Draft Wilderness Management Plan

Home , Grandview Trail, North Bass Trail, Toroweap Overlook

,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...... 3 - 25 3.2 National Park Service Planning Guidance...... 3 - 26 3.3 The Limits of Acceptable Change...... 3 - 28 3.4 Management Zoning...... 3 - 29 3.5 Summary of Changes and Actions ...... 3 - 31

i Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Section Two Visitor Use Management

CHAPTER FOUR Recreational Use Of The Wilderness

4.1 Issues and Public Concerns...... 4 - 35 4.2 The Regional Recreation Opportunity Spectrum ...... 4 - 35 4.3 Accessibility ...... 4 - 35 4.4 Day Use...... 4 - 36 4.5 Overnight Use...... 4 - 36 4.6 Private Stock Use ...... 4 - 36 4.7 Fishing...... 4 - 37 4.8 Rock Climbing ...... 4 - 37 4.9 Nordic Skiing and Snowshoeing ...... 4 - 37 4.10 Bicycling ...... 4 - 38 4.11 Commercial Use of the Wilderness...... 4 - 38 4.12 Cave Entry...... 4 - 38 4.13 Semi-Primitive Access in Nonwilderness Corridors ...... 4 - 38 4.14 Area Limitations and Closures...... 4 - 39 4.15 Applicable Regulations...... 4 - 40 4.16 Summary of Changes and Actions ...... 4 - 42

CHAPTER FIVE Backcountry Permit System

5.1 Issues and Public Concerns...... 5 - 43 5.2 System and Administration...... 5 - 44 5.3 Recreation Fee Demonstration Program...... 5 - 44 5.4 Access Through Adjacent Lands...... 5 - 45 5.5 Administrative Use...... 5 - 46 5.6 Summary of Changes and Actions...... 5 - 46

ii Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

CHAPTER SIX Wilderness Campsite Management

6.1 Issues and Public Concerns...... 6 - 54 6.2 Use-Area Allocation ...... 6 - 54 6.3 Campsite Classification...... 6 - 55 6.4 Group Size and Use Limits ...... 6 - 56 6.5 Special Management of Use Areas ...... 6 - 57 6.6 Nonwilderness Use Areas with Semi-Primitive Mechanized Access. 6 - 60 6.7 Resource Protection and Stewardship...... 6 - 61 6.8 Summary of Use Area Changes ...... 6 - 62

CHAPTER SEVEN Trails Management

7.1 Criteria for Establishing Trail Standards and Specifications...... 7 - 64 7.2 Trail Classification...... 7 - 65 7.3 Trail Standards ...... 7 - 65 7.4 Monitoring ...... 7 - 67 7.5 Arizona Trail ...... 7 - 67 7.6 Restoration and Implementation Priorities ...... 7 - 67 7.7 Other Considerations...... 7 - 69 7.8 Summary of Changes and Actions...... 7 - 69

CHAPTER EIGHT Semi-Primitive Access And Facilities

8.1 Issues and Public Concerns...... 8 - 74 8.2 Primitive Roads Management...... 8 - 75 8.3 Primitive Roads To Be Restored or Converted To Trails ...... 8 - 76 8.4 Facilities...... 8 - 78 8.5 Summary of Changes and Actions ...... 8 - 74

CHAPTER NINE Safety And Emergency Operations

9.1 Issues and Public Concerns ...... 9 - 84 9.2 Grand Canyon National Park Emergency Operations ...... 9 - 85 9.3 Preventative Search and Rescue (PSAR)...... 9 - 87 9.4 Summary of Changes and Actions...... 9 - 87

iii Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

CHAPTER TEN Interpretation, Education and Information

10.1 Issues and Public Concerns ...... 10- 88 10.2 Wilderness Education ...... 10- 89 10.3 What Needs to be Communicated...... 10- 90 10.4 Communicating Information Successfully ...... 10- 92 10.5 Wilderness Education for Staff ...... 10- 94 10.6 Summary of Changes and Actions...... 10- 94

Section Three Resources Management

CHAPTER ELEVEN Ecosystem Management

11.1 Wilderness and Ecosystem Management...... 11- 96 11.2 Fundamental Scientific Principles for Ecosystem Management. . . . .11- 97 11.3 Legal Basis for Ecosystem Management ...... 11- 98 11.4 Implementing Ecosystem Management...... 11- 98 11.5 Summary of Changes and Actions...... 11-107

CHAPTER TWELVE Monitoring And Research

12.1 Campsite Monitoring Program...... 12-110 12.2 Monitoring Visitor Experience ...... 12-111 12.3 Archeological Site Monitoring ...... 12-113 12.4 Monitoring Water Resources ...... 12-115 12.5 Monitoring Trail Condition...... 12-115 12.1 Research in Wilderness...... 12-123 12.2 Summary of Changes and Actions...... 12-128

CHAPTER THIRTEEN Rehabilitation and Restoration of Recreational Impacts

13.1 Revegetation and Site Rehabilitation...... 13-130 13.2 Site Restoration Recommendations ...... 13-132 13.3 Summary of Changes and Actions...... 13-138

iv Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

CHAPTER FOURTEEN Cultural Resource Management

14.1 Issues and Public Concerns...... 14-140 14.2 Program Overview...... 14-140 14.3 Archaeological Resources...... 14-141 14.4 Ethnographic Resources ...... 14-142 14.5 Historic Resources ...... 14-143 14.6 Objects ...... 14-144 14.7 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act...... 14-144 14.8 Cultural Resource Stewardship...... 14-145 14.9 Summary of Changes and Actions ...... 14-146

CHAPTER FIFTEEN Havasupai Traditional Use Lands

15.1 Issues and Public Concerns...... 15-148 15.2 Background ...... 15-148 15.3 Management of the Havasupai Use Lands ...... 15-149 15.4 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act...... 15-150 15.5 Culturally Sensitive Areas...... 15-151 15.6 Summary of Changes and Actions ...... 15-151

Section Four Wilderness Management Plan Implementation

CHAPTER SIXTEEN Wilderness Management Plan Implementation Schedule

16.1 Implementation Schedule...... 16-152

v Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Appendices

A. The Wilderness Act of 1964...... A-1 B. National Park Service Management Policies: Chapter 6, Wilderness Preservation and Management ...... B-1 C. History of the Wilderness Recommendation at Grand Canyon ...... C-1 D. Minimum Requirement Decision Process ...... D-1 E. Recreational Opportunities and Permit Information for Adjacent Lands . E-1 F. Wilderness Use by Persons with Disabilities...... F-1 G. Backcountry Reservation and Permit System...... G-1 H. Wilderness Stock Use Guidelines ...... H-1 I. Commercial Use Policy...... I-1 J. Cave Entry Permit Application...... J-1 K. Use Area Codes, Limits and Camping Classification...... K-1 L. Natural Conditions...... L-1 M. Wild and Scenic Rivers...... M-1 N. Developing a Regional Wildlife Conservation Strategy...... N-1 O. Campsite Monitoring Manual ...... O-1

vi Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Map...... 1 - 6 Figure 2.1 Wilderness and Cross-Canyon Corridor Use ...... 2 - 11 Figure 2.2 Annual Use Patterns By Month, 1991-1995...... 2 - 12 Figure 3.1 Wilderness and Backcountry Opportunity Classes...... 3 - 32 Figure 3.2 Summary of Management Standards by Opportunity Class . . 3 - 33 Figure 6.1 Proportion of Wilderness Campsite Types by Opportunity Class ...... 6 - 56 Figure 6.2 Responsibilities Associated with Campsite Management. . . . 6 - 62 Figure 6.3 Summary of Use Area Changes...... 6 - 63 Figure 7.1 Grand Canyon National Park Trails...... 7 - 70 Figure 7.2 Summary of Actions...... 7 - 72 Figure 8.1 Primitive Roads Open to Trailheads and Overlooks (chart). . . 8 - 76 Figure 8.2 Primitive Roads Open to Trailheads and Overlooks (map) . . . 8 - 77 Figure 10.1 Leave No Trace Principles...... 10- 95 Figure 11.1 Steps, Goals, and Objectives Needed to Implement Ecosystem Management...... 11- 99 Figure 12.1 Campsite Condition and Distribution Monitoring Matrix . . . . . 12-117 Figure 12.2 Visitor Experience Monitoring Matrix...... 12-118 Figure 12.3 Cultural Resources Monitoring Matrix...... 12-120 Figure 12.4 Water Resources Monitoring Matrix...... 12-121 Figure 12.5 Trail Condition Monitoring Matrix...... 12-122 Figure 12.6 Wilderness-Related Decision Matrix for Scientific Permit Applications...... 12-125 Figure 14.1 Summary of Actions: Cultural Resource Management Program and Stewardship Responsibilities...... 14-146 Figure 16.1 Implementation Schedule...... 16-158

D.1 Process for Determining Minimum Requirement Matrix...... D-6

J.1 Cave Entry Permit Application...... J-1

K.1 Use Area Codes, Limits, and Camping Classification ...... K-2 K.2 Cross-Canyon Corridor Campgrounds and Use Limits...... K-5 K.3 Designated Day Use Areas in Wilderness...... K-5

O.1 Rapid Campsite Assessment (RCA) Data Sheet...... O-5 O.2 Campsite Monitoring Trip Report Form...... O-6

Bibliography ...... Biblio-1 vii Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

viii Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

1.1 Purpose and Need and administration of national parks CHAPTER only if conducted in light of the high he purpose of this Wilderness public value and integrity of such One Management Plan is to guide the areas, and shall not be exercised in TTmanagement of resources and visitor derogation of the values and purposes use in the wilderness areas of Grand for which these areas have been estab- Introduction Canyon National Park. The primary lished.... (16 USC 1a-1; NPS Man- need for the plan is to address wilder- agement Policies, 1:1) ness and backcountry issues in the context of the Wilderness Act (See The Wilderness Act also defines wil- Appendix A, Wilderness Act); Grand derness as an area possessing out- Canyons enabling legislation; National standing opportunities for solitude or a Park Service (NPS) Management primitive and unconfined type of recre- Policies (See Appendix B, NPS Man- ation. The Act not only strengthens the agement Policies); and the 1995 Grand NPS preservation mandate, but pro- Canyon National Park General Manage- vides for and protects opportunities for ment Plan (GMP). a wilderness experience.

1.2 Wilderness 1.3 Scope of This Responsibilities Wilderness Management PlaPlan The Wilderness Act defines wilderness as an area where the earth and its The Wilderness Management Plan community of life are untrammeled addresses issues and provides guide- [uncontrolled] by man...retaining its lines for managing those areas defined primeval character and influence, with- as proposed wilderness (See map, out permanent improvements.... Wilder- Figure 1.1). Over 94% (1.1 million ness managers are instructed to ad- acres) of Grand Canyon National Park minister [wilderness areas] for the use is proposed for immediate designation. and enjoyment of the American people The proposed wilderness is primarily in such a manner as will leave them inner canyon and rim areas and does unimpaired for future use and enjoyment not include the developed areas nor the as wilderness [emphasis added]. Cross-Canyon Corridor. The Cross- Canyon Corridor consists of camp- Wilderness reinforces the purposes of grounds, a tourist lodge, and ranger the national parks established by the stations along the North Kaibab, South National Park Service Organic Act Kaibab, and Bright Angel Trails. The (1916) to provide the enjoyment...in Colorado River is proposed as poten- such manner and by such means as will tial wilderness, and issues specific to leave them unimpaired for the enjoy- river management will be addressed in ment of future generations. The Organic the Colorado River Management Plan. Act (as amended) allows for activities, Issues which pertain specifically to the including the protection, management, Cross-Canyon Corridor and the Colo- 1-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

rado River are not within the purview of Visitors traveling through the this Wilderness Management Plan. Canyon in the backcountry should have the opportunity for a variety of This Plan has incorporated some of the personal outdoor experiences, management objectives, standards, and ranging from solitary to social. strategies of the 1988 Backcountry Visitors should be able to continue Management Plan. Within this frame- to experience the backcountry with work, this Plan provides direction for as little influence from the modern If future management of natural and cultural world as possible. The backcountry generations resources within the context of wilder- experience should help visitors are to remember us ness management policies, with a relate intimately to the majesty of with primary focus on visitor use and impacts the Canyon. gratitude to wilderness values and resources. rather than Changes since the 1988 Plan are noted Within this context, this Wilderness contempt, at the end of the applicable chapter. Management Plan is intended to serve we must leave them more the following goals than the 1.4 Goals of the miracles of Provide guidance and describe technology. Wilderness Management 1. Wilderness Management strategies for meeting legislative We must leave Plan and policy mandates on wilderness them a glimpse management while providing As stated in the 1995 Grand Canyon of the world recreational opportunities consis- General Management Plan as it was tent with wilderness, for a broad in the range of visitor experiences and beginning, The vision statements for the park settings, and preserving and pro- not just after convey the essence of the parks we tecting the natural, cultural, and qualities and desired future condi- got social resources of Grand Canyon tions... The visions affirm what must through National Park. with be preserved, as well as what types it. of experiences visitors should be Provide for the continuity of wilder- able to expect. 2. President ness management throughout Lyndon B. changes of park administration and In terms of Wilderness, the GMP further Johnson staff. on signing the states that Wilderness Act, 1964 ...these areas offer visitors opportuni- 1.5 Objectives of the ties for solitude and primitive recre- Wilderness Management ation. The management of these Plan areas should preserve wilderness values and character. Non-wilder- The management objectives of this ness undeveloped areas should Wilderness Management Plan are continue to serve primarily as primi- based on the Parks vision statements tive thresholds to wilderness. articulated in the GMP, and are within

1-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

the intent of the enabling legislation and Objective Two Wilderness Act. The objectives, which are quantifiable and measurable, de- Establish indicators and standards for scribe desired conditions to be desired visitor experiences, and bio- achieved. physical and cultural resources; monitor regularly the condition of these indica- Objective One tors; and take management action as necessary to meet these standards. Establish and implement a permit system that Chapter 3 Wilderness Management serves the visitor by providing the Planning Framework opportunity to obtain permits for Chapter 6 wilderness and nonwilderness Wilderness Campsite Management areas that yield the type of experi- Chapter 12 ence they seek Monitoring and Research Chapter 13 serves Park management by Restoration and Rehabilitation of providing an effective way to Recreational Impacts educate the public on low-impact Chapter 14 practices, ethics, and safety Cultural Resource Management

serves Park management by Objective Three providing data on hiker use levels The and distribution in order to make Provide access consistent with wilder- chapters informed decisions regarding the ness values, including protection of and management and protection of natural and cultural resources. Preserve appendices backcountry and wilderness the character of individual trails, and which resources. establish minimal standards for primi- discuss tive roads. actions to Chapter 5 meet stated Backcountry Permit System Chapter 7 Trails Management objectives Chapter 6 are listed Wilderness Campsite Management Chapter 8 Semi-Primitive Access and Facilities after each Chapter 12 objective. Monitoring and Research

1-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Objective Four Objective Six

Establish a coordinated interpretive/ Provide a reasonable level of public educational program to provide hikers safety, consistent with wilderness adequate information to plan and ex- areas in accordance with NPS Man- ecute an enjoyable and safe expedition, agement Policies and Park guide- whether hiking for a day or for an ex- lines. tended period, and to conduct themselves in a manner which is not damag- Chapter 4 ing to wilderness resources and values. Recreational Use of Wilderness Chapter 9 Chapter 5 Safety and Emergency Operations Backcountry Permit System Chapter 10 Chapter 9 Interpretation, Education Safety and Emergency Operations and Information Chapter 10 Interpretation, Education, and Objective Seven Information Encourage research which adds to an understanding of the Park and contrib- Objective Five utes to the body of knowledge required Provide, through partnerships with for effective management and protec- adjacent land-managing agencies, tion of wilderness resources and information on wilderness and nonwil- values. derness recreational opportunities on adjacent lands, including National Forest Chapter 11 Service, Bureau of Land Management, Ecosystem Management State, and Tribal lands. Chapter 12 Monitoring and Research Chapter 4 Recreational Use of Wilderness Chapter 5 Backcountry Permit System Chapter 15 Havasupai Traditional Use Lands Appendix E Recreational Opportunities and Permit Information for Adjacent Lands

1-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Objective Eight The Wilderness Management Plan update will occur within a five-year Develop, through partnerships with period depending on the need for adjacent land-management agencies, major revision and update as deter- conservation organizations, and insti- mined through the annual review pro- tutes of higher learning, an interagency cess or as necessitated by change in ecosystem-management strategy. The Grand Canyon National Park manage- strategy will emphasize restoration and ment direction and/or NPS policy. The maintenance of natural processes and update will incorporate public meetings viable populations of all native species and comments, research and monitor- in natural patterns of abundance and ing data, visitor use information, NPS distribution. policy, and legislated wilderness mandates. Chapter 11 Ecosystem Management

1.6 Wilderness Management Plan Review and Update

The Wilderness Management Plan will be effective for a minimum of five years, and a period not to exceed ten years. Staff with wilderness responsibilities, including the Wilderness Coordinator, Wilderness District Ranger, and Trail Crew Foreman will conduct an annual review. The annual review process will incorporate data from resource monitoring and research projects, visitor use statistics, and status reports on visitor use management in the Parks wilderness areas. The purpose of the annual review will be to evaluate the status and effectiveness of management actions, and to ensure that the management objectives stated in this Plan are being met. Priorities of implementing actions described in the Plan will also be determined, and incorporated into the annual work plans for the appropriate work unit.

1-5

Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

1-6 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

2.1 Grand Canyon National for designation as potential wilderness, pending resolution of boundary and CHAPTER Park Wilderness Park Wilderness motorized riverboat issues (See Ap- 2 Recommendation pendix C, A History of the Wilderness Recommendation at Grand Canyon he Grand Canyon National National Park). Represented within Park Enlargement Act of January 3, Wilderness these units are examples of all the TT1975, as amended June 10, 1975, Management Parks physiographic regions. A map required the National Park Service to of the Grand Canyon National Park at prepare a wilderness recommendation wilderness is included as Figure 1.1. Grand for Grand Canyon National Park. In Canyon September 1980, the NPS submitted a The 1975 Grand Canyon Enlargement wilderness recommendation consisting National Act dealt directly with the question of of 980,088 acres proposed for immedi- Park occupancy and use of the Havasupai ate designation, and 131,814 acres Reservation lands of Grand Canyon proposed for potential wilderness National Park. The Act declared a designation. (U.S. Department of the reservation of approximately 185,000 Interior, National Park Service 1980). acres to be held in trust for the Havasu- pai Tribe, and specified conditions on Since that time, acquisition of grazing, the uses of those trust lands. The Act mineral, and other leases, and comple- also provided for an additional 95,300 tion of land-use studies, necessitated a acres as Havasupai Use Lands within revision of the recommendation. The Grand Canyon National Park where the 1993 update of the 1980 recommenda- Secretary may allow tribal uses ...sub- tion (U.S. Department of the Interior, ject to such reasonable regulations as National Park Service 1993) is based he may prescribe to protect the scenic, on changes in the land status of pro- natural, and wildlife values thereof. posed potential wilderness, the 1969 Congressional intent to include these Field Solicitors opinion regarding the lands within the wilderness recommen- western boundary of the Navajo Reser- dation was explicit. vation, and refinements in acreage determined by the Geographical Infor- NPS Management Policies (1988) mation System (GIS). All changes are require that proposed wilderness study consistent with the letter or intent of the areas be managed as designated 1980 recommendation (Crumbo 1996). wilderness, and that no actions be taken that would diminish wilderness Two units totaling 1,139,077 acres are suitability until the legislative process proposed for wilderness designation in for wilderness designation has been Grand Canyon National Park. These completed. The General Management units include about 94% of the Parks Plan (1995) treats all proposed wilder- total area. Of this total, 1,109,257 acres ness areas as designated wilderness, are proposed for immediate wilderness and anticipates the final resolution of designation, and 29,820 are proposed wilderness issues. 2-7 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

2.2 Natural and Cultural thousands of different aquatic and Every great terrestrial invertebrates. Seven ani- landscape Aspects of the Aspects of the mals are officially listed as endan- carries in its Wilderness Resource gered, one as threatened, and a dozen beauty the seeds of are listed as sensitive or candidate its own Natural Resources its own Natural Resources species. The Kaibab squirrel, for destruction. example, is a unique subspecies that Primitive Grand Canyon National Park contains has coevolved with natural processes, wilderness some of the worlds most spectacular such as fire, on the Kaibab Plateau. characteristics topography. The Canyon is about a mile give the The California condor, recently reintro- deep, and varies in width from a mini- national parks duced immediately outside the Park, mum of 75 feet at river level in the their real will become an uncommon but appre- prestige Middle Granite Gorge to about 18 miles ciated inhabitant. and will at rim level along the Bright Angel Fault increasingly between Grand Canyon Village and the add to their The largest carnivore, the mountain North Rim. Sedimentary rock layers distinction as lion, roams much of the Grand Canyon, have been carved into buttes, temples, these qualities although little is known about their disappear and spires by water, wind, and faults. In populations. Mammals common to the elsewhere. But addition, the Canyon is comprised of inner canyon include mule deer and these qualities igneous and metamorphic rock, volca- are readily desert bighorn sheep. Other wildlife, noes and lava flows, waterfalls, springs, destroyed; sometimes considered threats to and caverns. they are personal comfort or safety, include fragile things. ground squirrels, ringtail cats, striped How preserve The plant communities within the Grand skunks, rattlesnakes, and scorpions. them? Canyon vary from cool, moist subalpine The answer Regulations pertaining to proper forests and meadows between 8,000 may well camping distance from creeks and and 9,000 feet to hot, dry deserts at depend upon springs are primarily for the protection how clearly elevations as low as 1,200 feet. About of water resources, habitat, and pre- we 1,500 plant species occur within the vention of wildlife disturbance. The define Park, including one listed endangered our proper storage of food, and low- species, and several other candidate aims. impact meal preparation practices species. Cryptogamic soil crusts are help avoid unwanted encounters with extensive in portions of the Canyon, but rodents and insects at wilderness Newton B. Drury are highly vulnerable to the impacts of campsites. Director, recreational use. National Park Service, Water resources originating as springs Grand Canyon National Park is a valu- 1940-1951 and seeps in the inner canyon provide able wildlife refugia due to the immense important water sources for wildlife primitive areas, the topographic charac- and humans. At least 70 major springs ter, and the relatively unfragmented and streams are supported by ground- habitat. There are 315 bird species, 88 water draining from plateaus outside mammal species, 50 reptile and eight the Park boundary. The major water amphibian species, 21 fish species source for many backcountry users is (including five native species), and 2-8 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

the Colorado River which bisects the Cultural Resources Park, flowing a distance of 277 miles between the reservoirs of Lake Powell Grand Canyon National Park contains and Lake Mead. While major tributaries a rich assortment of cultural resources and the Colorado River provide peren- spanning 10,000 years of human nial water, seeps and springs in many occupation. Four cultural resource side canyons may be unreliable sources categories are present in the wilder- at different times of the year. ness areas of Grand Canyon National Park: archeological, ethnographic, Grand Canyon enjoys some of the historic, and objects. nations cleanest air. Under the Clean Air Act, the Park is a Class I area which At present, six historic districts, two affords the highest level of protection prehistoric sites and one individual from increased pollution. Air quality is structure are listed on the National influenced by humidity, precipitation, Register of Historic Places. One pre- and temperature inversions, as well as historic site and one historic district are long-distance, regional, and local pollu- located in the wilderness; the Little Jug tion sources. Under the most pristine site is located on the Uinkaret Plateau, conditions, visitors may enjoy a visual of near Tuweep, while the Last Chance range of more than 240 miles. Mine Historic District is located at the base of the Grandview Trail on Horse- Natural sounds and natural quiet have shoe Mesa. long been regarded as Park resources. They are among the conditions and In 1980 the entire Park was determined resources the National Park Service is eligible by the State Historic Preserva- mandated to protect and preserve. Just tion Officer as a multiple resource as natural quiet is important to visitor archeological district. Formal listing experience and Park appreciation, it is has yet to be completed. Historic also critically important to other pro- properties listed on the National Regis- tected Park resources. Non-natural ter of Historic Places, as well as those sounds (i.e., introduced, human- that are pending nomination and those caused, or mechanically produced that are eligible for nomination, are sounds) may, depending on location, subject to the same protections under volume, and timing, produce direct and the National Historic Preservation Act indirect negative physiological and and NPS policies. Determinations of behavioral responses in wildlife. eligibility for the National Register have been received for ten trails within the Nonnatural sounds may also negatively Canyon. impact cultural resources, specifically, ceremonial, sacred, or traditional-use Archeological Resources sites. The presence of aerial overflights, motorized rafts, and power tools can Nearly 3,700 prehistoric and historic threaten wilderness values. sites have been documented in Grand 2-9 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Canyon National Park to date, and it is Ethnographic Resources estimated that approximately 50,000 sites are present. The existing inventory An ethnographic resource is defined is based on intensive survey of only two as any natural or cultural resource percent of the Park. The archaeological linked to traditional practices, values, resources of Grand Canyon encompass beliefs, history, and/or ethnic identity of a wide variety of cultural remains indicat- a cultural group or groups. ing human use of the Canyon over the past 10,000 years. Grand Canyon has been home to various peoples for thousands of In addition to the prehistoric and historic years. These people, both American American Indian archaeological legacy, Indians and Euro-Americans, have physical remains of Euro-American used the Canyon as both a home and endeavors from the time of first contact a place linked to traditional practices, in 1540 through development of the values, and beliefs. To the Hopi and national park are represented in the Zuni, the Grand Canyon represents archaeological record. The historic their place of origin into this world. For archaeological record includes evidence Hopi, it also represents the place of early exploration by John Wesley where their spirits come to rest after Powell and Robert Brewster Stanton, death. For the Pueblo people (Hopi mineral exploitation by Ralph Cameron, and Zuni), archaeological remains in Pete Berry, William Wallace Bass, Louis the Canyon provide evidence for their Boucher, and John Hance among oth- migration from their place of origin to ers, and the remains of early tourist their present homes. For the Pai enterprises. people (Hualapai and Havasupai), the Canyon and the River are lands for Historic Resources which they have been entrusted to care. For the Southern Paiute, the Historic resources are cultural resources Canyon represents a place given to which have been determined significant them by the Creator to protect and in a historic context or theme, on Park manage, including its water and natu- lands. Significance has been achieved ral resources. To the Navajo people, during the historic, as opposed to the the Colorado River in Grand Canyon prehistoric, time period. Historic re- forms a protective boundary on the sources include districts, sites, land- western border of Navajo land, and scapes, structures, archival materials, some Navajo clans trace their ancestry and objects. Significance is determined to specific Canyon locations. primarily through archival research. Euro-Americans recognized the The historic period is best summarized Canyons spiritual values in the estab- by the history of exploration, exploitation, lishment of Grand Canyon National pioneer settlement, railroad develop- Park in 1919. World Heritage designa- ment, and Federal administration. tion informed the world that the Grand 2-10 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Canyon had value beyond just the and wilderness use is measured in American people. The 1975 Grand user nights, which is defined as one Canyon Enlargement Act specified person per night. Wilderness use natural quiet and scenic views as impor- statistics indicate a significant increase tant, yet intangible, qualities that must in use from 1988 to 1996. (See Figure be protected. These, too, are ethno- 2.1, Wilderness and Cross-Canyon graphic resources. Corridor Use).

2.3 Description of Since 1993, user night totals have exceeded 100,000 annually. Permit Wilderness Visitor Use Wilderness Visitor Use operations changed in that year when Permits are required for backcountry the Park began issuing permits four use. Over 15,000 backcountry permits months in advance by mail. Prior to this are issued annually. Although more time, backcountry users were required permits are issued for the Cross-Can- to pick up permits at the Park just prior yon Corridor, total use is highest in to their hike. The change in the permit wilderness areas. Overall backcountry system allowed operations to issue

Figure 2.1

Wilderness and Cross- Canyon Corridor Use

2-11 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

permits more efficiently, but at the same (Hendee, et al. 1990). Studies showed time sacrificed accountability of actual that the highest proportion of users use versus cancellations and changes in were between the ages of 23 and 35, trip plans, including the number of lived in cities of 75,000 or more, had people in each party. Statistically, visitor an annual income of at least $50,000, use peaks in the wilderness areas in the and that over two-thirds had completed months of April and October, which is at least four years of college (Underhill, typically when conditions are most et al. 1986; and Jalbert 1992). amenable for wilderness travel. (See Figure 2.2, Annual Use Patterns by Although it is difficult to determine the Month, 1991-1995.) overall experience level of hikers in the Grand Canyon wilderness Use Areas, Sociological research and studies on it is known that the more experienced backcountry users at Grand Canyon hikers tend to use more remote areas. reveal that, demographically, the popula- Research conducted by Underhill and tion of users appears to conform with others in 1986 evaluated the hiking national trends for wilderness use experience of overnight users; the

Figure 2.2

Annual Use Patterns by Month, 1991- 1995

2-12 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

results showed seasonal differences stock camps are also located near the among users. Summer hikers were the developed Corridor campgrounds. least experienced group at Grand Frequent encounters with day hikers Canyon, winter hikers most experi- are most common on the Corridor enced, with spring and fall hikers in trails, and are increasing on trails between. accessible from popular rim overlooks. Encounters with river users along the There is little variation in the seasonal Colorado River vary seasonally. During distribution of overnight use in the the summer months when river use is Threshold Use Areas; whereas, the highest, hikers who camp at popular more remote Primitive and Wild Use beaches may encounter groups of up to Areas have higher use in the spring and 36 people travelling on large motorized fall (Jalbert 1992). For a discussion of rafts. A small hiking group could poten- Use Areas see Chapter Six, Wilderness tially encounter a large river trip at Campsite Management. popular attraction sites within large tributaries of the Colorado River. The maximum allowed group size is 11 people. Park statistics show that the 2.4 Mandates Guiding average size of an overnight hiking party Park Actions is 3.3 persons, and the average trip Park Actions length is three days (Backcountry Office, Congressional legislation, National 1988-95). The studies showed that Park Service policies, and Park poli- groups of two made up the highest cies provide guidelines for administer- proportion of users, followed by groups ing each national park. The guidelines of three or more, and solo hikers tend to become more specific as one (Underhill, et al. 1986; Jalbert 1992). Of moves from Congressional acts to local the groups with two or more people, policies. While the mandates authorize over 50% were friends hiking together, the establishment and delegate man- less than 30% were families, and less agement of Federal lands, the purpose than 10% were organized groups and significance, goals, and manage- (Underhill, et al. 1986 and Jalbert 1992). ment objectives are further defined in national and local park policies. Wilderness hikers often encounter other user groups including stock users and National Park Service day hikers on popular Corridor trails, Legislation and river users at beaches and attraction sites along the Colorado River. The National Park Service Organic Act Currently, private and commercial stock of 1916 (39 Stat. 535, 16 USC 1) use in the inner canyon is limited to 40 established the NPS and provided the miles of trail, primarily within the Cross- agency with its fundamental direction Canyon Corridor. Several miles of by defining its purpose, which is to: primitive roads and trails on the rims are also open to stock use. Designated 2-13 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

...promote and regulate the use of been or shall be directly and the Federal areas known as Na- specifically provided by Con- tional Parks...by such means and gress. measures as conform to the fundamental purpose of the said Congress intended park visitation to Parks... which purpose is to con- be contingent upon the ability of the serve the scenery and the natural NPS to preserve park environments in and historic objects and the wild life an unimpaired condition. What consti- therein and to provide for the en- tutes an impaired resource is ulti- joyment of the same in such man- mately a management determination. It ner and by such means as will is in this context that the vision, goals, leave them unimpaired for the en- and objectives for wilderness manage- joyment of future generations. ment at Grand Canyon were developed and are being implemented. These areas derive increased national dignity and recognition of Grand Canyon National Park their environmental quality....The Legislation authorization of activities shall be construed and the protection, On January 11, 1908, President management, and administration Theodore Roosevelt, under the author- of these areas shall be conducted ity of the Antiquities Act of 1906, in light of the high public values reserved land as the Grand Canyon and integrity of the National Park National Monument. In Proclamation System and shall not be exer- No. 794 (35 Stat. 2175), Roosevelt cised in derogation of the values stated that the Grand Canyon is: and purposes for which these various areas have been established. ...an object of unusual scientific interest, being the greatest The Redwood Act Amendments in 1978 eroded canyon within the United (16 U.S.C. §1a-1) further expanded the States, and it appears that the Organic Act to state: public interests would be pro- moted by reserving it as a The authorization of activities National Monument with such shall be construed and the pro- other land as is necessary for its tection, management, and ad- proper protection. ministration of these areas shall be conducted in light of the high The Grand Canyon National Park public value and integrity of the Establishment Act of 1919 (40 Stat National Park System and shall 1175) dedicated and set apart Grand not be exercised in derogation of Canyon National Park as a public the values and purposes for which park for the benefit and enjoyment of these various areas have been the people. In the Grand Canyon established, except as may have National Park Enlargement Act of 2-14 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

1975 (16 U.S.C. §228a et seq.) Con- The Wilderness Act of 1964 gress stated that its object was to: The Wilderness Act of 1964 (P.L. 88- ...provide for the recognition by 577) guides the form of most adminis- Congress that the entire Grand trative decisions affecting the Parks Canyon, from the mouth of the wilderness. The purpose of Wilderness, Paria River to the Grand Wash as stated in the Act, is: Cliffs, including the tributary side canyons and surrounding pla- To establish a National Wilder- teaus, is a natural feature of ness Preservation System for national and international signifi- the permanent good of the whole cance. Congress therefore recog- people...to secure for the Ameri- nizes the need for the further can people of current and future protection and interpretation of generations the benefits of an the Grand Canyon in accordance enduring resource of wilderness with its true significance. (Section 1 (a)).

On June 10, 1975, The Grand Canyon The National Wilderness Preser- National Park Enlargement Act was vation System, therefore, is for amended (P.L. 94-31), and provided the people and its components are Secretary of the Interior two years to to be administered in such a make a recommendation as to the manner as will leave them unim- suitability or nonsuitability of any portion paired for future use and enjoy- of the Park as wilderness. ment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of World Heritage Site these areas, the preservation of Designation their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemina- In October 1979, Grand Canyon Na- tion of information regarding tional Park was designated as a World their use and enjoyment as Heritage Site by the United Nations wilderness (Section 2(c)). Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). As a World The Act implicitly distinguishes be- Heritage Site, the Grand Canyon was tween an areas public purposes and given the greatest protection for a the administrative actions necessary to natural area. The protection of the realize those purposes. The Wilder- areas outstanding geological, biologi- ness Act does not contradict a cal and cultural features and processes superintendents discretionary authority is assured for all people for all time. The to administer a park. As the Act states: Grand Canyon is unique in meeting both natural and cultural resource criteria for ...except as necessary to meet World Heritage Site designation. minimum requirements for the administration of the area for the 2-15 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

purpose of this Act (including special treatment or accommo- measures required in emergen- dation, or to contract any facili- cies involving the health and ties or modify any conditions of safety of persons within the area), lands within a wilderness area to there shall be no temporary road, facilitate such use. no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motor boats, Additionally, the ADA defines the term no landing of aircraft, no other wheelchair as a device designed form of mechanical transport, and solely for use by a mobility-impaired no structure or installation within person for locomotion, that is suitable any such area (Section 4(c)). for use in an indoor pedestrian area. (See Appendix F, Wilderness Use By The Act makes clear that mechanized or Persons with Disabilities; U.S. Depart- motorized equipment is inappropriate ment of Agriculture. National Forest for public purposes like recreation, Service 1996). education, or scientific study that is not serving administrative purposes. Such The National Environmental equipment, however, is occasionally Policy Act (NEPA) appropriate for administration of a wilderness area, provided that the result The National Environmental Policy Act meets the Acts requirements for such of 1969 (P.L. 91-190; 31 Stat. 852) an effort. More specifically, efforts ne- declared a Federal policy to preserve cessitating the equipment must protect important historic, cultural, and natural or rehabilitate the areas character and aspects of our national heritage. It contents as wilderness for enjoyment or required Federal agencies to utilize study by future generations. systematic, interdisciplinary approaches which will insure the inte- The Americans With grated use of the natural and social Disabilities Act (ADA) sciences and the environmental design arts in planning and in decision The Americans With Disabilities Act making which may have an impact on addresses the issue of accessibility in mans environment. the National Wilderness Preservation System: With the passage of NEPA, Federal agencies were required to use a ...Congress reaffirms that nothing specific environmental planning pro- in the Wilderness Act is to be cess where any Federal action being construed as prohibiting the use considered would, if implemented, of wheelchairs by an individual have an impact on the human environ- whose disability requires use of a ment. These actions may include, but wheelchair, and consistent with are not limited to, adoption of policy, the Wilderness Act, no agency is plans, programs, and approving required to provide any form of projects and permits. NEPA sets 2-16 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

environmental policy goals; imposes 2.5 National Park analysis of potential environmental, Service Policies social, and economic impacts; and Service Policies requires a public review process. Authority for implementing Congres- sional laws is delegated to agencies The National Historic which identify and interpret all relevant Preservation Act (NHPA) laws, and formulate management policies to guide their implementation. The National Historic Preservation Act For the NPS, these policies are set of 1966 (P.L. 89-665, 80 Stat. 915), as forth in a document titled NPS Man- amended in 1992 (P.L. 102-575), de- agement Policies, revised in 1988. clared a national policy of historic preservation, including encouragement of These policies provide direction for preservation on the State and private management decisions; adherence is levels. It authorized the Secretary of the mandatory unless waived or modified Interior to expand and maintain the by an appropriate authority. Recom- National Register of Historic Places. It mended procedures for implementing established the Advisory Council on servicewide policy are described in the Historic Preservation and designated NPS guideline series, and are also State Historic Preservation Officers. It mandatory where the language so required Federal agencies to consider indicates. the effects of their undertakings on properties listed or eligible for listing on Wilderness Management the National Register. National Park Service wilderness By incorporating Executive Order management policies are based on 11593, it instructed all Federal agencies provisions of the Organic Act and the to support the preservation of cultural Wilderness Act, as well as the estab- properties and directed them to identify lishing legislation of individual parks and nominate to the National Register within the national system. NPS Man- properties under their jurisdiction which agement Policies (6:8) treats all cat- may be eligible. The 1992 amendments egories of wilderness in the same redefined Federal undertaking and manner: emphasized the interests of American Indians, Native Hawaiians, and Native ...the term wilderness includes Alaskans. It also introduced the concept the categories of designated of Traditional Cultural Properties as wilderness, potential wilderness, National Register eligible properties, and recommended/study wilder- and included additional provisions for ness, and these policies apply location confidentiality. regardless of category...

2-17 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

The Park Service will take no nate or unreasonably control action that would diminish the risks that are normally associ- wilderness suitability of an area ated with wilderness, but it will recommended for wilderness strive to provide users with study or for wilderness designa- general information concerning tion until the legislative process possible risks, recommended has been completed. Until that precautions, minimum-impact process has been completed, use ethics, and applicable management decisions pertain- restrictions and regulations. ing to recommended wilderness and wilderness study areas will be Minimum Requirement Policy made in expectation of eventual wilderness designation. In protecting wilderness character and resources, and in managing wilder- NPS Management Policies also ad- ness use in accordance with the dresses the management of public use Wilderness Act, Grand Canyon Na- of wilderness, and states that the NPS tional Park will adhere to the minimum will encourage and facilitate those uses requirement concept within all proof wilderness that require the wilderness posed wilderness, including the river environment and do not degrade wilder- corridor. All decisions pertaining to ness resources and character. As administrative practices and use of stated in the Wilderness Act, these equipment in wilderness will be based areas are for public purposes of recre- on this concept. The guiding principle ational, scenic, scientific, educational, of the minimum requirement concept conservation, and historical uses. is: that only the minimum regimenta- tion necessary to achieve established Regarding public use, NPS Manage- wilderness management objectives is ment Policies (6:8) states: justified...apply only the minimum tools, equipment, device, force, regulation, Park visitors must accept wilder- or practice that will bring the desired ness largely on its own terms, result (Hendee, et al. 1990). without modern facilities provided for their comfort or convenience. NPS Management Policies (6:4) Users must also accept certain requires the selection of the mini- risks, including possible dangers mum tool or administrative practice arising from wildlife, weather necessary to successfully and safely conditions, physical features, and accomplish the management objective other natural phenomena, that are with the least adverse impact on inherent in the various elements wilderness character and resources and conditions that comprise a [emphasis added]. By indicating that wilderness experience and primi- managers are to examine all adminis- tive methods of travel. The Na- trative practices and equipment use, tional Park Service will not elimi- the NPS applies the minimum require- 2-18 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

ment analysis to the full breadth of the The GMP specifies management wilderness management tasks in pro- objectives which are based on the tecting wilderness resources. This Parks purpose and significance, and includes outstanding opportunities for which set the direction for manage- solitude or a primitive and unconfined ment. Several management objectives type of recreation. This principle pro- define the desired conditions for man- vides an encompassing framework for agement of wilderness values, includ- management decisions at several levels ing the preservation of visitor experi- (See Appendix D, Minimum Require- ence and protection of natural and ment Decision Process). cultural resources.

2.6 Grand Canyon The GMP also directs the preparation of separate action plans to implement National Park Policies National Park Policies overall Park management. This includes the development of this docu- General Management Plan ment, i.e., a plan for managing visitor (GMP) use and protecting resources in the The Grand Canyon National Park Gen- Parks backcountry and wilderness eral Management Plan (U.S. Depart- areas. The GMP specifies that, in ment of the Interior. National Park Ser- accordance with NPS Management vice 1995) provides the overall direction Policies, the proposed wilderness must for the protection of resources and be managed as designated wilder- visitor experiences. The GMP states ness, and anticipates the final resolu- that the Parks purpose is based on the tion of wilderness issues, and the enabling legislation, and that as a place preparation of a wilderness manage- of national and global importance, ment plan as future actions. Grand Canyon Nation Park is to be managed to: Resource Management Plan (RMP) 1) preserve and protect its natural and cultural resources and ecologi- The Parks 1997 Resource Manage- cal processes, as well as its scenic, ment Plan (U.S. Department of the aesthetic, and scientific values Interior. National Park Service 1997a) provides a comprehensive overview of 2) provide opportunities for visitors the Parks natural and cultural re- to experience and understand the sources, and identifies actions that will environmental interrelationships, enable the NPS to fulfill its legislative resources, and values of the Grand mandate to protect Grand Canyon in Canyon without impairing the keeping with its true significance. resources. The RMP defines specific, nonroutine actions for resource protection, and provides justification for allocating 2-19 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

funds to various resource management Management Plan and management projects. The RMP contains a priority policies regarding administrative use listing of projects determined by manag- of roads, road closures, landing facili- ers to address primary issues. Pertinent ties, and use of aircraft in wilderness. to the scope of the Wilderness Manage- ment Plan, several project statements Colorado River Management address wilderness resources and Plan values. Included in the projects statements are: Wilderness management issues and strategies that overlap with river man- 1) updating visitor use management agement pertain primarily to the link- action plans (such as the Wilderness age of the two user groups (overnight and Colorado River Management Plans) hikers and river runners), and the 2) monitoring visitor use and impacts to application of minimum requirement social and biophysical resources, and policies. While Park policy on group size differs for either user group, the 3) mitigating wilderness resource im- Wilderness and Colorado River Man- pacts. agement Plans each describe standards for the types of experience on a Fire Management Plan spatial and temporal basis. The Wil- derness Plan emphasizes the differ- The goal of the Parks Fire Management ence in experience opportunities Program as defined in the 1992 Fire through the zoning or spatial concept, Management Plan is to effectively man- while the Colorado River Plan defines age wildland fire and provide for the opportunities on a seasonal or tempo- protection of life, property, and cultural ral basis. Each plan will integrate the resources, while ensuring the perpetua- overarching issues pertaining to each tion of ecosystems and natural re- user group. sources. The Fire Management Plan also specifically addresses the restora- Park policy on administrative use of tion of the natural fire regime in wilder- wilderness, or minimum requirement, ness areas, using practices consistent will be consistent in the Wilderness with management policies and other and Colorado River Management planning documents, including the Plans. This policy includes use of the Resource Management Plan and Wil- appropriate conveyance, tools, and derness Management Plan. visitor contact techniques to meet the objectives of resource protection and The current Fire Management Plan visitor experience management in addresses the proper minimum-impact wilderness. suppression techniques, but lacks clear direction for implementing a Minimum Requirement Process. The updated plan will be consistent with the Wilderness 2-20 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Cross-Canyon Corridor Habitat Restoration Plan Management Plan Wildlife Management Plan.

Management of the Cross-Canyon As stated in the GMP, as implementa- Corridor will continue under the 1988 tion plans are developed and updated, Backcountry Management Plan until a they will be consistent with NPS wilder- specific visitor use management plan ness policy requirements. for the Cross-Canyon Corridor is developed. Management standards for Other Authorities campsite condition and visitor experience will be consistent with the goals One method to limit or eliminate poten- and objectives of the 1995 General tial resource damage is through selec- Management Plan. Regulations regard- tive temporary or permanent closures ing backcountry permitting operations to all or certain types of public use. The and overnight camping are consistent general authority for such closures is 36 with the Wilderness Management Plan. CFR §1.5(a), which states

Cave and Karst Management Consistent with applicable legis- Plan lation and Federal administrative policies, and based on a Of an estimated 1,000 caves in the determination that such action is Parks wilderness, 335 have been necessary for the maintenance recorded. The 1997 Cave and Karst of public health, safety, protec- Management Plan provides for a sys- tion of environmental or scenic tematic inventory, assessment, and values, protection of natural or classification of Park cave resources. cultural resources, aid to scien- Recreational and scientific use of caves tific research, implementation of is also directed by the plan, which management responsibilities, addresses management responsibili- equitable allocation and use of ties for resources management, safety, facilities, or the avoidance of education, and restoration of impacted conflict among visitor use activi- cave resources. ties, the superintendent may:

Other Plans (1) Establish, for all or a portion of a park area, a reasonable The following undeveloped but antici- schedule of visiting hours, im- pated plans may affect wilderness pose public use limits, or close qualities and management of resources all or a portion of a park area to in wilderness areas: all public use or to a specific use or activity. Aircraft Management Plan Water Resource Management Plan Vegetation Management Plan 2-21 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

(2) Designate areas for a specific Wilderness Trail Crew use or activity, or impose conditions or restrictions on a use or Trail-crew numbers vary with the avail- activity. ability of supplemental funding. Cur- rently, (1998) there are no full-time Decisions made under the authority of wilderness trail staff, although part- this section will be based on written time or seasonal crews assigned to determinations justifying the actions, and wilderness have numbered up to ten signed by the superintendent. workers. On the average, approximately 200 person-days are devoted 2.7 Grand Canyon to river and backcountry trail restoration. Major restoration efforts on the Wilderness Management Wilderness Management Hermit and Grandview Trails were Staff conducted in the 1997 season, involving crews of eight over a period of Grand Canyon staff responsible for approximately three months. At wilderness management include wilder- present, there are no base-funded, full- ness rangers; backcountry office visitor- time trail staff devoted to wilderness use assistants; a variable trail-crew staff; trails. Additional work will depend on and a wilderness coordinator. available supplemental funding.

Wilderness Rangers Wilderness Coordinator Wilderness rangers are assigned geo- Grand Canyon funds a full-time wilder- graphic areas of responsibility about ness coordinator in the Science Cen- which they are expected to be highly ter. Duties include providing guidance knowledgable. They conduct extended in implementing NPS wilderness trips into wilderness on foot, monitoring preservation and management poli- resources, contacting hikers, providing cies; developing and writing wilder- information and education, and working ness-related plans; assisting in the on resource projects. Wilderness rang- development of restoration projects; ers are also responsible for visitor NEPA compliance; and coordinating protection and emergency operations. wilderness training. Wilderness rangers spend approximately 80 to 85% of their time to wilderness protection. Backcountry office staff Wilderness Steering spend approximately 50% of their time Committee on wilderness management through In 1994, the Director of the National permit processing, education, and Park Service, in response to the information exchange. recommendations of the 1993 Wilder- ness Task Force, outlined the responsibilities of park superintendents regarding wilderness management 2-22 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

(U.S. Department of the Interior. Na- 2.8 Summary of Changes tional Park Service 1994b). One of the and Actions Task Forces recommendations in- and Actions cluded the establishment of a national Implement wilderness management and park-level Wilderness Steering policies for areas of proposed Committee (U.S. Department of the wilderness in Grand Canyon Na- Interior. National Park Service 1994d:2). tional Park in accordance with NPS The purpose of the committee is to Management Policies, the Grand provide strong wilderness leadership... Canyon General Management Plan, [and] facilitate and promote interagency and the Wilderness Act cooperation.... The report emphasized the need for wilderness training, re- Implement minimum requirement search and ecosystem management strategy for public and administrative (U.S. Department of the Interior. Na- use in Grand Canyon National Park tional Park Service 1994d:2). The Parks immediate response was to Prepare other Park management develop a Wilderness Resource Man- plans consistent with the Wilderness agement Team (U.S. Department of the Management Plan as directed in the Interior. National Park Service 1994c). General Management Plan and Composition of this group was modified consistent with NPS Management in 1995 to comprise the Parks current Policies, including the Wilderness Steering Committee (U.S. Fire Management Plan Department of the Interior. National Park Colorado River Service 1995c). Management Plan Cave and Karst The role and function of the Grand Management Plan Canyon National Park Wilderness Steering Committee (WSC) is twofold: Establish and maintain Park staffing levels to ensure wilderness manage- To provide leadership for the field ment responsibilities are met as implementation of NPS wilderness directed by NPS Wilderness Man- policy at the Park; and agement Guidelines: Wilderness Steering To make recommendations to man- Committee agement regarding minimum-require- Wilderness Coordinator ment operational decisions. The WSC Wilderness Rangers is made up of senior-level managers Wilderness Trail Crew who share responsibility for field implementation of the Wilderness Manage- ment Program.

