DOCSLIB.ORG

Visitor Perceptions of Alternative Transportation Systems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Visitor Perceptions of Alternative Transportation Systems View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Texas A&M University VISITOR PERCEPTIONS OF ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS AND INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS IN NATIONAL PARKS A Dissertation by VIRGINIA ANN DILWORTH Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY August 2003 Major Subject: Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences VISITOR PERCEPTIONS OF ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS AND INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS IN NATIONAL PARKS A Dissertation by VIRGINIA ANN DILWORTH Submitted to Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved as to style and content by: C. Scott Shafer James Gramann (Chair of Committee) (Member) David Scott Katherine Turnbull (Member) (Member) Joseph O’Leary (Head of Department) August 2003 Major Subject: Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences iii ABSTRACT Visitor Perceptions of Alternative Transportation Systems and Intelligent Transportation Systems in National Parks. (August 2003) Virginia Ann Dilworth, B.S., California State University at Sacramento; MBA, Bentley College Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. C. Scott Shafer This dissertation examines the potential use of intelligent transportation systems (ITS) and alternative transportation systems (ATS) in national parks. Visitors at two of the national park units in California, Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GOGA) and Sequoia and Kings Canyons National Parks (SEKI), were surveyed during May and July 2002 regarding their attitudes and intentions toward a variety of transportation and travel planning items (including ITS and ATS tools). There were three principal areas of inquiry: attitude toward transportation and travel planning tools, likelihood of using transportation and travel planning tools, and the difference between intentions for using tools before arriving at the study parks and while at the study parks. The results revealed several key findings. First, there was substantial support for the relationship between attitudes and intentions. Furthermore, both experience with technology and attitude toward technology were predictive of intention to use technology in the study parks. Third, there was a significant difference between the iv attitudes and intentions of visitors to an urban park (GOGA) and visitors to a rural park (SEKI). In particular, GOGA respondents perceived alternative transportation (e.g. shuttle, public bus, park and bike) as more appropriate than did SEKI respondents. Fourth, while some support was found for a relationship between one of the ITS goals, safety, and attitude toward ITS tools in national parks, there was no support for the relationship between other ITS and ATS goals (e.g. reduction of congestion) and attitudes toward or intent to use these tools in national parks. Finally, there was a significant difference between the types of tools respondents would use before arriving at and while at the study parks. Technology such as the Internet was more likely to be used before arriving at the parks. Following from diffusion of innovations theory, changes in perception toward these tools, as well as possible changes in the likelihood that they will be used in national parks, may be monitored by future research. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS There are many people to whom I am indebted for their guidance during my stay in Aggieland. First, and most importantly, is my committee chair, Scott Shafer. I would not have been able to achieve my goals without his constant support, advice, and patience. I would also like to thank the other members of my committee, Drs. Gramann, Scott, and Turnbull, for their support and guidance. It has been quite a learning experience. I am also indebted to my friends at TTI and WTI who gave me the opportunity to work on this project. Shawn Turner and Chris Strong provided me with the opportunity to engage in a transportation study and to get an up-close look at how engineers view the world. It has been an interesting journey. I would also like to thank Pam Rowe for her last minute editing efforts. You are a lifesaver! My friends in Aggieland and fellow graduate students in RPTS provided support and laughter when I needed it most. I most appreciate Kathryn Nachlinger and her family for taking me into their home this summer for a far longer stay than they had expected. Bless you! Finally, I must thank the faculty, staff, and students at the University of Maine - Presque Isle. Their support and understanding during this past and very crazy year was greatly appreciated. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT......................................................................................................................iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................................................................................v TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................................vi LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................viii LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................1 Crowding and Congestion..............................................................3 Transportation Solutions.................................................................6 Intelligent Transportation Systems .................................................8 Purpose of This Study...................................................................10 II LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................12 Attitudes and Behaviors................................................................12 Recreation and Leisure Literature................................................24 