. Interpretive visiting public on a daily basis. opportunities would continue to be City of Waco, Baylor University, and NPS collaborate on the development provided through controlled visitor of an expanded interpretive program and media. City of Waco, Baylor University, access to the core paleontological and NPS collaborate on the area during at least 12 public In addition, an environmental education center provides enhanced visitor development of an expanded events scheduled throughout the understanding and appreciation of the mammoth site as well as the interpretive program and media. year. unique environment found along the interface of the Texas Hill Country and Gulf Coastal Plain.

Educational Educational outreach programs City of Waco, Baylor University, and the National Park Service collaborate to provide educational outreach Outreach continue to be limited. programs targeting school groups at the elementary through high school level, programs for the general public to promote life-long learning, and scientifically detailed programs for students at the post secondary education level.

Interactive “Portal to the Pleistocene” website could be established to provide an in-depth presentation of the site and its relationship to the Pleistocene, updates on the progress of ongoing scientific investigations, and links to other mammoth sites found throughout the country and potentially other locations around the world.

Recreational Recreational opportunities are not Access to the Bosque Riverfront by way of connecting trails and water Same as alternative A. Opportunities currently provided. taxis service could be accommodated. Picnic areas area could also be provided.

Table 4: Summary Table of Alternative Highlights

Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D Continuation of Partnerships led by Partnerships led by Managed as a focused unit of current management trends the city of Waco the National Park Service the National Park System Facility City of Waco continues to provide Same as alternative A, although… NPS provides for the maintenance National Park Service provides for Management for the maintenance and operations and operations of the excavation the maintenance and operations of of onsite facilities. Specimen preparation laboratory shelter. all onsite facilities. may be established and maintained Baylor University continues to by Baylor University within the City of Waco provides for the provide for the maintenance and Mayborn Museum Complex or maintenance and operations of all operations of paleontological established and maintained by the other onsite facilities. collection storage space at Mayborn city of Waco onsite. Museum Complex. Baylor University maintains paleontological collection storage space at Mayborn Museum Complex.

Site Security City of Waco continues to provide city services such as security, police Same as alternative A, plus… and Law protection, fire suppression, and emergency medical response for the Enforcement study area. Shared jurisdiction for law enforcement established between city of Waco and the National Park Service.

Site City of Waco and Baylor University City of Waco is the primary manager NPS is primary manager of the core NPS is the primary manager of the Administration continue to share site administration of the site. paleontological area while the city site. responsibilities. of Waco is the primary manager of the surrounding lands.

Ownership Core paleontological site Core paleontological site Core paleontological site All lands, collections, and archives City of Waco City of Waco City of Waco transfers to NPS. transferred to the National Park Service. Surrounding lands Surrounding lands Surrounding lands Baylor University Baylor University transfers to the Baylor University transfers to the city of Waco. city of Waco.

Collections and Archives Collections and Archives Collections and Archives Baylor University & city of Waco Baylor University & city of Waco Transfers to NPS.

Table 4: Summary Table of Alternative Highlights

Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D Continuation of Partnerships led by Partnerships led by Managed as a focused unit of current management trends the city of Waco the National Park Service the National Park System Level of Waco community efforts to Same as alternative A, plus… Same as alternative A, plus… Development construct excavation shelter, interpretive waysides, access road, As funding permits, additional facilities may be provided onsite. This could As funding permits, additional parking, visitor contact station, include an environmental education center, research and specimen facilities may be provided onsite. restrooms, security fencing, and preparation laboratory (either onsite or within the Mayborn Museum This could include onsite collections connecting trails to the excavation Complex), interpretive plaza, expanded interpretive waysides, expanded storage, specimen preparation shelter are assumed to be complete. parking, expanded restrooms, administration/maintenance support laboratory, and administration/ The development is treated as an structure, interpretive nature trails and connecting trails to the Bosque maintenance support structure. existing condition under this River and Brazos River Corridor, boat dock, picnic and informal play areas. alternative.

Site Recognition Potential The city pursues National Natural New unit of the national park system National Natural Landmark Landmark designation. National Park Service affiliated area status Eligible for NPS Affiliated area may be considered by Congress to status further strengthen NPS involvement.

Waco Community $8.1 million Initial Costs (1) Waco Community $8.1 million NPS $2.6 million NPS $0.6 million

City of Waco $300,000 City of Waco $300,000 Annual Costs (2) Mayborn Museum $45,000 Mayborn Museum (2) NPS $768,500 NPS (for 5 years) $25,000 NPS $345,000

Table 5: Summary Table of Potential Environmental Consequences

Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D Continuation of Partnerships led by Partnerships led by Managed as a focused unit of current management trends the City of Waco the National Park Service the National Park System

In Situ Specimens No impact Moderate, long-term beneficial Moderate, long-term beneficial

and Geologic Rationale: Current resource conditions Rationale: Technical assistance from the Rationale: Same as alternative B but with NPS taking the management lead for Context of the continue to be stabilized. The current NPS could enhance stabilization efforts stabilization efforts and controlled excavations. Discovery Site moratorium on additional excavations and guide controlled excavation remains in place. There are no activities that could promote a greater anticipated changes to the existing understanding of the paleontological condition of the resource. resource.

Paleontological No impact Moderate, long-term beneficial Moderate, long-term beneficial

Collection Rationale: The collection storage Rationale: Technical assistance provided Rationale: Same as alternative B but with NPS taking the management lead for continues at the Mayborn museum. by NPS to develop protocols and specimen preparation. There are no anticipated changes to the methodologies to guide the specimen existing condition of the resource. preparation and cataloging efforts by Mayborn Museum staff. The results of this effort would enhance the

Fundamental Resources Resources Fundamental usefulness of the collection for future research as well as allow opportunities for casting of select fossils for interpretive purposes.

Soils and No impact Minor, long-term adverse

Prime Farmland Rationale: There are no changes Rationale: To accommodate additional park development within the study area, some localized loss of soils and prime anticipated to the existing condition of farmland are anticipated. the resource.

Floodplains and No impact Negligible to minor, long-term adverse Same as alternative A.

Wetlands Rationale: There are no changes anticipated to the existing condition of Rationale: To accommodate connecting trails and water taxi service along the the resource. Bosque River, some construction is anticipated within the floodplains and potential wetland areas of the study area.

Vegetation, No impact Minor, long-term adverse

Wildlife, Habitat, Rationale: There are no changes Rationale: To accommodate additional park development within the study area, some localized loss of vegetation and wildlife Other Resources and Special anticipated to the existing condition of habitat are anticipated. As development plans are prepared, consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service and the state of Status Species the resource. Texas would be needed to assess the potential for impacting special status species.

Moderate, long-term beneficial

Rationale: Resource management strategies are implemented to restore native vegetation and enhance wildlife habitat.

Table 5: Summary Table of Potential Environmental Consequences

Visitor Negligible to minor, long-term beneficial Moderate, long-term beneficial Moderate, long-term beneficial Moderate, long-term beneficial

Experience Rationale: Controlled visitor access to Rationale: Daily access provided to the Rationale: Same as alternative B but Rationale: Daily access provided to the the core paleontological area with onsite core paleontological area and with NPS taking the management lead core paleontological area and enhanced interpretation mechanisms continues to surrounding lands with enhanced for enhanced interpretation of the core onsite interpretation mechanisms be provided during at least 12 public onsite interpretation mechanisms, paleontological area. Provisions for provided by the National Park Service. events scheduled throughout the year. potential environmental educational accommodating visitor observation of Provisions for accommodating visitor and recreational opportunities and the specimen preparation effort could observation of the specimen preparation facilities that partners led by the city of be integrated into the interpretive effort could be integrated into the Waco might develop. experience. interpretive experience.

Educational outreach programs are Educational outreach programs are Educational outreach programs are made available to local and regional made available to local and regional made available to local and regional communities. communities. communities.

City of Waco Minor, long-term adverse Moderate, long-term adverse Moderate, long-term beneficial

Rationale: Assume staffing levels stay Rationale: Expanded responsibilities assigned to city of Waco Parks and Recreation Rationale: Management responsibilities the same; however additional Department for managing a new city park. for the study area are transferred to operational funding needed to maintain NPS. the excavation shelter.

Mayborn Negligible, long-term adverse Moderate, long-term adverse Negligible to minor, long-term adverse Moderate, long-term beneficial

Museum Rationale: Assume staffing levels stay Rationale: Expanded responsibilities Rationale: Management responsibilities Rationale: Management responsibilities Complex the same with little change in current assigned to museum staff for providing are shared with NPS. for the study area are transferred to museum operations. interpretive and educational outreach NPS. programs for a new city park.

National Not applicable Minor, short-term adverse Moderate, long-term adverse

Park Service Rationale: No management Rationale: Expanded responsibilities assigned to the NPS Intermountain Region for responsibilities assigned, however a managing and operating a new unit of the national park system. commitment for technical assistance

Management Operations Management Operations would be provided.

Table 5: Summary Table of Potential Environmental Consequences

Waco MSA Negligible to minor, short-term Moderate, long-term beneficial

Economy beneficial Rationale: Anticipate daily increased visitor spending would occur within the community. Rationale: Anticipate limited increased visitor spending would occur within the community when public events are scheduled at the site.

Central Negligible, short-term beneficial Moderate, long-term beneficial

Texas Region Rationale: Limited opportunities for Rationale: Expanded and enhanced educational outreach programs provided to central Texas regional school systems. Communities educational outreach programs provided.

Adjacent Negligible to minor, short-term adverse Minor, long-term, adverse

Neighborhoods Rationale: With the monthly operation Rationale: With the daily operation of a new park accessed by New Steinbeck Bend Road, it is anticipated that there would and Businesses of a new park accessed by New be a daily increase in traffic congestion. Steinbeck Bend Road, it is anticipated Socioeconomic Environment that there would be an increase in traffic congestion when public events are scheduled at the site.

Chapter Five: Affected Environment

CHAPTER OVERVIEW the assessment and analysis described in chapter six. Chapters Five (Affected Environment) and Six

(Environmental Consequences) provide the information and rationale for evaluating the IMPACT TOPICS DISMISSED fourth criteria for new parklands: whether or not the site requires direct management by the The following mandatory impact topics were National Park Service instead of protection by dismissed from further consideration and another public agency or the private sector. analysis.

The descriptions, data, and analysis presented Possible Conflicts between the below focus on the general conditions or Proposal and Land Use Plans, Policies, consequences that may result from or Controls for the Area Concerned implementing each management alternative. Chapter Five begins with a description of how All alternatives include providing preservation environmental impact topics are addressed in of the paleontological resources and the study. This is then followed by a providing opportunities for visitor enjoyment, description of the existing conditions that all compatible uses under current zoning and could be affected by the actions of the the city of Waco’s Brazos River Corridor alternatives. This is intended to provide the Overlay District requirements. As there are no reader a better understanding of the anticipated conflicts with any of the actions environmental context and to establish a outlined under each alternative, this impact benchmark by which the magnitude of topic has been dismissed from further environmental consequences can be consideration. developed for each management alternative. Environmental Justice Executive Order 12898, “General Actions to IMPACT TOPICS Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” Impact topics, simply defined, are the requires all federal agencies to incorporate resources and values that could be affected by environmental justice into their missions. This the actions of the management alternatives is to be done by identifying and addressing the considered in the study. They serve to focus disproportionately high and/or adverse the environmental analysis and to ensure the human health or environmental effects of relevance of impact evaluation. Impact topics their programs and policies on minorities and were identified based on federal laws and low-income populations and communities. other legal requirements, Council on According to the Environmental Protection Environmental Quality (CEQ) guidelines, NPS Agency, environmental justice is the management policies, staff subject-matter expertise, and issues and concerns expressed …fair treatment and meaningful by the public and other agencies during the involvement of all people, regardless of study process. This document addresses the race, color, national origin, or income, impact topics in one of two ways: either a with respect to the development, rationale is provide for dismissing the topic implementation, and enforcement of from further consideration or the topic is environmental laws, regulations, and described in more detail under the following policies. Fair treatment means that no existing conditions section and included in group of people, including a racial, ethnic, 77 CHAPTER FIVE: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

or socioeconomic group, should bear a Indian Trust Resources disproportionate share of the negative Indian trust assets are owned by American environmental consequences resulting Indians but are held in trust by the United from industrial, municipal, and States. Requirements are included in the commercial operations or the execution Secretary of the Interior’s Secretarial Order of federal, state, local, and tribal No. 3206, “American Indian Tribal Rites, programs and policies. Federal –Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the

Endangered Species Act,” and Secretarial The goal of ‘fair treatment’ is not to shift risks Order No. 3175, “Departmental among populations, but to identify potentially Responsibilities for Indian Trust Resources.” disproportionately high and adverse effects The study area has not been identified as an and mitigate for such impacts. Indian Trust resource; therefore this impact Waco, Texas, contains both a minority and topic has been dismissed from further low-income population; however, consideration. environmental justice is dismissed as an impact topic for the following reasons: Indian Sacred Sites • The planning team actively solicited Executive Order 13007, “Indian Sacred Sites,” public participation as part of the planning states that those with statutory or process and gave equal consideration to administrative responsibilities for the all input from persons regardless of age, management of federal lands shall race, income status, or other socioeco- accommodate ceremonial use of and access to nomic or demographic factors. Indian sacred sites by Indian religious • Implementation of any of the proposed practitioners, as well as avoid affecting the actions would not result in any identifiable physical integrity of the sacred site. An adverse human health effects. Therefore, "Indian Sacred Site" means any specific, there would be no direct or indirect discrete, narrowly delineated location on adverse effects on any minority or low- federal land that is identified by an Indian income population. tribe, or Indian individual determined to be an appropriately authoritative representative of • Implementation of any of the proposed an Indian religion, as sacred by virtue of its actions would not result in any identified established religious significance to, or effects that would be specific to any ceremonial use by, an Indian religion; minority or low-income community. provided that the tribe or appropriately

authoritative representative of an Indian Energy Requirements and religion has informed the agency of the Conservation Potential existence of such a site. The Waco Indian A detailed analysis of energy requirements Tribe was contacted during the study process and potential for energy conservation is not and has provided no notification of any possible at this level of planning as this special resources or traditional uses associated with resource study presents only conceptual the site. As the study area has not been alternatives for managing the special resources identified as an Indian Sacred Site, this impact of the Waco Mammoth Site. Because energy topic has been dismissed from further requirements and conservation potential consideration. would be addressed in future environmental compliance documents, as appropriate, this Archeological Resources impact topic has been dismissed from further Currently, there are no known sites with consideration. archeological resources within the Waco Mammoth Site. The Waco Mammoth Site itself is listed with a Texas Historical Commission archeological trinomial 78 Impact Topics Dismissed

(41ML207), perhaps because it at one time mitigation would continue through SHPO and was thought to be Paleo-Indian as a possible tribal consultation, if necessary, archeological kill site of mammoths circa 28,000 years ago. resources is dismissed as an impact topic for However, there have been no cultural further consideration and analysis. materials found in the course of past paleontological excavations. As noted Cultural Landscapes elsewhere in this document, more recent According to the National Park Service’s dating places the time of the mammoths’ Cultural Resource Management Guideline deaths at circa 68,000 years ago, well before (DO-28), a cultural landscape is the documented first appearance of Paleo- Indians in North America. ...a reflection of human adaptation and use of natural resources and is In the event that the Waco Mammoth Site often expressed in the way land is should become a unit of the national park organized and divided, patterns of system, the National Park Service would settlement, land use, systems of conduct a systematic archeological survey circulation, and the types of within the boundaries of the Waco Mammoth structures that are built. The Site on lands under its jurisdiction. Such character of a cultural landscape is research would include documenting and defined both by physical materials, inventorying any evidence of archeological such as roads, buildings, walls, and sites or other archeological resources such as vegetation, and by use reflecting isolated artifactual finds. The timing of the cultural values and traditions. study would be subject to funding availability and would serve to inform about any The subject of cultural landscapes is dismissed prehistoric or historic archeological materials as an impact topic for further consideration that might be found. Any archeological and analysis because none apply to the site resources discovered would be evaluated for and mammoth herd. A cultural landscape their eligibility for listing in the National reflects human adaptation to the environment Register of Historic Places. and the use of its natural resources. Such a landscape develops from inter-relationships For future paleontological excavations and among human-modified features and natural ground disturbances of development under features and results in particular land-use construction, known archeological resources patterns characteristic of certain activities. At would be avoided to the greatest extent the time of the life and death of the mammoth possible or archeological monitoring herd, no humans were there because the procedures would be put into place to deal mammoth period at Waco occurred well with any inadvertent discoveries of cultural before humans had entered the New World artifacts. If discoveries were made, and migrated to the area. Thus, there can be construction underway would be stopped no cultural landscapes associated with the site immediately, the superintendent of the Waco and the mammoth herd. Mammoth Site would be notified, and proper consultation would be initiated with the Texas For interpretation to visitors, what might be Historical Commission’s historic preservation termed a Pleistocene landscape for the officer (SHPO) and the Waco Indian Tribe in propagation of Pleistocene plants could be Oklahoma, which is traditionally associated inventoried, protected, and preserved to give with lands of the Waco area. Because (1) there visitors an idea of what the mammoths might is a dearth of known archeological resources, have seen. However, such details would be (2) such resources would be avoided in the part of a comprehensive interpretive plan for future if they become known through later development if the site should come into archeological survey, and (3) monitoring and the national park system.

