DOCSLIB.ORG

Fort Monroe National Historic Park Natural Resource Condition Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fort Monroe National Historic Park Natural Resource Condition Assessment National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Monroe National Historic Park Natural Resource Condition Assessment Natural Resource Report NPS/FOMR/NRR—2018/1604 ON THE COVER North Beach Area at Fort Monroe National Monument, Virginia. Todd Lookingbill, University of Richmond Fort Monroe National Historic Park Natural Resource Condition Assessment Natural Resource Report NPS/FOMR/NRR—2018/1604 Todd Lookingbill1, Katia Engelhardt2, Connor Geraghty1, Nadia Hatchel1, David Kitchen1 1Department of Geography and the Environment University of Richmond Richmond, VA 23173 2Appalachian Laboratory University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science Frostburg, MD 21532 March 2018 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting more lengthy results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received informal peer review, which was provided by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data. The level and extent of peer review was based on the importance of report content or its potentially controversial or precedent- setting nature. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available in digital format from the Natural Resource Condition Assessment Program website and the Natural Resource Publications Management website. Please cite this publication as: Lookingbill, T., K. Engelhardt, C. Geraghty, N. Hatchel, D. Kitchen. 2018. Fort Monroe National Monument: Natural resource condition assessment. Natural Resource Report NPS/FOMR/NRR— 2018/1604. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 250/142910, March 2018 ii Contents Page Figures.................................................................................................................................................. vii Tables .................................................................................................................................................... xi Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. xv Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................... xxi 1. NRCA Background Information ........................................................................................................ 1 2. Introduction and Resource Setting ..................................................................................................... 5 2.1. History and Enabling Legislation ............................................................................................ 5 2.1.1. Pre-European Settlement ................................................................................................. 5 2.1.2. European Arrival ............................................................................................................. 5 2.1.3. American Civil War Years .............................................................................................. 6 2.1.4. Post-Civil War Era .......................................................................................................... 7 2.1.5. Enabling Legislation ........................................................................................................ 7 2.2. Geographic Setting .................................................................................................................. 8 2.2.1. Location ........................................................................................................................... 8 2.2.2. Geomorphology and Land Use ...................................................................................... 10 2.2.3. Climate .......................................................................................................................... 15 2.2.4. Population and Socioeconomic Conditions ................................................................... 15 2.2.5. Visitation Statistics ........................................................................................................ 18 2.3. Natural Resources .................................................................................................................. 19 2.3.1. Ecological Units and Watersheds .................................................................................. 19 2.3.2. Resource Description ..................................................................................................... 26 2.3.3. Resource Issues Overview ............................................................................................. 30 2.4. Resource Stewardship ........................................................................................................... 33 2.4.1. Management Directives and Planning Guidance........................................................... 33 2.4.2. Status of Supporting Science ......................................................................................... 34 2.5. Literature Cited ...................................................................................................................... 34 iii Contents (continued) Page 3. Study Scoping and Design ............................................................................................................... 37 3.1. Preliminary Scoping .............................................................................................................. 37 3.2. Study Design ......................................................................................................................... 38 3.2.1. Indicator Framework, Focal Study Resources and Indicators ....................................... 38 3.2.2. Reporting Areas ............................................................................................................. 38 3.2.3. General Approach and Methods .................................................................................... 40 3.3. Literature Cited ...................................................................................................................... 42 4. Natural Resource Conditions ........................................................................................................... 43 4.1. Air Resources ........................................................................................................................ 43 4.1.1. Wet Sulfur Deposition ................................................................................................... 44 4.1.2. Wet Nitrogen Deposition ............................................................................................... 48 4.1.3. Visibility ........................................................................................................................ 50 4.1.4. Ozone ............................................................................................................................. 54 4.2. Aquatic Resources ................................................................................................................. 58 4.2.1. Water Quality ................................................................................................................ 64 4.2.2. Sediment Contaminants ................................................................................................. 77 4.2.3. Benthic Macroinvertebrates ........................................................................................... 81 4.2.4. Beaches .......................................................................................................................... 87 4.3. Biotic Resources .................................................................................................................... 90 4.3.1. Southern Live Oaks ....................................................................................................... 91 4.3.2. Salt Marsh ...................................................................................................................... 99 4.3.3. Invasive Species .........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bandelier National Monument Executive Summary & Final Report
    NPS Greening Charrette -- Bandelier National Monument Executive Summary & Final Report This report is a summary of the NPS Bandelier Greening Charrette Conducted in Santa Fe, New Mexico on April 8-10, 2003 Funding and coordination provided by: U.S Environmental Protection Agency National Park Service Bandelier National Monument Final Report prepared by: Joel A. Todd and Gail A. Lindsey, FAIA 1 Bandelier National Monument Greening Charrette April 8-10, 2003 Santa Fe, New Mexico Executive Summary Bandelier National Monument is located northwest of Santa Fe, New Mexico. It contains cliff dwellings and other structures built by Puebloan ancestors as well as more recent buildings constructed by the Civilian Conservation Corps in the 1930s. In addition, there are almost 33,000 acres of wilderness, served by only three miles of public road and 70 miles of trails. The park has already taken steps to “green” its operations, but important issues remain. These include crowded parking lots and lines of cars waiting to enter the park, maintenance and updating of the historic CCC buildings including the Visitor Center, renovation of the snack bar and renegotiation of the concessions contract, and construction of a new maintenance facility at the current “boneyard.” This workshop and charrette was the third in a series co- sponsored by the National Park Service and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Participants included the Bandelier Superintendent and staff as well as personnel from other national parks, state parks, and experts from around the country. The day before the event, there was a tour of the park, designed to introduce participants to issues at Bandelier.