2-23 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

2-24 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

3.1 Background of In 1975, the Grand Canyon National Park Enlargement Act incorporated Chapter Backcountry and Marble Canyon National Monument, 3 Wilderness Planning at Grand Canyon National Monument, Grand Canyon National portions of Lake Mead National Recre- WILDERNESS WILDERNESS Park ation Area, Kaibab National Forest and MANAGEMENT some Bureau of Land Management PLANNING wilderness study process pre- lands into Grand Canyon National Park. FRAMEWORK ceded the development of the The Act, as amended in August 1975 first Backcountry Management (P.L. 94-31), required the submission of APlan.A In 1970, the Park released its a wilderness recommendation reflecting Preliminary Wilderness Study for Grand an enlarged Grand Canyon National Canyon National Park, Marble Canyon Park within two years. National Monument, and Grand Canyon National Monument (U.S. Department During 1975, a Backcountry Reserva- of the Interior. National Park Service tions Office (BRO) was established. 1970). The total recommendation was Backcountry reservations were made up 569,000 acres or approximately 63% of to one year in advance. A lottery was the 900,000-acre Park. Then in 1971, conducted for persons requesting the Park issued a Wilderness Recom- permits during the busy Easter holiday mendation (U.S. Department of the period. In 1976, a new management Interior. National Park Service 1971) system was implemented based on of 508,000 acres, not including the river heavy use in Hermit Creek. Camp- corridor or North Rim. By 1973, the grounds and nightly capacities were Park released its Final Environmental established for the area west of the Statement for the Proposed Wilderness Bright Angel Trail to Hermit Creek. Classification (U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service 1973) In 1977, the Final Wilderness Recom- which consisted of 512,870 acres and mendation (U.S. Department of the included North Rim. Interior. National Park Service 1977) recommended 1,004,066 acres for The first visitor-use management plan immediate designation, and an addi- for the backcountry areas of Grand tional 108,945 acres as potential wilder- Canyon was approved in 1974. This ness. The action was suspended until document, the Backcountry Use and completion of the Colorado River Man- Operations Plan (U.S. Department of agement Plan. Then in 1980, the Wilder- the Interior. National Park Service ness Recommendation was revised to 1974), established use limits for trail- eliminate the Cross-Canyon Corridor heads outside the corridor (use limits from wilderness consideration. During for the corridor had been established in this same period, the reservation system 1971), and set a maximum group size was changed from accepting reserva- of 16 individuals. Permits were issued tions one year in advance to three at the South Rim Visitor Center. months in advance. The change was 3-25 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

intended to spread the BRO workload was implemented whereby mail-in over the year, and reduce the number of permits were accepted four months in no-shows, which were estimated at 50% advance, and a pre-trip check-in was in 1977 and 35% in 1980. no longer required. Statistics showed a 32% increase in overnight use from A new Backcountry Use Plan was 1992 to 1995. drafted in 1981, and by 1983, the new Backcountry Management Plan was In 1993, the Wilderness Recommen- In Gods adopted (U.S. Department of the Interior. dation was updated to include wilderness lies National Park Service 1983a). Major 1,139,007 acres proposed for desig- the hope of changes included establishment of four nation. Of this total, 1,109,257 acres the worldthe great fresh Management Zones and 72 Use Areas were recommended for immediate unblighted, with prescribed use limits, replacing a designation, and 29,820 acres were unredeemed trailhead quota system. Another major recommended for designation as wilderness. action was the initiation of sociological potential wilderness pending resolution The galling and ecological research and monitoring of boundary and motorized river use. harness of civilization programs. A North Rim Backcountry drops off, and Reservation Office was established in Public Scoping began for a new Back- the wounds 1983. country Management Plan in June heal ere we 1995. The General Management Plan are aware. Between 1983 and 1986 extensive was also approved, replacing a 1976 John Muir sociological research was conducted, Master Plan. The General Manage- July 1890 resulting in recommendations on use ment Plan provided guidance for From distribution and backcountry operations. wilderness management, and called John of the Ecological research focused on camp- for the development of a Wilderness Mountains site condition and distribution. A public Management Plan. As a result, efforts review process was initiated in 1987, to update the Backcountry Manage- and by September 1988, a revised ment Plan were redirected to complete Backcountry Management Plan was a Wilderness Management Plan for the approved incorporating information from 1.1 million acres of proposed wilder- these studies (U.S. Department of the ness in Grand Canyon National Park. Interior. National Park Service 1988a) . Major changes included opening more 3.2 NPS Planning corridor and rim trails to private stock Guidance use, inclusion of a commercial use policy, reallocation and distribution of Planning guidance for resource man- use based on the research, and adapta- agement and visitor use plans is tion of management objectives for provided at the national and park specific management strategies. levels. NPS Management Policies (6:4) specifically requires and guides In the four-year period between 1988 the development of planning docu- and 1992, overnight use increased by ments which address backcountry and 12%. In 1993, a new permitting system wilderness management: 3-26 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

The superintendent of each park NPS-77, Natural Resources Manage- containing wilderness will develop ment Guidelines (U.S. Department of and maintain a wilderness manage- the Interior. National Park Service 1991), ment plan to guide the preserva- provides comprehensive guidelines on tion, management, and use of that natural resource management which wilderness. This plan may be assure that activities planned and initi- developed as a separate document ated at the park level comply with Fed- or as a action component of an- eral laws and regulations and NPS and other appropriate management Departmental policies. Specific guid- plan, such as the general manage- ance is provided for Backcountry Recre- ment plan or backcountry manage- ational Use Planning and Special Park ment plan...The plan will be devel- Designations Uses, which include oped with public involvement and wilderness areas. will contain specific, measurable management objectives that ad- The 1993 Wilderness Task Force evalu- dress the preservation of wilder- ated wilderness management in the ness-dependent cultural and natu- National Park Service. The report, ral resources and values in order to Wilderness Task Force Report on achieve the public purposes speci- Improving Wilderness Management in fied by the Wilderness Act and the National Park Service (U.S. Depart- other appropriate legislation. ment of the Interior. National Park Ser- vice 1994), identified several areas Backcountry use will be managed where management practices were not to avoid unacceptable impacts on consistent with Federal laws and na- park resources or adverse effects tional policies. The report identified the on visitor enjoyment of appropriate weakness or lack of NPS guidance for recreational experiences. The wilderness planning. Actions recom- National Park Service will identify mended for improving wilderness plan- acceptable limits of impacts, ning included the development of wilder- monitor backcountry use levels ness planning and management guide- and resource conditions, and take lines, and the development of a wilder- prompt corrective action when ness resource team concept to facilitate unacceptable impacts occur. the wilderness planning process. The Management strategies designed National Wilderness Steering Commit- to guide the preservation, man- tee was formed in response to the agement, and use of the back- report, and has drafted guidelines which country and to achieve the parks include wilderness planning require- management objectives will be ments (U.S. Department of the Interior, integrated into the parks back- National Park Service 1997b). country management plan. (NPS Management Policies, 8:3)

3-27 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

In February 1995, a special directive 3.3 The Limits of regarding wilderness management in Acceptable Change National Parks was issued from the Directors Office. Special Directive 95- The Wilderness Management Plan 2, Management and Planning Policy uses the concepts outlined in The for Suitable, Proposed, Recom- Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) mended, and Potential Wilderness System for Wilderness Planning Areas (U.S. Department of the Interior. (Stankey, et al. 1985). The LAC em- National Park Service 1995a), states phasizes a framework for establishing that in addition to managing classified acceptable, appropriate, and measur- areas for the preservation of their wilder- able resource and social conditions in ness values, planning for these areas wilderness. The LAC process focuses must be oriented toward ensuring the on desired conditions, defines what is, preservation of their wilderness charac- and is not, acceptable, and develops a ter until such time as Congress deter- strategy to prevent unacceptable mines their eventual designation. It conditions. further states that wilderness policy must be reflected in general management The premises of the Limits of Accept- planning and in all types of activity plans able Change process are: for wilderness areas. some change in conditions is Grand Canyon National Parks General inevitable Management Plan directs the prepara- the focus is on human-induced tion of visitor-use management plans for change all areas of the Park. The GMP specifies the effects of human activities are that, in accordance with NPS Manage- important ment Policies, the proposed wilderness a diversity of settings is important be managed the same as designated to maintain wilderness, and anticipates the final determining what is acceptable is resolution of wilderness issues, and the value-based. preparation of a wilderness management plans as future actions. As a Planning models such as LAC are specific project statement, the 1997 designed to facilitate the balancing of Resource Management Plan (U.S. visitor use with the protection of park Department of the Interior. National Park resources and impacts to other visitor Service 1997a) directs that the 1988 and park uses. The LAC model was Backcountry Management Plan be adopted for the 1988 Backcountry revised to be consistent with NPS wil- Management Plan, and the 1989 derness policy requirements. Colorado River Management Plan, and provided clear guidance for monitoring and implementing management actions to reduce impacts to resources from recreational use. 3-28 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

NPS Management Policies and the ment Policies (2:7) requires general Natural Resources Management management plans to define Manage- Guidelines (NPS-77), recognize the ment Zones where strategies for man- Limits of Acceptable Change model as agement and use will best fulfill manage- a planning framework for recreation ment objectives and achieve the pur- management planning. NPS Manage- pose of the park. ment Policies states that such plans will establish indicators, standards, The wilderness areas of Grand Canyon conditions, and thresholds above which National Park are within the Natural management actions will be taken to Zone, managed to conserve natural reduce impacts (6:5). Standards are resources and ecological processes developed using the best available and to provide for their use and enjoy- knowledge of Grand Canyon wilderness ment by the public in ways that do not management, including ecological adversely affect these resources and limitations, visitor use patterns, and processes (NPS Management Poli- existing environmental conditions, as cies, 2:7). To further represent the diver- well as current literature on wilderness sity of wilderness settings and opportu- management and national trends. nities, the Park has defined four recre- Indicators are those measurable vari- ational Opportunity Classes. ables which determine resource condition, and measure the standard. Recreational Opportunity Classes The emphasis of the LAC framework is to outline management objectives The term Opportunity Class replaces through the use of indicators and stan- Management Zone described in the dards for various resource and social 1983 and 1988 Backcountry Manage- conditions and values. These methods ment Plans. The concept has not are applied to help managers structure changed, simply the terminology. As in management direction. This information the GMP, zone implies a physical is included in a description of indica- management area, whereas the term tors, standards and monitoring pro- opportunity class describes a range of grams in Chapter 12. conditions or settings for which the Park manages. 3.4 Management Zoning Grand Canyon backcountry and wilder- In accord with legislative intent and ness areas are comprised of five Op- specific objectives to manage for a portunity Classes: Corridor, Threshold, diverse range of visitor experiences Semi-Primitive Mechanized, Primitive, compatible with the protection of re- and Wild. This Plan establishes the sources and values (GMP 1995), Semi-Primitive Mechanized Opportunity zoning of Park areas provides a Class which identifies access to nonwil- framework for management based on derness corridors within the Grand different Park settings. NPS Manage- Canyon Wilderness. Each Opportunity 3-29 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Class is described in terms of the de- sites or at-large, depending on the use sired resource, social, and managerial area. Composting toilets exist at most conditions for that particular use area areas, or may be installed if required (See Figure 3.1). to deal with unacceptable concentrations of human waste. The smallest The Opportunity Classes are based Threshold Use Area limit for total upon the following criteria: number of overnight campers is six; the largest is 40. type and amount of use opportunity for solitude Semi-Primitive Mechanized current resource conditions management uses. This Opportunity Class applies to the 58 miles of primitive roads in 300-foot The following narrative descriptions wide nonwilderness corridors which outline the general characteristics asso- access wilderness trailheads and ciated with each Opportunity Class. A overlooks. These nonwilderness listing of standards and criteria is de- corridors were identified in the public tailed in Figure 3.2. review process (leading to the 1980 Wilderness Recommendation). Use Corridor Areas in this Opportunity Class overlap with adjacent Threshold and Primitive The Cross-Canyon Corridor is a devel- Opportunity Classes, and include oped inner-canyon area with camp- designated and at-large camping. grounds and facilities. The Corridor is Mechanized (motorized and bicycle) not included in the proposed wilderness. access is permitted on primitive roads The Bright Angel, South Kaibab, and only. North Kaibab Trails provide access to developed areas, and act as thresholds Primitive to the wilderness use areas. The Corri- dor, which is not specifically covered by This Opportunity Class applies to 50% this Plan, is referenced to the extent that of the use areas. Primitive areas it represents the spectrum of opportuni- provide a more isolated and remote ties and provides a comparison for experience, and are managed for low management strategies in the wilder- to moderate use. Camping is at-large ness areas. except in very rare cases where campsites may be temporarily designated Threshold for resource protection. Toilets are not common and are installed only as a This Opportunity Class applies to 24% last resort to correct human waste of the wilderness use areas. Threshold problems. Other structures are gener- Use Areas are managed for moderate ally not permitted except temporary to high levels of use relative to wilder- structures that are not visible and do ness. Camping can be in designated not leave permanent impacts. The 3-30 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

maximum number of overnight users permitted per use area is 29.

Wild

This Opportunity Class applies to 26% of the use areas. Wild areas are mostly remote and provide the greatest opportunities for solitude. No structures of any kind, including toilets, are permitted. The maximum number of overnight users permitted per Wild Use Area is 12.

3.5 Summary of Changes and Actions

Adopt recreation management concept of Opportunity Classes, replacing former management zone concept first adopted in 1983

Establish Semi-Primitive Mechanized Opportunity Class to describe conditions and standards for nonwilderness primitive road corridors, in addition to the existing Corridor, Threshold, Primitive and Wild Oppor- tunity Classes

3-31 Figure 3.1 Wilderness and Backcountry Opportunity Classes

CORRIDOR THRESHOLD SEMI-PRIMITIVE PRIMITIVE WILD MECHANIZED

Resource A modified natural, A natural environment with A modified natural, A natural environment with A natural environment with Setting nonwilderness environment moderate to high impacts from nonwilderness environment low to moderate impacts from minimal impacts from with high impact levels from recreational use. Some areas with moderate to high impacts recreational use. Dispersed, at- recreational use. Dispersed heavy recreational use. with designated campsites and from recreational use. Access large camping with frequent camping in remote areas. Three developed toilets. These areas have to trailheads with designated and concentrated use at creeks campgrounds with water, moderate to high density with campsites, and day-use and attraction sites. toilets, and shade structures. frequent use. overlook areas. Campsites are moderate to high density.

Social Setting Corridor trails are heavily Access trails to use areas also Infrequent encounters with Frequent encounters on Infrequent to no contacts used by day hikers and used frequently by day hikers. other users including motorists threshold trails, becoming with others except near backpackers. Commercial High probability of frequent and bicyclists. High more infrequent with trailheads or along river. stock use is frequent and encounters with backpackers probability of encounters with remoteness. Infrequent Route finding and cross- private stock use is and river users. High others at popular day-use contacts with hikers and river country travel likely. infrequent. High numbers of probability of camping within destinations. Opportunities for users except at popular Outstanding opportunities for trail encounters with hikers sight or sound of others during solitude increase during non- beaches. Increased solitude exist. and mule riders. High primary use periods. peak use periods. opportunities for solitude exist probability of camping Opportunities for solitude year-round especially during within sight and sound of often exist during non-peak non-peak use periods. other groups in periods. campgrounds. Opportunities for solitude are unlikely.

Managerial Trails maintained for heavy Trails maintained infrequently Roads maintained infrequently Trails maintained infrequently Trails maintained very Setting hiker and stock use. based on resource protection. and kept in an unpaved based on resource protection. infrequently except for Informational, warning, and Trail mileage, directional, condition. Improvements made Trail signs at trailhead, park resource protection. Signs at mileage signs are frequent. resource protection, to reduce resource impacts boundary and for resource trailheads and boundaries Ranger stations are located regulatory, and boundary signs only. Temporary closure of protection. No facilities; toilets only. No facilities or near campgrounds, and placed as needed. Interpretive roads for resource protection. placed as last resort for health structures. Infrequent ranger routine patrols are signs in historic areas and at Frequent ranger patrols based and safety. Frequent ranger patrols based on resource conducted. trailheads. Toilets at on use and resource patrols based on use and monitoring. designated campsites. monitoring. resource monitoring. Temporary ranger stations possible, and frequent patrols based on use and resource monitoring. Figure 3.2 Summary of Management Standards by Opportunity Class

Factor CORRIDOR THRESHOLD SEMI-PRIMITIVE PRIMITIVE WILD MECHANIZED

Stock use: Permitted only on the Bright Permitted only on the Permitted on primitive roads Permitted only on the Ken Not Permitted. Commercial Angel, Plateau Point, South Whitmore Trail and on and trails on rim areas. Patrick Trail to the Uncle Jim and Private. Kaibab, Tonto between Bright designated rim trails. Trail on to Uncle Jim Point, Equine only. Angel and South Kaibab, and on designated rim trails. River, and North Kaibab trails.

Roads within No roads present. Roads in wilderness areas Designated unpaved roads Roads in wilderness areas will No roads present. the will be closed to mechanized within a 300-foot-wide non- be closed to mechanized travel. backcountry travel. wilderness corridor. and wilderness Maintenance will be the minimum necessary for resource protection.

Camping Camping in designated sites Camping in designated Camping in designated At-large camping. Designated At-large camping. restrictions within developed campsites or at-large campsites or at-large campsites or areas may be campgrounds only. camping depending on camping depending on required for resource specific use area. specific use area. protection on a temporary basis in localized areas.

Variety of Day hiking, backpacking, Inner canyon: day hiking, Motorized and bicycle use on Inner canyon: day hiking, Day hiking, backpacking and recreational horse or mule riding, fishing, backpacking, horse or mule roads only within non- backpacking, fishing, river river running. uses river running. riding, fishing, river running. wilderness corridor. Access running. Rim areas: day Rim areas: day hiking, to day-use overlooks and hiking, backpacking, horse and backpacking, horse and mule designated campsites. Horse mule riding. riding. and mule riding.

Use area limits Up to 180 people or 59 small Up to three small groups and Applicable limits based on Up to three small groups and Up to two small groups or one for groups and four large groups two large groups for a adjacent Threshold and one large group may be large group may be permitted recreational permitted within three possible maximum of 40 Primitive use areas. permitted for a possible for a possible maximum of 12 use designated campgrounds. people. One exception is the maximum of 29 people. people. Monument use area where eight small groups and two large groups are permitted for a possible maximum of 70 people. Factor CORRIDOR THRESHOLD SEMI-PRIMITIVE PRIMITIVE WILD MECHANIZED

Structures Ranger stations, bridges, Primitive facilities at Scientific and administrative Primitive toilets may be placed No structures are permitted (other than scientific facilities, designated campsite clusters structures, and emergency as a last resort to deal with except in extreme situations cultural campground facilities (toilets and pack bars). communication facilities may localized human waste approved by the resources) including pack bars, toilets, Temporary scientific and be permitted if they are not problems. Temporary scientific Superintendent. shade structures and picnic administrative structures, and normally visible from and administrative structures, tables, concession facilities emergency communication wilderness areas. The and emergency communication and utilities including facilities may be permitted if Kanabownits Cabin and Fire facilities may be permitted if telephone, electricity, water they are determined to be the Tower, and Pasture Wash they are determined to be the and sewage treatment plants. minimum requirement. cabin currently exist. The minimum requirement. continued need for these facilities will be evaluated under the requirements of NPS Management Policies.

Signs: Types Trail mileage, trailhead, Trail mileage, trailhead, Road and trail mileage, Trailhead and park boundary. Park boundary. Special signs permitted interpretive, directional, regulatory, directional, trailhead, regulatory, Small signs indicating road site under exceptions regulatory, and resource resource protection and park directional, resource closures. Special signs only by circumstances only by protection. boundary designations. protection, park boundary, approval of Superintendent. approval of Superintendent. Interpretive signs only in and road designations. historic areas of Hermit and Horseshoe Mesa use areas.

Sign materials Etched metal, reflective, Routed wood except at Etched metal, reflective, Routed wood except at Routed wood except at park adhesive lettered, and routed trailheads and park adhesive lettered, and routed trailheads and park boundary. boundary. wood. boundary. Etched metal wood. Small wood or metal signs for interpretive signs in historic road closures. areas only by Superintendent approval. Small metal or wood signs for road closures.

Ranger and Rangers stationed year-round Temporary stationing of Frequent patrols based on Frequent patrols based on Infrequent patrols based on resource at Indian Garden and Bright rangers and resource intensity of use and resource intensity of use and resource intensity of use and resource specialist Angel campgrounds and specialists is possible. monitoring. monitoring. monitoring. presence seasonally at Cottonwood. Frequent patrols based on Frequent patrols and contacts intensity of use and resource with visitors. Patrols based on monitoring. intensity of use and resource monitoring.

Interpretive Scheduled formal programs, Informal contacts. Bulletin Informal contacts. Informal contacts. Informal contacts. and interpretive signs, bulletin boards and interpretive signs Interpretive signs only in educational boards, and informal contacts. at trailheads. Special historic areas, or for resource contacts interpretive signs in Hermit protection. and Horseshoe Mesa use areas. Grand Canyon National Park Draft Wilderness Management Plan

3-34 Grand Canyon National Park Draft Wilderness Management Plan

ne of the goals of the Wilderness Many respondents commented on the CHAPTER Management Plan is to guide Parks efforts to preserve natural condi- OOmanagement of wilderness resources tions and protect cultural resources in 4 while providing recreational opportuni- wilderness areas. Some suggested that ties for a broad range of visitor experi- use levels be decreased in popular RECREATIONAL ences and settings. Within the context camp areas such as Hermit Creek and USE OF of the wilderness mandate, Grand Horseshoe Mesa in order to decrease Canyon National Park offers the oppor- the impacts from visitor use. Many WILDERNESS tunity for a variety of recreational activi- suggested that the best way to address ties and uses in popular destinations problems related to visitor use is through as well as remote areas. public education.

4.1 Issues and Public 4.2 The Regional Concerns Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Comments related to wilderness recreational use were received during the The recreational activities offered within Public Scoping Process in 1995. In Grand Canyon National Park are com- particular, people were asked to compatible with the Parks significance and ment on day use in the Cross-Canyon its wilderness resources. Opportunities Corridor, private stock use, impacts to for other activities such as motorboating, natural and cultural resources from hunting, mountain biking, and users, and conflicts between different snowmobiling are available on neighbor- use groups. ing public and Tribal lands. Specific information on use of public and Tribal While many respondents indicated a lands adjacent to the Park is found preference for hiking in wilderness elsewhere in this Plan (See Chapter areas, many mentioned that they often Five, Backcountry Permit System, and access wilderness trails through the Appendix E, Recreational Opportunities Cross-Canyon Corridor. Those who and Permit Information for Adjacent provided information on their day- Lands). hiking experience said they often avoid the Corridor trails due to crowding and 4.3 Accessibility stock use. It appears that most user conflicts are related to high use levels In compliance with the Americans with of these trails, and on occasion, at Disabilities Act of 1990, the NPS will popular river beaches and attraction allow, as appropriate, the use of wheel- sites where hikers encounter large river chairs in Grand Canyon wilderness parties. areas. Visitors with sight or other impair- ments requiring the use of guide animals in the backcountry and wilderness areas, should make specific inquiries at the

4-35 Grand Canyon National Park Draft Wilderness Management Plan

Backcountry Office. All visitors must be Presently, noncommercial day-use President aware of the unique, and challenging hiking is unrestricted. However, for the Clinton and I characteristics of the Grand Canyon health and safety of Park visitors, believe wilderness, including steep terrain, temporary restrictions on inner canyon that preserving potential interactions with wildlife, mules trails can be imposed as a result of Americas and horses, and diverse weather pat- extreme environmental conditions. special places terns (See Appendix F, Wilderness Use These restrictions have resulted from isnt just good by Persons with Disabilities). floods, rockfalls, and for periods of public policy, extremely high temperatures. Over- it is a moral 4.4 Day Use night users and guided trips are also obligation... subject to these restrictions. The parks and National trends indicate increasing day forests and use of wilderness areas. The actual wilderness 4.5 Overnight Use preserves amount of day-use hiking on trails at can never be Grand Canyon National Park is un- All overnight use of the wilderness and replicated.... known. High concentrations of day use backcountry areas of Grand Canyon Our occur on the corridor trails, where hikers National Park requires a backcountry responsibility may also encounter several mule strings. use permit. Demand for overnight use to this land is one of the Day hiking is also common on North Rim of popular Grand Canyon wilderness most profound wilderness rim trails, and is increasing areas far exceeds availability. The and on inner canyon trails accessible from maximum group size for overnight use sacred the South Rim road system, especially of the wilderness (and Corridor) is 11 we have. the Hermit and Grandview Trails. The people. The National Park Service Vice President proposed transportation system (Gen- strives to maintain a fair and equitable Al Gore eral Management Plan 1995) will also permit system to balance the demands September 2, have an effect on the dispersal of day of visitor use with mandates for protec- 1997 hikers. tion and preservation. Chapter Five discusses the permit system; the A day-use research project at Grand Backcountry Reservation and Permit Canyon National Park began in June, System is included as Appendix G. 1997. The purpose of the study is to learn more about day-use of the wilder- 4.6 Private Stock Use ness and nonwilderness backcountry areas. Information from this study may Private stock use (equine only) in the be incorporated into future visitor-use wilderness is permitted on existing plans, and will provide a basis for in- primitive roads and trails on the North formed decision-making about issuing and South Rims (See Appendix H, permits for guided day hikes, visitor Wilderness Stock Use Guidelines). A education, and safety programs. permit is required for overnight use.

4-36 Grand Canyon National Park Draft Wilderness Management Plan

This Plan establishes the overnight 4.9 Nordic Skiing and group-size limit for wilderness areas as Snowshoeing a maximum of six people and a maximum of six stock animals (with a limit of Nordic skiing and snowshoeing in the five stock to one mounted packer). The Park is unregulated. These activities total numbers in wilderness for day use occur primarily on the rims, often on will not exceed 12 people and 12 stock unmarked trails or roads. Due to the animals. Parks remote areas and hazardous winter conditions, winter travelers must 4.7 Fishing be prepared for storms and delays. Skiers or snowshoers camping overnight Recreational fishing is permitted in in the Park must have a backcountry Grand Canyons wilderness areas. All permit. Any delay or change in itinerary fishing activities must meet Arizona due to conditions should be reported as Game and Fish Department regula- soon as possible to the first available tions, and any special regulations ranger so that the permit can be ad- established by the National Park Ser- justed. vice. Fishing in the Colorado River is prohibited within one-half mile of the Once Highway 67 and the North En- confluence with the Little Colorado trance Road close for the winter, all River, and in that portion of the Little overnight travel on the North Rim re- Colorado River in the Park. quires a backcountry permit. Snow machines are prohibited in the Park 4.8 Rock Climbing (except for administrative use). Back- country users may camp at-large north of Presently, there is no permit required the intersection of the North Entrance for technical rock climbing. Many Road and Fuller Canyon Road. South of technical climbing areas are remote, this point, and continuing along the and only accessible by overnight hiking entrance road to the North Rim Lodge that requires a Backcountry Use Per- developed area, campers must use the mit. Most of the rock formations at winter campground facility at the group Grand Canyon are extremely unstable, sites behind the closed Camper Store. resulting in hazardous climbing condi- At-large camping must be out of view of tions. Climbers are required to employ the North Entrance Road. All trash must minimum-impact climbing techniques. be carried out, and human waste cannot The use of power tools to install bolts or be buried over roads, parking lots, trails, other hardware is prohibited. All hard- near buildings or other areas that will be ware must be removed upon finishing in view of summer users. the route. Commercial ski trips must comply with regulations identified in an Incidental (IBP) Business Permit or a Special Use Permit (SUP). 4-37 Grand Canyon National Park Draft Wilderness Management Plan

4.10 Bicycling required for overnight stays. Special campsites may be designated on the Bicycling is allowed on all Park roads Cave Entry Permit as provided in the accessible and open to private vehicles. Cave and Karst Management Plan. In addition, the Arizona Trail on both rims Cave Entry permits are not automati- is open to mountain biking, and bicycling cally issued. opportunities are available on adjacent Forest Service lands. All bicycles are Approvals for cave entry depend on prohibited in wilderness areas. Com- the caves classification and whether mercially guided bicycle tours must or not it has been classified using the comply with regulations identified in an criteria put forth in the Cave and Karst IBP or SUP. (See Appendix I, Commer- Management Plan, the experience of cial Use Policy.) the person requesting the approval, and the availability of a backcountry permit. A Cave Entry Permit applica- 4.11 Commercial Use of tion is included as Appendix J. Wilderness

Commercially guided overnight and day 4.13 Semi-Primitive trips are considered an appropriate use Mechanized Access in of the Grand Canyon wilderness, and Nonwilderness Corridors must comply with the regulations identified in an Incidental Business Permit. Nonwilderness road corridors adjacent The Commercial Use Policy for wilder- to the wilderness areas on the North ness and backcountry areas is included and South Rims provide access to as Appendix I. Commercially guided various rim overlooks and designated day-hiking trips are currently permitted in camping sites. The primitive roads Grand Canyon National Park pursuant to which are open to motor vehicles and an IBP or SUP. bicycles are subject to temporary closures based on fire conditions, 4.12 Cave Entry weather, and potential hazards. High- clearance vehicles are recommended. Cave entry and management is guided Sections of the Arizona Trail on the by the Grand Canyon National Park Kaibab Plateau within the Park allow Draft Cave and Karst Management Plan bicycle use. Mechanized access in (1997c). All caving activity (day use or nonwilderness corridors is further overnight), except for access to Class I addressed in Chapter 8. caves, must be approved in advance through the Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. A permit will be issued to applicants under the provisions defined in the Cave and Karst Manage- ment Plan. A Backcountry Use Permit is

4-38 Grand Canyon National Park Draft Wilderness Management Plan

4.14 Area Limitations and Grandview Mining District (designated camping is located just Closures outside the historic district boundary) The fragility of Grand Canyons lands Deer Creek (north side of the Colo- and resources necessitates use limits rado River within ¼ mile upstream or in some cases, and, in other cases, downstream at confluence, and to temporary or permanent closures (U.S. the upper end of the narrows) Department of the Interior, National Elves Chasm (within ¼ mile of Royal Park Service 1993c). These limits and Arch Creeks confluence with the closures are authorized by 35 Code of Colorado River, or within the chasm) Federal Regulations (CFR) section 1.5: The area on the east side of the Colorado River (within one-half mile 1. Camping is not permitted in the of the confluence of the Little Colo- Transept, Manzanita, Uncle Jim rado and Colorado Rivers) Point, Long Jim, and Tusayan Use Redwall Cavern Areas. These are day use areas only. The basis for the closures is 3. The following are closed to all that each is adjacent to the Cross- visitor use Canyon Corridor Use Area or the rim camping areas, each has a Hance Mine (in Asbestos Canyon limited physical carrying capacity, south of Hance Rapid) and each has special ecological Bass Mine (in Hakatai Canyon and sensitivities. the area immediately surrounding the mine tailings and waste rock areas) 2. Also closed to camping but open Furnace Flats from mile 71.0 to mile to day use are the following: 71.3 on the north side of the Colo- rado River Dripping Spring Anasazi Bridge Page Spring Portions of Phantom Creek (below 4. The Hopi Salt Mines along the 3600-foot contour) Colorado River within the Park are Thunder River drainage (from its closed to all visitation except by origin to its confluence with Tapeats permission from the superintendent. Creek) The closure extends from river mile Havasu Creek within the Park (from 62 to river mile 62.5 on the southeast the confluence at the Colorado side of the Colorado River. If permis- River to Beaver Falls) sion is obtained, a backcountry Matkatamiba Canyon below the permit is also required. Redwall Limestone (i.e., below the major side canyon on the east)

4-39 Grand Canyon National Park Draft Wilderness Management Plan

5. Havasupai Use Lands are closed 3. Trash must be packed (carried) to all visitation except to access out. Burning or burying of trash or areas authorized on a Havasupai toilet paper is prohibited (36 CFR Tribe or Grand Canyon backcountry 2.14). permit (includes the Olo and Fossil Use Areas). 4. Possession of firearms, and/or bows and arrows is prohibited (36 4.15 Applicable Regulations CFR 2.4).

The National Park Service advocates 5. Pets are not allowed in Grand Leave No Trace camping principles Canyon National Park wilderness (See Chapter 10, Interpretation, Educa- areas or within the inner canyon. In tion, and Information). The following rim developed areas, pets can be regulations have been established to taken on trails, roads, and other support these principles, to promote outdoor areas as long as they are protection of the Canyons fragile envi- under physical restraint, and there ronment, and provide an equitable are no posted closures. Where pets system for permitting use. are allowed, they must be under physical restraint at all times. It is the responsibility of all trip participants to know and obey the following Exception: Use of guide animals is regulations while in the wilderness and allowed; specific information can backcountry areas of Grand Canyon be obtained from the Backcountry National Park. These regulations are Office. (See Appendix F, Wilder- considered the terms and conditions of ness Use by Persons with Disabili- a backcountry permit under 36 CFR 1.6: ties).

1. A Backcountry Use Permit is 6. Leaving a trail or walkway to required for all overnight use, and shortcut between portions of the must be in possession while in the same trail or walkway, or to shortcut wilderness. Overnight users must to an adjacent trail or walkway, is have a Backcountry Use Permit prohibited (36 CFR 2.1). displayed on the outside of their pack, tent, or other camping equipment once camp has been estab- 7. Throwing or rolling rocks or other lished (36 CFR 1.6). items inside caves or caverns, into valleys, or canyons, down hillsides 2. Wood or charcoal fires are prohib- or mountainsides, is prohibited (36 ited. However, the use of Sterno or CFR 2.1). backpack stove is permitted (36 CFR 2.13).

4-40 Grand Canyon National Park Draft Wilderness Management Plan

8. Feeding, touching, teasing, 12. More than one party/group from frightening, or intentionally disturb- the same organization camping in ing wildlife is prohibited (36 CFR the same designated campground or 2.2). Unattended food must be noncorridor use area per night is stored properly to prevent access prohibited. Violating a closure, desig- by wildlife. Improper food storage is nation, use, or activity restriction or prohibited (consult the Backcountry condition, schedule of visiting hours, Office for information on proper or use limit is prohibited (36 CFR 1.5 food storage). and 1.6).

9. Possessing, destroying, injuring, 13. Use of soap in any side stream or defacing, removing, digging, or within 100 yards of any side stream disturbing from its natural state any junction with the Colorado River is plants, rocks, animals, or mineral, prohibited (36 CFR 2.10). cultural, or archeological resources is prohibited. Walking on, entering, Exception: Use of soap is allowed in traversing or climbing an archeo- the mainstream of the Colorado logical resource is prohibited (36 River only. CFR 2.1). 14. Commercial use of the back- 10. The use of motorized or country must be authorized by a wheeled vehicles, such as motor- permit from Grand Canyon National cycles, bicycles, baby buggies/ Park (See Appendix I, Commercial strollers, and similar vehicles, on Use Policy). trails below the rim is prohibited (36 CFR 4.10 and 4.30). 15. All trails within the Grand Canyon are closed to use for competitive Exception: The use of wheelchairs travel, including rim-to-rim and for mobility-impaired persons is other races or timed events. allowed (See Appendix F, Wilder- ness Use by People with Disabili- 16. Disposing of human waste within ties). 100 feet of a water source, high-water mark of a body of water, or a camp- 11. Writing, scratching, or otherwise site, or within sight of a trail is prohib- defacing signs, buildings, or other ited (36 CFR 2.14a9). However, property is prohibited (36 CFR hikers camped along the Colorado 2.31). River must urinate directly into the Colorado River. Fecal waste must still be disposed beyond 100 feet as described above. This exception for urine applies to the Colorado River only, and does not include any sidestream or other water course. 4-41 Grand Canyon National Park Draft Wilderness Management Plan

This is consistent with the Colorado River trip regulations.

17. Violating a term or condition of a backcountry permit is prohibited. This includes all aspects of the permit process as outlined in the Wilderness Management Plan (36 CFR 1.6g2).

4.16 Summary of Changes and Actions

Provide information on recreational opportunities outside the Park (See Appendix E, Recreational Opportuni- ties and Permit Information for Adja- cent Lands).

Support day hiking research project. Incorporate findings into future visitor use plans.

Implement group-size limits for stock overnight and day use in wilderness areas.

4-42 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

ne of the management objec- A high percentage of respondents CHAPTER tives of the Wilderness Manage- seemed to favor a cost-recovery system, Oment Plan as stated in Chapter One, and stated that the revenues collected 5 specifies desired outcomes for the should be used to support backcountry- permitting system and operations: related programs and operations. These operations and services include direct BACKCOUNTRY serve the visitor by providing contact with knowledgeable staff by users the opportunity to obtain phone or in person, extended office PERMIT PERMIT permits for wilderness and hours, more rangers in the field, trail SYSTEM nonwilderness backcountry maintenance, education, and resource areas that offer the type of management programs. experience they seek While many commented that the current serve Park management by system is satisfactory, a majority of providing an effective way to comments suggested that certain as- educate the public on low- pects of the permit system should be impact practices, ethics, and improved. Of greatest concern was the safety inability of users to obtain information from the Backcountry Office. The tele- provide information on use phone system did not provide an ad- levels and patterns that enable equate level of service. Of those who management to make informed indicated they were experienced Grand decisions regarding the protec- Canyon hikers, the mail-out system was tion of wilderness values and the preferred way of obtaining permits. resources. Of those who did not favor a cost-recov- This chapter discusses issues, initia- ery system for backcountry permits, tives, and strategies to achieve the many believed that current Park entrance management objectives. (See Appen- fees should cover this service. Others felt dix G, Backcountry Reservation and that the system should be simplified to Permit System). avoid charging for permits, and many felt strongly that access to public lands 5.1 Issues and Public should be free. Concerns Neighboring Tribal governments raised During the Public Scoping Process for issues about access. While permits are the Wilderness Management Plan required for recreational use on the conducted in 1995, people were Navajo, Havasupai, and Hualapai Tribal asked to comment on issues related lands, visitors accessing the Park to the Parks backcountry permitting through Tribal lands often do not obtain operations, including a proposed cost- the required permits from the Tribes. recovery program. Visitors mentioned that getting tribal permits can be difficult and confusing. 5-43 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

5.2 System and use at a level that encourages compliance with the permit system. Wilder- Administration ness use statistics will be distributed by In those days To meet the tremendous demand for the Backcountry Office quarterly to the there was no Backcountry Use Permits in a fair and Wilderness Subdistrict, Trail Crew, road, the park timely manner, an automated backcoun- Interpretation Staff, and the Science was all a blessed wil- try reservation and permit system was Center to facilitate wilderness management. derness, and established in 1983. A Backcountry Use I have often Permit is required for all overnight thought since wilderness and backcountry use, includ- The permit system is administered by what a won- ing overnight hiking, overnight cross- the Backcountry Office. The main office derful people we would have country ski trips, off-river overnight hikes (South Rim), is open year-round. The North Rim office is open from May to been if we by river-trip members, Colorado River had wanted to beach camping by backpackers, over- October. These offices handle permit keep it that night equine backcountry use, and all applications by mail, FAX, or in person. way. overnight backcountry caving activity. (A Permits may also be obtained in- Adolph Murie Cave Entry Permit is required to enter person at a number of remote loca- caves. See Appendix J, Cave Entry tions. Specific guidelines and proce- Permit). The Backcountry Use Permit is dures for obtaining a backcountry valid only for the trip leader, itinerary, permit are included as Appendix G, and dates specified on the permit. Backcountry Reservation and Permit Overnight stays in the dormitories or System. cabins at Phantom Ranch do not require backcountry permits. 5.3 Recreation Fee Demonstration Program The permit system is designed to regulate, facilitate, distribute, and In 1996, Congress mandated the measure use in wilderness and back- Secretary of the Interior to implement a country areas. Use regulation is essen- three-year Recreation Fee Demonstra- tial for protecting Park resources and tion Program in up to 100 National insuring a variety of backcountry experi- Park Service areas. Grand Canyon ences. The permit system also provides National Park is participating in the information about the extent and inten- Recreation Fee Demonstration Pro- sity of wilderness use, including identifi- gram, implementing an increased cation of problem areas. Use statistics entrance fee and a backcountry permit generated from the automated system and impact fee. This program directs are compared to resource conditions parks to increase current fees and evaluated through the campsite monitor- establish new fees for recreational ing program (See Chapter 12, Monitor- uses, and retains a large portion of the ing and Research). This provides a resulting revenues at the collecting park basis for determining actions to prevent for new services and facilities. The further resource impacts from recre- program mandates collection of fees ational use. Park ranger patrols monitor for three years, and allows for expendi- 5-44 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

tures from fees for up to six years. 5.4 Access Through After this three year period, the Park Adjacent Lands may continue collection of use fees under a cost recovery program. Cur- Access to wilderness in Grand Canyon rently, all fees are collected under the National Park is sometimes gained by Fee Demonstration Program. A cost crossing other Federal or Tribal lands. recovery program would allow fees to On some North and South Rim areas, be collected to cover actual costs, and primitive roads through National Forest would have to be approved by Con- Service lands access remote trailheads. gress. In western Park areas, access is through lands administered by the Bureau of In general, the benefits realized at Land Management. These Federal Grand Canyon include additional agencies do not currently require per- service to the public, increased pro- mits; however, fees and permits may be tection of Park resources, and con- required in the future under the Recre- struction of needed facilities accord- ation Fee Demonstration Program. ing to the Parks General Manage- Visitors to Federal lands are required to ment Plan. comply with applicable regulations for each agency. The direct benefits of the Recreation Fee Demonstration Program to wil- Permits are required for use of, or ac- derness users include improved cess across, Tribal lands adjacent to access to the Backcountry Office by Grand Canyon National Park. Navajo, FAX or phone, longer office hours, and Havasupai, and Hualapai Tribal lands additional staff to disseminate infor- share boundaries with Grand Canyon mation and process permits. In 1997, National Park. Access permits must be and educational hiking video was obtained from each Tribal government. written and produced by the Grand Through the government-to-government Canyon Association in cooperation consultation process, the Tribes re- with the Park. Fees collected through quested that the park work with them to the demonstration program will sup- establish a system that ensures visitors port additional copies and distribution have both Park and Tribal permits. This of the video to permittees and visitor Plan establishes a cooperative recre- contact stations. In addition, impact ational use permitting strategy with the fees will support wilderness resource Navajo, Havasupai, and Hualapai Tribes. monitoring programs, trail mainte- (See Chapter 16, Implementation nance, and visitor education. Several Schedule). Specific information on projects have been identified and are permit requirements for Tribal lands are included in Chapter Sixteen, Imple- outlined in Appendix E, Recreational mentation Schedule. Opportunities and Permit Information for Adjacent Lands.

5-45 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

5.5 Administrative Use scientific studies. Group-size limits depend on project scope, and will be Park staff conducting work related to determined through the Minimum resource protection, visitor contact, or Requirement Decision Process (See other administrative duties are not Appendix D.) required to obtain a permit for overnight use. These activities include natural, Organized Groups cultural and recreational monitoring such as monitoring water quality, wildlife, An organized group is any number of caves, campsites, and archeological persons united for some purpose, sites; routine ranger patrols; and trail whether commercial or noncommercial. maintenance. Park group-size limits See Appendices G, Backcountry depend on the projects scope, and will Reservation and Permit System, and I, be determined through the Minimum Commercial Use Policy, for permit Requirement Decision Process (See information. Appendix D). Park staff must provide the Backcountry Office with dates and 5.6 Summary of Changes location of scheduled work. When ap- and Actions propriate, this information will be con- veyed to visitors. Upgrade automated reservations system, and improve customer Scientific Studies service by increased staffing, communications, and hours of operation Individuals or groups conducting scientific studies in the Park must first obtain Distribute quarterly wilderness-use a research and/or collecting permit; statistics to Wilderness District, Trail applications are due at least 90 days in Crew, Interpretive Staff and Science advance of planned field activities. See Center to facilitate wilderness man- Chapter 12 for information on the re- agement search permit process. Show educational video in Back- Projects requiring access to restricted country Office and Visitor Centers, locations or popular backcountry use and distribute to permit holders areas may require more than 90 days to review and process. Non-park research- In cooperation with the Navajo, ers must obtain a permit for overnight Havasupai, and Hualapai Tribes, use, and should submit a backcountry establish a cooperative permitting permit application through the reseach system for use on Tribal and Park office at the same time the research lands. and/or collecting permit is submitted. The Research Office and Backcountry Office will coordinate the review and approval of backcountry permits for 5-46 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

6.1 Issues and Public The vast majority of respondents did not support increased group-size limits. CHAPTER Concerns Many supported a smaller group size (a 6 he primary issues of wilderness limit of six was most often mentioned). campsite management are related Several individuals expressed dissatis- TTto the amount and type of impacts to faction with encounters made with larger natural and cultural resources, and the groups; and some inferred that a smaller distribution of campsites and subse- group size is more closely related to a WILDERNESS quent effects on visitor experience. wilderness experience. CAMPSITE Long-term monitoring programs have MANAGEMENT documented campsite and trail condi- 6.2 Use-Area Allocation tions and impacts to archeological sites. The wilderness of Grand Canyon Na- tional Park is divided into 88 overnight Two issues identified in the June use areas. Each use area describes a 1995 Public Scoping process specifi- specific land area, and has an estab- cally addressed concerns related to lished camping capacity. To the extent campsite management, 1) use-area possible, use-area boundaries have boundaries, and 2) group-size limits. been defined according to identifiable topographic features such as ridge tops Several suggestions for addressing and drainages, and vary in size from concerns related to visitor impacts at several hundred to several thousand popular campsites were made. Those acres. Each use area has an overnight most often mentioned were to reduce camping capacity based on the areas the number of permits (and use), and size, the number of suitable and avail- to provide more information and able camping sites, management zoning education on wilderness camping or Opportunity Class, and its use history. practices. The strategy for allocating by use areas Those who expressed support for was adopted in the 1983 Backcountry changes in use-area boundaries Management Plan. Prior to this, permits focused on greater opportunities for were issued for the wilderness areas by solitude, and supported dispersal of trailhead entry. Each major trailhead had use. Several suggestions were made a daily quota which allowed a defined on how to divide use-area bound- number of groups. In some cases, one aries, recommending adjustments trailhead provided access to several use based on terrain and geologic forma- areas but visitors typically congregated tions. Rather than adjusting use-area in a specific area such as Hermit Camp. boundaries, some suggested evaluat- As a result, irreversible impacts to ing the management zoning and natural features and cultural sites oc- camping classifications (designated curred, and the high number of people at versus at-large). camps did not provide the desired wilderness experience. The use-area 6-54 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

strategy serves as a management tool 6.3 Campsite for dispersing use for resource protec- Classification tion and preservation of wilderness values such as opportunities for soli- Three types of camping exist within the The long fight tude. backcountry and wilderness areas of to save wild Grand Canyon National Park. Camping beauty represents democ- As described in Chapter Three, the within the nonwilderness Cross-Canyon Opportunity Classes define manage- racy at its Corridor is restricted to developed best. It re- ment objectives for resource, social, campgrounds at three locations: Cot- quires citi- and managerial settings of each man- tonwood, Bright Angel, and Indian zens to agement zone. Each use area by defini- Garden. Primitive designated camp- proctice the hardest of all tion falls into an Opportunity Class, and sites are located in the wilderness overall management of the use area is virtures--self- areas which receive high use levels restraint. based on specific management objec- and are typically concentrated near tives and standards. water sources. Unrestricted, at-large Edwin Way Teale camping is available in over 90% of the The wilderness-use allocation system is wilderness use areas. Table 6.1 shows based on the number and size of over- the proportion of campsite types by night groups. In use areas with desig- Opportunity Class. nated camping, the number of groups allowed is determined by the number of Designated-Site Camping campsites that are, in turn, based on the levels of impacts a particular area can Camping at designated locations is tolerate. Management objectives for required when necessary to limit further providing a range of opportunities and resource degradation and to restrict experiences including solitude, warrant intensive use of previously disturbed lower use allocations. In addition, the areas. There are use areas in the Parks vast, remote use areas defined Threshold Opportunity Class with by geologic complexity, lend themselves campsites that have been designated well to use dispersal, and, as defined in because of archeological, resource the Wilderness Act, outstanding oppor- protection, aesthetic, and sociological tunities for solitude or a primitive and considerations. Where designated unconfined type of recreation. campsites exist, backcountry users may not select other campsites. In A complete listing of use areas with an some use areas within the Primitive explanation of the system for assigning Opportunity Class, camping areas codes is included as Appendix K, Use have been defined to direct hikers to Area Classification and Limits. more resistant areas, and to prevent impacts to fragile and sensitive areas.

6-55 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Figure 6.1 Threshold Primitive Wild Proportion Total Use Areas 26 40 22 of Wilderness Designated Sites 62% 2% 0% Campsite Types by At-Large Camping 38% 98% 100% Opportunity Class

At-large Camping on the resistant post-dam sandbar areas, and not in the fragile desert zones Camping in the backcountry at sites (Colorado River Management Plan other than designated campsites is 1989). Backpackers may experience considered at-large camping. In use frequent contacts with river trips when areas without designated campsites camping on Colorado River beaches. within the Threshold Opportunity Class, as well as those within the 6.4 Group Size and Use Primitive and Wild Opportunity Limits Classes, individuals or groups can camp anywhere in the use area in In 1993, the group-size limit was reduced accordance with minimum-impact from 16 to 11. The determination was camping techniques (See Chapter based on the recommendations of 10, Interpretation, Education, and ecological and sociological wilderness Information). research (Cole 1985; Underhill, et al. 1986; and Hendee, et al. 1990) and River Beach Camping National Park Service monitoring programs (Jalbert 1992 and 1993). Camping on Colorado River beaches is permitted for backcountry hikers, or The unit of measure for allocating use in for those on commercial or private use areas is by groups. These are Colorado River trips. Commercial categorized as small group consisting and private river users are required to of 1-6 persons, and large group con- comply with the specific conditions of sisting of 7-11 ) persons. The upper limit their river trip permits. Backcountry on total number of groups (small and users should recognize that differ- large combined) per night is five in the ences exist between backcountry and Horseshoe Mesa Use Area. Other use river-use regulations. River-use areas within the Threshold Opportunity regulations, for example allow group Class allocate a maximum of four groups sizes up to 36 on commercial trips, per night. Tanner Use Area is the only and require the carry-out of human inner canyon use area within the Primi- waste in approved portable toilets. tive Opportunity Class that allows up to River users are also required to camp 6-56 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

four groups each night. The maximum is 12, Monitoring and Research). When three in all other Primitive Use Areas. All standards are not being met, specific but two use areas in the Wild Opportu- treatments are needed to address nity Class have a use limit of two small resource problems. These treatments or one large group per night. Fossil and may involve a range of actions includ- Vishnu Use Areas are limited to one ing rehabilitation, campsite designa- small group or one large group. These tion, use dispersal to other areas, use limits for the Fossil and Vishnu Use reduction, and sensitive area closure. Areas assure the opportunity for an Following is a list of Use Areas which experience without contact with another require special management. party or group. In the Cross-Canyon Corridor campgrounds, use limits are Hermit and Monument Use based on the total number of campers Areas as well as on the number of groups. The high demand for the Hermit and All use areas which have at-large camp- Monument Use Areas is primarily due ing have an overnight stay limit of seven to their accessibility and the presence nights/use area/trip. The superintendent of water. The designated sites for may approve an extended stay due to a camping in the Hermit and Monument research or resource-monitoring project. Use Areas are Hermit Creek, Hermit The overall trip length, both in number of Rapid, Monument Creek, Granite days and miles, is not limited. In use Rapid, Cedar Spring, Salt Creek, and areas having designated campsites or Horn Creek. campgrounds, overnight stays in any one designated campsite or camp- At both Hermit Creek and Monument ground are limited to two nights per trip. Creek, campsites are located in a cluster of four campsites in close 6.5 Special Management proximity. Toilets are provided at the cluster areas as well as designated of Use Areas sites along the Tonto Trail east of A variety of factors necessitates diligent Monument Creek. An administrative management efforts to maintain the site is located near the campsite ecologic integrity and cultural signifi- cluster at Hermit Creek. cance of heavily visited fragile wilderness areas. Intensive recreational use of Specific problems at both use areas popular areas has resulted in deteriora- are associated with the presence of tion of natural and cultural resources. archeological sites, impacts to water Additionally, the effects of concentrated sources, presence of rodents, and, in use has implications on the quality of the social context, the proximity of experience a visitor may have. For each campsites to one another. Opportunity Class, management objectives for campsite condition and distribution have been described (See Chapter 6-57 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Maintenance of the backcountry currently located near cultural resources. toilets is conducted by mule and by Alternatives to mitigate the impacts to resource river patrol trips (See Ap- cultural resources will be developed pendix D, Minimum Requirement through a separate action plan (See Decision Process). Rehabilitation Chapter 16, Implementation Schedule). and restoration work has also been The range of alternatives will include done at each site. These treatments reduction in overnight use, increased have not been completely successful. visitor education through staff contacts, A range of alternatives including printed material and signing, and closure reduction in use, data recovery at of campsites within the Last Chance archeological sites, and campsite Mine Historic District. See Chapter 16, relocation are being considered in Implementation Plan and Schedule. action plans for the Monument Creek and Hermit Creek Use Areas. These Tanner Use Area management actions are identified in Chapter 16, Implementation Plan and The Tanner Use Area has high use levels Schedule. on the delta area near the Colorado River. Impacts to concentrations of Horseshoe Mesa Use Area archeological sites and vegetation in the dunes have resulted in the closure of the The Horseshoe Mesa Use Area has sand dune area immediately down- relatively easy access and high levels stream of Tanner Creek. Campsites and of overnight and day use. Designated trails have been defined in the sand and campsites are located in two clusters cobble areas adjacent to the Colorado for small and large groups. Toilets are River. A composting toilet has been within each cluster. placed experimentally to address human waste and trailing problems. This Plan The actual and potential impacts to expands the Tanner Use Area bound- fragile cultural resources necessitates aries at the River to allow for greater the reevaluation of campsite manage- dispersal of use into resistant areas ment in this area. The historic re- adjacent to the Colorado River. mains on Horseshoe Mesa are officially listed on the National Register Deer Creek Use Area of Historic Places as the Last Chance Mine Historic District. As a National One of the most popular destinations is Register site, the NPS is mandated to the Deer Creek Use Area. During the manage the area to protect the summer months, as many as 200 river Districts long-term integrity and users visit Deer Creek Falls and the historic values. Limiting factors in this Narrows in a single day (Jalbert 1990 area are adequate human waste and 1991). The preferred campsites in disposal and the protection of cultural the Deer Creek valley are within sight of resources. Camping is restricted to the trail, and archeological sites are designated sites, some of which are located near the high-use area. Human- 6-58 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

caused wildfires (two in the past seven just to the east of the confluence of years) have destroyed vegetation and Clear Creek and the Colorado River is damaged archeological features in this also allowed. area. Phantom Creek Use Area This Plan separates the Deer Creek Use Area from the expansive, rim to The Phantom Creek Use Area includes river, Indian Hollow Use Area. The new Utah Flats and the Phantom Creek Deer Creek Use Area is managed by drainage two miles above its the standards described in the Thresh- confluence with Bright Angel Creek. old Opportunity Class. A composting The Phantom Creek drainage is only toilet has been placed, and the over- open to camping above the major night camper limit set at one small and waterfall near the 3600 foot contour line one large group per night in two desig- on United States Geological Survey nated campsites. (USGS) maps.

Tapeats Use Area Cape Final Use Area

Although the Tapeats Use Area is This Plan separates the Cape Final remote and access from the rim is Use Area on the North Rim from the difficult, this area is visited frequently by Walhalla Use Area. This use area also river trips, especially during the summer offers an increasingly popular day hike season. Camping is restricted to two with views of the Canyon from the rim. designated areas, Upper Tapeats and Overnight camping is limited to two Lower Tapeats. Three designated nights for small groups only at the campsites and a toilet are provided at designated campsite. At-large camp- the Upper Tapeats site. The Lower ing is available in the adjacent Walhalla Tapeats Use Area is at the confluence Use Area. of Tapeats Creek and the Colorado River, and is also a popular camp for Other Considerations river trips. For the Walhalla Plateau, Thompson Clear Creek Use Area Canyon, and Robbers Roost Use Areas, access is from the North Rim The Clear Creek Use Area includes the Entrance and Point Imperial/Cape Clear Creek drainage as well as the Royal Roads. Camping is at-large, and area on the Tonto Plateau to Sumner campsites must not be visible from Wash (two miles east of the North paved access roads. Kaibab Trail). In the Clear Creek drainage, camping is restricted to areas above the first major side canyon north of the River that enters from the east. Camping on the Colorado River beach 6-59 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

6.6 Nonwilderness Use Swamp Ridge Complex Areas with Semi- Within the Swamp Ridge Cluster, two Primitive Mechanized designated campsites and at-large Access camping are accessible by primitive roads. Overnight use is limited to two These areas are characterized by a nights at the designated campsites. predominately natural setting where use is relatively low, but evident. Use Fire Point is a popular rim dispersal is achieved by designated- viewpoint and camping area within site camping. Motorized use is per- wilderness, and is reached by mitted. (Manning 1986; U.S. Depart- travelling Forest Service roads to ment of Agriculture, Forest Service the Park boundary. Users of the 1982) Within the wilderness, a 300- Fire Point designated site must foot wide nonwilderness road corridor park near the boundary fence and will be retained in a primitive state to hike approximately one mile into provide mechanized access. The the campsite. One designated following use areas are accessible by campsite accommodates one large primitive roads within the Semi- or one small group per night. Primitive Mechanized Opportunity Class. Swamp Point is popular rim viewpoint, campsite, and trailhead to the Point Sublime Use Area North Bass Trail and Powell Plateau. Two designated campsites are The Point Sublime Use Area on the located here: one at the trailhead, North Rim is a popular day use and and the other adjacent to the road overnight destination. This area is within the nonwilderness corridor. The reached by the Point Sublime Road, campsite at the trailhead is intended and is excluded from wilderness for for use by those doing an inner the purpose of providing an overlook canyon trip. The limit is two large or site. Two designated sites for one two small groups per night. small and one large group are located away from the popular rim viewpoint. Swamp Ridge Use Area is Overnight camping is limited to two open to at-large camping, and is nights. accessible by primitive roads.

Pasture Wash Complex

The Pasture Wash Use Areas are accessible by high-clearance vehicles during most of the year; heavy rains and snow may make the roads impassable requiring temporary closures for re- 6-60 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

source protection. Use areas within the Eremita Mesa Use Area cluster are managed as designated and at-large camping. Overnight use is Access to the new Eremita Mesa Use limited to two nights at designated Area is by the Boundary Road. Road campsites. conditions may limit access as described for the Pasture Wash Use Signal Hill and Ruby Point Area. At-large camping is limited to each location has one designated one large and one small group per campsite located on the Boundary night. Road toward Havasupai Point. Camping is limited to one small 6.7 Resource Protection group at each site with a maximum and Stewardship of two vehicles per group. Havasu- pai Point is designated for day-use The primary dimensions of recreation only, camping is not allowed. management in wilderness (to provide visitors the opportunity for quality South Bass Trailhead has wilderness experiences and to limit the two designated campsites. Groups resource site impacts caused by visitor planning hikes into the South Bass use), are not separate or distinct con- Use Area must also have a permit cepts (Hendee, et al. 1990). The inter- for the trailhead designated camp- relationship between these two as- sites if they plan to camp on the rim pects of managing visitor use in wilder- prior to their hike. Two designated ness presents a challenge for manag- campsites accommodate one large ers. Many resource impacts (such as or two small groups. litter and vandalism) affect visitor experience, and reducing impacts Pasture Wash At-large camp- improves experience. However, some sites to the southwest of the Pas- management actions taken to control ture Wash Ranger Station must not impacts may restrict visitors in ways be visible from access roads. that adversely affect their experience Designated campsites are located (e.g., signs, closures, and designated at the South Bass Trailhead and campsites). along the Havasupai Point Road. Camping is not allowed near the Management of resource impacts to historic Pasture Wash Ranger campsites, trails, and associated Station or at the Havasupai point activities requires an understanding of overlook area. visitor behaviors as well as the affects of treating these problems. This involves an interdisciplinary strategy to achieve management objectives. To that end, Park staff play various roles in campsite management.

