Effectiveness of Limiting Use in Wilderness Areas

Copy Link

University of Montana

ScholarWorks at University of Montana

Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers
Graduate School

1990

Effectiveness of limiting use in wilderness areas

Mary Beth Hennessy

The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd

Let us know how access to this document beneﬁts you.

Recommended Citation

Hennessy, Mary Beth, "Effectiveness of limiting use in wilderness areas" (1990). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 2166.

https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/2166

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact

[email protected].

Recommended publications

Wilderness Visitors and Recreation Impacts: Baseline Data Available for Twentieth Century Conditions

United States Department of Agriculture Wilderness Visitors and Forest Service Recreation Impacts: Baseline Rocky Mountain Research Station Data Available for Twentieth General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-117 Century Conditions September 2003 David N. Cole Vita Wright Abstract __________________________________________ Cole, David N.; Wright, Vita. 2003. Wilderness visitors and recreation impacts: baseline data available for twentieth century conditions. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-117. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 52 p. This report provides an assessment and compilation of recreation-related monitoring data sources across the National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS). Telephone interviews with managers of all units of the NWPS and a literature search were conducted to locate studies that provide campsite impact data, trail impact data, and information about visitor characteristics. Of the 628 wildernesses that comprised the NWPS in January 2000, 51 percent had baseline campsite data, 9 percent had trail condition data and 24 percent had data on visitor characteristics. Wildernesses managed by the Forest Service and National Park Service were much more likely to have data than wildernesses managed by the Bureau of Land Management and Fish and Wildlife Service. Both unpublished data collected by the management agencies and data published in reports are included. Extensive appendices provide detailed information about available data for every study that we located. These have been organized by wilderness so that it is easy to locate all the information available for each wilderness in the NWPS. Keywords: campsite condition, monitoring, National Wilderness Preservation System, trail condition, visitor characteristics The Authors _______________________________________ David N.
Building 27, Suite 3 Fort Missoula Road Missoula, MT 59804

Photo by Louis Kamler. www.nationalforests.org Building 27, Suite 3 Fort Missoula Road Missoula, MT 59804 Printed on recycled paper 2013 ANNUAL REPORT Island Lake, Eldorado National Forest Desolation Wilderness. Photo by Adam Braziel. 1 We are pleased to present the National Forest Foundation’s (NFF) Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2013. During this fourth year of the Treasured Landscapes campaign, we have reached $86 million in both public and private support towards our $100 million campaign goal. In this year’s report, you can read about the National Forests comprising the centerpieces of our work. While these landscapes merit special attention, they are really emblematic of the entire National Forest System consisting of 155 National Forests and 20 National Grasslands. he historical context for these diverse and beautiful Working to protect all of these treasured landscapes, landscapes is truly inspirational. The century-old to ensure that they are maintained to provide renewable vision to put forests in a public trust to secure their resources and high quality recreation experiences, is National Forest Foundation 2013 Annual Report values for the future was an effort so bold in the late at the core of the NFF’s mission. Adding value to the 1800’s and early 1900’s that today it seems almost mission of our principal partner, the Forest Service, is impossible to imagine. While vestiges of past resistance what motivates and challenges the NFF Board and staff. to the public lands concept live on in the present, Connecting people and places reflects our organizational the American public today overwhelmingly supports values and gives us a sense of pride in telling the NFF maintaining these lands and waters in public ownership story of success to those who generously support for the benefit of all.
Desolation Wilderness Volunteers

Desolation Wilderness United States Eldorado National Forest Department ,\ of Agriculture Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit Welcome to Desolation Wilderness, 63,960 acres of subalpine and alpine forest, granitic peaks, and glacially- formed valleys and lakes. It is located west of Lake Tahoe and north of Highway 50 in El Dorado County. Desolation Wilderness is jointly administered by both the Eldorado National Forest and Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit. This is an area where natural processes take precedent; a place where nature remains substantially unchanged by human use. You will find nature on its own terms in Desolation; there are no buildings or roads. Travel in Desolation is restricted to hikers and packstock. No motorized, mechanized, or wheeled equipment such as bicycles, motorcycles, snowmobiles, strollers or game carts are allowed. Rugged trails provide the only access, and hazards such as high stream crossings and sudden stormy weather may be encountered at any time. These are all part of a wilderness experience. Wilderness Permits the summer. Day use is not subject to fees nor Permits are required year-round for both limited by the quota at any time of the year. Note: day and overnight use. There are fees for overnight camping year-round. Group size is limited Zone Quota System to 12 people per party who will be hiking or Because of its beauty and accessibility, Desolation camping together. Overnight users without Wilderness is one of the most heavily used reservations must register in person and pay fees wilderness areas in the United States. In order to at one of the following offices.
Desolation Wilderness; • Rana Sierrae Monitoring in the Highland Lake Drainage: Update