CHAPTER FIVE: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

The remnant ranching structures mentioned The National Park Service recognizes that the below under historic structures could Waco Indian Tribe once lived in the Waco comprise a land-use pattern reminiscent of a area where the land was part of the tribe’s ranching historic cultural landscape. traditional territory and that the Waco Indians However, as discussed below in the section on in historic times lent their name to the historic structures, the structures themselves European American settlement, town, and lack significance related to the mammoth eventual city that grew up there. A written fossils and lack integrity in their own right as invitation to participate in the special resource historic resources. study along with copies of the scoping summary and preliminary alternatives Historic Structures newsletters were sent October 4, 2007, to Mr. Gary McAdams, president of the Wichita and The subject of historic structures is dismissed Affiliated Tribes in Oklahoma, of which the as an impact topic for further consideration Waco Tribe is one of the affiliated tribes. The and analysis because the remnant ranching letter was seeking to inquire if he or other structures are neither significant as members of the tribal government would like contributing components to the to consult about the special resource study for paleontological resources constituting the the Waco Mammoth Site and any possible purpose of the Waco Mammoth Site, nor do traditional uses associated with the site. There the remnant ranching structures possess has been no response to date. integrity as historic resources due to their physical deterioration. Examples of the few Cattle ranching occurred in recent times in outbuildings extant include a pump house to relation to the land surrounding the core pump water to livestock, corrugated metal paleontological site. However, no ranchers tubs and cement tubs to water livestock, and a and no ranching families have been identified pole barn and corral to hold cattle after a whose use of Waco Mammoth Site lands round-up. Eligibility for listing in the National might be traditional and pertinent to their Register of Historic Places would be very cultural heritage. unlikely because of their lack of significance and integrity. In the event that the Waco Thus, neither with the Waco Indians nor with Mammoth Site should become a unit of the European American cattle ranchers has the national park system, the National Park National Park Service been able to identify Service would conduct a historic resource any contemporary uses of the Waco study. The research would include Mammoth Site lands as ethnographic documenting the history of ranching on the resources, or ethnographic resources eligible site. The timing of the study would be subject for listing in the National Register of Historic to funding availability and would serve to Places as traditional cultural properties. inform and likely formally verify the initial Therefore, the subject of ethnographic NPS evaluation of national register resources is dismissed from further ineligibility for the remnant ranching consideration as an impact topic because none structures. are known to exist at the site.

Ethnographic Resources Hazardous Materials Ethnographic resources are defined by the Correspondence with the city of Waco’s National Park Service as any “site, structure, director of environmental services indicates object, landscape, or natural resource feature that there are no known brownfield sites in assigned traditional legendary, religious, the vicinity of the study area. However, the subsistence, or other significance in the city is aware of an existing plating business cultural system of a group traditionally approximately 1.29 miles west of the study associated with it” (Director’s Order 28: area that is currently under orders from the Cultural Resource Management Guideline). Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 80 Description of Existing Conditions

(TCEQ), the state environmental agency, to A number of other mandatory impact topics clean up chromium, which has leached into will be addressed under the category “Other the groundwater around its facility. The Resources” and include: business is currently conducting remediation • Soils including Prime Farmlands activities, and the city does not anticipate any adverse affects on the study area. The reme- • Floodplains and Wetlands diation work is being constantly monitored by • Vegetation, Wildlife, Habitat, and Special the city, groundwater retrieved is below haz- Status Species ardous levels and is pretreated before allowed to discharge into the sanitary sewer system, In addition, the following topics were and the study area is not down gradient of the identified through public and agency scoping plating business. The two sites drain in parallel and therefore will be described as part of the directions towards the Bosque River. existing conditions as well as included in the impacts analyzed under “Chapter Six: There has not been an onsite survey of the Environmental Consequences”: study area for hazardous materials. If the • Visitor Experience study area were to become a new unit of the • Management and Operations national park system, this would need to be undertaken and mitigation completed before • Socioeconomic Environment any land transfers could be accepted by the federal government. For easier cross-referencing and to help simplify the presentation of the information Since there are no known onsite contaminates and the analysis, the description of the that would meet current state or federal existing conditions that follows is organized requirements for remediation, this impact by the impact categories listed above. This topic has been dismissed from further organization was replicated in “Chapter Six: consideration. Environmental Consequences” to present the analysis and assumptions of impacts for each alternative under consideration. IMPACT TOPICS CONSIDERED

Potential impacts to the special resources of DESCRIPTION OF the Waco Mammoth Site are a primary EXISTING CONDITIONS concern of this study and therefore merit their own impact category. They will be assessed Regional Context under the category “Fundamental Resources The Waco Mammoth Site is within McLennan of the Waco Mammoth Site.” The existing County, in east central Texas, 230 miles inland conditions of the fundamental components from the Gulf of Mexico. The city of Waco, (geological context of the discovery site, the in the county seat, is located at the confluence of situ specimens, the collected specimens, and the Bosque and Brazos rivers and at the archival records) have already been described intersection of Interstate Highway 35 and U.S. in “Chapter Two: Resource Description” and Highway 84, 90 miles south of Dallas and 90 therefore will not be repeated under the miles north of Austin. Situated partially in the existing conditions section that follows. This Grand Prairie and partially in the Blackland category also addresses the mandatory impact Prairie, McLennan County comprises 1,031 topics of “unique natural resources” and square miles of flat to rolling terrain at “important scientific resources,” and the elevations ranging from 400 to 850 feet above discretionary impact topic of “paleontological sea level. The land in the western section of collections and archives” (typically referred to the county has varied terrain surfaced by as museum collections).

CHAPTER FIVE: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT shallow, stony soils that support mountain paleontological material within the excavation cedar and oak. The eastern section is generally area. The erosion potential from these storm low rolling to flat, with black, waxy soils made events continually poses a threat to the in situ up of clay and sand loams that support specimens. mesquite, scrub brush, and grasses. The county is bisected from southwest to Soils, Including Prime Farmlands northeast by the Balcones Fault, and the Most of the soils in the McLennan County are rolling prairie along the fault line is broken by formed under prairie vegetation and are dark locally steep slopes. The county lies entirely colored clays, silty clays, or clay loams. In within the Brazos River basin and is drained some areas on terraces along the Brazos River, primarily by the South and Middle Bosque the soils formed under post oak-savannah rivers in the west and by the Tehuacana and vegetation. These soils are mostly light Aquilla creeks in the east; the Brazos River colored sandy loams or loamy fine sands. crosses the county from northwest to (McLennan County Soil Survey) southeast. (The Handbook of Texas Online) Based on correspondence with the United McLennan County and Waco are located on States Department of Agriculture, Natural the west boundary of the Gulf Coastal Plain, Resources Conservation Service, McLennan which experiences both a humid coastal County Soil and Water Conservation District, climate and continental climate. The most nearly 47% of the soils (over 300,000 acres) commonly used climatic classification is found in McLennan County meet the humid subtropical. The southeastern breezes requirements for prime farmland. Prime are usually moist and warm while the farmland has the best combination of physical northern breezes are dry and cool. The and chemical characteristics for producing continental features are most dramatic in the food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops. winter when polar air moves into the area and This category requires that the land is causes rapid changes in temperature, large available for farming uses. Over three-quarters variations in temperatures, and low of the study area (over 80 acres) is designated temperatures extremes. The coastal climate is prime farmland. Of the five soil types found most evident in the spring when moist, warm there, the following four soil types are air from the Gulf of Mexico brings humidity designated as prime farmland: and precipitation to the area (Environmental Atlas of McLennan County). The temperature Bastsil Fine Sandy Loam (BaA): This deep, and humidity extremes typical of this climate well-drained soil is found on slopes ranging pose a risk to the in situ specimens. Drastic from 0% – 2% on the upper terrace area of the fluctuations may cause the bones to expand site. The soil is well drained and the shrink- and contract leading to fracturing, crushing, swell potential is low. Major limitations for and/or delamination of the bone. development include the potential for seepage of effluent into groundwater in areas used for The Gulf of Mexico is the primary source of septic tank absorption fields as many areas are moisture for the area. The major topographic underlain by beds of sand and gravel. This soil high, the Bosque Escarpment, trends NE-SW type covers almost 35 acres or 31% of the and influences local climate by forcing warm, study area and is found in four pockets moist air to rise and cool, thus producing surrounding almost 26 acres of Wilson Clay precipitation. This feature parallels the west Loam (WnA), a claypan prairie soil, which is bank of the Bosque River near the study area. not considered prime farmland. This soil has a Approximately 75% of the total precipitation very slow permeability with a high shrink- is caused by thunderstorms and frontal storms swell potential. Major limitations to (Environmental Atlas of McLennan County). development include potential for septic Major rainfall events over the past 30 years systems to fail because of very slow have repeatedly uncovered additional

82 Description of Existing Conditions permeability and shrink-swell characteristics The Army Corp of Engineers does not have may cause infrastructure to crack or buckle. any records of a wetland delineation being prepared for the site. It is assumed that a Burleson Clay (BuA): This is a deep, fertile wetland fringe exists along the lower terrace blackland clay soil, found in an isolated, area of the site containing Frio silt clay soils upland 3-acre pocket in the west central bordering the Bosque River. portion of the site. The soil has a very slow permeability with a very high shrink-swell Vegetation, Wildlife, Habitat, and potential. Limitations for development are Special Status Species similar to the Wilson Clay described. Onsite surveys of vegetation were not

conducted as a part of this study. The Frio Silt Clay (Fr): This is a deep, well-drained, vegetation mapping provided by the fertile clay loam and loam alluvial soil found Environmental Atlas of McLennan County along the lower terrace floodplain area was consulted as the primary reference for bordering the Bosque River. This soil type this section. covers almost 8 acres or 7% of the site.

Along the Brazos terrace areas, the major Sunev Clay Loam (SzB): This is a nearly level vegetation type is dominated by post oak and to rolling upland clayey soil found over 36% blackjack oak in canopy and prairie species of the site between the Bastsil and Frio soils. such as little false bluestem in the understory. The soil has a moderately slow permeability, Much of the terrace area has been grazed and moderate shrink-swell, and experiences the post oaks are found as isolated patches occasional flooding. The major limitation to protected by fences. Where cattle have been development is the severe hazard from allowed to graze, the trees are in savannah, flooding. and where the trees are protected from

grazing they are in thicket. Mesquite is an The study area is not currently under active invader that is often enhanced with cultivation; although previously the site has overgrazing. Grazing also encourages been actively grazed and was used for cattle increased amounts of short grasses, annuals, ranching and/or dairy farming. pricklypear, elm, and juniper.

Floodplains and Wetlands Along the Bosque riverfront alluvium, large Executive Orders 11988 and 11990, deciduous tress such as pecan, cottonwood, “Floodplain Management” and “Wetlands,” willow, and elm are typical. Grassland appears respectively, require analysis of impacts on between these large deciduous trees and the floodplains and regulated wetlands. Based terrace scarps. Other floodplain trees include upon an examination of the FEMA Flood bur oak, live oak, hackberry, and sycamore. Insurance Rate Map (dated 1988) for the The deep alluvial soils and the abundance of Waco area, the 100-year and 500-year water allow these trees to become very large. floodplain both exist within the study area. The 100-year floodplain occurs along the Onsite surveys of wildlife and special status lower terrace area of the site where the Frio species were not conducted as a part of this silt clay soils border the Bosque River. The special resource study. However, according to 500-year floodplain extends upslope within the Handbook of Texas Online and other portions of the same drainage swale where the published accounts, some of the more mammoths were first discovered. It appears common wildlife species found in McLennan that the upper fringe of the 500-year County include whitetailed deer (Odocoileus floodplain terminates at or just prior to the virginiana), beavers (Castor Canadensis), excavation area. bobcat (Lynx rufus), fox (Vulpes vulpes) coyote (Canis latrans), raccoon (Procyon lotor), 83

CHAPTER FIVE: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), eastern bars within braided streams/rivers. Also spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius), opossum known to nest on manmade structures (Didelphis virginiana), cotton tail rabbit such as inland beaches, wastewater (Sylvilagus floridana), fox squirrel (Sciurus treatment plants, gravel mines. niger), turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), bobwhite Whooping Crane (Grus americana), which quail (Colinus virginianus), and mourning is also listed as state endangered, is a dove (Zenaida macroura). Prior to extensive potential migratory species with a settlement, the county's wildlife also included preferred habitat that includes large antelope, bison, bear, and javelina. wetland areas.

Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Piping plover (Charadrius melodus) is a Service, Austin Ecological Service Office, as of potential migratory species with a August 11, 2005 and the Texas Parks and preferred habitat of sandy beaches and Wildlife Department, Wildlife Division, Non- lakeshores. game and Rare Species and Habitat Assessment programs, County Lists of Texas’ Texas-listed endangered species Special Species, McLennan County revised American Peregrine Falcon (Falco June 2, 2005 revealed the following list of peregrines antum) is a year-round resident special status species with confirmed sightings and local breeder in west Texas, nests in and/or are known to migrate through tall cliff eyries; also, migrant across state McLennan County. A review of the federal from more northern breeding areas in US and state lists published online was conducted and Canada, winters along the coast and February 12, 2008. Changes noted include the farther south; occupies wide range of federal delisting of the bald eagle, the addition habitats during migration. of two more state listed endangered species: Golden-cheeked Warbler the American peregrine falcon and the red wolf, and one more state listed rare species: Interior Least Tern the western burrowing owl. Based on the site Whooping Crane conditions of the Waco Mammoth Site, the Red wolf (Canis rufus) is an extirpated following special status species could species, formerly known throughout the potentially inhabit or utilize the study area as eastern half of Texas in brushy and stop-over habitat: forested areas, as well as coastal prairies.

Federally listed endangered species Texas-listed threatened species Black-capped vireo (Vireo atricapilla) prefer habitat that is low brush on steep Artic Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus slopes in the vicinity of dry streambeds. tundris), federally delisted, is a potential migratory species that prefer meadows, Golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica mudflats, beaches, marshes, and lakes chrysoparia), which is also listed as state where birds are abundant. They nest on endangered, require juniper-oak cliff edges. woodlands; dependent on juniper (also known as cedar) for long bark strips that Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), a are only available from mature trees for recently federally delisted threatened nest construction. Nests are built in trees species, is typically found primarily near other than juniper. Forage for insects in seacoasts, rivers, and large lakes; nests in broad-leaved trees and shrubs. tall trees or on cliffs near water. Interior Least Tern (Sterna antillarum Timber/Canebrake Rattlesnake (Crotalus athalassos), which is also listed as state horridus) is found in swamps, floodplains, endangered, is a potential migratory upland pine and deciduous woodlands, species that nests along sand and gravel riparian zones, abandoned farmland,

84 Description of Existing Conditions

limestone bluffs. Soils may be sandy or contained in chapter four, efforts by the Waco dense clay and prefers dense ground cover. community are underway to erect a protective shelter over the excavation area and in situ Texas listed rare species specimens as well as developing the site to accommodate visitor use. It is anticipated that Henslow’s Sparrow (Ammodramus these improvements will be completed by henslowii) Wintering individuals are found 2009. in weedy fields or cut-over areas where lots of bunch grasses occur along with vines and Management and Operations brambles. A key component is bare ground for running/walking. The management and operations of the city of Waco, Baylor University, and the National Plains Spotted Skunk (Spilogale putorius Park Service could potentially be affected by interrupta) is found in a variety of habitats: the actions outlined in the four management open fields, prairies, croplands, fence rows, alternatives. A brief description of each entity farmyards, forest edges, and woodlands is provided below. although it prefers wooded brushy areas

with tall grass prairie. City of Waco Texas garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis The city of Waco is composed of a number of annectens) is a terrestrial species, generally departments that manage a variety of city found in dry, lightly wooded areas. services. The Parks and Recreation Western Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia Department manages the city’s park system, hypugaea) prefers open grasslands, which consists of more than 60 facilities and especially prairie, plains, and savanna, open spaces including a zoo, 19 neighborhood sometimes in open areas such as vacant lots parks, 4 community parks, 7 regional parks, a near human habitation or airports; nests and regional tennis center, golf course, and three roosts in abandoned burrows. recreation centers.

Visitor Experience The city manager, with support from the city’s During the study scoping process, the public Parks and Recreation Department, provides expressed great concern with the lack of for the maintenance and security of the Waco access to this remarkable resource. At present, Mammoth Site. interpretation of the Waco Mammoth Site is currently provided off-site within Baylor Baylor University University’s Mayborn Museum Complex. A Baylor University, founded in 1845, is a full room interpretive exhibit of the Waco private, Baptist-affiliated, research university Mammoth Site is presented in the Hall of located in Waco, Texas. It is the largest Baptist Natural History. A dynamic walk-in diorama university in the world by enrollment. In 2006, featuring a cast of the skeletal remains of the the university had 11,800 undergraduate and herd’s bull with a juvenile cradled in its tusks 2,200 graduate and professional students in can be viewed through a thick glass floor over 145 baccalaureate programs, 76 masters, and the exhibit. A continuous loop film depicts 22 doctoral programs. Enrollment includes what is believed to be the last moments of the students from all 50 states and 90 foreign herd’s survival before they perished. Static countries. There are 804 full-time faculty and interactive interpretive displays on members, of which 50% are tenured. The mammoths are presented as well. campus is located just southeast of downtown Waco. The site remains essentially undeveloped for visitor use. However, as described under the elements common to all alternatives

CHAPTER FIVE: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Baylor is one of the few universities in the Oklahoma, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, and United States to offer both undergraduate and Texas) and includes 91 units of the national graduate degrees in Museum Studies. park system from Glacier National Park located in Northern Montana to Palo Alto The director of Baylor University’s Mayborn Battlefield National Historic Park in Museum Complex and her staff provide Brownsville, Texas. The regional office is stewardship for the collected and in situ headquartered in Denver, Colorado. The paleontological specimens of the Waco closest national park unit to the Waco Mammoth Site. Collected specimens and Mammoth Site is the 647 acre Lyndon B. archives are currently housed in a collection Johnson National Historical Park located in storage room in the Mayborn Museum Johnson City, 120 miles southwest of Waco. Complex. The park was established by Congress in 1969 for two main purposes: The Mayborn Museum has a collections • To research, preserve, and interpret manager on staff who has specific training in significant resources and influences the preparation of fossils and their curation. associated with the life and heritage of She is also the only person who has done Lyndon B. Johnson. research specifically on the care of in situ fossils. • To provide a variety of opportunities to experience the local and regional context Baylor University has a vertebrate that shaped the last frontier president, paleontologist on staff whose primary informed his policies and programs, and research is on Pleistocene mammals. defined his legacy.