6-61 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Figure 6.2 describes the general staff Other use area changes not included in responsibilities associated with the previous sections reflect use-area wilderness campsite management. boundary changes. Use-area changes are summarized in Figure 6.3, and are 6.8 Summary of Use included in Appendix K, Use Area Classification and Limits. Area Changes

Changes in use patterns, resource Upon approval of this Plan, the National conditions, and increased demand Park Service will produce a map which have required a reevaluation of use- will include these use-area boundary area classification and allocations. As and classification changes, wilderness previously stated, the primary pur- boundaries and primitive roads. pose of allocating use is to maintain the standards described for natural, cultural, and experiential wilderness values. The use area changes allow for a slight increase overall in wilderness use levels. In many of the popular areas visitor use is concentrated, and by separating these sites from the larger use area, a broader range of opportunities is provided. Many of the changes also provide for a more appropriate level of management.

Figure 6.2 Inventory Monitoring Visitor Resource Responsibilities Education Protection Associated with Wilderness Ranger✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Campsite Management Natural Resource ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Specialist

Recreation ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Researcher

Archaeologist ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Interpretive ✔ ✔ Specialist

6-62 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Use Area Nature of Change Figure 6.3 Name and Code Summary of Badger (AA9) Extend boundary to include Nine-Mile Canyon Use Area Changes Soap Creek (AB0) New. Formerly within Rider Use Area. Primitive Use Area with at-large camping

Rider (AB9) Extend boundary to include 19 Mile Canyon

Walhalla Plateau (NA0) Redefine boundaries, decrease total area. Create NA8 and NC9 (See below) Cape Final (NA1) New. Formerly within Walhalla. Manage as separate Threshold Use Area with designated campsites

Ken Patrick (NC9) New. Formerly within Walhalla. Manage as separate Primitive Use Area with at-large camping

Thompson Canyon (NB9) Change to Wild classification

Robbers Roost (ND9) Boundary change. Extend boundary to include a portion of the Basin north of access road, and toward Point Sublime

Outlet (NG9) Boundary change. Includes a portion of the Basin south of access road. Point Sublime (NH1) Reduction of total area (See ND9). Manage as Threshold Use Area with mechanized access and designated campsites.

Swamp Point (NJ2) Separate from Swamp Ridge. Manage as Primitive Use Area with mechanized access and designated camp areas.

Fire Point (NJ1) Separate from Swamp Ridge. Manage as Primitive Use Area with mechanized access to Park boundary and designated campsite

Indian Hollow (AN9) Formerly called Deer Creek. Does not include high-use area in Deer Creek Valley

Deer Creek (AX7) Separate Deer Creek valley from expansive area. Threshold Use Area with designated campsites

Tanner (BB9) Extend boundaries at river to drainage at Basalt Rapids

Eremita Mesa (SC9) Separate from SE9. Manage as Primitive Use Area with mechanized access and at-large camping

Pasture Wash Reduction in total area (See SC9). Designate campsites at South (SE1, SE2, SE3, SE0) Bass Trailhead and along Havasupai Point Road

6-63 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

rand Canyon National Park has 7.1 Criteria for Establish- over 400 miles of established Chapter ing Trail Standards and trails, of which 375 miles lie out- 7 GGside the routinely maintained Cross- Specifications Canyon Corridor. Eighteen of these Trails are widely recognized as consis- wilderness trails (approximately 260 tent with wilderness. Controversy can miles) contain historic features (i.e., center on the appropriateness of trail retaining walls, tread riprap, log crib- Trails type. Research indicates that wilderness bing, etc.), and ten have been deter- Management visitors favor low-standard trails (some- mined eligible for the National Register what like a game trailnarrow, varying of Historic Places. Most trails have grade, winding, not the shortest route) received little or no stabilization or more than high-standard trails (wide, rehabilitation since Park establishment steady grades, fairly straight) (Lucas over 75 years ago. Consequently, 1980). these trails are in various states of disrepair as cultural features and In 1988, Grand Canyon adopted specific natural components deteriorate. trail standards based on these criteria: Trail standards are necessary to meet Natural Resource Protection the 1995 General Management Plans Cultural Resource Protection and management objectives to provide a Stabilization variety of primitive recreational oppor- Management Zone Classification tunities consistent with wilderness and Trail Character and Visitor Experience NPS policies on accessibility. Stan- Recreational Use Levels dards are also necessary to meet the Visitor Safety objectives of this Wilderness Manage- ment Plan (See Chapter 1, Introduc- Regarding visitor safety, NPS Manage- tion) by providing a trail system consis- ment Policies (6:8), states tent with wilderness values, including [p]ark visitors must accept wilder- protection of natural and cultural re- ness largely on its own terms, sources, and preservation of the char- without modern facilities provided acter of individual trails. for their comfort or convenience. Users must also accept certain The NPS will conduct administrative risks, including possible dangers activities for trail maintenance in a arising from wildlife, weather condi- manner consistent with NPS Manage- tions, physical features, and other ment Policies regarding wilderness natural phenomena, that are inher- management and the use of Minimum ent in the various elements and Requirements (See Appendix D, conditions that comprise a wilder- Minimum Requirement Decision Pro- ness experience and primitive cess). methods of travel.

7-64 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

7.2 Trail Classification Level III Maintained for intermediate use. Traffic Trail classification is specified by the is medium. Tread is maintained for NPS Trails Management Handbook user convenience. (1983). Classification of each trail includes both trail type and maintenance Level IV level. These trails are maintained for semi- primitive use. Traffic is low to medium. Types of Trails The tread is often not smooth, having a dirt and rock surface. Maintained for Type A Major Trails either foot or horse use. Less mainte- (nonwilderness: Cross-Canyon Corridor nance is required than on the previous and Arizona Trail). Trails are marked levels. routes improved and maintained for foot and horseback traffic. They may contain Level V Something will bridges, corduroy elements, drainages, Maintained for primitive use. Traffic is have gone out and necessary shelters. low. These foot trails require custodial of us as a care. Minimal maintenance is required. people if we ever let the Type B Minor Trails remaining These trails are marked, improved, and 7.3 Grand Canyon Trail wilderness be maintained to accommodate foot or Standards destroyed. horseback traffic, but contain an overall lower construction standard than Each of the Parks 63 established trails Wallace Stegner Type A. is classified by type and level of main- Wilderness tenance. The standards, based on trail Letter Type C Wilderness Trails classification, are described in three 1960 These trails are marked, but are gener- categories as follows. Figure 7.1 ally unimproved except for clearing and details the complete list of trails, classi- some work on eroding or dangerous fication, and trail mileage. areas. Corridor Trails Maintenance Levels (Nonwilderness)

Level I Type A, Level I Maintained for high use. Traffic is heavy. The North Kaibab, South Kaibab, Maintained at the highest level. Bright Angel, Plateau Point, River, and the Tonto between Bright Angel and Level II South Kaibab, are designated Corridor Traffic is medium to heavy. Tread is Trails. The Arizona Trail also falls under maintained at a high standard for user this category. convenience and comfort. Requires high maintenance.

7-65 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Threshold Trails erosion. The discriminate placement of essential cairns is permitted. Generally Type B, Level IV These trails are constructed with sig- Threshold trails include the Hermit, Clear nificant historic features within or Creek, Thunder River, Whitmore, and leading to use areas within the Thresh- Grandview Trails. old Opportunity Class. Primitive Trails Trail maintenance will be performed on previously constructed sections to Type C (wilderness), Level V protect the integrity of historical fea- Constructed historic features are absent tures including outside retaining walls, or much less evident than those present rock riprap, log cribbing, and drainage on Threshold Trails. structures. Trail maintenance will consist of resource Trail width should be a maximum of 18 rehabilitation efforts at impacted sec- inches, except where historically con- tions, including stabilization of historic structed to wider dimensions, or where features. Trail width should be an aver- environmental conditions require wider age maximum of 18 inches, unless tread (e.g., switchback junctions). environmental considerations require a Average trail width of 12 to 15 inches wider tread. Low-key maintenance on relatively level sections should be techniques such as out-sloping and preserved. drainage dips may be used where necessary. Slough removal to a minimum safe trail width (8 to 12 inches, depending on Multiple trail eradication and route delin- slide slope angle) will be conducted. A eation and/or minor relocation may be 10% out-slope of trail tread (one-inch necessary to mitigate resource damage. drop for every ten inches of tread width) In areas of severe or potentially severe will be attempted where possible to resource damage, rock or log checks, facilitate drainage. Outside berm waterbars or cribbing may be used. should generally be removed, unless Outside rock retaining lining, buried and environmental considerations support generally no more than two layers high, retention of the feature. may be used to control sloughing on traverses. The discriminate placement of Loose rock removal may be con- essential cairns is permitted. ducted. Obstructive tree limbs or brush may be cut or removed to prevent Primitive trails include: Havasu, South detours and multiple trailing. Drainage Bass, Tonto, Boucher, Hance, Tanner, structures (waterbars, drainage dips, Beamer, South Canyon, Nankoweap, check dams, sand ladders) may be North Bass, Deer Creek, Kanab Creek, used as necessary to correct trail Tuckup, Lava Falls, and river-attraction- site trails. 7-66 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Routes or Wild Trails withstanding use. Problem segments are identified, and those segments are Routes or wild trails are defined as a either redesigned or relocated. Experi- nondelineated access with no evident ence demonstrates that a descriptive historical trail construction and minimal log of trail problems and prescriptive user-defined path development. Reha- actions will usually be more useful than bilitation on such routes will be to miti- a system of trail-monitoring samples gate unacceptable resource damage (Cole 1991). Grand Canyon currently only. Once an impacted section is maintains a log of trail problems. identified, and appropriate clearances are conducted, rehabilitation efforts not 7.5 The Arizona Trail to exceed Primitive Trail (Type C, Level V) standards may be undertaken for the The Arizona Trail will be completed as specified site. an unpaved trail from Grand Canyon Village to Kaibab National Forest lands Borrow Pits on the South Rim, and, on North Rim, to connect the Kaibab National Forest The need to use borrow pits for trail section to the North Kaibab Trail. It will maintenance will be minimized; trail be used for hiking, biking, and horse- maintenance materials will be brought back riding (GMP 1995:28, 45, 55). from outside the Park whenever pos- The Cross-Canyon Corridor trail sys- sible (U.S. Department of the Interior, tem will be designated as part of the National Park Service 1991a, Special Arizona Trail, but restrictions on bi- Directive 91; and NPS Management cycle, livestock, and overnight hiking Policies 1988). This direction is also use will continue, consistent with this provided in the GMP (1995:10,17,55). Wilderness Management Plan.

7.4 Monitoring 7.6 Restoration and Implementation Priorities The focus of trail management is on specific problem segments. The prob- As mentioned above, over 400 miles of ability that any trail segment will deterio- wilderness trails wind through the rate is a function of the trails immediate canyons and rimlands of Grand Canyon environment, its design and mainte- National Park. During the past decade, nance, and the amount, type and timing Park staff conducted trail-condition of use it receives. The factors that most surveys on approximately 150 miles of influence trail conditions are trail loca- this system. Based upon these surveys, tion and design. This suggests that the the NPS identified the following trails or principal solutions to trail problems trail complexes as high priority mainte- involve increasing the ability of the trail nance efforts: to withstand use (through improved engineering) or changing the location of the trail to one that is more capable of 7-67 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Hermit Trail Complex Thunder River/Deer Creek (Hermit, Hermit Creek, Waldron, and Complex Dripping Spring Trails; 16 miles). The (Thunder River, Deer Creek, and Park conducted intensive restoration Tapeats Trails; 20 miles). This popular efforts on sections of the Hermit Trail and extensive trail system consists of the during the 1997 season. This popular Bill Hall (Monument Point), Thunder River trail complex contains abundant histori- (Indian Hollow), and Deer Creek access cal features consisting of unique stone trails. Portions of the Thunder River Trail, riprap and stone-retaining walls. Land- probably the oldest Anglo-constructed slides, rockfall, and intense runoff trail in the Canyon, contain historic adversely impacted significant sections features possibly dating back to the of the complex. The 1997 maintenance 1870s (Dutton 1882). Park staff have effort mitigated many of the most routinely performed maintenance and seriously damaged sections of the reconstruction of trail sections since main Hermit Trail. Additional restora- 1980. Restoration of the Redwall section tion work is required on sections of the and some historic retaining walls near Dripping Spring and Waldron Trails. Indian Hollow is still needed, as is peri- Minimal routine maintenance is neces- odic minimal maintenance of the entire sary to protect the natural and cultural trail complex. values of the trail and its immediate environment. Colorado River Trails The Colorado River provides ready Grandview Trail Complex access to approximately 70 miles of (Grandview, Horseshoe Mesa, Page wilderness trails. The NPS routinely Springs, and Cottonwood Trails; 7 conducts winter river trips addressing miles). The Park conducted intensive restoration and routine maintenance of restoration efforts on sections of the these important access routes. Grandview Trail during the 1997 season. This popular trail contains abun- Rim Access Trails dant historical features consisting of (Tanner, New Hance, South Bass, South unique stone riprap and stone-retaining Canyon and Nankoweap Trails; 47 walls similar to the Hermit. The 1997 miles). These historic, primitive trails maintenance effort mitigated many of provide important access to the inner the most seriously damaged sections canyon. The upper (Kaibab to the base of the main Grandview Trail, although of the Redwall) reaches of each trail substantial restoration work is required contain severely eroded sections, result- on sections of the Page Springs and ing in significant damage to soil and Cottonwood Creek Trails. vegetation, as well as loss of historic features.

7-68 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

The Old Bright Angel Trail 7.8 Summary of Changes This trail will be slightly upgraded from and Actions route/wild trail standards to primitive trail standards (GMP 1995:57). See Figure 7.2 for a list of actions mentioned in this chapter. Restoration and maintenance efforts directed at the wilderness trail system traditionally relied on special funding and volunteer programs. Currently, the NPS is actively pursuing long-term funding for a professional workforce to continue this important program. An implementation schedule, based on the priorities identified above, will be developed and implemented as funding becomes available (See Chapter 16, Implementation Schedule). Continued survey and monitoring efforts may identify additional priority sections.

7.7 Other Considerations

The Hermit and Grandview Trails will be suggested as alternatives to the Cross- Canyon Corridor trails for visitors with experience hiking in the Grand Canyon. However, neither trail use nor maintenance will be increased to levels that will alter their status as threshold trails. The Hermit and Grandview Trails will also be the subject of a separate monitoring program and carrying-capacity study to ensure that resources and visitor experiences do not significantly change on those trails as a result of dispersing some corridor trail use to them. Mea- sures may be taken if carrying capacities are exceeded (GMP 1995:55).

7-69 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Figure 7.1 Trail Classification Mileage Grand Canyon Arizona Trail Corridor 11.0 Basin Primitive 9.2 National Beamer Primitive 8.0 Park Trails Bill Hall (Monument Point) Threshold 2.6 Boucher Primitive 11.0 Brady Hollow Primitive 9.0 Bright Angel* Corridor 7.8 Cape Final Primitive 2.0 Cape Solitude Primitive 9.6 Carbon-Chuar Creek Primitive 3.2 Clear Creek Threshold 9.0 Cliff Springs Threshold 0.42 Colorado River Trail* Corridor 1.8 Cove Threshold 10.0 Cottonwood Creek Threshold 1.26 Deer Creek/Deer Springs Threshold 1.33 Dripping Spring Threshold 4.6 Fire Point Threshold 1.0 Fort Garrett Primitive 1.0 Francois Matthes Point Primitive 4.7 Grandview* Threshold 3.2 Great Thumb Point Primitive 2.0 Havasu Creek Primitive 3.3 Hermit Trail* Threshold 8.0 Hermit Creek Primitive 1.1 Horseshoe Mesa Primitive 1.5 Kanab Plateau Primitive 10.0 Ken Patrick Primitive 8.6 Komo Point Primitive 5.0 Lava Trail Primitive 1.5 Little Colorado River Primitive 1.6 Long Jim Threshold 3.9 Monument Canyon Threshold 1.5 Nankoweap Primitive 14.0 New Hance* Primitive 7.5 North Bass* Primitive 14.0 North Kaibab* Corridor 14.0 Old Bright Angel (N. Kaibab) Primitive 7.0 Page Springs Threshold 0.86 Powell Plateau Threshold 1.2 Plateau Point Corridor 1.5 Ribbon Falls Threshold 0.5 Saddle Canyon Primitive 0.7 South Bass* Threshold 9.0 South Canyon Primitive 6.2 South Kaibab* Corridor 7.3 Stone Creek Primitive 2.06 Surprise Valley Primitive 1.6

7-70 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Trail Classification Mileage Tanner Primitive 8.1 Tapeats Creek Threshold 3.2 Tapeats/Deer River Trail Primitive 1.9 Tiyo Point Primitive 6.2 Tonto Primitive 72.0 Thunder River* Threshold 10.5 Tuckup Primitive 64.0 Uncle Jim Threshold 3.4 Upper Ribbon Falls Primitive 1.0 Waldron Threshold 2.0 Walhalla Glades Primitive 7.5 *Eligible Walhalla Spur Primitive 2.7 properties Whitmore Threshold 1.2 Widforss Point Primitive 4.7 for the Widforss Primitive 4.0 National Register of 63 Trails Total Miles: 439.53 Historic Places

7-71 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Figure 7.2 Trail/Complex Miles Management Action/ Summary Treatment of Actions Hermit Trail Complex 16 Hermit Trail: restoration in 1997. Dripping Spring and Waldron Trails: restoration work needed. Schedule routine/cyclic maintenance of each trail following restoration work.

Grandview Trail 7 Grandview Trail: restoration in 1997 Complex Page Spring/Cottonwood Creek Trails:restoration work needed. Schedule routine/cyclic maintenance of each trail following restoration work.

Thunder River/ Thunder River/Deer Creek Deer Creek Complex 20 Trails:routine maintenance conducted during winter river restoration trips. Bill Hall and Surprise Valley Trails: Routine/cyclic maintenance conducted during winter river restoration trips.

Colorado River Trails ~70 Routine/cyclic maintenance conducted during winter river restoration trips.

Rim Access Trails ~47 Tanner, New Hance, South Bass, South Canyon, Nankoweap: Restora- tion of upper reaches; periodic maintenance.

Old Bright Angel Trail 4.1 Upgrade to primitive trail standards.

7-72 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

7-73 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

n accordance with the Final in mine-related roads in the 1980s CHAPTER Wilderness Recommendation, outside the Park resulted in an in- IIthe NPS will retain ten primitive roads to crease of visitors to the Kanab Plateau, 8 overlooks and trailheads in the Park. At and a corresponding increase in van- least 15 other primitive roads on adja- dalism to cultural resources (Huffman Semi- cent public lands provide access to 1993). Primitive Grand Canyon scenic overlooks (See Access Appendix E, Recreational Opportunities In addition to impacts on archaeologi- and and Permit Information for Adjacent cal resources, adequate maintenance Lands). With the exception of the ten of primitive roads in remote locations Facilities Grand Canyon primitive roads de- imposes significant costs. Poorly scribed below, all other roads in the located or unmaintained roads often proposed wilderness will be closed and result in serious erosional problems returned to a natural state or converted (Moll 1996; Ketcheson and Megahan to trails (See Appendix L, Natural Con- 1996). Severe gully formation nega- ditions). This position is consistent with tively impacts soils, vegetation, and NPS Management Policies (6.5) which Park archaeological resources. The states that permanent roads will not be most practical and economical long- built or retained in wilderness. Where term mitigation of these problems lies abandoned roads have been included with closure and revegetation (Moll within wilderness, they will be used as 1996; Fleischner 1992). Primitive trails or restored to natural conditions. roads, maintained or not, create ad- The Wilderness Recommendation verse impacts on natural resources. identifies approximately 70 miles of For example: primitive roads on the Kanab Plateau, approximately 40 miles on the Kaibab Vehicular traffic directly destroys Plateau, and an estimated 20 miles biological resources by crushing elsewhere in the Park for either conver- vegetation and microbiotic crusts, sion to trails or restoration. and retards revegetation through soil compaction. 8.1 Issues and Public Disturbed surfaces provide ideal Concerns Concerns habitat and avenues for exotic As mentioned above, the Final Wilder- plants to spread (Amor and ness Recommendation identifies ap- Stevens 1976). NPS Management proximately 130 miles of primitive roads Policies (4:12) require manage- that will be restored to a natural condi- ment of exotic species whenever tion or converted to trails. Roads result prudent or feasible. The restoration in significant resource impacts. The of disturbed areas is an important additional vehicular access provided by management tool for protecting primitive roads facilitates illegal exca- native biodiversity. vating and collecting of archaeological resources. For example, improvement 8-74 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Other undesirable consequences country and wilderness toilets. The The hour is of road access include illegal collect- majority of respondents stated that late, the ing of rare plants and animals (Noss toilets are needed in popular areas. opportunities 1995). Many felt that toilets were not intru- diminish with sive, and were a solution to dealing each passing year, and we Even though roads occupy a small with human waste, toilet paper, and must establish fraction of the landscape in terms of wildfires caused by burning toilet here a Common total area, their influence extends far paper. Several suggestions were Market of beyond their immediate boundaries. made for location, type, and design conservation Roads precipitate habitat fragmen- of toilet structures in the backcoun- knowledge which will tation by dissecting otherwise large try. Of those who did not support enable us to patches into smaller ones, and thus placement of toilets, some felt they achieve our creating edge habitat along both were intrusive and did not belong in highest goals sides of the road, potentially at the a wilderness setting. Others sug- and broadest expense of interior habitat (Reed, gested alternative ways for dealing purposes. With each day Barnard, and Baker 1996). with the problem of human-waste that passes, disposal such as a carry-out system the natural Roads result in frequent and often and better education. world shrinks negative encounters between as we exert wildlife and humans (Buckley and Very few comments on roads were greater artificial Pannell 1990; Stankey 1980). received. General comments re- control over Wildlife biologists have recognized garding road access included our problems with open roads that support for maintaining primitive environment. expose large mammals such as access to Pasture Wash and deer, cougar and bighorn sheep to Swamp Ridge, and closing the road Stewart L. Udall heavy hunting pressure, poaching, to Cape Solitude. and harassment. Open-road density has been found to be a good 8.2 Primitive Roads predictor of habitat suitability for Management large mammals, with habitat effec- Management tiveness and population viability Primitive roads will be managed declining as road density in- according to standards set forth in the creases (Noss and Cooperrider Semi-Primitive Mechanized Access in 1994). Studies have indicated that Nonwilderness Corridors section of in order to protect species sensi- this Plan (Chapter 3, Wilderness tive to legal or illegal hunting and Management Planning Framework). persecution, habitat must have low This is a modified version of the For- road density (Thiel 1985; Mech, est Services Semi-Primitive Motor- Fritts, Raddle, and Paul 1988). ized Recreation Opportunity Spectrum classification (U.S. Department of During the Public Scoping Process Agriculture, Forest Service 1982), and for this Plan, people were asked to constitutes a separate Opportunity comment about Grand Canyon back- Class. The Semi-Primitive Mecha- 8-75 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Figure 8.1 Trailhead or Overlook Access Primitive Roads North Rim Open to 1 North Bass Trailhead 1 Swamp Point Road 7.5 miles 2 Point Sublime 2 Point Sublime Road 14.7 miles Trailheads and Kanab Plateau Overlooks 1 Kanab Point 1 Kanab Point Road 4.4 miles 2 SB Point 2 SB Point Road 7.7 miles 3 150 Mile Canyon Trailhead 3 150 Mile Canyon Road 5.9 miles 4 Tuckup Canyon Trailhead 4 Tuckup Canyon Road 8.4 miles

Tuweep 1 Toroweap Overlook 1 Tuweep Road 6.6 miles 2 Lava Trailhead 2 Vulcans Throne Road 2.0 miles

South Rim 1 Havasupai Point 1 Havasupai Point Road 2.7 miles 2 South Bass Trailhead 2 Pasture Wash Road 4.2 miles

nized Opportunity Class consists of The NPS will maintain these primitive nonwilderness corridors with the follow- roads in an unpaved condition without ing characteristics: major improvements. With the exception of the Tuweep Road, only improve- the area is predominantly natural ments that reduce resource impacts in in appearance keeping the road minimally open for interaction between users is low high-clearance or four-wheel-drive evidence of other users is vehicles will be considered (GMP:11). present The Tuweep Road will remain dirt, and camping is permitted only in have limited maintenance, with vehicle designated sites sizes restricted to a maximum of 22 wilderness group-size limits feet in length (GMP:51). apply mechanized (motorized and 8.3 Primitive Roads to Be bicycle) access is permitted Restored or Converted to Figure 8.1 summarizes primitive road Trails access to trailheads and overlooks. The map, Figure 8.2, shows road locations. North Rim

The 1980 Wilderness Recommenda- Primitive Roads Standards tion originally called for the closure of Nonwilderness corridors containing most primitive roads in wilderness on primitive roads are generally 300-feet the North Rim. Nonwilderness corri- wide (See 1993 Wilderness Update). dors providing access to Point Sub- lime and the North Bass Trailhead are 8-76 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

allowed (U.S. Department of the Interior, Kanab Plateau National Park Service 1980c). The one- mile road to Fire Point and the 2.7 mile The 1993 Final Wilderness Recom- Walhalla Spur will be closed to mecha- mendation proposes most of the nized access, and converted to hiking Kanab Plateau within Grand Canyon trails. The six former fire roads (Komo National Park for wilderness designa- Point, Francois Matthes Point, Walhalla tion. The exceptions consist of five Glades, Widforss, and Tiyo Point), and nonwilderness corridors for mecha- the section of W-1 from the landfill to its nized access to trailheads and over- junction with the Point Sublime Road are looks. closed to mechanized access, and designated as wilderness trails. Mini- In order to remain consistent with the mum requirements for emergency 1980 Wilderness Recommendation, situation temporary vehicular access are this Plan retains approximately 27 defined in Appendix D, Minimum Re- miles of existing roads necessary to quirement Decision Process and in provide access to Kanab Point, S.B. Chapter 9, Safety and Emergency Point, 150 Mile Canyon Trailhead, and Operations. Requirements specific to the Tuckup Trailhead. As specified in fire management, including minimal trail the GMP, the Wilderness Recommen- standards and prescribed fire opera- dation, and NPS Management Poli- tions, will be addressed in the upcoming cies, the proposed action calls for the revision of the Fire Management Plan. conversion of 70 miles of additional

Figure 8.2 Primitive Roads Open to Trail- heads and Overlooks

8-77 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

roads to trails or restoration to a natural Cape Solitude The Final Wilderness condition. This Plan establishes a ten- Recommendation calls for the closure mile section of this road network as the of the Cape Solitude Road to mecha- Kanab Plateau Trail connecting Kanab nized access. The GMP provides for Point with the 150 Mile Canyon Road. the establishment of a trail along the old road alignment from Desert View to This Plan also establishes the closure to Cape Solitude. mechanized access of the so-called Toroweap Point Overlook Road on the Pasture Wash Restore the Huitzal mesa above the Tuweep Ranger Sta- Spur Road to a natural condition. tion. This primitive road should not be confused the popular Toroweap over- 8.4 Facilities look road at Tuweep. Although the 1980 Wilderness Recommendation provides Wilderness is undeveloped Federal for retaining a nonwilderness corridor to land retaining its primeval character Toroweap Point, the existing 7.85-mile and influence, without permanent road is severely damaged in numerous improvements (Wilderness Act 1964). locations and fades completely in the Accordingly, authorizations of NPS pinyon-juniper forest well before reach- administrative facilities located in ing any vista. This Plan establishes a wilderness will be limited to the types nine-mile section of this road network as and minimum number essential to meet the Brady Hollow Trail. the minimum requirements for the administration of the Wilderness area. Toroweap Valley A decision to construct, maintain, or remove an administrative facility will be The ten-mile primitive road to The based primarily on whether such a Cove will be converted to a trail. facility is required to preserve wilderness character or values or essential to A two-mile section of a west-trending ensure public safetynot on consider- spur of the Vulcans Throne Road and a ations of administrative convenience, one-mile section of the Toroweap Land- economy of effect, or convenience to fill and Access Road will be restored to the public. Maintenance or removal of a natural condition. historic structures will additionally comply with cultural resource protection Other Areas policies (NPS Management Policies, 6:5). Sanup Plateau The Fort Garrett road will be converted to a trail. The Kanabownits cabin and fire tower are classified as administrative sites The Hook The two primitive roads excluded from wilderness (1980 Wil- north of New Water Springs in the Park derness Recommendation). The NPS will be restored to a natural condition. will conduct a record search and his-

8-78 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

torical documentation to determine their Fire Towers, Cable eligibility for the National Register of Crossings, Radio Repeaters, Historic Places. Upon completion of this Etc. process, a determination regarding course of action will be made. Hydrologic, hydrometeorologic, seis- mographic, and other research and Cabins monitoring devices may be installed and operated in wilderness only upon Ranger stations, patrol cabins, associ- a finding that (1) the desired informa- ated storage or support structures, drift tion is essential and cannot be ob- fences, and facilities supporting trail- tained from a location outside wilder- stock operations may be placed in ness, and (2) the proposed device wilderness only if they are necessary to meets the Minimum Requirement to carry out wilderness management accomplish the objective safely and objectives and provisions of this Plan. successfully (see Appendix D, Mini- mum Requirement Decision Process). Currently there is one administrative Devices located in wilderness will be cabin in wilderness. The Muav Saddle removed when determined to be no cabin, constructed in 1927, remains on longer essential. All research activities the List of Classified Structures. It is a and the installation, servicing, and contributing element to the National monitoring of research devices will be Register of Historic Places nomination accomplished in compliance with NPS for Bass Camp and Trails Historic wilderness management policies and District. The District was determined procedures contained in this Plan. eligible for listing by the Arizona SHPO in August 1997. Facilities such as fire lookouts, radio antennas, and radio repeaters will be The construction or reconstruction of placed in wilderness only if they are shelters for public use generally will not the minimum required to carry out be allowed, since wilderness users are essential administrative functions and self-supporting. An existing shelter will are specifically authorized by the be maintained only if the facility is nec- regional director (NPS Management essary to achieve wilderness manage- Policies, 6:5). ment objectives or cultural resource protection objectives. Currently, there is The Signal Hill Fire Tower only one shelter in the wilderness, the lies within the proposed wilderness. Santa Maria shelter on the Hermit Trail. The NPS will conduct a record search The shelter and associated rock out- and historical documentation to deter- houses have been determined eligible mine its eligibility for National Register for listing on the National Register of of Historic Places. Upon completion of Historic Places and will be protected as this process, a determination regard- significant cultural resources. ing the appropriate action will be made. 8-79 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

The Mt. Emma Repeater, con- condition after the emergency has structed in 1983, lies within the pro- ended. Natural openings may be used posed wilderness of Grand Canyon for authorized nonemergency aircraft National Park (Thomas, J.T. 1983). landings, but no site markings or im- Originally envisioned as a temporary provements of any kind will be installed facility, the continued need for this to support nonemergency use (NPS facility will be evaluated under the re- Management Policies, 6:6). quirements of NPS Management Policies. Upon completion of this pro- Campsites cess, a determination regarding the appropriate action will be made. Although the development of facilities to serve users will generally be Colorado River Cable avoided, campsites may be desig- Crossings nated when essential for resource protection or enhancement of opportu- Currently, two cable crossings are nities for solitude. In keeping with the located within the proposed wilderness, terms of this Plan, campsite facilities one just above the Little Colorado River may include a site marker, a tent site, a confluence and the other just above food-storage device, and a toilet, but Diamond Creek. These facilities were only if determined by the superinten- constructed in 1982 to assist in the Glen dent to be the minimum facilities nec- Canyon Environmental Studies. The essary for the health and safety of continued need for these facilities will wilderness users or for the protection of be evaluated under the requirements of wilderness resources and values. NPS Management Policies. Upon Picnic tables will not be placed in completion of this process, a determina- wilderness (NPS Management Poli- tion regarding the appropriate action will cies, 6:6). be made. Toilets Helispots Toilets will be placed only in locations No permanent heliports, helipads, or where their presence and use will airstrips are allowed in resolve health and sanitation problems wilderness. Temporary landing facilities may be used to meet the minimum requirements of emergency situations. Site improvements determined to be essential for safety reasons during individual emergency situations may be authorized, but the site will be restored to a natural 8-80 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

or prevent serious damage and where 8.5 Summary of Changes reducing or dispersing visitor use has and Actions failed to alleviate the problems or is and Actions impractical. (NPS Management Poli- Retain ten primitive roads (nonwil- cies, 6:6). derness corridors) to trailheads or overlooks (Figure 8.1). Manage Signs these areas as part of the Semi- Primitive Mechanized Opportunity Signs detract from the wilderness char- Class spectrum acter of an area and make the imprint of management more noticeable. Only Maintain primitive roads to minimal those signs necessary to protect wilder- standards, allowing only improve- ness resources or for public safety will ments that reduce resource impacts be permitted. Where signs are used, while keeping the roads minimally they will be compatible with their sur- open for high-clearance or four- roundings and be the minimum size wheel-drive vehicles possible (NPS Management Policies, 6:6). Convert to trails or restore to a natural condition approximately 140 Bat Cave Tram Towers miles of primitive roads described in Figure 8.3. The 1980 Wilderness Recommendation called for the removal of the mining tram towers near River Mile 266. To restore wilderness values, the park service proposed in 1995 to remove the three towers and the surrounding debris located within Grand Canyon National Park (U.S. Department of Interior, Na- tional Park Service, 1995b. FONSI Transmittal Memo.). Due to public controversy, the Park chose not to implement the proposed action at that time (U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service 1995b).

This issue will be reviewed by the Su- perintendent, and appropriate actions will be pursued.

8-81 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Figure 8.3 Primitive Road Miles Management Action/ Summary of Treatment Actions North Rim Fire Roads 27.4 Designate as wilderness trails. Requirements specific to fire management will be addressed in the Fire Management Plan

Basin W-1 Road 9.2 Designate as wilderness trails. Requirements specific to fire management will be addressed in the Fire Management Plan. 1.4 Relocate 1.4 miles of trail cross the Basin. Restore the Basin section of old W-1 to a natural condition.

Kanab Plateau Roads 40 Restore to a natural condition. (except those described in Figure 8.1) 10 Establish sections of road net work as Kanab Plateau Trail

Toroweap Point Overlook Road 9 Establish severely damaged section of road network as Brady Hollow Trail

Toroweap Valley Cove Road 10 Designate as Cove Trail Vulcans Spur 2 Restore to a natural condition Tuweep Landfill and Access Road 1 Restore to a natural condition

Cape Solitude 9.6 Establish trail on old road alignment from Desert View

Fort Garrett 1 Convert to trail

Two Primitive Roads North of 3.8 Restore to a natural condition New Water Springs on The Hook

Huitzal Spur 2 Restore to a natural conditon

8-82 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

8-83 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

s stated in Chapter One, an 9.1 Issues and Public objective of the Wilderness CHAPTER Concerns Management Plan is to provide a Concerns 9 AAreasonable level of public safety, consis- The extreme conditions (temperature, tent with wilderness areas and in accor- aridity, and elevation) of Grand dance with NPS Management Policies. Safety Canyons environment, the topography The saving of human life will take prece- and remoteness, combined with the and dence over all other management challenges inherent in wilderness travel Emergency actions. The National Park Service and sometimes result in unexpected events Operations its concessioners, contractors, and that may require the need for emer- cooperators will seek to provide a safe gency services. and healthful environment for visitors and employees. The Park Service will Trained NPS staff handle at least 480 work cooperatively with other Federal, rescues below the rim each year for State, and local agencies, organiza- injuries, hypothermia, dehydration, and tions, and individuals to carry out this heat-related illnesses. While the high- responsibility. However, visitors assume est proportion of emergency services a certain degree of risk and responsibil- occur in the Cross-Canyon Corridor, ity for their own safety when visiting many also occur in wilderness including areas that are managed and maintained the Colorado River. Emergency opera- as natural, cultural or recreational envi- tions in these remote areas are often ronments. (NPS Management Policies, hazardous. 8:5). Heat-related emergencies are common Additionally, Policies emphasizes that during the summer months. During this visitors must accept wilderness largely time, the staff spends most of its time on its own terms, and accept certain dealing with emergency responses at risks, including possible dangers that the expense of other responsibilities are inherent in the various elements and including resource protection and conditions that comprise a wilderness visitor education. A major concern is experience. In wilderness areas in that many of the situations are often a particular, management efforts focus on result of ill-prepared, uninformed hikers, educating visitors about conditions and and the Park recognizes the need for possible risks (NPS Management an increased effort toward visitor Policies, 6:8; See this Plans Chapter education (See Chapter 10, Interpreta- 10, Interpretation, Education and Infor- tion and Education). mation). The public revealed safety concerns about day use and hiker education in the Public Scoping Process held in 1995. Most respondents suggested that the Park needs to disseminate more information on potential risks of 9-84 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

traveling in the Canyon. Restrictions on under no circumstances will pure hiking distances, time of day, and num- convenience dictate the destruction of ber of open trails were also suggested any Park resources or allow the signifi- as ways to reduce NPS emergency cant interference of visitor enjoyment responses. Another frequent suggestion (SAR Plan:6). was to charge victims for all emergency medical services rendered by the NPS Safety Ability to see and other providers. In recognition of the the cultural Canyons wilderness values, several The SAR Plan stresses safety priori- value of wilderness respondents stated that the NPS should ties of responders and protection of boils down, not be responsible for each visitors resource values. Safety of responders in the last safety, and that part of the wilderness comes before the life of a victim; this analysis, to a experience is the risk and challenge. philosophy will guide all SAR opera- question of tions. The Incident Commander is intellectual humility. responsible for the health and safety of 9.2 Grand Canyon National The shallow- all involved responders. Park Emergency minded modern who has lost Operations The Grand Canyon National Park his rootage in Safety Policy (U.S. Department of the the land NPS Management Policies provides assumes that Interior. National Park Service 1996) overall guidance to evaluate the urgency he has already sets direction for managing a safe of emergency incidents and to allocate discovered work environment for all Park employ- what is available resources. Operational proce- ees. The Park Safety Policy empha- important.... dures are directed through the Grand sizes prevention of accidents by Canyon National Park Emergency Aldo Leopold proper training, maintenance of equip- Medical Service (EMS) Plan (U.S. A ment, and conformance to safety Department of the Interior. National Park Sand County process and procedures. Almanac Service. 1995d) and the Grand Canyon National Park Search and Rescue In addition to safety policies and (SAR) Plan (U.S. Department of the operational plans, the Park has estab- Interior. National Park Service 1993a). lished Standard Operating Procedures The EMS Plan requires specific levels of (SOP) that deal specifically with emer- training for all emergency response gency operations and hazardous work- personnel. This Plan also includes related procedures. These SOPs are guidance for emergency services pro- as follows: vided to visitors and medical evacua- tions. The SAR Plan governs all search Emergency Communications for and rescue operations. Backcountry Operations (1996a) Emergency Reporting Procedures During a SAR incident, consideration (1996b) will be given to protecting the Parks Emergency Medical Requirements natural and cultural resources. While for Backcountry Operations (1996c) hazard mitigation may be required,

9-85 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Hazards from Intentional Movement of landfill). Temporary mechanized access Objects During Trail Restoration is allowed for wildfire operations as (1996d). defined above. Administrative use, such as required for prescribed burning Minimum Requirement programs, will be addressed on a project-by-project basis through the NPS Management Policies (6:4) Minimum Requirement Decision Pro- provides for the administrative use of cess (See Appendix D). motorized equipment or mechanical transport, including motorboats and Fire Management aircraft, in emergency situations involving human health or safety. For the Fire management activities conducted purposes of this Plan, emergency in wilderness areas will conform to the situations include: basic purposes of wilderness. Actions taken to suppress wildfires will use the responses to those in need of medi- Minimum Requirement Decision Pro- cal or physical assistance when cess, and will be conducted in such a threats to human health and safety way as to protect natural and cultural are reasonably assumed (SAR features, and to minimize the lasting Plan:3) impacts of suppression actions and the responses to those who are deter- fires themselves (NPS Management mined to be unjustifiably overdue and Policies, 6:7). threats to human health and safety are reasonably assumed (SAR Aircraft Plan:8) any response to downed aircraft No permanent heliports, helipads, or any response to an unknown emer- airstrips will be allowed in wilderness. gency (e.g., mirror flash, radio dis- Temporary landing facilities may be tress signal) (SAR Plan:9) used to meet the minimum require- any reported disaster ments of emergency situations. Site responses to wildfire which threatens improvements determined to be essen- life, property, cultural resources or tial for safety reasons during individual natural resources (Fire Management emergency situations may be autho- Plan:76). rized, but the site will be restored to natural conditions after the emergency There are six wilderness trails on the has ended (NPS Management Poli- North Rim available for emergency cies, 6:6). mechanized access. These are E-4 (Komo Point), E-5 (Francois Matthes The Grand Canyon National Park Point), E-6 (Walhalla Glades, W-1C Internal Aviation Policy (U.S. Depart- (Widforss), W1-D (Tiyo Point), and a ment of the Interior. National Park portion of W-1 (the junction of W-4 with Service 1991b) directs use of helicop- W-1 to the west end of the abandoned ters for emergency response opera- 9-86 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

tions. NPS staff are required to evaluate 9.4 Summary of Changes methods of travel for response and and Actions evacuation if needed. This evaluation is and Actions done within the context of the Minimum The Park will continue to stress the Requirement Decision Process. safety priorities of responders and the protection of resource values 9.3 Preventative Search and Rescue (PSAR) Fire-management activities conducted in wilderness areas will Grand Canyon environmental conditions conform to the basic purposes of often present unexperienced desert wilderness. Actions taken to sup- hikers with a greater challenge than press wildfires will use the mini- expected. For example, in 1996 alone mum-requirement concept, and will Grand Canyon staff performed over 480 be conducted to protect natural and rescues below the rim. Any reduction in cultural features and to minimize the the frequency of necessary medical lasting impacts of suppression assistance is dependent on providing actions and the fires themselves. users with adequate information regard- The Park will develop minimum ing their planned activities. While per- requirements for wilderness pre- sonal safety is always the responsibility scribed-burning programs in the of the individual, the agency can reduce revision of the Fire Management risk by providing relevant, pre-trip infor- Plan mation, including accurate trail information, timely weather reports, maps, and No permanent heliports, helipads, appropriate advice for both day and or airstrips will be allowed in wilder- overnight hikes. ness

Because of increasing injuries, ill- While personal safety is always the nesses, and even deaths due to heat- responsibility of the individual, the related factors, the Park initiated a task Park will attempt to reduce risk by force to review this issue. Their recom- providing relevant, pre-trip informa- mendations resulted in a concerted tion, including accurate trail informa- visitor information effort in the spring of tion, timely weather reports, maps, 1997 which consisted of additional and appropriate advice for both day information at trailheads, local restau- and overnight hikes. rants, and local newspapers and radio stations. In addition, warning signs were installed on popular trails and PSAR rangers and volunteers provided personal contact with visitors.

9-87 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

10.1 Public Concerns commented on the types of information CHAPTER hikers should receive including: im- uring the Public Scoping Process proved pre-hike guidance; low-impact 10 for the Wilderness Management and wilderness ethics for group lead- DD Plan conducted in 1995, people ers; Leave No Trace ethics for all users; were asked to provide suggestions to information on expectations, for ex- Interpretation, solve the issues surrounding hiker ample, where aircraft will be heard or Education, education including damage to natural where encounters may occur with river and and cultural resources; the accumulation runners or other groups; hiker etiquette; Information of human waste and litter; lost, ill-pre- proper human waste disposal methods; pared hikers; and backcountry users and sensitivity to archaeological sites. who venture on to Tribal lands without permission. Some comments regarded use of adjacent Tribal lands. Respondents The most prevalent suggestion was that stated it was difficult to communicate wilderness users (defined as river with Tribal offices which resulted in an runners, overnight and day hikers, and inability to obtain permits. It was stated stock users) should attend some type of that the NPS needs to develop a better mandatory orientation prior to their permitting and access system for Grand Canyon hike, the most popular working with appropriate Tribal offices. being a video or slide presentation. Others felt that direct contact with knowl- Respondents also suggested various edgeable staff was the most effective media to provide information, including: way to educate hikers. improved educational literature; an automated video; brochures; written Another popular suggestion involved trail descriptions, displays at visitor having wilderness users pass a written centers or trailheads, and ranger talks. test to acquire a license or certificate Many respondents suggested im- demonstrating proficiency in wilderness proved and/or increased signing, skills and ethics. Most agreed that including: trailhead signs showing level educating inexperienced hikers was of difficulty; signs with mileages, warn- best accomplished when permits were ings and hiking times; signs that de- picked up. Some thought that experi- scribe energy expenditure and water enced hikers should be issued advance loss required to climb up vs. down; permits, and that inexperienced people signs showing cost of rescues and should be required to pick up their medical aid; scary warning signs with permits. death statistics and cost of rescues; signs in ten languages; signs with Wilderness users want more informa- proper camping techniques; and signs tion, especially when permits are is- at archaeological sites to educate sued. Several comments were made hikers about sensitivity, and to demar- regarding the need for better maps and cate boundaries. water-resource information. People also 10-88 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

A number of ideas were offered to wilderness management principles provide better permitting-office ser- and philosophy; (b) Leave No vices, including: effective phone and Trace; (c) application of the Mini- FAX services; on-line permitting ser- mum Requirement Concept; (d) vices; training for inexperienced staff proficiency in the use of primitive giving inaccurate or insufficient informa- tools; (e) minimum-impact trail tion; extended office hours; improved maintenance techniques and fire staffing numbers; a backcountry office in suppression tactics; (f) wilderness Flagstaff; information to permittees safety practices and (g) appropri- about size and location of other groups ate medical response skills. in a Use Area; information about archaeological site etiquette; staff and NPS Management Policies (6:10) A thing is volunteers patrolling corridor trails to provides guidance on wilderness right when it inform visitors and prevent emergen- interpretation: tends to cies; contact stations above and below preserve the integrity, the rim for dispersing information; orga- The National Park Service will stability, and nized educational sessions; guided develop and maintain an effective beauty of the hikes, and staff at the three main trail- public education program de- biotic heads. signed to promote and perpetuate community. public awareness of and apprecia- It is wrong when it tends 10.2 Wilderness Education tion for wilderness character, re- otherwise. sources, and ethics without stimu- Aldo Leopold Wilderness Education lating an unacceptable demand for Objectives use. Efforts will focus on the fostering of an understanding of the The objectives of the wilderness educa- concept of wilderness that includes tion program set forth in this Plan are to: respect for the resource, willingness to exercise self-restraint in 1) Establish a coordinated interpre- demanding access to it, and an tive program to provide hikers ac- ability to adhere to appropriate, cess to adequate and accurate minimum-impact techniques when information to (a) plan and execute a using it. rewarding and safe expedition, whether hiking for a day or for an Establish a Coordinated extended period, and (b) conduct Interpretive Program themselves in a manner which is not damaging to wilderness resources Grand Canyon National Park will and values. adhere to this policy when planning or presenting information and interpreta- 2) Establish a coordinated, inter- tion regarding wilderness and back- agency wilderness educational country resources. program for staff (permanent, seasonal, and volunteer) to include (a) 10-89 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Wilderness education must be balanced rate information available to Grand with the essential spirit of wilderness. Canyon wilderness users. Just as management of wilderness is a paradox, so to is providing information 10.3 What Needs to be or a safe experience. Wilderness is an Communicated area devoid of mans influence, where Communicated nature is taken on its own terms. It is There are three main ideas to which essential that prospective wilderness wilderness users need exposure, and users have access to information with which, with hope, they will come to which they can plan safe and rewarding understand and incorporate into their expeditions. It is equally important to the wilderness practices: wilderness val- continuance of wilderness conditions ues, personal safety, and resource that users have enough information to protection. preserve the very essence they came to find. But, while it is essential to be The need to teach wilderness values is adequately informed, it is important that clearly expressed in NPS Manage- users have a true wilderness experiment Policies (6:10) ence, not one filled with signs, pam- phlets, brochures, videos, rules, regula- The National Park Service will tions, and contacts. Information and develop and maintain an effective education must be accurate, up-to-date, public education program designed readily available, easily understood, to promote and perpetuate public concise, and appropriate to maintain awareness of and appreciation for wilderness conditions. Not only must wilderness character, resources, wilderness users adhere to minimum- and ethics. . . . impact techniques, but so must managers in their maintenance of wilderness. Wilderness Values

At Grand Canyon National Park, 40 to Wilderness may mean something 100 hikers a day crowd the Backcountry different to different people, but three Office. An estimated 800,000 day central themes have consistency hikers trek the Corridor trails. Over emerged: experiential, the direct value 50,000 backpackers sleep under the of the wilderness experience; the value wild stars, and over 20,000 river runners of wilderness as a scientific resource yearly experience the Canyons wilder- and environment baseline; and the ness from the soft sand of remote symbolic and spiritual values of wilder- beaches. The NPS will never be able to ness to the nation and the world reach each and every hiker who treads (Hendee 1990). While words may fail to Grand Canyons wilderness. Since convey all aspects of wilderness, an wilderness is inherently dangerous, it essential role of interpretation and can never provide a completely safe education in wilderness is to promote experience. But the NPS will attempt, and perpetuate the values expressed in through various media, to make accu- the Wilderness Act. 10-90 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Personal Safety mended precautions, minimum- impact use ethics and applicable Due to the high number of wilderness restrictions and regulations. users requiring medical assistance (in 1996, Grand Canyon performed over Due to increasing injuries, illnesses, 480 rescues below the rim), it is essen- and even deaths at Grand Canyon due tial that users have access to adequate to heat-related factors, the Park initi- information about their planned activi- ated a task force to review this issue. ties. Personal safety is always the Their recommendations resulted in a responsibility of the individual, and much concerted visitor information effort in depends on pre-trip preparations. It is the spring of 1997 which consisted of important that users have access to addition information at trailheads, local correct trail information, maps, and restaurants, newspapers, and radio techniques both for day and overnight stations. In addition, warning signs hikes. The environmental conditions of were installed on popular trails and the Grand Canyon may present inexperi- PSAR rangers and volunteers pro- enced desert hikers with a greater vided personal contact with visitors challenge than expected, and users (See Chapter 9, Safety and Emer- need access to information specific to gency Operations). this location and environment. Resource Protection Although the Wilderness Act briefly addresses public safety, NPS Manage- Resource protection is essential to the ment Policies (6:8) states, preservation of wilderness attributes and experience, and critical to the Park visitors must accept wilderness mission of a national park. The pur- largely on its own terms, without pose of wilderness is to provide a modern facilities provided for their certain experience for people based comfort or convenience. Users must on an intact natural resource. Protec- also accept certain risks, including tion of the natural and cultural re- possible dangers arising from wild- sources for current and future use is life, weather conditions, physical the very basis of wilderness. It is features, and other natural phenom- important that visitors to wilderness ena, that are inherent in the various understand the purpose and param- elements and conditions that com- eters of wilderness so to leave it prise a wilderness experience and unimpaired as wilderness. primitive methods of travel. The National Park Service will not elimi- Leave No Trace nate or unreasonably control risks that are normally associated with The National Park Service has entered wilderness, but it will strive to provide into an agreement with the National users with general information con- Outdoor Leadership School (NOLS) to cerning possible risks, recom- teach Leave No Trace (LNT) practices 10-91 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

and ethics for national park users. See Fee Demonstration monies available Figure 10.1. during the years 1997-2000, a number of concerns expressed by the public 10.4 Communicating will, with hope, be addressed. Included would be longer backcountry office Information Successfully Information Successfully hours, better phone and fax services, There are a number of options for increased staffing, better trained staff, effective interpretation and education; and increased visibility on trails or at these include Personal Services (i.e., trailheads. When the planned Mather person-to-person) and Nonpersonal Orientation Center comes online in the Services (i.e., written materials, video year 2000, potential day users of productions, signs, etc.). Other param- wilderness will have a better and more eters taken into account when present- complete source of information than is ing information include Target Audience, currently provided. Timing, and Location. Nonpersonal Services Since different people have differing learning styles, it is important to realize Nonpersonal Services include bro- that there is no best way to provide chures, videos, site bulletins, permit information, thus information must be attachments, signs, and exhibits. As of provided repeatedly in a variety of 1997, brochures and a backcountry media. People who enjoy reading will video are underway to increase wilder- read wilderness information brochures. ness user access to information. Al- People who enjoy watching television though the Scoping Process identified will benefit from video productions, etc. that many respondents felt more signs Thus, Grand Canyon will provide infor- are needed to insure wilderness values mation to wilderness users in a variety are preserved, NPS Management of media hoping to reach the widest Policies (6:6) states, number of people. Signs detract from the wilderness character of an area and make the Personal Services imprint of man and management Personal Services (people talking to more noticeable. Only those signs people) have been shown to be the necessary to protect wilderness most effective means of communicating resources or for public safety, such information. Due to the overwhelming as signs identifying trails and dis- number of people using Grand Canyon tances, will be permitted. Where wilderness, it is impossible for park signs are used, they should be personnel to contact even a small per- compatible with their surroundings centage. The Public Scoping Process and be the minimum size possible. for this Plan revealed that numerous respondents felt that personal services Grand Canyon has always maintained needed improvement. With the arrival of that signs are an intrusion in wilder- 10-92 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

ness, and that they will be used spar- Indian Garden ingly. Standards and criteria for use and Cottonwood placement of signs is outlined in Figure Phantom Ranch 3.2. Rest houses Lees Ferry Target Audience, Timing, and Meadview Location Concession Operations River It is essential that the right message get Hiker to the right people at the right place. For U.S. Forest Service Offices in example, it would be less than effective Tusayan and Jacob Lake to provide river-user information at the Bureau of Land Management rims, or day-hiking information at Phan- Offices in St. George tom Ranch. It is essential that users get as much information as far in advance of Timing their trip as possible so that adequate Pre-arrival (user home) preparations can be made. In many Pre-arrival (in region) ways, day hikers who often begin a hike Pre-trip (in-park) on the spur of the unprepared moment As trip begins (trailheads, etc.) are often the most difficult group to During trip reach. The timing and location of such information will be critical to these users. Media Brochures Wilderness users are identified as river Video runners, overnight hikers, day hikers, Permit attachments and stock users. Since many of these Site bulletins users reach the Canyon from different Signing directions and through permitting pro- Exhibits cesses, information can be targeted Personal contacts appropriate to each group. Studies are Internet needed to determine the most appropri- Mailouts ate place and time to present informa- Audio tapes tion for the greatest effect. Plans are Regional information distributors underway to make information more Bulletin boards accessible to users. Park and other newspapers

Locations Audience Backcountry Office River runners Trailheads Day hikers and stock users Wilderness Users Homes Overnight hikers and stock users Flagstaff Locations Guides Grand Canyon Contact Stations Concessioners Inner canyon locations Local and organized runners 10-93 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

10.5 Wilderness Messages Education for Staff Wilderness Ethics Education for Staff Leave No Trace Principles This program includes permanent, Hiking etiquette seasonal, and volunteers and consists Waste disposal of training in 1) wilderness manage- Multiple trailing ment principles and philosophy; 2) Resource issues application of the minimum-tool/re- Expectations quirement concept; 3) proficiency in the Overflights use of primitive tools; 4) minimum Encountering other groups impact trail maintenance techniques Safety and fire suppression tactics; 5) wilder- Proper gear ness safety practices; 6) appropriate Rescue statistics and information medical response skills; and 7) Leave Pre-trip planning No Trace (LNT). LNT is the manage- Fitness ment and education program promot- Canyon environment ing responsible use of wildlands by Desert limitations encouraging an attitude of stewardship Weather and responsibility (U.S. Department of Elevation Agriculture, et al. 1994). Proper mind set Animals (wild and mules) Grand Canyons interpretation of wil- Resource Protection derness will strive toward a sound Regulations wilderness ethic, both in influencing the Fishing and other rules actions of wilderness users and in the Closures presentation of information and inter- Archeology pretation. Feeding wildlife

In 1993, the superintendent of Grand 10.6 Summary of Changes Canyon National Park requested the and Actions establishment of a field institute in order to extend available Park interpretive Establish a coordinated public Inter- opportunities. The Grand Canyon Asso- pretive Program which communi- ciation established and administers the cates wilderness values, personal Field Institute in cooperation with the safety, and resource protection National Park Service. The Institute conducts a variety of educational field Establish a wilderness education courses to accomplish this task (U.S. program for Park staff Department of the Interior, National Park Service 1993b).