State of California Department of Fish and Wildlife Memorandum Date: 2 February 2021 To: Sarah Mussulman, Senior Environmental Scientist; Sierra District Supervisor; North Central Region Fisheries From: Isaac Chellman, Environmental Scientist; High Mountain Lakes; North Central Region Fisheries Cc: Region 2 Fish Files Ec: CDFW Document Library Subject: Native amphibian restoration and monitoring in Desolation Wilderness; • Rana sierrae monitoring in the Highland Lake drainage: update. • Rana sierrae translocation from Highland Lake to 4-Q Lakes: 2018–2020 summary. SUMMARY The Highland Lake drainage is a site from which California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) staff removed introduced Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss, RT) from 2012–2015 to benefit Sierra Nevada Yellow-legged Frogs (Rana sierrae, SNYLF). Amphibian monitoring data from 2003 through 2020 suggest a large and robust SNYLF population. For the past several years, the Highland Lake drainage has contained a sufficient adult SNYLF population to provide a source for translocations to nearby fishless aquatic habitats suitable for frogs. The Interagency Conservation Strategy for Mountain Yellow-legged Frogs in the Sierra Nevada (hereafter “Strategy”; MYLF ITT 2018) highlights translocations as a principal method for SNYLF recovery. As a result, in July 2018 and August 2019, CDFW and Eldorado National Forest (ENF) staff biologists translocated a total of 100 SNYLF adults from the Highland Lake drainage to 4-Q Lakes (60 adults in 2018 and 40 adults in 2019). Each year from 2018–2020, CDFW field staff revisited 4-Q Lakes two times to monitor the new SNYLF population. In total, CDFW has recaptured 54 of the 100 released SNYLF at least once since release at 4-Q Lakes.
John Muir Wilderness

John Muir Wilderness Sierra National Forest +\ The John Muir Wilderness encompasses approxi Group Size mately 584,000 acres in the Sierra and Inyo National Group size is limited to 15 people and 25 head of Forests. It extends along the crest of the Sierra Ne• stock are permitted on overnight trips. vada from Mammoth Lakes southeasterly for 30 miles, and then forks around the boundary of Kings Proper Food Storage Canyon National Park to Crown Valley and Mt. Backcountry and wilderness users are required to store Whitney. food or refuse in a manner designed to keep bears from gaining access to it. Visitors are encouraged to Elevations range from 4,000 feet to 14,496 feet at use bear-resistant food canisters to safeguard food. If Mt. Whitney with many peaks above 12,000 feet. a bear canister is not available, the counter-balance Deep canyons as well as beautiful meadows among method of storing food is also an acceptable method. the many lakes and streams characterize the Wilder ness. The South and Middle Forks of the San Joa• Bear-Resistant Canisters quin River, the North Fork of the Kings River and many creeks, which drain into the Owens Valley, These portable containers are the only effective way originate in the John Muir Wilderness. for backpackers to store food in wilderness. Each can ister weighs less than 3 pounds, fits in a full-sized Stands of jeffery and lodgepole pine, incense cedar, backpack, and is capable of holding up to 3 to 5 day’s and red and white fir can be found on the lower west worth of food for one person.
Data Set Listing (May 1997)

USDA Forest Service Air Resource Monitoring System Existing Data Set Listing (May 1997) Air Resource Monitoring System (ARMS) Data Set Listing May 1997 Contact Steve Boutcher USDA Forest Service National Air Program Information Manager Portland, OR (503) 808-2960 2 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 DATA SET DESCRIPTIONS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10 National & Multi-Regional Data Sets EPA’S EASTERN LAKES SURVEY ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11 EPA’S NATIONAL STREAM SURVEY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------12 EPA WESTERN LAKES SURVEY------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13 FOREST HEALTH MONITORING (FHM) LICHEN MONITORING-------------------------------------------------14 FOREST HEALTH MONITORING (FHM) OZONE BIOINDICATOR PLANTS ----------------------------------15 IMPROVE AEROSOL MONITORING--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------16 IMPROVE NEPHELOMETER ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------17 IMPROVE TRANSMISSOMETER ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18 NATIONAL ATMOSPHERIC DEPOSITION PROGRAM/ NATIONAL TRENDS NETWORK----------------19 NATIONAL
Wilderness Trail Names and Quotas for Inyo National Forest