National Park Service The park has provided logistical support for the special resource study effort, and could The National Park Service (NPS) is an agency potentially provide management support for within the United States Department of the the Waco Mammoth Site if it were designated Interior. It is headed by a director, and the a new unit of the national park system. organization consists of a headquarters office based in Washington, D.C., seven regional Socioeconomic Environment offices and multiple park and support units. The National Park Service provides For purposes of this socioeconomic analysis, stewardship for nearly 400 units of the it is assumed that the primary area of influence national park system representing natural, encompasses all inhabitants and related cultural, and recreational sites across the economic activity within the Waco, Texas, nation. Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) that is also coincident with McLennan County, Beyond national parks, the National Park Texas. Service helps communities across America preserve and enhance important local heritage Based on the Texas Comptroller’s 13-region and close-to-home recreational opportunities. economic model of Texas, the Waco MSA is a Grants and assistance are offered to register, part of the central Texas region, a 20-county record, and save historic places; create area that also includes Temple-Killeen and community parks and local recreation Bryan-College Station metropolitan areas. facilities; conserve rivers and streams, and Located halfway between Dallas and Austin develop trails and greenways. on Interstate 35, the region is central to all major Texas markets. The state of Texas lies within the geographic range of the National Park Service’s Central Texas Regional Trends Intermountain Region. The region covers In 2002, the comptroller issued a report eight states (Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, outlining economic conditions and forecasts 86 Description of Existing Conditions for the state as a whole as well as for each of business, followed by a half as robust 3.9% the state’s thirteen regions. The following increase in tourism and entertainment. excerpts highlight some of the major findings Personal services; healthcare; local for the central Texas region. government; high tech, communications, aviation and electronics; and finance also Table 6: Central Texas Region Employment experienced a range of increases from 2.8% to 3.4%.

Employment Area 1980 1990 2000 During this time, the population of the central Wholesale/Retail Trade 47,173 54,793 71,035 Texas region increased more than 62 percent, Local Government 26,308 35,958 47,811 Agriculture 35,813 39,353 44,981 rising from 564,300 to 916,300. As a result of Tourism 18,326 27,605 39,162 strong growth in the value of production in Healthcare 20,336 29,413 38,233 the region and somewhat slower population Construction 25,405 21,942 37,589 growth, per capita real incomes rose Finance, Insurance and dramatically over the last 30 years from Real Estate 19,772 23,824 34,379 $11,050 in 1970 to $19,400 in 2000. State Government 19,409 28,204 33,552 Services to Business 6,474 14,406 29,234 Waco MSA Demographics Personal Services 12,157 17,165 23,736 Looking more specifically at the community Other Services 12,775 15,261 19,608 surrounding the study area, the Waco MSA Other Durable Goods Manufacturing 12,470 12,466 15,107 has also experienced considerable growth High Tech, over the past decades. The areas in the city Communications, that are experiencing growth are north and Aviation and Electronics 8,154 12,067 14,203 considerably west of the study area. Federal Government 12,363 14,086 13,020 McLennan County has a population of Other Non-Durable 213,726, reflecting a racial makeup of 72% Goods Manufacturing 11,636 12,426 11,423 Other Transportation and White, 18% Hispanic, and 15% African Public Utilities 9,217 7,826 10,784 American. (2000 U.S. Census) It is estimate that Other 3,396 4,183 3,961 the current total work force is approximately Oil and Gas Production, 102,000. (Wikipedia) Refining and Petrochemicals 2,981 2,876 3,356 There are 78,859 households, 67% of which are family households. One third of these Sources: Carole Keeton Rylander, Texas State families have children under the age of 18 Comptroller of Public Accounts; and Regional Economic Modules, Inc. living with them. Almost 50% are married couples living together, 14% have a female The region saw astounding growth during the householder with no husband present. last 30 years of the 20th century. In real terms Nonfamily households make up the remaining (1992 dollars), gross regional product in this 33%, with 26% percent of the householder region—the sum total of all value added living alone, of which 10% are 65 years of age within the region—increased nearly three- or older. The average household size is 2.6 and fold, rising from $7.9 billion in 1970 to $21.8 the average family size is 3.2. (2000 U.S. billion in 2000. This is an average annual Census) growth rate of 3.4 percent. The city of Waco, the centrally located county In terms of jobs, growth in this region was seat of McLennan County, has a population of very strong during much of the 1970s and 113,726. The city has 42,279 households 1980s. The average annual growth rate in representing over 50% of the total households regional employment between 1980 through in McLennan County. The median household 2000 reflects a 7.8% increase in services to 87

CHAPTER FIVE: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT income is $26,264, with the per capita income reach beyond the county, tourist and conven- at $14,584. (2000 U.S. Census) tion spending by out-of-county visitors, regional shopping facilities that attract out-of- Downtown Waco is small compared to most county visitors, and business and professional other cities, such as Dallas or Houston, services that extend beyond the immediate however, each day 17,000 people commute area. (Kelley 2007 Central Texas Forecasts) into downtown for work. Downtown Waco was built around the Waco Suspension Bridge, Local Planning and Zoning which was a crucial crossing of the Brazos The Waco Mammoth Site and the lands River. In May 1953, the worst tornado in surrounding the site lie with the R-1B Zone Texas history struck downtown Waco killing that allows for single-family residential 114, and injuring hundreds. It caused millions development, agriculture use, and public uses of dollars in damage, and for decades since such as parks. It is anticipated that existing growth focused on other areas west of land use patterns surrounding the site would downtown. Recent efforts by the community remain fairly stable. have initiated a number of major redevel- opment projects within the downtown Waco The site is also within the Brazos River area that are helping to re-establish the city Corridor overlay district. In 2000, the City center. (Wikipedia) Comprehensive Plan designated the Brazos River Corridor as an overlay district, which Employment takes precedence over the underlying zoning. Waco is characterized by a large number of The purpose of the overlay district is to ensure education and health care employees due to the development of the Brazos River Corridor the presence of Baylor University, Texas State as a center for quality recreation, convention, Technical College, McLennan Community tourism, housing, commercial, retail, and College, two full service hospitals, and several office facilities. The regulations are designed clinics and medical offices. (Kelley 2005 to protect the special environmental character Economic Forecast for Central Texas) of the corridor and to promote continued private and public investment. Some of the Waco’s hospitality industry is becoming one goals contained in the mission statement for of its most important components, reaching the corridor include the following: over 9 thousand jobs. The outlook for the • Preserve, protect, and enhance the hospitality and leisure industry in Waco is historically, culturally, architecturally, and increasingly positive with the Cameron Park archeologically significant sites and Zoo addition, the potential addition of a four- structures which impact a distinct aspect star hotel and conference center, Waco Con- of the city and serve as visible reminders vention Center renovations, and development of the city’s culture and history. of activities and properties in Downtown • Recognize and protect the special Waco and the Brazos River Corridor. Waco is distinctive qualities and ecosystems of developing sufficient family based tourist both the Brazos River and the Bosque attractions to encourage more overnight stays River and their tributaries. at local hotels. (Kelley 2005 Economic Forecast for Central Texas) • Encourage developments that interconnect for pedestrian access and Manufacturing income remains an important circulation. contributor to basic income in the Waco MSA, but other important sectors contribute The city of Waco has recognized the basic income. The export of higher education significance of the Waco Mammoth Site by services (spending by students from house- including the site within the boundaries of the holds outside the county), regional health care Brazos River Corridor overlay district. By services provided by our area hospitals that connecting the Waco Mammoth Site to the 88 Description of Existing Conditions rest of the corridor, the city has made a Texas. The ranch is located just 10 miles west commitment to encouraging compatible land of the city of Waco. uses in the vicinity of the site. In addition, the city owns the parcel to the south east of the Tourism Waco Mammoth Site as well as parcels south A majority of Waco’s tourist destinations are of West Lake Shore Drive. It is the intent of within the Brazos River Corridor, or near the city to provide continuous access through enough to the corridor to be influenced by it. these parcels to the Waco Mammoth Site. For many who visit Waco, the corridor represents an important first impression of the Transportation community. Some of Waco’s major attractions The Waco Mammoth Site is centrally located include the following: within the state of Texas, with a travel distance of 90 miles south of Dallas/Fort Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum Worth, 90 miles north of Austin, 180 miles Complex opened in May 2004; it is a natural northwest of Houston, and within 200 miles science and cultural history museum. The of 80% of the state’s population. The total 143,000-square-foot building includes the population for the state of Texas in 2000 was collection from university’s former Strecker almost 21 million people. The study area is Museum, the Jeanes Discovery Center, a located less than 12 miles from Interstate 35, a 5,000-square-foot traveling exhibit hall, 178- well traveled, primary north/south tiered-seat theater, museum store, and café. transportation corridor traversing the Midwest section of the country. Annual The complex also includes the faculty and average daily traffic recorded in 2003 was administration offices for Baylor University’s 46,512. The study area has almost 1,000 feet of Department of Museum Studies, as well as frontage along New Steinbeck Bend Road, a collections storage and preparation areas. The local arterial collector road that currently collected specimens from the Waco experiences low volume traffic, as the Mammoth Site are currently being housed in surrounding areas are mostly undeveloped. one of the collections storage rooms.

The Waco transit system provides safe and Within the Waco at the Crossroads of Texas reliable public transportation to the citizens of Natural History Exhibits are four exploration Waco and the surrounding communities. stations focusing on geology, paleontology, Services include a fixed route bus service natural history, and archaeology and three within the city of Waco, the Baylor University walk-in dioramas showcasing a limestone Shuttle (BUS), and the Para Transit van cave, a Texas forest, and the Waco Mammoth service for individuals with special site. Within the mammoth exhibit, visitors can transportation needs. walk over a transparent floor and look down upon a cast of the bones of the Columbian The study area is also located within a few mammoth bull with the juvenile laying over miles of the Waco Regional Airport, which his tusks displayed exactly as they were primarily provides commuter service to the unearthed at the Waco Mammoth Site. Dallas-Fort Worth Airport and Houston-Bush International Airport. There are sixteen discovery rooms in the Jeanes Discovery Center with themes from An industrial airport is located at Texas State vertebrates to weather designed to provide Technical College which accommodates Air hands-on, interactive learning. Force One when President George W. Bush visits his Prairie Chapel Ranch, also known as Outside the museum, a number of vintage the Western White House, in Crawford, wooden structures have been assembled into the 13-acre Governor Bill & Vara Daniel 89

CHAPTER FIVE: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Historic Village, giving visitors a visual sample special events, development projects, and of Texan community life from the latter part guest service arrangements. of the 19th century into the early 20th century. Lake Waco is a manmade reservoir located 3 Located just over 2 miles from downtown miles upstream from the Waco Mammoth Waco and I-35, Cameron Park is a 416-acre Site. The lake was created by the construction municipal park that includes a series of bluffs of an earthen embankment and concrete dam and gullies along the banks and confluence of on the Bosque River. The work was the Brazos and Bosque rivers. It is one of the completed by the U.S. Army Corps of largest municipal parks in the state. Fishing, Engineers, Fort Worth District, in 1965 for the canoeing, or kayaking on both rivers is made purposes of flood control, water supply, and possible by easily accessible boat ramps. recreation. There a number of developed Mountain-biking trails, bridle paths, parks around the perimeter of the lake that volleyball, disc golf courses, and picnic provide for boat access, marina services, facilities are provided along almost 2.5 miles fishing, trailer camping, swim beach areas, of parkland adjacent to the rivers. picnic areas, recreational fields, playgrounds, and hiking trails. There is also a wetland Located within the southeast end of Cameron restoration area along the northwest inlet. Park, the Cameron Park Zoo is a 52-acre natural habitat zoo that shares with the Waco Located within downtown Waco, the Dr Mammoth Site a similar history of community Pepper Museum commemorates the soft initiative and support for its establishment. drink’s history and includes the original 1906 This zoo was originally established by local bottling plant and spring source. Dr. Pepper citizens to create recreation and educational was originally developed in 1885 by Dr. opportunities for central Texas residents. In Charles Alderton in his Waco drugstore for 1981, a master plan was prepared to build a medicinal purposes. The museum holds an new zoological park and a countywide bond impressive collection of soft drink issue was passed to fund the development. memorabilia and provides drink service from Subsequent gifts from the community as well a reconstructed old-style soda fountain. as approved bond requests have continued to provide an expanded menu of exhibit The Texas Ranger Hall of Fame and opportunities at the zoo. This history of Museum, located adjacent to I-35 and the exceptional public support and positive Brazos River in Waco provides exhibits and growth is possible due to the cooperative information on the history of the Texas working relationship between the Zoological Rangers, a legendary symbol of Texas and the Society, the city of Waco, and McLennan American West. It also serves as the principal County. The county has supported a number repository for artifacts and archives relating to of bond elections while the city is responsible the Texas Rangers. The museum is one of the for the operation and maintenance of the zoo. better attended venues in the city. The Zoological Society manages and handles capital fundraising for the zoo, along with all

Chapter Six: Environmental Consequences

CHAPTER OVERVIEW Plans provide a general framework and focus for future managers and include: The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires that federal agencies 1) Measures for the preservation of the disclose, prior to taking action, the area’s special resources as well as other environmental impacts of that action, feasible resources found there (types of studies, alternatives to that action, and any adverse inventories, and implementation and environmental effects that cannot be avoided stewardship strategies). if a proposed action is implemented. In this 2) Types and general intensities of case, the proposed federal action includes development associated with public preparing for Congress, a special resource enjoyment & use of the area (including study report and recommendation on whether general locations, timing of or not the Waco Mammoth Site should be implementation, and associated costs). considered for designation as a new unit of the National Park System. 3) Implementation commitments for visitor

carrying capacities for all areas of the unit. The following section of this study analyzes the potential impacts of implementing four 4) Justifications for potential boundary alternative management frameworks for modifications. resource protection and visitor enjoyment of the special resources of the Waco Mammoth This chapter begins with a description of the Site. The analysis focuses specifically on the methods and assumptions used for analyzing consequences of each alternative on the each impact topic. The analysis is organized fundamental resources of the Waco by alternative and then by impact category Mammoth Site, the other resources found and topic. The existing conditions for all of there, the potential visitor experience, the the impact topics that are analyzed were management and operations of each identified in “Chapter Five: Affected managing entity, and the surrounding Environment.” All of the impact topics are socioeconomic environment. This analysis assessed for each alternative. For each impact provides the basis for comparing the topic, there is a description of the specific consequences of implementing any of the actions under each alternative that would management alternatives so that the most result in either a beneficial or adverse impact effective and efficient management and a discussion of cumulative effects. framework for the Waco Mammoth Site can be identified. The impacts of each alternative are

summarized in table 5 found at the end of There are number of assumptions made in this “Chapter Four: Alternatives for analysis that address the general level of Management.” development required to support each management scenario. However, it is important to remember that if the site were to become a new unit of the National Park METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS FOR System, NPS management policies require ANALYZING IMPACTS that a General Management Plan be prepared Methodology to clearly define what resource conditions and visitor experiences should be achieved and Generally, the methodology for resource maintained over time. General Management impact assessments follows direction 91 CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES provided in the Council on Environmental another place, or to another resource. Impacts Quality (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing are assumed to be direct unless otherwise the National Environmental Policy Act, Parts indicated. 1502 and 1508. Additional guidance has been provided by the National Park Service Cumulative Impacts Director’s Order 12: Conservation Planning, Regulations implementing NEPA issued by Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision the CEQ require the assessment of cumulative Making. The impacts from the four impacts in the decision-making process for alternatives were evaluated in terms of their federal actions. Cumulative impacts are context, type, intensity, and duration as defined as "the impact on the environment defined below. which results from the incremental impact of

the action when added to other past, present, Context and Type and reasonably foreseeable future actions Each impact topic addresses impacts on regardless of what agency (federal or non- resources inside and outside the project study federal) or person undertakes such other area; to the extent those impacts are traceable actions" (40 CFR 1508.7). Cumulative impacts to the actions described in each alternative. If can result from individually minor but there are impacts, they can either provide a collectively significant actions taking place benefit (beneficial) or create a negative over a period of time. consequence (adverse) on a particular resource or value. Impact Analysis

The impacts of the action alternatives Intensity and Duration (alternatives B, C, and D) describe the Impacts are analyzed in terms of their difference between implementing the no- intensity and their duration. The criteria used action alternative (alternative A) and to define the thresholds for assigning intensity implementing the action alternatives. To are presented in the Impact Intensity understand a complete “picture” of the Threshold Definitions Matrix (Table 7). impacts of implementing any of the action Duration can be short-term or long-term. alternatives, the reader must also take into Short-term impacts are typically impacts that consideration the impacts that would occur last for a temporary period of time (usually under the no-action alternative. not more than 1-3 years) or may be intermittent depending on the activity. Long- The study team based the impact analysis term impacts are those impacts that persist described in this chapter primarily on the indefinitely beyond an action or activity. information gathered through consultations with the staff of Baylor University’s Mayborn Direct and Indirect Impacts Museum Complex, the city of Waco, and Direct impacts would be caused by an action other agencies; guidance provided by NPS and would occur at the same time and place as subject matter experts; a review of existing the action. Indirect impacts would be caused literature and studies; and professional by the action and would be reasonably judgment. foreseeable but would occur later in time, at

Table 7: Impact Intensity Threshold Definitions

Impact Intensity/ Negligible Impact Minor Impact Moderate Impact Major Impact Impact Topic

In Situ Impacts are at the lowest level of Impacts are slight but detectable. The Impacts are readily apparent. The Impacts are severe or of exceptional Specimens and detection—barely perceptible and not impact affects an area of the site impact affects an area of the site with benefit. The impact affects an area of Geological easily measured. with modest data potential. high data potential. the site with exceptional data Context of the potential. Discovery Site

Paleontology Impacts are at the lowest levels of Adverse impact-would affect Adverse impact- would affect Adverse impact- would affect the Collections detection—barely perceptible and integrity of a few items in the integrity of many items in the integrity of most items in the museum not easily measured. museum collection but would not museum collection or archives and collection and destroy the usefulness (museum degrade the usefulness for future diminish the usefulness of the of the collection and/or archives for collections) research and interpretation. collection or archives for future future research and interpretation. research and interpretation.

