Petrified Forest National Park National Park Arizona
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
National Park Service Petrified Forest U.S. Department of the Interior Petrified Forest National Park National Park Arizona Final General Management Plan Revision / Environmental Impact Statement May 2004 Final General Management Plan Revision / Environmental Impact Statement Petrified Forest National Park Navajo and Apache Counties, Arizona May 2004 This Final General Management Plan Revision / Environmental Impact Statement describes and analyzes four alternatives for managing Petrified Forest National Park. The approved plan revision will help managers make decisions about managing resources, visitation, and development for the next 15 to 20 years. Issues addressed by the plan revision relate to use of Painted Desert Inn National Historic Landmark, staff housing needs, cultural landscape values, use and treatment of Painted Desert headquarters complex, museum collections, accommodating researchers, concessions, and providing for resource protection and visitor experience/understanding in different areas of the park. Alternative 1, the no-action alternative, would continue present management. It provides a baseline for understanding changes and impacts of the other alternatives. There would be no new construction or major changes, and the park would be operated and maintained as before. Resources would be protected as funding allows. Visitor and operational facilities would remain concentrated in the Painted Desert and Rainbow Forest areas. Some areas would be closed or access modified to address harmful resource impacts. Visitor uses would be reassessed and revised as new information about natural and cultural resource impacts becomes available. Museum collections would be stored offsite and in the park, some in substandard facilities. In alternative 2, the preferred alternative, reusing and maintaining the historic integrity of Painted Desert headquarters complex would be a priority. Visitor services at Painted Desert Inn (rehabilitated) would be expanded. Facility improvements would be made at Rainbow Forest. Park lands would be managed similar to now, but with greater protection for natural and cultural resources from increased monitoring and adapting to new information. Some trails and turnouts would be added, and visitor hours would be expanded in the north. Most park collections would be housed in a new facility. In alternative 3, the park would be managed as a fossil resource preserve. Painted Desert Inn and the headquarters complex would be rehabilitated and adaptively reused. Improvements would be made at Rainbow Forest developed area. This alternative would provide the most protection for natural and cultural resources. Visitors would be encouraged to explore the park primarily in selected frontcountry areas. Some sensitive areas would be closed to visitor use. Backcountry access would be managed with permits and/or other methods (e.g., guided access only). Interpretive services would be expanded to increase understanding of park resources. Park collections would be reunited at the park in a new facility. In alternative 4, resources would be protected while more opportunities to experience park resources would be provided. Visitor services at Painted Desert Inn (rehabilitated) would be expanded. Painted Desert headquarters complex would be demolished and rebuilt in phases in the same location. Improvements would be made at Rainbow Forest developed area. New trails, turnouts, and other options would expand opportunities to experience and understand park resources. Visitor hours would be expanded in the north. Park collections would be moved to institutions and/or agency facilities outside the park that meet National Park Service standards. This document includes discussion of the potential environmental consequences of each alternative. Notable impacts of alternative 1 include adverse impacts to the Painted Desert headquarters complex and historic residences near the Painted Desert Inn from continued deterioration; adverse impacts on museum collections from inadequate facilities, limited work space, and difficulties with recordkeeping; adverse impacts on archeological resources and petrified wood and other fossils, primarily from visitor use; adverse impacts on visitor experience and appreciation from dated interpretive materials and lack of opportunities and accessibility. Notable impacts of alternative 2 include potential adverse impacts to archeological sites and petrified wood from new trails; adverse impacts to Rainbow Forest cultural landscape from parking and walkway realignment; beneficial impacts to park collections from construction of a new collections facility; beneficial impacts on visitor experience and appreciation from new turnouts, trails, and facility improvements; beneficial impacts to park operations from improved work conditions and facilities. Impacts of alternative 3 include adverse impacts to Rainbow Forest cultural landscape from parking and walkway realignment; beneficial impacts on archeological sites and petrified wood from reducing trails and controlling backcountry use; adverse impacts to operations from new visitor programs; beneficial impacts on park operations from improved work conditions and facilities. Impacts of alternative 4 include adverse impacts to Rainbow Forest cultural landscape from parking and walkway realignment; adverse impacts to archeological sites and petrified wood from new trails and turnouts; beneficial impacts on visitor experience and appreciation from new facilities, turnouts, trails, and expanded services; beneficial impacts to park operations from new facilities and removal of deteriorating structures. Please address comments to: Superintendent; Petrified Forest National Park; PO Box 2217; Petrified Forest, Arizona 86028. E-mail: [email protected] United States Department of the Interior National Park Service i ii SUMMARY Petrified Forest National Park is located in future management of that specific unit. northeastern Arizona, about 100 miles east The last comprehensive planning effort at of Flagstaff, Arizona. The park features one Petrified Forest National Park was of the largest and most colorful concen- completed in 1993, with the development of trations of petrified wood in the world. a General Management Plan/Environmental Present day exposures of the 225-million- Impact Statement (NPS 1993). Although year-old Chinle Formation extend through much of the 1993 General Management the Painted Desert. Fossils preserved in this Plan (1993 GMP) is still relevant, certain formation represent an entire ecosystem. aspects need to be revised due to changing These rare, accessible associations of circumstances, new information, and new animal and plant fossils make it possible to policies. The purpose of this General learn more about the Late Triassic period Management Plan Revision (GMP here than anywhere else in the world. Revision) is to: The park also contains historic structures, Clearly define the resource archeological sites, petroglyphs, wildlife, conditions and visitor experience, and interpretive exhibits. The Painted understanding, and appreciation to Desert headquarters complex, Painted be achieved in Petrified Forest Desert Inn, and Rainbow Forest areas of the National Park. park are considered key historic resources of Petrified Forest National Park. Of the Provide a framework for park park’s 93,533 acres, about 54% is managers to use when making designated wilderness, arranged in two decisions about such issues as how separate units: the Painted Desert unit in the to best protect park resources, how northern segment of the park (43,020 to provide high-quality visitor acres), and the Rainbow Forest unit in the experiences, how to manage visitor southeast segment of the park (7,240 acres). use, and what kinds of facilities, if any, to develop in the park. The vegetation of Petrified Forest National Park is varied. Juniper stands; pinyon- Ensure that the foundation for juniper woodlands; grasslands, including decision making has been developed shortgrass prairie that has recovered from in consultation with interested over-grazing in many areas; desert plant stakeholders and adopted by communities; and shrublands typical of the National Park Service (NPS) Great Basin cool desert are supported here. leadership after an adequate analysis The Puerco River riparian corridor has the of the benefits, impacts, and most vegetation biodiversity in the park— economic costs of alternative 40 different species (30 native to North courses of action. America) can be found here. This GMP Revision will amend and Every unit of the national park system is supplement the 1993 GMP. It is intended required to operate under a general to: management plan that sets the direction for iii SUMMARY Confirm the purpose, significance, Serve as the basis for later, more and mission of the park. detailed management documents such as five-year strategic plans and Determine the best mix of resource implementation plans (e.g., resource protection and visitor experience, management and wilderness understanding, and appreciation management plans). beyond what is prescribed by law and policy. This GMP Revision presents four alterna- tives, including the NPS preferred alterna- Define management zones that tive, for future management of Petrified implement the desired conditions of Forest National Park. The four alternatives the National Park Service and public are alternative 1 (the no-action alterna- with regard to natural and cultural tive—continuation of existing