DOCSLIB.ORG

Cultural Landscape Inventory: Cross Canyon

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cultural Landscape Inventory: Cross Canyon 1 National Park Service Cultural Landscape Inventory April 2013 Cross Canyon Corridor Historic District Grand Canyon National Park 2 Contents Page 3 Inventory Unit Summary and Site Plan Page 24 Concurrence Status Page 25 Geographic Information and Location Maps Page 38 Management Information Page 39 National Register Information Page 49 Chronology and Physical History Page 151 Analysis and Evaluation Page 328 Condition Page 330 Treatment Page 331 Biography and Supplemental Information 3 Inventory Unit Summary and Site Plan Inventory Unit Cultural Landscape Inventory Name: Cross Canyon Corridor Historic District Cultural Landscape Inventory Number: Parent Cultural Landscape Inventory Name: Grand Canyon National Park Landscape Parent Cultural Landscape Inventory Number: 85011 Park Name: Grand Canyon National Park Park Alpha Code: GRCA Park Org Code: 8210 Landscape/Component Landscape Description: This document constitutes a Cultural Landscape Inventory (CLI) for the Cross Canyon Corridor Historic District (District), a component landscape of Grand Canyon National Park (GRCA). For the purposes of this CLI, the component landscape is further divided into ten contiguous Landscape Areas: Bright Angel Trail Landscape Area Indian Garden Landscape Area Colorado River Trail Landscape Area Phantom Ranch Landscape Area South Kaibab Trail Landscape Area Yaki Point (South Kaibab Trailhead) Landscape Area North Kaibab Trail Landscape Area Bright Angel Campground Landscape Area Cottonwood Campground Landscape Area Roaring Springs Landscape Area The period of significance for the Cross Canyon Corridor Historic District is from AD 1891 to 1942. The information for the Cross Canyon Corridor Historic District contained herein was developed from research and two field visits which were completed in 2009 and 2011. The information for the Bright Angel Trail Landscape Area, the Indian Garden Landscape Area, and the Colorado River Trail Landscape Area were adapted from the Bright Angel Trail Corridor (BAT) CLI prepared by Logan Simpson Design Inc. (LSD) in 2010. Information regarding the Indian Garden Landscape Area contained in the BAT CLI was derived from the Indian Garden Cultural Landscape Report, prepared in June 2005 by John Milner Associates, Inc. (JMA). In addition, basic information about the Cross Canyon Corridor Historic District as well as the Landscape Areas contained within it has been incorporated from existing National Register Nominations for the Cross Canyon Corridor Historic District, the North Kaibab Trail, the South Kaibab Trail, the Bright Angel Trail, and the Colorado River Trail, as well as a multiple property listing for historic trails and roads in the Grand Canyon (Anderson et al. 2008). The Cross Canyon Corridor Historic District nomination was prepared by the Denver Service Center of the National Park Service (NPS) in 1980. GRCA trails historian, Mike Anderson, and others prepared individual nominations for the trails in 1991 and 1992 and subsequently revised them in 2002 and 2010. 4 BRIGHT ANGEL TRAIL LANDSCAPE AREA The Bright Angel Trail is approximately 7.8 miles in length and traverses almost 4,800 feet of elevation change from the South Rim of the Grand Canyon to the Colorado River. Before reaching the Colorado River, the Bright Angel Trail intersects with the Colorado River Trail which continues 1.8 miles to its terminus at Phantom Ranch. From its inception, the trail has functioned as a transportation corridor for Native Americans, miners and prospectors, North and South Rim residents, and recreationists. For this reason, it remains the GRCA’s most traveled trail and is considered the safest because of its regular maintenance and facilities that supply shade, potable water, and emergency phones, and a consistent ranger presence. While Niles Cameron, Pete Berry and others are credited with initially “building” the Bright Angel Trail in 1890 to access mining claims in the inner Grand Canyon, the men quickly realized the true worth of their efforts would be better realized by soliciting the tourism trade and charging a toll for visitation. The use of the trail as a “toll road” became the source of much controversy and subsequent legal battles with railroad companies and the Federal Government in the early 1900s. The outcome of the legal battle resulted in the trail being deeded to the NPS in 1928. In the 1930s, the trail was extensively improved by enrollees of the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), resulting in the trail alignment and most of the amenities of the trail as they appear today. Contributing resources of the Bright Angel Trail Landscape Area include CCC-era built features of the trail, such as its native stone rest houses, retaining walls, steps, and the Trans-canyon Telephone Line, as well as the alignment of the trail itself. For the most part, the present-day alignment of the Bright Angel Trail and its associated features were built between 1929 and 1939. CCC reconstruction efforts along the trail during the 1930s likely removed most, if not all, of the earlier trail features built during Cameron’s initial development of the trail. On-going maintenance and repairs of the trail and its associated features during post-period of significance projects has not affected its integrity. The