Beneficial impact-would stabilize Beneficial impact-would improve Beneficial impact-would secure current conditions of museum conditions of museum collections, conditions of museum collections as a Fundamental Resources Fundamental collections and/or its constituent protect its constituent components whole or its constituent components components to minimize from threats of degradation, and/or from threats of further degradation degradation. enhance the usefulness for research and enhance the usefulness for or interpretation. research or interpretation.

Soils and Impacts are at the lowest level of Impacts would be detectable and Impacts would be readily apparent Impacts would be readily apparent Prime detection—barely perceptible and result in a change to soil character and result in a change to soil and substantially change the soil Farmlands not easily measured. and productivity over a relatively character and productivity over a character and productivity over a small area. relatively wide area. majority of the study area.

Floodplains There would be no detectable Changes in the ability of a floodplain Changes in the ability of a floodplain Changes in the ability of a floodplain change in a floodplain values and to convey floodwaters, or its values to convey floodwaters, or its values to convey floodwaters, or its values fluctuations or the ability to convey and functions, would be measurable and functions, would be appreciable and functions, would be considerable, floodwaters. and local. and local. and widespread.

Other Resources Addition of structures within the Addition of structures within the Addition or removal of structures in floodplain would have a very limited floodplain would have the potential to the floodplain would change flood potential to increase flood levels. increase flood levels. levels.

Table 7: Impact Intensity Threshold Definitions

Impact Intensity/ Negligible Impact Minor Impact Moderate Impact Major Impact Impact Topic

Wetlands No measurable or perceptible The impact would be measurable or The impact would be sufficient to The action would result in a changes in wetland size, integrity, or perceptible, but slight. A small cause a measurable change in the measurable change in all three continuity would occur. change in size, integrity, or continuity size, integrity or continuity of the parameters (size, integrity, and could occur due to short-term wetland or would result in a small, continuity) or a permanent loss of indirect effects such as construction- but permanent, loss or gain in large wetland areas. The impact related runoff. However, the overall wetland acreage. would be substantial and highly viability of the resource would not be noticeable. affected.

Vegetation Individual native plants may be Impacts on native plants would be A change would occur over a Impacts on native plant communities impacted, but measurable or measurable or perceptible, but would relatively large area in the native plant would be readily apparent, and would perceptible changes in plant impact a small area. The viability of community that would be readily substantially change vegetation community size, integrity, or the plant community would not be measurable in terms of abundance, community types over a large area. continuity would not occur. impacted and the community, if left distribution, quantity, or quality. Changes might have effects on the alone, would recover. viability of some species.

Wildlife and There would be no observable or Impacts would be detectable, but Impacts on native species, their Impacts on native species, their Wildlife measurable impacts on native they are not expected to be outside habitats, or the natural processes habitats, or natural processes Habitat species, their habitats, or the natural the natural range of variability of sustaining them would be detectable, sustaining them would be detectable, processes sustaining them. Impacts native species’ populations, their and they could be outside the natural and expected to be outside the would be well within natural habitats, or the natural processes range of variability. natural range of variability. Key

Other Resources population fluctuations. sustaining them. ecosystem processes might be affected. Changes to habitat might have effects on the viability of some species.

Special Status No effect: The action would cause no Not likely to adversely affect: The Likely to adversely affect: The action Likely to adversely affect: The action Species effect on the species or critical action would be expected to result in would result in a direct or indirect would result in a direct or indirect habitat. insignificant and discountable effects adverse effect on a species or critical adverse effect on a species or critical Definitions are on a species or critical habitat (i.e., habitat, and the effect would not be habitat, and the effect would not be consistent with extremely unlikely to occur and not discountable or completely beneficial. discountable or completely beneficial. section 7 of the able to be meaningfully measured, Endangered detected, or evaluated), or it would Species Act. be completely beneficial.

Table 7: Impact Intensity Threshold Definitions

Impact Intensity/ Negligible Impact Minor Impact Moderate Impact Major Impact Impact Topic

Visitor Experience Visitors would likely be unaware of Some characteristics of visitor use Multiple characteristics of visitor Areas of the park containing any effects associated with and/or experience would change, experience would change. Visitors fundamental resources are made implementation of the alternative. and visitors would likely be aware of would be aware of the effects available and accessible for visitor the effects associated with associated with implementation of experience opportunities for the first implementation of the alternative. the alternative. time. Multiple characteristics of visitor experience would change substantially. Visitors would be aware of the effects associated with implementation of the alternative.

Management Impacts to an entity’s operations that Impact to an entity’s operations that Impact to an entity’s operations that Impact to an entity’s operations that Operations would be at a low level of detection may increase (adverse) or decrease would be readily apparent and result would be readily apparent, result in and would not appreciable change (beneficial) operational expenses, but in increases (adverse) or decreases substantial increases (adverse) or (City of Waco, their current operations. would not require changes in current (beneficial) in staffing and/or decreases (beneficial) in staffing Mayborn Museum staffing levels. operational expenses. Programs and/or operational expenses, and Complex, and and/or efforts would need to be re- would be markedly different from National Park prioritized to accommodate their current operations. Service) expanded responsibilities.

Socioeconomic Impacts to the economic environment Impacts to the economic conditions Impacts to the economic conditions Impacts to the economic conditions Environment are at the lowest level of detection— would be slight but detectable. would be readily apparent. Any would be readily apparent. barely perceptible and not easily effects would result in changes to Measurable changes in economic measured. economic conditions at the Waco conditions at the central Texas MSA level. regional level occur. The impact is severely adverse or exceptionally beneficial in the affected area.

Impacts to the community are at the Impacts to the community would be Impacts would be readily apparent Impacts to the community would be lowest level of detection—barely detectable and only affect a small and affect community conditions. readily apparent and affect perceptible and not easily measured. portion of the surrounding community conditions. The impact is population. severely adverse or exceptionally beneficial in the affected area.

CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

IMPACT TOPICS AND CUMULATIVE Cumulative Effects Scenario for the In Situ EFFECTS SCENARIOS Specimens and Geologic Context The team’s method for analyzing each impact The context for potential cumulative effects topic is further described below. under this impact topic covers the in situ specimens and geologic context of the Waco Also, in order to assist in the analysis of the Mammoth Site. Other past, present or cumulative effects resulting from the actions foreseeable future actions that were in each alternative, a “Cumulative Effects considered as part of the cumulative effect Scenario” was developed for each impact analysis included the following activities. topic. To determine potential cumulative effects, other actions within and surrounding Since the initial discovery of the site in 1978 the Waco Mammoth Site were identified. through 1996, staff from Baylor University’s Depending on the impact topic, the context former Strecker Museum as well as a host of included the central Texas region, McLennan volunteers from the Waco community have County, the city of Waco, Baylor University’s actively investigated the site. Their efforts Mayborn Museum, or the National Park have preserved vital information relating to Service. To establish an understanding of the the geologic context of the site, and include cumulative effects scenario, a short topographic surveys of bone positions, a description of relevant past, present, and photographic record of excavation activities, reasonably foreseeable future actions is and collected soil samples. included under the introduction of each impact topic that follows this section. The recent research conducted by John Bongino as a part of his masters’ thesis An assessment is made to determine the effects through Baylor University’s Department of of these other actions on each impact topic, Geology has provided valuable additional which is later combined with the impacts information and interpretation of the soil described for each alternative under the stratigraphy and geologic context of the environmental consequences section to discovery site. His work has resulted in a determine the overall cumulative impact for refinement of the understanding of the that component of the environment. The circumstances surrounding the concentration effect of each alternative relative to the overall of mammoths discovered there. His findings cumulative impact is also identified. indicate that a herd of 19 adult female and juvenile mammoths succumbed in a single Fundamental Resources of the Waco event, while also suggesting there were subsequent accumulations later in time. Mammoth Site

This impact category considers the effects of Current actions underway by the Waco each management alternative on the community—erecting the protective shelter fundamental resource components that over the discovery site and improving site collectively represent the special resources of drainage to arrest further soil erosion the Waco Mammoth Site. This was examined threatening the resource—should stabilize under two impact topics. The first examines current conditions. This initiative will ensure potential impacts to the in situ specimens and the long-term protection of the geologic the geologic context of the discovery site; the context by preserving the soil stratigraphy second examines potential impacts to the surrounding the in situ specimens and paleontological collections that include the assuring that future scientific research collected specimens and the archival record opportunities could continue to provide (typically referred to as museum collections in information to enhance the understanding of the National Park Service). this special resource. These actions will also allow for the accommodation of controlled visitor access into the shelter to view the in situ 96 Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios mammoth specimens and protect the resource central Texas region. As these actions secure from potential vandalism. the condition of the collection and archives from threats of further degradation they Since all of these activities focus on areas of represent a major, long-term beneficial impact exceptional data potential, collectively they on the University’s central Texas museum represent a major, long-term beneficial impact collections. on the in situ specimens and geological context of the Waco Mammoth Site. Looking at National Park Service museum management practices, the current trend has Cumulative Effects Scenario for the been to provide designated centralized Paleontological Collections (museum repositories with space for collections meeting collections) museum standards in accordance with the The context for potential cumulative effects approved NPS Museum Collection Facilities under this impact topic covers the museum Strategy, Intermountain Region (National Park collections of the Baylor University’s Service 2005b). Following this protocol, a Mayborn Museum Complex as this is the number of National Park Service units within current location of the Waco Mammoth Site’s the state of Texas have made arrangements paleontological collection. It also includes the with the University of Texas at Austin to museum collections of the National Park provide for the curatorial care of their Service’s Intermountain Region as some paleontological collections. This represents a alternatives consider including the Waco moderate, long-term beneficial impact on the Mammoth Site’s collection into the museum National Park Service’s Intermountain collections of the National Park Service. Other Region’s museum collections as park units past, present or foreseeable future actions and have not had to invest in duplicate collections activities that were considered as part of the storage facilities and the research community cumulative effect analysis include: is provided a convenient centralized location to study and compare specimens found across The construction of Baylor University’s $23 a wide region of the state and beyond. million Mayborn Museum Complex in 2004, vastly improved the conditions of the Other Resources of University’s Strecker Museum collections. the Waco Mammoth Site The Strecker Museum was the oldest This impact category evaluated the general continuously operating museum in the state anticipated effects of the alternatives on until it closed in 2003, and the collections several components of the natural were moved to the new 35,000 square foot environment such as soils and prime complex. The Waco Mammoth Site’s farmland; floodplains and wetlands; paleontological collections and archives were vegetation, wildlife, habitat, and special status previously housed within the Strecker species. Museum. The museum was located in the basement of Baylor University’s Sid Cumulative Effects Scenario for Soils and Richardson Science Building which had Prime Farmlands limitations on space (5,000 square feet), The context for potential cumulative effects security, and climate control capabilities. This under this impact topic covers the soils and location did not provide ideal conditions for prime farmlands within McLennan County. the long-term curatorial care of the collection. Other past, present or foreseeable future With the new facility, museum staff can actions and activities that were considered as continue to accession and catalogue for part of the cumulative effect analysis include: curation of prehistoric and historic objects, artifacts, works of art, archival documents, Under current actions already underway by and natural history specimens from the the Waco community, the study area would be 97

CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES minimally developed to protect paleon- Since collectively these changes are readily tological resources and to provide for visitor apparent and have altered floodplain and access to the Waco Mammoth Site. It is wetland values and functions over a relatively anticipated that there would be minor, long- large area of the watershed, they represent a term adverse impacts resulting from the moderate, long-term adverse impact on these localized loss of soil and prime farmland to resources. accommodate the construction of the excavation shelter and infrastructure needed Cumulative Effects Scenario for Vegetation, to protect the resource and provide for visitor Wildlife, Habitat, and Special Status Species access. The context for potential cumulative effects under this impact topic covers the vegetation, Looking beyond the study area, previous and wildlife, habitat, and special status species of continuing development activities within McLennan County. The following past, McLennan County have converted prime present or foreseeable future actions and farmland into residential neighborhoods, activities were considered as part of the commercial centers, industrial parks, and cumulative effect analysis. other uses that have resulted in major, long- term adverse impacts on these resources. Previous ranching activities and the attendant cattle grazing within the study area have Collectively, since these changes are readily altered native vegetation patterns and wildlife apparent and result in a change to soil habitat resulting in moderately adverse character and productivity over a relatively although reversible effects on the site. wide area of McLennan County, they represent a moderate, long-term adverse Under current actions underway by the Waco impact on this resource. community, the study area would be minimally developed to protect Cumulative Effects Scenario for Floodplains paleontological resources and to provide for and Wetlands visitor access to the Waco Mammoth Site. The context for potential cumulative effects These actions would create minor, long-term under this impact topic covers floodplains and adverse impacts on existing vegetation, wetlands of the Bosque River watershed wildlife, habitat, and special status species by within McLennan County. Other past, present dedicating a portion of the landscape to or foreseeable future actions and activities infrastructure and thereby removing a portion that were considered as part of the cumulative of the study area’s vegetation and wildlife effect analysis include: habitat to accommodate protection and presentation of these special resources. Looking beyond the study area, previous agricultural practices, urban and residential Looking beyond the study area, previous development have incrementally adversely urban and residential development along with affected floodplains and wetland areas within widespread agricultural activities within the Bosque River watershed. McLennan County has resulted in a substantially modified natural environment. The creation of Lake Waco in 1965 has These activities have essentially carved the provided the Waco community the benefits of county into isolated islands of native flood control, water supply, and recreation. vegetation and wildlife habitat. The website By design, the dam has altered the frequency Texas Handbook Online references a number of river flooding downstream of this structure. of extirpated species: antelope, bison, bear, The creation of the Lake Waco Wetland Area and javelins that once existed within has provided some mitigation for the resource McLennan County prior to its extensive impacts of the reservoir. settlement. Other actions such as the creation of Lake Waco, has resulted in a loss of habitat 98 Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios for some species while creating habitat for special milestone for members of the Waco others. The creation of the Lake Waco community who have been actively involved Wetland Area has provided some measure of in preservation efforts there for almost 30 mitigation for habitat loss. Future actions, years. At least 12 public events at the site such as increasing population growth and would be scheduled throughout the year urbanization could further reduce and during the early phases of the park’s adversely impact these resources. establishment. However, it is assumed that this schedule would be expanded with the Since collectively these activities have assistance of the Waco Mammoth substantially changed vegetation community Foundation. Since public access to the types and wildlife habitat over a large area of fundamental resources of the Waco the county resulting in a number of extirpated Mammoth Site will be provided for the first species and a number of designated special time by this community effort, this represents status species, they represent a major, long- a major, long-term, beneficial impact to the term adverse impact on the vegetation, visitor experience. wildlife, habitat, and special status species of McLennan County. There are a number of other visitor experience opportunities available for folks Visitor Experience who live within the surrounding community and for those visiting the greater Waco area. Throughout the study process, the public has They include Baylor University’s Mayborn expressed an unwavering desire to experience Museum Complex, a natural science and the special resources of the Waco Mammoth cultural history museum focusing on the Site. This impact topic includes various central Texas region; Cameron Park, a 416- aspects of visitor use at the Waco Mammoth acre municipal park along the Bosque and Site, including the effects on visitors’ ability to Brazos river corridors; the Cameron Park access and experience the site’s fundamental Zoo, a 52-acre natural habitat zoo located resources; opportunities for orientation, along the Brazos River corridor; Lake Waco, a interpretation, and education; the freedom to manmade recreational reservoir located on experience the resources at one’s own pace; the Brazos River 3 miles upstream of the study and opportunities for the scientific area; the Dr. Pepper Museum, which community to conduct research. commemorates the creation of this popular

beverage in the Waco area as well as the soft Cumulative Effects Scenario for the Visitor Experience drink industry; the Texas Ranger Hall of Fame and Museum and the contemporary The context for potential cumulative effects headquarters station of Ranger Company F of under this impact topic covers the visitor the Texas Rangers; and the Taylor Museum of experience opportunities within the city of Waco History. Waco. The following past, present or foreseeable future actions and activities were There are a number of foreseeable future considered as part of the cumulative effects actions planned for the Waco area that will analysis. continue to enhance visitor experience opportunities there. Renovations are planned Currently, visitor access to the Waco for the Convention Center, Texas Ranger Hall Mammoth Site is restricted and would of Fame, the library, and Cameron Park. continue to be so until the current actions already underway by the Waco community to Since all of these activities collectively erect an excavation shelter and provide for contribute to a greatly enhanced array of visitor access are completed. This would be visitor experience opportunities available the first time that public access would be within the city of Waco, they represent a accommodated at the site and marks a very 99

CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES major, long-term beneficial impact on the museum operations, which required an visitor experience opportunities within the increase in staffing and expenses to operate city of Waco. and maintain this larger museum complex. This represents a minor to moderate, long- Management and Operations term adverse impact on the management and operations of the Mayborn Museum The impact topic includes evaluating the Complex. effects of the alternatives on existing management and operations of the city of The National Park Service continues Waco, Baylor University, and National Park management and operations of nearly 400 Service. The analysis was conducted in terms units nationwide. Work on reducing the of how operations, staffing, and expenses backlog of deferred maintenance effects on might vary for each group under each park infrastructure throughout the system management scenario. continues to be addressed. The

implementation of inventory and monitoring Cumulative Effects Scenario for Management and Operations programs for park resources continues. Operational funding levels are maintained The context for potential cumulative effects without appreciable increases to offset the under this impact topic covers the effects of inflation or new mandates, although management and operations of the city of there is the potential for increased annual Waco, Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum funding through the Centennial Challenge Complex, and the National Park Service. program currently under consideration by Other past, present or foreseeable future Congress. NPS managers continue to balance actions and activities that were considered as the accommodation of visitor use with the part of the cumulative effect analysis include: resource protection needs of these units. This represents a minor to moderate, long-term Under current actions planned by the Waco adverse impact on the management and community, the construction of the operations of the National Park Service. excavation shelter and infrastructure to protect the resource and to accommodate Socioeconomic Environment visitor use, the city of Waco Parks and Recreation Department would acquire To evaluate the socioeconomic impacts of additional facility management each alternative, this impact topic was broken responsibilities. down into two components. The first component examines the effects on the As the city of Waco grows, the need to provide economic environment and the second for expanded city services will also grow. component examines the effects on the Depending on the health of the city’s surrounding community. economy, this may or may not strain city budgets to maintain the level of services Economic Environment currently provided throughout the city. This In 2001, a report titled “The Economic Impact potentially represents a minor to moderate, of the Waco Mammoth Park on the Central long-term adverse impact on the management Texas Region” was prepared by Dr. Tom Kelly, and operations of the city of Waco. economist and Director of Baylor Center for Business and Economic Research. In this The construction of the 35,000-square-foot study, Dr. Kelly projected that basic income Mayborn Museum Complex at Baylor would come from two sources: 1) from the University has greatly enhanced the construction, operations, and maintenance of management of the museum collections the facilities and 2) from visitors traveling previously housed in the University’s former from outside the region and spending within Strecker Museum (5,000 square feet). The the local economy. opening of the new museum expanded their 100 Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios

Dr. Kelly applied the central Texas region’s for the construction of new educational expenditure multiplier for construction of facilities (2.325), the $3.2 million effort could new educational facilities (2.325) and the potentially provide over $7.4 million to the expenditure multiplier for tourism visitors Waco MSA. When visitor access is (2.827) according to an input-output model accommodated, this would also provide estimated by the Ray Perryman Group. He additional on-going beneficial economic also projected that 10% of the visitors to the impacts from visitor spending in the area. site would spend at least one additional person day (and $80 per person) in the central Looking beyond the study area, past, present Texas region. and future population growth and urban development would continue to affect the For the purposes of this analysis, Dr. Kelly’s social and economic environment. methodology has been applied to each of the alternatives to project their economic impact. In addition to the Waco community initiative Projected visitation rates were based on the to erect a protective shelter and provide for more conservative assumptions identified in visitor access at the Waco Mammoth Site, the the 2003 Lord Report, which projected 30,000 community is involved in a number of other visitors per year after the third year of initiatives. The Greater Waco Strategic operation. The initial construction costs and Economic Development Plan, completed in annual operating costs were developed by the 2005, identified a number of goals to achieve a assumptions listed for level of development stronger, more sustainable economy and and delegation of management responsibilities quality of life in the area. These included identified under each alternative. strengthening the economy, developing the workforce, retaining and attracting more Community businesses, residents, and visitors, revitalizing This second component of the socioeconomic strategic community areas such as environment includes qualitatively analyzing reinvigorating the downtown area and the the consequences of the management Brazos riverfront. alternatives on the characteristics and components of the surrounding community A number of projects currently underway in that included adjacent landowners, the greater the downtown area include the renovation of Waco area, and the central Texas region. the Hilton Hotel, the construction of a new $4 million building for the Greater Waco Cumulative Effects Scenario for the Chamber of Commerce, and a $60 million Socioeconomic Environment mixed-use private development called Waco Town Square. The context for potential cumulative effects under this impact topic covers socioeconomic There are a number of foreseeable future environment within the Waco MSA and actions planned for the Waco area. Last May central Texas region. Other past, present or (2007), city of Waco voters approved the first foreseeable future actions and activities that city bond issue in 40 years. They approved a were considered as part of the cumulative $63 million bond package to refurbish the effect analysis include: Convention Center ($17.5 million), build a new library and improve the central library Under current actions planned by the Waco ($12 million), add two fire stations ($6.8 community, the construction of the million), move police headquarters ($13 excavation shelter and infrastructure to million), renovate Knox Hall at the Texas protect the resource and to accommodate Ranger Hall of Fame ($2 million), and visitor use will provide a onetime impact on renovate parks ($11.7 million) which includes the economy of the Waco MSA. Using the Cameron Park ($6.9 million) which is central Texas region’s expenditure multiplier 101

CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES approaching its 100 year anniversary in 2010, local and state governments providing a Cameron Park East ($2.1 million), and trail moderate, long-term economic benefit to the improvements ($0.9 million). Waco MSA and central Texas region.

The city is actively promoting the Waco residents could potentially experience enhancement of the Brazos River Corridor minor, long-term adverse impacts from the throughout the downtown area as well as in increase in traffic generated by these the vicinity of the Waco Mammoth Site. improvements. Although, it is equally Greenway corridors and connecting trails are expected that the enhanced range of shopping planned to connect the Waco Mammoth Site and entertainment opportunities would with other features along the corridor. provide moderate, long-term benefits to the community. As improvements to Waco’s downtown and enhancements to their park system are Collectively, these changes represent implemented, it projected that this would moderate long-term beneficial impacts on the increase business activity and tourism in the socioeconomic environment of the Waco area. This in turn would generate increased MSA. visitor spending in the area and generate revenue for the business community as well as

102 Environmental Consequences of Alternative A

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF ALTERNATIVE A Continue Current Management Trends (No-Action Alternative)

Impacts on Fundamental Resources of but not prepared as the museum does not the Waco Mammoth Site have preparation laboratory for paleontological specimens. In the reasonably In Situ Specimens and Geologic Context of foreseeable future for protection and the Discovery Site preservation of these resources, it is expected Analysis. Under this alternative, the staff at that the current conditions would remain Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum unchanged and therefore there would be no Complex would continue to monitor impact to these resources. conditions and ensure the in situ paleontological resources are stabilized and Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, preserved. The current moratorium on further present, and foreseeable future actions excavation activities would remain in place. As affecting the Mayborn Museum’s museum a result of these actions, it is anticipated that collections are described in the “Impact there would be no impact to the current Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” conditions of the in situ specimens and section of this chapter. Alternative A would geologic context of the discovery site. have no impacts on these resources and therefore would not contribute to the effects Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, of these other actions. Consequently, there present, and foreseeable future actions would be no cumulative impacts to affecting the in situ specimens and the paleontological collections of the Mayborn geological context of the discovery site are Museum under alternative A. described in the “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this Conclusion. There would be no impact to the chapter. Alternative A would have no impacts paleontological collections and archives of the on these resources and therefore would not Waco Mammoth Site from the actions under contribute to the effects of these other actions. alternative A. Correspondingly, there would Consequently, there would be no cumulative be no cumulative effect. impacts to the in situ specimens and the geological context of the discovery site under Impacts on Other Resources alternative A. Soils including Prime Farmlands Conclusion. There would be no impacts to the Analysis. Under this alternative, it is assumed in situ specimens and geologic context of the that the study area would not be further discovery site from the actions under developed, thereby preserving a majority of alternative A. Correspondingly, there would the soils and prime farmland found there. be no cumulative effect. Consequently, there would be no impact to the current condition of these resources. Paleontological Collections (Museum Collections) Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, Analysis. Baylor University’s Mayborn present, and foreseeable future actions Museum Complex would continue to provide affecting the soils and prime farmland of climate-controlled secured storage of the McLennan County are described in the paleontological collections and archives, “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects which include the records of site excavation Scenarios” section of this chapter . Alternative and research. Access to the collections would A would have no impacts on these resources continue to be convenient. Specimens in and therefore would not contribute to the plaster jackets would continue to be stored effects of these other actions. Consequently, 103 CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES there would be no cumulative impacts to soils or developing management strategies for and prime farmland of McLennan County restoring native vegetation patterns and under alternative A. enhancing wildlife habitat. Consequently, it is anticipated that there would be no impact to Conclusion. There would be no impact to the the current condition of these resources. soils and prime farmland within the study area from the actions under alternative A. Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, Correspondingly, there would be no present, and foreseeable future actions cumulative effect. affecting the vegetation, wildlife, habitat, and special status species of McLennan County Floodplains and Wetlands are described in the “Impact Topics and Analysis. Under this alternative, there are no Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this management actions or activities proposed chapter. Alternative A would have no impacts within the floodplain or potential wetlands on these resources and therefore would not along the Bosque River section of the study contribute to the effects of these other actions. area. Consequently, there would be no impact Consequently, there would be no cumulative to the current condition of these resources. impacts to vegetation, wildlife, habitat, and special status species of McLennan County Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, under alternative A. present, and foreseeable future actions affecting the floodplains and wetlands of the Conclusion. There would be no impact to the Bosque River watershed within McLennan vegetation, wildlife, and wildlife habitat; and County are described in the “Impact Topics no effect on special status species within the and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of study area from the actions under alternative this chapter. Alternative A would have no A. Correspondingly, there would be no impacts on these resources and therefore cumulative effect. would not contribute to the effects of these other actions. Consequently, there would be Impacts on Visitor Experience no cumulative impacts to floodplains and Analysis. Under alternative A, the city of Waco wetlands of the Bosque River watershed and Baylor University would continue to within McLennan County under this accommodate visitor access to the Waco alternative. Mammoth Site through scheduled public events at the site. It is also assumed that they Conclusion. There would be no impact to the would continue working through local floodplains and potential wetlands found community efforts to enhance visitor within the study area from the actions under enjoyment and understanding. These efforts alternative A. Correspondingly, there would would result in ongoing, negligible to minor, be no cumulative effect. beneficial impacts on the visitor experience.

Vegetation, Wildlife, Habitat, and Special School groups of the central Texas region Status Species would benefit from the added although Analysis. Under this alternative, it is assumed limited opportunity to engage in onsite that the study area would not be further educational opportunities. developed, thereby preserving a majority of the vegetation and wildlife habitat found The expectation for the area surrounding the there. It is also assumed that resource core paleontological site, which is owned by management strategies would not be Baylor University, is that it will not be developed for these resources such as developed for visitor use but simply provide a conducting inventories to determine the natural buffer for the protection and composition of native, nonnative, and/or preservation of the core paleontological site. special status species inhabiting the study area; 104 Environmental Consequences of Alternative A

Consequently, there would be no impacts to impacts on the city of Waco operations the visitor experience in this area. resulting from the need to maintain a new facility. Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, present, and foreseeable future actions Baylor University would continue to provide affecting visitor experience opportunities for the curatorial care of the in situ specimens within the Waco area are described in the. at the site and the paleontological collections “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects within their Mayborn Museum Complex. It Scenario” section of this chapter. The impact would also be expected that museum staff of these other actions in combination with the would continue to assist in conducting public actions under this alternative would result in events at the site. It is anticipated that there major, long-term beneficial cumulative would be relatively little change in how they impacts since a number of projects have currently manage and operate the site. greatly enhanced the visitor experience opportunities found within the city. Although Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, alternative A adds a unique component to this present, and foreseeable future actions affecting mix, it is nonetheless a very small increment management and operations of the city of Waco due to the limited schedule of visitor access to and Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum are the site when compared to the vast array of described in the “Impact Topics and Cumulative engaging visitor experience opportunities Effects Scenarios” section of this chapter. The already available within the Waco area. impact of these other actions in combination with the actions under this alternative would result in Conclusion. Alternative A would result in minor to moderate, long-term adverse cumulative negligible to minor, long-term beneficial impacts on the operations of the city of Waco and impacts to the visitor experience Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum Complex. opportunities at the Waco Mammoth Site. The contribution of alternative A relative to these The cumulative effect of this alternative on the cumulative impacts is expected to be a very small visitor experience opportunities within the increment. Waco area would be very small. Conclusion. The impacts of alternative A on Impacts on Management and management and operations would vary Operations depending on the managing entity. There could be minor, long-term, adverse impacts Analysis. Under this no-action alternative, the on the city of Waco operations and negligible, management and operations of the Waco long-term, adverse impacts on Baylor Mammoth Site would continue through the University’s Mayborn Museum Complex partnership efforts of the city of Waco and operations. Overall, the cumulative effect of Baylor University. It is assumed that existing this alternative on the management and staffing levels would remain the same and operations of the city of Waco and Baylor programs to recruit and train volunteers University’s Mayborn Museum complex is would not be initiated. It is also assumed that very small. once the excavation shelter is complete, visitation to the site would be accommodated Impacts on Socioeconomic with existing staff during at least 12 public events scheduled throughout the year. The Environment city of Waco Parks and Recreation Analysis. Under this alternative, the city of Department would acquire additional facility Waco and Baylor University would management responsibilities with the new accommodate limited visitor access to the excavation shelter added to their inventory of Waco Mammoth Site during at least 12 public park structures to operate and maintain. events scheduled throughout the year. It is There would be minor, long-term adverse expected that this minimal level of visitor 105

CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES access to the site would not measurably Conclusion. The impacts of alternative A contribute to the range of tourism would be negligible to minor, (intermittent) opportunities or visitor spending within the short-term beneficial on the Waco MSA city. economic environment resulting from increased visitor spending within the Communities in the central Texas region community during those times when public would benefit from the added although events are scheduled at the site. Impacts to the limited educational outreach programs. communities within the central Texas region would be negligible, (intermittent) short-term Residents living in the surrounding area may beneficial impacts resulting from limited experience increased traffic congestion during educational outreach programs. Impacts scheduled public events at the site. However, would be negligible to minor, (intermittent) impacts would be minimal since access to the short-term adverse to the residents of the site would be by New Steinbeck Bend Road, a surrounding area due to increased traffic local arterial connector road that currently congestion generated during times when experiences low volume traffic as the public events are scheduled at the site. surrounding areas are mostly undeveloped. Overall, the cumulative effect of this alternative on the economic environment of Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, the Waco MSA and the communities of the present, and foreseeable future actions central Texas region would be very small. affecting the socioeconomic environment of the Waco MSA are described in the “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this chapter. The impact of these other actions in combination with the actions under this alternative would result in moderate, long-term beneficial cumulative impacts on the Waco MSA socioeconomic environment. The incremental effect of alternative A relative to these cumulative impacts would be a very small component when compared to the vast array of other economic activity and community initiatives previously completed or underway.

106 Environmental Consequences of Alternative B

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF ALTERNATIVE B Partnerships Led by the City of Waco

Impacts on Fundamental Resources of Paleontological Collections the Waco Mammoth Site (Museum Collections) In Situ Specimens and Geologic Context of Analysis. Similar to alternative A, the actions the Discovery Site under this alternative call for continued storage of the paleontological collections and Analysis. Similar to alternative A, the staff at archives at Baylor University’s Mayborn Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum Museum Complex. Paleontological Complex would continue to monitor collections, including the archived records of conditions and ensure the in situ excavation, would continue under adequate paleontological resources are stabilized and temperature, humidity, and security preserved. What is different under this conditions and controls. Access to the alternative is that the current moratorium on collections would continue to be convenient excavation activities may be lifted to allow for because storage would continue at the controlled investigations of the site. Technical Mayborn Museum Complex of Baylor assistance from the National Park Service University. would be provided to help guide the stabilization, preservation, and controlled However, under alternative B, technical investigation efforts. These changes would assistance from the National Park Service enhance resource conditions and promote a could be provided to assist Mayborn Museum greater understanding of the paleontological staff develop protocols and methodologies for resource. As this would affect areas with high initiating preparation and cataloging of the data potential, these actions would result in specimens currently housed in plaster jackets moderate, long-term, beneficial impacts. as well as the smaller fragments and soil

samples in card board boxes. It is assumed Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, that climate-controlled space could be present, and foreseeable future actions dedicated for a specimen preparation affecting the in situ specimens and the laboratory within the Mayborn Museum or geological context of the discovery site are the preparation lab could be incorporated into described in the “Impact Topics and the city’s proposed environmental education Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this center at the site. This would benefit future chapter. The impact of these other actions in researchers as access to prepared specimens combination with the actions under this would be made possible for the first time. It alternative would result in major, long-term, would also provide a benefit for the public as beneficial cumulative impacts on the in situ select fossils could be caste for exhibit specimens and geologic context of the purposes. This change would result in a discovery site. The contribution of alternative moderate, long-term, beneficial impact on B relative to these cumulative impacts would paleontological collections of the Waco be an appreciably beneficial component. Mammoth Site under this alternative.