10-94 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Leave No Trace Principles* Figure 10.1 Plan Ahead and Prepare Leave No Know the regulations and special concerns for the area you visit Trace Visit the backcountry in small groups Principles Avoid popular areas during times of high use Repackage food into reusable containers

Camp and Travel on Durable Surfaces On The Trail Stay on designated trails. Walk in single file in the middle of the path Do not shortcut switchbacks Hike on the most durable surfaces: rock, gravel, dry grass or snow Step to the inside of the trail when encountering pack stock At Camp Choose an established, legal site that will not be damaged by your stay Restrict activities to the area where vegetation is absent or compacted Camp at least 200 feet (70 paces) from water sources

Pack It In; Pack It Out Take everything out that you brought Protect wildlife and your food by storing securely Pick up all spilled foods and microtrash

Properly Dispose of What you Cant Pack Out Deposit human waste in cathole six- to eight-inches deep, at least 200 feet from water, camp or trails. Cover and disguise cathole when finished Use toilet paper sparingly, and PACK IT OUT When washing, carry water 200 feet from sources. Strain dishwater, and carry out food scraps

Leave What You Find Respect the resource. Leave plants, rocks, and artifacts where found Good campsites are found not made. Altering a site is not necessary Do not build structures, furniture or dig trenches Let natures sounds prevail. Keep loud noise to a minimum

Minimize Use and Impacts of Fires** Carry a lightweight stove for cooking

* Printed with cooperation of the National Outdoor Leadership School (NOLS), Inc.

** Campfires are prohibited in the Grand Canyon wilderness. River trips are allowed driftwood campfires contained in regulation firepans. 10-95 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

11.1 Wilderness and Natural resources will be managed with a concern for supporting basic and CHAPTER Ecosystem Management fundamental ecological processes as 11 his chapter outlines the develop- well as for individual species and ment of the interagency ecosystem features. Managers will try to maintain all the components and processes of Ecosystem TTmanagement strategy specified as a management objective in Chapter One. naturally evolving park ecosystems, Management This strategy emphasizes the restora- including the natural abundance, diver- tion and maintenance of natural pro- sity, and ecological integrity of plants cesses and viable populations of all and animals (NPS Management native species in natural patterns of Policies). Wilderness management abundance and distribution. includes maintenance and/or restoration of sustainable natural processes Ecosystem management is manage- and viable populations of all native ment driven by explicit goals, executed species in natural patterns of abun- by specific practices, and made adapt- dance and distribution (See Appendix able by research and monitoring based L, Natural Conditions). on our best understanding of the ecological interactions and processes In wilderness, managers must maintain necessary to sustain ecosystem compo- and protect ecological processes and sition, structure, and function natural conditions as well as provide for (Christensen, et al. 1996). The ecosys- a wilderness experience (Wilderness tem concept provides the fundamental Act, Section 2[a][c]). While this appar- premise for regional management, and ently contradictory preserve and use brings a compelling new vision to the philosophy reiterates a fundamental ongoing debate over the future of public premise of the NPS Organic Act (39 lands (Keiter 1989). Stat. 535, 16 U.S.C. 1), the Redwoods Act Amendment (16 U.S.C. Section 1a- Within the national park system, all 1) emphasizes a rigorous standard of wilderness is classified as a Natural protection, and prohibits use-related Zone (NPS Management Policies, derogation of all park values (Lockhart 6:3). According to NPS Management 1988:31-32). Policies the primary objective in natural zones is the protection of natural re- Protection of park values must be sources and values for appropriate accomplished within the context of types of enjoyment while ensuring their surrounding lands which often have availability to future generations. Wilder- conflicting management mandates. To ness requires additional consideration meet wilderness objectives, wilderness for outstanding opportunities for solitude management programs must develop a or a primitive and unconfined type of thorough understanding of the condi- recreation, i.e., a wilderness experi- tions and processes that make up the ence. wilderness resource such as air and water quality, wildfire, and recreation to 11-96 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

name a few (Cole 1990b). Land use plexity and function of any particular The supreme practices, such as mining, grazing, location is influenced heavily by the reality of our logging and road construction, occurring surrounding systems (Christensen, time is...the on adjacent lands may pose environ- et al. 1996). vulnerability of our planet. mental threats to the Park. Attainment of the long-term management goals of (3) Ecosystems are dynamic in space John F. Kennedy protecting the ecological integrity of and time. Ecosystem management individual wilderness requires looking is challenging in part because beyond the wilderness boundary and ecosystems are constantly chang- adopting what is called an ecosystem ing. Over time scales of decades management approach. or centuries, many landscapes are altered by natural disturbances that 11.2 Fundamental lead to a mosaic of successional patches of different ages. Such Scientific Principles for patch dynamics are critical to Ecosystem Management ecosystem structure and function (Christensen, et al. 1996). Effective ecosystem management incorporates critical scientific precepts (4) Uncertainty, surprise, and limits to into an integrated land-management knowledge are unavoidable as- strategy: pects of ecosystem management. Ecological systems are complex. (1) Spatial and temporal scales are Their dynamics are expressed in critical. Ecosystem function includes probabilities, and random (sto- inputs, outputs, cycling of nutrients chastic) influences may be strong and energy, and the interactions of (Meffe, et al. 1997). Ecosystem organisms. Boundaries defined for management acknowledges that, the study or management of one given sufficient time and space, process are often inappropriate for unlikely events such as cata- the study of others. Ecosystem strophic fires and floods, are management requires the broadest, certain to occur. Consequently, most comprehensive view conservationists should include (Christensen, et al. 1996). safety margins in the design of management and recovery strate- (2) Ecosystem function depends on its gies. Adaptive management ad- structure, diversity and integrity. dresses this uncertainty by combin- Ecosystem management seeks to ing democratic principles (i.e., maintain biological diversity as a citizen and expert involvement; See critical component in strengthening Grumbine 1992: 204), scientific ecosystems against unnatural distur- analysis, education, and institu- bance. Management of biological tional learning to increase our diversity requires a broad perspec- understanding of ecosystem pro- tive and recognition that the com- cesses. The consequences of 11-97 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

management interventions, and the agement, and the Forest Service) have improvement of the quality of data independently announced that they are upon which decisions must be implementing or will implement an made, need to be addressed in ecosystem management approach ecosystem management (Keiter 1996; Government Accounting (Christensen, et al. 1996). Office 1994; Keystone Center 1991, 1996; Grand Canyon Resource Man- 11.3 Legal Basis for agement Plan 1997a:47-48). This gives hope of a new vision of public Ecosystem Management land management based on ecosystem Public law traditionally has accorded principles rather than on traditional Federal land management agencies boundaries (Keiter 1989). considerable discretion in administering lands based principally on the agency Unfortunately, disparate missions and boundary line (Keiter 1989). It should be planning requirements set forth in noted that, based upon existing law, the Federal land management statutes and judiciary has given ecosystem manage- regulations hamper and limit the implement a tentative stamp of approval mentation of such efforts. Although (Keiter 1996). Current law not only ecosystem management requires emphasizes environmental protection collaboration and consensus-building as a primary responsibility of Federal among Federal and non-Federal par- land-management agencies, it also ties, incentives, authorities, interests, obligates land managers to view their and limitations embedded in the larger responsibilities regionally, taking ac- national-land and natural-resource use count of trans-boundary environmental framework constrain these parties’ impacts (Grumbine 1997). Ecosystem efforts to work together effectively management will require unparalleled (Primm and Clark 1996:143; National coordination among Federal agencies. Research Council 1992; Goldstein 1992:184). Improving interagency Ecosystem management does not relations demands innovative and bold necessarily alter the Federal land- approaches in light of the ideological management agencies’ basic legisla- and political history of interagency tive mandates. Rather, it changes the conflict (Grumbine 1991; 1994). agencies’ approach to fulfilling their stewardship responsibilities through a 11.4 Implementing better understanding, not only of eco- Ecosystem Management logic relationships, but between the agencies themselves (Government Implementing sound ecosystem man- Accounting Office 1994). Over the past agement requires taking practical several years, all four of the primary steps that clearly identify what must be Federal land-management agencies done and which agencies and parties (National Park Service, U.S. Fish and must be involved (Government Ac- Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Man- counting Office 1994). To facilitate 11-98 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

implementation of the ecosystem man- (Christensen, et al. 1996; Government agement concept, the Park established Accounting Office 1994): the Science Center Partnership Pro- gram (Resource Management Plan Step 1 1997a:47-48). The purpose of this partnership is to integrate the efforts of Define Sustainable Goals and State and Federal land-managing Objectives agencies, American Indian Tribes, educational institutions, and science and Understanding regional ecology, environmental advocates to achieve the including current ecosystem conditions shared mission of protecting and man- and trends, the minimum level of aging natural and cultural resources integrity and functioning needed to within the Park. maintain or restore ecosystem health, and the effects of human activities, is Moving from concept to practice is a critical (Christensen, et al. 1996). daunting challenge and will require the Ecosystem management requires steps and actions outlined in Figure 11.1 choices about desired future ecologi-

Figure 11.1 Step 1 Define Sustainable Goals and Objectives Steps, Goals, and Goal 1.1 Protect Ecological Processes Objectives Wild and Scenic Designation Objective a Needed to Goal 1.2 Protect Native Biodiversity Implement Objective b Protect and Preserve Genetic Integrity Ecosystem Objective c Protect Rare and Listed Species Management Objective d Maintain Long-term Viable Carnivore Populations Objective e Restore Altered Ecosystems

Goal 1.3 Restore Altered Ecosystems Objective f Restore Natural Fire Objective g Restore Extirpated Species Objective h Control Nonnative Plants and Animals Objective i Manage Naturalized Ecosystems Objective j Protect Air Quality

Step 2 Restore Spatial Scales Goal 2.1 Develope and Implement a Regional Wildlife Conservation Strategy

Step 3 Reconcile Temporal Scales Step 4 Develop Adaptable and Accountable Management Systems 11-99 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

cal conditions (i.e., processes); the the Interior. National Park Service. types, levels, and mixes of activities that Final Draft Strategic Plan. 1996f:13). can be sustained; and the distribution of activities over time among the various Step 1, Goal 1 Objective 1a land units within the ecosystems (Gov- ernment Accounting Office 1994). Wild and Scenic Rivers

Step 1, Goal 1 Riparian areas comprise some of the most diverse and endangered ecosys- Protect Ecological Processes tems in the southwestern United States (Noss and Cooperrider 1994; Noss The Wilderness Act (Section 2[c]) and Peters 1995; Noss, et al. 1995). defines wilderness as an area where Protection of riparian water quality and the earth and its community of life are instream flows requires protection of a untrammeled by man. Untrammeled variety of ecological processes. The lands are not subject to human controls Wild and Scenic Rivers Act provides that hamper the free play of natural the most comprehensive legal protec- forces (Stankey 1990:106). Other tion available for the instream values of phrases in the Wilderness Act useful in rivers (U.S. Department of the Interior. defining goals include primeval charac- National Park Service 1991, 4:26). The ter and influence, wilderness character, Act is potentially as significant to the and unimpaired condition. These Park’s water resources as the Wilder- phrases imply that wilderness managers ness Act is to land resources (Gray maintain or restore, to the extent pos- 1988). Because an adequate supply of sible, the wilderness conditions and water is necessary to preserve the free- processes existing prior to the period of flowing conditions of designated rivers, increasing population, and growing the Act stands as the clearest expres- mechanization that spurred Congress to sion yet of Congress’ intent to assert pass the Wilderness Act (Cole Federal rights to water (Gray 1988). 1995:42). Designation as Wild and Scenic would afford long-term instream flow protec- Park policy provides general direction tion for the Colorado River in Grand for preserving, protecting, and interpret- Canyon and especially for its tributar- ing the Park’s ecological processes ies, some of which are already threat- (Grand Canyon General Management ened by activities such as well drilling Plan 1995:7). It also requires, to the and development. More than 285 miles maximum extent possible, the restora- of the Colorado River and its tributaries tion of altered ecosystems to their in Grand Canyon National Park are natural conditions. Policy emphasizes eligible for consideration as wild or reliance on natural processes to control scenic rivers. The Park has committed populations of native species to the to actively pursue the designation of greatest extent possible (RMP eligible segments of the Colorado 1997a:112; See U. S. Department of River and its tributaries as part of the 11-100 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

National Wild and Scenic Rivers System Step 1, Goal 1.2, Objective 1c (GMP 1995:7). (See Appendix M, Wild and Scenic Rivers). Protect Rare and Listed Species

Step 1, Goal 1.2 The GMP (p. 7) calls for preserving of critical processes and linkages that Protect Native Biodiversity ensure the protection of rare, endemic, and specially protected (threatened/ Preserving viable populations of the endangered) plant and animal spe- Park’s native flora and fauna requires cies. This also requires improving management considerations of activities inventories, including invertebrates. occurring beyond the Canyon’s bound- The GMP (p. 17) also directs the park ary (RMP 1997a:112). The NPS has service to develop and implement an committed to preserve natural genetic ecosystem approach to managing integrity and species composition, threatened and endangered species, consistent with ecosystem processes and to institute an active research and (RMP 1997a:50). A general strategy for recovery program. accomplishing this goal is outlined in the RMP (See RMP 1997a, Chapter 3; See Park policy requires the restoration, Appendix L, Natural Conditions). enhancement, and protection of populations of threatened or endangered Step 1, Goal 1.2, Objective 1b species (RMP:50). Current funding levels are inadequate to achieve these Protect and Preserve Genetic objectives. Conservation strategies for Integrity these animals will be strengthened in subsequent revisions of the RMP and The Park has also committed to pre- Fire Management Plan. serve Grand Canyon’s natural genetic integrity and species composition, Step 1, Goal 1.2, Objective 1d consistent with ecosystem processes, and protect genetic diversity through Maintain Long-term Viable perpetuating natural evolutionary pro- Carnivore Populations cesses and minimizing human interference (GMP:7; RMP:50,112). While the Carnivores play a significant role in general strategy for accomplishing this ecological processes and constitute goal is outlined in the RMP, further an important, if precarious, component refinement of management objectives of the region’s fauna. The presence of and implementation schedules will be self-sustaining populations of large addressed in subsequent revisions of carnivores, as part of a full comple- the RMP and the Fire Management Plan ment of native species, is indicative of (See Appendix N, Developing a Re- a healthy environment. Historically, the gional Wildlife Conservation Strategy). Grand Canyon ecoregion contained a diversity of mammalian carnivores, 11-101 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

including the mountain lion, bobcat, This includes restoring wilderness coyote, jaguar, grizzly and black bear. character when it has been damaged Persecution decimated wolf, grizzly by human use (Society of American bear, and jaguar populations and these Foresters [SAF] 1989a). Grand Can- creatures are extirpated in the Grand yon National Park is committed, to the Canyon ecoregion (Brown 1983; Clark, maximum extent possible, to restore et al. 1996). The current status of cou- altered ecosystems to their natural gar, black bear, otter, and bobcat popu- conditions (GMP:7; See Appendix L, lations is unknown. Natural Conditions). Managers not only have a responsibility to maintain, Historically, large-scale extermination preserve and protect present wilder- and loss of habitat were the major ness qualities, but also to restore those threats to large carnivores. Now the which are below minimum standards most significant ecological threats to specified in planning documents de- carnivore survival are related to loss and scribed below (NPS Management alteration of habitat resulting from ex- Policies, 6:2; Society of American ploitation of natural resources, perma- Foresters 1989b). nent facilities, and associated infrastruc- ture outside Park boundaries (Paquet Step 1, Goal 1.3, Objective 1f and Hackman 1995:17). Restore Natural Fire Few conservation challenges demand as much innovation and interagency The primary goal of the fire manage- cooperation as the conservation of large ment program in the national park carnivorous mammals. Key to this system is to integrate fire into sustain- approach is the recognition that the fate able naturally functioning ecosystems of these animals depends on sociologi- (Botti, et al. 1994:4). The Park’s goals cal, political, as well as biological solu- include ensuring the perpetuation of tions (Paquet and Hackman 1995: Park ecosystems and the restoration of Preface). The Park will develop, as part natural fire regimes (GMP:17; RMP:50; of its Science Center Partnership Pro- Fire Management Plan:1). gram, an interagency carnivore management program (RMP:47-48; See In order to achieve this goal, the Park’s Appendix N, Developing a Regional Fire Management Plan will be updated Wildlife Conservation Strategy). to be consistent with the direction provided in the management objectives Step 1, Goal 1.3 and other sections of the GMP (GMP:57). Revisions of the Fire Man- Restore Altered Ecosystems agement Plan will address the restoration of the natural fire regime in wilder- An overall goal of wilderness manage- ness areas, using practices consistent ment is to allow a wilderness area to with this Wilderness Management Plan remain as wild and natural as possible. 11-102 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

(GMP: 57; See Wilderness Manage- Dam to removal of the dam, may prove ment Plan, Chapter 2). expensive and controversial.

Step 1, Goal 1.3, Objective 1g Reintroduction of large carnivores, such as the grey wolf, presents addi- Restore Extirpated Species tional challenges. These species require enormous areas to maintain Extirpated species include the burrow- viable populations. Successful mainte- ing owl, southwestern river otter, razor- nance and restoration of these spe- back sucker, zebra-tailed lizard, sage cies will require development and grouse, prairie dog, wolf, grizzly bear, implementation of a regional wildlife jaguar, Colorado squawfish, and the conservation strategy (Noss and bonytail and roundtail chubs (RMP:31; Cooperrider 1994:161). The Park will See Project Statement GRCA-270,100). establish partnerships, as described in The Park has committed to restore the Science Center Partnership Pro- extirpated native animals wherever gram, to facilitate the design and possible and will conduct feasibility implementation of a feasibility studies studies on reintroducing extirpated for the reintroduction of extirpated species (GMP:17; RMP:112). species (RMP:47-48; See Appendix N, Developing a Regional Wildlife Restoration of extirpated animals re- Conservation Strategy). quires varying degrees of effort as well as institutional tenacity. The reintroduc- Step 1, Goal 1.3, Objective 1h tion of condors is underway (Kiff, et al. 1996). Cattle interests eliminated the Control Nonnative Plants and prairie dog from the South Rim in the Animals 1930s (Brown, et al. 1987:195). Rees- tablishing burrowing owls, dependant on Invasive nonnative plants cause tre- abandoned prairie dog burrows for mendous damage to park resources. nesting, may simply require the reintro- Called exotics, or aliens, fast-growing duction of that otherwise ubiquitous nonnative plants, such as brome rodent. grasses, Russian olive, tamarisk, camelthorn, lovegrass and ravenna Habitat conditions in the mainstem river grass, encroach from populations continue to favor nonnative species and established outside the Park. Conse- preclude the successful reintroduction of quently, the ecological balance extirpated native fish (Carothers and achieved over many thousands of Brown 1991:84; RMP: Project State- years is disrupted and often de- ment GRCA-N-270). Restoration mea- stroyed. Displacement of native plants sures necessary for successful reintro- directly and adversely affects the duction, ranging from increasing water creatures dependant on often complex temperatures by modifying Glen Canyon food-web relationships (U.S. Depart-

11-103 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

ment of the Interior. National Park Ser- system was dominated by native fish. vice 1996g). These native species are specifically adapted to highly variable seasonal The Park will preserve the Canyon’s fluctuations in sediment load, flow, and natural genetic integrity and species temperature, and were severely im- composition, consistent with ecosystem pacted by dramatic changes resulting processes, including the elimination of from the dam. The introduction of nonnative plant and animal species nonnative fish contributed to competi- wherever possible (RMP:50). A general tion and direct mortality. Of the eight management strategy and implementa- native species found in the River before tion program is outlined in the RMP (pp. 1963, three species are now extirpated 96-107). Control of exotic plant inva- (the Colorado Squawfish, and the sions will require additional cooperation bonytail and roundtail chubs). with adjacent land managers. The necessary cooperative agreements and The Park is committed, to the maxi- implementation programs will be coordi- mum extent possible, to the restoration nated by the Natural Resources staff. of altered ecosystems to their natural conditions (See Appendix L, Natural Step 1, Goal 1.3 Objective 1i Conditions), and will maintain, rehabilitate and perpetuate the inherent integ- Manage Altered Ecosystems rity of water resources and aquatic ecosystems (GMP:7; RMP:83). The In 1992, Congress enacted the Grand NPS has also committed to manage Canyon Protection Act (Public Law 102- the Colorado River to restore or 575) which instructed the Secretary of “mimic,” to the degree feasible, pre- the Interior to protect, mitigate adverse dam natural and physical processes, impacts to, and improve the values for including fish, wildlife and plant popula- which Grand Canyon National Park and tions, and ecological relationships Glen Canyon National Recreation Area (RMP:50). In managing altered ecosys- were established. The Record of Deci- tems, such as the River corridor, the sion (U.S. Department of the Interior, Park will ensure the preservation of Bureau of Reclamation 1996) imple- native components through the active mented a long-term monitoring and management of nonnative components adaptive management program, as and processes. Achieving these goals required by the Grand Canyon Protec- through an interagency, adaptive man- tion Act, and outlined in Operation of agement process is coordinated by the Glen Canyon Dam Final EIS’s pre- Grand Canyon Monitoring and Re- ferred alternative (U.S. Department of search Center. the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation 1995).

Until Glen Canyon Dam was completed in 1963, the Colorado River’s aquatic 11-104 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Step 1, Goal 1.3, Objective 1j and implementation of a wildlife conservation strategy (RMP:47-48; See Protect Air Quality Appendix N, Developing a Regional Wildlife Conservation Strategy). Grand Canyon enjoys some of the cleanest air remaining in the United Step 3 States. This is a fragile resource, and existing levels of human-caused pollu- Reconcile Temporal Scales tion create a clearly visible haze. The Park is committed to the preservation, Ecosystem management is challeng- protection, and enhancement of air ing because, over time scales of quality and air-quality related values by decades or centuries, natural distur- ensuring compliance with the require- bances alter the landscape in both ments of the Clean Air Act and the NPS predictable and unpredictable ways. Organic Act (RMP:90). The NPS will Environmental uncertainty, including strive for the preservation of Grand variation over time in habitat quality Canyon’s Class I airshed, and to protect and the impacts of natural catastro- it from within-Park, as well as, external phes, must be integrated in the spatial degradation (RMP:50). Development of evaluation of existing vegetative com- a regional air quality plan is addressed munities and wildlife population distri- in the RMP (p.215). bution (Murphy and Noon 1992:5). For conservation planning, reserve de- Step 2 signs including connectivity should be evaluated at several spatial and tem- Reconcile Spatial Scales poral scales, ranging from daily movements within home ranges to long- Step 2, Goal 2.1 distance dispersal events connecting populations once every generation or Develop and Implement a Regional two (Noss and Cooperrider Wildlife Conservation Strategy 1994:152). The design of management and recovery strategies must Protection of native species requires include risk analysis and safety mar- developing an ecosystem-based con- gins which account for random (sto- servation strategy for wildlife (including chastic) influences, including cata- large carnivores) that transcends politi- strophic events. The regional wildlife cal boundaries. It also requires a con- conservation strategy proposed above certed integrated research and manage- in Step 2 will include these temporal ment effort consisting of steps de- considerations (See Appendix N, scribed in Appendix N, Developing a Developing a Regional Wildlife Con- Regional Wildlife Conservation Strategy. servation Strategy). The Park will establish partnerships, as described in the Science Center Part- In addition, ecosystem management nership Program, to facilitate the design must deal with time scales that tran- 11-105 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

scend human lifetimes, and requires methodology used to obtain information long-term planning and commitment and implement a region-wide adaptive (Christensen, et al. 1996). Land man- management strategy must be hypoth- agement agencies, accustomed and esis-driven, and based on solid, objec- often required to make decisions on a tive science (See Weaver 1993; fiscal-year basis, will need flexibility and Ruggiero, et al. 1994). Agencies must support to achieve long-term ecosystem adapt management strategies on the management goals. This issue will be basis of continually researching, moni- addressed in subsequent planning toring, and assessing ecological condi- revisions and as part of establishing tions (Christensen, et al. 1996; Govern- ecosystem management partnerships. ment Accounting Office 1994). By constructing networks for information sharing and learning with partners, Step 4 managers expand their role as facilita- tor in a large-scale societal conversa- Develop Adaptable and tion about conservation (Grumbine Accountable Management 1997). To act prudently, managers need Systems to understand how the current Grand Understanding ecosystems requires Canyon ecoregion evolved and the collecting and linking large volumes of ways in which humans have altered, scientific data. Although ecosystem often radically, the structure of the management will require greater reli- ecosystems inhabited by native spe- ance on ecological and socioeconomic cies. Without understanding the information, the available data, collected present-day condition and its historical independently by various agencies for origins, managers have little hope of different purposes, are often not compa- ensuring that future decisions will be rable and insufficient, and scientific beneficial for native biodiversity understanding of ecosystems is far from (Paquet and Hackman 1995:29). complete (Government Accounting Office 1994). Furthermore, there is still The development of an ecosystem much uncertainty about how ecosystems research program, based on a function. This uncertainty contributes to baseline inventory and long-term moni- strong differences in the interpretation of toring program is a Park priority scientific evidence (Government Ac- (GMP:17). The RMP (p. 50) specifies, counting Office 1994). through the development and operation of a science-based comprehensive Successful ecosystem management natural resource inventory and monitor- requires institutions that are adaptable ing program, the understanding of the to changes in ecosystem characteristics status and trends of populations, com- and in our knowledge base. The conser- munities and ecosystems. The comple- vation of native biodiversity should be tion of the Glen Canyon Dam Environ- viewed adaptively and dynamically in mental Impact Statement (EIS) initiated terms of ecological processes. The a process of adaptive river manage- 11-106 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

ment whereby the effects of dam opera- • Conservation strategies for the tions on downstream resources would restoration, enhancement, and be assessed and the results of those protection of populations of threat- resource assessments form the basis ened or endangered species will be for future modifications of dam opera- strengthened in subsequent revi- tions (U.S. Department of the Interior. sions of the 1997 Resource Man- Bureau of Reclamation 1995). The agement Plan and Fire Manage- Adaptive Management Program (AMP) ment Plan. was developed and designed to provide a process for cooperative integration of • The Park will develop an inter- dam operations, resource protection agency management program to and management, and monitoring and maintain long-term viable carnivore research information (U.S. Department populations. of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation 1995:34-38). In addition, the Park is • Revisions of the Fire Management developing a new, comprehensive Plan will specifically address the research program within the Science restoration of the natural fire regime Center to obtain accurate information in wilderness areas, using practices about the Grand Canyon’s resources, consistent with the Wilderness ecological processes, and human Management Plan. influences. The role of parnerships will be a key element in achieving Park • The Park will establish partnerships objectives (RMP:47-48;174). to facilitate the design and implementation of feasibility studies for 11.5 Summary of Changes the reintroduction of extirpated species. and Actions

• The Park is committed to actively • The Park will strive to preserve the pursue the designation of eligible Canyon’s natural genetic integrity segments of the Colorado River and and species through the elimination its tributaries as part of the National of nonnative plant and animal spe- Wild and Scenic Rivers System. cies wherever possible. Park staff will develop the necessary coopera- • Further refinement of management tive agreements and implementa- objectives and implementation sched- tion program with agencies and ules to protect and preserve genetic nongovernmental organizations. integrity will be addressed in subsequent revisions of the 1997 Resource • To the maximum extent possible, the Management Plan and the Fire Man- Park will restore altered ecosys- agement Plan. tems, and maintain, rehabilitate and perpetuate the inherent integrity of aquatic ecosystems. Achieving these goals will be accomplished 11-107 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

through an interagency, adaptive management process coordinated by the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center.

• The Park will establish partnerships to facilitate the design and implementation of a wildlife conservation strategy.

• The Park will expand its comprehensive research program within the Science Center to obtain accurate information about the Grand Canyon’s resources, ecological processes, and human influences. The role of partnerships will be a key element in achieving this Plan’s objectives.

11-108 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

12-10911-109 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

ntegral to the Limits of Accept- 12.1 Campsite Monitoring able Change (LAC) framework CHAPTER Program II is the implementation of monitoring 12 programs which identify and track the At Grand Canyon, a campsite-inventory condition of wilderness resources and program began in 1981, prior to the values. At Grand Canyon, monitoring Monitoring establishment of the use-area manage- programs for campsites, trails, archeo- ment strategy. The early program was and logical sites, and visitor experience built on an overall inventory of the most Research have been in place for several years. popular wilderness campsites. The Programs This chapter will describe each of those 1983 Backcountry Management Plan programs. The Monitoring Matrix (Fig- mandated a monitoring plan to evaluate ures 12.1 - 12.5) summarizes the indi- campsite condition and distribution. At cators, standards, management actions, that time, however, specific manage- and monitoring programs for specific ment objectives were not articulated. resources. The 1988 Backcountry Management Revised Plan established management Monitoring by itself cannot mitigate the objectives which set standards for impacts that have already or are cur- campsite condition and distribution, rently occurring to natural and cultural with the exception of designated sites resources and the wilderness experi- in use areas within the Threshold ence. Monitoring is not an end product; Opportunity Class. This Wilderness it is a method for tracking and evaluat- Management Plan further describes ing resource conditions and wilderness indicators and standards for all wilder- values so managers can develop appro- ness opportunity classes, and identifies priate actions for protection. Law en- potential management actions to meet forcement and public education provide specific management objectives. avenues for preventing future impacts, but cannot address the impacts which The current campsite monitoring pro- have already occurred. For long-term gram was adapted from the ecological monitoring to be worthwhile, it is essen- studies done by Cole (1985, 1989a). tial that the monitoring programs be The methodology includes an assess- directly linked with other treatment ment of several variables or “indica- programs that can address the ongoing tors,” culminating in a campsite-condi- impacts to natural resources including tion rating. The overall condition is wildlife, vegetation, and water; to nonre- rated on the type and level of impact to newable heritage resources; and those each campsite. The standards de- values that characterize a wilderness scribe the relative amount of impact, or experience. This integrated program is the “Condition Class” of each camp- outlined in Chapter 13, Rehabilitation site. The Condition Class is the overall and Restoration of Recreational Im- descriptor used to evaluate manage- pacts. ment objectives for desired campsite conditions. Standards are also described for the total amount of im- 12-110 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

pacted ground or barren core in any area boundaries and campsite classi- In order to square mile within the use area. (Barren fication. These changes are described assure that an core is defined as, an area devoid of in Chapter Six, Wilderness Campsite increasing vegetation and organic litter, with com- Management. These treatments or population, accompanied pacted soil and trampled perimeter management actions have been by expanding vegetation). The campsite-monitoring implemented to ensure conformity with settlement and methods, rating system, and procedures environmental and sociological stan- growing are described in the Campsite Monitor- dards developed for each Opportunity mechanization, ing Manual included as Appendix O. Class. does not occupy and modify all The distribution of campsites within use Under this Wilderness Management areas within areas has sociological and ecological Plan, the current methodology of the United management implications. This is of campsite assessment will continue. States and its greatest importance for use areas with Wilderness Rangers and Resource possessions, leaving no at-large camping. The proximity of Specialists will establish a monitoring lands desig- campsites to one another has a direct schedule based on use statistics and nated for bearing on the number and type of trend information. In addition, empha- preservation encounters hiking parties may have. The sis will be placed on conducting an and protection standards describe the maximum num- inventory of campsites in use areas in their natural condition, ber of campsites in any square-mile within the Wild Opportunity Class. it is hereby area. (See Figure 12.1, Campsite Condition declared to be and Distribution). the policy of Campsite-monitoring data collection the Congress and analysis have been documented to secure for 12.2 Monitoring Visitor the American since 1988. The most recent results of Experience people of the monitoring data indicate a negative present and trend in campsite condition overall. A sociological study of backcountry future generations the When comparing field data to manage- users was conducted in a twelve- ment objectives, the monitoring data benefits of an month period beginning in June 1984 enduring show that management standards are and concluding in December 1985. resource of not being met, specifically for campsite The purpose of the study was to de- wilderness. condition and campsite density velop a sociological database to (Hoffman 1989; Jalbert 1993 and 1996). The Wilderness provide a basis for effective manage- Act of 1964 ment decisions when combined with Management treatments have been resource information. The objectives of applied to rehabilitate these impacted the study were 1) to identify the over- campsites and surrounding areas. night users of the Park’s backcountry, These treatments have included reveg- 2) to determine user motivations, etation, obliteration of social trails and expectations and preferences, 3) to barren ground, and definition of trails measure user levels of satisfaction and campsites. The campsite monitor- with their Grand Canyon experience, ing program has also produced informa- 4) to evaluate user reaction to the tion that has resulted in changes to use reservation and permit system, 5) to 12-111 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

develop a sociological monitoring social contact are available in the system to be used by Park staff, and, 6) wilderness Threshold Use Areas as to suggest management actions that well as in the Cross-Canyon Corridor. best meet social needs of visitors (Underhill, et al. 1986). Two monitoring programs were developed from the 1986 sociological study. A significant outcome of this study was One program was established to the development of management objec- collect data on the actual number of tives in the 1988 Backcountry Manage- encounters an overnight hiker may ment Plan that described desired social have. A random sampling of hikers in conditions. The sociological standards each Opportunity Class were asked to describe the acceptable number and complete a short survey form by record- duration of contacts an overnight user ing the number of people and groups may have while hiking and at campsites. they encountered during the day and at These standards are based on data their camp, and to rate their level of which correlates users’ reported satis- satisfaction associated with each faction level with the number of other contact. Analysis of the data deter- parties they encounter while travelling or mined 1) the number of contacts made, at campsites. Wilderness researchers and 2) at what level the number of have found that most overnight hikers contacts became unacceptable. The are more sensitive to being within sight results were measured against the or sound of others while at camp, com- management objectives described for pared to when they are hiking (Underhill, each Opportunity Class. et al. 1986; and Hendee, et al. 1990). The second monitoring program in- In keeping with goals outlined in the volved a lengthy questionnaire based Park’s General Management Plan, on the original sociological study. A wilderness areas will be managed so mail-back survey was completed by visitors have the “opportunity for a overnight hikers who had done a recent variety of personal outdoor experiences, trip. This monitoring program, which ranging from solitary to social.” The was conducted on a five-year cycle, standards for maintaining or enhancing provided Park staff with feedback on visitor experience are described for management actions and policies. The each Opportunity Class. The Wilderness survey also provided basic demo- Act of 1964 also defines a wilderness graphic information, background on the experience as one with “outstanding user’s skill level, and information on opportunities for solitude or a primitive visitor expectations and motivations. and unconfined type of recreation.” The These data were considered for deter- standards for contact levels at the mining changes in the permitting op- primitive and wild end of the recre- erations and group-size limits, and for ational opportunity spectrum therefore developing a structure for the cost reflect the desired experience. On the recovery program. Overall, this pro- other hand, opportunities for more gram provided an evaluation of man- 12-112 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

agement objectives, and an assessment impacts and prevent or substantially of strategies for providing a range of reduce those impacts in the future. To opportunities for personal experiences. do this, it is necessary to establish detailed baseline information on the This Wilderness Management Plan current attributes and condition of establishes a schedule for implementing sites, as well as gather information a monitoring program based on socio- suitable for evaluating long-term im- logical research and previous monitor- pact trends. ing programs. The monitoring program will be initiated by 2002, and will focus The wilderness areas of Grand Can- on users in the wilderness areas of the yon National Park have never been backcountry, specifically use areas systematically inventoried for cultural within the Threshold, Primitive, and Wild resources, so baseline information is Opportunity Classes (See Figure 12.2, still lacking. The only trails that have Visitor Experience). been systematically inventoried are the Bright Angel, North and South Kaibab, 12.3 Archeological Site plus the uppermost portions of the Grandview and Hermit Trails. Most Monitoring documented sites in the backcountry During the late 1980s, Grand Canyon are known from reconnaissance National Park initiated a monitoring helicopter surveys in the mid-1960s program for archeological sites in the and early 1970s, from a few small- backcountry and wilderness. Prior to this scale reconnaissance pedestrian time, monitoring of archeological sites surveys by outside researchers and occurred on a highly irregular basis, and Park personnel, and from sporadic was focused primarily on highly visible visitor reports. Many of the “known” structural sites that were easily acces- sites have not been revisited by a sible from the Colorado River corridor. trained archaeologists since they were Beginning in 1989, Park archaeologists originally reported (some as long ago initiated a more comprehensive monitor- as the 1930s). In many cases, the only ing program that included sites along available information consists of an primary hiking trails and other heavily inaccurate map and a few lines of visited backcountry and wilderness descriptive text. Most sites in the areas. wilderness need to be relocated and documented according to current The current monitoring program im- standards so they can be incorporated proves management and protection of in the monitoring program. cultural resources by 1) identifying sources of impacts to archeological The current archeological monitoring sites, 2) prioritizing sites for future program was adapted from a program monitoring and treatment, and 3) provid- developed by Cole (1985, 1989a) for ing information for the development and monitoring impacts to wilderness implementation of plans to mitigate campsites. Elements from archeologi- 12-113 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

cal monitoring programs in other south- Many impacts from on-site camping western national parks are also incorpo- can be reduced or eliminated through rated. The methodology involves ranking improved visitor education, physical several impact variables to produce an deterrents, stabilization and restoration overall condition class assessment. techniques, or formal site closures. Change in site condition is documented Generally, the intervention strategy that with repeat photographs, supplemented is least intrusive to the visitor will be by written descriptions. tried first, and the results will be monitored to see if the desired results Unlike the campsite-monitoring objec- (elimination or substantial reduction of tives, levels of acceptable impacts to impacts) are achieved. If monitoring archeological sites do not vary by Op- reveals that desired results have not portunity Class. The Park is mandated been achieved, more direct forms of by law to protect the integrity of all intervention can be implemented. If significant archeological resources, no none of the intervention techniques matter where they occur in the Park. The achieve the desired results, excavation monitoring program serves mainly to may be undertaken as a last resort. document whether impact levels are increasing, decreasing, or continuing In a few wilderness areas, archeologi- without significant change. Sites which cal sites offer the only reasonable place have received or are currently receiving to camp. If the site still retains archeo- high levels of impact are given the logical integrity and contains potentially highest priority for future intervention, valuable information about the past, the while those with no or low impact levels National Park Service is legally obli- continue to be monitored at regular gated to mitigate impacts that are intervals based on a monitoring priority occurring to the site from this use. In ranking system. most instances, mitigation will involve recovering and preserving information The distribution of archeological sites in from the site by means of a profes- the backcountry has important socio- sional archeological excavation. In logical and ecological implications for some instances, it may be possible to wilderness management because many stabilize a site and protect its integrity of the environmental attributes that without complete excavation, but some attracted prehistoric occupants to settle level of archeological excavation is in a location 1000 or 5000 years ago usually required as a component of such as level terrain, shelter from the stabilization. elements, proximity to water and trails, or a good view are the same ones that This Wilderness Management Plan attract modern campers. Consequently, establishes a systematic method of many places occupied by prehistoric archaeological inventory and monitor- and historic inhabitants of Grand Can- ing in wilderness use areas. A sched- yon are still used by visitors as camps. ule will be established based on use trends and patterns, and will focus on 12-114 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

areas that receive moderate to high use hikers in the Grand Canyon wilder- levels. Archaeological site surveys, ness. In recent years, intensive studies inventories, and compliance will be have been conducted on water quan- conducted prior to developing resource tity and quality at popular wilderness protection action plans. (See Figure destinations, many of which address 12.3, Cultural Resources). water chemistry of ground water emerging from Canyon springs (Rihs 12.4 Monitoring Water 1997). Resources The water quality and flow data-moni- The objectives of the water resource toring program is conducted at peri- inventory and monitoring program are 1) odic intervals annually. Water quality inventory all Park water resources, 2) data includes discharge, conductivity, develop baseline water resource infor- dissolved solids and oxygen, alkalinity, mation on water quality and quantity for turbidity, and temperature. Water a wide variety of management needs, quality information includes bacterial including identification and mitigation of analyses for fecal coliform and strepto- human health hazards, identification and coccus, chemical analyses of several mitigation of human impacts to the variables, and testing for radionuclides resource, and water rights issues, 3) and radioisotopes at selected sites. develop and maintain high-quality data Monitoring results are reported annu- for streamflow and water chemistry on ally and included in periodic updates South Rim springs, 4) interpret water on water availability and quality for resources from the Grand Canyon, and public use. 5) identify future research and monitoring needs. (RMP 1997a) This Plan establishes a schedule for monitoring water quality in tributaries An intensive, three-year seasonal water within wilderness use areas. The quality sampling program was con- schedule will be based on use trends ducted from 1990 to 1994. The study and patterns, and will focus on use sites were located in 20 Park tributaries areas with moderate to high use along the Colorado River. The objective levels. Site specific water quality data of the study was to inventory water will be provided to the Backcountry quality characteristics of state-protected Office for visitor education and public waters at locations of potential impact information (See Figure 12.4, Water (Mazzu 1995). Resources).

Although the intensive study focused on 12.5 Monitoring Trail many high-use recreational tributaries, it Condition did not include wilderness source areas for creeks and springs that dry up before Over 400 miles of established trails reaching the Colorado River. These exist in Grand Canyon National park. water sources are vital to overnight Of this total, approximately 380 lie 12-115 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

within the proposed wilderness areas. Indicators can be measured to Some contain historic features, and track change in conditions caused by most trails have received little or no human activity. The purpose of indica- stabilization or rehabilitation work, and tors is to focus data collection efforts on currently exist in various states of disre- what is important. Monitoring indicators pair. Until recently, monitoring trail are a means to ensure that standards conditions focused on problem seg- are being met. ments. A trail-condition survey using a descriptive log of trail problems and Standards are developed to ensure prescriptive actions has proven useful at desired conditions of wilderness re- Grand Canyon in developing action sources and values are maintained or plans for trail rehabilitation. enhanced. These are measurable statements that describe the resource While there has been no systematic and experience conditions that are method for trail-condition monitoring, considered realistic, attainable, and Park staff have conducted trail surveys acceptable. Standards are specific and on approximately 150 miles of the measurable so they clearly trigger the wilderness trail system. This Plan estab- need for corrective management ac- lishes a strategy for routinely conducting tion. They are established to promote trail-condition surveys on wilderness achievement of desired conditions. trails and routes. The focus will be on trails that contain historic features, and Management Action(s) to be those that receive moderate to high use Implemented are identified and may be by backpackers and river users. Trail- implemented as needed depending on condition surveys will be conducted in the resource conditions. The NPS conjunction with routine trail mainte- recognizes that, especially in wilder- nance and rehabilitation river trips. ness areas, the lowest level of interven- Following rehabilitation or restorative tion will be implemented to address work, trails will be monitored on a cyclic problems. In many cases, indirect basis (See Figure 12.5, Trail Condition; management actions such as visitor Chapter 7, Trail Management). education accompany more direct actions such as site rehabilitation to Figures 12.112.5 achieve desired conditions. Wilderness Resources Monitoring Programs currently Monitoring Matrix being conducted are identified. The frequency of each program is deter- The following matrices summarize the mined by the staff specialists based on indicators, standards, management the level of potential impacts to the actions, and monitoring programs for resources in specific wilderness areas. specific wilderness resources and Where monitoring programs have not values. Below is a brief description of been identified, resource inventory will the components of the matrix. be conducted. 12-116 Figure 12.1 Campsite Condition and Distribution

Value to be Indicators Standards Management Action(s) to be Monitoring and Sampling Maintained and Implemented Procedures Enhanced

THRESHOLD OPPORTUNITY CLASS Campsite Condition Barren core area within each site Routine patrols for resource protection. Permit system: data provided for assessing Designated sites: actual use vs levels of impact. and Distribution Tree and perimeter vegetation Condition Class: Low-impact wilderness use education. damage 5% or less in CC5 Rapid Campsite Assessment: 85% or less in CC5 or 4 Minor rehabilitation and obliteration of 5 to 10 Use Areas per year. Baseline Soil compaction At-Large camping: illegal sites in designated site use areas. inventories for all use areas, subsequent Condition Class: monitoring based on Opportunity Class, Number of access trails at campsite 5% or less in CC5 Action plans for major work projects for use levels, patrol schedules, and mitigation 25% or less in CC5 or 4 trail and campsite rehabilitation. priorities. Fire impacts 50% or less in CC5,4, or 3 85% or less in CC5,4,3 or 2 Designation of additional camping sites or Trail erosion adjacent to site areas. Intensive Campsite Assessment conducted Total Barren Core Area: Maximum of when additional campsite data is needed, Disturbance of archeological features 2000 ft2 in designated or at-large sites. Decrease use limits. such as when major changes in Use Area status or boundaries is proposed. Number of campsites PRIMITIVE OPPORTUNITY CLASS Closure of campsite on temporary or permanent basis. Condition Class: Study of 24 sites in 3 vegetation types 0% in CC5 Mitigation to recreational impacts along conducted on five year cycle. (Cole, 1985) 5% or less in CC4 beaches and at river-use attraction sites 20% or less in CC4 or 3 (Little Colorado River, Elves Chasm, 50% or less in CC4,3 or 2 Thunder River, Deer Creek, etc.) outlined in the Colorado River Management Plan. Total Barren Core: Maximum of 1000 ft2 per square mile.

WILD OPPORTUNITY CLASS

Condition Class: 0% in CC5,4 or 3 25% or less in CC2

Total Barren Core Area: Maximum of 500 ft2 per square mile. Figure 12.2 Visitor Experience

Value to be Maintained Indicators Standards Management Action(s) to be Monitoring Programs and and Enhanced Implemented Sampling Procedures

Visitor Experience Number of backcountry visitors: actual density CORRIDOR OPPORTUNITY CLASS Routine compilation of Backcountry and Rim Campsite density (number per square mile Use Areas use statistics. area) data collected in Rapid Campsite Campsite Density Developed, designated sites in main cluster. Assessment (RCA) monitoring program. See Appendix J. Perceived Crowding High probability of contacts w/ up to 30 parties in camps and large numbers on corridor trails. Number of groups camped w/in sight or sound High probability of contacts with mules Routine patrols and maintenance. Backcountry user survey for camp and trail (concession and NPS) on Bright Angel, S.Kaibab Visitor contacts. encounters. Use of diary, or survey form Number of parties contacted and N.Kaibab trails. Interpretive programs. based on programs developed by Underhill while travelling and Stewart et.al., (1986). Correlate number Frequent use of helicopter for administrative of encounters with satisfaction levels in non- Number of encounters between purposes. No tour operator flights in Bright Angel corridor use areas. Surveys approved by different types of users Flight Free Zone. Education on low-impact camping techniques. OMB.

Litter Obliteration of illegal sites in designated camp THRESHOLD OPPORTUNITY CLASS areas. Aircraft monitoring program: Observation Number of occurrences of human and recordation of number and type of flights noises per hour or day (e.g. Campsite density limited by designated sites. Max. Obliteration of selected sites in use areas where over Flight Corridors. Correlation of visitor aircraft, motors) 20 campsites in any square mile area in at-large density exceeds standards. satisfaction with levels of aircraft noise. camping use areas. Dispersal of use in clustered designated site use 80% probability of camp contacts with up to 5 areas, by trail and campsite relocation or parties per night. rehabilitation.

80% probability of up to 10 contacts with other overnight parties per day except in Monument and Pre-trip information on aircraft use and zoning Hermit where up to 15 contacts may occur. for trip planning purposes.

Low probability of contacts with stock, except for Pre-trip information on river runners use of NPS maintenance. popular camping beaches along the Colorado River. Figure 12.2 Visitor Experience (Continued)

Value to be Maintained and Indicators Standards Management Action(s) to be Monitoring Programs and Enhanced Implemented Sampling Procedures

Visitor Experience Number of backcountry visitors: actual density PRIMITIVE OPPORTUNITY CLASS Campsite density (number per square mile Education on low-impact camping area) data collected in RCA monitoring Campsite Density Maximum of 10 campsites in any square mile techniques. program. See Appendix J. area per Use Area. Perceived Crowding Obliteration of illegal sites in designated 80% probability of camp contacts with up to 2 camp areas. Number of groups camped w/in sight parties per night except in rim areas and Backcountry user survey for camp and trail or sound Tanner where more may occur. Obliteration of selected sites in use areas encounters. Use of diary, or survey form where density exceeds standards. based on programs developed by Underhill Number of parties contacted while 80% probability of up to 5 contacts with other and Stewart et.al., (1986). Correlate travelling overnight parties per day except in rim areas Dispersal of use in clustered designated site number of encounters with satisfaction and Tanner, and along Colorado River where use areas, by trail and campsite relocation or levels in non-corridor use areas. Surveys Number of encounters between more may occur. rehabilitation. approved by OMB. different types of users Low probability of contacts with stock, except Litter for NPS maintenance. Pre-trip information on aircraft use and Aircraft monitoring program: Observation zoning for trip planning purposes. and recordation of number and type of Number of occurrences of human flights over Flight Corridors. Correlation noises per hour or day (e.g. aircraft, WILD OPPORTUNITY CLASS Pre-trip information on river runner use of of visitor satisfaction with levels of aircraft motors) popular camping beaches along the Colorado noise. Maximum of 5 campsites in any square mile River. area per Use Area.

No contacts with other overnight parties.

80% probability of contacts with one overnight party per day. Probably no contact with day hikers.

No probability of contacts with stock.

ALL AREAS:

High probability of occurrences with aircraft noise in use areas beneath designated flight corridors.

High probability of occurrences of noise from motors in areas adjacent to the Colorado River during the Primary Use Period (5/1-9/15). Figure 12.3 Cultural Resources

Value to be Maintained and Indicators Standards Management Action(s) to be Monitoring and Sampling Enhanced Implemented Procedures Cultural Resources Site Integrity No significant cultural resource Public information and education Archeological surveys of main which is being damaged by human through written materials, and wilderness trails, designated camp Vandalism (potholes, graffiti) use or eroded by natural forces--to the visitor contacts. areas, and popular at-large sites in point there is a danger of loosing all use areas. Site Alterations (fallen or integrity or informational values--will Impose site specific regulations and stacked rock elements) be acceptable. special use limitations in Cyclic site monitoring conducted compliance with National Historic in conjunction with campsite Collector's Piles Preservation Act and NPS policies. monitoring and trail surveys.

Loss of Artifacts Recreational use may be restricted to areas outside designated historic Trailing districts, traditional cultural places, and other areas where cultural Soil Compaction resources are threatened by visitation. Vegetation Trampling Restoration and rehabilitation of disturbed sites will be conducted and may include stabilization, trail re-routing, etc.

Areas where cultural sites are threatened as a result of recreational use will be closed.

Sites will be excavated, data analyzed, and crated. Figure 12.4 Water Resources

Value to be Maintained and Indicators Standards Management Action(s) to be Monitoring and Sampling Enhanced Implemented Procedures

Water Quality Fecal coliform State and Federal standards for Health Advisories. Periodic sampling of water quality chemical and biological parameters. parameters to: 1) develop baseline Temperature Alteration of camping facilities. data, 2) characterize natural Maintain natural water quality to conditions, 3) identify impact of Dissolved Oxygen promote healthy habitat. Use area limits may be modified management actions and visitor based on potential hazards or use. Turbidity impacts to water sources.

Water Quantity Instream flow levels Maintain natural flow regimes of Water chemistry studies. Periodic sampling of water springs, seeps, and tributaries of the chemistry and routine discharge Vegetation type Colorado River. Inventory all tributaries and measurements. quantify flows to greatest extent Vegetation condition possible. Inventory & monitor riparian vegetation extent and composition Presence of wildlife Conduct Wild & Scenic Rivers to document changes. suitability studies for major tributary streams. Figure 12.5 Trail Condition

Value to be Maintained and Indicators Standards Management Action(s) to be Monitoring and Sampling Enhanced Implemented Procedures

Trail Condition Number of permitees CORRIDOR TRAILS Trail condition surveys conducted on On-going, routine maintenance of heavily Threshold and Primitive trails on cyclic Number of day users Type A, Level I. Maintained for high use. The used Corridor trails. basis. N. Kaibab, S. Kaibab, Bright Angel, Plateau Stock Use (commercial, Point, Colorado River, and Arizona trails are Development of Action Plans for Monitoring of river attraction site trails and noncommercial and administrative) designated Corridor Trails. maintenance and rehabilitation of Threshold some Threshold and Primitive trails that and Primitive trails. lead to camps adjacent to the Colorado Erosion THRESHOLD TRAILS River, conducted annually in the fall Trail maintenance performed to protect following primary river use period. Number of multiple trails (incl. Generally, Type C, Level IV. Maintained for integrity of historical features, maintain switchback cuts) semi-primitive, medium to low use levels. maximum trail width and outslope. Special management actions apply to trails listed on National Register. Threshold trails Development of Action Plans for include the Hermit, Clear Creek N.Kaibab to rehabilitation work on Routes to mitigate Clear Creek drainage, Thunder River, and unacceptable resource damage only. Grandview trails. Trail rehabilitation on Routes performed not PRIMITIVE TRAILS to exceed standards for Primitive Trails.