overall condition of the Bright Angel Trail Landscape Area remains much as it was during the period of significance and its physical condition is considered to be fair. The period of significance for the Bright Angel Trail Landscape Area is 1891 to 1942. According to National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) criteria, the Bright Angel Trail Landscape Area is significant at the national level under Criteria A, B, and C. Under Criterion A, the Bright Angel Trail is significant within the areas of Recreation and Tourism and Politics/Government, and for the landscape’s association with the CCC. The Bright Angel Trail is significant under Criterion B because of its association with Arizona entrepreneur and politician, Ralph Henry Cameron. It is also significant under Criterion C, within the area of Architecture, for its collection of NPS Rustic- style buildings. INDIAN GARDEN LANDSCAPE AREA Indian Garden is located approximately 4.5 miles along the Bright Angel Trail and can also be accessed by the Tonto Trail from the Hermit and Monument Creek areas to the west and the South Kaibab or Horseshoe Mesa areas from the east. For over 100 years, the site of Indian Garden has been used as a stopping point for hikers, campers, and mule riders, although its fertile landscape of creeks, springs, and seeps was used by Native Americans and miners for many years prior to the start of tourism (JMA 2005, I-1). Indian Garden is a palimpsest whose earlier traces of history are still faintly visible in today’s multi-layered landscape. Whether ensuing generations of management and design were based on legal negotiations, the need to rebuild due to flood damage, or the necessity of enhancing facilities for an ever-growing number of visitors, Indian Garden has been a model of how to keep pace with change. The issues that face Indian Garden most often are those that involve mitigation of water—an element that is both welcome as a source of refreshment, but is also a source of 5 apprehension when flash floods rush through the landscape. Throughout history, it is water that has both drawn people to this site and shaped the form and appearance of the cultural landscape seen today. The JMA CLR team identified the period of significance for Indian Garden as beginning in 1903 and extending through 1943. 1903 marks the year when Ralph Cameron began his tourism facilities at Indian Garden in earnest. 1943 marks the end of CCC involvement at Indian Garden and the final implementation of NPS Rustic-style design aesthetics within the landscape. Within this overall period of significance are two sub-periods: from 1903 until 1927, marking the years of Ralph Cameron’s influence at Indian Garden, and 1928 until 1943, marking the years of NPS and CCC influence upon the site. After evaluating Indian Gardens according to the NRHP’s seven aspects of historic integrity, the JMA CLR team found that Indian Garden does not retain integrity as an individual District. This finding was based on the fact that Indian Garden has undergone considerable alterations since the period of significance. These changes have impeded Indian Garden’s ability to convey its historical significance and importance within American history. For this reason, Indian Garden is not individually eligible for listing in the NHRP as a District or a site. Portions of the landscape, however, including all contributing resources, were included in the Bright Angel Trail Corridor National Register nomination and should also be included in the Cross Canyon Corridor National Register nomination so they are preserved and protected as part of the park’s management plans. Historic areas within the Indian Garden Landscape Area consist of the Bright Angel Trail, Day Use Area, Pump Station and Corral Area, and North Indian Garden Area. The overall condition of the Indian Garden Landscape Area portion of the component landscape is considered to be fair. Although Indian Garden may not retain integrity sufficient for NRHP eligibility, it is still an important historic landscape within the Cross Canyon Corridor Historic District. According to guidelines provided by the NHRP, Indian Garden draws its significance in American history under Criteria A, B, and C. Under Criterion A, Indian Garden is significant within the areas of Recreation and Tourism, for the landscape’s association with tourism-related activities, and Politics/ Government, and for the landscape’s association with the CCC. Indian Garden is significant under Criterion B because of its association with Arizona entrepreneur and politician, Ralph Henry Cameron. Indian Garden is also significant under Criterion C within the area of Architecture, for its collection of NPS Rustic-style buildings. PHANTOM RANCH LANDSCAPE AREA Phantom Ranch is located on the north side of the Colorado River approximately 4,600 feet below the North Rim.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • National Park Service Centennial and a Great Opportunity