Conclusion. Impacts would be moderate, long- Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, term, and beneficial on the in situ specimens present, and foreseeable future actions and geologic context of the discovery site affecting the Mayborn museum collections from the actions under alternative B. The and archives are described in the “Impact cumulative effect of this alternative on the in Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” situ specimens and geologic context of the section of this chapter. The impact of these discovery site would be an appreciable other actions in combination with the actions benefit. under this alternative would result in minor, 107 CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES long-term, beneficial cumulative impacts to relative to these cumulative impacts would be the Mayborn Museum’s central Texas a very small component. collection as specimen preparation activities could be conducted on fossils found in other Conclusion. Impacts would be minor, long- areas of the region unconnected with the term, and adverse on soils and potentially Waco Mammoth Site. The incremental effect minor, long-term, and adverse on the prime of alternative B relative to these cumulative farmland in the study area. The cumulative impacts would be appreciably beneficial. effect of this alternative on the soils and prime farmland of McLennan County would be very Conclusion. Impacts would be moderate, long- small. term, and beneficial on the paleontological collections of the Waco Mammoth Site under Floodplains and Wetlands alternative B. The cumulative effect of this Analysis. Under this alternative, the city’s alternative on the Mayborn Museum’s central long-range vision for accommodating water Texas collection would be an appreciable taxi service along the Bosque River and benefit. connecting to regional trailways along the Brazos River Corridor would entail a minor Impacts on Other Resources level of development on a portion of the study Soils including Prime Farmlands area adjacent to the Bosque River. Features such as a boat dock and trails may be Analysis. Under this alternative, the city constructed within the floodplain and envisions additional park development to wetlands areas and would affect relatively provide for an environmental education small, localized areas of these resources. This center and connecting trails to the Bosque would result in negligible to minor, long-term, River to compliment the paleontological adverse impacts. The city would be required features of the site. To accommodate this to consult and coordinate with the Army Corp additional park infrastructure, there would be of Engineers to obtain permits for these localized loss of soils and prime farmland activities. within the study area. It is anticipated that these changes would occur over a relatively Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, small percentage of the study area (less than 5- present, and foreseeable future actions 10%) and that the majority of the site would affecting the floodplains and wetlands of the remain undeveloped and managed as a nature Bosque River watershed within McLennan preserve. These changes would result in County are described in the “Impact Topics minor, long-term, adverse impacts to soils and and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of potentially minor, long-term, adverse impacts this chapter. The impact of these other actions to prime farmland in the study area. in combination with the actions under this

alternative would result in moderate, long- Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, term, adverse cumulative impacts on the present, and foreseeable future actions floodplains and wetlands of the Bosque River affecting the soils and prime farmland of watershed, as these changes are readily McLennan County are described in the apparent and have occurred throughout the “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects watershed. The incremental effect of Scenarios” section of this chapter. The impact alternative B relative to these cumulative of these other actions in combination with the impacts would be a very small component. actions under this alternative would result in moderate, long-term, adverse cumulative Conclusion. Impacts from the actions under impacts on the soils and prime farmland of alternative B would be negligible to minor, McLennan County as these changes are long-term, and adverse to the floodplains and readily apparent and occur throughout the potential wetlands found within the study county. The incremental effect of alternative B area. The cumulative effect of this alternative 108 Environmental Consequences of Alternative B on the floodplains and wetlands of the Bosque are described in the “Impact Topics and River watershed within McLennan County Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this would be very small. chapter. The impact of these other actions in combination with the actions under this Vegetation, Wildlife, Habitat, and Special alternative would result in major, long-term, Status Species adverse cumulative impacts as substantial changes to vegetation communities and Analysis. Under this alternative, the city wildlife habitat over a large area of the county envisions additional park development to have resulted in a number of extirpated provide for an environmental education species and the designation of a number of center and connecting trails to the Bosque special status species. The incremental effect River to compliment the paleontological of alternative B relative to these cumulative features of the site. There would be minor, impacts would provide a small beneficial long-term, adverse impacts on vegetation, offset to the countywide loss of native wildlife, and wildlife habitat over a localized vegetation and wildlife habitat by providing area of the site to accommodate park restoration and enhancement of these development. It is anticipated that these resources over a majority of the 109-acre changes would occur over a relatively small study area. percentage of the study area (less than 5% –

10%) and that the majority of the site would Conclusion. Impacts would be minor to remain undeveloped and managed as a nature moderate, long-term, and adverse or preserve. beneficial, depending on the particular action

being taken under alternative B. There could There could be on-going minor, adverse be minor, long-term, adverse impacts on impacts to vegetation and wildlife from the vegetation, wildlife, and wildlife habitat over a increase in human activities at the site that localized area of the site to accommodate park may result in the dispersal of wildlife and development and increased human activity. habitat degradation. Moderate, long-term, beneficial impacts are

anticipated when resource management When more detailed site planning is initiated, strategies are implemented to restore native consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service vegetation and enhance wildlife habitat and the state of Texas would be needed to throughout the study area. The cumulative assess the potential for impacting special effect of this alternative on the vegetation, status species. wildlife, habitat, and special status species of

McLennan County would provide a small As part of the environmental education focus beneficial offset. of this alternative, resource management plans could be initiated by the city and Baylor Impacts on Visitor Experience University for the undeveloped portions of the site such as conducting inventories to Analysis. Under alternative B, visitor determine the composition of native, non- experience opportunities at the Waco native, and/or special status species inhabiting Mammoth Site would expand markedly. the study area; and developing management Instead of the limited operational schedule (12 strategies for restoring native vegetation scheduled events) described under alternative patterns and enhancing wildlife habitat. This A, visitors to the site would be accommodated would result in moderate, long-term, on a daily basis. beneficial impacts for these resources. Under the three action alternatives, the visitor Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, experience would be governed by a tripartite present, and foreseeable future actions division of labor and responsibility among the affecting the vegetation, wildlife, habitat, and city of Waco, Baylor University, and the special status species of McLennan County National Park Service. In particular, under 109 CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES this alternative, the National Park Service experience opportunities found within the would likely become involved by providing city. Under alternative B, the study area would technical assistance in cooperation with the be available daily to the visiting public and city and university to interpret the core represents an appreciable beneficial paleontological site to visitors once the Waco increment to the vast array of engaging visitor Mammoth Site achieves National Natural experience opportunities found in the Waco Landmark status, which would be actively area. pursued under this alternative. The educational quality of probable exhibits at the Conclusion. Under alternative B, the impact to core paleontological site and educational the visitor experience would be moderate, outreach programs would be enhanced by long-term, and beneficial. The cumulative NPS input. effect of this alternative on the visitor experience opportunities within the Waco It is projected there would be moderate, long- area would be an appreciable benefit. term, beneficial impacts to the communities within the central Texas region and within the Impacts on Management and scientific community. This would be realized Operations by enhancing onsite access and interpretation Analysis. Under this alternative, the existing of the Waco Mammoth Site, encouraging cooperative management arrangement research activities to help broaden the between the city of Waco and Baylor understanding of what occurred there, and University is expanded with additional enhancing educational opportunities for local partners, with the city assuming the lead and regional school groups. responsibility for managing the site as a city

park. The city of Waco envisions additional For the area surrounding the core park development to provide for an paleontological site, which the city of Waco environmental education center and could potentially acquire from Baylor connecting trails to the Bosque River to University, the city could pursue ideas compliment the paleontological features of involving environmental education and the site. This would result in an expanded recreation. Visitors would benefit from this range of management responsibilities for the expanded range of visitor opportunities. city of Waco Parks Department, requiring

increases in staff and park operational funds. Change from the no-action alternative under Impacts to the city of Waco’s operations this alternative involves the potential of would be moderate, long-term, and adverse enhanced and expanded site-interpretation with the need to hire additional staff and mechanisms, educational outreach programs, allocate additional operational funding for and environmental educational and managing a new city park. recreational facilities. This would provide ongoing benefits to the visitor experience. Similar to alternative A, Baylor University’s

Mayborn Museum Complex would continue Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, to provide for the curatorial care of the in situ present, and foreseeable future actions specimens at the site and the paleontological affecting visitor experience opportunities collections within their Mayborn Museum within the Waco area are described in the. Complex. However, under this alternative the “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects Mayborn Museum staff would take on a more Scenario” section of this chapter. The impact active role for initiating a preparation program of these other actions in combination with the for the collected specimen, initiating resource actions under this alternative would result in management strategies for the other resources major, long-term, beneficial cumulative of the site, and developing onsite interpretive impacts since a number of projects have and educational programs as well as greatly enhanced the range of visitor educational outreach programs. The impacts 110 Environmental Consequences of Alternative B on Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum Impacts on Socioeconomic Complex operations would be moderate, Environment long-term, and adverse with the need to hire Analysis. Under this alternative, the city of additional staff and allocate additional Waco and Baylor University would expand operational funding to accommodate an visitor access to the Waco Mammoth Site. expanded range of management Instead of the limited operational schedule (12 responsibilities. scheduled events) described under alternative

A, the site would be open 7 days a week. Under this alternative, the National Park Depending on the level of marketing Service could provide technical assistance to employed to promote the site, the park would the city and university in the areas of resource have the potential to attract large numbers of management, interpretation, and educational long-distance travelers – the types of visitors outreach. This would be accomplished who patronize hotels, restaurants, and other through existing programs and staffing of the commercial establishments. This would service. The impacts to the National Park provide an economic benefit for area Service operations would be minor, short- businesses. It is projected that the term, and adverse resulting from the need to construction phase ($8.1 million) would add allocate additional funding to support $18.8 million to the central Texas region. Staff technical assistance activities and travel costs. and operation budgets ($345,000) would have

an on-going economic impact of $0.98 million. Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, The economic impact of visitor spending present, and foreseeable future actions would be $0.68 million. The total economic affecting management and operations of the impact of this alternative would amount to a city of Waco, Baylor University’s Mayborn one-time impact of $20.46 million with a Museum Complex, and the National Park continuing annual impact of $1.66 million to Service are described in the “Impact Topics the central Texas region. This would result in and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of a moderate, long-term, beneficial impact on this chapter. The impact of these other actions the Waco economic environment resulting in combination with the actions under this from enhanced tourism and increased alternative would result in minor to moderate, spending in the area generated by the daily long-term, adverse cumulative impacts on the influx of visitors to the site and the addition of city of Waco, Baylor’s Mayborn Museum new employment opportunities for managing Complex, and National Park Service’s and maintaining a new city park. operations. The contribution of alternative B relative to these cumulative impacts would be Communities in the central Texas region a small component. would benefit from enhanced educational

outreach programs. Conclusion. Under alternative B, impacts on management and operations would vary It is expected that this enhanced level of depending on the managing entity. The visitor access to the site would noticeably impacts to operations at the city of Waco and expand the range of tourism opportunities Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum would within the city and thereby beneficially be moderate, long-term, and adverse. The impacting local community life. impacts to the National Park Service’s operations would be minor, short-term, and Residents living in the surrounding area may adverse. The cumulative effect of this experience increased traffic congestion on a alternative on the management and operations daily basis. However, impacts would be of the city of Waco, the Mayborn Museum, minimal since access to the site would be by and the National Park Service would be small. New Steinbeck Bend Road, a local arterial

connector road that currently experiences low

111 CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES volume traffic as the surrounding areas are of other economic activity and community mostly undeveloped. initiatives previously completed or underway.

Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, Conclusion. Under alternative B, there would present, and foreseeable future actions be moderate, long-term, beneficial impacts on affecting the socioeconomic environment of the Waco economic environment and the the Waco MSA and central Texas region are communities within the central Texas region. described in the “Impact Topics and There would be minor, long-term, adverse Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this impacts on the residents of adjacent chapter. The impact of these other actions in neighborhoods and businesses resulting from combination with the actions under this increased traffic congestion generated daily alternative would result in moderate, long- along New Steinbeck Bend Road. The term, beneficial cumulative impacts on the cumulative effect of this alternative on the Waco MSA socioeconomic environment. The economic environment of the Waco MSA and incremental effect of alternative B relative to the communities of the central Texas region these cumulative impacts would be a small would be small. component when compared to the vast array

112 Environmental Consequences of Alternative C

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF ALTERNATIVE C Partnerships Led by the National Park Service

Impacts on the Fundamental Paleontological Collections Resources of the Waco Mammoth Site (Museum Collections) In Situ Specimens and Geologic Context of Analysis. Under this alternative, the the Discovery Site paleontological collections management would be divided between the National Park Analysis. Under alternative C, the National Service and Baylor University with the Park Service would assume management initiation of a program of specimen responsibilities for geologic context of the preparation and cataloging called for, as in discovery site. This would include monitoring alternative B, but with the National Park the conditions of the in situ specimens and Service taking the lead. It is assumed that a perhaps exploring other areas within the specimen preparation laboratory could be excavation shelter to acquire additional incorporated into the city’s proposed information about the circumstances of the environmental education center at the site site. These changes would enhance resource with the National Park Service operating the conditions and promote a greater lab. The collection would continue to be understanding of the paleontological housed within Baylor University’s Mayborn resource. As this would affect areas with high Museum Complex, except that select portions data potential, these actions would result in of the collection may be housed on site within moderate, long-term, beneficial impacts. the education center for the purposes of

exhibiting prepared specimens and/or Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, exhibiting the specimen preparation process present, and foreseeable future actions to the public. Research reports, documenta- affecting the in situ specimens and the tion of the site and excavation activities would geological context of the discovery site are be maintained onsite by the National Park described in the “Impact Topics and Service. Similar to alternative B, this would Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this benefit future researchers, as access to chapter. The impact of these other actions in prepared specimens would be made possible combination with the actions under this for the first time. It would also provide a alternative would result in major, long-term, benefit for the public, as select fossils could be beneficial cumulative impacts to the in situ cast for exhibit purposes. However, under this specimens and geologic context of the alternative, it would provide an added benefit discovery site. The contribution of alternative of integrating the specimen preparation C relative to these cumulative impacts would activities into the interpretive experience at be appreciably beneficial. the site. These changes would result in a

moderate, long-term, beneficial impact on Conclusion. Under alternative C, impacts paleontological collections of the Waco would be moderate, long-term beneficial to Mammoth Site under this alternative. the in situ specimens and geologic context of the discovery site. The cumulative effect of Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, this alternative on the in situ specimens and present, and foreseeable future actions geologic context of the discovery site would affecting the Mayborn Museum’s museum provide an appreciable benefit. collections are described in the “Impact

Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this chapter. The impact of these other actions in combination with the actions under this alternative would result in major, 113 CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES long-term, beneficial cumulative impacts on anticipated, resulting in potentially minor, the Mayborn Museum’s central Texas long-term adverse impacts to soils and museum collections. The incremental effect of potentially minor, long-term adverse impacts alternative C relative to these cumulative to some of the prime farmland contained impacts would be appreciably beneficial. within the study area. It is anticipated that these changes would occur over a relatively The effects of other past, present, and small percentage of the study area (less than 5- foreseeable future actions affecting the 10%) and that the majority of the site would museum collections of the National Park remain undeveloped and managed as a nature Service’s Intermountain Region are described preserve. in the “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this chapter. The impact Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, of these other actions in combination with the present, and foreseeable future actions actions under this alternative would result in affecting the soils and prime farmland of moderate, long-term, beneficial cumulative McLennan County are described in the impacts on the museum collections of the “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects National Park Service’s Intermountain Scenarios” section of this chapter. The impact Region. Alternative C would expand the NPS of these other actions in combination with the collection although it deviates from the trend actions under this alternative would result in to centralize museum collections in the NPS moderate, long-term, adverse cumulative Intermountain Region. The intent of this impacts on the soils and prime farmland of alternative is to keep the entire McLennan County as these changes are paleontological collection intact and in close readily apparent and occur throughout the association with the discovery site. The county. The incremental effect of alternative incremental effect of alternative C to these C relative to these cumulative impacts would cumulative impacts would be a very small be a very small component. component. Conclusion. Under alternative C, impacts Conclusion. Under alternative C, impacts would be minor, long-term, and adverse on would be moderate, long-term, and beneficial soils and potentially minor, long-term, and on the paleontological collections of the Waco adverse on the prime farmland in the study Mammoth Site. The cumulative effect of this area. The cumulative effect of this alternative alternative on the Mayborn Museum’s central on the soils and prime farmland of McLennan Texas collection would be an appreciable County would be very small. benefit. The cumulative effect of this alternative on the museum collections of the Floodplains and Wetland National Park Service’s Intermountain Region Analysis. Under alternative C, there are no would be very small. federal actions contemplated that would affect floodplains or wetlands. However, the Impacts on Other Resources city’s long-range vision for accommodating Soils including Prime Farmlands water taxi service along the Bosque River and connecting to regional trailways along the Analysis. Under this alternative, the city Brazos River Corridor would entail a minor envisions additional park development to level of development on a portion of the study provide for an environmental education area that fronts the Bosque River. Features center and connecting trails to the Bosque such as a boat dock and trails may be River to compliment the paleontological constructed within the floodplain and features of the site. It is assumed under this wetlands areas and would adversely impact alternative that space for NPS management relatively small, localized areas of these staff would also be accommodated in the resources. This would result in negligible to center. To accommodate additional park minor, long-term, adverse impacts. The city infrastructure, some localized loss of soil is 114 Environmental Consequences of Alternative C would be required to consult and coordinate may result in the dispersal of wildlife and the with the Army Corp of Engineers to obtain degradation of habitat. permits for these activities. When more detailed site planning is initiated, Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service present, and foreseeable future actions and the state of Texas would be needed to affecting the floodplains and wetlands of the assess the potential for impacting special Bosque River watershed within McLennan status species. County are described in the “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of As part of the environmental education focus this chapter. The impact of these other actions of this alternative, it is anticipated that in combination with the actions under this resource management plans could be initiated alternative would result in moderate, long- by the city, Baylor University, and the term, adverse cumulative impacts as these National Park Service for the undeveloped changes are readily apparent and have portions of the site such as conducting occurred throughout watershed. The inventories to determine the composition of incremental effect of alternative C relative to native, non-native, and/or special status these cumulative impacts would be a very species inhabiting the study area; and small component. developing management strategies for restoring native vegetation patterns and Conclusion. Impacts from the actions under enhancing wildlife habitat. This would result alternative C would be negligible to minor, in moderate, long-term, beneficial impacts for long-term, and adverse to the floodplains and these resources. potential wetlands found within the study area. The cumulative effect of this alternative Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, on the floodplains and wetlands of the Bosque present, and foreseeable future actions River watershed within McLennan County affecting the vegetation, wildlife, habitat, and would be very small. special status species of McLennan County are described in the “Impact Topics and Vegetation, Wildlife, Habitat, and Special Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this Status Species chapter. The impact of these other actions in Analysis Under this alternative, the city combination with the actions under this envisions additional park development to alternative would result in major, long-term, provide for an environmental education adverse cumulative impacts as substantial center and connecting trails to the Bosque changes to vegetation communities and River to compliment the paleontological wildlife habitat over a large area of the county features of the site. There would be minor, have resulted in a number of extirpated long-term, adverse impacts on vegetation, species and the designation of a number of wildlife, and wildlife habitat over a localized special status species. The incremental effect area of the site to accommodate park of alternative C relative to these cumulative development. It is anticipated that these impacts would provide a small beneficial changes would occur over a relatively small offset to the countywide loss of native percentage of the study area (less than 5-10%) vegetation and wildlife habitat by providing and that the majority of the site would remain restoration and enhancement of these undeveloped and managed as a nature resources over a majority of the 109-acre preserve. study area.