Type C, Level V. Maintained for primitive, low Trail closure as necessitated by extensive use levels. Historic features are generally damage to natural and cultural resources, or absent. Primitive trails include the Havasu, for human safety. Tonto, S.Bass, Boucher, Hance, Tanner, Beamer, Nankoweap, N.Bass, S.Canyon, Deer Creek, Kanab Creek, Tuckup, Lava Falls, and river attraction site trails.

WILD TRAILS/ROUTES

Type C, Level V. Maintained for primitive, low use levels. No evident historical trail construction, user-defined paths in more remote areas. Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

12.6 Research in neously maximizing the benefits of scientific investigations (See Appen- Wilderness dix B, NPS Management Policies). A wide range of scientific studies are conducted within wilderness manage- Approval for scientific studies within ment areas in Grand Canyon National wilderness areas is guided by prin- Park. Wilderness-related topics include ciples established by Congress. studies of backcountry and river recre- Among these principles are that the ation and of ecosystem management imprint of man’s work be substantially alternatives. An overview of the entire unnoticeable, that the wilderness area research program, including a listing of have outstanding opportunities for current science information needs is solitude, that wilderness be preserved contained within the Grand Canyon and used in an unimpaired condition, National Park Resource Management and that wilderness contain ecological, Plan (1997a). A complete listing of geological, or other features of scien- ongoing studies is prepared annually as tific, educational, scenic, or historical the compiled Investigator’s Annual value. In many cases, Federal law and Report (available on request from the Departmental policy allow sufficient Grand Canyon Science Center). latitude to achieve the investigators’ objectives Information gained through inventories, monitoring, and research is essential for An area should not be excluded scientifically based resource manage- from wilderness designation ment. Collection of complete, accurate, solely because established or and high-quality data is basic to sci- proposed management practices ence, and frequently study objectives require the use of tools, equip- can be accomplished only through use ment or structures, if these prac- of the best available technology. How- tices are necessary for the health ever, the tools and methods of scientific and safety of wilderness travelers, study can also have undesirable impacts or the protection of the wilderness on the character of wilderness. Such area. Managers will use the study-related impacts can be temporary minimum tool, equipment or or long-lasting. Examples of temporary structure necessary to success- effects include visitor disturbance, noise fully, safely and economically from survey helicopters or boats, and accomplished the objective... brightly colored dyes released during economic factors should be hydrologic studies. Longer lasting ef- considered the least important of fects can include permanent markers, the criteria. The chosen tool scarring of woody vegetation and rock should be the one that least outcrops, excavation pits, and equip- degrades wilderness values ment installations. In Grand Canyon temporarily or permanently (U.S. National Park, every reasonable effort is Department of the Interior, National taken to minimize impacts while simulta- Park Service 1972). 12-123 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Grand Canyon National Park applies a parks, and permitting schedules. It multistep review process to ensure that contains the application form used for studies within wilderness management requesting research and collecting areas will benefit the public and the park permits; proposals are accepted units in which the studies are conducted. throughout the year. Each proposal is Permits are required for scientific evaluated on its own merit, starting with research, specimen collection, and for the premise that opportunities for access to restricted locations. Scien- resource-based scientific investigation tists wishing to work within the Park are are basic to the Park’s mission, and invited to submit proposals specifically that the information gained through outlining the objectives, methods, loca- scientific studies will help protect park tion, and expected benefits of their resources and benefit public programs. proposed work. Proposals are required of both Federal and non-Federal investi- Consideration for wilderness-related gators. Proposals undergo scientific issues is part of both the scientific and and administrative review prior to the administrative review processes. A permitting decision. Scientific reviews conceptual representation of the ad- are generally conducted by independent ministrative-review process pertaining qualified subject-matter experts, who to wilderness issues is contained in are invited to comment on the signifi- Figure 12.6. When potentially significance and urgency of the study, validity cant effects to Park resources, safety of the methods, and qualifications of the concerns, or excessive costs are scientist. Administrative reviews, which discovered in the course of a permitting are conducted by park management, evaluation, joint reevaluation of the are intended to evaluate the proposed proposed study by the principal investi- activities relative to standards of legisla- gator and Park management may be tive authority, and visitor and resource required. protection. Well designed studies with a high potential for positive benefits to the Investigators who concur with the Park are generally reviewed favorably. stipulations of their permits can be authorized to conduct studies within the Guidelines for the preparation of study Park for as long as five years, depend- proposals and general research permit ing primarily on their study plan. conditions and restrictions are con- Progress on all studies is reevaluated tained within the Application Proce- at least annually. When necessary, dures for Research and Collecting permits can be canceled for noncompli- Permits, December 1996, Grand ance or significant deviations from the Canyon National Park and Glen Can- study plan. yon National Recreation Area (1996). Copies are distributed to prospective researchers on request. This document provides general guidance about conducting scientific studies within these 12-124 Figure 12.6 Wilderness-related decision matrix for scientific permit applications

Each column of this table represents one set of ranking criteria (e.g., significance, safety, effects on park resources, etc.). Proposals that match descriptions at the top of a column are frequently complex and controversial. Some will require lengthy impact assessments and negotiation prior to a permit decision. Decision making is simpler for proposals matching descriptions near the bottom of a column.

Means of Access1 Mechanized Equipment2 Magnitude of Effects Duration of Effects

Helicopter Combustion engines (e.g., generators, Potential regional or greater effect (e.g., Permanent modification of park resources pumps, motors) species introductions) or adjacent areas (e.g., construction of a Fixed-wing aircraft permanent study platform, field laboratory, Solar, battery, wind, current, and hand- Potential effects extend over a broad area or quarters; alteration of non-renewable Off-road motorized vehicle (e.g., truck, powered devices within or adjacent to the Park unit (e.g., resources, excavation of archaeological or auto, ATV, snowmobile) fire, river manipulation, extensive aircraft paleontological sites) No powered devices use) Sport or utility watercraft (i.e., frequent Long-term impacts (6 months to several upriver travel) Potential effects confined to multiple small years) to renewable resources (e.g., tree areas (e.g., multiple small sampling plots, damage, population manipulation, Motorized watercraft (i.e., principally excavations, campsites) excavations in recent sediments above downriver travel) mean high water) Probable effects confined to a single study Nonmotorized wheeled vehicles (e.g., bike, site, which will be restored and is out of Seasonal impact (2 - 6 months, e.g., wagon) public view. removal of seasonal plant growth, disturbance of beach deposits) Oar-powered watercraft (e.g., raft, dory, Probable effects will be hard to detect kayak) without prior knowledge (e.g., limited Extended impact (obvious to casual sampling of loose geologic materials, observers for 2-4 weeks) Stock animals seasonal plant growth, water, or air) Short term impact (1 day to 2 weeks, e.g., Human powered (e.g., day hike, backpack, No physical site impacts anticipated (e.g., surface water dye studies, overnight field x-country ski, sled, climb) photography, survey, sound or climate excursion) monitoring) Instantaneous disturbance (e.g., seismic survey blast)

No apparent impact

1 Use restrictions apply to all forms of access except day hikes and public roads. 2 Use of quietest available technology may be required. Frequency of Disturbance Field Crew Safety Cost/Benefit Factors Continuous or near continuous activity Multiple group encampments or very large High perceived risk to project personnel, Cost of NPS requirements associated with (e.g., permanent field laboratory) groups (e.g. 12 or more persons) visitors, or park staff from proposed the proposed activities will make activities. Training, safety gear, and other completion of the primary study objective Frequent, long term activities (seasonal Large group encampment (e.g., 7-11 reasonable precautions do not appear infeasible. encampments) persons) sufficient to mitigate risk. Permit stipulations are expected to increase Multiple overnight site visits Small group encampment (2-6 individuals) Participation of essential personnel will not cost to the point that meeting the be possible under existing safety or secondary objectives will not be achieved. Multiple daytime site visits (e.g., repetitive Single individual logistical stipulations. Other qualified surveys, data collection) personnel are not available (i.e., can’t Permit stipulations will increase costs to No additional personnel placed on site, complete primary study objectives given the point that other, equally important, Single overnight site visit activities concurrent with approved site current restrictions). studies will be negatively affected. visits for other studies Single daytime site visit Participation of preferred, but non-essential Permit stipulations have no lasting No site visit personnel may be limited by safety or significant effect on ability to complete the No site visit (e.g., high altitude remote logistical considerations, inaccessibility of study, or on institutional capabilities. sensing) site, or personal capabilities (e.g., technical rock climbing, hike out from river). Other Proposed alternatives are expected to qualified individuals can be available to reduce total project costs complete tasks.

Broad participation of study team may be possible, but will require development of additional skills, special training or certification, guide services, special supplies or equipment (e.g., backpack, river trip, winter camping, electrofishing).

Participation of study team is not limited by safety, logistical considerations or permit stipulations.

Risks or other limitations associated with proposed activities can be significantly reduced by alternate methods acceptable to all cooperators. Scheduling Significance/Urgency Timing of access is critical, and may be Proposed activity is deemed inappropriate spur-of-the-moment. Essential data can for NPS areas (permit will be denied) only be collected within a short window of time. (e.g., studies of short term or Importance of study, or the need for unpredictable phenomena, floods, conducting the study within an NPS area, migrations, fire, seismic activity). is not supported by the proposal (permitting decision will be postponed Study has specific seasonality and site pending major proposal revision) visits must be made during pre-established time frames (e.g., migratory wildlife, plant Significance of study and need for or animal reproduction, seasonal growth, conducting activities in protected NPS seasonal visitation). areas is documented in letters of recommendation from the investigator’s Study objectives can be met at any time of institution and colleagues, but is not year subject to convenient scheduling of supported by qualified independent peer personnel, equipment, access, funding, reviews (permitting decision may depend etc. (i.e., work is not seasonal, resources on a compelling justification by principal are relatively stable, e.g., geologic strata, investigator or other recognized authority archaeology, paleontology, forest history) if there is any potential for resource impacts or interference with visitors) Study objectives have a high probability of being met through opportunistic sampling Significance of study and value to the park (e.g. river guide monitoring of beach sites, unit is clearly recognized by qualified participation on river trips on a space- independent peer reviews and by park available basis) management

Broad recognition for the importance of the study exists at park, regional, and national/international level. Data are deemed important to solving immediate threats to public resources or human safety

Need for studies on this topic is documented in the Park’s current Resource Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

12.7 Summary of Changes • Prepare biennial monitoring reports for Park staff including wilderness and Actions rangers, trail crew, and interpretation • Continue Rapid Campsite Assess- staff ment methodology for campsite monitoring. Establish a monitoring sched- • Continue to evaluate the tools and ule based on use statistics and trend methods of scientific study for im- information. Conduct an inventory of pacts on wilderness character apply- campsites in use areas within the Wild ing the minimum-requirement deci- Opportunity Class sion process.

• Implement a monitoring program based on sociological research and previous monitoring programs by 2002. Focus on users in wilderness areas (Threshold, Primitive and Wild Opportunity Classes)

• Develop a systematic schedule of archaeological inventory and monitoring in wilderness use areas based on use trends and patterns. Archaeologi- cal site surveys, inventories, and compliance will be conducted prior to developing resource-protection action plans

• Establish a strategy to conduct routine trail-condition surveys on wilderness trails and routes. Focus will be on trails that contain historic features, and those that receive moderate to high use levels by backpackers and river users. Conduct trail-condition surveys will be conducted in conjunction with routine trail maintenance and fall and spring rehabilitation river trips. Monitor trail-restoration work, on a cyclic basis

12-128 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

13-12912-129 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

n overall goal of wilderness tiple trail pattern will develop. The CHAPTER management is to keep and second step is to determine the nature make wilderness as wild and as of the impacted site requiring rehabili- 13 AAnatural as possible. This includes restor- tation and devise an appropriate miti- ing wilderness character when it has gation plan. been damaged by human use (Society Rehabilitation of American Foresters [SAF] 1989a). Restoration and Managers not only have a responsibility Restoration to maintain, preserve and protect Restoration to a “natural” condition of present wilderness qualities, but also to (See Appendix L, Natural Conditions) Recreational restore those which are below minimum includes restoration and maintenance standards (NPS Management Policies, of natural processes and viable popula- Impacts 6:2; SAF 1989b). tions of all native species in natural patterns of abundance and distribution. 13.1 Revegetation and Site For this discussion, the term “impact” will refer to human-induced alterations Rehabilitation of natural processes, native biotic The primary objective of Grand community compositions, and/or aes- Canyon’s revegetation program is to thetic elements. restore native vegetation cover in impacted areas (Grand Canyon Resource In widespread degraded areas restora- Management Plan 1997a:97). This tion may consist of landscape-scale effort consists of four distinct yet interre- actions, such as reducing or removing lated aspects: 1) rehabilitating and nonnative grazing animals and/or the restoring impacted sites to a natural restoration of natural fire regimes (See condition; 2) establishing a dependable Chapter 11, Ecosystem Management). seed and propagule source for restora- The restoration of small-scale sites tion efforts; 3) educating the public and resulting from recreational impacts, workforce; and 4) monitoring the usually consists of returning impacted program’s effectiveness. sites to the vegetative composition and aesthetic conditions of the area. Rehabilitating Impacted Sites Rehabilitation There are at least two critical steps in restoring impacted sites. The first is to Rehabilitation consists of returning an identify the area of concern and deter- impacted site or area to a specified mine why impacts occurred. For ex- (generally natural) level of soil condi- ample, if multiple trailing is the issue, it tions and biological productivity (includ- would make little sense to intervene with ing vegetation composition) (See an aggressive multiple-trail rehabilita- Appendix L, Natural Conditions). Aes- tion project without first delineating an thetic considerations are also impor- adequate trail to accommodate tant. Since complete restoration is a recreationists. Otherwise, a new mul- long-term process, the steps taken by 13-130 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

managers generally constitute a se- ground-cover vegetation or presence I know it is a quence of rehabilitation actions which of tolerant vegetation (grasslike plants daring thing- anticipate eventual restoration to a are most tolerant—short woody plants for a man natural condition. are least ), (2) an open rather than whose life lasts 40, 50, closed tree canopy, (3) thick organic 60, 70, or 80 Rehabilitation of High-Use soils, and (4) a relatively flat but well- years to be Sites drained site. talking in terms of Given the same environmental setting, eternity, Rehabilitation of Little-Used but that is more highly impacted sites will require Sites indeed what longer recovery periods. When different we are doing. environmental settings are compared, Conversely much can be gained by We are think- however, it is difficult to predict how long reducing use in places that receive ing of the recovery will take merely on the basis of light use. Study results emphasize the eternity of the past that how badly the site is impacted. There is importance of minimizing impacts in now exists in some evidence that differences in parts of the backcountry that are these areas of recovery rates between different envi- currently relatively undisturbed. Most of wilderness, ronments may exceed differences in the backcountry falls under this cat- and we have deterioration rates. In addition, it may be egory, especially the Esplanade and the presump- tion to say more effective to speed recovery rather Tonto regions. This Plan emphasizes that we are than slow deterioration (Cole 1994). visitor education to encourage low- going to do impact behaviors, such as selection of our best to Sometimes anticipatory actions may not durable sites, as a key element in make it pos- have the intended effect. For example, minimizing recreational impacts (See sible for those areas from the seemingly logical strategy of rotating Chapter 10, Interpretation, Education, the eternity use—temporarily closing sites to allow and Information). of the past to recovery or frequently relocating trails— exist on into is likely to be counterproductive be- Other management strategies with the the eternity cause it usually results in a pronounced most promise include (1) controlling of the future. That is our increase in total impact. Many closed type of use, (2) avoiding use during faith. restoration sites recover slowly as seasons when soil and vegetation are displaced activity creates new impacts particularly vulnerable to disturbance as visitors go elsewhere. This increases (e.g., North Rim meadows) (3) confin- Howard the areal extent of impact and therefore, ing use in popular places, and (4) Zahniser Author total impact (Cole 1994). perhaps, dispersing use widely in of lightly used places. This latter strategy the The most likely effective strategy in is risky and if attempted, conditions Wilderness Act controlling impacts in high-use sites is will be monitored closely (Cole 1994). simply to select durable sites and to confine use to as small an area as possible. The characteristics of durable campsites and other areas of concentrated use include (1) either lack of 13-131 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

13.2 Site Restoration Minimum Requirements Recommendations Grand Canyon National Park will Disturbed sites in desert environments apply only the minimum tools, equip- are inherently difficult to revegetate (Gelt ment, device, force, regulation, or 1993; Jackson, McAuliffe, and Roundy practice that will bring the desired 1991; Heim 1994; Young, et al. 1994). result (See Appendix D, Minimum Poor soil properties, extremely high Requirement Decision Process). This surface temperatures, and lack of not only applies to methods of trans- moisture retard or even prevent seed- porting personnel and equipment to the ling establishment. On most sites, the site, and the selection of the types of relative contribution of wind and water to tools required for successful implemen- erosion in semiarid environments de- tation, but also the selection of materi- pends on soil conditions, and topogra- als needed for restoration. Materials phy, and the nature and extent of im- used for soil stabilization and mulching pacts. The resulting erosion causes an will consist of native vegetation, soil, almost irreversible loss in productivity and rock sources, if possible. Poten- (Ladyman and Muldavin 1996). Since tially intrusive materials such as jute geologic soil formation is estimated to matting (See Mulch and Shade below), be one inch per 300-1,000 years, sig- will be carefully camouflaged. Work nificant soil loss on even a modest scale projects will consist of the minimum can be devastating. Erosional pro- number of participants (generally less cesses may also lead to an impover- than the maximum hiker group size of ished soil seedbank (Francis 1994). 11). If possible, a project date will be Site restoration recommendations selected that avoids conflict with recre- include ational users. In general, project dates, tools, and materials will be selected • using the Minimum-Requirement that least impact the resource and Decision Process (Appendix D) visitor experience. • identifying the source of impact • preparing the site, including Identify the Source of moisture Impact catchments mulch and shade Generally, rehabilitation of natural ripping perturbations such as floods, fire and seeding landslides will not be attempted in wilderness. Exceptions may be made These elements are discussed in detail regarding exotics or rehabilitation of below. degraded landscapes (See Chapter 11, Ecosystem Management). Unac- ceptable recreational impacts, as defined through the LAC process, require active intervention. As dis- 13-132 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

cussed above, it makes little sense to woody debris that is slow to break initiate a rehabilitation project without down; and seeding prior to winter rains understanding the cause of the original to increase the probability of success- impact. Attempts to reduce the size or ful seedling establishment (Jackson, number of barren core areas (barren McAuliffe, and Roundy 1991; Gelt core areas have compacted soil, 1993). trampled perimeter vegetation, and are devoid of vegetation and organic litter) Catchments will be futile if the allowed group size or total group numbers exceed the area’s The use of contoured berms (resem- capacity. Elimination of multiple (social) bling contour plowing) on slopes, trailing may be counterproductive with- depressions, and checks (small dams) out first delineating an adequate primary in arroyos provides for water concen- trail. Otherwise, the area of impact tration, and greatly enhances soil simply increases as “rehabilitated” trails moisture. Since these measures reappear and new ones develop. Since require some degree of site manipula- many archeological features occupy tion, care will be taken to assure that sites providing shelter, shade, and only low-key, unobtrusive, minimally proximity to water—conditions deemed visible features consisting only of desirable by modern hikers—restoration natural materials are used. An ar- may not succeed unless adequate chaeological evaluation as part of the alternative sites and education are compliance process is necessary provided, or as a last resort, the area is before any surface disturbance occurs. closed to camping or visitation. Mulch and Shade Site Preparation Mulch reduces soil surface tempera- Moisture tures and greatly improves soil moisture accumulation, not only near the Moisture is not only necessary for imme- surface but at depth (Jackson, diate germination and growth, but seed- McAuliffe, and Roundy 1991). The lings must grow large enough to tolerate preferred mulch in wilderness settings drier, normal conditions. Even in undis- consists of woody debris and natural turbed deserts, seeding establishment leaf litter (preferably from beneath occurs infrequently and only when there native trees and large shrubs). Locally is unusually plentiful rainfall. Irrigation is derived leaf litter provides additional beneficial in establishing vegetation, but benefits such as a source of native in wilderness settings it is often impracti- seeds and important microbiotic soil cal, impossible, or in some cases may elements. It is also readily removed by exceed minimum tool. Some of the winds unless stabilized through soil actions Grand Canyon may take include, scarification (roughing the surface) or contoured water catchments (to concen- covering with heavier woody debris or trate moisture); mulching with coarse, commercially prepared jute matting. 13-133 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

For this discussion, jute matting refers providing an ameliorated microclimate to commercial blanket or matting con- of reduced temperature and improved sisting of wood fibers or burlap which is moisture. Grand Canyon will incorpo- used to stabilize exposed soils. Jute rate these ecologically sensitive mea- matting also functions as a mulch by sures into its rehabilitation program. reducing soil temperatures and increasing soil moisture, as well as capturing Ripping (Decompaction) of Soil windblown seeds. It is useful when the restoration surface area is large, espe- Tillage, scarification, or ripping com- cially when native mulch sources are pacted soils allows water to penetrate limited. Because of its visually intrusive much more easily, and this treatment is nature, jute matting will be used only important, but not critical, in improving when native material sources are insuffi- soil moisture. Because of the wide- cient for adequate site preparation. spread presence of archaeological Native woody debris and leaf litter will features in Grand Canyon, this practice be used to camouflage the jute matting. will not occur unless specifically autho- In addition, some jute matting comes rized by the Park archaeologist. Often, with a fine, plastic netting that degrades the freeze-thaw cycle affecting most of in sunlight. Since animals ranging in the Park generally breaks up soil size from elk to reptiles can become surfaces to a sufficient depth for many entangled, this netting will be removed grass species—provided additional after placement. impacts do not occur. If ripping is approved, a variety of methods will be Another useful (albeit labor intensive) used depending on the area’s extent. method of shading or blocking restora- Generally, hand tools such as picks, tion sites is to “plant” dead brush and shovels, pulaskis, and occasionally deadfall in the disturbed area. The rock bars will be used for small areas. material used consists mainly of dead Stock-drawn rippers resembling plows brush found in various states of abun- may be used by qualified persons for dance. If carefully and patiently done, larger-scale projects. Mechanical this method can facilitate restoration in alternatives, a last resort, are ad- a variety of ways. First, an artfully crafted dressed in Appendix D, Minimum planting, along with a liberal application Requirement Decision Process. Soils of leaf litter, can visually blend the dis- formed in arid and semiarid conditions turbed site with the surrounding vegeta- are extremely shallow; ripping should tion. This creates a passive, visual involve soil de-compaction with an barrier which, since the site is no longer absolute minimum of soil mixing (Jack- recognized as a trail or camp, reduces son, McAuliffe, and Roundy 1991). or eliminates subsequent recreational impacts. In addition, the planting activity Seeding provides a small scale de-compaction of soil as each element is planted. The Seeding will be derived from local brush also shades the immediate area, sources suitable to the restoration site. 13-134 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Depending on the life of the seeds in the and Martin 1948; Harper and Marble soil, an area might need to be re- 1988). As early as 1948, researchers seeded. If stands of native plants exist observed that Southwest crusts com- nearby, natural introduction of seeds posed of algae and lichen had the may be adequate provided the site beneficial function of reducing erosion preparation work persists or is refur- and adding organic matter to the soil bished (Jackson, McAuliffe, and Roundy (Fletcher and Martin 1948). There is a 1991; Day and Ludeke 1990). The value growing body of quantitative evidence of fertilizers in arid and semiarid envi- that cryptogamic crusts are important ronments is questionable (Morgan in stabilizing soil against erosional 1994). forces, especially in arid and semiarid environments that cannot support lush Some research and experience indi- grass growth and are particularly cates that seeding in the fall will result in susceptible to erosion (See Ladyman higher probability of seedling establish- and Muldavin 1996). ment. If fall-winter-spring precipitation is sufficient to start seedling emergence, Microbiotic crusts are extremely fragile midsummer moisture events may be and are prone to destruction with slight very important in native seedling estab- impacts (Belnap 1993; Beymer and lishment. A commonly accepted rule of Klopatek 1992; Cole 1990a). Tram- thumb for seeding grasses in rangeland pling by backcountry recreationists is seedbeds is to plant at a depth two and capable of seriously impacting large one-half times the diameter of the seed. areas. Very low levels of ongoing use Deep planting increases likelihood of will maintain high levels of disturbance. adequate moisture, and may make it This shows most commonly as webs more difficult for rodents to locate and of trails that surround trail junctions, recover artificially planted seeds (Jack- camping areas, and points of interest son, McAuliffe, and Roundy 1991). (Cole 1990a).

Cryptogamic Crust Although lichen and moss growth tends to be slow, other microbiotic A cryptogamic crust is a brown, black, crusts have the potential for rapid grey, or white soil cover composed of recolonization (Cole 1990a). Inocula- either algae, lichen, moss, fungi, or tion with cryptogam preparation is one liverwort, alone or combined (Ladyman way to hasten cryptogamic crust and Muldavin 1996). Living cryptogamic development (St. Clair, et al. 1984; crusts should not be confused with Belnap 1993). Dry inoculation— inorganic desert crusts which appear crumbling material from one area similar to the organic structures, but spread as thinly and evenly as pos- reduce water infiltration and increase sible over another area—is an effec- runoff and erosion. In contrast, the cryp- tive method. Studies indicate that togamic crust minimizes erosion and inoculation contributes significantly to provides nitrogen to the soil (Fletcher reestablishing crusts in as little as two 13-135 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

years, although not to levels of undis- plant phenotype. This will enhance the turbed sites (Belnap 1993). Studies probability of including genes for sur- conducted in Grand Canyon indicate vival under varying conditions, not just surprisingly rapid recovery of crusts in the conditions that contributed to the as little as five years, provided the phenotype and the vigor of the plant at source of perturbation is eliminated the time the seed was harvested (Cole 1990a). (Knapp and Rice 1994).

Cryptogam are significant ecosystem Collecting seed from a population components. They contribute to land- growing in a similar environment as the scape stability and increasing nutrient target environment, on both a regional status and biodiversity. In arid parks it is and local scale, can increase the odds important to educate visitors about the that a well-adapted germplasm will be nature, importance, and fragility of selected for restoration. Without knowl- cryptogamic crusts. It is also important edge of the gene combinations that to locate trails, camping areas, and determine adaptation to a certain other activity sites away from places environment, the best we can do is to with well-developed crust and, where collect material from environments with this is not possible, try to confine traffic potentially similar section pressures as to one well-developed route (Cole the planting site. Reasonable regional 1990a). Grand Canyon will consider adaptation can also be attained by just cryptogam life forms when planning selecting plant material from sites with backcountry facilities, rehabilitation, and similar elevation, latitude, climate, and a sustainable ecosystem-management so on as the site to be restored (Knapp strategy. and Rice 1994).

Establish a Dependable Seed Less obvious, but perhaps equally and Propagule Source important, genetic variation may be associated with local edaphic gradi- Seed Collection ents, biotic factors, microclimate, and soils. Aspect of a site is another poten- The more plants from which seeds are tially strong local selective force, with harvested, the greater the chance that plants growing on a sunny, southern the collection will contain potentially exposure more likely to contain genes important genes, and that these genes for drought stress than plants growing will be represented in the same frequen- just over the hill on more shaded north- cies as in the original population. erly slopes (Knapp and Rice 1994).

Grand Canyon National Park will Cultivation and Nursery choose plants from which to harvest Considerations seed in a random fashion, trying to avoid both conscious and unconscious If the seed cultivation (seed increase) selection by paying little attention to environment is different from the even- 13-136 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

tual target environment, selective pres- accurate information regarding protec- sures may greatly alter the seed’s ge- tion of natural and cultural resources netic composition. The best way to avoid genetic shifts is to cultivate seed • a coordinated wilderness education in an environment as similar as possible program for staff (permanent, sea- to the target site. In addition, upon sonal, and volunteer) to develop re- replanting a seed-increase field, it is source protection and restoration important to use originally collected skills. These include 1) wilderness seed, not seed from a previous seed management principles and philoso- increase (Knapp and Rice 1994). Grand phy; 2) Leave No Trace training; 3) Canyon will adhere to these specifica- application of minimum requirements, tions. 4) development proficiency in the use of primitive tools; 5) development of The Park currently has a nursery opera- minimum-impact trail maintenance, tion, including two greenhouses on the site restoration, and minimum-impact South Rim devoted to the propagation of fire suppression tactics and tech- native plants. In addition, the Science niques. Center staff is developing a partnership relationship with Glen Canyon national Implement Restoration/ Recreation Area to establish a native Rehabilitation Program grass seed cultivation area at Lees Ferry. Currently, two winter river trips (approximately 6 weeks total) are dedi- Educate the Public and cated to the restoration and rehabilita- Workforce tion of impacts within the proposed wilderness. Work crews of paid and An effective restoration effort requires volunteer staff conduct site restoration an effective educational program (See and revegetation, trail maintenance, Chapter 10, Interpretation, Education and exotic plant control in remote and Information). An educated public locations throughout the inner canyon. and workforce can effectively reduce the Additional volunteer crews are occa- extent of recreational impacts that would sionally organized to perform similar otherwise require active restoration work on the rims during the summer. intervention. In addition, the public and staff needs to understand the need for Park staff will continue to expand its restoration, not only to support such partnership relationships with conser- efforts, but also to decrease the likeli- vation groups, schools, and other hood of dismantling labor-intensive agencies in order to achieve restora- projects. An effective education program tion goals. will be established to create

• a coordinated interpretive program to provide visitors access to adequate and 13-137 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Develop an Effective Monitoring Program

Grand Canyon will implement an effective monitoring program which evaluates restoration treatment effectiveness (See Chapter 12, Monitoring and Research). All the good intentions in the world will not guarantee a successful restoration program without adequate evaluation of the techniques used.

13.3 Summary of changes and actions

• The Park will continue its winter river- based restoration program. This will be accomplished during two three- week trips, and will generally consist of work parties of 16 crew members.

• Park staff will continue and expand supplemental restoration programs, including the establishment of partnerships with governmental and nongovernmental organizations.

• The Park will continue its plant nursery program. Science Center staff will develop, in cooperation with Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, a native grass cultivation program.

13-138 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

14-13913-139 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

14.1 Issues and Public Cultural resources management is mandated by law and policy. Major CHAPTER Concerns historic preservation laws include the 14 hrough the Scoping process for Historic Sites Act of 1935, the National this Plan, public comments con- Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended 1992), the National Environ- Cultural TTcerning cultural resources were received; the majority related to site- mental Policy Act of 1969, the Archeo- Resources preservation efforts and education. logical and Historic Preservation Act of Management Numerous comments were received 1974, and the Archeological Re- suggesting ways to better protect ar- sources Protection Act (ARPA) of 1979 cheological resources. Improved educa- (as amended 1988). Of particular tion, in a variety of formats, was by far importance are additional documents the most common suggestion. Posting such as NPS Management Policies notices on archeological sites, closing (1988), the Antiquities Act of 1906, the sites, increasing interpretive information Native American Graves Protection provided to hikers, educating park and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of personnel, increasing patrols, and 1990, and Executive Order 13007 adding information to written guide- Indian Sacred Sites signed May 24, books were all suggested to mitigate 1996. site impacts. Education is the most important aspect of an active approach The primary objective of the Cultural to management, and is discussed in Resource Management Program is to Chapter Ten. On-site mitigation efforts, meet the basic requirements outlined in increased monitoring and signage, and the Cultural Resource Management active changes in trails and designated Guidelines, (NPS-28) to ensure cultural campsites are discussed in this section resources are identified, properly and also in Chapter 12, Archeological managed, and preserved. This objec- Monitoring, and Chapter 16 Implemen- tive is accomplished through a system- tation Plan and Schedule. atic program of research, planning, and stewardship.

14.2 Program Overview According to NPS Management Policies (5:2), the NPS will conduct a The Cultural Resource Management coordinated program of basic and Program at Grand Canyon is devoted to applied research to support planning the management of program require- for and management of park cultural ments, maintenance, ongoing projects, resources. In addition, NPS Manage- and activities. Cultural Resources ment Policies (6:7) states Program include archaeology, ethnogra- phy, curation, cultural landscapes, Cultural features such as archeo- historic preservation and American logical sites, historic trails or routes, Indian consultation. All these elements or structures that have been in- are a component of wilderness man- cluded within wilderness will be agement at Grand Canyon. 14-140 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

protected and maintained using mary wilderness trails, and near popu- methods that are consistent with the lar use areas such as Hermit Creek preservation of wilderness character and Tanner. The monitoring program and values and cultural resource focuses primarily on sites located at protection requirements. existing and potential camp or day use areas (See Chapter 12.3, Monitoring Cultural resources management within and Research Programs). the Park’s wilderness areas is focused on archeological resources (historic and Monitoring by itself can not mitigate prehistoric), ethnographic resources the impacts that have already occurred (traditional cultural properties and ac- or are currently occurring to archeo- cess accommodations), historic re- logical resources. Monitoring provides sources (buildings, trails, landscapes), the means of tracking and evaluating and objects (artifacts preserved in situ). the condition of archeological resources so that managers can develop 14.3 Archeological appropriate protection actions. Law enforcement and public education Resources provide avenues for preventing future Archeological resources are those impacts but cannot address the im- physical remains that provide the basis pacts which have already occurred. for understanding and interpreting For long-term monitoring to be worth- prehistory and history. Of all cultural while, it is essential that the monitoring resources found in Grand Canyon, the program be directly linked with other greatest conflict in visitor use and man- treatment programs that can address agement relates to archeological re- the ongoing impacts to these nonre- sources. This situation is caused, in newable heritage resources through part, by the fact that humans have used stabilization, rehabilitation, or, if no the Grand Canyon for thousands of other reasonable options are avail- years—a good route prehistorically has able, through site closure or excava- become a good trail today; a good tion. campsite 1000 years ago was a good Specific treatments to mitigate im- Every place, campsite 100 years ago, and is still a like every good campsite. Remains of prehistoric pacts to archeological sites, especially person, is and historic activity is evident in a large in the more popular wilderness areas elevated by portion of the more popular wilderness include designating campsites to the love and respect shown use areas. concentrate use in areas with high concentrations of archeological re- toward it, and by the way in As stated in Chapter Two of this Plan, sources, and to reroute and redesign which its the existing inventory of archeological trails to avoid impacts from foot traffic. bounty is sites is based on a survey of only two These management actions are identi- received. percent of the Park. Most of the inven- fied for specific areas in Chapter Sixteen, Implementation Plan and Richard Nelson tory has been conducted along the The Island Cross-Canyon Corridor trails, the pri- Schedule. Within 14-141 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

14.4 Ethnographic Tribal interest in management of wilderness areas at Grand Canyon National Resources Park is significant. The Park’s manage- An ethnographic resource is any natural ment staff is committed to ongoing or cultural resource linked to the tradi- integration of Tribal perspectives into tional practices, values, beliefs, history Park programs. Effective government- and/or ethnic identity of a cultural group to-government relationship with eight or groups. Specific direction on man- separate Indian Tribes (represented by agement of these resources is found in six Tribal governments) will be main- NPS-28 and NPS Management Poli- tained through the Cultural Resource cies. In addition to specific NPS direc- Management Program. tion, legal direction is also found in the American Indian Religious Freedom Traditional Cultural Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Properties Act, and Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites). Closely linked with ethnographic resources, traditional cultural properties Grand Canyon has been home to vari- (TCP) are defined as “one that is ous groups for thousands of years. eligible for inclusion in the National These people, both American Indian Register because of its association and more recent Euro-Americans, have with cultural practices or beliefs of a used the Canyon as both a home and a living community that (a) are rooted in place linked to traditional practices, that community’s history, and (b) are values and beliefs. Euro-Americans important in maintaining the continuing recognized the Canyon’s spiritual values cultural identity of the community” (U.S. in the establishment of the national park Department of the Interior, National in 1919. World Heritage designation Park Service, Undated). Given the told the world that Grand Canyon had thousands of years of American Indian value beyond the American people. The association with the Canyon, it is likely 1975 Grand Canyon Enlargement Act that many traditional cultural properties specified natural quiet and the view as can be defined in the Park. Locations important, yet intangible qualities, that can only be defined by those cultural must be protected. These are all ethno- groups whose association with Park graphic resources. resources and values can be defined within National Register contexts. Through the integration and improve- Ongoing consultations with groups ment of resource management, visitor affiliated with Grand Canyon National experience, and personnel sensitivity, Park will further identification of impor- the ethnographic program seeks to tant traditional cultural properties. raise the level of the public’s and park personnel’s understanding and appreciation for natural, cultural, and ethnic diversity. 14-142 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Access and Accommodation NPS wilderness policy and management does not preclude accommoda- On May 24, 1996, President Clinton tion and use of sacred sites. In con- signed Executive Order 13007 to ac- trast, NPS management has the ability commodate access to American Indian to embrace and implement the broad sacred sites by Indian religious practitio- provisions of EO 13007. ners, and to provide additional protection for the physical integrity of such 14.5 Historic Resources sites on Federal lands. EO 13007 directs the NPS (and other Federal Historic resources are those buildings, agencies) to accommodate access to trails, and objects that have achieved and ceremonial use of sacred sites by their significance during the recent American Indian people to the fullest past. At Grand Canyon, literally hun- extent possible under the law. dreds of buildings and hundreds of miles of trails are considered signifi- Wilderness areas of Grand Canyon cant historic structures. A structure is a National Park are likely to contain loca- “constructed work...consciously cre- tions of importance to American Indian ated to serve some human activity.” religious practitioners, requiring accommodation for access and use. NPS Although by its very nature, wilderness Management Policies (6:7) is specific areas are typically devoid of evidence when referencing cultural resources and of recent human activity, wilderness American Indian use in wilderness areas may contain features of histori- areas, and implementation of EO 13007 cal value. Proposed wilderness within will be consistent with existing policy: the Park contains significant historic structures, mainly in the form of con- Cultural features such as archeo- structed trails. These trails represent a logical sites, historic trails or routes, continuum of use, from prehistoric to or structures that have been in- historic times, and are the link be- cluded within wilderness will be tween the rim and inner canyon. His- protected and maintained using toric trails may serve and be main- methods that are consistent with the tained as part of the wilderness trail preservation of wilderness charac- system (NPS Management Policies, ter and values and cultural re- 6:2). source protection requirements.... Native American religious areas Cultural Landscapes and other ethnographic resources will be inventoried and protected. A cultural landscape is “a geographi- Native Americans will be permitted cal area, including both cultural and non-motorized access within wilder- natural resources and the wildlife or ness for sacred or religious pur- domestic animals therein, associated poses in accordance with criteria for with an historic event, activity, or per- special park uses. son or exhibiting other cultural or 14-143 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

aesthetic values.” In the broadest sense, undisturbed, unless removal of artifacts a cultural landscape reflects human or intervention into cultural material is adaptation and use of natural resources. justified in the planing process by This is often evident in the division and preservation treatment, protection, organization of the land, the presence of research, interpretation, or develop- both natural and cultural biotic features, ment requirements. They are preserved the systems of circulation that allow in a stable condition to prevent degra- movement, and the types of structures dation and loss of research values or in that are built. A cultural landscape’s situ exhibit potential” (U.S. Department character is defined by physical mate- of the Interior, National Park Service rial, use, and function. Individual fea- 1994a). Tribal consultations have tures, such as roads, buildings, walls recommended that archeological and vegetation are material compo- remains be left in their original location nents that, taken together, create the if at all possible. Objects that are col- whole landscape. Patterns of use and lected are curated in Grand Canyon’s function reflect cultural values and tradi- Museum Collection. tions. The Grandview Trail leading to Horseshoe Mesa and the Last Chance 14.7 Native American Mining District is considered a cultural Graves Protection and landscape. Repatriation (NAGPRA)

14.6 Objects NAGPRA was signed into law by President George Bush on November Although we typically think of historic 16, 1990. This law addresses the rights objects as curatorial materials within of lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, museum collections, preservation in situ and Native Hawaiian organizations to (in its original place) is often the pre- certain Native American human referred management decision. The range mains, funerary objects, sacred ob- of historic and prehistoric objects found jects, or objects of cultural patrimony in Grand Canyon’s wilderness is wide, with which they are affiliated. All provi- from broken pottery and projectile points sions of implementation specified in to cast iron stoves, tin cans and wooden NAGPRA and its implementing regula- burro panniers. All of these objects are tions will be followed by Grand Canyon. part of the cultural landscape, the archeological site, or the historic re- The possibility of inadvertently discov- source, and are afforded the same ering American Indian human remains, protection as other cultural resources. funerary objects, sacred objects or objects of cultural patrimony within Park Collection of objects, be they historic or wilderness is very real. Although human prehistoric, is not undertaken by archae- remains are rare in the archeological ologists without clear program definition inventory, we acknowledge that human and research orientation. “Park archeological resources are left in situ and 14-144 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

remains could be found anywhere people have lived and traveled. Grand Canyon National Park will enter into agreements with affiliated Tribes regarding inadvertent discoveries. Ongoing consultations with Tribes affiliated with the Canyon suggest that in situ preservation and reburial as close to the original location as possible are preferred. The details related to appropriate treatment under NAGPRA will be included in individual Memoranda of Understanding (MOU). Until such time as individual MOUs are in place, provisions specified in the final rule for NAGPRA §10.4 will be followed.

14.8 Cultural Resource Stewardship

Responsibilities are accomplished by many Park units, with the majority carried out by the Cultural Resource Man- agement Program. The Division of Maintenance is involved in cultural resources preservation through historic structures, trails, and landscapes. The Division of Visitor and Resource Protec- tion is key to cultural resource protection. Through ARPA-related patrols and monitoring efforts with the archeological staff, evaluations and recommendations for management actions are presented to the superintendent.

In addition, the Cultural Resource Pro- gram Manager, serves as liaison with the eight affiliated American Indian Tribes. An active consultation process involves working in cooperation with the affiliated Tribes when proposed management actions have potential impact to cultural resources and values. 14-145 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

14.9 Summary of Changes and Actions

Figure Program Area Management Actions Stewardship 14.1 Responsibilities

Summary of Archeological Resources •Prehistoric Inventory and Monitoring Archaeologist Changes and •Historic Site Protection Wilderness Ranger Actions Site Preservation Trail Crew Education Interpreters

Ethnographic Resources Cultural Resource Manager •Traditional Cultural Properties Consultation Archaeologist •Access Accommodations Education Interpreters

Historic Resources •Buildings, Trails, Inventory and Monitoring Archaeologist Roads, Objects •Cultural Landscapes Site Protection Wilderness Ranger Site Preservation Maintenance Crew Education Interpreters

NAGPRA Consultation Cultural Resource Manager Development of MOU Archaeologist Wilderness Ranger

14-146 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

15-14714-147 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

15.1 Issues and Public . . .nonmembers of the tribe shall be permitted to have access CHAPTER Concerns across such lands at locations 15 ccess to Park lands through the established by the Secretary in area known as the Havasupai consultation with the Tribal Council in order to visit adjacent parklands, Havasupai AAUse Lands was another concern identified during the public scoping process. and with the consent of the tribe, Traditional The majority of concerns were ex- may be permitted (i) to enter and Use Lands pressed by individuals who cross the temporarily utilize lands within the Great Thumb and Esplanade, included reservation in accordance with the within the Havasupai Use Lands, to approved land use plan described Park areas around Royal Arch and in paragraph (4) of this section for Elves Chasm. This chapter addresses recreation purposes or (ii) to pur- access and permitting on Havasupai chase licenses from the tribe to lands adjacent to the Park (See also hunt on reservation lands subject Chapter Five, Backcountry Permits to limitations and regulations System; and Appendix E, Recreational imposed by the Secretary of the Opportunities and Permit Information for Interior. Adjacent Lands). (7) except for the uses permitted in paragraphs 1 through 6 of this 15.2 Background section, the lands hereby transferred to the tribe shall remain The Grand Canyon Enlargement Act of forever wild and no uses shall be 1975 (Public Law 93-620), greatly permitted under the plan which enlarged Grand Canyon National Park detract from the existing scenic and by incorporating Marble Canyon Na- natural values of such lands. tional Monument, Grand Canyon Na- tional Monument, and portions of lands In addition to the description of lands previously administered by the Bureau added to the reservation, Section 10(e) of Land Management and Lake Mead of the Act directed the Secretary of the National Recreation Area into the legal Interior to “permit the tribe to use lands boundaries of Grand Canyon National within Grand Canyon National Park Park. In addition to enlarging the Park, which are designated as Havasupai significant additions were made to the Use Lands.” This provided Havasupai Havasupai Reservation. Section 10 (a) use “for grazing and other traditional of the Act provided an additional purposes” of 95,300 acres of Grand 185,000 acres to be held in trust by the Canyon National Park generally known Federal government for the Havasupai as the Esplanade, and extending Tribe. Subsection (b)(6) of the Act approximately from Royal Arch Creek states on the east to National Canyon on the west.”

15-148 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

15.3 Management of the will not be hunted. Problem predators will be reported to Grand Canyon Havasupai Use Lands National Park management, and a In 1982, Grand Canyon National Park joint and mutually satisfactory solution and the Havasupai Tribe developed a developed. Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) (U.S. Department of the Interior, National • As originally identified in the Act, There may be Park Service 1982a) which governed Havasupai use of the TUL will continue people who feel no need the use of what has become known as for traditional purposes. This includes gathering edible wild plants, materials for nature. the Havasupai traditional use lands They are (TUL). Although the MOU lapsed in for paints and medicines, other legiti- fortunate, 1987, incorporation of the essential mate traditional substances, and perhaps. elements of the agreement into the minimally improving existing springs to but for those of us who feel Wilderness Management Plan will maximize available water for wildlife and visitors in such a manner that the otherwise, who continue to provide guidance to Grand feel something Canyon National Park management and natural and scenic beauty of the TUL is missing the Tribal government regarding use and will not be marred. unless we can access on the TUL. hike across • Grand Canyon National Park will land distrubed limit visitor access to the TUL from the only by our • Both the National Park Service and footsteps the Havasupai Tribe concur that the Havasupai Reservation to two trails or see Tribe retains grazing rights in the TUL leading from the rim: the Apache Point creatures consistent with acceptable range-man- Trail and the 140 Mile Canyon Trail. roaming freely as they have agement practices for the particular Permits will be granted only to experienced hikers who request them. Visi- always done, acreage. we are sure tors remaining overnight in the TUL there should • The Havasupai will not graze sheep in must have Grand Canyon National be the TUL, and horses presently grazing in Park permits, and, to access and/or wilderness. the TUL that are unclaimed will be camp on the Havasupai Reservation, Tribal permits. Grand Canyon National Margaret E. removed by the Havasupai. Havasupai Murie livestock in the TUL will be branded. Park will forward individual permit information to the Tribe whenever • Consistent with traditional use, the overnight hikers access the Park via Havasupai may hunt in the TUL, except Tribal lands. Confirmation of a Tribal in the summer, in such a manner as is permit will be required prior to issuing consistent with acceptable wildlife- a Grand Canyon backcounty permit. management practices, and concurred For the benefit of those visitors permit- in by the Secretary of the Interior. Indi- ted to hike across the Great Thumb to viduals who are not members of the the head of Apache Point and/or 140 Havasupai Tribe will not be permitted to Mile Canyon Trails, the Havasupai hunt in the TUL. Bighorn sheep, preda- Tribe will designate adequate parking tors, and rare and endangered species facilities on the Topocoba Hilltop Road and, by means of a sign, bulletin 15-149 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

board, or other appropriate information •No removal or disturbance of device, inform the visitor of Tribal regu- archeological materials, artifacts, lations to be observed while crossing or ruins the reservation to gain Park access. •No camping at springs, archaeological sites, or around Mt. Sinyella • No vehicular access or use of horses •During foot travel across the Great by non-Tribal members will be permitted Thumb, whether on Tribal or Park on the Great Thumb north of the land, visitors will use what has Topocoba Road and north and west of a been called the Great Thumb Jeep line running south from Forster Canyon, Trail. Camping will be permitted except in an emergency, such as when within 50 yards (45 meters) of the human life is endangered, for forest-fire trail suppression, and for official Park ad- •No permits will be issued to climb ministrative and protective functions. Mt. Sinyella Havasupai Tribal members may guide •Visitors seeking water near 140 nonmembers on Tribal horses in the Mile Canyon should obtain it only TUL. from the spring running along the bottom of the wash at the head of • Numbers of visitors permitted in the 140 Mile Canyon TUL have been determined and are •Visitors must not disturb Tribal consistent with hiker limitations in other livestock areas of the Park. These areas are managed as “wild” zones, with no more 15.4 Native American than two hiking groups and a maximum Graves Protection and of 16 people permitted within the TUL at any given time, with a maximum stay in Repatriation Act each area not to exceed seven nights. Although the provisions related to the Native American Graves Protection • All visitors to the traditional use area, and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) were regardless of route or access, will at all discussed in Chapter Fourteen, men- times abide by NPS regulations and/or tion of law in relation to TUL manage- hiking permit conditions (See Chapter ment is appropriate. The TUL, as land Four, Recreational Use of Wilderness). within Grand Canyon National Park, is In addition, visitors to the traditional use subject to the same provisions regard- area must pay particular attention to the ing implementation of NAGPRA for all following permit conditions other areas of the Park. However, Havasupai traditional use of the TUL •No firearms presents a unique opportunity to work •No open campfires cooperatively with the Tribe in the •No removal of, marking on, or development of appropriate treatment breaking any natural object for human remains and sacred objects discovered within the TUL.

15-150 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

A specific agreement will be developed 15.6 Summary of with the Havasupai Tribe regarding Changes and Actions inadvertent discoveries on the TUL. Although identification of cultural affilia- • Incorporate essential elements of the tion is critical, consultation with the MOU governing the use of the TUL Havasupai and other affected Tribes will including actions related to tradi- be used in drafting a Memorandum of tional uses and visitor access Understanding related specifically to the Havasupai use lands within Grand • Establish a cooperative permitting Canyon National Park. system with the Havasupai Tribe that includes exchange of information on 15.5 Culturally Sensitive requested visitor use of the area, Areas and confirmation on permit issuance from either the Park or the Tribe. Certain reservation and TUL areas hold (See also Chapter 5, Backcountry special meaning to the Havasupai Permit System) people. These areas, discussed in general in Chapter Fourteen as tradi- • Under the provisions of NAGPRA, tional cultural properties, ethnographic develop a specific agreement with resources, and sacred areas, are de- the Havasupai Tribe regarding the fined by the Tribe. Grand Canyon Na- inadvertent discovery of human tional Park will incorporate information remains on the TUL provided by the Tribe in an attempt to protect the physical and spiritual integrity • Under the provisions of EO 13007, of those places and use as defined in incorporate information provided by EO 13007. (See Chapter 14, Cultural the Havasupai Tribe on culturally Resources Management). sensitive areas, and assure accommodation of the traditional use of these areas.

15-151 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

16-151 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

he following is a compilation of Prepare other Park management CHAPTER future and ongoing management plans consistent with the Wilderness TTactions to be taken to fully implement Management Plan. 16 this Wilderness Management Plan. Each management action, described Establish and maintain Park staffing earlier in this Plan, is listed under a levels needed to ensure that wilder- Wilderness corresponding Management Objective ness management responsibilities Management (see Chapter 1, Goals and Objectives). are being met in accordance with the Implementation In addition, the actions are referenced NPS Wilderness Management Plan by the chapter(s) in which they are Guidelines, including the described. A summary table follows Wilderness Steering Committee which outlines the action, target goals, Wilderness Coordinator and staff responsibilities. Wilderness Rangers Wilderness Trail Crew Wilderness Management Plan Goals Management Objective One

1. Provide guidance and describe Establish and implement a permit strategies for meeting legislative system that and policy mandates on wilderness management while providing recre- a) serves the visitor by providing the ational opportunities consistent with opportunity to obtain permits for wilder- wilderness for a broad range of ness and nonwilderness areas that visitor experiences and settings, yield the type of experience they seek and preserving and protecting the natural, cultural, and social re- b) serves Park management by pro- sources of Grand Canyon National viding an effective way to educate the Park. public on low-impact practices, ethics, and safety 2. Provide for the continuity of wilderness management throughout c) serves Park management by pro- changes of park administration and viding data on hiker use levels and staff. distribution in order to make informed decisions regarding the management Actions and protection of backcountry and wilderness resources. Implement wilderness management policies for areas of proposed wilderness in Grand Canyon National Park.