    CanyonVIEWS Volume XXIII, No. 4 DECEMBER 2016 Interview with Superintendent Chris Lehnertz Celebrating 100 Years: National Park Service Centennial An Endangered Species Recovers The official nonprofit partner of Grand Canyon National Park Grand Canyon Association Canyon Views is published by the Grand Canyon Association, the National Park Service’s official nonprofit partner, raising private funds to benefit Grand Canyon National Park, operating retail stores and visitor centers within the park and providing premier educational opportunities about the natural and cultural history of Grand Canyon. FROM THE CEO You can make a difference at Grand Canyon! Memberships start at $35 annually. For more What a year it’s been! We celebrated the 100th anniversary information about GCA or to become a member, of the National Park Service, and together we kicked off critically please visit www.grandcanyon.org. important conservation, restoration and education programs here at Board of Directors: Stephen Watson, Board the Grand Canyon. Thank you! Chair; Howard Weiner, Board Vice Chair; Lyle Balenquah; Kathryn Campana; Larry Clark; Sally Clayton; Richard Foudy; Eric Fraint; As we look forward into the next 100 years of the National Park Robert Hostetler; Julie Klapstein; Kenneth Service at Grand Canyon National Park, we welcome a new partner, Lamm; Robert Lufrano; Mark Schiavoni; Marsha Superintendent Chris Lehnertz. This issue features an interview with Sitterley; T. Paul Thomas the park’s new leader. I think you will find her as inspirational as we Chief Executive Officer: Susan Schroeder all do. We look forward to celebrating Grand Canyon National Park’s Chief Philanthropy Officer: Ann Scheflen Centennial in 2019 together! Director of Marketing: Miriam Robbins Edited by Faith Marcovecchio We also want to celebrate you, our members.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    INTRODUCTION 1 Using this book 2 Visiting the SouthWestern United States 3 Equipment and special hazards GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK 4 Visiting Grand Canyon National Park 5 Walking in Grand Canyon National Park 6 Grand Canyon National Park: South Rim, rim-to-river trails Table of Trails South Bass Trail Hermit Trail Bright Angel Trail South Kaibab Trail Grandview Trail New Hance Trail Tanner Trail 7 Grand Canyon National Park: North Rim, rim-to-river trails Table of Trails Thunder River and Bill Hall Trails, with Deer Creek Extension North Bass Trail North Kaibab Trail Nankoweap Trail 8 Grand Canyon National Park: trans-canyon trails, North and South Rim Table of Trails Escalante Route: Tanner Canyon to New Hance Trail at Red Canyon Tonto Trail: New Hance Trail at Red Canyon to Hance Creek Tonto Trail: Hance Creek to Cottonwood Creek Tonto Trail: Cottonwood Creek to South Kaibab Trail Tonto Trail: South Kaibab Trail to Indian Garden Tonto Trail: Indian Garden to Hermit Creek Tonto Trail: Hermit Creek to Boucher Creek Tonto Trail: Boucher Creek to Bass Canyon Clear Creek Trail 9 Grand Canyon National Park: South and North Rim trails South Rim Trails Rim Trail Shoshone Point Trail North Rim Trails Cape Royal Trail Cliff Springs Trail Cape Final Trail Ken Patrick Trail Bright Angel Point Trail Transept Trail Widforss Trail Uncle Jim Trail 10 Grand Canyon National Park: long-distance routes Table of Routes Boucher Trail to Hermit Trail Loop Hermit Trail to Bright Angel Trail Loop Cross-canyon: North Kaibab Trail to Bright Angel Trail South
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Canyon Archaeological Site
    ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE ETIQUETTE POLICY ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE ETIQUETTE POLICY For Colorado River Commercial Operators This etiquette policy was developed as a preservation tool to protect archaeological sites along the Colorado River. This policy classifies all known archaeological sites into one of four classes and helps direct visitors to sites that can withstand visitation and to minimize impacts to those that cannot. Commercially guided groups may visit Class I and Class II sites; however, inappropriate behaviors and activities on any archaeological site is a violation of federal law and Commercial Operating Requirements. Class III sites are not appropriate for visitation. National Park Service employees and Commercial Operators are prohibited from disclosing the location and nature of Class III archaeological sites. If clients encounter archaeological sites in the backcountry, guides should take the opportunity to talk about ancestral use of the Canyon, discuss the challenges faced in protecting archaeological resources in remote places, and reaffirm Leave No Trace practices. These include observing from afar, discouraging clients from collecting site coordinates and posting photographs and maps with location descriptions on social media. Class IV archaeological sites are closed to visitation; they are listed on Page 2 of this document. Commercial guides may share the list of Class I, Class II and Class IV sites with clients. It is the responsibility of individual Commercial Operators to disseminate site etiquette information to all company employees and to ensure that their guides are teaching this information to all clients prior to visiting archaeological sites. Class I Archaeological Sites: Class I sites have been Class II Archaeological Sites: Class II sites are more managed specifically to withstand greater volumes of vulnerable to visitor impacts than Class I sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Minimal Growth on Ikes Fire Following Wind Event