Research Question One.................................................................44 Research Question Two................................................................51 Research Question Three..............................................................52 III METHODS ..................................................................................................55 Study Sites ...................................................................................55 Survey Development ....................................................................56 Sampling.......................................................................................64 Operationalization.........................................................................66 Analysis ........................................................................................69 Pilot Study....................................................................................69 vii IV RESULTS ....................................................................................................72 Response Rate ..............................................................................72 The Respondents...........................................................................75 Summary of Descriptive Data......................................................76 Measuring Attitudes Toward ITS and ATS in National Parks.....80 Operationalizing Intent to Behave ................................................84 Overview of Results.....................................................................89 Key Findings...............................................................................103 Summary.....................................................................................118 V DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION.......................................................120 Key Findings...............................................................................121 Limitations..................................................................................139 Conclusions.................................................................................142 REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................146 APPENDIX ...................................................................................................................166 VITA...............................................................................................................................288 viii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE Page 2-1 Processes leading to attitude ............................................................................14 2-2 Theory of planned behavior .............................................................................17 2-3 Indirect effects of external variables on behavior ...........................................19 2-4 Antecedent variables of attitude toward ITS and ATS in national parks.........24 3-1 Appropriateness scale used to measure attitudes .............................................67 3-2 Scale design for “useful” and “likely” items....................................................68 4-1 Significant predictive relationships between antecedent variables and attitude and intention factors.........................................................................................90 4-2 Predictive relationships between technology experience, attitudes and intentions ........................................................................................................104
Load more

Recommended publications
  • California Condor Reintroduction Proposal for the Vermilion Cliffs, Northern Arizona
    CALIFORNIA CONDOR REINTRODUCTION PROPOSAL FOR THE VERMILION CLIFFS, NORTHERN ARIZONA Terry B. Johnson and Barbara A. Garrison Nongame Branch, Wildlife Management Division Arizona Game and Fish Department Technical Report 86 Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Program Chief: Terry B. Johnson Arizona Game and Fish Department 2221 West Greenway Road Phoenix, Arizona 85023-4312 October 1996 ( RECOMMENDED CITATION Johnson, T.B. and B.A. Garrison. 1996. California condor reintroduction proposal for the ( Vermilion Cliffs, northern Arizona. Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Technical Report 86. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, Arizona. ( ( ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank the following for cooperation in developing this proposal: Arizona Game and Fish Department: Greg Beatty, Tom Britt, Dennis Darr, Rich Glinski, Ben Gonzales, John Goodwin, Ray Lee, Susi Macvean, Fred Phillips, Steve Rosenstock, Barry Spicer, Bruce Taubert, Laurie Ward, and Jim Witham; Bureau of Land Management: Bill Grossi, Paul Sawyer, and Mike Small; The Los Angeles Zoo: Mike Wallace; The Peregrine Fund: Bill Burnham, Bert Harting, Bill Heinrich, and Lloyd Kiff; The Phoenix Zoo: Jeff Williamson; and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Marguerite Hills, Rob Marshall, and Robert Mesta. ( ( ( AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT COMPLIANCE . The Arizona Game and Fish Department complies with all provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. If you need this material in an alternative format or believe you have been discriminated against, contact the Deputy Director, Arizona Game and Fish Department, 2221 ( West Greenway Road, Phoenix, Arizona 85023 -- (602) 942-3000. PROJECT FUNDING Funding for this project was provided by: the Arizona Game and Fish Department's Heritage Fund; voluntary contributions to Arizona's Nongame Wildlife Checkoff; Project W-95-M (Jobs ( ( I 2 and 5), under the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (Pittman-Robertson Act); and Project E5 (Job 37), under Title VI of the Endangered Species Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Homeland Security Daily Open Source Infrastructure