There also could be on-going minor, adverse Conclusion. Impacts would be minor to impacts on vegetation and wildlife from the moderate, long-term, and adverse or increase in human activities at the site that beneficial, depending on the particular action 115

CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES being taken under alternative C. There could For the area surrounding the core be minor, long-term, adverse impacts on paleontological site, the National Park Service vegetation, wildlife, and wildlife habitat over a would look to partners to help initiate localized area of the study area to additional visitor experience opportunities accommodate park development and there. Under the city of Waco’s management increased human activity. Moderate, long- lead, they would have the freedom to pursue term, beneficial impacts are anticipated when ideas involving environmental education and resource management strategies are recreation. Visitors would benefit from this implemented to restore native vegetation and expanded range of visitor opportunities. enhance wildlife habitat throughout the study Change from the no-action alternative under area. The cumulative effect of this alternative this alternative involves the potential of on the vegetation, wildlife, habitat, and special increased interpretation mechanisms, status species of McLennan County would educational outreach programs, and provide a small beneficial offset. environmental educational and recreational facilities. This would provide on-going Impacts on Visitor Experience benefits to the visitor experience.

Analysis. Similar to alternative B, under Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, alternative C the visitor experience present, and foreseeable future actions opportunities at the Waco Mammoth Site affecting visitor experience opportunities would expand markedly. Instead of the within the Waco area are described in the. limited operational schedule (12 scheduled “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects events) described under alternative A, visitors Scenario” section of this chapter. The impact to the site would be accommodated on a daily of these other actions in combination with the basis. actions under this alternative would result in

major, long-term, beneficial cumulative Under this alternative, the tripartite division impacts since a number of projects have of labor and responsibility for interpretation greatly enhanced the range of visitor among the city of Waco, Baylor University, experience opportunities found within the and the National Park Service, would mean city. Alternative C adds a unique component that the National Park Service would take the to this mix, available daily to the visiting lead interpreting the core paleontological site public and represents a noticeable increment to visitors. It would own and control that to the vast array of engaging visitor experience portion of the study area, which would likely opportunities found in the Waco area. mean NPS designed interpretative exhibits at the core paleontological site; NPS designed Conclusion. Under alternative C, the impact to interpretive and educational outreach the visitor experience would be moderate, programs and media, and trained NPS long-term, and beneficial. The cumulative personnel to speak with visitors. effect of this alternative on the visitor

experience opportunities within the Waco It is projected there would be moderate, long- area would be an appreciable benefit. term, beneficial impacts to the communities within the central Texas region and within the scientific community. This would be realized Impacts on Management and by enhancing onsite access and interpretation Operations of the Waco Mammoth Site, encouraging Analysis. Under this alternative, the Waco research activities to help broaden the Mammoth Site would be managed as a new understanding of what occurred there, and unit of the national park system, in enhancing educational opportunities for local partnership with the city of Waco, Baylor and regional school groups. University, and others.

116 Environmental Consequences of Alternative C

The National Park Service would take the lead Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, responsibility for ensuring the protection, present, and foreseeable future actions scientific study, and visitor enjoyment of affecting management and operations of the paleontological resources, enlisting the help of city of Waco, Baylor University’s Mayborn partners to accomplish this mission. Impacts Museum Complex, and the National Park to the National Park Service’s operations Service are described in the “Impact Topics would be moderate, long-term, and adverse and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of resulting from the expanded range of this chapter. The impact of these other actions management responsibilities for the National in combination with the actions under this Park Service requiring congressional alternative would result in minor to moderate, allocation of park funding and the assignment long-term, adverse cumulative impacts on the of additional National Park Service personnel city of Waco; Baylor University’s Mayborn to manage a new unit of the national park Museum Complex; and National Park system. Service’s operations. The contribution of alternative C relative to these cumulative The city of Waco would take the lead for impacts would be a small component. initiating additional recreational, interpretive, and environmental educational opportunities Conclusion. Under alternative C, impacts on the site. This would result in an expanded would range from negligible to moderately range of management responsibilities for the adverse and would vary depending on the city of Waco Parks and Recreation managing entity. The impacts on the city of Department. The impacts on the city of Waco Waco’s operations would be moderate, long- operations would be moderate, long-term, term, and adverse. The impacts on Baylor and adverse with the need to hire additional University’s Mayborn Museum Complex staff and allocate additional operational operations would be negligible to minor, long- funding for managing new park facilities. term, and adverse. The impacts to the National Park Service’s operations would be Similar to alternative A, Baylor University moderate, long-term, and adverse. The would continue to accommodate the cumulative effect of this alternative on the curatorial storage of the paleontological management and operations of the city of collections within their Mayborn Museum Waco, the Mayborn Museum, and the Complex. However, under this alternative, National Park Service would be relatively management of the fundamental resources small. would be transferred to the National Park Service. Baylor University primary role under Impacts on Socioeconomic this alternative would be to collaborate with Environment the National Park Service and the city of Analysis. Similar to alternative B, under Waco for expanding the interpretive and alternative C visitor access to the Waco educational programs highlighting the special Mammoth Site would be expanded. Instead of resource. The impacts on Baylor University’s the limited operational schedule (12 Mayborn Museum Complex operations scheduled events) described under alternative would be negligible to minor, long-term, and A, the site would be open 7 days a week. adverse with the transfer of their management Depending on the level of marketing responsibility for the fundamental resources employed to promote the site, the park would to the National Park Service. It is anticipated have the potential to attract large numbers of that there would be a minimal change from long-distance travelers—the types of visitors their current investment in operations and who patronize hotels, restaurants, and other management support for the resource as the commercial establishments. Designation as a emphasis of their effort is redirected into new unit of the national park system would interpretive and educational programs. enhance awareness of the site and could 117

CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES potentially attract visitors from outside of the Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, state. This would provide an economic benefit present, and foreseeable future actions for area businesses. It is projected that the affecting the socioeconomic environment of construction phase ($8.7 million) would add the Waco MSA and central Texas region are $20.23 million to the central Texas region. described in the “Impact Topics and Staff and operation budgets ($645,000) would Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this have an on-going economic impact of $1.82 chapter. The impact of these other actions in million. The economic impact of visitor combination with the actions under this spending would be $0.68 million. The total alternative would result in moderate, long- economic impact of this alternative would term, beneficial cumulative impacts on the amount to a one-time impact of $22.73 million Waco MSA socioeconomic environment and with a continuing annual impact of $2.5 minor, long-term, beneficial cumulative million to the central Texas region. This impacts on the central Texas region. The would result in a moderate, long-term, incremental effect of alternative C relative to beneficial impact on the Waco economic these cumulative impacts would be a small environment resulting from enhanced tourism component when compared to the vast array and increased spending in the area generated of other economic activity and community by the daily influx of visitors to the site and initiatives previously completed or underway. the addition of new employment opportunities for managing and maintaining a new Conclusion. Under alternative C, there would park. be moderate, long-term, beneficial impacts on the Waco economic environment and the It is expected that this enhanced level of communities within the central Texas region visitor access to the site would noticeably and within the scientific community. There expand the range of tourism opportunities would be minor, long-term, adverse impacts within the city and thereby beneficially impact on the residents of adjacent neighborhoods local community life. and businesses resulting from increased traffic congestion generated daily along New There would be additional long-term, Steinbeck Bend Road. The cumulative effect beneficial impacts resulting from the of this alternative on the economic intangible value of collective community pride environment of the Waco MSA and the for the citizens of Waco who have supported communities of the central Texas region the notion of establishing the Waco would be small. Mammoth Site as a new unit of the national park system for the entire Nation to enjoy.

Residents living in the surrounding area may experience increased traffic congestion on a daily basis. However, impacts would be minimal since access to the site would be by New Steinbeck Bend Road, a local arterial connector road that currently experiences low volume traffic as the surrounding areas are mostly undeveloped.

118 Environmental Consequences of Alternative D

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF ALTERNATIVE D Managed as a Focused Unit of the National Park System

Impacts on the Fundamental archives would be transferred to the National Resources of the Waco Mammoth Site Park Service. The storage of collected specimens and archives would continue to be In Situ Specimens and Geologic Context of housed within Baylor University’s Mayborn the Discovery Site Museum Complex, until the collection could Analysis. Under this alternative, management be accommodated in a new collection storage of the entire study area would be transferred facility with a specimen preparation to the National Park Service. This would laboratory provided onsite. The National Park include monitoring the conditions of the in Service would develop protocols and situ specimens and perhaps exploring other methodologies for initiating preparation and areas within the excavation shelter to acquire cataloging of the specimens currently housed additional information about the in plaster jackets and the smaller fragments circumstances of the site. These changes and soil samples in cardboard boxes. This would enhance resource conditions and would benefit future researchers as access to promote a greater understanding of the prepared specimens would be made possible paleontological resource. As this would affect for the first time. It would also benefit the areas with high data potential, these actions public as select fossils could be caste for would result in moderate, long-term, exhibit purposes and specimen preparation beneficial impacts. activities could be integrated into the interpretive experience at the site. These Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, changes would result in a moderate, long- present, and foreseeable future actions term, beneficial impact on paleontological affecting the in situ specimens and the collections of the Waco Mammoth Site under geological context of the discovery site are this alternative. described in the “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, chapter. The impact of these other actions in present, and foreseeable future actions affecting combination with the actions under this the Mayborn Museum’s museum collections are alternative would result in major, long-term, described in the “Impact Topics and Cumulative beneficial cumulative impacts to the in situ Effects Scenarios” section of this chapter. The specimens and geologic context of the impact of these other actions in combination discovery site. The contribution of alternative with the actions under this alternative would D relative to these cumulative impacts would result in major, long-term, beneficial cumulative be appreciably beneficial. impacts for the Mayborn Museum’s central Texas collection. The incremental effect of Conclusion. Under alternative D, impacts alternative D would contribute a very noticeable would be moderate, long-term, and beneficial benefit to the Mayborn Museum collections as to the in situ specimens and geologic context the transfer of the Waco Mammoth Site of the discovery site. The cumulative effect of collections to an onsite facility operated by the this alternative on the in situ specimens and National Park Service would free up significant geologic context of the discovery site would collections space within the provide an appreciable benefit. geology/paleontological collections storage room of the Mayborn Museum. Paleontological Collections (Museum Collections) The effects of other past, present, and Analysis. Under this alternative, management foreseeable future actions affecting the of the entire paleontological collections and museum collections of the National Park 119 CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Service’s Intermountain Region are described over a relatively small percentage of the study in the “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects area (less than 5%) and that the majority of Scenarios” section of this chapter. The impact the site would remain undeveloped and of these other actions in combination with the managed as a nature preserve. actions under this alternative would result in moderate, long-term, beneficial cumulative Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, impacts on the museum collections of the present, and foreseeable future actions National Park Service’s Intermountain affecting the soils and prime farmland of Region. Alternative D would expand the NPS McLennan County are described in the collection although it deviates from the trend “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects to centralize museum collections in the NPS Scenarios” section of this chapter. The impact Intermountain Region. The intent of this of these other actions in combination with the alternative is to keep the entire actions under this alternative would result in paleontological collection intact and in close moderate, long-term, adverse cumulative association with the discovery site. The impacts on the soils and prime farmland of incremental effect of alternative D to these McLennan County as these changes are cumulative impacts would be a very small readily apparent and occur throughout the component. county. The incremental effect of alternative D to these cumulative impacts would be a very Conclusion. Under alternative D, impacts small component. would be moderate, long-term, and beneficial on the paleontological collections of the Waco Conclusion. Under alternative D, impacts Mammoth Site. The cumulative effect of this would be minor, long-term, and adverse on alternative on the Mayborn Museum’s central soils, and potentially minor, long-term, and Texas collection would be an appreciable adverse on the prime farmland in the study benefit. The cumulative effect of this area. The cumulative effect of this alternative alternative on the museum collections of the on the soils and prime farmland of McLennan National Park Service’s Intermountain Region County would be very small. would be very small. Floodplains and Wetlands Impacts on Other Resources Analysis Under alternative D, there are no Soils including Prime Farmlands federal actions contemplated that would affect the floodplains or potential wetland Analysis. Under this alternative, it is areas along the Bosque River section within anticipated that a minimum level of additional the study area. Consequently, there would be onsite development would be required to no impacts to the current condition of these allow the National Park Service to effectively resources. manage for resource protection and visitor enjoyment such as space to accommodate Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, enhanced interpretive and educational present, and foreseeable future actions programs, staff offices, maintenance support, affecting the floodplains and wetlands of the paleontological collections storage, and Bosque River watershed are described in the specimen preparation. To accommodate “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects additional park infrastructure, some localized Scenarios” section of this chapter. Alternative loss of soil is anticipated, resulting in D would have no impacts on these resources potentially minor, long-term, adverse impacts and therefore would not contribute to the to soils and potentially minor, long-term, effects of these other actions. Consequently, adverse impacts to some of the prime there would be no cumulative impacts to farmland contained within the study area. It is floodplains and wetlands of the Bosque River anticipated that these changes would occur 120

Environmental Consequences of Alternative D watershed within McLennan County under combination with the actions under this alternative this alternative. alternative would result in major, long-term, adverse cumulative impacts as substantial Conclusion. There would be no impact to the changes to vegetation communities and floodplains and potential wetlands found wildlife habitat over a large area of the county within the study area from the actions under have resulted in a number of extirpated this alternative. Correspondingly, there would species and the designation of a number of be no cumulative effect. special status species. The incremental effect of alternative D relative to these cumulative Vegetation, Wildlife, Habitat, and Special impacts could potentially provide a relatively Status Species small beneficial offset to the countywide loss Analysis. The National Park Service would of native vegetation and wildlife habitat by require a minimum level of additional onsite providing restoration and enhancement of development to effectively manage for these resources over a majority of the 109-acre resource protection and visitor enjoyment. study area. There would be minor, long-term, adverse impacts on vegetation, wildlife, and wildlife Conclusion. Impacts would be minor to habitat over a localized area of the site to moderate, long-term, and adverse or accommodate park development. It is beneficial, depending on the particular action anticipated that these changes would occur being taken under this alternative. There over a relatively small percentage of the study would be minor, long-term, adverse impacts area (less than 5%) and that the majority of on vegetation, wildlife, and wildlife habitat the site would remain undeveloped and over a localized area of the study area to managed as a nature preserve. accommodate park development. Moderate, long-term, beneficial impacts are anticipated As development plans are prepared, when resource management strategies are consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service implemented to restore native vegetation and and the state of Texas would be needed to enhance wildlife habitat throughout the study assess the potential for impacting special area. The cumulative effect of this alternative status species. on the vegetation, wildlife, habitat, and special status species of McLennan County would be It is also anticipated that the National Park a small beneficial offset. Service would initiate resource management activities for the undeveloped portions of the Impacts on Visitor Experience site such as conducting resource inventories Analysis. Similar to alternative B, visitor to determine the composition of native, experience opportunities at the Waco nonnative, and/or special status species Mammoth Site would expand markedly. inhabiting the study area; and developing Instead of the limited operational schedule (12 management strategies for restoring native scheduled events) described under alternative vegetation patterns and enhancing wildlife A, visitors to the site would be accommodated habitat. This would result in moderate, long- on a daily basis. term, beneficial impacts for these resources. Under this alternative, the tripartite division Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, of labor and responsibility for interpretation present, and foreseeable future actions among the city of Waco, Baylor University, affecting the vegetation, wildlife, habitat, and and the National Park Service, would mean special status species of McLennan County that the National Park Service would take the are described in the ”Impact Topics and lead for visitor understanding and enjoyment. Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this This would likely mean NPS designed chapter. The impact of these other actions in interpretative exhibits and interpretive and