    Joint News Release National Park Service U.S. Forest Service Grand Canyon National Park Kaibab National Forest www.nps.gov/grca www.fs.usda.gov/kaibab Media Contacts Grand Canyon National Park: Lily Daniels, (928) 638-7958 Kaibab National Forest: Jacqueline Banks, (928) 635-8314 Minimal growth on Ikes Fire following wind event GRAND CANYON, Ariz., Sept. 30, 2019 - After two days of strong winds over the wildfire, minimal growth occurred in critical areas of the Ikes Fire on the Kaibab Plateau. The wildfire remained at a little more than 11,000 acres in size despite the high wind event. Last week, two helicopters were used over portions of the fire below the canyon rim in Quaking Aspen Canyon to reduce the threat to unburned areas on Kaibab National Forest lands northeast of Fire Point. While the helicopter water drops did not entirely extinguish the wildfire, they did moderate fire behavior during the critical wind event. There is still potential for the Ikes Fire to move into unburned areas above and below the canyon rim. To prepare for this, fire crews have burned out along a containment line at Forest Road 271 on the North Kaibab Ranger District of the Kaibab National Forest in order to assist in the control of future fire growth. Fire managers are also evaluating other potential opportunities to contain or limit the spread of the wildfire. Although windy conditions will continue over the next several days, they are not expected to be nearly as severe as those that occurred Saturday and Sunday when the National Weather Service predicted sustained winds of 25 to 30 mph with gusts to 45 mph.
    [Show full text]
  • Hiker Perception of Wilderness in Grand Canyon National Park: a Study of Social Carrying Capacity
    Hiker perception of wilderness in Grand Canyon National Park: a study of social carrying capacity Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Towler, William L. Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 04/10/2021 01:56:21 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/566421 HIKER PERCEPTION OF WILDERNESS IN GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK: A STUDY OF SOCIAL CARRYING CAPACITY by William Leonard Towler A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY, REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT, AND URBAN PLANNING In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS WITH A MAJOR IN GEOGRAPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 1 9 7 7 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of re­ quirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judg­ ment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholar­ ship.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado River Management Plan, 2019 Commercial Operating
    2019 CORs COMMERCIAL OPERATING REQUIREMENTS PAGE 1 ATTACHMENT 1 COLORADO RIVER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2019 COMMERCIAL OPERATING REQUIREMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS I. WATERCRAFT AND CAPACITIES ............................................................................... 4 A. Types of Watercraft................................................................................................ 4 B. Capacities .............................................................................................................. 4 C. Individual Watercraft ............................................................................................. 5 D. Registration ............................................................................................................ 5 E. Name and Logo ...................................................................................................... 5 F. Best Management Practices ................................................................................... 6 II. EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURES ...................................................... 6 A. Personal Flotation Devices (PFDs) ........................................................................ 6 B. Navigation Light .................................................................................................... 6 C. Incident Response .................................................................................................. 6 D. First Aid ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • December, 1974
    Harvey Butchart’s Hiking Log DETAILED HIKING LOGS (March 16, 1974 – December 1, 1974) Nankoweap Trip [March 16, 1974 to March 23, 1974] Tony Williams was planning his own trip to Hindu Amphitheater, but he accepted my invitation to go to Nankoweap. I met the early plane on Saturday, and after we had eaten, we took off for Nankoweap. Although I drove a gas saving 50 to 55, we got to the hunting cabins in time to eat our lunch and get under way by 12:15 p.m. Our first objective was to check the route down through the Redwall at the very head of the arm of Nankoweap directly below the trail. Ellen Tibbets had found that this would go when she was trying to lead a party up via the break in the Redwall that Billingsley had rediscovered, the one that the cavers call the Huntoon Route. It is a steep ravine on the south side of the gorge that comes up where the Nankoweap Trail levels off after it has come down through the top Supai cliffs. We had to keep on west until we came to where a slide covers up the Supai ledges. From a distance we couldn't see how we were going to get down the 30 foot cliffs, but we found that the way was quite simple, down a rock slide in the bed of a ravine that goes directly down into the Redwall gorge. This fairly easy scramble kept to the left of the bed and continued about halfway through the Redwall.