    [Show full text]
  • Castle Clinton Foundation Document
    NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Foundation Document Castle Clinton National Monument New York September 2018 Foundation Document Robert F Whitehall St Wagner Jr Beaver St Battery P t Park l S am illi Castle Clinton S W National Monument Stone St Bridge St Pearl St State St Water St Broad St Battery Upper Bay South St §¨¦478 Battery Whitehall Maritime Terminal Building Manhattan North 0 250 500 Á Feet Castle Clinton National Monument Contents Mission of the National Park Service 1 Introduction 2 Part 1: Core Components 3 Brief Description of the Park 3 Park Purpose 4 Park Significance 5 Fundamental Resources and Values 6 Related Resources 7 Interpretive Themes 8 Part 2: Dynamic Components 9 Special Mandates and Administrative Commitments 9 Assessment of Planning and Data Needs 9 Analysis of Fundamental Resources and Values 9 Identification of Key Issues and Associated Planning and Data Needs 15 Planning and Data Needs 16 Part 3: Contributors 19 Castle Clinton National Monument 19 NPS Northeast Region 19 Other NPS Staff 19 Partners 19 Appendixes 20 Appendix A: Enabling Legislation and Legislative Acts for Castle Clinton National Monument 20 Appendix B: Inventory of Administrative Commitments 22 Foundation Document Castle Clinton National Monument Mission of the National Park Service The National Park Service (NPS) preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. The National Park Service cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Hovenweep National Monument, General Management Plan/EA
    National Park Service National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of the Interior Hovenweep National Monument Hovenweep National Monument Colorado • Utah Colorado • Utah Hovenweep NationalHovenweep Monument Environmental Assessment Environmental General Management Plan May GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 2011 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Cover photo: Hovenweep Castle General Management Plan / Environmental Assessment Hovenweep National Monument Montezuma County, Colorado, and San Juan County, Utah _______________________________________________________________________ Hovenweep National Monument was established by presidential proclamation on March 2, 1923 (Presidential Proclamation 1654 42 Stat. 2299). There is currently no approved general management plan for the monument. The purpose of the general management plan is to establish a comprehensive vision of the monument’s purpose, significance, and resource goals. The plan will also define the management strategies for protecting the monument’s resources, providing for public understanding and enjoyment, ensuring organizational effectiveness, and promoting partnership opportunities that will support and complement all aspects of park management. The plan will help monument staff guide programs and set priorities for resource stewardship, visitor use and experience, partnerships, facilities, and operations at Hovenweep National Monument. The National Park Service developed a draft general management plan and environmental assessment for Hovenweep in the mid-1980s and released a draft in 1988. The draft plan proposed a resource protection zone encompassing Bureau of Land Management lands with nationally significant cultural resources surrounding the Hovenweep units and a cooperative management strategy to protect these resources. The 1988 draft plan was never finalized. This document examines two alternatives for managing Hovenweep National Monument for the next 15 to 20 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Lesson Plan, Under Additional Notes
    National Park Service Dinosaur U.S. Department of the Interior Dinosaur National Monument The Arrowhead: Symbol of the National Park Service Grade level: 4th Grade Time spent: 30 minutes Curriculum standards: Every Kid in a Park (https://everykidoutdoors.gov/index.htm) Mental Map/Outline: 1. Introduction- Explain logos and what they mean. 2. Topic 1- The National Park Service logo is an arrowhead. Explain the arrowhead’s five elements that represent the National Park Service Mission. 3. Activity- Draw your own logo/symbol to help represent the National Park Service and their mission. Props & Supplies: Pictures included. Photos: Attached at end of lesson plan, under additional notes. All photos show resources found in Dinosaur National Monument that embody the elements of the arrowhead. Photos could be changed to meet resources found in other National Park units. Program Theme: How can a symbol teach us about what it represents? Introduction: Q: To be asked by the teacher/ranger to students. Begin activity by asking questions surrounding logos/symbols to get class in the correct mindset for thinking of a logo/symbol and how it represents an organization! Q: Ask students what are some company logos you know? (Apple, Nike, etc.) Q: What are those companies’ actual logos? (Apple, Swoosh, etc.) National Park Service Dinosaur U.S. Department of the Interior Dinosaur National Monument Q: What do the logos for these companies represent? (Greek God of Victory, etc.) Explain that each logo has thought behind it and it represents more than the company name. Explain how the National Park Service (NPS) is similar with their logo.