Implement minimum requirement strategy for public and administrative use in Grand Canyon National Park. 16-152 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Actions Management Objective Two Upgrade automated reservation and Two permits system, and improve customer Establish indicators and standards for service by increasing staff, communi- desired visitor experiences, and cations and hours of operation. [Chap- biophysical and cultural resources; ter 5, Backcountry Permit System; monitor regularly the condition of Appendix G, Backcountry Reservation these indicators; and take manage- and Permit System] ment action as necessary to meet these standards. Distribute quarterly wilderness-use statistics to Wilderness District, Trail Actions Crew, Interpretive Staff and Science Center. [Chapter 5, Backcountry Continue Rapid Campsite Assess- Permit System; Chapter 10: Interpreta- ment methodology for campsite tion and Education; Chapter 12, Moni- monitoring. Establish a monitoring toring and Research] schedule based on use statistics and trend information. Conduct baseline Show educational video in the Visitor campsite inventory in new use areas, Contact Stations and the Backcountry and complete inventory in Wild use Office; distribute to permit holders, and areas. [Chapter 6, Campsite Man- interested groups. [Chapter 5, Back- agement; Chapter 12, Monitoring country Permit System; Chapter 10, and Research] Interpretation, Education, and Informa- tion] Implement a monitoring program based on sociological research and In cooperation with the Navajo, Hava- previous monitoring programs. supai and Hualapai Tribes, establish a Focus on users in wilderness areas. cooperative permitting system for use [Chapter 12, Monitoring and Re- on Tribal and Park lands. [Chapter 5, search] Backcountry Permit System; Chapter 15, Havasupai Traditional Use Lands; Conduct archeological survey and Appendix E, Recreational Opportuni- monitoring along popular trails and ties and Permit Information for Adja- campsites in the following areas: cent Lands] Grandview Complex, Hermit-Monu- ment Complex, Thunder River/Deer Creek Complex [Chapter 6, Camp- site Management; Chapter 7, Trails Management; Chapter 12, Monitor- ing and Research; Chapter 14, Cultural Resources Management]

16-153 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Develop and implement action plans Determine eligibility for National for rehabilitation of campsites and Register of Historic Places for the trails in the following use areas: Santa Maria Springs shelter, Signal Horseshoe Mesa, Hermit Creek, Hill Firetower, Kanabownits Cabin, Monument Creek, Upper Tapeats. and the Kanabownits Firetower. Upon [Chapter 6, Campsite Management; completion of this process, a determi- Chapter 7, Trails Management; Chap- nation regarding course of action will ter 12, Monitoring and Research; be made. [Chapter 8, Semi-Primitive Chapter 13, Rehabilitation and Resto- Access and Facilities; Chapter 14, ration of Recreational Impacts] Cultural Resources Management]

Establish designated campsites, and Conduct water quality and flow data rehabilitate impacted areas in the monitoring at wilderness destinations following use areas: Deer Creek, and potential areas of impact on a Cape Final, Point Sublime, Fire Point, cyclic basis. [Chapter 12, Monitoring Swamp Point, and Pasture Wash. and Research Program] [Chapter 6, Campsite Management: Chapter 12, Monitoring and Research; Conduct an inventory of all tributary Chapter 13, Rehabilitation and Resto- streams to quantify flow data and ration of Recreational Impacts] riparian vegetation. Adopt methods for determining suitability of the Develop and implement site data Colorado River and its tributaries for recovery plan for archeological sites inclusion in the National Wild and located in the following use areas: Scenic Rivers System. [Chapter 11, Hermit Creek, Monument Creek, Ecosystem Management; Chapter Horseshoe Mesa, Cottonwood Creek, 12, Monitoring and Research Pro- Clear Creek, Cremation, Tanner. gram] [Chapter 12, Monitoring and Re- search; Chapter 14, Cultural Re- Management Objective sources Management] Three

Establish Semi-Primitive Mechanized Provide access consistent with wilder- Opportunity Class to describe condi- ness values including protection of tions and standards for nonwilderness natural and cultural resources. Pre- primitive road corridors. [Chapter 3, serve the character of individual trails Wilderness Management Planning and establish minimal standards for Framework; Chapter 4, Recreational primitive road maintenance. Uses of Wilderness; Chapter 6, Wil- derness Campsite Management; Chapter 8, Semi-Primitive Access and Facilities]

16-154 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Actions Develop and implement an action plan that establishes the Kanab Restore historic trails in Hermit, Plateau Trail, a ten-mile section of Grandview, and Thunder River/Deer existing road network. This will Creek Complexes. [Chapter 7, Trails connect Kanab Point with the 150 Management; Chapter 8, Semi-Primi- Mile Canyon Road, and involves tive Access and Facilities; Chapter 12, restoration of roads to natural condi- Monitoring and Research; Chapter 14, tions. [Chapter 8, Semi-Primitive Cultural Resources Management] Access and Facilities; Chapter 13, Restoration and Rehabilitation of Conduct cyclic maintenance and Recreational Impacts] rehabilitation of Colorado River trails to backcountry attraction sites. [Chap- Develop and implement an action ter 7, Trails Management; Chapter 12, plan that establishes the Brady Monitoring and Research; Chapter 13, Hollow Trail, a nine-mile section of Rehabilitation and Restoration of severely damaged road known as Recreational Impacts] the Toroweap Point Overlook Road. This will involve restoration of road Develop and implement action plans sections to natural conditions. [Chap- for rehabilitation of rim access trails ter 8, Semi-Primitive Access and including: Tanner, New Hance, South Facilities; Chapter 13, Restoration Bass, South Canyon, and Nankoweap. and Rehabilitation of Recreational Concentrate rehabilitation on upper Impacts] reaches of trail (within Kaibab to Redwall formations). [Chapter 7, Trails Develop and implement an action Management; Chapter 13, Rehabilita- plan that establishes the Cove Trail, tion and Restoration of Recreational a ten-mile section of road to the Impacts] Cove. [Chapter 8, Semi-Primitive Access and Facilities; Chapter 13, Upgrade condition of Old Bright Angel Restoration and Rehabilitation of from a route to primitive trail stan- Recreational Impacts] dards. [Chapter 7, Trails Manage- ment] Restore to a natural condition: a) two primitive roads north of New Water Develop and implement action plan to Springs on the Hook, b) the Huitzal establish a trail on the old road align- Spur Road, and c) the Toroweap ment from Desert View to Cape Soli- Valley landfill and access road. tude. [Chapter 7, Trails Management; [Chapter 8, Semi-Primitive Access Chapter 8, Semi-Primitive Access and and Facilities; Chapter 13, Restora- Facilities; Chapter 13, Rehabilitation tion and Rehabilitation of Recre- and Restoration of Recreational Im- ational Impacts] pacts]

16-155 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Develop and implement an action development of minimum impact trail plan to relocate 1.4 miles of trail maintenance techniques and fire across the Basin. Restore the Basin suppression tactics; 6) development section of the old W-1 to a natural of wilderness safety practices and 7) condition. [Chapter 7, Trails Manage- development of appropriate medical ment; Chapter 7, Semi-Primitive response skills. [Chapter 9, Safety Access and Facilities; Chapter 13, and Emergency Operations; Chapter Rehabilitation and Restoration of 10, Interpretation, Education, and Recreational Impacts] Information; Appendix D, Minimum Requirement Decision Process] Management Objective Four Management Objective Five Establish a coordinated interpretive/ educational program to provide hikers Provide, through partnerships with adequate information to plan and adjacent land-managing agencies, execute an enjoyable and safe expedi- information on wilderness and nonwil- tion, whether hiking for a day or for an derness recreational opportunities on extended period, and to conduct them- adjacent lands, including National selves in a manner which is not dam- Forest Service, Bureau of Land Man- aging to wilderness resources and agement, State, and Tribal lands. values. Actions Actions Provide information on recreational Establish a public Interpretive Pro- opportunities outside the Park. gram which provides relevant, pre-trip [Chapter 4, Recreational Use of information and focuses on wilderness Wilderness; Chapter 5, Backcountry values, personal safety, and resource Permit System; Chapter 15, Havasu- protection. [Chapter 5, Backcountry pai Traditional Use Lands; Appendix Permit System; Chapter 9, Safety and E, Recreational Opportunities and Emergency Operations; Chapter 10, Permit Information for Adjacent Interpretation, Education, and Informa- Lands] tion] In cooperation with the Navajo, Hava- Establish a coordinated, interagency supai and Hualapai Tribes, establish wilderness educational program for a cooperative permitting system for staff which includes 1) wilderness use on Tribal and Park lands. [Chap- management principles and philoso- ter 5, Backcountry Permit System; phy; 2) Leave No Trace training; 3) Chapter 15, Havasupai Traditional application of the minimum require- Use Lands; Appendix E, Recreational ment concept; 4) development profi- Opportunities and Permit Information ciency in the use of primitive tools; 5) for Adjacent Lands] 16-156 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Management Objective Six Evaluate the tools and methods of scientific study for impacts on the Provide a reasonable level of public character of the wilderness. Take safety, consistent with wilderness areas reasonable efforts to minimize in accordance with NPS Management impacts while maximizing the benefit Policies and Park guidelines. of scientific investigations by applying the minimum requirement deci- Actions sion process. [Chapter 12, Monitor- ing and Research; Appendix D, Establish a coordinated public Inter- Minimum Requirement Decision pretive Program which provides rel- Process] evant, pre-trip information and focuses on wilderness values, personal safety, Management Objective and resource protection. [Chapter 9, Eight Safety and Emergency Operations; Chapter 10, Interpretation, Education, Develop, through partnerships with and Information] adjacent land-management agencies, conservation organizations, and Distribute educational video to the institutes of higher learning, an inter- Visitor Center, permit holders, and agency ecosystem-management interested groups. [Chapter 5, Back- strategy. The strategy will emphasize country Permit System; Chapter 10, restoration and maintenance of Interpretation, Education, and Informa- natural processes, and viable population.] tions of all native species in natural patterns of abundance and distribu- Management Objective tion. Seven Actions Encourage research which adds to an understanding of the Park and contrib- In the revision of the Fire Manage- utes to the body of knowledge required ment Plan address 1) the restoration for effective management and protec- of the natural fire regime in wilder- tion of wilderness resources and val- ness areas, 2) the protection and ues. preservation of genetic integrity, and 3) strategies for restoration, en- Actions hancement and protection of threatened or endangered species. [Chap- Expand the Parks research program ter 11, Ecosystem Management] to obtain accurate information about the Grand Canyons resources, ecological processes and human influences. [Chapter 11, Ecosystem Man- agement] 16-157 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Develop partnership programs to 1) Adopt methods for determining maintain long-term viable carnivore suitability of the Colorado River and populations, 2) address the control of its tributaries for inclusion in the nonnative plant and animal species, 3) National Wild and Scenic Rivers facilitate the design and implementa- System. [Chapter 11, Ecosystem tion of studies for the reintroduction of Management; Chapter 12, Monitoring extirpated species, and 4) facilitate and Research Program] the design and implementation of a wildlife conservation strategy. [Chapter 11, Ecosystem Management]

Figure Action Target Responsible Work 16.1 Date Units and Partners Implementation 1. Upgrade automated permits system, FY98 Backcountry Office Schedule improve communications, increase staffing and hours of operation.

2. Use area changes: boundaries, use FY98 Backcountry Office limits, and classification. Wilderness District

3. Produce and distribute educational FY98 Backcountry Office video. Interpretation

4. Distribute quarterly wilderness use Ongoing Backcountry Office reports to Park work units.

5. Establish cooperative permit system FY99 Backcountry Office with Navajo, Havasupai, and Hualapai Tribes.

6. Conduct baseline campsite inventory in FY00 Wilderness District new use areas; complete inventory of Science Center Primitive and Wild use areas.

7. Conduct sociological monitoring FY00 Science Center program.

8. Conduct archeological survey and FY99 Science Center monitoring along popular trails and Wilderness District campsites.

16-158 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Action Target Responsible Work Figure Date Units and Partners 16.1 9. Develop and implement actions plans Trail Crew Implementation for rehabilitation of designated camp- Wilderness District Schedule sites and trails: Science Center (Continued) a. Horseshoe Mesa FY99 b. Hermit Creek FY99 c. Monument Creek FY99 d. Upper Tapeats FY99

10. Establish designated campsites and Trail Crew rehabilitate impacted areas for: Wilderness District a. Deer Creek FY98 Science Center b. Cape Final FY98 c. Point Sublime FY98 d. Fire Point and Swamp Point FY98 e. Pasture Wash FY98

11. Develop and implement site data Science Center recovery plans for: Wilderness District a. Horseshoe Mesa FY99 b. Hermit Creek FY99 c. Monument Creek FY99 d. Cottonwood Creek FY00 e. Tanner FY00 f. Cremation FY01 g. Clear Creek FY01

12. Evaluate significance and determine Science Center eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places for: a. Santa Maria Springs Shelter FY00 b. Signal Hill Firetower FY00 c. Kanabownits Cabin FY00 d. Kanabownits Firetower FY00

13. Conduct cyclic water quality and flow Annual Science Center data monitoring at potential areas of impact including Hermit Creek, Deer Creek, Tapeats Creek, Horn Creek, and Monument Creek

14. Conduct inventory of all tributary FY00 Science Center streams to quantify flow data and River District riparian vegetation.

16-159 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Figure Action Target Responsible Work 16.1 Date Units and Partners Implementation 15. Develop and implement action plans for Science Center Schedule historic trail restoration: Trail Crew (Continued) a. Hermit Complex FY99 Wilderness District b. Grandview Complex FY99 c. Thunder River/Deer Creek Complex FY99

16. Conduct cyclic maintenance and rehabili- Annual Trail Crew tation of Colorado River trails to attraction Wilderness District sites. River District Science Center

17. Develop and implement action plans for Trail Crew rehabilitation of rim access trails: Science Center a. Tanner FY00 Wilderness District b. New Hance FY00 U.S. Forest Service c. South Bass FY00 d. South Canyon FY01 e. Nankoweap FY01

18. Upgrade condition of Old Bright Angel FY00 Trail Crew Trail from a route to primitive trail stan- Corridor District dards. Science Center

19. Develop and implement action plan to establish trails on the old road align- Science Center ments: Trail Crew a. Desert View to Cape Solitude FY99 North Rim District b. Kanab Point to 150 Mile Canyon FY00 Road c. 9 miles of Toroweap Point Overlook FY00 Road d. 10 miles of road to The Cove FY00

20. Restore to natural conditions: a. Two roads north of New Water FY00 Science Center Springs on the Hook Wilderness District b. Huitzal Spur road FY01 Lake Mead NRA c. Vulcan Spur road FY01 Bureau of Land Management d. Toroweap landfill and access road FY01

21. Develop and implement action plan to FY00 Science Center relocate trail across the Basin. Restore North Rim District old W-1 road to natural condition. Road and Trail Crews

16-160 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Action Target Responsible Work Figure Date Units and Partners 16.1 22. Establish public Interpretive Program on FY99 Interpretation Implementation wilderness values, personal safety and Wilderness District Schedule resource protection. Backcountry Office (Continued) Grand Canyon Association Field Institute National Outdoor Leadership School (NOLS)

23. Establish interagency wilderness FY99 Interpretation education program for staff. Arthur Carhart National Wilderness Training Center National Outdoor Leadership School (NOLS)

24. Expand research program. FY02 Science Center Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center

25. Develop partnership programs which Science Center address a. viable carnivore populations FY04 b. control of nonnative species Ongoing c. studies for reintroduction of FY98 extirpated species d. wildlife conservation strategy FY04

26. Conduct suitability study for Colorado FY03 Science Center River and tributaries for inclusion in the River District National Wild and Scenic Rivers Sys- Grand Canyon Association tem. Field Institute

16-161 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Public Law 88-577 can people in such manner as will leave Appendix (16 U.S. C. 1131-1136) them unimpaired for future use and 88th Congress, Second Session enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to A September 3, 1964 provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilder- AN ACT ness character, and for the gathering Wilderness and dissemination of information Act of o establish a National Wilderness regarding their use and enjoyment as 1964 Preservation System for the perma- wilderness; and no Federal lands shall TTnent good of the whole people, and for be designated as wilderness areas other purposes. Be it enacted by the except as provided for in this Act or by Senate and House of Representatives a subsequent Act. of the United States of America in Congress assembled. (b) The inclusion of an area in the National Wilderness Preservation Short Title System notwithstanding, the area shall continue to be managed by the Depart- SECTION 1. This Act may be cited as ment and agency having jurisdiction the Wilderness Act. thereover immediately before its inclusion in the National Wilderness Preser- WILDERNESS SYSTEM vation System unless otherwise pro- ESTABLISHED vided by Act of Congress. No appro- STATEMENT OF POLICY priation shall be available for payment of expenses or salaries for the adminis- SECTION 2.(a) In order to assure that tration of the National Wilderness an increasing population, accompanied Preservation System as a separate unit by expanding settlement and growing nor shall any appropriations be avail- mechanization, does not occupy and able for additional personnel stated as modify all areas within the United States being required solely for the purpose of and its possessions, leaving no lands managing or administering areas solely designated for preservation and protec- because they are included within the tion in their natural condition, it is hereby National Wilderness Preservation declared to be the policy of the Con- System. gress to secure for the American people of present and future generations the DEFINITION OF WILDERNESS benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness. For this purpose there is (c) A wilderness, in contrast with those hereby established a National Wilder- areas where man and his works domi- ness Preservation System to be com- nate the landscape, is hereby recog- posed of federally owned areas desig- nized as an area where the earth and nated by the Congress as wilderness its community of life are untrammeled areas, and these shall be administered by man, where man himself is a visitor for the use and enjoyment of the Ameri- who does not remain. An area of A-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

wilderness is further defined to mean in legal descriptions and maps may be this Act an area of undeveloped Federal made. land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improve- (2) Maintain, available to the public, ments or human habitation, which is records pertaining to said wilderness protected and managed so as to pre- areas, including maps and legal de- serve its natural conditions and which (1) scriptions, copies of regulations gov- generally appears to have been affected erning them, copies of public notices primarily by the forces of nature, with the of, and reports submitted to Congress imprint of mans work substantially regarding pending additions, elimina- unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding oppor- tions, or modifications. Maps, legal tunities for solitude or a primitive and descriptions, and regulations pertain- unconfined type of recreation; (3) has at ing to wilderness areas within their least five thousand acres of land or is of respective jurisdictions also shall be sufficient size as to make practicable its available to the public in the offices of preservation and use in an unimpaired regional foresters, national forest condition; and (4) may also contain supervisors, and forest rangers. ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or (b) The Secretary of Agriculture shall, historical value. within ten years after the enactment of this Act, review, as to its suitability or NATIONAL WILDERNESS nonsuitability for preservation as PRESERVATION SYSTEM wilderness, each area in the national EXTENT OF SYSTEM forests classified on the effective date of this Act by the Secretary of Agricul- SECTION 3.(a) All areas within the ture or the Chief of the Forest Service national forests classified at least 30 as primitive and report his findings to days before the effective date of this Act the President. The President shall by the Secretary of Agriculture or the advise the United States Senate and Chief of the Forest Service as wilder- House of Representatives of his ness, wild, or canoe are hereby recommendations with respect to the designated as wilderness areas. The designation as wilderness or other Secretary of Agriculture shall reclassification of each area on which (1) Within one year after the effective review has been completed, together date of this Act, file a map and legal with maps and a definition of bound- description of each wilderness area with aries. Such advice shall be given with the interior and Insular Affairs Commit- respect to not less than one-third of all tees of the United States Senate and the the areas now classified as primitive House of Representatives, and such within three years after the enactment descriptions shall have the same force of this Act, and the remaining areas and effect as if included in this Act: within ten years after the enactment of Provided, however, That correction of this Act. Each recommendation of the clerical and typographical errors in such President for designation as wilder- A-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

ness shall become effective only if so and other units of the national park provided by an Act of Congress. Areas system and every such area of, and classified as primitive on the effective every roadless island within, the na- date of this Act shall continue to be tional wildlife refuges and game administered under the rules and regu- ranges, under his jurisdiction on the lations affecting such areas on the effective date of this Act and shall effective date of this Act until Congress report to the President his recommen- has determined otherwise. Any such dation as to the suitability or nonsuit- area may be increased in size by the ability of each such area or island for President at the time he submits his preservation as wilderness. The Presi- recommendations to the Congress by dent shall advise the President of the not more than five thousand acres with Senate and the Speaker of the House no more than one thousand two hundred of Representatives of his recommenda- acres in any one compact unit; if it is tion with respect o the designation as proposed to increase the size of any wilderness of each such area or island such area by more than five thousand on which review has been completed, acres or by more than one thousand two together with a map thereof and a hundred and eighty acres in any one definition of its boundaries. Such compact unit the increase in size shall advice shall be given with respect to not become effective until acted upon by not less than one-third of the areas and Congress. Nothing herein contained islands to be reviewed under this shall limit the President in proposing, as subsection within three years after part of his recommendations to Con- enactment of this Act, not less than two- gress, the alteration of existing bound- thirds within seven years of enactment aries of primitive areas or recommend- of this Act, and the remainder within ten ing the addition of any contiguous area years of enactment of this Act. A rec- of national forest lands predominantly of ommendation of the President for wilderness value. Notwithstanding any designation as wilderness shall be- other provisions of this Act, the Secre- come effective only if so provided by an tary of Agriculture may complete his Act of Congress. Nothing contained review and delete such areas as may herein shall, by implication or other- be necessary, but not to exceed seven wise, be construed to lessen the thousand acres, from the southern tip of present statutory authority of the Secre- the Gore Range-Eagles Nest Primitive tary of the Interior with respect to the Area, Colorado, if the Secretary deter- maintenance of roadless areas within mines that such action is in the public units of the national park system. interest. (d)(1) The Secretary of Agriculture and (c) Within ten years after the effective the Secretary of the Interior shall, prior date of this Act the Secretary of the to submitting any recommendations to Interior shall review every roadless area the President with respect to the suit- of five thousand contiguous acres or ability of any area for preservation as more in the national parks, monuments, wilderness A-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

(A) give such public notice of the pro- proposal and public hearing or hear- posed action as they deem appropriate, ings as provided in subsection (d) of including publication in the Federal this section. The proposed modifica- Register and in a newspaper having tion or adjustment shall then be recom- general circulation in the area or areas mended with map and description in the vicinity of the affected land; thereof to the President. The Presi- dent shall advise the United States (B) hold a public hearing or hearings at Senate and the House of Representa- a location or locations convenient to the tives of his recommendations with area affected. The hearings shall be respect to such modification or adjust- announced through such means as the ment and such recommendations shall respective Secretaries involved deem become effective only in the same appropriate, including notices in the manner as provided for in subsections Federal Register and in newspapers of (b) and (c) of this section. general circulation in the area: Provided. That if the lands involved are located in USE OF WILDERNESS AREAS more than one State, at least one hearing shall be held in each State in which a SECTION 4. (a) The purposes of this portion of the land lies; Act are hereby declared to be within and supplemental to the purposes for (C) at least thirty days before the date of which national forests and units of the a hearing advise the Governor of each national park and wildlife refuge sys- State and the governing board of each tems are established and adminis- county, or in Alaska the borough, in tered and which the lands are located, and Federal departments and agencies concerned, (1) Nothing in this Act shall be deemed and invite such officials and Federal to be in interference with the purpose agencies to submit their views on the for which national forests are estab- proposed action at the hearing or by not lished as set forth in the Act of June 4, later than thirty days following the date of 1897 (30 Stat. 11), and the Multiple- the hearing. Use Sustained-Yield Act of June 12, 1960 (74 Stat. 215). (2) Any views submitted to the appropri- (2) Nothing in this Act shall modify the ate Secretary under the provisions of (1) restrictions and provisions of the of this subsection with respect to any Shipstead-Nolan Act (Public Law 539, area shall be included with any recom- Seventy-first Congress, July 10, 1930; mendations to the President and to 46 Stat. 1020), the Thye-Blatnik Act Congress with respect to such area. (Public Law 733, Eightieth Congress, June 2, 1948; 62 Stat. 568), and the (e) Any modification or adjustment of Humphrey-Thye-Blatnik-Andresen Act boundaries of any wilderness area shall (Public Law 607, Eighty-fourth Con- be recommended by the appropriate gress, June 22, 1956; 70 Stat. 326), Secretary after public notice of such as applying to the Superior National A-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Forest or the regulations of the Secre- enterprise and no permanent road tary of Agriculture. within any wilderness area designated (3) Nothing in this Act shall modify the by this Act and except as necessary to statutory authority under which units of meet minimum requirements for the the national park system are created. administration of the area for the pur- Further, the designation of any area of pose of this Act (including measures any park, monument, or other unit of the required in emergencies involving the national park system as a wilderness health and safety of persons within the area pursuant to this Act shall in no area), there shall be no temporary road, manner lower the standards evolved for no use of motor vehicles, motorized the use and preservation of such park, equipment or motorboats, no landing of monument, or other unit of the national aircraft, no other form of mechanical park system in accordance with the Act transport, and no structure or installa- of August 25, 1916, the statutory author- tion within any such area. ity under which the area was created, or any other Act of Congress which might SPECIAL PROVISIONS pertain to or affect such area, including, but not limited to, the Act of June 8, (d) The following special provisions are 1906 (34 Stat. 225; 16 U.S.C. 432 et hereby made: seq.); section 3(2) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796 (2); and the Act of (1) Within wilderness areas designated August 21, 1935 (49 Stat. 666; 16 by this Act the use of aircraft or motor- U.S.C. 461 et seq.). boats, where these uses have already (b) Except as otherwise provided in this become established, may be permitted Act, each agency administering any to continue subject to such restrictions area designated as wilderness shall be as the Secretary of Agriculture deems responsible for preserving the wilder- desirable. In addition, such measure ness character of the area and shall so may be taken as may be necessary in administer such area for such other the control of fire, insects, and dis- purposes for which it may have been eases, subject to such conditions as established as also to preserve its the Secretary deems desirable. wilderness character. Except as other- (2) Nothing in this Act shall prevent wise provided in this Act, wilderness within national forest wilderness areas areas shall be devoted to the public any activity, including prospecting, for purposes of recreational, scenic, scien- the purpose of gathering information tific, educational, conservation, and about mineral or other resources, if historical use. such activity is carried on in a manner compatible with the preservation of the PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN USES wilderness environment. Furthermore, in accordance with such program as (c) Except as specifically provided for in the Secretary of the Interior shall de- this Act, and subject to existing private velop and conduct in consultation with rights, there shall be no commercial the Secretary of Agriculture, such areas A-5 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

shall be surveyed on a planned, recur- the mining laws of the United States ring basis consistent with the concept of affecting national forest lands desig- wilderness preservation by the Geologi- nated by this Act as wilderness areas cal Survey and the Bureau of Mines to shall convey title to the mineral depos- determine the mineral values, if any, that its within the claim, together with the may be present; and the results of such right to cut and use so much of the surveys shall be made available to the mature timber therefrom as may be public and submitted to the President needed in the extraction, removal, and and Congress. Mineral leases, claims, beneficiation of the mineral deposits, if etc. the timber is not otherwise reasonably (3) Notwithstanding any other provisions available, and if the timber is cut under of this Act, until midnight December 31, sound principles of forest manage- 1983, the United States mining laws and ment as defined by the national forest all laws pertaining to mineral leasing rules and regulations, but each such shall, to the same extent as applicable patent shall reserve to the United prior to the effective date of this Act, States all title in or to the surface of the extend to those national forest lands lands and products thereof, and no use designated by this Act as wilderness of the surface of the claim or the re- areas; subject, however, to such rea- sources therefrom not reasonably sonable regulations governing ingress required for carrying on mining or and egress as may be prescribed by the prospecting shall be allowed except as Secretary of Agriculture consistent with otherwise expressly provided in this the use of the land for mineral location Act: Provided, That, unless hereafter and development and exploration, specifically authorized, no patent within drilling, and production, and use of land wilderness areas designated by this for transmission lines, waterlines, tele- Act shall issue after December 31, phone lines, or facilities necessary in 1983, except for the valid claims exploring, drilling, production, mining, existing on or before December 31, and processing operations, including 1983. Mining claims located after the where essential the use of mechanized effective date of this Act within the ground or air equipment and restoration boundaries of wilderness areas desig- as near as practicable of the surface of nated by this Act shall create no rights the land disturbed in performing pros- in excess of those rights which may be pecting, location, and, in oil and gas patented under the provisions of this leasing, discovery work, exploration, subsection. Mineral leases, permits, drilling, and production, as soon as they and licenses covering lands within have served their purpose. Mining national forest wilderness areas desig- locations lying within the boundaries of nated by this Act shall contain such said wilderness areas shall be held and reasonable stipulations as may be used solely for mining or processing prescribed by the Secretary of Agricul- operations and uses reasonably incident ture for the protection of the wilderness thereto; and hereafter, subject to valid character of the land consistent with existing rights, all patents issued under the use of the land for the purposes for A-6 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

which they are leased, permitted, or strictions on other uses, including that licensed. Subject to valid rights then of timber, the primitive character of the existing, effective January 1, 1984, the area, particularly in the vicinity of lakes, minerals in lands designated by this Act streams, and portages: Provided, That as wilderness areas are withdrawn from nothing in this Act shall preclude the all forms of appropriation under the continuance within the area of any mining laws and from disposition under already established use of motorboats. all laws pertaining to mineral leasing (6) Commercial services may be and all amendments thereto. performed within the wilderness areas (4) Within wilderness areas in the na- designated by this Act to the extent tional forests designated by this Act, (1) necessary for activities which are the President may, within a specific proper for realizing the recreational or area and in accordance with such other wilderness purposes of the areas. regulations as he may deem desirable, (7) Nothing in this Act shall constitute authorize prospecting for water re- an express or implied claim or denial sources, the establishment and mainte- on the part of the Federal Government nance of reservoirs, water-conservation as to exemption from State water laws. works, power projects, transmission (8) Nothing in this Act shall be con- lines, and other facilities needed in the strued as affecting the jurisdiction or public interest, including the road con- responsibilities of the several States struction and maintenance essential to with respect to wildlife and fish in the development and use thereof, upon his national forests. determination that such use or uses in the specific area will better serve the STATE AND PRIVATE LANDS WITHIN interests of the United States and the WILDERNESS AREAS people thereof than will its denial; and (2) the grazing of livestock, where SECTION 5.(a) In any case where established prior to the effective date of State-owned or privately owned land is this Act, shall be permitted to continue completely surrounded by national subject to such reasonable regulations forest lands within areas designated by as are deemed necessary by the Secre- this Act as wilderness, such State or tary of Agriculture. private owner shall be given such rights (5) Other provisions of this Act to the as may be necessary to assure ad- contrary notwithstanding, the manage- equate access to such State-owned or ment of the Boundary Waters Canoe privately owned land by such State or Area, formerly designated as the Supe- private owner and their successors in rior, Little Indian Sioux, and Caribou interest, or the State-owned land or Roadless Areas, in the Superior Na- privately owned land shall be ex- tional Forest, Minnesota, shall be in changed for federally owned land in the accordance with regulations established same State of approximately equal by the Secretary of Agriculture in accor- value under authorities available to the dance with the general purpose of Secretary of Agriculture: Provided, maintaining, without unnecessary re- however, That the United States shall A-7 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

not transfer to a State or private owner involved. Regulations with regard to any mineral interests unless the State or any such land may be in accordance private owner relinquishes or causes to with such agreements, consistent with be relinquished to the United States the the policy of this Act, as are made at mineral interest in the surrounded land. the time of such gift, or such conditions, consistent with such policy, as (b) In any case where valid mining may be included in, and accepted with, claims or other valid occupancies are such bequest. wholly within a designated national forest wilderness area, the Secretary of (b) The Secretary of Agriculture or the Agriculture shall, by reasonable regula- Secretary of the Interior is authorized tions consistent with the preservation of to accept private contributions and the area as wilderness, permit ingress gifts to be used to further the purposes and egress to such surrounded areas by of this Act. means which have been or are being customarily enjoyed with respect to other ANNUAL REPORTS such areas similarly situated. (c) Subject to the appropriation of funds SECTION 7. At the opening of each by Congress, the Secretary of Agricul- session of Congress, the Secretaries ture is authorized to acquire privately of Agriculture and Interior shall jointly owned land within the perimeter of any report to the President for transmis- area designated by this Act as wilder- sion to Congress on the status of the ness if (1) the owner concurs in such wilderness system including a list and acquisition or (2) the acquisition is descriptions of the areas in the sys- specifically authorized by Congress. tem, regulations in effect, and other pertinent information, together with any GIFTS, BEQUESTS, AND recommendations they may care to CONTRIBUTIONS make.

SECTION 6.a) The Secretary of Agricul- Approved September 3, 1964. ture may accept gifts or bequests of land within wilderness areas designated by Legislative History this Act for preservation as wilderness. The Secretary of Agriculture may also House Reports: No. 1538 accompanying H.R. 9070 (Committee on Interior & Insular Affairs) accept gifts or bequests of land adjacent and No. 1829 (Committee of Conference). to wilderness areas designated by this Senate Report: No. 109 (Committee on Interior Act for preservation as wilderness if he & Insular Affairs). Congressional Record: Vol. 109 (1963): April 4, 8, considered in Senate. has given sixty days advance notice April 9, considered and passed Senate. thereof to the President of the Senate Vol. 110 (1964): July 28, considered in House. and the Speaker of the House of Repre- July 30, considered and passed House, amended, in lieu of H.R. 9070. sentatives. Land accepted by the Sec- August 20, House and Senate agreed to retary of Agriculture under this section conference report. shall become part of the wilderness area A-8 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Management Policies The following characteristics are used Appendix U.S. Department of the Interior in the Wilderness Act to define and National Park Service describe a wilderness area. Wilder- B 1988 ness is an area

[Editors Note: Chapter references at the end of where the earth and its community of NPS each section refer to chapters of NPS Manage- ment Policies.] life are untrammeled by man, where Management man himself is a visitor who does not remain Policies he National Park Service will 1988 manage wilderness areas for the of undeveloped federal land retaining TTuse and enjoyment as the American TT its primeval character and influence, people in such manner as will leave Chapter 6 without permanent improvements or them unimpaired for future use and Wilderness human habitation enjoyment as wilderness. Management Management Management will include the protection of these which generally appears to have and areas, the preservation of their wilder- been affected primarily by the forces of Preservation ness character, and the gathering and nature, with the imprint of mans work dissemination of information regarding substantially unnoticeable their use and enjoyment as wilderness. Public purpose of wilderness will in- which is protected and managed so clude recreation, scenic preservation, as to preserve its natural conditions scientific study, education, conservation, and historical use. which has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and uncon- The NPS wilderness management fined type of recreation policies are based on statutory provisions of the 1916 NPS Organic Act (16 which has at least five thousand USC 1 et seq.), and legislation estab- acres of land or is of sufficient size to lishing individual units of the national make practicable its preservation and park system. use in an unimpaired condition Although these policies are intended to which may also contain ecological, establish consistent servicewide direc- geological, or other features of scien- tion for the preservation, management, tific, educational, scenic, or historical and use of wilderness, certain policies value may be superseded by statutory provisions that apply to individual wilderness areas, by rights reserved by former landowners, and in Alaska, by applicable provisions of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA, 16 USC 3101 et seq.).

B-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

These attributes serve both as stan- substantially unnoticeable or their dards for studying areas and evaluating wilderness character could be re- their suitability for inclusion in the na- stored through appropriate manage- tional wilderness preservation system ment actions. and as objectives to guide NPS actions pertaining to the preservation and use of An area will not be excluded from a wilderness areas. wilderness recommendation solely because established or proposed Wilderness Reviews management practices require the use of tools, equipment, or structures if The National Park Service will continue those practices are necessary for the to review areas that qualify for wilder- health and safety of wilderness travel- ness study, consistent with provision of ers or protection of the wilderness the Wilderness Act and subsequent area. legislation directing that wilderness studies be made. Lands will not be excluded from a wilderness recommendation solely Wilderness studies will be supported by because of prior rights or privileges, appropriate documentation of compli- such as grazing and stock driveways, ance with the National Environmental provided these operations do not Policy Act (42 USC 4371 et seq.) and involve the routine use of motorized or the National Historic Preservation Act mechanical equipment and do not (16 USC 470 et seq.). involve development and structures to such an extent that the human imprint (See Park Planning Process and is substantially noticeable. Products 2:4) Lands subject to mineral exploration Criteria for Recommended and development should be recom- Wilderness mended for wilderness only if it is likely that mineral rights will be relinquished, Lands and waters found to possess the acquired, exchanged, or otherwise characteristics and values of wilderness, eliminated in the foreseeable future. as defined in the Wilderness Act, will be studied for recommendation to Con- Lands containing aboveground utility gress for wilderness designation. lines will not be recommended for wilderness. Areas containing under- Lands that have been logged, farmed, ground utility lines may be included if grazed, or otherwise utilized in ways not the area otherwise qualifies as wilder- involving extensive development or ness and the maintenance of the utility alteration of the landscape will be con- line does not require the routine use of sidered for wilderness if at the time of mechanized and motorized equip- study the effects of these activities are ment. No new utility lines may be

B-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

installed in wilderness, and existing tial wilderness areas will become utility lines may not be extended or designed wilderness upon the enlarged. Secretarys determination, published in the Federal Register, that they have Historic features that are primary met the qualifications for designation. attractions for park visitors will not be recommended for wilderness. How- (See General Policy 6:3, Mineral ever, an area that attracts visitors Development 6:10) primarily for the enjoyment of solitude and unconfined recreation in a primitive Wilderness Management setting may also contain historic features and still be included in wilderness. General Policy Typical historic features that may be included are archeological sites, his- For the purposes of these policies, the toric trails, travel routes, battle sites, term wilderness includes the catego- and minor structures. Historic trails may ries of designated wilderness, potential serve and be maintained as part of the wilderness, and recommended/study wilderness trail system. However, if the wilderness, and these policies apply planned scope and standard of mainte- regardless of category. Designated nance would result in the imprint of wilderness is wilderness that has been mans work being substantially notice- established by Congress; potential able, the trail or other feature should not wilderness is wilderness that has been be included in wilderness. authorized by Congress but not yet established due to temporary incom- (See Management Zoning 2:7, Land patible conditions; recommended/study Protection Plans 3:1, Mineral Devel- wilderness is in an area that has been opment 6:10, Mineral Development recommended to Congress, or is being 8:12, Grazing 8:14, Trails and Walks studied for recommendation, for estab- (9:9) lishment as wilderness. Caves with all entrances in wilderness will be man- Potential Wilderness aged as wilderness.

A wilderness review may identify lands Wherever a wilderness area is desig- that are surrounded by or adjacent to nated within a park, the preservation of lands proposed for wilderness desig- wilderness character and resources nation but that do not themselves becomes an additional statutory pur- qualify for immediate designation due pose of the park. Within a designated to temporary incompatible conditions. wilderness area, the preservation of The legislative proposal may recom- wilderness character and resources mend these lands for future inclusion in while providing for appropriate use is wilderness when the incompatible the primary management responsibility condition has been removed. If so (other than activities related to the authorized by Congress, these poten- saving of human life). Activities to B-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

achieve all other statutory purposes of tions and will encourage, sponsor, and an area designated as wilderness will participate in intra-agency and inter- be carried out in accordance with appli- agency workshops and seminars cable provisions of the Wilderness Act designed to promote the sharing of so as to preserve wilderness resources ideas, concerns, and techniques and character. The establishment of related to wilderness management. wilderness within a park will in no manner lower the standards evolved for the (See Management Zoning 2:7, Land use and preservation of that area under Protection Plans 3:1, Potential Wil- other statutes. derness 6:3)

The National Park Service will manage Responsibility areas of potential wilderness as wilderness, to the extent that existing noncon- NPS responsibility for carrying out forming uses will allow, and will seek to wilderness preservation mandates will eliminate the temporary conditions that be shared by the Director, regional preclude wilderness designation. directors, and superintendents of parks with designated, potential, or The Park Service will take no action that recommended\study wilderness. would diminish the wilderness suitability Interagency cooperation and coordina- of an area recommended for wilderness tion and training responsibilities will study or for wilderness designation until also be carried out at the Washington, the legislative process has been com- region, and park levels. Wilderness pleted. Until that process has been management coordinators will be completed, management decisions assigned at each of these administra- pertaining to recommended wilderness tive levels to carry out these responsi- and wilderness study areas will be made bilities effectively and to facilitate in expectation of eventual wilderness efforts to seek servicewide and inter- designation. agency consistency in wilderness management techniques. All categories of wilderness lands will be classified as natural zones. A wilderness Wilderness Management Plan subzone may be used if such a designation will facilitate or support planning The superintendent of each park activities or management actions. containing wilderness will develop and maintain a wilderness management The National Park Service will seek to plan to guide the preservation, man- achieve consistency in wilderness agement, and use of that wilderness. management objectives, techniques, This plan may be developed as a and practices, on both a servicewide separate document or as an action and an interagency basis. The Service component of another appropriate will seek to maintain effective intra- management plan, such as the general agency and interagency communica- management plan or backcountry B-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

management plan, and it will be sup- safety concerns will be considered ported by appropriate documentation of before, and given significantly more compliance with the National Environ- weight than, economic efficiency. If mental Policy Act and the National some compromise of wilderness Historic Preservation Act. The plan will resources or character is unavoidable, be developed with public involvement only those actions that have localized, and will contain specific, measurable short-term adverse impacts will be management objectives that address acceptable. the preservation of wilderness-dependent cultural and natural resources and Administrative use of motorized equip- values in order to achieve the public ment or mechanical transport, including purposes specified by the Wilderness motorboats and aircraft, will be autho- Act and other appropriate legislation. rized in accordance with the parks wilderness management plan only (1) if (See Park Planning Process and determined by the superintendent to be Products 2:4) the minimum tool needed by management to achieve the purposes of the Management Techniques area, or (2) in emergency situations involving human health or safety or the The Wilderness Act generally prohibits protection of wilderness values. Such motorized equipment or mechanized management activities will be con- transport in designated wilderness ducted in accordance with all appli- areas; however, it allows them as cable regulations, policies, and guide- necessary to meet minimum require- lines and, where practicable, will be ments for the administration of the area scheduled to avoid creating adverse for the purpose of this Act. In protecting resource impacts or conflicts with wilderness character and resources and visitor use. in managing wilderness use in accordance with the Wilderness Act, the The wilderness management plan will National Park Service will adhere establish indicators, standards, condi- closely to the minimum tool concept. tions, and thresholds above which Superintendents, in accordance with the management actions will be taken to wilderness management plan, will select reduce impacts. The National Park the minimum tool or administrative Service will monitor resources and practice necessary to successfully and document use. Where resource im- safely accomplish the management pacts or demands for use exceed objective with the least adverse impact established thresholds or capacities, on wilderness character and resources. superintendents may limit or redirect All decisions pertaining to administra- use. Physical alterations, public educa- tive practices and use of equipment in tion, general regulations, special regu- wilderness will be based on this con- lations, and permit systems, as well as cept. Potential disruption of wilderness local restrictions, public use limits, character and resources and applicable closures, and designations imple- B-5 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

mented under the discretionary authority Management Facilities of the superintendent (36 CFR 1.5), may all be used in managing and protecting Part of the definition of wilderness as wilderness. provided by the Wilderness Act is undeveloped federal land retaining its (See Monitoring of Wilderness Re- primeval character and influence, source 6:5, Management of Recre- without permanent improvements. ational Use 8:2, Emergency Prepared- Accordingly, authorizations of NPS ness and Emergency Operations 8:6, administrative facilities located in Search and Rescue 8:6, Aircraft Use wilderness will be limited to the types 8:8) and minimum number essential to meet the minimum requirements for Monitoring of Wilderness the administration of the wilderness Resources area. A decision to construct, maintain, or remove an administrative In every park containing wilderness, the facility will be based primarily on conditions and long-term of wilderness whether such a facility is required to resources will be monitored to identify preserve wilderness character or needs for, and results of management values or essential to ensure public actions. Given that wilderness is de- safety, not on considerations of admin- scribed in the Wilderness Act as an istrative convenience, economy of area untrammeled by man, where out- effect, or convenience to the public. standing opportunities for solitude and Maintenance or removal of historic unconfined recreation exist, every wil- structures will additionally comply with derness monitoring program will not only cultural resource protection policies. assess physical and biological resources, but also identify what impacts Ranger stations, patrol cabins, associ- people have on resources and values ated storage or support structures, drift and what impacts they have on other fences,a nd facilities supporting trail people using the wilderness. These stock operations may be placed in monitoring programs will also be de- wilderness only if they are necessary signed to identify whether or not wilder- to carry out wilderness management ness resources are being impacted by objectives and provisions of the parks human activities conducted outside the wilderness management plan. Facili- wilderness, and if so, to determine the ties such as fire lookouts, radio anten- nature, magnitudes, and probable nas, and radio repeater sites may be sources of those impacts. placed in wilderness only if they constitutes the minimum facility required to (See Science and Research 4:2, Inven- carry out essential administrative tory and Monitoring 4:4, Research 6:6) functions and are specifically authorized by the regional director.

B-6 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Permanent roads will not be built or under conditions prescribed in the retained in wilderness. Temporary parks wilderness management plan. vehicular access may be permitted only to meet the minimum requirements of Although the development of facilities emergency situations. Where aban- to serve users will generally be doned roads have been included within avoided, campsites may be desig- wilderness, they will be used as trails or nated when essential for resource restored to natural conditions. protection or enhancement of opportunities for solitude. In keeping with the Unpaved trails and trail bridges may be terms of the parks wilderness manage- provided where they are essential for ment plan, campsite facilities may resource protection or where significant include a site marker, a fire ring, a tent safety hazards exist during the normal site, a food-storage device, and a period of use. toilet, but only if determined by the superintendent to be the minimum No permanent heliports, helipads, or facilities necessary for the health and airstrips will be allowed in wilderness. safety of wilderness users or for the Temporary landing facilities may be protection of wilderness resources and used to meet the minimum requirements values. Toilets will be placed only in of emergency situations. Site improve- locations where their presence and use ments determined to be essential for will resolve health and sanitation prob- safety reasons during individual emer- lems or prevent serious damage and gency situations may be authorized, but where reducing or dispersing visitor the site for authorized nonemergency use has failed to alleviate the problems aircraft landings, but no site markings or or is impractical. Picnic tables will not improvements of any kind may be be placed in wilderness. installed to support nonemergency use. (See Water Quality and Quantity 4:15, The construction or reconstruction of Planning and Proposal Formulation shelters for public use generally will not 5:4, Treatment of Cultural Resources be allowed, since wilderness users 5:5, Backcountry Use 8:3, Emergency should be self-supporting in terms of Preparedness and Emergency Opera- shelter. An existing shelter may be tions 8:6, Aircraft Use 8:8, Access and maintained only if the facility is neces- Circulation Systems 9:7, Camp- sary to achieve wilderness management grounds 9:13, Comfort Stations 9:14) objectives or cultural resource protection objectives. The construction, use, Signs and occupancy of cabins and other structures in wilderness areas in Alaska Signs detract from the wilderness are governed by applicable provision of character of an area and make the ANILCA and by NPS regulations in 36 imprint of man and management more CFR 13, and they may be permitted noticeable. Only those signs necessary to protect wilderness resources or for B-7 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

public safety, such as signs identifying location outside of wilderness, and (2) trails and distances, will be permitted. the proposed device is the minimum Where signs are used, they should be tool necessary to accomplish the compatible with their surroundings and objective safely and successfully. be the minimum size possible. Devices located in wilderness will be removed when determined to be no (See Signs 9:11) longer essential. All research activities and the installation, servicing, and Research monitoring of research devices will be accomplished in compliance with NPS The statutory purposes of wilderness wilderness management policies and include scientific and educational use, procedures contained in the parks and the National Park Service will fully wilderness management plan. Non- support the value of wilderness areas as NPS research activities that might natural outdoor laboratories. A research disturb resources or visitors or require project may be conducted in wilderness the waiver of any regulation may be if it meets all of the following require- allowed only pursuant to the terms and ments conditions of a permit.

The research activities are otherwise (See Science and Research 4:2, allowable under federal laws and regula- Inventory and Monitoring 4:4, tions. Weather and Climate 4:19, Research 5:2, Ethnographic Research and There is no alternative to conducting Inventories 5:12, Research and the research in a wilderness area. Collection Activities 8:15)

The project will not adversely affect Fire Management physical or biological resources, ecosystem processes, or aesthetic values [Note: Fire management policies are under review by the Interagency Fire Management over an area or duration greater than Policy Review Team and will be modified as necessary to meet research objectives. necessary pursuant to their recommendations.]

The project will not interfere with Fire management activities conducted recreational, scenic, or conservation in wilderness areas will conform to the purposes of the wilderness over a broad basic purposes of wilderness. The area or long duration. parks fire management and wilderness management plans together will Hydrologic, hydrometeorologic, seismo- identify the natural and historic roles of graphic, and other research and moni- fire in the wilderness and will provide a toring devices may be installed and prescription for response, if any, to operated in wilderness only upon a natural and human-caused wildfires. If finding that (1) the desired information is a prescribed fire program is imple- essential and cannot be obtained from a mented, these plans will also include B-8 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

the prescriptions and procedures under (See Planning and Proposal Formula- which the program will be conducted. tion 5:4, Treatment of Cultural Re- sources 5:5, Ethnographic Resources Actions taken to suppress wildfires will 5:11, Native American Use 8:8, Spe- use the minimum tool concept and will cial Park Uses 8:10, Cemeteries and be conducted in such a way as to pro- Burials 8:16, Commemorative Works tect natural and cultural features and to and Plaques 9:17) minimize the lasting impacts of the suppression actions and the fires them- Use Of Wilderness selves. Information on developing a fire management program is contained in The National Park Service will encour- the Fire Management Guideline (NPS- age and facilitate those uses of wilder- 18). ness that require the wilderness environment and do not degrade wilder- (See Fire Management 4:14, Fire ness resources and character. NPS Detection and Suppression 5:13) wilderness management actions will be directed toward providing opportunities Cultural Resources for primitive and unconfined types of recreation by park visitors. Appropriate Cultural features such as archeological restrictions may be imposed on any sites, historic trails or routes, or struc- authorized activity in the interest of tures that have been included within preserving wilderness character and wilderness will be protected and main- resources or to ensure public safety. tained using methods that are consis- Visitors will be encouraged and in tent with the preservation of wilderness some situations may be required character and values and cultural re- through the regulatory process to source protection requirements. Burial comply with the concept of no-trace or plots or commemorative features, such minimum-impact wilderness use for as plaques or memorials, that have both themselves and their livestock. been included in wilderness may be retained, but no new additions may be (See Management of Recreational made unless authorized by federal Use 8:2) statute, existing reservations, or retained rights. Native American religious General Public Use areas and other ethnographic resources will be inventoried and protected. Native Park visitors must accept wilderness Americans will be permitted largely on its own terms, without mo- nonmotorized access within wilderness dem facilities provided for their comfort for sacred or religious purposes in or convenience. Users must also ac- accordance with criteria for special park cept certain risks, including possible uses. dangers arising from wildlife, weather conditions, physical features, and other natural phenomena, that are inherent in B-9 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

the various elements and conditions that public will be outlined in each parks comprise a wilderness experience and wilderness management plan. primitive methods of travel. The National Park Service will not eliminate or unrea- The use of hand-propelled watercraft sonably control risks that are normally may be allowed in wilderness. How- associated with wilderness, but it will ever, the watercraft and all other sup- strive to provide users with general plies and equipment must be removed information concerning possible risks, at the end of each wilderness trip. recommended precautions, minimum- impact use ethics, and applicable re- Mobility-impaired persons may use strictions and regulations. wheelchairs (as defined in 36 CFR 1.4) in wilderness. Wilderness users will be required to carry out all refuse as defined in 36 CFR (See Accessibility for Disabled Per- 1.4. sons 8:5, Accessibility for Disabled Persons 9:3) As a general rule, public use of motorized equipment or any form of mechani- Commercial Services cal transport will be prohibited in wilderness. Operating a motor vehicle or Wilderness-oriented commercial possessing a bicycle in designated services that contribute to achieving wilderness outside Alaska is prohibited public enjoyment of wilderness values by NPS regulations in 36 CFR 4. How- or that provide opportunities for primi- ever, the Wilderness Act authorizes tive and unconfined types of recreation continuation of motorboat and aircraft may be authorized if they meet the use under certain circumstances where necessary and appropriate tests of those activities were established prior to the Concessions Policy and Wilder- wilderness designation. The National ness acts and if they are consistent Park Service will limit authorizations for with the wilderness management the continued use of any motorized objectives contained in the parks equipment in wilderness to situations wilderness management plan. Activi- where such use has been specifically ties such as guide services for outfit- authorized by Congress and determined ted horseback, hiking, mountain climb- by Congress or the Park Service to be ing, or river trips and similar activities compatible with the purpose, character, may be appropriate and may be and resource values of the particular authorized if conducted under terms wilderness area involved. The use of and conditions outlined in the parks motorized equipment by the public in wilderness management plan and in wilderness areas in Alaska is governed documents authorizing concessions or by applicable provisions of ANILCA and commercial use. The only structures or NPS regulations in 36 CFR 13. The facilities to support such commercial specific conditions under which motor- services that will be allowed in wilder- ized equipment may be used by the ness will be temporary shelters, such B-10 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

as tents, which will be removed from the dents will be responsible for monitoring wilderness after each trip. livestock use of wilderness to the same degree as human use and may use the (See Commercial Services 8:3, Plan- same management tools and tech- ning Criteria for Park Concessions niques to manage livestock use that 10:1, Commercial Use License 10:3, are available for managing other wil- Rates Charged to Visitors 10:6, Inter- derness uses. pretation 10:9) (See Grazing 8:14) Special Events Rights-of-Way The National Park Service will not sponsor or issue permits for special Existing rights-of-way that have been events to be conducted in wilderness if included in wilderness should be those events might be inconsistent with phased out where practicable. Where it wilderness resources and character. is not practicable, rights-of-way subject to NPS administrative control may be (See Special Events 8:10) renewed under conditions outlined in the parks wilderness management Grazing and Livestock plan that protect wilderness character Driveways and resources and limit the use of motorized or mechanical equipment. Commercial grazing or driving of live- The National Park Service will not issue stock in park wilderness will be allowed any new rights-of-way or widen or only when authorized by Congress. extend any existing rights-of-way in Where these activities are so autho- wilderness. rized, they will be managed under conditions outlined in the wilderness Rights-of-way and access procedures management plan to protect wilderness affecting wilderness areas in Alaska resources and values. The use of motor- are governed by applicable provisions ized or mechanical equipment will not of ANILCA and regulations in 43 CFR be allowed. The construction of facilities 36 and 36 CFR 13. incompatible with wilderness values or management objectives will be prohib- (See Land Protection Plans 3:1, ited. Rights-of-Way 8:11)

Noncommercial grazing of trail stock Mineral Development incidental to recreational use of wilderness may be authorized in accordance The National Park Service will seek to with NPS regulations and conditions eliminate valid mining claims and outlined in the wilderness management nonfederal mineral interests in wilder- plan that ensure protection of wilderness ness through acquisition. In parks resources and character. Superinten- where Congress has authorized the B-11 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

leasing of federal minerals, the Park Service will take appropriate actions to preclude the leasing of lands or minerals that are included within wilderness. Lands included within wilderness will be listed as excepted areas under applicable regulations in 43 CFR 3100 and 3500.

(See Land Protection Plans 3:1, Min- eral Development 8:12)

Public Education

The National Park Service will develop and maintain an effective public education program designed to promote and perpetuate public awareness of and appreciation for wilderness character, resources, and ethics without stimulating an unacceptable demand for use. Efforts will focus on the fostering of an understanding of the concept of wilderness that includes respect for the resource, willingness to exercise self-restraint in demanding access to it, and an ability to adhere to appropriate, minimum-impact techniques when using it.