Wilderness Trail Names and Quotas for Inyo National Forest • Quota is the number of people that can start at the listed location each day. • Permit is only valid to start on specific entry date and location reserved. • (JMT) or (PCT) indicates trail connects to the John Muir Trail or Pacific Crest Trail. • Information about quotas, commercial use, wilderness permit requirements on page 3. • For help identifying what quota applies for a trip, contact our wilderness permit office. Trail Name Trail Total Reserve Reserve Commercial Code Quota (6 month (2 weeks Quota – Notes* advance) advance) Baker Lakes JM22 8 5 3 Special Approval Baxter Pass (JMT) JM29 8 5 3 Special Approval Beck Lake AA12 15 9 6 *Single quota Big Pine Creek North Fork JM23 25 15 10 15 (PO); 8 (O/G) Big Pine Creek South Fork JM24 12 7 5 *Single quota Birch Lake JM25 8 5 3 Special Approval Bishop Pass (JMT) JM21 36 22 14 15 Blackrock GT66 Non Quota--Unlimited Bloody Canyon AA03 8 5 3 Special Approval Convict Creek JM04 10 6 4 *Single quota Cottonwood Lakes JM39 60 36 24 15 Cottonwood Pass (PCT) GT60 40 24 16 Non-quota Deer Lakes JM0 10 6 4 *Single quota Duck Pass (JMT) JM01 30 18 12 15 Fern Lake AA13 10 6 4 *Single quota Fish Creek AA14 15 9 6 15 Gable Lakes JM12 8 5 3 Special Approval George Creek - Mt. Williamson JM33 8 5 3 Special Approval George Lake JM18 10 6 4 *Single quota Gibbs Lake AA02 8 5 3 *Single quota Glacier Canyon AA01 8 5 3 *Single quota Golden Trout Lakes (Onion JM30 10 6 4 Special Approval Valley) Haiwee Pass (PCT) SS64 Non Quota--Unlimited High Trail –PCT
Management Direction for the Ansel Adams, John Muir and Dinkey Lakes Wildernesses

Final Environmental Impact Statement Management Direction for the Ansel Adams, John Muir and Dinkey Lakes Wildernesses Volume 1, Executive Summary, Chapters 1 - 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary............................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1 PROPOSED ACTION.............................................................................................................................. 1 PURPOSE AND NEED ............................................................................................................................ 1 DECISION TO BE MADE....................................................................................................................... 2 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT...................................................................................................................... 2 ISSUES...................................................................................................................................................... 2 SOCIAL CONDITIONS............................................................................................................................... 2 RESOURCE CONDITIONS.......................................................................................................................... 3 EQUITY BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND NON-COMMERCIAL ACCESS .........................................................
Mineral Resource Potential of the John Muir Wilderness, Fresno, Inyo, Madera, and Mono Counties, California

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR TO ACCOMPANY MAP MF-1185-C UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERAL RESOURCE POTENTIAL OF THE JOHN MUIR WILDERNESS, FRESNO, INYO, MADERA, AND MONO COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA SUMMARY REPORT By 2 E. A. du Bray1, D. ~ Dellinger1, H. W. ~ver 1 , M. F. Diggl~l, Fredrick L. J~ , Horace K. 'lburber , Richard W. Morris , Thomas J. Peters , and David s. Lindsey STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS Under the provisions of the Wilderness Act (Public Law 88-577, September 3, 1964) and the Joint Conference Report on Senate Bill 4, 88th Congress, the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines have been conducting mineral surveys of wilderness and primitive areas. Areas officially designated as "wilderness," "wild," or "canoe" when the act was passed were incorporated into the National Wilderness Preservation System, and some of them are presently being studied. The act provided that areas under consideration for wilderness designation should be studied for suitability for incorporation into the Wilderness System. The mineral surveys constitute one aspect of the suitability studies. The act directs that the results of such surveys are to be made available to the public and be submitted to the President and the Congress. This report discusses the results of a mineral survey of the John Muir Wilderness, Inyo and Sierra Na tional Forests, Fresno, lnyo, Madera, and Mono Counties, California. The area was established as a wilderness by Public Law 88-577, September 3, 1964. SUMMARY The U.S. Bureau of Mines arj the U.S. Geological Survey identified many areas of the John Muir Wilderness as having marginal and subeconomic resources of tungsten, molybdenum, copper, gold, and silver.
Challenge of the Big Trees