    [Show full text]
  • Chiricahua National Monument Historic Designed Landscape Historic Name
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 (Oct. 1990) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not apply to the property being nominated, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property Chiricahua National Monument Historic Designed Landscape historic name other name/site number Wonderland of Rocks; Rhyolite Park; The Pinnacles; Say Yahdesut “Point of Rocks” 2. Location street & number: Chiricahua National Monument (CHIR) 12856 E. Rhyolite Canyon Road _____not for publication city/town: Willcox___________________________________________________________ _X_ vicinity state: Arizona_____ code: AZ __________ county: Cochise_________ code: 003_____ zip code: 85643___ 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this ¨ nomination ¨ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places an meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property ¨ meets ¨ does not meet the National Register criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • National Park Service: FY2021 Appropriations
    Updated January 26, 2021 National Park Service: FY2021 Appropriations The National Park Service (NPS) administers the National fiscal year, several continuing resolutions provided funding Park System, which includes 423 units valued for their at FY2020 levels before enactment of P.L. 116-260. natural, cultural, and recreational importance. System lands cover 81 million federal acres and 4 million nonfederal NPS also receives mandatory appropriations. NPS’s budget acres. As part of the Department of the Interior, NPS justification estimated $0.749 billion in mandatory receives funding in annual appropriations laws for Interior, appropriations for FY2021, a 1% increase over estimated Environment, and Related Agencies. Selected issues for NPS mandatory funding for FY2020. These mandatory Congress include the total level of NPS appropriations, appropriations come from entrance and recreation fees, funding to address NPS’s backlog of deferred maintenance concessioner fees, donations, and other sources. In August (DM), and funds for NPS assistance to nonfederal entities. 2020, the GAOA established additional mandatory spending for NPS, including a fund to address agency DM FY2021 Appropriations needs. The GAOA also designated as mandatory spending The Trump Administration requested $2.793 billion in agency funding from the Land and Water Conservation FY2021 discretionary appropriations for NPS. This amount Fund (LWCF; 54 U.S.C. §200301), previously provided was 17% less than NPS’s FY2020 appropriation of $3.377 through discretionary appropriations. billion, enacted in P.L. 116-94. The request included reductions for all NPS accounts as compared with FY2020. NPS’s Appropriations Accounts NPS has six discretionary appropriations accounts. P.L. 116-260, enacted on December 27, 2020, contained However, in FY2021, one account—Land Acquisition and $3.123 billion for NPS, 8% less than the FY2020 regular State Assistance—did not receive discretionary appropriation and 12% more than requested by the appropriations (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Statement for the Record Department of the Interior Senate
    Statement for the Record Department of the Interior Senate Committee on Energy & Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks S. 192, River Democracy Act June 23, 2021 Thank you for the opportunity to testify on S. 192, the River Democracy Act. The bill would add nearly 4,700 miles of rivers and streams in Oregon to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, including nearly 800 miles managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), over 3,000 miles managed by the U.S. Forest Service, and the remainder managed by the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and other entities. In addition, the bill authorizes federal land management agencies to enter into cooperative agreements with tribal, state or local governments to share river management responsibilities. S. 192 also withdraws certain river segments in the State of Oregon from operation of the public land and mining laws, and all laws pertaining to mineral and geothermal leasing. On January 27, 2021, President Biden signed Executive Order 14008, Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad, which launched a government-wide effort to confront climate change