    [Show full text]
  • August 1954 - December 1957)
    Harvey Butchart’s Hiking Log DETAILED HIKING LOGS (August 1954 - December 1957) Floating on the Colorado River [August 27 and 28, 1954 and September 18, 1954] During this last weekend of August, Ellery Gibson and I took our packs down the Hermit Trail to sleep out a couple nights. I had been down here several times before, so we kept going at a steady pace and aimed for the bottom of Monument Creek. We knew that Purtymun's gear was cached there, and we wanted to see about the trip to the river here. As usual, there was a little water running in Monument Creek, and we saw the bed springs under the overhang which had been used in the old days when the loop from the Hermit Trail over to the Bright Angel Trail was an accepted and popular outing. Walking to the river down Monument Creek is a pretty simple task, which didn't surprise me since I knew that horses could make it. We timed ourselves back up from the river to the Tonto Trail at about 45 minutes. I don't think the Inner Gorge is as deep here as it is at the South Kaibab Trail. The river seemed very low and the rapids known as Granite Falls were concentrated over toward the right bank. The water was pretty wild, and I was not surprised that the Purtymun Party had given up here. What surprised me more was that they had come through Horn Creek Rapids with portaging. We found the pile of duffel. A life jacket was near the top and we tried it on for size.
    [Show full text]
  • Dear Eddy • Prez Blurb • Guide Profiles • GTS 2019 • Back of the Boat A-A-B • Sixtymile Formation • 279 Miles
    the journal of the Grand Canyon River Guide’s, Inc. • voulme 32 number 1 spring 2019 the journal of Grand Canyon River Guide’s, Dear Eddy • Prez Blurb • Guide Profiles • GTS 2019 • Back of the Boat A-A-B • Sixtymile Formation • 279 Miles... • Water Stop Lee Monument • Cooler Research • Ken Sleight • New T-Shirts boatman’s quarterly review Dear Eddy …is published more or less quarterly by and for GRAND CANYON RIVER GUIDES. ’VE ENJOYED THE PROFILE OF BERT JONES as well as GRAND CANYON RIVER GUIDES his obit about Steve Mahan. He had quite a cool is a nonprofit organization dedicated to Icareer. One item to expand on was the launch date in June Protecting Grand Canyon ’83 when the Park Service was scrambling to close the Setting the highest standards for the river profession river. I remember seeing OU on the ramp with us… Celebrating the unique spirit of the river community and maybe even a private…but we too were in a rush Providing the best possible river experience to get on the river. Think we didn’t even completely finish rigging, just jumped in with our passengers and General Meetings are held each Spring and Fall. Our took off. The water was moving so quickly we were Board of Directors Meetings are generally held the first well below the Paria riffle in a heartbeat before we Wednesday of each month. All innocent bystanders are could pull over and tidy things up. urged to attend. Call for details. Attached is a photo of Michael Marstellar, our lead STAFF Executive Director LYNN HAMILTON Board of Directors President STEVE “DOC” NICHOLSON Vice President MARGEAUX BESTARD Treasurer FRED THEVENIN Directors MARA DRAZINA ZEKE LAUCK JUSTIN SALAMON THEA SHERMAN DERIK SPICE LYNN WESTERFIELD GCRG’S AMWG Representative DAVE BROWN GCRG’S TWG Photo credit: JB Irving Representative BEN REEDER BQR Editors KATHERINE SPILLMAN boatman on that trip, just before we took off… MARY WILLIAMS One of my adventures I hope no one ever tops was Our editorial policy, such as it is: provide an open flipping my boat in the middle of the night while tied forum.