    Daily Open Source Infrastructure Report 20 March 2012 Top Stories • Eight people were questioned on counterfeiting charges March 19 after they were found with $100 million in fake U.S. treasury bonds in Poland, authorities said. – Associated Press (See item 8) • A winter storm packing heavy snow and gusty winds forced authorities to close 180 miles of Interstate 40 in Arizona. The storm also closed schools and canceled flights in Arizona and New Mexico. – CNN (See items 18, 2) • A report found the Washington, D.C. agency responsible for providing clean drinking water rigged lead-monitoring test results by not conducting tests in known problem areas. – Washington Examiner (See item 26) • Authorities in Johnston City, Illinois, issued a boil water order after two teenagers were arrested for climbing a water tower March 16. – Associated Press (See item 27) • The Los Angeles Fire Commission allocated emergency funds to fix glitches in the city’s emergency response system that are delaying the dispatch of firefighters and paramedics. – Associated Press (See item 39) • A security researcher identified approximately 5 million Internet-accessible Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) endpoints that are potentially vulnerable to a network worm exploiting a critical Microsoft vulnerability. – Threatpost (See item 45) - 1 - Fast Jump Menu PRODUCTION INDUSTRIES SERVICE INDUSTRIES • Energy • Banking and Finance • Chemical • Transportation • Nuclear Reactors, Materials and Waste • Postal and Shipping • Critical Manufacturing • Information Technology • Defense Industrial Base • Communications • Dams • Commercial Facilities SUSTENANCE and HEALTH FEDERAL and STATE • Agriculture and Food • Government Facilities • Water • Emergency Services • Public Health and Healthcare • National Monuments and Icons Energy Sector Current Electricity Sector Threat Alert Levels: Physical: LOW, Cyber: LOW Scale: LOW, GUARDED, ELEVATED, HIGH, SEVERE [Source: ISAC for the Electricity Sector (ES-ISAC) - [http://www.esisac.com] 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks
    National Park Service Visitor Guide: Late Spring 2016 U.S. Department of the Interior Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks & Sequoia National Forest/Giant Sequoia National Monument A century of national parks Check for details & hours inside: One hundred years. Not long belts and hatbands of park rangers. Return for more programs and in geologic time, but long enough Activities: programs ............5 At the heart of the park system activities that celebrate 100 years of to embed an idea in the heart of lies stewardship, the commitment national parks, including: America — the national parks. And Bears & food storage ........11 to protect something not only for like our hearts, the park system can • June 18 - The Legacy of the Buf- ourselves but for the future; the Campgrounds .....................4 grow to include more stories, more falo Soldiers: Special walks and willingness to care for something people, more of our treasured talks, and an encampment of histori- Exploring: above and beyond our own lives. landscapes. cal re-enactors take us back to 1903. Sequoia NP ........................6 You play a critical role in steward- Kings Canyon NP & USFS ..7 Nature, history, sacred sites: Like ship here! Your eff orts to protect • August 5-7 - Dark Sky Festival many national parks, Sequoia and your parks not only ensure their (annually): Astronauts, star-gazing Facilities & hours . .............8-9 and photography programs, night Kings Canyon have them all. Se- longevity; they protect the sur- Lodging ...............................5 quoia and the forerunner of Kings rounding areas and towns, as well. walks, telescopes, and more. Canyon, the tiny General Grant Map of park roads ...............8 Get yourself, your children, your • August 25 - NPS Founders Day: National Park, were designated th friends out in these parks.
    [Show full text]
  • Sequoia National Park Cycle 5 Report
    Road Inventory and Condition Assessment Sequoia National Park SEQU Cycle 5 Report Prepared By: Federal Highway Administration Road Inventory Program (RIP) Data Collected: 09/2011 Report Date: 01/2013 Sequoia National Park in California Boise ^_ Sequoia National Park Sacramento Salt Lake City ^_ ^_ San Francisco ^_ Carson City ! ! Oakland ! San Jose Fresno ! ! Las Vegas Los Angeles ! Anaheim Long Beach !!! Santa Ana ! Phoenix San Diego ^_! Mesa DCV = Data Collection Vehicle TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION 1 - 1 2. PARK ROUTE INVENTORY Route IDs, Subcomponents & Changes Report (As Applicable) 2 – 1 3. PARK SUMMARY INFORMATION Paved Route Miles and Percentages by Functional Class and PCR 3 – 1 DCV Road Condition Summary 3 – 3 4. PARK ROUTE LOCATION MAPS Route Location Key Map 4 – 1 Route Location Area Map 4 – 2 Route Condition Key Map – PCR Mile by Mile 4 – 5 Route Condition Area Map – PCR Mile by Mile 4 – 6 5. PAVED ROUTE CONDITION RATING SHEETS CRS Pages 5 – 1 6. MANUALLY RATED PAVED ROUTE CONDITION RATING SHEETS MRR Pages 6 – 1 7. PARKING AREA CONDITION RATING SHEETS Paved Parking Area Pages 7 – 1 8. ROUTE MAINTENANCE FEATURES SUMMARIES DCV Route Maintenance Features Summary 8 – 1 Structure List 8 – 3 9. ROUTE MAINTENANCE FEATURES ROAD LOGS Route Maintenance Features Road Logs 9 – 1 10. APPENDIX Explanation of Changes to the RIP Index Equations and Determination of PCR 10 – 1 Explanation of the Excellent, Good, Fair and Poor Condition Descriptions 10 – 2 Description of Rating System 10 – 3 Surface Distresses 10 – 5 Index Formulas 10 – 12 Data Collection Vehicle Subsystems 10 – 16 Geodatabase – Background and Metadata 10 – 19 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations 10 – 20 Section 1 Introduction Sequoia National Park INTRODUCTION The Federal Highway Administration, (FHWA), in the mid 1970s, was charged with the task of identifying surface condition deficiencies and corrective priorities on National Park Service (NPS) roads and parkways.