and restore balance on public lands and waters. The President’s directive recognizes the opportunities America’s lands and waters provide to meet its goals and outlines a historic and ambitious challenge to the nation with the America the Beautiful initiative to conserve at least 30 percent of our lands and waters by 2030. The President’s America the Beautiful initiative specifically emphasizes the value of conserving the nation’s natural resources, recognizing multiple uses of our lands and waters, including its working lands, can be consistent with the long-term health and sustainability of natural systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Castle Clinton U.S
    National Park Service Castle Clinton U.S. Department of the Interior Castle Clinton National Monument National Park Service Educational Programs Castle Clinton National Monument has seen many changes. The structure was one of the New York Harbor defenses built just before the War of 1812. Later it became a great entertainment complex, then an important immigrant processing station and then an aquarium. The National Park Service offers a variety of free Ranger-led tours of the site specially designed for groups. Programs include: The Many Lives of Castle Clinton: Students participate in an NPS Ranger-led tour explaining how Castle Clinton and surrounding Battery Park have been “re-invented” over the course of nearly 200 years, and how the changes to the area have reflected changing social needs, concerns and attitudes both nationally and in the city of New York. Elementary Standards addressed in this program include: 1.1a, 1.4c, 2.2a, 2.2d, 2.4c, 3.1e, 3.2a, and 4.1d Middle School Standards: 1.2b, 1.4d, 2.2a, 2.4d, and 3.1d Harbor Defense and the War of 1812: This program covers how Castle Clinton served as the last line of defense in a larger system of forts protecting New York Harbor. Additionally, the program expands on the history of the harbor and strategic value of the port in the War of 1812 and today. Elementary Standards addressed in this program include: 1.4c, 2.4c, 3.1a, 3.1e, 4.1a, 4.1b Middle School Standards: 1.2b, 1.4d, 2.2c, 3.1c, 3.1d Castle Clinton as Castle Garden, the Immigration Years: The creation of Castle Garden, the first official immigration processing center in the nation was a monumental achievement and stands as one of the finest human expressions in our nation’s history.
    [Show full text]
  • Navajo National Monument
    UNITLDS1A1LS DLPAKTMLN1 OK 1 ML INI 1-.RIOR FOR NFS USE ONLY NATIONAL PARK SERVICE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES RECEIVED INVENTORY - NOMINATION FORM DATE ENTERED FOR FEDERAL PROPERTIES SEE INSTRUCTIONS IN HOW TO COMPLETE NATIONAL REGISTER FORMS TYPE ALL ENTRIES -- COMPLETE APPLICABLE SECTIONS NAME HISTORIC Navajo National Monument AND/OR COMMON Navajo National Monument LOCATION STREET & NUMBER .NOT FOR PUBLICATION CITY. TOWN CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT Kayenta Arizona 3;4 STATE CODE COUNTY CODE Arizona AZ Coconino; Navajo oo5; 017 CLASSIFICATION CATEGORY OWNERSHIP STATUS PRESENT USE X-DISTRICT X.PUBLIC —OCCUPIED —AGRICULTURE —MUSEUM _BUILDING(S) —PRIVATE ^.UNOCCUPIED —COMMERCIAL X_PARK _STRUCTURE —BOTH —WORK IN PROGRESS —EDUCATIONAL —PRIVATE RESIDENCE —SITE PUBLIC ACQUISITION ACCESSIBLE —ENTERTAINMENT —RELIGIOUS __OBJECT _IN PROCESS X.YES. RESTRICTED —GOVERNMENT X-SCIENTIFIC —BEING CONSIDERED — YES UNRESTRICTED —INDUSTRIAL —TRANSPORTATION —NO —MILITARY —OTHER AGENCY National Park Service REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS (HmpplicMe) SOUthW6St STREET & NUMBER P.O. Box 728 CITY. TOWN STATE Santa Fe New Mexico VICINITY OF LOCATION OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION COURTHOUSE. REGISTRY OF DEEDS.ETC Coconino County Courthouse; Navajo County Courthouse STREET* NUMBER 121 E. Birch; Government Complex CITY. TOWN STATE Flagstaff; Hoi brook Arizona REPRESENTATION IN EXISTING SURVEYS TITLE No archaeological surveys have been done DATE —FEDERAL —STATE —COUNTY —LOCAt- DEPOSITORY FOR SURVEY RECORDS CITY. TOWN STATE DESCRIPTION CONDITION CHECK ONE CHECK ONE X-EXCELLENT _DETERIORATED —UNALTERED LORIGINALSITE _GOOD ' XRUINS X_ALTERED _MOV£D DATE. _FAIR _UNEXPOSEO DESCRIBE THE PRESENT AND ORIGINAL (IF KNOWN) PHYSICAL APPEARANCE The present appearance of the major ruins 1s close to the original, except for some fallen walls and roofs and some reconstruction and stabilization 1n the twentieth century.