121 CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES educational outreach programs and media, Conclusion. Under alternative D, the impact to and trained NPS personnel to interact with the visitor experience would be moderate, visitors. Additional opportunities for visitors long-term, and beneficial. The cumulative to observe the work of paleontologists and effect of this alternative on the visitor technicians within the specimen preparation experience opportunities within the Waco laboratory could be provided. Such readily area would be an appreciable benefit. apparent visitor access would emphasize the core values of the paleontological resources at Impacts on Management and the site and enable visitors to realize, Operations appreciate, and enjoy new interpretative Analysis. Under this alternative, the Waco mechanisms. Mammoth Site would be managed as a new

unit of the national park system, with the School groups of the central Texas region entire paleontological resource (in situ fossils would benefit from the opportunity to engage and the collection of fossils currently housed in onsite educational opportunities. at Baylor University) managed onsite by the

National Park Service. The National Park Under this alternative, visitor experience Service would focus on a core mission of opportunities within the surrounding lands protection, scientific study, and interpretation would not be accommodated, as this area of the fundamental paleontological resources. would be managed as a natural buffer for the Impacts to the National Park Service’s protection and preservation of the core operations would be moderate, long-term, paleontological site. Consequently, there and adverse resulting from the expanded would be no impacts to the visitor experience range of management responsibilities for the in this area. National Park Service requiring congressional

allocation of park funding and the assignment Change from the no-action alternative under of additional National Park Service personnel this alternative involves the potential of to manage a new unit of the national park increased interpretation mechanisms, system. educational outreach programs, and environmental educational and recreational The city of Waco would transfer ownership of facilities. This would provide on-going their land to the federal government as well as benefits to the visitor experience. the primary responsibilities for managing and

operating the Waco Mammoth Site to the Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, National Park Service. This would reduce the present, and foreseeable future actions need to dedicate staff and funding to operate affecting visitor experience opportunities and maintain the excavation pavilion. The city within the Waco area are described in the. would still retain an affiliation with the site by “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects participating in a collaborative effort with the Scenario” section of this chapter. The impact National Park Service for developing of these other actions in combination with the interpretive and educational outreach actions under this alternative would result in programs on the special resource. It is major, long-term, beneficial cumulative assumed that city services such as fire, police, impacts to the overall visitor experience and emergency medical response would still opportunities found within the Waco area. be provided for the site. Alternative D adds unique component to the mix, available daily to the visiting public and Baylor University would transfer the represents a noticeable increment to an ownership of the paleontological collection to already vast array of engaging visitor the National Park Service, and when a experience opportunities found in the Waco collection storage facility is constructed on area. 122

Environmental Consequences of Alternative D site, the collection would be moved into this city of Waco’s and Baylor University’s new facility. This change in management Mayborn Museum Complex would be responsibilities would free up space in the moderate, long-term, and beneficial while the Mayborn Museum collection room and impacts to the National Park Service reduce the need to dedicate museum staff for operations would be moderate, long-term, the curatorial care of the paleontological and adverse. The cumulative effect of this collection. Similar to the city’s wishes to still alternative on the management and operations retain some form of affiliation with the site, of the city of Waco and the Mayborn Museum Baylor University would participate in a would provide a small beneficial offset. The collaborative effort with the National Park cumulative effect of this alternative on the Service for developing interpretive and National Park Service would be small. educational outreach programs on the special resource. Impacts on Socioeconomic Environment The impacts to the operations of the city of Analysis. Similar to alternative B, under Waco and Baylor University’s Mayborn alternative D visitor access to the Waco Museum Complex would be moderate, long- Mammoth Site would be expanded. Instead of term, and beneficial with the transfer of the limited operational schedule (12 management responsibilities to the National scheduled events) described under alternative Park Service. This would free up the staff and A, the site would be open 7 days a week. operational expenses previously dedicated to Depending on the level of marketing the Waco Mammoth Site for other needs employed to promote the site, the park would within each of their respective organizations. have the potential to attract large numbers of

long-distance travelers – the types of visitors Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, who patronize hotels, restaurants, and other present, and foreseeable future actions commercial establishments. As a new unit of affecting management and operations of the the national park system, this would enhance city of Waco, Baylor University’s Mayborn nationwide awareness of the site and Museum Complex, and the National Park potentially attract visitors from outside of the Service are described in the “Impact Topics state. This would provide and economic and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of benefit for area businesses. It is projected that this chapter. The impact of these other actions the construction phase ($2.6 million) would in combination with the actions under this add $6.05 million to the central Texas region. alternative would result in minor, long-term, Staff and operation budgets ($768,500) would adverse cumulative impacts on the city of have an on-going economic impact of $2.17 Waco; Baylor’s Mayborn Museum Complex; million. The economic impact of visitor and National Park Service operations. The spending would be $0.68 million. The total contributions of alternative D relative to the economic impact of this alternative would cumulative impacts on the city of Waco and amount to a one-time impact of $8.9 million Baylor University’s Mayborn Museum with a continuing annual impact of $2.85 Complex would provide a modest beneficial million to the central Texas region. This offset to the cumulative effects on their would result in a moderate, long-term, operations by reducing their overall beneficial impact on the Waco economic management responsibilities at the Waco environment resulting from enhanced tourism Mammoth Site. The contributions of and increased spending in the area generated alternative D relative to the cumulative by the daily influx of visitors to the site and impacts on the National Park Service would the addition of new employment add a small increment. opportunities for managing and maintaining a

new city park. Conclusion. Impacts would vary depending on the management entity. The impacts to the 123 CHAPTER SIX: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Communities in the central Texas region affecting the socioeconomic environment of would benefit from enhanced educational the Waco MSA and central Texas region are outreach programs. described in the “Impact Topics and Cumulative Effects Scenarios” section of this It is expected that this enhanced level of chapter. The impact of these other actions in visitor access to the site would noticeably combination with the actions under this expand the range of tourism opportunities alternative would result in moderate, long- within the city and thereby beneficially impact term, beneficial cumulative impacts on the local community life. Waco MSA socioeconomic environment. The incremental effect of alternative D to these There would be additional long-term, cumulative impacts would be a small beneficial impacts resulting from the component when compared to the vast array intangible value of collective community pride of other economic activity and community for the citizens of Waco who have supported initiatives previously completed or underway. the notion of establishing the Waco Mammoth Site as a new unit of the national Conclusion. Under alternative D, there would park system for the entire Nation to enjoy. be moderate, long-term, beneficial impacts on the Waco economic environment and Residents living in the surrounding area may communities within the central Texas region. experience increased traffic congestion on a There would be minor, long-term, adverse daily basis. However, impacts would be impacts on the residents of adjacent minimal since access to the site would be by neighborhoods and businesses resulting from New Steinbeck Bend Road, a local arterial increased traffic congestion generated daily connector road that currently experiences low along New Steinbeck Bend Road. The volume traffic as the surrounding areas are cumulative effect of this alternative on the mostly undeveloped. economic environment of the Waco MSA and the communities of the central Texas region Cumulative Effect. The effects of other past, would be small. present, and foreseeable future actions

124

Chapter Seven: Public Involvement, Consultation, and Coordination

CHAPTER OVERVIEW The team prepared handout materials for initial agency and public contacts including a Solicitation of public comment on Special brochure with a mail back card for listing Resource Studies is required by NPS policy. contact information for the purpose of More importantly however, public input helps engaging interested members of the public. the National Park Service shape and improve its preliminary ideas to better meet the Lyndon B. Johnson National Historical Park is mission of the Park Service, the goals of the nearest NPS unit to the study area and NEPA, and the interests of the American they have graciously provided logistical public. support to the special resource study team as

well as preparing the initial mailing list for the This chapter describes the public involvement study. program employed during this project and documents the role public participation On October 14, 2005, Congressman Chet played in identifying and refining the Edwards conducted a press conference management alternatives included in this announcing the start of the special resource report. study; Texas State Coordinator and former

Superintendent of Lyndon B. Johnson

Historical Park David Vela represented the AGENCY AND PUBLIC SCOPING National Park Service. ACTIVITIES Internal scoping with representatives of the On October 18, 2005, Lyndon B. Johnson city of Waco and Baylor University was Historical Park issued a press release conducted during July 19 –20, 2005. The announcing the start of the study. primary objective was to meet with current landowners and principal players who have On October 25, 2005, the study team met with been actively involved in the protection and representatives of the Texas Historical preservation of the site. This enabled the Commission, (the umbrella agency for the study team to gain a better understanding of State Historic Preservation Office). Attending site conditions, history of excavations the meeting included Mark H. Denton, activities, stakeholders, issues, and Director, State & Federal Review Section, informational sources. Additional topics of Archeology Division, Dr. James Bruseth, discussions included reviewing the SRS Director, Archeology Division, and Dr. Ernest process, the study schedule, and strategies for Lundelius, Professor Emeritus, University of public involvement. Texas at Austin. Mr. Denton noted that an archeological investigation was previously A web page was established on the National conducted within the excavation area of the Park Service Planning, Environment, and site. The archeologist did not find any signs of Public Comment (PEPC) website that human interaction with the mammoth herd. introduced the special resource study The State Historic Preservation Officer is initiative, including information on the study supportive of the study and the possibility of process and schedule, and invited members of the site becoming a unit of the national park the public to participate in the process. system; however, with this general level of 125

CHAPTER SEVEN: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT, CONSULTATION, AND COORDINATION planning, the state does not see a need to enter additional 46 individuals requested to be into 106 consultations concerning the special included on the mailing list. resource study. They would prefer to revisit the 106 consultation during future Common threads of concern focused on the undertakings such as additional archeological following primary themes: provide visitor surveys at the site or during implementation access to the site, utilize the research and activities for park development. educational potential of the site, and balance resource protection with these activities. A On October 27, 2005, Baylor University summary of the public input collected is more hosted a series of four public and agency fully described under chapter four. scoping meetings throughout the day, providing a forum for the NPS study team to During the preparation of this plan, NPS staff meet with the original donors, local coordinated informally with the U.S. Fish and government managers, affiliated groups, Wildlife Service’s Austin, Texas, field office. agencies, the general public, and local The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service responded community leaders. It also provided the in December 2005 with a list of threatened opportunity for public discussion of their and endangered species for McLennan visions and concerns for the resource, as well County. The Texas Department of Parks and as providing the study team an opportunity to Wildlife (TPW) forwarded a list of state provide an overview of the study process and candidate, proposed, and listed threatened schedule. and endangered species for McLennan County in February 2006.

On April 11 –12, 2006, the study team met with representatives of Baylor University and the city of Waco to discuss the city’s progress with the Save America’s Treasures initiative, provide an update on the study team’s progress with significance, suitability, and feasibility, review fundamental purpose framework of NPS units, develop “working” purpose statement for the Waco Mammoth Site, discuss the current Waco/Baylor

October 27, 2005 public meeting in Baylor University management agreement, explore potential Mayborn Museum Complex’s SBC Auditorium. roles in management alternatives, and to provide a briefing of the study purpose and The evening program almost filled Baylor progress for a fundraising luncheon hosted by University’s SBC auditorium (200 seat the city for the purpose of generating capacity). The meetings were covered by the additional donations to match the Save local newspaper and television stations. America’s Treasures grant from the National Contact cards were distributed to attendees at Park Service. each session to help grow the mailing list. A total of 171 cards were collected that day. On December 7, 2006, an interim report detailing the resource evaluation and study A newsletter introducing the study process, team’s initial findings for the significance, schedule, as well as a summary of the issues suitability, and feasibility of the Waco identified by the public during the October Mammoth Site was submitted to NPS public scoping meetings was distributed in leadership for consideration and review. A March 2006. We received 48 responses from number of internal meetings and presenta- individuals providing comments. An tions were conducted between the study team

126

Agency and Public Scoping Activities and NPS colleagues, which culminated in an Meetings with representatives of the city of approval from NPS leadership to proceed Waco, Baylor University, and the Waco with the evaluation of the fourth criteria, Mammoth Foundation were conducted on which considers management options. September 19, 2007, to discuss the management options under consideration by Drawing from the body of stakeholder and the National Park Service. Baylor University public input, the study team developed a range scheduled a media event at the Waco of management alternatives and tested their Mammoth Site to encourage a broader viability with current managers of the coverage of the special resource study, resource within the city of Waco and Baylor community initiatives for protecting the site, University and then NPS leadership. and to encourage public participation in the Differences among alternatives related study. primarily as to who would manage the area and the approach or method to which the Over 90 written responses were received by site’s purpose would be achieved. Four mail and via the NPS planning website. Almost potential management alternatives evolved all of the public comments indicated that the and were outlined in a newsletter that was alternatives presented in the newsletter distributed for public review and comment represented a reasonable range of options to during September through October 2007. further develop and analyze in the special resource study. A majority of the public A written invitation to participate in the responses expressed support for expanding special resource study along with copies of the the existing partnership between Baylor scoping summary and preliminary alternatives University and the city of Waco to include the newsletters were sent October 4, 2007, to Mr. National Park Service so that the strength of Gary McAdams, president of the Wichita and each organization can focus on the Affiliated Tribes in Oklahoma, of which the stewardship of this special resource. Waco Tribe is one of the affiliated tribes. The letter was seeking to inquire if he or other The current mailing list includes over 400 members of the tribal government would like names, consisting of members of to consult about the special resource study for governmental agencies, organizations, the Waco Mammoth Site and any possible businesses, legislators, local governments, and traditional uses associated with the site. There interested citizens. has been no response to date.

127

CHAPTER SEVEN: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT, CONSULTATION, AND COORDINATION

128

Appendixes, Selected References, Preparers and Participants

129

130

APPENDIX A: PUBLIC LAW 107-341

An Act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designating the Waco Mammoth Site Area in Waco, Texas, as a unit of the National Park System, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

Section 1. Study and Report Regarding Waco Mammoth Site Area.

(a) Study.--The Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the State of Texas, the city of Waco, and other appropriate organizations, shall carry out a special resource study regarding the national significance, suitability, and feasibility of designating the Waco Mammoth Site Area located in the city of Waco, Texas, as a unit of the National Park System.

(b) Study Process and Completion.--Section 8(c) of Public Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-5(c)) shall apply to the conduct and completion of the study required by this section.

Sec. 2. Submission of Study Results.

Not later than 3 years after funds are first made available for this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report describing the results of the study.

Approved December 16, 2002

Legislative History--H.R. 1925: House Reports: No. 107-317 (Comm. on Resources). Senate Reports: No. 107-264 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources). Congressional Record, Vol. 148 (2002): May 14, considered and passed House. November 19, considered and passed Senate.

131 APPENDIXES, SELECTED REFERENCES, PREPARERS AND PARTICIPANTS

132

APPENDIX B: COLLECTION AND ARCHIVE ASSESSMENT OF THE WACO MAMMOTH SITE

Compiled on February 22, 2006 by Greg McDonald with the help of Anita Benedict & John Bongino

Collected Specimens

93 plaster field jackets with specimens

Currently many jackets occupy 18 4’x8’ shelves on open shelving. Others are on pallets with multiple jackets on some pallets.

Estimates of preparation time:

12 jackets would require a year = 144 months 30 jackets would require 3 months = 90 months 51 jackets would require .5 months = 26 months

Total preparation time 260 months = approximately 22 years

Note: Based on field photos the bone tends to be highly fragmented and reassembly and gluing of pieces could add to estimated time for preparation. Preparation protocols also need to be established to ensure that potential information such as dermestid beetle marks and bone weathering are not lost during the preparation process.

Boxes of Mammoth Bones • 137 total, average size 18”x13”x10” • 11 of the boxes contain soil samples and not bone • 20 boxes of bones have been unpacked and sorted but bones have not been reassembled

Approximately 30 to 40% of the boxes contain bones washed out from skeletons during 1978, 1981, 1984, and 1986. The museum is sorting these specimens and trying to associate them with specific skeletons. At this time specimens are not being reassembled but are bagged together. The time required for the reassembly of these bones cannot be calculated and has not been included in the estimate of required preparation time for the assemblage.

The museum is going through all boxes and placing all bones from the same individual together in the same drawer.

The museum has purchased 10 Delta Design Cabinets Model DDLX with dimensions of 58” wide, 79 “high and 32 “deep to house mammoth bones. Each cabinet will hold approximately 10 drawers with bones.

Currently the sorted and cleaned bone removed from boxes and stored in bags occupies 20 drawers in the Delta cabinets.

Staff at the Mayborn Museum is sorting through all specimens and re-associating all bones from each individual skeleton together. This will eventually allow a better assessment of space needs. Not all skeletal elements of each individual mammoth can be stored together as 133 APPENDIXES, SELECTED REFERENCES, PREPARERS AND PARTICIPANTS skulls, jaws, major limb bones and pelvis will need to be stored on open shelving while vertebrate, ribs, and hand and foot bones will best be stored in the cabinets.

During the examination of the collection a small box with a lower third molar of a small antiliocaprid probably Capromeryx was found, thus increasing the diversity of animals known from the site. All non-mammoth bones will be stored together in one drawer.