Challenge of the Big Trees Challenge of the Big Trees CHALLENGE OF THE BIG TREES Lary M. Dilsaver and William C. Tweed ©1990, Sequoia Natural History Association, Inc. CONTENTS NEXT >>> Challenge of the Big Trees ©1990, Sequoia Natural History Association dilsaver-tweed/index.htm — 12-Jul-2004 http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/dilsaver-tweed/index.htm[7/2/2012 5:14:17 PM] Challenge of the Big Trees (Table of Contents) Challenge of the Big Trees Table of Contents COVER LIST OF MAPS LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS FOREWORD PREFACE CHAPTER ONE: The Natural World of the Southern Sierra CHAPTER TWO: The Native Americans and the Land CHAPTER THREE: Exploration and Exploitation (1850-1885) CHAPTER FOUR: Parks and Forests: Protection Begins (1885-1916) CHAPTER FIVE: Selling Sequoia: The Early Park Service Years (1916-1931) CHAPTER SIX: Colonel John White and Preservation in Sequoia National Park (1931- 1947) CHAPTER SEVEN: Two Battles For Kings Canyon (1931-1947) CHAPTER EIGHT: Controlling Development: How Much is Too Much? (1947-1972) CHAPTER NINE: New Directions and A Second Century (1972-1990) APPENDIX A: Visitation Statistics, 1891-1988 APPENDIX B: Superintendents of Sequoia, General Grant, and Kings Canyon National Parks NOTES TO CHAPTERS PUBLISHED SOURCES ARCHIVAL RESOURCES ACKNOWLEDGMENTS INDEX (omitted from online edition) ABOUT THE AUTHORS http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/dilsaver-tweed/contents.htm[7/2/2012 5:14:22 PM] Challenge of the Big Trees (Table of Contents) List of Maps 1. Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks and Vicinity 2. Important Place Names of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks 3.
Recreational Fishing in the Golden Trout Wilderness at $148,000 to $713,000 a Year

ECONOMIC VALUE OF GOLDEN TROUT FISHING IN THE GOLDEN TROUT WILDERNESS, CALIFORNIA An Analysis By Carolyn Alkire, Ph.D. Resource Economist A Report for California Trout March 21, 2003 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks to the many individuals who provided essential data and information, without which this study would not have been possible: Del Hubbs, Adam McClory, and Julie Molzahn, Inyo National Forest; Cheryl Bauer and Judi Kaiser, Sequoia National Forest; Jim Shackelford, Forest Service Region 5; and Donn Burton and Dave Lentz, California Department of Fish and Game. The author is grateful for the professional review by Dr. John Loomis. Stan Stephens of the California Department of Fish and Game and Dr. Robert Richardson also offered helpful comments and suggestions. This report was expertly edited by Deanne Kloepfer. California Trout would like to thank Joseph Tomelleri for the use of his trout illustrations. California Trout thanks C. Pat Patterson and Bill Hooper for generously funding this report. Cover illustration courtesy of Michael Flynn FOREWORD By R. Brett Matzke Public Lands Director California Trout, Inc. Cattle began grazing the Kern Plateau more than 130 years ago, long before the area and surrounding environs were established as the Inyo and Sequoia national forests. Various studies have documented that cattle grazing can seriously damage water and land resources. But attempts to reform grazing management policy on the Kern Plateau and to protect native species in this case, California's state fish, the golden trout, and its close relative shave met with little success. In part, the failure to reform grazing management stems from the long-held view that cattle ranching is the cornerstone of the local economy.
Computer Simulation Modeling of Recreation

Chapter 2: Historical Development of Simulation Models of Recreation Use Jan W. van Wagtendonk David N. Cole The potential utility of modeling as a park and Numerous sociological studies were launched to elicit wilderness management tool has been recognized for the relationship between benefits and encounters, decades. Romesburg (1974) explored how mathemati- but, other than laborious field work, no means existed cal decision modeling could be used to improve deci- for enumerating encounters. sions about regulation of wilderness use. Cesario (1975) To overcome this obstacle, researchers from Re- described a computer simulation modeling approach sources for the Future began to develop a computer that utilized GPSS (General Purpose Systems Simula- model that would simulate travel behavior in a wilder- tor), a simulation language designed to deal with ness and track encounters between parties. They soon scheduling problems. He identified a number of poten- found that the programming expertise needed far tial uses and the advantages of using simulation exceeded their capabilities, so they approached IBM instead of trial and error. In this chapter, we review for assistance. The result was a simulation program many of the most important applications of computer written by Heck and Webster (1973) in the General simulation modeling to recreation use, and the major Purpose Simulation System (GPSS) language run- lessons learned during each application. ning on an IBM mainframe computer. The model was dynamic, stochastic, and discrete, meaning that it represented a system that evolves over time, incorpo- rates random components, and changes in state at Wilderness Use Simulation discrete points in time (Law and Kelton 2000).