    [Show full text]
  • Cabrillo National Monument U.S
    National Park Service Cabrillo National Monument U.S. Department of the Interior Visitor Guide Spring/Summer 2016 Photo By Bill Griswold Meet Cabrillo’s New Superintendent! The National Park Service has Joshua Tree National Park’s chief park.” selected Andrea Compton to of resources management, where be the next superintendent of she oversaw natural and cultural Prior to joining the National Park Cabrillo National Monument in resources in Joshua Tree’s Mojave Service, Compton worked at Mesa San Diego. and Sonoran desert ecosystems. College where she taught general biology, and at San Diego State “Andrea’s proven leadership in “Cabrillo represents a beautiful University where she worked with park management and experience blend of natural environments the Field Stations Program. Her with the partners, communities, on land and in the water, which business experience includes and cultural heritage of San Diego together with its rich stories and work with an environmental makes her the ideal leader to take artifacts represent a part of San consulting firm in Portland, Cabrillo National Monument into Diego’s amazing history,” said Oregon. She holds a master’s the National Park Service’s second Compton. “I am delighted and degree in fishery and wildlife century,” said Martha Lee, Pacific honored to have been selected biology from Colorado West Region Deputy regional for this position. I look forward to State University and a bachelor’s director. rejoining the wonderful staff, degree in animal ecology from volunteers, Cabrillo National Iowa State University. Compton is returning to Cabrillo Monument Conservancy and National Monument, where she Cabrillo National Monument Welcome aboard, Superintendent began her National Park Service Foundation associates, and the Compton! career in 2002.
    [Show full text]
  • Changing Approaches to Management at the Tsankawi Mesa of Bandelier National Monument
    Michael Kelleher Changing Approaches to Management at the Tsankawi Mesa of Bandelier National Monument s demonstrated by a special section of The George Wright Forum titled “Taking Stock: Changing Ideas and Visions for Parks” (Volume 17, Number 2), both the park idea and approaches to managing parks Ahave changed greatly over the past century. Parks have been “man- aged, exploited, enjoyed, glorified, or left alone, depending on the ideals espoused” during a specific period (Carr 2000, 16). This is particularly true of the national parks, which have been, seemingly contradictorily, developed for mass tourism and preserved in a relatively unaltered state depending upon the management approach taken by the National Park Service (NPS). The Tsankawi unit of Bandelier National Monument in New Mexico can stand as a particular- ly relevant example of the agency’s changing concept of park stewardship. Throughout much of its history as part of a protected national monument, this mesa was to have been developed to accommodate large numbers of visitors, similar to the principal area of Bandelier, Frijoles Canyon. Because NPS never followed through on these plans, Tsankawi was preserved as an intact cultural landscape containing the remains of an unexcavated pueblo, ceremonial kivas, cavates, pictographs, and a prehistoric footpath worn deeply into the rock of the mesa. Recently, it has become a focal point for a new approach to park manage- ment: NPS and other land management agencies now recognize such areas as indigenous ancestral sites that are important to contemporary Native American culture, and are engaged in efforts to consult with tribes on their preservation and interpretation.
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2022 National Park Service
    The United States BUDGET Department of the Interior JUSTIFICATIONS and Performance Information Fiscal Year 2022 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE NOTICE: These budget justifications are prepared for the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittees. Approval for release of the justifications prior to their printing in the public record of the Subcommittee hearings may be obtained through the Office of Budget of the Department of the Interior. Printed on Recycled Paper THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK National Park Service FY 2022 Budget Justifications Department of the Interior NATIONAL PARK SERVICE FISCAL YEAR 2022 BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE Overview, Tables, and Highlights NPS General Statement ................................................................................................................ Overview-1 Organization Chart ..................................................................................................................... Overview-17 National Park System Units ....................................................................................................... Overview-18 Park Visitation and Acreage ...................................................................................................... Overview-22 Unit Designations and Other Abbreviations .............................................................................. Overview-30 Budget at a Glance ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]