(See Interpretive Programs 7:1, Inter- pretive Services 7:2)

B-12 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Wilderness Act tional Park Service 1971). Deleted from the recommendation were the Appendix Requirements Requirements North Rim and river corridor. The river C he passage of the 1964 Wilder- corridor was excluded because of the ness Act, Public Law 88-577, planned continued use of motors on the river. The perceived requirement for fire History TTSection 3(c), instructed the Secretary of the Interior to review all roadless areas roads, and projected use of mechanical of the of at least 5,000 acres in the National equipment, resulted in the exclusion Wilderness Park System, and to submit a report from wilderness consideration of North Recommend- regarding the suitability of these areas Rim lands until completion of a fire- ation for wilderness classification. The Act hazard reduction program. at Grand provided a ten-year review period and timetable. The November, 1971 Wilderness Canyon Recommendation reflected the August Final Draft acreage and rationale Grand Canyon National (U.S. Department of the Interior, Na- Park Wilderness tional Park Service 1971a). Included Recommendations within the recommendation was a rationalization for a 1/8-mile manage- In 1970, the National Park Service ment zone between the Park boundary released for public review its Prelimi- and the wilderness boundary. nary Wilderness Study for Grand Canyon National Park, Marble Canyon In 1972, the Service released another National Monument, and Grand Can- Wilderness Recommendation consist- yon National Monument. The study ing of 512,870 acres, due to environ- recommended phasing out motorized mental concerns. This action resulted in use on the Colorado River, and closing the potential wilderness addition of the network of fire roads on the North Grand Canyon National Monument and Rim to qualify these areas for wilder- the North Rim, based upon projected ness. The total wilderness recommen- elimination of grazing in the former, and dation was 569,200 acres, or approxi- elimination of fuel buildup in the latter. mately 63% of the 900,000-acre Park. The 1/8-mile management zones Absent from the study are any South were also eliminated as a result of Rim lands except the Palisades of the public input (U.S. Department of the Desert rim area (U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service 1972; the Interior, National Park Service Hardy and Associates 1971). 1970). In 1973, the Park released its Final In August of 1971, the Park issued a Environmental Statement for the Final Draft Wilderness Recommenda- Proposed Wilderness Classification of tion of 508,500 acres, approximately 1972 (U.S. Department of the Interior, 60,000 acres less than the earlier study National Park Service 1973). (U.S. Department of the Interior, Na- C-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

The passage of the Grand Canyon the Interior, National Park Service National Park Enlargement Act of 1977). The total recommended for 1975, Public Law 93-620, (amended PL immediate wilderness designation 94-31), Section 11, required that the and recommended potential wilder- Secretary of the Interior submit within ness acreage of both the 1976 and two years a new wilderness recommen- 1977 proposals was 1,113,011 acres. dation accommodating an enlarged The NPS sent this recommendation to Grand Canyon National Park. the Legislative Counsel in 1977, where it was held in abeyance pending The July 1976 Preliminary Wilderness completion of the River Management Proposal called for 992,046 acres as Plan (U.S. Department of the Interior, suitable for wilderness. An additional National Park Service 1977a: U.S. 120,965 acres, including the river corri- Department of the Interior 1979). dor, was recommended as potential wilderness (U.S. Department of the Upon completion of the 1980 Colo- Interior, National Park Service 1976). rado River Management Plan, a The total proposal was 1,113,011 acres. memorandum from the Director of the A Draft Environmental Statement was National Park Service to the Assistant also prepared in 1976 (U.S. Department Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks of the Interior, National Park Service recommended 980,088 acres for 1976a). immediate wilderness designation, and an additional 131,814 acres as In August 1976, the Service conducted potential wilderness (U.S. Depart- public wilderness hearings in Flagstaff, ment of the Interior, National Park Grand Canyon, Phoenix, and St. Service 1980c). Attached was a George, Utah. A total of 509 letters and revised 1977 recommendation that written statements resulted from the eliminated from wilderness consider- hearings and the document review ation the 1,109-acre area between the process. The Park received comments Kaibab and the Bright Angel Trails from 23 Federal agencies, 17 State (U.S. Department of the Interior, Na- agencies, three Indian Tribes, 39 organi- tional Park Service 1980; May 1992). zations, 24 companies, and 501 indi- The river corridor was also recom- viduals (U.S. Department of the Interior, mended as potential wilderness until National Park Service 1980:14). the planned phase-out of motors in 1985. The so-called Hatch Amend- The Final Wilderness Recommenda- ment to the 1981 Department of the tion, February 1977, signed by the Interior Appropriations Bill resulted in Director, recommended 1,004,066 the abandonment of the 1980 Colo- acres (including the river corridor, p.16, rado River Management Plan and its and most of the North Rim) for immedi- wilderness emphasis. ate wilderness designation with an additional 108,945 recommended as potential wilderness (U.S. Department of C-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

A new river plan was written, and motor use on the river continued indefinitely (U.S. Department of the Interior, Na- tional Park Service 1981).

In 1993, the Park conducted an internal review and update of the 1980 Wilder- ness Recommendation (U.S. Depart- ment of the Interior, National Park Ser- vice 1993). Revisions were made, based upon the acquisition of mining, grazing, and other leases, the 1969 Field Solicitors Opinion regarding the western boundary of the Navajo Reser- vation, and refinement in acreage determined by the Geographical Infor- mation System (GIS). All modifications were consistent with the letter or intent of the 1980 Recommendation. On August 3, 1993, the superintendent transmitted this recommendation to the Director of the National Park Service (U.S. Department of the Interior, Na- tional Park Service 1993a).

C-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

C-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

D- Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

he purpose of the minimum- defined in the Grand Canyon National Appendix requirement process is to deter- Park Emergency Medical Service TTmine the minimum tool or administra- (EMS) Plan, the Grand Canyon Na- D tive practice necessary to successfully tional Park Search and Rescue (SAR) and safely accomplish the management Plan, and the Grand Canyon National objective with the least adverse impact Park Fire Management Plan (See Minimum on wilderness character and resources. Chapter 11, Ecosystem Management). Requirement (NPS Management Policies, 6:4). In Decision doing so, the following matrix provides If the action is not an emergency, con- Process Park staff and managers with a frame- tinue with the process outlined below. for Grand work to guide the decision-making process while triggering consideration Step 2 Canyon of specific variables which may affect National wilderness values, resources, and Determine if the proposed Park experiences. action is essential to achieve planned wilderness objectives. The following minimum-requirement matrix should be completed for adminis- These objectives are presented in trative activities in the proposed wilder- approved plans (e.g., Wilderness ness. These activities include, but are Management Plan, Colorado River not limited to, fire management, wildlife Management Plan, General Manage- management, archaeological monitor- ment Plan, Resource Management ing and treatments, research, and Plan, Fire Management Plan, etc.). For resource protection. The minimum- this purpose, approved research is requirement decision process may be considered essential. applied at a programmatic level but should describe specific activities. The Step 3 minimum-requirement decision process Step 3 may be applied at a programmatic level Can the desired action be for proposed actions, but should de- accomplished through visitor scribe specific activities. and staff education?

Things to consider when completing the According to the Wilderness Act, Grand Canyon National Park Minimum wilderness is an area which has out- Requirement Matrix for actions in pro- standing opportunities for solitude or a posed wilderness: primitive and unconfined type of recreation. The National Park Service will Step 1 not eliminate or unreasonably control risks that are normally associated with Is This An Emergency? wilderness; it will strive to provide users with general information concerning Emergency minimum-requirement possible risks, recommended precau- standard operational procedures are tions, minimum-impact use ethics, and D-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

applicable restrictions and regulations Authority of the Resource (NPS Management Policies, 6:8). The Arthur Carhart National Wilder- The emphasis of visitor contacts will be ness Training Center teaches that educational prior to embarking on a agencyvisitor contacts in wilderness backcountry or river experience.1 This should be conducted in a manner that will be accomplished through an ex- respects visitors expectations for a panded permitting process and other wilderness experience (Arthur Carhart efforts including brochures, staff contact, National Wilderness Training Center displays, and pre-departure orientations 1993). Many violations are careless, (See Chapter 10, Interpretation, Educa- unskilled, or uninformed actions which tion, and Information). result in impacts on wilderness resources or other visitors wilderness Leave No Trace (LNT) experience. When contacting visitors who exhibit undesirable behavior LNT is a management and education reference Authority of the Resource. program which promotes minimum- This concept requires the manager impact camping and hiking techniques and visitor to evaluate the conse- in wildlands (See Chapter Ten). Wilder- quence of their actions on an environ- ness travelers, both recreational and ment that both value. The agency administrative, can greatly reduce their representative should attempt to impacts by adhering to LNT principles. resolve the matter by following a three- step approach: Minimum-Impact Suppression 1 The most desir- 1) Give an objective description of the able times to Tactics (MIST) and Light Hand contact the visitor or on the Land situation. Referencing the regulation to make regulations or the visitor as violator is not re- known is during the These concepts are associated with quired at this time. anticipation/ planning phase of low-impact fire suppression tactics and the wilderness trail maintenance, and describe an 2) Explain the implications of the experience. Re- appropriate wilderness work ethic (U.S. action or situation that was ob- searchers suggest the agency regulate Department of Agriculture. National served. It is here that the agency at the entry level Forest Service. 1995). A light-hand representative attempts to reveal rather than the approach is one in which the work is the authority of the resource or activity level within an area. accomplished with the least necessary interpret what detrimental impacts (See Hendee, John disturbance of wilderness resources, will occur if the action is continued. C., et al. 1990:188- including visitor experience. The man- This may include social impacts or 189; 401-422) ager and field personnel must keep in reference to what will happen to mind that people working in wilderness other visitors interaction with nature often have a greater impact than the if the action continues. private visitor. Field crews must scrupu- lously adhere to minimum-impact camp- 3) Inform the visitor how the manager/ ing (LNT) techniques. ranger (and the agency) feels about D-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

the action and what steps can or Primitive Skills should be taken to improve the situation. The agency representative can Primitive skills involve the proficient use then decide whether or not it is nec- of tools and skills of the pre-motorized essary to cite the regulation per se, or pioneering era (e.g., the double-bit and whether to escalate the level of axe, the crosscut saw, the pack string, law enforcement (Wallace 1990). and oar-powered and paddle-powered watercraft). The working understanding Wilderness rangers are guided by NPS- of primitive skills is important to appro- 9, Law Enforcement Guidelines (U.S. priately plan for their use. Managers Department of the Interior, National Park must take the lead in demonstrating Service 1989a). The goals of NPS-9, that tasks can be performed well by which include visitor and staff safety, primitive or traditional, nonmotorized park resource protection, and the en- methods. Field staff require adequate hancement of visitor enjoyment, are training in primitive-tool selection, use, achieved through the application of the and care to efficiently accomplish lowest level of enforcement technique planned work. While agency staff necessary to gain compliance. should constantly stress the importance of using primitive skills in accomplish- Step 4 ing management objectives, they should understand that minimum- Decide if the action can be requirement analysis will not always accommodated outside lead to the use of a primitive tool. 2 Routine is defined as a wilderness. regular, more or Mechanized Use in Wilderness less unvarying If possible, locate activities or facilities procedure, custom- determined essential (e.g., visitor The use of motorized equipment is ary, prescribed, or prohibited when other reasonable habitual, as of orientation, information signs or a radio- business or daily repeater station) outside wilderness. alternatives are available to protect life. wilderness values. While Congress mandated a ban on motors and mecha- Step 5 Step 5 nized equipment, it also recognized that managers may occasionally need List alternatives appropriate those sorts of tools. While this provision for wilderness management. complicates the decision-making For the Minimum-Requirement Process process, it remains an exception to be to work, it is important to develop and exercised very sparingly and only when seriously consider a range of realistic it meets the test of being the minimum alternatives. This process involves a necessary for wilderness purposes tiered analysis beginning with the least (Worf 1987; Colorado State University obtrusive, nonmechanized alternative. 1991). Administrative use of motorized equipment or mechanical transport, including motorboats and aircraft, may D-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

be authorized only if determined by the The manager must determine how to superintendent to be the minimum tool safely accomplish the action with the needed to protect wilderness values. least impact on the wilderness re- Such management activities will be source and visitor experience. Re- conducted in accordance with all appli- member that potential disruption of cable regulations, polices, and guide- wilderness character and resources lines and, where practicable, will be and applicable safety concerns will be scheduled to avoid creating adverse considered before, and given signifi- resource impacts or conflicts with visitor cantly more weight than, economic use (NPS Management Policies, 6:4- efficiency. 5). The net result of a minimum-require- Routine2 nonemergency restoration, ment analysis is a carefully weighed visitor contact, monitoring, and mainte- project or action found to be the most nance in proposed wilderness should effective way of meeting wilderness consist of nonmechanized tools. objectives and the minimum neces- Nonroutine (preferably one-time) use of sary for Wilderness Act purposes. motorized equipment such as pionjars, chain saws, etc., during extensive trail Step 7 reconstruction, stabilization, and relocation may be permitted on a case-by- Select the appropriate case determination by the superinten- minimum tool or action. dent.3 Nonroutine helicopter support may be authorized if nonmechanized trans- 3 The reoccurring Obtain review from the Division Chief need for mecha- port is deemed unreasonable or hazard- and Wilderness Coordinator, and nized equipment, ous. If some compromise of wilderness approval from the superintendent. such as chainsaws resources or character is unavoidable, or mechanized Coordinate the preparation of a transport, may be only those actions that have localized, project proposal with the Park environ- necessary to short-term adverse impacts will be mental compliance officer unless the accomplish fire acceptable (NPS Management Poli- management proposed action has been addressed objectives on the cies, 6:4). at the programmatic level. existing temporary fire roads until the natural fire regime Step 6 is restored. At that time, the roads will be restored to a Evaluate the alternatives to natural condition, or determine which has the converted into trails least impact on wilderness as specified by Management resources. Can the desired Policies, Chapter action be accomplished safely 6:5. This issue will and effectively with primitive be addressed in the revision of the skills? Grand Canyon National Park Fire Management Plan. D-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Note

The following individuals provided comment on this document:

Judy Alderson* Environmental Specialist NPS Alaska System Support Office Jim Walters* Wilderness Coordinator NPS Intermountain Field Area Bill Briggle* Superintendent Mt. Rainier National Park Karen Wade* Superintendent Great Smoky Mountains National Park Uwe Nehring* District Ranger Crater Lake National Park Doug Morris* Superintendent Saquaro National Monument Dan Oltrogge Fire Management Officer Grand Canyon National Park

* National Wilderness Steering Committee

D-5 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

D- 6 Process for Determining Minimum Requirement Grand Canyon National Park

Proposed Action:

To be undertaken by:

1 IS THIS AN EMERGENCY?

YES NO

Act according to approved emergency minimum- tool SOPs

IS ACTION ESSENTIAL? List the Objective(s) met by this action: 1Management objectives are listed in 2 (to meet planned approved plans, for example: wilderness objectives1) Wilderness Management Plan Colorado River Management Plan Fire Management Plan General Management Plan YES NO Management Policies Strategic Plan for GCNP Don't Do It Resource Management Plan Approved Research

Can this action be 3 accomplished through visitor education?

YES NO

Do it

Can Action Be Accomplished Other (non-wilderness) areas considered: 4 Elsewhere? (Outside of Wilderness area)

YES NO

Do It There

Go to Page two Process for Determining Minimum Requirement

List alternatives: List alternative ways to Considerations: 5 accomplish this action. What is the best group size to complete this action with the least impact on resources and visitor experience? Evaluate which alternative would have the Least Impact on: What is the best time of Wilderness resources? year to complete action Visitor experience? while minimizing impact on resources and visitor 6 Can this action be safely and experience? effectively accomplished with If mechanized equipment is primitive skills? (Economic selected, how often will it be efficiency and convenience are used, and how long will the not primary considerations) project last? If this action cannot be accomplished through visitor education alone, how YES NO can it contribute to the accomplishment/enhancement of this action?

Select Appropriate 7 Primitive Tools and Skills

Select Appropriate 7 Mechanized Tool (non-routine2 uses only) or Administrative/Research Facility

GO TO PAGE THREE

2Routine is defined as: "A regular, more or Givens: less unvarying procedure, customary, We will manage for wilderness. prescribed, or habitual, River is included as of business or daily life." Economics and convenience are secondary Process for Determining Minimum Requirement

Action:

List selected alternative and justification here:

Prepared by Date Reviewed by Division Chief Date

Reviewed by Wilderness Coordinator

Approved by Superintendent, Grand Canyon National Park Form Approved 1998, GRCA Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Appendix Navajo Tribal Lands Havasupai Tribal Lands here are a number of trails and A one-time entrance fee is charged by E routes on Navajo land used by the Tribe for use of Havasupai lands. TTGrand Canyon hikers: Lees Ferry to the The main trail into Supai village is confluence with the Little Colorado located at Hualapai Hilltop. Nightly Recreational River; and the Little Colorado River camping fees for the campground are Opportunities Gorge from Cameron to the confluence required. The campground is located and of the Colorado River. Permits are two miles from the village between Permit required from the Tribe for backcountry Havasu Falls and Mooney Falls. Back- Information use and camping on Navajo Nation country use of Great Thumb areas for lands. requires a permit from the Havasupai Tribe as well as the Grand Canyon Adjacent Permits and information may be ob- National Park. Lands tained at three locations throughout the year: Havasupai entrance and camping fees differ for the high-use season (April 1 Navajo Nation Parks and Recreation through October 31) and the off-season Department (November 1 through March 31). P.O. Box 9000 Window Rock, AZ 86515 For information and campground (520) 871-6647 reservations, contact

Cameron Visitor Center (at junction of Havasupai Tourist Enterprise Hwy 89 and Hwy 64) General Delivery P.O. Box 549 Supai, AZ 86435 Cameron, AZ 86020 (520) 448-2141 (520) 679-2303

LeChee Sub-Office Located near LeChee Chapter House, seven miles south of Page, Arizona (520) 698-3360

Navajo Nation fishing and hunting permits, fees, and dates can be obtained by contacting:

Fish and Wildlife Department P.O. Box 1480 Window Rock, AZ 86515 (520) 871-5338

E-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Hualapai Tribal Lands Permit fees are required for day-use and overnight camping in the Paria The primary access to the Colorado Canyon, Buckskin Gulch, and Coyote River in the western part of Grand Can- Buttes portions of the Paria Canyon yon is by the Diamond Creek Road. Vermilion Cliffs Wilderness Area. Hualapai permits and fees are required Visitors to the area can deposit fees at for private boat launching or take-out, self-serve stations located at White camping, and sight-seeing. Commercial House, Buckskin, and Wire Pass whitewater rafting trips may also be Trailheads. scheduled through Hualapai River Runners. Hunting permits are also Information on the various BLM recre- available through the Department of ational opportunities on the Arizona Natural Resources. Strip may be obtained by contacting

For information on various recreational Interagency Office and activites on Hualapai Tribal lands, con- Information Center tact 345 East Riverside Drive St. George, UT 84790 Hualapai Enterprises, Inc. (801) 688-3200 P.O. Box 359 Peach Springs, AZ 86434 U.S. Forest Service (520) 769-2419 (USFS)

Kaibab National Forest Bureau Of Land Management The north and south boundaries of Grand Canyon National Park are Arizona Strip District shared with the Kaibab National Forest. The Tusayan District is located A variety of wilderness and nonwilder- near the South Rim, and the North ness recreational activities are available Kaibab District is located north of the on public lands to the north and north- Park. The Saddle Mountain and west of Grand Canyon National Park Kanab Creek Wilderness Areas are near the Utah border. Many of the public located in the North Kaibab District. lands on the Arizona Strip are administered by the Bureau of Land Manage- Primitive roads in the North Kaibab ment (BLM). District provide access to several Grand Canyon scenic overlooks Primitive roads on BLM lands provide including Indian Hollow, Monument access to Fort Garrett Point and Point, Crazy Jug Point, Timp Point, Whitmore Point, two scenic overlooks in and Marble View. western Grand Canyon.

E-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

USFS permits are not required for Access to Grand Canyon scenic over- backcountry use. Reservations and fees looks at Whitmore Wash and Twin are required for overnight campground Point is through primitive roads in Lake use on Forest Service areas. Mead National Recreation Area.

Information may be obtained by contact- For information, contact ing: Glen Canyon National Recreation Area For areas adjacent to South Rim P.O. Box 1507 Page, AZ 86040-1507 Kaibab National Forest (520) 608-6404 Recreation and Visitor Information Lake Mead National Recreation Area 200 W. Railroad Ave. 601 Nevada Highway Williams, AZ 86046 Boulder City, NV 89005 (520) 635-4061 (702) 293-8990

For areas adjacent to North Rim

North Kaibab Ranger District P.O. Box 248 Fredonia, AZ 86022 (520) 643-7395

Kaibab Plateau Visitor Information Center at Jacob Lake May through October (520) 643-7298

National Park Service

Glen Canyon National Park Lake Mead National Park

Water-based recreation such as motor boating, water skiing, sailboarding, and fishing are found on the reservoirs at Lake Powell, which is managed by Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, and at Lake Mead, which is managed by Lake Mead National Recreation Area.

E-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

E-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

In GeneralCongress Wheelchairs are appropriate in Wil- Appendix reaffirms that nothing in the derness only if they meet the ADA Wilderness Act is to be con- definition. The intent of this definition F (1)strued(1) as prohibiting the use of a was that a wheelchair is a persons wheelchair in a wilderness area by an primary mode of locomotion, manual individual whose disability requires use or electric, but not an all terrain ve- Wilderness of a wheelchair, and consistent with the hicle. This definition was also intended Use by Wilderness Act, no agency is required to ensure that persons using wheel- Persons to provide any form of special treat- chairs were reasonably accommo- with ment or accommodation, or to con- dated in wilderness without the need to Disabilities struct any facilities or modify any compromise the resource and charac- conditions of lands within a wilderness ter of wilderness. area to facilitate such use. Service animals are permitted in (2) Definition For the purposes of wilderness. Service animals are not to paragraph (1), the term wheelchair be confused with pets. The ADA means a device designed solely for the defines a service animal as any use by a mobility-impaired person for guide dog, signal dog, or other animal locomotion that is suitable for use in an individually trained to provide assis- indoor pedestrian area. (Section 507(c), tance to a person with a disability. 104 Stat. 327, 42 USC. 12207, Americans They are required by persons with with Disabilities Act of 1990 [ADA]) disabilities in day-to-day activities.

All requests involving wilderness use A publication entitled Wilderness by persons with disabilities shall be in Access Decision Tool (available accordance with the Architectural through the Arthur Carhart National Barriers Act, the Rehabilitation Act of Wilderness Training Center) has been 1973 (amended in 1978), Section developed and should be followed to 507(c) of the Americans with Disabili- make appropriate, objective, and ties Act of 1990 and be reviewed to consistent decisions regarding the use ensure that wilderness resources and of wilderness areas by persons with character are not damaged or dimin- disabilities. Any decision should ished. insure that it does not inadvertently discriminate against persons with The NPS is not required to provide any disabilities (U.S. Department of the modification or special treatment to Interior, National Park Service.1997d). accommodate accessibility by persons with disabilities. However, managers should explore solutions for reasonable accommodations when not in conflict with the Wilderness Act (e.g. barrier-free trails, accessible campsites). F-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

F-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

he demand for permits for over In-Person Appendix night use from March through The South Rim Backcountry Office at the TOctoberT far exceeds the use limits that Maswik Transportation Center TT Hours: 8 a.m. to noon; 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. G protect wilderness resources and the quality of recreational experiences. An The North Rim Backcountry Office in the North automated reservation system ensures Rim Administrative Area Backcountry a fair and equitable distribution of Hours: 8 a.m. to noon; 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. Reservation opportunities for recreation in the Parks and wilderness areas. Backcountry is Requirements Permit defined as all areas outside the devel- System oped areas (i.e., rims, Cross-Canyon A Backcountry Use Permit is required Corridor, and Proposed Wilderness); for all overnight use in wilderness and wilderness refers to the Proposed backcountry areas. Phantom Ranch Wilderness areas only. Lodge guests do not need a backcountry use permit. Backcountry Permits Backcountry permits are not required Information Information for private day hikes or day rides; Permits are required for all backcountry however, day users must observe and wilderness overnight use, and must wilderness and backcountry regula- be in possession at all times. Maximum tions. Incidental Business Permits (IBP) group size is 11 people. are required for all commercially guided day hikes, including those Advance permit requests are accepted accompanying a motor-vehicle tour or up to four months prior to the trip start other Park use. (See Appendix I, Com- date. mercial Use Policy). Permits are valid only for the trip leader, By Mail Backcountry Office number of people, itinerary, and dates Grand Canyon National Park specified on the permit. Backcountry P.O. Box 129 and wilderness travelers must have Grand Canyon, AZ 86023 their permit in their possession and in plain view while hiking or camping so it By FAX can be easily checked by rangers. (520) 638-2125

Obtaining Permits Information Telephone (520) 638-7875 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. daily The demand for a Grand Canyon Reservations are not accepted by phone. backcountry permit far exceeds availability, resulting in a highly competitive process. Obtaining a permit in advance is strongly recommended. There are no guarantees that there will be any last G-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

minute walk-in permits available. The participating in the Recreation Fee demand for permits is greatest for use Demonstration Program, which in- between March and early November, creased entrance fees and created a and all holiday periods. November backcountry permit/impact fee. The through February is considered a low- benefits realized at Grand Canyon will use period. be additional service to the public, increased protection of Park re- Permit requests for overnight backcoun- sources, and construction of needed try and wilderness use are accepted facilities according to the Parks only by mail, in person, or by FAX (520- General Management Plan. 638-2125), and are issued on a first- come, first-served basis. Fees should All fees paid to the Backcountry Office be paid at this time by credit card, are nonrefundable. Current fees in- check, or money order. clude a $20 Basic Permit Fee plus a $4 per-person, per-night Impact Fee. A written response will be sent via U.S. Frequent users may wish to purchase Mail to all mail-request and FAX appli- a one-year Frequent Hiker member- cants with the requests results. ship for $50. This membership will waive the initial $20 fee for each For in-person requests, the South Rim permit obtained by the member trip Backcountry Office, located at the leader (who must be on the trip). This Maswik Transportation Center, is open membership is valid for twelve months from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon and 1:00 from the date of purchase. p.m. to 5:00 p.m. daily. The North Rim Backcountry Office is open daily mid- Advance Permit Requests May through October only (weather permitting) during the same hours. Note: Beginning with the first day of a month, Grand Canyon is on Mountain Standard permit requests will be accepted for a Time all year, and does not participate in proposed trip starting on any date in Daylight Savings Time. that month or the following four months.

Permit Fees Apply On For Dates Or After Through In 1996, Congress mandated the Secre- January 1 May tary of the Interior to implement a three- February 1 June year Recreation Fee Demonstration March 1 July April 1 August Program in up to 100 national park May 1 September areas. This program directs parks to June 1 October increase current fees and establish new July 1 November fees for recreational uses, and retains a August 1 December large portion of the resulting revenues at September 1 January October 1 February the collecting park for new services and November 1 March facilities. Grand Canyon National Park is December 1 April G-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

For example: Beginning on December Credit card number, expiration date, 1, 1998, any start date through April 30, signature and date, amount autho- 1999, would be available for request. rized Name of organization (if applicable) A permit request that starts in an open The number of people and livestock month and ends in a closed month, but (if applicable) is seven days or fewer in duration, will Proposed night-by-night itinerary be processed as a valid request. Trips showing use-area codes, and dates extending beyond that guideline into the for each night of the proposed trip closed month will require an additional State and license plate numbers of permit request for the closed month vehicles that will be parked at a once that month becomes available. trailhead (if applicable) Alternate proposed itineraries in Mail or FAX Request case the first itinerary is not available Procedures Permits will not be issued unless com- Permit requests sent by mail or FAX will plete information is provided. The be accepted if mailed or FAXed on or listing of at least three alternate itinerar- after the appropriate date as specified ies with this information is strongly above. The envelope postmark or FAX recommended. machine received date will be used to determine if the request is valid. Re- Phone Information quests postmarked or FAXed earlier than the specified date will be returned Backcountry Office staff answer ques- without processing. tions between 1 p.m. and 5 p.m. Mon- day through Friday (except on Federal If available, a Backcountry Use Permit holidays) at (520)638-7875. Permit will be issued and mailed to the trip requests are not accepted by phone. leader. The permit will be valid only for the trip leader named on the permit. If a The Backcountry Office does not make permit has been requested and not reservations for campground space on received prior to trip departure, contact the rims, for river trips, mule trips, the Backcountry Office. A valid permit Phantom Ranch lodging, or trips into must be in possession before a trip the Canyon on the Havasupai Indian begins. Reservation.

Each mail-in or FAX permit request Other Locations must specify the following: Reservations and/or permits may Name, address, and phone number of sometimes be obtained from rangers the trip leader on duty at the Tuweep, Meadview, and Lees Ferry Ranger Stations. However, these rangers have other patrol respon- G-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

sibilities and may not be available to Wilderness Private Stock provide assistance. Consequently, it is Use recommended that trips be planned in advance through the Backcountry Office Permit application procedures for to be certain permits are available. wilderness stock users are the same Grand Canyon permits may also be as those described for backpackers, available on a limited basis at Pipe except that stock users need to include Spring National Monument; the Bureau the number of stock as well as the of Land Management offices in St. number of people in their permit appli- George and Kanab, Utah; and at the cation. For wilderness use areas, the U.S. Forest Service offices in Fredonia, limit is six animals and six people with Arizona. no more than five animals to one mounted packer. Organized Groups Grazing is not permitted. Stock han- An organization is any number of per- dlers must bring enough feed for the sons united for some purpose, whether trips duration. Any feed packed into commercial or noncommercial. the backcountry or wilderness must be sterile to protect the Park from the No more than eight small groups or four introduction of nonnative plants and large groups (not to exceed 48 persons) noxious weeds. For more information from the same organization may camp on private stock use, see Appendix H, below the rim on the same night. Only Wilderness Stock Use Guidelines. An one large group of 11 maximum or one information sheet on stock use in the small group of six maximum from the Cross-Canyon Corridor is available on same organization are allowed in the request from the Grand Canyon Back- same campground or use area on the country Office. same night. A small group is defined as six people or less on a permit. A large Last-Minute Permits group is defined as 7-11 people on a permit. Maximum group size is 11 Persons without advance reservations people. may be able to obtain a Backcountry Use Permit by placing their name on Groups of more than 11 must divide the waiting list for cancellations. This between different campgrounds or use must be done in person at the Back- areas. Only one group per night will be country Office on the South Rim (or allowed in use areas in the Wild Oppor- North Rim, when open). tunity Class. Only a small percent of permits are issued to large groups. A North Rim Winter Use group size to six or less improves the chance of obtaining a permit. During the winter season (approximately late October through mid-May), a Backcountry Permit is required for G-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

overnight use of the North Rim from the Parks northern boundary to Bright Angel Point on the Canyon rim. Winter access is by hiking, snowshoeing, or Nordic skiing.

Permittees are allowed to camp at-large between the Parks north boundary and the Widforss Road junction, but not at the North Kaibab Trailhead. Between the Widforss Road junction and the Bright Angel Point area, camping is permitted only at the North Rim Camp- ground group campsite.

Human waste should be deposited at the base of a tree well away from any road or developed area where it will not be encountered by a summer visitor after the snow has melted. During the winter months, burning toilet paper is acceptable if the area is snow covered.

G-5 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

G-6 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

urrent recreational stock day use Recreational stock use is permitted in Appendix within the proposed wilderness is the areas mentioned above provided CCessentially unknown but believed to exist the following environmental-protection H at relatively low levels. Recreational requirements are met (see Cole, stock use is permitted where, 1) im- Peterson, and Lucas 1987; and Cole pacts to resources lie within acceptable 1989, 1990) Wilderness levels (See Figure 3.2), and 2) the Stock Use potential conflict with other established A Backcountry Permit is required for Guidelines wilderness users is minimal. overnight private livestock trips. Permit availability is determined by use-area Stock Use Guidelines limits.

Proposed Wilderness Total numbers for wilderness overnight parties will not exceed the small In the proposed wilderness, stock are group size of six stock and six people permitted on following designated trails (with a limit of five stock to one mounted packer) Cape Solitude Fort Garrett Total numbers for wilderness day Brady Hollow users will not exceed twelve stock and Kanab Plateau 12 people Tiyo Point Uncle Jim When taking a break, stock should Whitmore be moved off trail far enough so that Cove other parties can pass safely and unnoticed. Select a durable site for the Nonwilderness Areas break, tying stock in a place and manner that will not cause avoidable im- Additional riding opportunities are pacts. Do not tie directly to trees and available on the following nonwilderness other vegetation. Keep stock well away trails and roads from destination overlooks.

South Bass Trailhead Road Stock must stay on established trails Havasupai Point Road or primitive roads. Pack stock should North Bass Trailhead Road be tied together and led single file, not Point Sublime Road turned loose and herded. Animals are Arizona Trail not allowed to spread out or walk on Cross-Canyon Corridor parallel or developing trails.

An information sheet on private stock Grazing is not permitted. Stock use in the Cross-Canyon Corridor is parties must carry adequate feed free available from the Grand Canyon Na- of exotic weeds. Feed and salt will be tional Park Backcountry Office. placed on a tarp or in a feedbag. H-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

All stock should be contained outside causing impacts is much more pro- camping or overlook areas. nounced than with human traffic (Hammit and Cole 1987). Problems Stock should be tied to existing hitch resulting from this high potential for rails where provided. Where not pro- trampling disturbance are com- vided, the use of trees and a hitch line pounded by the tendency for shod with wide nylon tree saver straps is hooves to loosen the soil making it recommended. These straps come with more susceptible to erosion. As a a quick-adjusting buckle for convenience result, stock trails are more prone to while a rope is tied to the straps and not erosion and more likely to require directly to vegetation. A resistant site of extensive supplemental maintenance hard, rocky ground is usually best. It is (Hammit and Cole 1987; McQuaid- suggested that two or more horses be Cook 1978; Weaver and Dale 1978). tied together to reduce the tendency to This is of particular concern at Grand paw the ground. Animals inclined to paw Canyon where inner canyon trails are should be hobbled. generally steep.

Stock parties will renovate any pawed Research and experience indicate that area, pack-out excess feed and salt, creation of multiple trails and new trails and scatter manure before leaving will occur much more rapidly with stock camp. use than with hiker use (Cole 1990; Weaver and Dale 1978; Nagy and The Basis of the Stock Scotter 1974). The trails created will also be wider, deeper, more com- Use Guidelines Use Guidelines pacted, and less vegetated (Weaver and Dale 1978; Cole 1989). Widening, Trails for example, results from horse use on Stock typically have more impact on side hills. Horses tend to walk on the wilderness ecosystems than an equal downhill side of the trail, which breaks number of hikers, especially on fragile down this outer edge and widens the sites (Hendee, et al. 1990; Hammitt and trail (Hammit and Cole 1987). Cole 1987; Whittaker 1978). Horse trails and campsites have been shown to be Campsites ten times as impacted as sites used by only backpackers (Hammit and Cole). An campsites, differences in the Since horses, mules, and other types of magnitude of impact caused by hikers recreational stock are heavier than as opposed to stock parties are even humans and weight is concentrated on a more pronounced than on trails. The smaller surface area, stock exerts much action of shod hooves causes rapid more pressure on the ground. Effects site deterioration through loss of due to greater concentrated weight organic soil horizons, increased com- contribute to substantial gouging and paction, and decreased infiltration ripping of ground, and the potential for rates (Cole 1990). Research indicates H-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

and experience demonstrates that wildernesses where stock use is a campsites used by stock parties result small minority, such as in Grand Can- in significantly larger barren core areas yon (Cole, 1990). as sites used primarily by backpackers (Cole 1990). Damage to vegetation and The underlying ecological arguments soil, as well as the accumulation of currently framing the livestock-hiker manure and urine, result in severe debate are set in cultural traditions and ecological and aesthetic damage to symbols that fuel the emotions on each campsites (Cole 1989). In addition, side (Moore and McClaran 1991). seeds of exotic plants contained in While the ultimate resolution of these horsefeed readily geminate and grow issues lies beyond the scope of this on such disturbed sites (Cole 1990). document, Park management recognizes the inescapable conclusion that Stock parties disturb a larger area social, environmental, and administra- because of the need for an adjacent tive costs associated with stock use area to accommodate stock (Cole are much more pronounced than those 1990). Horses and mules, particularly associated with comparable amounts when overnight use is involved, require of hiker use (Cole, 1990). This situation additional space at campsite locations is exacerbated by the large number of and lead to impacts beyond the specific backpackers who feel that use of stock campsite boundaries (Hammit and Cole and its impacts are inappropriate. Park 1987). management also recognizes that adequate areas have been provided In areas where stock are grazed or for stock use. confined for the night, impacts result from both trampling and defoliation of plants. These impacts are unique to stock parties and often affect a much larger area than all other recreational impacts combined (Cole 1990).

Visitor Conflicts

Although few stock users consider meeting hikers as inherently unpleasant, hikers generally find it undesirable to meet stock in wilderness (Watson, Niccolucci, and Williams 1994). For many wilderness users, meeting parties with stock or finding evidence of stock use, such as manure or corrals, also detracts greatly from their experience. This is particularly true in the majority of H-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

H-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Appendix Goal Definitions he goal of commercial use man- Commercial I agement in wilderness and back- TTcountry areas is to provide quality Any or all goods, services, agreements, services for guided hikes, winter use, or anything offered to park visitors and/ Commercial equipment rental, and other services or the general public for recreational Use Policy which have been determined by the purposes, which uses park resources, National Park Service to be necessary or is undertaken for or results in com- and appropriate and enhance visitor pensation, monetary gain, benefits or enjoyment consistent with NPS wilder- profit to an individual, organization, or ness policy. corporation, whether or not such entity is organized for purposes recognized The NPS strives to interpret regulations as nonprofit under local, State, or consistently regarding organizational Federal law. status (i.e., commercial versus educational). Commercial organizations, as Verifiable Clients defined in 36 CFR 5.3, must be respon- sive to commercial authorization Trip participants whom the commercial requirements. Educational organiza- operator can identify by name, ad- tions, as defined in 36 CFR 71.13(d), dress, and telephone number are are exempt from securing commercial verifiable clients. When required, authorizations and paying certain fees. verifiable client information is submitted at the time a reservation is made Some organizations have declared through the Backcountry Office. themselves to be nonprofit, and do not pay taxes but, in fact, they are busi- Noncommercial nesses providing services with a paid staff in return for payment by their cli- All nonprivate trips not covered under ents. These organizations fall under the the commercial definition are consid- purview of 36 CFR 5.3 and the Conces- ered noncommercial trips (including sions Management Program (NPS-48). trips conducted by the organizations or They are properly authorized via Inci- organization types listed below). Orga- dental Business Permits (IBP). nizations not listed below may submit their qualifications for consideration of Organizations providing field trips are noncommercial status to the superin- not viewed as educational institutions in tendent for review. the same sense as elementary, junior, and senior high schools, colleges, and Specific Noncommercial Groups universities whether public or private. Girl Scouts of America These field trip organizations must Boy Scouts of America secure commercial authorizations and Campfire Girls pay applicable entrance and user fees. 4-H Clubs of America I-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Other Noncommercial Group making reservations for hikes when Types they have a verifiable participant list. Bona fide educational institutions when academic credit is given to Overnight Commercial Use enrollees for the in-park activity Authorizations Certain governmental entities (e.g., city, county, or State recreation dis- An appropriate commercial authoriza- tricts, etc.) tion will be required for all overnight Certain civic organizations (e.g., backcountry or wilderness commercial Helping Hands, Big Brothers/Sisters, use. The authorization will be initiated etc.) by request through the Backcountry Religious organizations (when partici- Office, and upon receipt of a commer- pants are official members of record of cial groups reservation request, will the religious organization) be prepared by the Concessions Office, and approved or disapproved Procedures by the superintendent.

Noncommercial Use All applicants for Incidental Business Authorizations Permits (IBP) will be required to meet the following minimum qualifications Noncommercial organizations are and conditions prior to issuance of a permitted to make backcountry reserva- permit. tions in advance without a verifiable list of participants. However, in order to Proof of liability insurance coverage assure an equitable use of the system, (Certificate of Insurance) naming the all noncommercial organizations must United States Government as an confirm their reservations no later than additional insured. Minimum accep- 30 days prior to their trip start. Uncon- table level of insurance is $300,000 firmed reservations will be cancelled per occurrence and $500,000 and made available to the general aggregate, if the policy specifies public. aggregate limits.

Any single noncommercial entity (e.g., Payment of all required fees. A Boy Scout Troop #30 of Grand Canyon, nonrefundable $200 fee is charged Arizona) will be permitted to make no for application and administration of more than two (2) advance backcountry the IBP, irrespective of the IBPs reservations in any given calendar year length. Entrance fees and overnight except when a verifiable list of partici- use fees are also required. pants (names, addresses and telephone numbers) is provided for the additional Certification that all guides/leaders reservations. There is no reservation meet the following qualifications limit for noncommercial organizations Must be 18 years of age or older Must hold a current Advanced I-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

First Aid, First Responder, or is required for each reservation higher, Emergency Medical Ser- period, and commercial operators vices (EMS) certification. must compete for permits on the same basis as noncommercial and All IBP holders must assume rescue private groups. No special consider- expenses incurred by any member of ation or exceptions to reservation their group. policies, campground and/or Use Area limits, etc., will be granted. All The National Park Service reserves commercial operators may have the right to establish commercial user- equal access to the backcountry night limitations for the time periods reservation system in order to book and/or Use Areas as future conditions verifiable client reservations. Verifi- may warrant. Commercial use in the able clients are trip participants Cross-Canyon Corridor and wilder- whom the commercial operator can ness areas, including North Rim identify by name, address and tele- winter use, are not limited at this time phone number. except as follows: Commercial operators who have Incidental Business Permits will received proper authorization and have not be issued to authorize activi- verifiable clients may offer guided hikes ties granted to existing in all backcountry areas where visita- concessioners under the terms of tion is allowed on a first-come, first- current concession contracts. served basis according to the requirements specified herein. An exception to the limitations and restrictions on overnight Day-use Commercial Use Corridor use may be made for Authorizations commercially guided special populations groups (physically or Commercially guided day hikes below otherwise handicapped). Com- the rim are authorized under the Inci- mercial use for Corridor trips for dent Business Permit (IBP) program. these groups may be granted by IBPs are mandatory for conducting the superintendent on a need commercial trips in the Park; their basis, after careful review of each issuance is a courtesy not an entitle- request individually on its own ment. Requests for day-hike IBPs are merits. handled through the Division of Con- cessions Management. Commercial Commercial operators will be issued services are not authorized until the IBP a date-specific IBP covering one or is final. Prospective permittees should more trips occurring within the same allow two to four weeks for permit reservation window as defined by the processing, and should not schedule Backcountry Reservation and Permit any commercial trips to the Park prior System (Appendix G). A separate IBP to obtaining a fully executed IBP. I-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

All applicants for an IBP will be required Commercial day hiking will be on to meet the following requirements prior established trails only. Permit holders to issuance of an IBP: are required to submit a trip form prior to each trip which identifies the spe- Proof of liability insurance coverage cific trails to be hiked. Rim-to-river-to- (Certificate of Insurance) naming the rim hikes are prohibited. Commercial United States Government as an day hikes must not be advertised as additional insured. Minimum accept- athletic achievements. The permittee able level of insurance is $300,000 per is responsible for organizing and occurrence. providing reasonable hikes for their clients abilities. Payment of all required fees. A nonrefundable $200 fee is charged for All backcountry use and environmental application and administration of the protection regulations apply. Specific IBP, irrespective of the IBPs length. guidelines are outlined in the Require- Entrance fees as required at the ments for Commercial Day Hiking Entrance Stations will be paid by the Use, available through the Grand permittee. Canyon National Park Division of Concessions Management. Certification that all guides/leaders meet the following qualifications Bike Tour Commercial Use Must be 18 years of age or older. Authorizations Must hold a valid Emergency Responder, Wilderness Advanced Commercially guided bike trips are First Aid, or higher, Emergency authorized under the Incidental Busi- Medical Services (EMS) certifica- ness Permit (IBP) program. IBPs are tion. mandatory for conducting commercial trips into the Park; their issuance is a The permittee must ensure that staff courtesy not an entitlement. Requests have the expertise to operate all ser- for bike tour IBPs are handled through vices authorized under the IBP. The the Division of Concessions Manage- permittee must furnish the Park with a ment. Commercial services are not list that identifies staff members and authorized until the IBP is finalized. their qualifications. A staff registration Prospective permittees should allow form must be submitted prior to working two to four weeks for permit process- in the Park. ing, and should not schedule any commercial trips to the Park prior to The maximum size for a commercially obtaining a fully executed IBP. guided day hike is 16, including guides All applicants for an IBP will be re- in the Corridor Use Area. In wilderness, quired to meet the following require- group size is limited to 11 (two guides ments prior to issuance of an IBP for nine clients).

I-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Proof of liability insurance coverage Commercial bike tours will be limited to (Certificate of Insurance) naming the the following unpaved roads which are United States Government as an open to the public. additional insured. Minimum acceptable level of insurance is $300,000 Rowe Well Road per occurrence. Pasture Wash Road from FS 328 to South Bass Trailhead (W-9 and Payment of all required fees. A nonre- W9-A) fundable $200 fee is charged for Havasupai Point Road from Pasture application and administration of the Wash Road to Havasupai Point IBP, irrespective of the IBPs length. (W-9B) Entrance fees as required at the Grandview Entrance Road (E-10) Entrance Stations will be paid by the from East Rim Drive to Grandview permittee. Entrance Desert ViewCedar Mountain Road Certification that all guides/leaders (E-14) from Desert View to Cedar meet the following qualifications Mountain Entrance Must be 18 years of age or older. Must hold a valid Emergency Commercial bike tours are limited to Responder, Wilderness Advanced roads specified in the IBP. All bikes First Aid, or higher, Emergency must stay on designated roads. Off- Medical Services (EMS) certifica- road travel is prohibited. tion. Commercial bike tours must not be The permittee must ensure that staff advertised as athletic achievements. have the expertise to operate all ser- The permittee is responsible for orga- vices authorized under the IBP. The nizing and providing reasonable rides permittee must furnish the Park with a for their clients abilities. list that identifies staff members and their qualifications. A staff registration All backcountry use and environmental form must be submitted prior to working protection regulations apply. Specific in the Park. guidelines are outlined in the Require- ments for Commercial Bike Tours, The maximum size for a commercially available through the Grand Canyon guided bike tour is 14, including guides. National Park Division of Concessions There should be no less than one guide/ Management. leader for every six clients. Bicycle use in wilderness areas is prohibited (36 CFR 4.30 (d)1).

I-5 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

I-6 Appendix J UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK CAVE ENTRY APPLICATION AND PERMIT

Permission is hereby granted to enter the following sensitive cave:

______/____/____ (Cave Name) (Cave Number) (Date of Entry)

Approved by: ______on ____/____/____

The group leader (18 years old minimum) will sign below in the first space, and will accompany the group at all times. The group leader assumes responsibility for the groups actions.

Your signature indicates you have read and understand all conditions of this permit.

Name (sign above, print below) Age Address and Phone Number

1. ______Trip Leader

______

2. ______

______

3. ______

______

4. ______

______

5. ______

______

6. ______

______

IN CASE OF EMERGENCY CONTACT: ______This permit authorizes the permittee to enter and explore the cave indicated on the reverse side of this permit. Persons signing this permit accept responsibility for informing themselves of the inherent dangers of exploring undeveloped caves, accept full responsibility for their conduct, and personal safety. The permittees shall hold harmless the Federal Government and it's employees, for any mental or physical injury or damages resulting from entering or exploring the above cave, and that the Federal Government assumes no responsibility therefore.

Removal or destruction of any natural formations, minerals, rocks, or artifacts in or near caves is prohibited. Strict adherence to all rules and regulations stated on this form is understood and agreed to.

Conditions of this Permit: 1. This permit is valid only on the date specified for cave entry. 2. This permit must be returned, even if canceling the trip. 3. The permittee copy must be in your possession while visiting the cave. All party members must sign their names, provide a phone number, and address before entering the cave. This permit is valid only for those listed on the permit. 4. The group leader must be over 18 years of age and accompany the group at all times. 5. The minimum number allowed on the trip is three (3) people, unless special permission is obtained. 6. The maximum number of people allowed on a trip is six (6) unless special permission is obtained. 7. Each person shall carry three (3) separate sources of light, a hard hat, and non-skid footwear. 8. For your safety please leave the gate key in a safe location just inside the gate, known to all members of your party. 9. The trip leader is responsible for replacing the lock and gate at the end of the cave trip. 10. All materials carried into the cave by the group must be removed and properly disposed of. The disposal of any human waste within caves is prohibited. 11. The permittee agrees that information concerning the location of this sensitive cave will not be dispersed, published, duplicated, or in any other way disseminated, unless permission is first obtained from the park service. Dissemination of cave location information can lead to vandalism or destruction of cave resources. 12. Failure to comply with any of the above requirements may result in curtailment of future cave-access privileges.

NOTICE: If you find a gate broken, please do not enter the cave, even though you have a valid permit. Entering the cave may destroy evidence needed by investigators. Notify the Park Service of any evidence of forced entry, or if you notice damage to cave resources.

If you find anyone doing damage to a cave, please get all possible information (names, date & time, vehicle descriptions, License numbers, etc.) and report the incident to the park service as soon as possible.

Please return this permit, and any cave gate keys, to Grand Canyon Science Center within seven working days.

Under Comments, please report any gates which are unlocked, have missing locks, or have locks in poor condition. Report any damage noticed in the cave.

COMMENTS: Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Overnight Use-Area Code location of the use area can be derived from its alphabetical relationship. Appendix Characters and What They Represent K Third Character Except when an area is limited to day he three-digit codes used to use only, the third character is either the reference the various overnight Use Area letter G or a numeral ranging from 0 to TTbackcountry use areas, campsites, and Classification TT 9. This character signifies the following: campgrounds can be deciphered as and Limits follows: Code Used only for

First Character 0 shared at-large use The first character is always a letter and areas (i.e., when the first tells where the use area is in general two characters of the terms. code are shared with another use area) Code Location A on the north side of the 9 at-large use areas where Colorado River below the the first two characters Canyon rim are not shared with another use area B on the south side of the Colorado River below the 8 designated campsites Canyon rim near the Colorado River 7 designated campsites C within the popular Cross- below the rim near peren- Canyon Corridor nial water L within the Lower Gorge 6 to 4 other designated campsites below the rim N above the rim on the north side of the Canyon 3 to 1 designated campsites on the rim S above the rim on the south side of the Canyon G designated campground within the popular Cross- Second Character Canyon Corridor The second character is always a letter and indicates the relative location of the use area from east to west. The east- ern-most use area is designated by the letter a and the western-most is designated by the letter z. The approximate

K-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Figure K1: Use Area Codes, Limits, and Camping Classification (A/L = At-Large camping, D/S = Designated Camping)

Use Map Opportunity Large Small Camper Camp Area ID Class Group Group Limit Type Badger AA9 Primitive 1 1 17 A/L Blacktail Canyon AU9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L Boucher BN9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L Boysag LB9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L Burnt Point LK9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L Cape Final NA1 Threshold 0 or 1 6 D/S Cape Solitude SA9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L

Cedar Mountain SB9 Threshold 2 2 34 A/L Cheyava AJ9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

Chuar AF9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

Clear Creek AK9 Threshold 1 3 29 A/L Cottonwood Creek BG9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L

Cremation BJ9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L

Deer Creek AX7 Threshold 1 1 17 D/S

Diamond Creek LG9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L Eminence Break SF9 Primitive 1 1 17 A/L

Eremita Mesa SC9 Threshold 1 or 1 11 A/L Escalante BC9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L

Esplanade AY9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L Fishtail AZ9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L Fossil BS9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L Garnet BR9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L Grand Wash Cliffs LM9 Primitive 1 or 2 12 A/L Grapevine BH9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L Greenland Spring AL9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L Hance Creek BE9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L

K-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Use Map Opportunity Large Small Camper Camp Area ID Class Group Group Limit Type

Hermit Creek BM7 Threshold 1 3 29 D/S

Hermit Rapids BM8 Threshold 1 1 17 D/S

Horseshoe Mesa BF5 Threshold 2 2 36 D/S

Indian Hollow AN9 Primitive 1 1 17 A/L

Jackass SI9 Threshold 1 1 17 A/L

Kanab Creek LA9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L

Ken Patrick NC9 Primitive 1 or 2 12 A/L

Kanab Point NK9 Primitive 1 3 29 A/L

Lava NN9 Threshold 1 1 17 A/L

Monument Cluster Horn Creek BL4 Threshold 0 1 6 D/S

Salt Creek BL5 Threshold 0 1 6 D/S

Cedar Spring BL6 Threshold 0 1 6 D/S

Monument Creek BL7 Threshold 1 3 29 D/S

Granite Rapids BL8 Threshold 1 2 23 D/S

Nankoweap AE9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L

National BU9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

North Bass AS9 Primitive 1 1 17 A/L

Olo BT9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

Outlet NG9 Primitive 1 2 17 A/L

Palisades BA9 Primitive 1 2 17 A/L

Parashant LE9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

Pasture Wash Cluster Signal Hill SE1 Threshold 0 1 6 D/S

Ruby Point SE2 Threshold 0 1 6 D/S

S. Bass Trailhead SE3 Threshold 1 or 2 12 D/S

Pasture Wash SE0 Threshold 1 1 17 A/L

K-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Use Map Opportunity Large Small Camper Camp Area ID Class Group Group Limit Type

Phantom Creek AP9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

Point Sublime NH1 Threshold 1 1 17 D/S

Powell Plateau AT9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L

Red Canyon BD9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L

Rider AB9 Primitive 1 or 1 17 A/L

Robbers Roost ND9 Primitive 1 3 29 A/L

Ruby BP9 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L

Saddle Canyon AD9 Primitive 1 1 17 A/L

Saltwater Wash SH9 Primitive 1 1 17 A/L

Scorpion Ridge AR9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

Separation LH9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

Shinumo Wash SG9 Primitive 1 1 17 A/L

Slate BO9 Primitive 1 2 17 A/L

Snap Point LL9 Primitive 1 or 2 12 A/L

Soap Creek AB0 Primitive 1 or 2 17 A/L

South Bass BQ9 Primitive 1 1 17 A/L

South Canyon AC9 Threshold 1 1 17 A/L

Surprise LJ9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

Surprise Valley AM9 Primitive 1 1 17 A/L

Swamp Ridge Cluster Fire Point NJ1 Primitive 1 or 1 11 D/S

Swamp Point NJ2 Primitive 2 or 2 22 D/S

Swamp Ridge NJ0 Primitive 1 1 17 A/L

Tanner BB9 Primitive 1 3 29 A/L

Tapeats Cluster Upper Tapeats AW7 Threshold 1 2 23 D/S

Lower Tapeats AW8 Threshold 1 1 17 D/S

Tapeats Ampitheatre AV9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

The Dome LC9 Primitive 1 or 2 12 A/L

K-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Use Map Opportunity Large Small Camper Camp Area ID Class Group Group Limit Type

Thompson Canyon NB9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

Toroweap Valley NM9 Threshold 1 2 17 A/L

Trail Canyon LF9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

Trinity AQ9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

Tuckup Point NL9 Primitive 1 3 29 A/L

Unkar AG9 Wild 1 or 2 12 A/L

Vishnu AH9 Wild 1 or 1 11 A/L

Walhalla Plateau NA0 Primitive 1 2 23 A/L

Whitmore LI9 Threshold 1 1 17 A/L

Widforss NF9 Threshold 1 2 23 A/L

Figure K2: Cross-Canyon Corridor Campgrounds and Use Limits

Use Map Large Small Camper Area ID Group Group Limit

Bright Angel CBG 2 31 90

Cottonwood (Summer) CCG 1 11 40

Cottonwood (Winter) CCG 1 11 16

Indian Garden CIG 1 15 50

Figure K3: Designated Day Use Areas in Wilderness

Use Map Area ID

Havasupai Point HAV

Long Jim LJM

Manzanita MAN

Transept TRA

Uncle Jim Point UNJ

K-5 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

K-6 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

f all the concepts dealt with in management (Johnson and Agee, Appendix conservation history, the term 1988:7). Components of these ecosys- OOnatural is one of the most persistent and tems cannot be defined at a particular L difficult to address due, in part, to its level that will unequivocally be per- cultural, aesthetic and spiritual signifi- ceived as natural. The word natural cance (Noss 1995:26). Anderson often evokes diverse value judgments Natural (1991) offered three criteria for assess- difficult to reconcile. Some authors Conditions ing the relative naturalness of an area: suggest that the tern natural has to be (1) the amount of cultural energy redefined in terms of the special at- quired to maintain the system in its tributes of each park and wilderness present state; (2) the extent to which the area (Kilgore and Nichols 1995: 27). system would change if humans were For example, plant species (e.g., removed from the scene; and (3) the ponderosa and pinyon pine) have proportion of the fauna and flora com- reacted individually to climatic changes posed of native versus nonnative spe- for millennia, so that the communities cies. Although it may be difficult to seen today on the landscape are in part define such concepts as natural (or a result of past climatic shifts and the wilderness or wildness, for that matter), differential colonization rates associ- the philosophy behind the original ated with each species (Brubaker establishment of national parks and 1988). They represent the state of the wilderness requires that we make the vegetation of the ecosystem today, but effort (Kilgore and Heinselman are not necessarily representative of 1990:308). some past equilibrium vegetation mosaic. Considerable confusion has resulted from a widespread misconception of the For fire, some authors suggest the dynamics about ecosystems. Some NPS set specific ecosystem policy envision these systems as having a goals (e.g., fire policy goals) that vary natural balance or static equilibrium that somewhat from park to park and wil- in fact does not exist (Johnson and derness to wilderness, based on vari- Agee, 1988:7). Although periods of ables in fire history, fire behavior, fire stability may exist, and multiple levels of effects, and fire responses (Kilgore and stability can be defined, park and wil- Nichols 1995: 27; Parsons and Botti derness ecosystems are described as 1996:30). A working definition for nonequilibrium systems (Holling, 1978). natural, developed for the 1983 Wilder- According to some authors, a balance ness Fire Symposium, involved both of nature occurs only over short and the fire process and the resulting ef- constrained periods. The constant in fects. According to this definition, a these systems, they maintain, is change natural fire for any given ecosystem (1) (Grumbine 1992:61-63). burns within the range and frequency distribution of fire intensities, frequen- This fact is fundamental to establishing cies, seasons, and size found in that realistic goals for park and wilderness ecosystem before arrival of technologi- L-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

cal man, and (2) yields the range of fire Ecological Integrity effects found in that ecosystem before the arrival of technological man (Kilgore A sound definition of integrity must be 1985). based on evolutionary and bio-geographic context (Noss 1995:20). For Even with this definition in mind, philo- this Wilderness Management Plan, sophical and policy questions remain ecological integrity is defined as about the appropriateness of specific restoration efforts. While the GMP (p.7) ...a state of ecosystem develop- requires the restoration of altered eco- ment that is optimized for its systems, the level and extent of all geographic location, including restoration techniques relies on a Mini- energy input, available water, mum Requirement analysis (See Chap- nutrients and colonization ter13; Appendix D, Minimum Require- history. For national parks, this ment Decision Process). In regard to optimal state has been referred large-scale techniques such as fire, to by such terms as natural, wilderness managers must decide naturally evolving, pristine and whether to (1) simply allow natural fires untouched. It implies that eco- to burn; (2) reduce obvious fuel accumu- system structures and functions lations in certain zones with prescribed are unimpaired by human- fires or other methods and then allow caused stresses and the native natural fires to burn; or (3) carefully species are present at viable restore natural stand structure to esti- population levels (Woodley mated presettlement conditions before 1993; See Noss 1995:20). allowing natural fires to burn (Bancroft, et al. 1985; Bonnicksen 1985; Bonnicksen Population Viability and Stone 1985; Lucas 1985; Parsons, Population Viability et al. 1986; Worf 1985). Population viability should be considered over centuries and should be While admitting that change is natural, highly probable, e.g., 95-99% prob- we must also accept extreme fluctuation ability using the best available popula- is abnormal in many ecosystems and, tion viability analysis (PVA) models when caused by human activity, often (Noss 1995:11). threatens native biodiversity (Noss 1995:11). In protecting natural ecosystems, human-generated change must be constrained because nature has functional, historical, and evolutionary limits (Pickett, et al. 1992).