    [Show full text]
  • Yosemite, Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks 5
    ©Lonely Planet Publications Pty Ltd Yosemite, Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks Yosemite National Park p44 Around Yosemite National Park p134 Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks p165 Michael Grosberg, Jade Bremner PLAN YOUR TRIP ON THE ROAD Welcome to Yosemite, YOSEMITE NATIONAL Tuolumne Meadows . 80 Sequoia & PARK . 44 Hetch Hetchy . 86 Kings Canyon . 4 Driving . 87 Yosemite, Sequoia & Day Hikes . 48 Kings Canyon Map . 6 Yosemite Valley . 48 Cycling . 87 Yosemite, Sequoia & Big Oak Flat Road Other Activities . 90 Kings Canyon Top 16 . 8 & Tioga Road . 56 Winter Activities . 95 Need to Know . 16 Glacier Point & Sights . 97 Badger Pass . 60 What’s New . 18 Yosemite Valley . 97 Tuolumne Meadows . 64 If You Like . 19 Glacier Point & Wawona . 68 Month by Month . 22 Badger Pass Region . 103 Hetch Hetchy . 70 Itineraries . 24 Tuolumne Meadows . 106 Activities . 28 Overnight Hikes . 72 Wawona . 109 Yosemite Valley . 74 Travel with Children . 36 Along Tioga Road . 112 Big Oak Flat & Travel with Pets . 41 Big Oak Flat Road . 114 Tioga Road . 75 Hetch Hetchy . 115 Glacier Point & Badger Pass . 78 Sleeping . 116 Yosemite Valley . 116 VEZZANI PHOTOGRAPHY/SHUTTERSTOCK © VEZZANI PHOTOGRAPHY/SHUTTERSTOCK DECEMBER35/SHUTTERSTOCK © NIGHT SKY, GLACIER POINT P104 PEGGY SELLS/SHUTTERSTOCK © SELLS/SHUTTERSTOCK PEGGY HORSETAIL FALL P103 VIEW FROM TUNNEL VIEW P45 Contents UNDERSTAND Yosemite, Sequoia & TAHA RAJA/500PX TAHA Kings Canyon Today . .. 208 History . 210 Geology . 216 © Wildlife . 221 Conservation . 228 SURVIVAL GUIDE VIEW OF HALF DOME FROM Clothing & GLACIER POINT P104 Equipment . 232 Directory A–Z . 236 Glacier Point & SEQUOIA & KINGS Badger Pass . 118 Transportation . 244 CANYON NATIONAL Health & Safety . 249 Big Oak Flat Road & PARKS .