    [Show full text]
  • Polishing the Jewel
    Polishing the Jewel An Administra ti ve History of Grand Canyon Na tional Pa rk by Michael F.Anderson GRA N D CA N YO N A S S OC I ATI O N Grand Canyon Association P.O. Box 399 Grand Canyon, AZ 86023 www.grandcanyon.org Grand Canyon Association is a non-profit organization. All proceeds from the sale of this book will be used to support the educational goals of Grand Canyon National Park. Copyright © 2000 by Grand Canyon Association. All rights reserved. Monograph Number 11 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Anderson, Michael F. Polishing the jewel : an adminstrative history of Grand Canyon National Park/by Michael F.Anderson p. cm. -- (Monograph / Grand Canyon Association ; no. 11) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-938216-72-4 1. Grand Canyon National Park (Ariz.)--Management—History. 2.Grand Canyon National Park (Ariz.)--History. 3. United States. National Park Service—History. I. Title. II. Monograph (Grand Canyon Association) ; no. 11. F788 .A524 2000 333.78’3’0979132--dc21 00-009110 Edited by L. Greer Price and Faith Marcovecchio Designed by Kim Buchheit, Dena Dierker and Ron Short Cover designed by Ron Short Printed in the United States of America on recycled paper. Front cover: Tour cars bumper-to-bumper from the Fred Harvey Garage to the El Tovar Hotel, ca.1923. Traffic congestion has steadily worsened at Grand Canyon Village since the automobile became park visitors’ vehicle of choice in the mid-1920s.GRCA 3552; Fred Harvey Company photo. Inset front cover photo: Ranger Perry Brown collects a one dollar “automobile permit” fee at the South Rim,1931.GRCA 30.
    [Show full text]
  • ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INFORMATION DISCLOSURE POLICY Commercial Use Authorizations
    National Park Service Grand Canyon National Park PO Box 129 U.S. Department of the Interior Science and Resource Grand Canyon, AZ 86023 Management ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INFORMATION DISCLOSURE POLICY Commercial Use Authorizations This disclosure policy was developed as a preservation tool to protect archaeological sites. The policy is designed to concentrate visitation on archaeological sites that have been researched, stabilized and interpreted, thus reducing impacts to more fragile sites. Following appropriate etiquette (reverse) which will reduce the accumulated effects associated with repeated visitation is an essential component to the success of this policy. Commercial guides and their clients may visit Class I sites without conditions and Class II sites under certain conditions (see below); however, inappropriate behaviors and activities on any archaeological site is a violation of all Commercial Use Authorizations. Commercially guided groups may not visit Class III and Class IV archaeological sites. This list of Class I and Class II sites is reviewed and updated annually. It is the responsibility of individual Commercial Use Authorization holders to disseminate site etiquette information to all company employees and to insure that guides are relaying this information to all clients prior to visiting archaeological sites. Etiquette for visiting archaeological sites follows closely the principles of Leave-no-Trace, widely adhered to by outdoor recreationists in the United States. Class I Archaeological Sites: Class I sites are open to Class II Archaeological Sites: Class II sites are more general visitation and their locations can be readily fragile and vulnerable to visitor impacts than Class I sites. disclosed to the public. Grand Canyon National Park has Visitors may request information about how to access and managed Class I archaeological sites specifically to visit Class II sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Wilderness Management Plan
    ,H=BJ Wilderness Management Plan April 1998 Grand Canyon National Park Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Wilderness Management Plan April 1998 Prepared by The Wilderness Planning Team Linda Jalbert, Team Leader Kim Crumbo, Wilderness Coordinator Greer Chesher, Resource Planner Kevin Cochary, North Rim District Ranger Nick Herring, Wilderness Dirtrict Ranger Dan Blackwell, Trails Foreman With Contributions From Dan Oltrogge, Fire Management Officer Jan Balsom, Cultural Resources Program Manager Helen Fairley, Archaeologist Steve Sullivan, Backcountry Office Supervisor Robert Winfree, Senior Scientist Ken Phillips, Search and Rescue Coordinator Allen Keske, Concessions Management Specialist Susan Lakes, Concessions Assistant Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Table Wilderness Management Plan of Grand Canyon National Park Contents Section One Introduction CHAPTER ONE Goals And Objectives 1.1 Purpose and Need. .1 - 1 1.2 Wilderness Responsibilities. .1 - 1 1.3 Scope of the Plan . 1 - 1 1.4 Goals of the Wilderness Management Plan. 1 - 2 1.5 Objectives of the Wilderness Management Plan. 1 - 2 1.6 Wilderness Management Plan Review and Update . 1 - 5 CHAPTER TWO Wilderness Management At Grand Canyon National Park 2.1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Recommendation. 2 - 7 2.2 Natural and Cultural Aspects of the Wilderness Resource. 2 - 8 2.3 Description of Wilderness Visitor Use . 2 -11 2.4 Mandates Guiding Park Actions . 2 -13 2.5 National Park Service Policies . 2 -17 2.6 Grand Canyon National Park Policies . 2 -19 2.7 Grand Canyon Wilderness Management Staff . 2 - 21 2.8 Summary of Changes and Actions. 2 - 23 CHAPTER THREE Wilderness Management Planning Framework 3.1 Background of Backcountry and Wilderness Planning at Grand Canyon.
    [Show full text]