L-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Biodiversity

This Wilderness Management Plan adopts the definition of biodiversity from the Keystone Report (1991:6) as

...the variety of life, and its process; including the variety of living organisms, the genetic differences among them, and the communities and ecosystems In which they occur.

Native biodiversity extends this definition to include viable populations of all native species in natural patterns of abundance and distribution.

L-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

L-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

ublic Law 90-542, the Wild and Suitability Study Appendix Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, as amended and supplemented, estab- Suitability studies are initiated by M PPlishes a national policy that certain Congress under Section 5(a) of the selected rivers of the nation containing Act, or by a Federal land management outstandingly remarkable values shall agency as part of its ongoing land Wild and be preserved in their free-flowing condi- management planning process under Scenic tion and protected for the benefit and Section 5(d).1 Content of the study as Rivers enjoyment of present and future genera- provided in Section 4 of the Act in- tions (NPS Management Policies, cludes: Chapter 4:26-31). a determination of the suitability of In response to the 1990 Special Direc- the river for inclusion in the national tive 90-4, Determination of Rivers on system. National Park System Lands which are a description and analysis of existing Eligible for National Wild and Scenic protection, current land ownership, Rivers System Designation, 285 miles and use in the study area. of the Colorado River and its tributaries alternatives for administration of the in Grand Canyon National Park were river area that should be included in reported as eligible for consideration as the system as well as an alternative wild or scenic rivers (see GMP 1995:3). proposing that no action be taken to The GMP states that the NPS will ac- add the river to the national system. tively pursue the designation of eligible an analysis of the impacts of the segments of the Colorado River and its proposal and alternatives, including tributaries as part of the national wild benefits and costs. and scenic rivers system. a record of consultation and coordination with other agencies and The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act pro- interests and public involvement vides two methods for adding river during the study. segments to the system. The first method is by an act of Congress to The basis for the judgment will be designate a river directly or following a documented in the study report (NPS Congressionally mandated study and a 1990:39457). The determination of positive recommendation by a study whether a river area contains outstand- team for designation. The second ingly remarkable values is a profes- method is for the Secretary of the Inte- sional judgement on the part of the rior, upon application by a governor, to study team. Rationales for proposing add a state designated river to the designation include, but are not limited National System (USDI and USDA to, 1) protection of park resources from 1982). internal or external threats, 2) to extend into or out of a park a designation or proposed designation of the river on other public lands, 3) to recognize the M-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

outstanding values of the river, or 3) as a 1 Section 5(d) states that [i]n all planning perceived aid in managing a river area for the use and in the park. development of water and related land resources, River study reports contain an NPS consideration shall position on which of the alternatives be given by all presented should be selected. Con- Federal agencies involved to potential gress may request additional input from national wild, scenic the NPS. In any event, an administrative and recreational process is required environmental river areas, and all river basin and assessment or environmental impact project plan reports statement must be prepared to evaluate submitted to the environmental implications of the Congress shall consider and recommendation. discuss any such potentials. The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture shall make specific studies and investigations to determine which additional wild, scenic and recreational river areas within the United States shall be evaluated in planning reports by all Federal agencies as potential alternative uses of the water and related land resources involved.

M-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

eveloping a conservation strat- for restoration, and document the Appendix egy for wildlife, including large temporal and spatial relationship DD carnivores, requires a concerted, between human activities and wildlife N DDintegrated research and management and carnivore status. Secondly, a effort consisting of at least ten steps: review could be designed to obtain important information about how resi- Developing Step 1 dents of the region, especially private a Regional landowners, perceive the proposed Wildlife Confirm The Focal Region For conservation program. This is an Conservation The Strategy important step in enlisting local support Strategy (Meffe and Carroll 1997). In this case, it would be the Grand Canyon ecoregion (Resource Manage- Step 3 ment Plan 1997a:2). This area consists of protected core areas (national parks, Determine Conservation Goals national monuments and national recre- for Target Species ation areas, etc.) with significant defacto wilderness lands. In order to meet the Managers can estimate the status of needs of viable populations of native populations using Population Viability species including large carnivores, the Analysis (PVA) (Shaffer and Samson study area may need to be reconfigured 1985; Suchy, et al. 1985; and Boyce as new information becomes available. 1992). This will require better informa- Significantly, no single conservation tion on sex ratios, mortality and life area can be expected to function as a span, social structure, population size self-sustaining island. The land and changes in carrying capacity, and managers immediate concern is to genetic variability. Long-term monitor- define a focal region in which implemen- ing of a species in the field can reveal tation of the strategy will effectively temporal changes in population size, counter the continuing erosion of large and help to distinguish short-term terrestrial carnivore range (Paquet and fluctuations from long-term declines. Hackman 1995:30). Demographic studies are particularly valuable in assessing the long-term Step 2 resilience of a population. In undertaking PVA the efforts should focus initially Review the Regions on species for which sufficient data is Ecological History available for exploratory modeling, e.g., the gray wolf (U.S. Department of the There are two reasons why this is im- Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service portant. First, it is useful to know what 1996). changes have occurred in the landscape, especially since European settlement. Among other things, this record will help establish benchmarks N-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Step 4 A strategy based on an ecosystem approach has to encompass commu- Improve Understanding Of The nity and population level relationships Implications Of Small (see Laundre and Lopez-Gonalez Population Sizes 1993). Carnivore community structure is thought to be influenced by predator size relative to prey size (Rosenweig Step 5 Step 5 1966), spatial and temporal differences in habitat use (Bothma et al. Determine maximum sustainable 1984), habitat configuration annual mortality rates, and (Rabinowitz and Walker 1991), and for exploited species, interspecific relationships incorporate a system to (Rosensweig 1966; Paquet and Hack- regulate nonnatural deaths. man 1995:31). This task must acknowledge the trans- boundary movements of the species Step 8 involved (Paquet and Hackman 1995:31). Determine tolerance limits of sensitive species for human Step 6 activities. Understanding how sensitive species Identify essential ecological can be preserved on multiple-use land requirements and long-term including areas of intense human ecological processes that activity needs expanding. It is not affect individual species. known how close animals already are Managers can use various methods of to a threshold level of disturbance in habitat evaluation, including interaction which direct and cumulative effects will assessment (INTASS), multispecies result in disruption. (Paquet and Hack- matrix models, multispecies virtual man 1995:31). population analysis (MSVPA), Gap Analysis Habitat Evaluation Procedures Step 9 (HEP), and cumulative impacts assessment. Design a Network Reserve Strategy.. Step 7 Step 7 Assuring long-term survival of critical wildlife species, such as large preda- Provide details on the tors, require enormous areas. For interspecific relationships of example, researchers estimate that an species that constitute the effective population of mountain lions, large carnivore associations in approximately 1000-2000 adults, the Grand Canyon ecoregion. would require about 100 million acres N-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

of wildland (Jordan 1991; Noss 1991). densities would possibly qualify areas Single reserves of this magnitude do not like the Grand Canyon Game Preserve exist in the Grand Canyon ecoregion, (North Kaibab, USFS) and BLM re- but the problem becomes manageable source conservation areas as core when we recognize that viable popula- areas. tions can be distributed over a much larger area in smaller protected units Multiple-use buffer zones comprising the metapopulation. endure a greater range of activities Metapopulations are discontinuous than core areas, but still provide impor- populations distributed over spatially tant ecological functions. They enlarge disjunct patches of suitable habitat the effective size of reserves and may separated by intervening less-suitable contribute to overall metapopulation habitat (McCullough 1996). Generally, persistence by at least temporarily viable populations are possible supporting resident individuals while provided effective connectivity exists serving as connections between source between protected subpopulations of habitats (Noss and Cooperrider:150; the metapopulation. McCullough 1996). The vast areas of BLM public lands and national forests Although Grand Canyon National Park provide excellent opportunities for this is not large enough to support long-term ecological function. viable populations of all native species, especially species with large area Connectivity, essentially the opposite requirements, linking other core areas of fragmentation, is fundamental to the by corridors holds great promise (Noss concept of regional reserve networks. and Cooperrider 1994:144). In simpli- Instead of breaking the landscape into fied form, the regional reserve network pieces, connectivity seeks ways to model consists of reserves connected preserve existing connections and by broad corridors, surrounded by a restore severed connections. The gradation of multiple-use buffer zones, connectivity of interest is functional and connected to other biogeograph- connectivity, usually measured accord- ically appropriate areas by interregional ing to the potential for movement and corridors (Noss and Cooperrider population interchange of target spe- 1994:146). cies. (Noss and Cooperrider:150-151). Connectivity implies more than physical Core areas consist of protected areas corridors. For species that disperse in such as existing National Park Service more or less random directions, such units, BLM areas of critical concern, as goshawks and spotted owls, con- wilderness areas (designated and nectivity is affected more by the suit- proposed), research natural areas, ability of the overall landscape matrix certain State preserves, and national than by the presence or absence of wildlife refuges. An emphasis on restor- discrete corridors. Multiple-use landing native biodiversity and ecological scapes with low road density and processes (e.g., fire), and reducing road minimal human disturbance generally N-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

provide adequate connectivity for most native organisms (Noss and Cooperrider 1994:151).

For corridors or other habitat linkages to serve conservation goals, their functions must be stated explicitly and analyzed carefully (Soule 1991). While the scientific literature has concentrated on the discrete, species-specific conduit function of corridors, habitat linkages have several functions affecting many species. Landscape linkages (1) provide dwelling habitat for plants and animals and (2) serve as a conduit for movement. The conduit role (a) permits daily and seasonal movement of animals; (b) facilitates dispersal and conse- quent gene flow between populations, and rescues small populations from extinction; and (c) allows long-distance range shifts of species, such as in response to climate change (Noss and Cooperrider 1994:152).

Step 10

Implement Interagency Cooperation

The General Management Plan (pp. 8-9) establishes the goal to carry the NPS concern for the environment beyond Park boundaries, including the protection of Park resources and values from external influences and to understand, assess, and consider the effects of Park decisions outside the Park as well as inside.

N-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

O-7 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Goals patrol or field session. The RCA has Appendix also been designed so that inventories o provide basic data for every are repeatable, and the campsite- O campsite in the wilderness back- monitoring program could continue on TTcountry that is reasonably located. a long-term basis. The collection of campsite information should also be Campsite To provide managers with an accurate consistent over time. Monitoring representation of campsite location, Manual distribution, and condition in Use Areas Tools needed for a field session include with a range of use levels and manage- RCA Data Sheets Rapid ment practices for the Threshold, Primi- A camera with 35-50 mm lens and color slide film Campsite tive, Semi-Primitive Mechanized, and Wild Opportunity Classes. Data Sheets and slides from previ- Assessment ous RCAs of the Use Area (RCA) USGS quad map of area 7.5 Minute Purpose Purpose Series. (Copies may be used in the To gather information that provides field then transferred to master evaluation of the standards for campsite copy) management described in the Wilder- Compass ness Management Plan concerning: Clipboard and/or Write in the Rain Notebook, pens, etc. Campsite Distribution 50-foot measuring tape (optional) Number of campsites in a square mile area Instructions for Conducting Amount of barren core area of RCA and Completing Data campsites in any ten-acre area Sheet (Attached) within Use Areas Campsite Condition The Rapid Campsite Assessment Data Sheet is relatively self explanatory. The To provide a basis for management format of the Data Sheet corresponds actions required to meet management to the dBase III+ program used for data objectives that may include treatments storage and analysis. It is also impor- such as trail and campsite rehabilitation, tant to remember that when evaluating site restoration, and/or other strategies impacts, a certain level of subjectivity is to reduce impacts to the physical and in order. social environments. Campsite Number

Method This number should correspond with the previous inventory. If an inventory The Rapid Campsite Assessment has not been conducted, field staff (RCA) method was developed to collect should number campsites consecu- as much information on campsites as tively as the inventory proceeds. possible during a routine backcountry O-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

The following may be completed prior to The following information will be re- field work: corded in the field:

Use-Area ID Barren-Core Area

The three-character code used to iden- A barren-core area is typically the tify use areas. most obvious indicator of impact. Characteristics of barren core areas Use-Area Name include: devoid of vegetation and organic litter, compacted soil, and Full name of use area such as Hermit trampled perimeter vegetation. Creek. Record the number of barren-core Recorder(s) areas within the individual campsite; tent spaces, cooking, and/or Personnel conducting inventory or social areas, etc. monitoring. Measure the size of each barren- core area with a tape, or by pacing. Date Record the dimensions of each barren core, enter as core A, B, C, Survey month, day and year. etc. Record the total barren core area. Date of Last RCA This may be calculated on site, or later. Date of last monitoring work from forms on file. If this is the first inventory, mark Impact Evaluation as Baseline. This is a total of ratings given to the General Location and Description various impacts observed at the site.

Provide enough information so that Core Area someone whos never been there before Assign a rating (0 to 10) based on could find the site. Note GPS coordi- total from (c) above. Which is high- nates, if available, and compass bear- est and lowest. ings. Information from previous RCA, and the slides will help locate the camp- Core Soil Compaction site. Determine soil compaction by firmly poking your finger onto the area. If USGS Quad theres any depression, consider this a rating of two. Use your best List the 7.5 Minute Series quad map on judgement, considering current which campsite is located. environmental conditions.

O-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Access Trails should be noted in the comments Number of distinct trails leading to/ section. It may not be necessary to from the campsite. This does not duplicate photos each monitoring include the main trail. period if no changes are noted. The duplication of photos provides a tool for Perimeter Vegetation Damage illustrating backcountry campsite condi- This does not include tree damage. tion. When taking baseline photos, it is The most common damage observed useful to include landmarks within the is a result of trampling; however, more frame, or take general location photos, severe impacts such pulled grass for and label accordingly. bedding has also been observed. The photo log enables you to transfer Tree Damage this information to the slides when they Determine whether or not damage is have been developed. It is also useful new. Compare to previous data to carry a separate photo log to record sheets, if any. information other than the campsite slides. Noting the compass bearing Access Trail Erosion enables the next monitor to relocate the Determine if over two inches of ero- photo direction. The description should sion has occurred on access trails. be brief such as: Cores A and B Record number of trails affected. looking SSE from 16' away, or, 245o 10' away from trail. Fire Impacts Evaluate evidence of fire impacts. Overall Condition Rating Note presence of charcoal, fire scars, etc. Based on previous information and judgement, rate the condition of the Total Impact Rating campsite in comparison to the previous monitoring session. Circle Baseline if Record impact rating by adding the this is the initial inventory. This informa- score for each variable (described tion is used in evaluating the overall above). condition of wilderness campsites by use areas, and for determining a moni- Condition Class Rating toring schedule.

Record condition class rating based on Comments total impact score. This may include additional information Photo Log (1) useful in relocating the site, or if it was not reasonably relocated, (2) Color slides are used in the field for reference to archeological sites, and relocating campsites, and for evaluating distance to water, (3) changes from change over time. Any changes seen previous RCA, (4) notes on impacts or

O-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

improvement of site, and (5) observa- tions or recommendations for management action.

After Completing the Field Session

Make sure information on Data Sheet is complete and legible. Send in slides for processing. Label when returned (see below). Complete Campsite Monitoring Trip Report to summarize activities and campsites monitored. Plot all campsites on master map. Return report, data sheets and labeled slides to master file at the Science Center.

Slide Labeling

All slides should be labeled with use- area name and number, photo number, campsite number, date, and description similar to that recorded on data sheet.

O-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

RAPID CAMPSITE ASSESSMENT (RCA) DATA SHEET

1. Campsite # 2. Use Area ID 3. Use Area Name 4. Recorder(s) 5. Date 6. Date of Last RCA 7. General location & Description (GPS)

8. USGS Quad 9. BARREN CORE MEASUREMENTS: Number of barren core areas Size of each A: x = B: x = C: x = D: x = E: x = TOTAL of all barren core areas in square feet: 10. IMPACT EVALUATION: RATING Core Area Rating: 0:<25 2:26-50 4:51-100 6:101-250 8:251-500 10: >500 Core Soil Compaction as result of human impacts: 0: Minimal surface disturbance 2: Surface Compacted but not cement like 3: Surface cement like in compaction Access Trails: 0: No distinct trails 1: 1-2 distinct trails 2: >2 distinct trails Perimeter Vegetation Damage: 0: Not apparent off trails 2: Obvious damage to perimeter vegetation Tree Damage: 0: Not evident 1: Old damage 3: New damage Access Trails eroded >2 inches below ground surface: 0: No 1: Yes Number of trails eroded below ground surface: Permanent impacts from fires 0: Not evident 1: Small impact 3: Large impact

TOTAL IMPACT RATING Impact Rating: 0 - 5 Condition Class #1 6 - 10 #2 11 - 15 #3 CONDITION CLASS RATING 16 - 20 #4 20 - 25 #5

Photo Log: Roll # Focal length of lens Photo # Compass Bearing Description Photo # Compass Bearing Description Photo # Compass Bearing Description Photo # Compass Bearing Description

Overall Condition Rating based on comparison of previous RCA (circle one): No Change Positive Change Negative Change Baseline Other

Comments: (Use back for maps)

O-5 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

CAMPSITE MONITORING TRIP REPORT

Trip Date(s): Name(s) ______Use Area Name: _ Use Area Number: ______

Campsites Inventoried (Numbers and Locations):

Campsites Located but not Inventoried: (Describe where they are located. Have they been plotted on the map?)

Description of area that was surveyed sufficiently to find approximately 95% of all existing campsites:

Description of areas that need additional surveys to find 95% of campsites:

OTHER COMMENTS:

POST-TRIP CHECKLIST:

1. Location and number of all campsites plotted on map? 2. Sketch maps for cluster sites completed (Redrawn for clarity)? 3. Data sheets checks to ensure accuracy? 4. Photographs labeled and place in folder with data sheets?

O-6 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Amor, R.L., and P.L. Stevens. 1976. Spread of Weeds from a Roadside Into Biblio- Scierophyll Forests at Dartmouth, Australia. Weed Research. 16:111-118. Anderson, J.E. 1991. A Conceptual Framework for Evaluating and Quantifying graphy Naturalness. Conservation Biology 5:347-352. Arthur Carhart National Wilderness Training Center. 1993. Wilderness Ranger Training Module. Huson, MT: Arthur Carhart National Wilderness Training Center. Bancroft, Larry, Thomas Nichols, David Parsons, David Graber, Boyd Evison, and Jan Van Wagtendonk. 1985. In Lotan, James E., et al., Technical Coordina- tors. ProceedingsSymposium and Workshop on Wilderness Fire; 1983 November 15-18; Missoula, MT. General Technical Report INT-182. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station:174-180. Belnap, J. 1993. Recovery Rates of Cryptobiotic Crusts: Inoculant Use and As- sessment Methods. Great Basin Naturalist 53:89-95. Beymer, R.J., and J.M. Klopatek. 1992. Effects of Grazing on Cryptogamic Crusts in Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands in Grand Canyon National Park. American Midland Naturalist. 127:139-148. Bonnicksen, Thomas M. 1985. Ecological Information Base for Park and Wilder- ness Fire Management Planning. In Lotan, James E. et al., Technical Coordi- nators. ProceedingsSymposium and Workshop on Wilderness Fire; 1983 November 15-18; Missoula, MT. General Technical Report INT-182. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station:168-173. Bonnicksen, Thomas M., and Edward Stone. 1985. Restoring Naturalness to National Parks. Environmental Management. 9(6):479-486. Bothma, J.P., J.A.J. Nel, and A. MacDonald. 1984. Food Niche Separation Be- tween Four Symatric Namib Desert Carnivores. Journal of Zoology. London. 202:327-340. Botti, Stephen J., Thomas Zimmerman, Howard T. Nichols, and Jan Van Wagtendonk. 1994. Fire Management and Ecosystem Health in the Na- tional Park System. Document on file at Grand Canyon National Park Sci- ence Center. Boyce, M.S. 1992. Population Viability Analysis. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 23:481-506. Brown, Bryan T.; Steven Carothers, and R. Roy Johnson. 1987. Grand Canyon Birds. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. 302 p. Brown, David E. 1983. The Wolf in the Southwest: The Making of an Endan- gered Species. Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona Press. 195 p. Brubaker, Linda B. 1988. Vegetation History and Anticipating Future Vegetation Change. Pages 41-61 In Agee, James K., and Darryll R. Johnson. Ecosystem Management for Parks and Wilderness. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press. Biblio-1 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Buckley, R., and J. Pannell. 1990. Environmental Impacts of Tourism and Recre- ation in Natural Parks on Conservation Research. Journal of Tourism Studies, 1:24-32. Carothers, Steven W.: and Bryan Brown. 1991. The Colorado River through Grand Canyon: Natural History and Human Change. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. 236 p. Christensen, Norman L., Ann M. Bartuska, James H. Brown, Stephen Carpenter, Carla DAntonio, Robert Francis, Jerry F. Franklin, James A. MacHahon, Reed F. Noss, David J. Parsons, Charles H. Peterson, Monica G. Turner, and Robert G. Woodmansee. 1996. The Report of the Ecological Society of America Committee on the Scientific Basis for Ecosystem Management. Ecological Applications 6(3):665-691. Clark, Tim W., A. Peyton Curlee, and Richard P. Reading. 1996. Crafting Effective Solutions to the Large Carnivore Conservation Problem. Conservation Biology 10(4):940-948. Cole, David N. 1985. Ecological Impacts on Backcountry Campsites in Grand Canyon National Park. Final Report, Missoula, MT. Systems for Environmental Management. 96p. Cole, David N. 1989. Low-Impact Recreational Practices for Wilderness and Backcountry. General Technical Report INT-265. Ogden, UT: U.S. Depart- ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 131 p. Cole, David N. 1989a. Wilderness Campsite Monitoring Methods: A Sourcebook. General Technical Report INT-259. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agricul- ture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 57p. Cole, David N. 1990. Ecological Impacts of Wilderness Recreation and Their Management. In Hendee, John C., George H. Stankey, and Robert C. Lucas. 1990. Wilderness Management. Fulcum Publishing, Golden, Colorado. Pages 425-426. Cole, David N. 1990a. Trampling Disturbance and Recovery of Cryptogamic Soil Crusts in Grand Canyon National Park. Great Basin Naturalist 50(4):321-325. Cole, David N. 1990b. Wilderness Management: Has It Come of Age? Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 45(3):360-364. Cole, David N. 1991. Changes on Trails in the Selway-Bitteroot Wilderness, Montana, 1978-89. General Technical Report INT-450. Ogden UT: US Depart- ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 5p. Cole, David N. 1994. Backcountry Impact Management: Lessons from Research. Trends.31(3):10-14. Cole, David N. 1995. Defining Fire and Wilderness Objectives: Applying Limits of Acceptable Changes. In Brown, James K., Robert W. Mutch, Charles W. Spoon, and Ronald H. Wakimoto (Technical Coordinators). Proceedings: Symposium of Fire in Wilderness and Park Management, 1995, March 30- April 1; Missoula, MT. General Technical Report INT-GTR-320. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. Biblio-2 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Cole, David N., and Troy E. Hall. 1992. Trends In Campsite Condition: Eagle Cap Wilderness, Bob Marshall Wilderness, and Grand Canyon National Park. Research Paper. INT-453. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 40p. Cole, David N., Petersen, Margaret E., Lucas, Robert C. 1987. Managing Wilder- ness Recreation Use: Common Problems and Potential Solutions. General Technical Report INT-230. Ogden, UT. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 60p. Colorado State University. 1991. Syllabus for Wilderness Management Skills and Projections. (RR 455/DCE 177). Ft. Collins, CO: Colorado State Univer- sity. Cooperrider, Allen Y. 1996. Science as a Model for Ecosystem Management Panacea or Problem? Ecological Applications 6(3):736-737. Crumbo, Kim. 1996. Wilderness Management at Grand Canyon: Waiting for Godot? International Journal of Wilderness. 2(1):19-23. Day, A.D., and K.L. Ludeke. 1990. Forest Litter as a Seed Source in Coal Mine Reclamation in the Southwest. Desert Plants. 10(2):58-60. Dutton, Clarence Edward. 1882. The Tertiary History of the Grand Canyon; with atlas. U.S. Geological Survey Monograph 2. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. 264 p. Fleischner, Thomas L. 1992. Preservation is not Enough: The Need for Courage in Wilderness Management. In S.I. Zeveloff, L.M. Vause, and W.H. McVaugh, eds., Wilderness Tapestry: An Eclectic Approach to Preservation. Reno, Nevada: University of Nevada Press. Pages 236-253. Fletcher, J.E., and W.P. Martin. 1948. Some Effects of Algae and Molds in the Rain-Crusts of Desert Soils. Ecology. 29(1):95-100. Francis, C.F. 1994. Plants on Desert Hill Slopes. In Abrams, A.D., and A.J. Par- sons [eds.] Geomorphology of Desert Environments. London: Chapman and Hall. Gelt, Joe. 1993. Abandoned Farmland Often is Troubled Land in Need of Restora- tion. Arroyo 7(2):1-8. General Accounting Office (GAO). 1994. Ecosystem Management: Additional Actions Needed to Adequately Test a Promising Approach. GAO/RCED-94- 111. 87 p. Goldstein, Bruce. 1992. The Struggle Over Ecosystem Management at Yellowstone. Bioscience 42(3):183-187. Gray, Brian E. 1998. No Holier Temples: Protecting the National Parks through Wild and Scenic River Designation. In Simon, David J. (ed.) Our Common Lands: Defending the National Parks. Washington D.C.; Covelo, CA: Island Press. Pages 331-386. Grumbine, R. Edward. 1991. Cooperation or Conflict? Interagency Relationships and the Future of Biodiversity for U.S. Parks and Forests. Environmental Management 15(1):27-37. Biblio-3 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Grumbine, R. Edward. 1992. Ghost Bears: Exploring the Biodiversity Crisis. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. Grumbine, Edward R. 1994. What is Ecosystem Management? Conservation Biology 8(1):31. Grumbine, Edward R. 1997. Reflections on What is Ecosystem Management? Conservation Biology 11(1):41-47. Hammitt, William E., David N. Cole. 1987. Wildland Recreation: Ecology and Management. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 341p. Hardy, W. Scott and Associates. 1971. Official Report of Proceedings Before the United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service: In the Matter of the Public Hearing of the Wilderness Proposal for Grand Canyon National Park, Grand Canyon, Arizona. May 18, 1971. 109p. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. Harper, K.T., and J.R. Marble. 1988. A Role for Non-vascular Plants in Manage- ment of Semiarid Rangelands. In Tueller, P.T., (ed.). Vegetation Science Applications for Rangeland Analysis and Management. Kluwer Academic Publishers, London:135-169. Heim, Margaret L. 1994. Rehabilitation of Sites along the Colorado River through Grand Canyon National Park. Colorado Plateau 4(3):4,7. Hendee, John C., George H. Stankey, and Robert C. Lucas. 1990. Wilderness Management. Fulcum Publishing, Golden, Colorado. 546 p. Hoffman, Martos. 1989. Backcountry Campsite Monitoring Program 1989 Status Report. Grand Canyon National Park, AZ. Copy on file, Grand Canyon Na- tional Park Science Center. Holling, C.S. (ed.) 1978. Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Manage- ment. London: John Wiley and Sons. Huffman, Jim. 1993. Between River and Rim: A Comparative View of Subsis- tence Systems in Grand Canyon, Arizona. Unpublished Thesis. Flagstaff, Arizona: Northern Arizona University. Pages 14-36. Jackson, Laura L., Joseph R. McAuliffe, and Bruce A. Roundy. 1991. Desert Restoration. Restoration and Management Notes 9(2):71-80. Jalbert, Linda M. 1990. Monitoring Visitor Distribution and Use Patterns along the Colorado River Corridor. Status Report on River Contact Survey and Attraction Site Monitoring. January, 1990. On File, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. Jalbert, Linda M. 1991. Monitoring Visitor Distribution and Use Patterns along the Colorado River Corridor. Status Report on River Contact Survey and Attraction Site Monitoring. On file, Grand Canyon National Park. Jalbert, Linda M. 1992. Sociological Monitoring Status Report (draft). On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. Jalbert, Linda M. 1993. Backcountry Campsite Monitoring Program: Rapid Campsite Assessment Status Report. Reports on file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. Biblio-4 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Jalbert, Linda M. 1996. Backcountry Campsite Monitoring Program: Rapid Campsite Assessment Status Report. Reports on file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. Johnson, Darryll R., and James K. Agee. 1988. Introduction to Ecosystem Man- agement. Pages 3-14. In Agee, James K., and Darryll R. Johnson. Ecosystem Management for Parks and Wilderness. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press. Jordon, D.B. 1991. A Proposal to Establish a Captive Breeding Population of Florida Panthers. Draft Supplemental Environmental Assessment. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Gainesville, FL. Keiter, Robert B. 1989. Taking account of the Ecosystem on the Public Domain: Law and Ecology in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. University of Colo- rado Law Review 60:923-1007. Keiter, Robert B. 1996. Toward Legitimizing Ecosystem Management on the Public Domain. Ecological Applications, 6(3):727-730. Ketcheson, Gary L., and Walter F. Megahan. 1996. Sediment Production and Downslope Sediment Transport from Forest Roads in Granitic Watersheds. Research Paper INT-RP-486. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 11 p. Keystone Center. 1991. Final Consensus Report on the Keystone Policy Dia- logue. Keystone, CO: The Keystone Center. 96 p. Keystone Center. 1996. The Keystone National Policy Dialogue on Ecosystem Management. Final Report. Keystone, CO: The Keystone Center. 43 p. Kiff, Lloyd F., Robert I. Mesta, and Michael P. Wallace. 1996. Recovery Plan for the California Condor. Portland, OR: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 62 p. Kilgore, Bruce M. 1985. What is Natural in Wilderness Fire Management? In Lotan, James E., et al., Technical Coordinators. ProceedingsSymposium and Workshop on Wilderness Fire; 1983 November 15-18; Missoula, MT. General Technical Report INT-182. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station:57-67. Kilgore, Bruce M., and Tom Nichols. 1995. National Park Service Fire Policies and Programs. In Brown, James K., Robert W. Mutch, Charles W Spoon, Ronald H. Watkimoto, Technical Coordinators. 1995. ProceedingsSymposium on Fire in Wilderness and Park Management; 1993 March 30-April 1; Missoula, MT. General Technical Report INT-GTR-320. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station:24-29. Kilgore, Bruce M., and Miron L. Heinselman. 1990. Fire in Wilderness Ecosys- tems. In Hendee, John C., George H. Stankey, and Robert C. Lucas. Wilder- ness Management. Golden, CO: Fulcrum Publishing:297-335. Knapp, Eric E., and Kevin J. Rice. 1994. Starting from Seed: Genetic Issues in Using Native Grasses for Restoration. Restoration and Management Notes 12(1):40-45.

Biblio-5 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Ladyman, Juanita A.R., and Esteban Muldavin. 1996. Terrestrial Cryptogam of Pinyon-Juniper Woodlands in the Southwestern United States: A Review. General Technical Report RM-GTR-280. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 33 p. Laundre, J., and C. Lopen-Gonalez. 1993. In Clark, T.W., A.P. Curlee, and R.P. Reading (eds.) Conserving Threatened Carnivores: Developing Interdiscipli- nary, Problem-Oriented Strategies. Report on a meeting held August 26, 1993, Bozeman, MT. Northern Rockies Conservation Cooperative., Jackson, Wyoming. Pages 47-50. Lockhart, William J. 1988. External Park Threats and Interiors Limits: The Need for an Independent National Park Service. In David Simon (ed.), Our Common Lands; Defending the National Parks. Covelo, CA; Washington, D.C.: Island Press. Pages 3-72. Lucas, Robert C. 1980. Use Patterns and Visitor Characteristics, Attitudes and Preferences in Nine Wilderness and Other Roadless Areas. U.S. Depart- ment of Agriculture, Forest Service Research Paper INT-258. Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT. Page 68. Lucas, Robert C. 1985. Planned Ignitions in Wilderness: Response to Paper by William A. Worf. In Lotan, James E., et al., Technical Coordinators. Proceed- ingsSymposium and Workshop on Wilderness Fire; 1983 November 15- 18; Missoula, MT. General Technical Report INT-182. Ogden, UT: U.S. Depart- ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experi- ment Station:286-290. Manning, Robert E. 1986. Studies in Outdoor Recreation. Oregon State Univer- sity Press: Corvallis, OR. Marion, Jeffrey L., Joseph W. Roggenbuck, Robert E. Manning. 1993. Natural Resources Report 93-12. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Na- tional Park Service, Natural Resources Publication Office. 64p. May, Larry. 1992. Record of Call (10 August 1992). On file, Grand Canyon Na- tional Park Science Center. Mazzu, Linda C. 1995. Intensive Reconnaissance Sampling of Grand Canyon Tributaries. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. McQuaid-Cook, J. 1978. Effects of Hikers and Horses on Mountain Trails. Journal of Environmental Management. 6:209-212. McCullough, Dale R. (ed.) 1996. Metapopulations and Wildlife Conservation. Washington D.C.; Covelo, CA: Island Press. 429p. Mech, L.D., S.H. Fritts, G.L. Raddle, and W.J. Paul. 1988. Wolf Distribution and Road Density in Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 16:85-87. Meffe, G.K., and C.R. Carroll (eds.). 1997. Principles of Conservation Biology. Sinauer Associates., Sunderland, MA. 600 p.

Biblio-6 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Moll, Jeffry E. 1996. A Guide for Road Closure and Obliteration in the Forest Service. San Dimas, California: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Ser- vice, San Dimas Technology and Development Center. 49 p. Moore, Steven D., Mitchell P. McClaran.1991. Symbolic Dimensions of Wildlife. Leisure Sciences. 13:221-237. Morgan, John P. 1994. Soil Impoverishment: A Little-Known Technique Holds Potential for Establishing a Prairie. Restoration and Management Notes. 12(1):55-56. Murphy, Dennis D.: and Barry R. Noon. 1992. Integrating Scientific Methods with Habitat Conservation Planning: Reserve Design for Northern Spotted Owls. Ecological Applications 2(1):3-17. Nagy, J.A. S., and G.W. Scotter. 1974. A Quantitative Assessment of the Effects of Human and Horse Trampling on Natural Areas. Waterton Lakes National Park. Unpublished report on file at: Canadian Wildlife Service, Edmonton, AP. 145 p. National Park Service Organic Act of 1916. 39 Stat. 535, 16 USC 1. National Park Service Organic Act Amendments. 1978. (Redwoods) Pub. Law No. 95-250 92 STAT. 166 (1978) (Codified at 16 USC 1A-1, 79b-79q (1982). National Research Council. 1992. Science and the National Parks. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Noss, Reed. 1991. A Critical Review of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services Proposal to Establish a Captive Breeding Population of Florida Panthers, With Emphasis on the Population Reestablishment Issue. Report to the Fund for Animals. Washington D.C. Noss, Reed. 1995. The Ecological Effects of Roads. Road-Rippers Handbook. Missoula, Montana: ROAD-RIP. Pages 11-20. Noss, Reed. 1995a. Maintaining Ecological Integrity in Representative Reserve Networks. Discussion Paper. Toronto; Washington D.C.; Covelo, CA: Island Press. 416p. Noss, Reed F., and Allen Y. Cooperrider. 1994. Saving Natures Legacy. Covelo, California: Island Press. 465p. Noss, Reed F., Edward T. LaRoe III, and J. Michael Scott. 1995. Endangered Ecosystems of the United States: A Preliminary Assessment of Loss and Degradation. Biological Report 28. Washington D.C.: National Biological Survey. 68p. Noss, Reed F., and Robert Peters. 1995. Endangered Ecosystems: A Status Report on Americas Vanishing Habitat and Wildlife. Defenders of Wildlife. Washington, D.C. 132p. Parsons, D.J., D.M. Graber, J.K. Agee, and J.W. van Wagtendonk. 1986. Natural Fire Management in National Parks. Environmental Management. 10(1):21- 24.

Biblio-7 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Parsons, David J. and Stephen J. Botti. 1996. Restoration of Fire in National Parks. In Hardy, Colin C., and Stephen F. Arno. 1996. The Use of Fire in Forest Restoration. General Technical Report INT-GTR-341. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. Pages 29-31. Paquet, Paul and Arlin Hackman. 1995. Large Carnivore Conservation in the Rocky Mountains: A Long-Term Strategy for Maintaining Free-Ranging and Self-Sustaining Populations of Carnivores. Toronto; Washington, D.C.: World Wildlife Fund. 52 p. Pickett, S.T.A., V.T. Parker, and P.L. Fiedler. 1992. The New Paradigm in Ecology: Implications for Conservation Biology Above the Species Level. In P.L. Fiedler and S.K. Jain (eds), Conservation Biology: The Theory and Practice of Nature Conservation, Preservation, and Management. New York: Chapman and Hall. Pages 65-88. Primm, Steven A., and Tim W. Clark. 1996. The Greater Yellowstone Policy De- bate: What is the Policy Problem? Policy Sciences 29:137-166. Rabinowitz, A, and S. Walker. 1991. The Carnivore Community in a Dry Tropical Forest Mosaic in Huai Kha Khaeng Sanctuary, Thailand. Journal of Tropical Ecology. 7:37-47. Reed, Rebecca A., Julia Johnson-Barnard, and William L. Baker. 1996. Contribu- tion of Roads to Forest Fragmentation in the Rocky Mountains. Conservation Biology 10(4):1098-1106. Rihs, John. 1997. Annual Water Quality and Stream Inventory Report for 1996. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. Rosenweig, M.L. 1966. Community Structure in Sympatric Carnivora. Journal Of Mammalogy 47:602-612. Roggenbuck, Joseph W., Jeffrey L. Marion, Robert E. Manning. 1994. Day Users of the Backcountry: The Neglected National Park Visitor. Trends 31(3):19-24. Ruggiero, L.F., K.B. Aubry, W.W. Buskirk, L.J. Lyon, and W.J. Ziliniski. 1994. The Scientific Basis for Conserving Forest Carnivores; American Martin, Fisher, Lynx, and Wolverine in Western U.S. Technical Report RM-254, Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 184 p. Shaffer, M.L., and F.B. Samson. 1985. Population Size and Extinction: A Note on Determining Critical Population Size. American Naturalist. 125:144-152. Society of American Foresters (SAF). 1989a. Managing Wilderness as a Re- source, In Wilderness ManagementReport of the Society of American Foresters Wilderness Management Task Force. SAF Resource Policy Se- ries. Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, Maryland:3-14. Society of American Foresters (SAF). 1989b. Recreation Management. In Wil- derness ManagementReport of the Society of American Foresters Wilder- ness Management Task Force. SAF Resource Policy Series. Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, Maryland:15-24.

Biblio-8 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Soule, M.E. 1991. Theory and Strategy. In Hudson, W.E. (ed.) Landscape Link- ages and Biodiversity. Washington D.C.: Island Press and Defenders of Wild- life. Pages 91-104. St. Clair, L.L., B.L. Webb, J.R. Johansen, and G.T. Nebecker. 1984. Cryptogamic Soil Crusts: Enhancement of Seedling Establishment in Disturbed and Undis- turbed Areas. Reclamation and Revegetation Research. 3:129-136. Stankey, G. H. 1980. Wilderness Carrying Capacity: Management and Research Progress in the United States. Landscape Research 5:6-11. Stankey, George H. 1990. The Wilderness Act: Legal Basis for Wilderness Man- agement. In John C. Hendee, George H. Stankey and Robert C. Lucas. Wil- derness Management. Golden, CO: Fulcrum Pulbishing:99-121[106]. Stankey, George H., David N. Cole, Robert C. Lucas, Margaret E. Petersen, Sidney S. Frissell. 1985. The Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) System for Wilderness Planning. General Technical Report INT-176. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 37p. Stewart, William P. 1987. Different Groups, Different Perceptions: A Context for Understanding the Management of Backcountry Use. Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation, University of Arizona. Suchy, W., L.L. McDonald, M.D. Strickland, and S.H. Anderson. 1985. New Esti- mates of Minimum Viable Population Size for Grizzly Bears of the Yellowstone Ecosystem. Wilderness Society Bulletin. 13:223-228. Thiel, R.P. 1985. Relationship Between Road Densities and Wolf Habitat Suitabil- ity in Wisconsin. American Midland Naturalist 113:404-407. Thomas, J.T. 1983. Mt. Emma Radio Repeater. Environmental Clearance dated July 1. Copy on file, Grand Canyon Science Center. Towler, William Leonard. 1977. Hiker Perception of Wilderness in Grand Canyon National Park: A Study of Social Carrying Capacity. Masters thesis, Univer- sity of Arizona. Underhill, A. Heaton, William P. Stewart, Robert E. Manning, Edwin H. Carpenter. 1986. A Sociological Study of Backcountry Users at Grand Canyon National Park. Technical Report 17. Tucson, AZ: Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit, University of Arizona. 88p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Forest Service. 1982. Recreation Oppor- tunity Spectrum Users Guide. Washington, D.C: Forest Service. 38 p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Forest Service. 1995. Minimum Impact Suppression Tactics. Southwest Region. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1982. National Wild and Scenic Rivers System; Final Revised Guidelines for Eligibility, Classification and Management of River Areas. Federal Register, September 7, 1982. 47(173):39454-39461.

Biblio-9 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

U.S. Department of Agriculture. National Forest Service and U.S. Department of Interior. Bureau of Land Management, and Wilderness Inquiry, Inc. 1996. Wilderness Access Decision Tool. U.S. Department of Agriculture; U.S. Department of the Interior; and the National Outdoors Leadership School. 1994. Memorandum of Understanding Be- tween the Department of Agriculture (Forest Service), Department of Interior (Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, Bureau of Reclama- tion, and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service), and the National Outdoor Leadership School, Concerning the Leave No Trace Program. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. 7 p. U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation. 1995. Operation of Glen Canyon Dam: Final Environmental Impact Statement. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. 337 p. plus appendices. U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation. 1996. Record of Deci- sion, Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Final Environmental Impact State- ment. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1970. Preliminary Wilder- ness Study for Grand Canyon National Park, Marble Canyon National Monument, and Grand Canyon National Monument. 17p. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1971. Final Draft Wilder- ness Recommendation: Grand Canyon Complex. On File, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1971a. Wilderness Rec- ommendation: Grand Canyon Complex. November 1971. 65p. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1972. Wilderness Recom- mendation: Grand Canyon Complex. Septermber 1972. 28 pages plus appendicies and maps. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1973. Final Environmental Statement for Proposed Wilderness Classification: Grand Canyon Complex. 104p. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1974. Backcountry Use and Operation Plan. Grand Canyon National Park, AZ. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1976. Preliminary Wilder- ness Proposal: Grand Canyon. July 1976. 38 pages. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1976a. Draft Environmen- tal Statement: Proposed Wilderness Classification for Grand Canyon Na- tional Park. DES 76-28. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1977. Final Wilderness Recommendation. 131p. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Cen- ter. Biblio-10 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1977a. Wilderness Rec- ommendation, Grand Canyon Nationa Park. Memorandum to Regional Director, Western Region, NPS, from the Chief, Office of Legislation. January 5, 1977. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1979. Wilderness Recom- mendation, Grand Canyon national Park. Memorandum to Solicitor, through the Assistnat Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. Dated April 3, 1979. On file (N1632), Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1980. Final Wilderness Recommendation. 131 p. plus appendices and map. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1980b. Exhibit A (Map accompanying the 1980 Wilderness Recommendation). On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. 1980c. Wilderness Recom- mendation, Grand Canyon National Park. Memorandum from the Director, National Park Service, to the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. Dated September 11, 1980. On file, Grand Canyon Science Center [N1623]. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1981. Colorado River Management Plan and Annual Operating Requirements: Grand Canyon National Park. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1982. NPS-2: Planning Process Guideline (revised 1983, 1985). Denver, CO: Denver Service Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1982a. Memorandum of Understanding Between the Havasupai Tribe and the National Park Service Regarding the Havasupai traditional Use Lands. Dated September 20, 1992. On file at the Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1983. NPS Trails Manage- ment Handbook. Denver Service Center. 53 p. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1983a. Backcountry Man- agement Plan. Grand Canyon National Park, AZ. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1986. NPS-48, Conces- sions. Release No. 2, as subsequently amended. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1988. NPS Management Policies. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1989. Grand Canyon National Park Colorado River Management Plan. Grand Canyon National Park, AZ. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1989a. NPS-9, Law Enforecement Guidelines. Washington, D.C.

Biblio-11 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1990. Special Directive 90-4 (June 15). Determination of Rivers on National Park Service Lands which are Eligible for National Wild and Scenic Rivers System Designation. Washington Office. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1991. NPS 77: Natural Resources Management Guideline. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1991a. Field Guidance on Implementing the NPS Management Policies Re: Administrative Use of In- Park Borrow Material. Special Directive 91. August 5. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. May, 1991b. Grand Can- yon Internal Aviation Management Plan. On file Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. 1992. Grand Canyon National Park Fire Management Plan. 223 p. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. 1992. Memorandum to the Superintendent, Grand Canyon National Park, from the Aviation and Fire Management Officer. Dated March 13, 1992. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center [N1623]. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1993. Final Wilderness Recommendation, 1993 Update. 14 p. plus appendices and map. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. 1993a. Grand Canyon Na- tional Park Search and Rescue Plan. 29 p. On file at the Grand Canyon National Park Ranger Operations. U. S. Department of Interior. National Park Service. 1993b. Memorandum of Understanding Between Grand Canyon National Park and Grand Canyon Natural History Association. Dated June 3, 1993. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. 3 p. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1993c. Grand Canyon National Park Compendium of Closures and Restrictions. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Superintendents Office. 10 p. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1993d. Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Recommendation. Memorandum to the Director, National Park Service, from the Superintendent, Grand Canyon National Park. (N1623[GRCA8213]). 2p. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1994. Wilderness Task Force Report on Improving Wilderness Management in the National Park Service. Ranger Activities Division, September 3, 1994.

Biblio-12 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1994a. NPS-28. Cultural Resource Management Guideline. Release Number 4. Washington, D.C. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1994b. Implementing the Recommendations of the 1993 Wilderness Task Force Report. Memoran- dum (N1632[650]) from the Director, National Park Service, to All Superin- tendents with Designated Wilderness, Wilderness Study Areas, or Areas Recommended to Congress for Wilderness Designation. November 4. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1994c. Wilderness Task Force Recommendations. Memorandum (N1632[GRCA 8211]) from the Superintendent, Grand Canyon National Park, to the Deputy Superintendent. November 30. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1994d. Wilderness Task Force Report on Improving Wilderness management in the National Park Service. September 3, 1994. Prepared by the 1993 Wilderness Task Force, Washington, D.C. 38p. U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. 1995. General Management Plan, Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona. National Park Service, Denver Service Center. 67p. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. February 1, 1995a. Special Directive 95-2: Management Planning Policy for Suitable, Proposed, Rec- ommended and Potential Wilderness Areas. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1995b. Bat Cave Restora- tion FONSI. Memorandum from Superintendent, Grand Canyon National Park, to Director, Grand Canyon Science Center (L76 [GRCA 8211]) dated October 10. 2 pages. On file at Grand Canyon National Park Science Center (N1623). U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1995c. Wilderness Re- source Management Team. Memorandum from the Deputy Superintendent, Grand Canyon National Park, to the Director, Grand Canyon National Park Science Center, et al. October 26. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Sci- ence Center. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1995d. Emergency Medi- cal Services Plan. October 3, 1995. 20p plus appendix. U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. 1996. Grand Canyon National Park Safety Policy. Memorandum (A76 [GRCA 8221]), dated May 3. 3p. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Superintendents Office. U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. 1996a. Grand Canyon Na- tional Park Emergency Communications for Backcountry Operations. Stan- dard Operating Procedure 8221-004, Memorandum (A56 [GRCA 8221]), dated June 3. 2 p. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Superintendents Office.

Biblio-13 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. 1996b. Grand Canyon Na- tional Park Emergency Reporting Procedures. Standard Operating Proce- dure 8221-005, Memorandum (A56 [GRCA 8221]), dated June 3. 2 p. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Superintendents Office. U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. 1996c. Grand Canyon Na- tional Park Emergency Medical Requirements in Backcountry Operations. Standard Operating Procedure 8221-003, Memorandum (A56 [GRCA 8221]), dated June 3. 3p. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Superintendents Office. U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. 1996d. Grand Canyon Na- tional Park Hazards from Intentional Movement of Objects During Trail Restoration. Standard Operating Procedure 8221-002, Memorandum (A56 [GRCA 8221]), dated June 3. 2p. On file, Grand Canyon National Park Superintendents Office. U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. 1996f. National Park Service Strategic Plan Final Draft. Resource Planning Group, Denver, Colorado. 59p. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1996g. Preserving Our Natural Heritage: A Strategic Plan for Managing Invasive Nonnative Plants on National Park System Lands. 16p. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1997a. Grand Canyon National Park Resource Management Plan. Grand Canyon National Park, AZ. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1997b. Draft NPS Wilder- ness Guidelines. National Wilderness Steering Committee. On file Grand Canyon National Park Science Center. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1997c. Draft Grand Can- yon National Park Cave and Karst Management Plan. Grand Canyon Na- tional Park, AZ. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. 1997d. Draft Directors Order #41: Wilderness Preservation and Management. Section 11: Wilder- ness Use by Persons with Disabilities. Washington, D.C. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. Undated. Natural Register Bulletin 38: Guidelines for Evaluation and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties. Washington, D.C. U. S. Department of the Interior. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Reintroduc- tion of the Mexican Wolf within its Historic Range in the Southwestern United States: Final Environmental Impact Statement. Albuquerque, NM. Wallace, George N., Ph.D. 1990. Law Enforcement and the Authority of the Resource. Legacy, Volume 1 Number 2:(4-8) Watson, Alan E., Michael J. Niccolucci, and Daniel R. Williams. 1994. The Nature of Conflict Between Hikers and Recreational Stock Users in the John Muir Wilderness. Journal of Leisure Research. 26(4):372-385.

Biblio-14 Grand Canyon National Park Wilderness Management Plan

Weaver, John L. 1993. Lynx, Wolverine, and Fisher in the Western U.S.: Re- search Assessment and Agenda. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. Northern Rockies Conservation Coop. Missoula, MT. 132 p. Weaver, T., and D. Dale. 1978. Trampling Effects of Hikers, Motorcycles and Horses in Meadows and Forests. Journal of Applied Ecology 15:451-457. Whittaker, P.L. 1978. Comparison of Surface Impact by Hiking and Horseback Riding in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Management Report 24. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Southeast Region. 32 p. Woodley, S. 1993. Monitoring and Measuring Ecosystem Integrity in Canadian National Parks. In Woodley, S., J. Kay, and G. Francis. Ecological Integrity and The Management in National Parks. Ottawa: St. Lucie Press. Pages 155- 176. Worf, William A. 1985. Wilderness Management: A Historical Perspective on the Implications of Human-Ignited Fire. In Lotan, James E., et al., technical coordinators. ProceedingsSymposium and Workshop on Wilderness Fire; 1983 November 15-18; Missoula, MT. General Technical Report INT-182. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 276-282. Worf, William A. 1987. Introduction. In Primitive Skills Catalog. Bridger-Teton National Forest. Jackson, WY:38p. Young, James A., Robert R. Blank, William S. Longland, and Debra E. Palmquist. 1994. Seeding Indian Ricegrass in an Arid Environment in the Great Basin. Journal of Range Management 47(1):2-7.

Biblio-15