CHACO CULTURE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK NEW MEXICO MARCH 2012 National Park Service United States Department of the Interior GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT / ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT / ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Chaco Culture National Historical Park San Juan and McKinley Counties, New Mexico Chaco Culture National Historical Park is in northwestern New Mexico, about 150 miles northwest of Albuquerque, New Mexico. Chaco Culture National Historical Park was first established as a national monument by Presidential Proclamation in 1907 and was designated as a national historical park in 1980. The park consists of 33,974 acres. The park has an approved general management plan that was completed in 1984. The 1984 plan provides sufficient direction for park management with the exception of one area: visitor use management. Therefore, the National Park Service is amending the current general management plan to provide specific guidance and direction on this topic. This document describes four alternatives for managing visitor use in Chaco Culture National Historical Park for the next 15 to 20 years, and the impacts on the environment and cultural resources of implementing each alternative. The no-action alternative describes continuation of existing management and serves as a basis of comparison for the action alternatives. The action alternatives describe what park management could be like using different visitor use management techniques. Alternative 2 has been identified as the NPS preferred management approach. Under alternative 2, the National Park Service would implement a reservation system to manage groups and the campground, increase education and outreach programs, and institute a monitoring system that would allow the park to better track and manage resource and visitor experience conditions. If needed, based on monitoring results, a reservation system for individual access to the park may be implemented in the future. This document has been distributed to other agencies and interested organizations and individuals for their review and comment. The public comment period for this document will last for 30 days after this document is published and distributed. Please note that NPS practice is to make comments, including names and addresses of respondents, available for public review. Please see the “How to Comment on this Plan” section on the next page for further information. U.S. Department of the Interior ● National Park Service i HOW TO COMMENT ON THIS PLAN Comments on this general management plan amendment / environmental assessment are welcome and will be accepted for 30 days after this document is published and distributed. Comments and responses may be submitted either via the Internet or in writing. Commenters are encouraged to use the Internet if at all possible. Please submit only one set of comments. To be sure that you are on our mailing list, please include your name and address on any correspondence. Internet comments can be submitted at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/chcu. Written comments may be sent to: National Park Service Denver Service Center–Planning Attention: Chaco GMP Planning Team PO Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225-0287 Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information with your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. Although you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. ii SUMMARY amendment is needed to establish PURPOSE AND NEED management systems and thresholds whereby Chaco Culture National Historical The purpose of a general management plan Park staff can proactively respond to is to present the general path the National changes in visitor use and preserve the park’s Park Service intends to follow in managing resources and visitor experiences. the park over the life of the plan. Chaco Culture National Historical Park has an approved general management plan, completed in 1984, that provides sufficient THE ALTERNATIVES direction for park management with the exception of one area: visitor use Development of the Alternatives management. In response to potential changes in visitation, mostly because of the Because there are different approaches to potential improvement of County Road achieving the purpose of this general (CR) 7950 by San Juan County, which would management plan amendment, the planning make access to the park easier for a larger team investigated a range of possible number of visitors, the park requires a new management alternatives. Ultimately four framework to address visitor use in order to alternatives were developed, including the protect the park’s sensitive resources and no-action alternative that describes a unique visitor experiences. continuation of the park’s current visitor use management approach. Although the 1984 general management plan provides general guidance on visitor use, a Each alternative involves a different much more rigorous examination of this approach to achieving the desired resource topic is essential in order to sustain park conditions and visitor experiences in the resources and the qualities of the park that park. These differences are expressed so many visitors value. A strategic through each alternative’s unique approach management approach is needed so that the to three types of visitor use management park’s fragile cultural resources are strategies: visitor knowledge, group protected and also that the visitor management, and individual visitor access. experience at Chaco is not sacrificed—an The primary distinction between the four experience that is unique in that visitors are alternatives is the spatial and temporal scales allowed to freely and independently visit the at which specific actions within these three park’s world-renowned, yet fragile cultural types of visitor use management strategies resources. Lack of roving staff at the sites would be implemented. and the limited regulation of visitor access within and around sites, in groups or From the four alternatives, the preferred otherwise, is affecting management’s ability alternative was selected through an objective to monitor and protect cultural resources analysis process called “choosing by during periods of heavy visitation. Sites that advantages.” Through this process, the have high levels of visitation have had planning team identified and compared the substantially more instances of disturbance relative advantages of each alternative or loss than other, less visited sites. It is according to a set of factors that were based expected these impacts could get worse with on the desired resource conditions and future changes in visitation patterns. visitor experiences in the park. The Therefore, this general management plan relationship between the advantages and iii SUMMARY costs of each alternative was also established. Alternative 2 (The This information was used to identify the Preferred Alternative) alternative that gives the National Park Service and the public the greatest advantage In alternative 2, visitor use management for the most reasonable cost. strategies would be applied year-round and throughout the park. Strategies addressing The results of the “choosing by advantages” visitor knowledge include requiring visitors process identified alternative 2 as the to participate in a structured education agency’s preferred alternative. This program prior to accessing the park’s alternative provides the best combination of primary cultural sites. This would ensure strategies to protect the park’s unique visitor that all visitors receive a consistent and experience and cultural resources, while comprehensive message regarding the improving the park’s operational efficiency sensitivity of park resources, park and effectiveness. regulations, and appropriate visitor behaviors. The park would also increase Alternative 1 (No Action) roving patrols and interpretive contacts at the park’s primary cultural sites. The no-action alternative is included as a required baseline against which to compare Group management strategies would include the action alternatives. This alternative providing all groups with information on the prescribes the continuation of the park’s sensitivity of park resources prior to their current visitor use management approach. visit. This would be implemented by This approach is in keeping with the park’s requiring groups to obtain advance 1984 general management plan that registration, and carefully managing group emphasizes self-discovery of the park’s size. The number of groups would be limited archeological resources and historic to no more than two per day, year-round. structures. The 1984 plan also states that if This strategy would prevent several large visitation exceeds levels identified in the groups from accessing the park at one time, plan, then a reservation or transportation which would have a beneficial effect on system may be implemented. However, these resources and the visitor experience. levels have not been exceeded and currently there are no plans in place to implement a Strategies related to individual visitor access reservation or transportation system. would include providing visitors with an online campsite reservation system in The no-action alternative would protect addition to limited first-come/first-served visitors’ freedom of choice and flexibility