    [Show full text]
  • Mexican Gray Wolf Blue Range Reintroduction Project 5-Year
    Billing Code: 4310-55 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2013-0056; FXES11130900000-156–FF09E42000] RIN 1018-AY46 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revision to the Regulations for the Nonessential Experimental Population of the Mexican Wolf AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), revise the regulations for the nonessential experimental population of the Mexican wolf (Canis lupus baileyi) under section 10(j) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. This action is being taken in coordination with our final rule in today’s Federal Register to list the 1 Mexican wolf as an endangered subspecies. The regulatory revisions in this rule will improve the project to reintroduce a nonessential experimental population, thereby increasing potential for recovery of this species. DATES: This rule becomes effective [INSERT DATE 30 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. ADDRESSES: This final rule, along with the public comments, environmental impact statement (EIS), and record of decision, are available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0056 or from the office listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sherry Barrett, Mexican Wolf Recovery Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office, 2105 Osuna Road, NE, Albuquerque, NM 87113; by telephone 505–761– 4704; or by facsimile 505–346–2542. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
    [Show full text]
  • Yosemite, Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Park Transit Market Assessment & Feasibility Study
    Draft Report YOSEMITE, SEQUOIA AND KINGS CANYON NATIONAL PARK TRANSIT MARKET ASSESSMENT & FEASIBILITY STUDY Submitted by: Fehr & Peers 2990 Lava Ridge Court Suite 200 Sacramento, CA 95661 Prepared for: Council of Fresno County Governments February 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 1 Study Purpose ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Transit Routes ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Feasibility Summary ............................................................................................................................... 1 Study Organization ................................................................................................................................. 1 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 3 Study Purpose ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Background ............................................................................................................................................. 3 Study Advisory Committee ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Argonaut Hotel, 495 Jefferson St
    THE GRAND CANYON 1 Postcard Panoramas The Grand Canyon Where the Earth Splits Open All Ages • Arizona POSTCARDS JUST DON’T DO JUSTICE TO THIS CLASSIC AMERICAN PAN- orama—this majestic 277-mile-long canyon of the Colorado River, an enormous primeval gash in the earth’s crust. Gaze down into its depth from the rim and you’ll see striated bands of multicolored rock, a living history of geologic periods unfolding at your feet. Descend into it and you’ll pass through no less than four distinct climate zones, as if you began your day in Mexico and ended it in Alaska. The Grand Canyon attracts a staggering number of tourists every year, many of whom simply view the panorama from the North or South Rim viewpoints and then drive on. While it’s awe- some indeed to gaze around from the rim, something about that monumental chasm makes me long to climb down in. There are any number of hiking trails, from 7 to 9 miles long; if taking on the river is more your style, check the park website for a list of approved commercial outfitters that run 3- to 18-day rafting trips, from placid floats to heart-stopping whitewater thrill rides. Perhaps the most memorable way to explore the Grand Canyon is to pick your way down the steep, narrow trails on the back of an ornery mule. The best options for kids depart from the North Rim and are offered by Canyon Trail Rides (& 435/679-8665; www. canyonrides.com). These rides range from 1-hour scenic rides along the rim to half-day trips (either a longer rim route or one that heads 2,300 ft.
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Forest
    Sketch Volume 64, Number 1 1999 Article 17 Giant Forest Melanie Dylan Fox∗ ∗Iowa State University Copyright c 1999 by the authors. Sketch is produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press (bepress). http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/sketch MEIANJE DylAN Fox GIANT FOREST have known from the beginning that I cannot stay. I carry this I knowledge close to me like a secret I must keep, through every day that passes in the forest. It has become part of me now, woven in layers beneath my skin, entwined in flesh and muscle. It is deep like the roots I have planted in the hard, rocky granite earth at the edge of a mountain peak, the roots which make this my home. It speaks to me, calls to me quietly late at night on wind that rises from the valley below and wraps around the Sequoia trees. Sometimes I almost forget that in a few years, every part of my life here in Giant Forest will be gone. In a box underneath my bed I keep an old photograph, its edges now curled, the image scratched and dull. The season was late spring, in the weeks just before the days change into summer. Rachel and I had spent three long weeks crossing the United States in a wandering, crooked path, driving further and further south until we reached New Orleans and then west toward our summer jobs in Sequoia National Park. We drove into the park, tired and elated all at once. At the entrance to the park I saw a tall, wooden sign.
    [Show full text]
  • Sequoia En Kings Canyon National Park
    Nationale Parken van Amerika @ www.ontdek-amerika.nl Last Update : Juli 6, 2015 Sequoia en Kings Canyon National Park KORTE OMSCHRIJVING Actuele Informatie Grootte : Sequoia NP = 1631 vierkante kilometer Kings Canyon NP = 1863 vierkante kilometer Hoogte : De hoogte van de wegen in het park varieert van 520 meter tot 2330 meter. Het hoogste punt is Mount Whitney. Deze 4418 meter hoge berg is de op één na hoogste berg van Amerika. Sequoia NP sinds : 25 september 1890 General Grant NP sinds : 1 oktober 1890 Kings Canyon NP sinds : 4 maart 1940 Sequoia en Kings Canyon zijn twee aan elkaar gelegen parken, die samen als één Nationaal Park worden beheerd. De meeste toeristen bezoeken het park vooral vanwege de aanwezigheid van de machtige Sequoiadendron; dit is qua volume de grootste boomsoort ter wereld. In de Sequoiabossen zijn veel eenvoudig begaanbare wandelpaden aangelegd. De bomen komen op diverse plaatsen in het park voor, maar de bossen beslaan samen maar een relatief klein deel ervan. In Kings Canyon National Park ligt een groot, onbedorven en werkelijk schitterend gedeelte van de Sierra Nevada Mountains. Er zijn diepe, door gletsjers uitgeslepen kloven, ontelbare meren, veel watervallen en bergweiden, en meer dan 20 rotspieken van rond de 4.000 meter hoogte. Het grootste deel van dit park is niet per auto toegankelijk, het zijn dan ook vooral doorgewinterde backpackers die dit gebied bezoeken. De drukst bezochte gebieden in Sequoia / Kings Canyon National Park zijn de sequoiabossen Giant Forest en Grant Grove; de kalksteengrot Crystal Cave en het ravijn Kings Canyon. In Giant Forest staat de General Sherman Tree, de grootste boom ter wereld.
    [Show full text]
  • Final General Management Plan and Comprehensive River Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement
    Final National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior General Management Plan and Sequoia and Kings Canyon Comprehensive River Management Plan / National Parks Middle and South Forks of the Environmental Impact Statement Kings River and North Fork of the Kern River Tulare and Fresno Counties California Volume 2: The Affected Environment / Environmental Consequences / Appendixes / Glossary / Selected Bibliography Preparers and Consultants / Index [This page intentionally left blank.] 216 SEQUOIA AND KINGS CANYON NATIONAL PARKS and MIDDLE AND SOUTH FORKS OF THE KINGS RIVER AND NORTH FORK OF THE KERN RIVER Tulare and Fresno Counties • California FINAL GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AND COMPREHENSIVE RIVER MANAGEMENT PLAN / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Volume 2: The Affected Environment / Environmental Consequences / Appendixes / Glossary / Selected Bibliography / Preparers and Consultants / Index United States Department of the Interior • National Park Service [This page intentionally left blank.] 216 Contents: Volume 2 THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Ecosystem Stressors ................................................................................................................................ 3 Loss of Pre-Euro-American Fire Regimes ...................................................................................... 3 Introduced Species........................................................................................................................... 3 Air Pollution ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Petition to Maintain Gray Wolf Protections
    Petition to Maintain Protections for Gray Wolves (Canis lupus) in the Lower 48 States as Endangered or Threatened “Distinct Population Segments” Under the Endangered Species Act December 17, 2018 Authored By: Center for Biological Diversity The Humane Society of the United States December 17, 2018 David Bernhardt, Deputy Secretary of the Interior U.S. Department of the Interior 1849 C Street NW Washington, DC 20240 [email protected] Margaret Everson, Principal Deputy Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1849 C Street NW Washington, DC 20240 [email protected] Dear Deputy Secretary Bernhardt and Principal Deputy Director Everson: Pursuant to 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(3) of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) and its implementing regulations, 50 C.F.R. § 424.14, as well as section 5 U.S.C. § 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), the Center for Biological Diversity and The Humane Society of the United States hereby petition the U.S. Department of the Interior (“DOI”), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“Service” or “FWS”), to change the existing listing for the gray wolf (Canis lupus), excluding the Mexican wolf subspecies (Canis lupus baileyi),1 into one or several “distinct population segments” (“DPSs”) that encompass the entire range of the gray wolf in the conterminous U.S. This petition requests one of three alternative DPS designations: 1) a DPS for the entire lower 48 States; 2) “Western” and “Eastern” DPSs; or 3) regional DPSs for the West Coast, Southern Rocky Mountains, Northern Rocky Mountains, Northeast, and Midwest. Such biologically-sound DPSs should be assigned ESA listing statuses according to the best available science, as described in this petition.
    [Show full text]