DOCSLIB.ORG

Petersburg National Battlefield Visitor Study Summer 2011

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Petersburg National Battlefield Visitor Study Summer 2011 National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Petersburg National Battlefield Visitor Study Summer 2011 Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/EQD/NRR—2012/508 ON THE COVER Battery #5, captured by Union soldiers on June 15, 1864 during the opening battles around Petersburg. Photograph courtesy of Petersburg National Battlefield. Petersburg National Battlefield Visitor Study Summer 2011 Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/EQD/NRR— 2012/508 Mystera Samuelson, Marc F. Manni, Yen Le, Steven J. Hollenhorst Visitor Services Project Park Studies Unit University of Idaho Moscow, ID 83844-1139 April 2012 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado Petersburg National Battlefield – VSP Visitor Study 246 July 26 – August 1, 2011 The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. Data in this report were collected and analyzed using methods based on established, peer- reviewed protocols and were analyzed and interpreted within the guidelines of the protocols. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available from the Social Science Division (http://www.nature.nps.gov/socialscience/index.cfm) and the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/nrpm/). This report and other reports by the Visitor Services Project (VSP) are available from the VSP website (http://www.psu.uidaho.edu/reports.htm) or by contacting the VSP office at (208) 885- 7863. Please cite this publication as: Samuelson, M., M. F. Manni, Y. Le, & S. J. Hollenhorst. 2012. Petersburg National Battlefield visitor study: Summer 2011. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/EQD/NRR—2012/508. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 325/113681, April 2012 ii Petersburg National Battlefield – VSP Visitor Study 246 July 26 – August 1, 2011 Contents Page Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ v! Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................ vii! About the Authors .................................................................................................................. vii! Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1! Organization of the Report ...................................................................................................... 1! Presentation of the Results ....................................................................................................... 2! Methods........................................................................................................................................... 3! Survey Design and Procedures ................................................................................................ 3! Sample size and sampling plan ........................................................................................... 3! Questionnaire design ........................................................................................................... 3! Survey procedure ................................................................................................................ 4! Data analysis ....................................................................................................................... 4! Limitations .......................................................................................................................... 5! Special conditions ............................................................................................................... 5! Checking non-response bias ............................................................................................... 6! Results ............................................................................................................................................. 7! Group and Visitor Characteristics ........................................................................................... 7! Visitor group size ................................................................................................................ 7! Visitor group type ............................................................................................................... 7! Visitors with organized groups ........................................................................................... 8! United States visitors by state of residence ....................................................................... 10! Visitors from Virginia by county of residence ................................................................. 11! International visitors by country of residence ................................................................... 12! Number of visits to park ................................................................................................... 13! Visitor age ......................................................................................................................... 14! Visitor ethnicity ................................................................................................................ 15! Visitor race ........................................................................................................................ 15! Language used for speaking and reading .......................................................................... 16! Visitors with physical conditions affecting access/participation ...................................... 17! Respondent level of education .......................................................................................... 18! Trip/Visit Characteristics and Preferences ............................................................................ 19! Information sources prior to visit ...................................................................................... 19! Information sources for future visit .................................................................................. 22! Park website ...................................................................................................................... 23! Park as destination ............................................................................................................ 25! Number of vehicles ........................................................................................................... 25! Length of stay visiting park sites ...................................................................................... 26! Visitor groups that visited the park on more than one day ............................................... 27! Length of stay in the park area .......................................................................................... 28! Order of sites visited in the park ....................................................................................... 29! Sites visited in the park first .............................................................................................. 30! Reason for order of sites visited in the park ..................................................................... 31! iii Petersburg National Battlefield – VSP Visitor Study 246 July 26 – August 1, 2011 Contents (continued) Page Sites visited in the park ..................................................................................................... 32! Local attractions visited .................................................................................................... 33! Activities on this visit ....................................................................................................... 36! Most important activity ..................................................................................................... 38! Activities on future visits .................................................................................................. 40! Use of park trails ............................................................................................................... 41! Problems encountered on park trails ................................................................................. 42! Ratings of Services, Facilities, Attributes,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Springfield Railroad Underpass Project Hampshire County State Project # S314-SBV-RR-6.50 Federal Project # N/A FR#: 15-479-HM
    Springfield Railroad Underpass Project Hampshire County State Project # S314-SBV-RR-6.50 Federal Project # N/A FR#: 15-479-HM HISTORIC DOCUMENTATION July 2015 West Virginia Department of Transportation Division of Highways Engineering Division Environmental Section (304) 558-2885 HISTORIC DOCUMENTATION SPRINGFIELD RAILROAD UNDERPASS BRIDGE Location: West Virginia State Route 28 and Abernathy Run Springfield Hampshire County West Virginia USGS Springfield Quadrangle Date of Construction: circa 1880 Builder: South Branch Railroad Company Present Owner: West Virginia State Rail Authority 120 Water Plant Drive Moorefield, WV 26836 Present Use: Railroad Bridge Significance: The Springfield Railroad Underpass is significant on the local level with a period of significance 1890 to 1952. Project Information: The project has been undertaken due to the poor condition of the Underpass bridge. Any future deterioration of the underpass bridge will result in its closure, the existing underpass warrants replacement. The documentation was undertaken in July 2015 in accordance with a Memorandum of Agreement among the West Virginia Department of Transportation and West Virginia State Historic Preservation Office. These measures are required prior to replacement of this National Register eligible structure. Sondra L. Mullins, Structural Historian West Virginia Division of Highways Charleston, WV 25301 July 10, 2015 Springfield Railroad Underpass Page 2 BALTIMORE & OHIO RAILROAD HISTORY The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company (B & O) was chartered on February 28, 1827 by businessmen from Baltimore, Maryland. The goal of the businessmen was to ensure that traffic was not lost to the proposed Chesapeake & Ohio Canal. By the end of the 19th century the B & O had almost 5,800 miles of track connecting Chicago and St.
    [Show full text]
  • At Pocahontas Island City of Petersburg, Virginia
    ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF SIX SITES (44PG5, 44PG470, 44PG471, 44PG472, 44PG473, and 44PG474) AT POCAHONTAS ISLAND CITY OF PETERSBURG, VIRGINIA VOLUME I: RESULTS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING Prepared For: Department of Planning and Community Development City of Petersburg 135 N. Union Street Petersburg, Virginia 23803 Prepared By: Matthew Laird (Ph.D.) James River Institute for Archaeology, Inc. 223 McLaws Circle, Suite 1 Williamsburg, Virginia 23185 (757) 229-9485 September 2006 ABSTRACT Between December 2005 and April 2006, the James River Institute for Archaeology, Inc. (JRIA), conducted intensive archaeological testing of six sites within the Pocahontas Island Historic District. The objective of the testing, which focused primarily on properties owned by the City of Petersburg, was to evaluate the integrity and research potential of a representative sample of site types encompassing both the prehistoric- and historic-period occupations of Pocahontas Island. The resources examined included the archaeological components of the extant Jarratt House (44PG470) and “Underground Railroad House” (44PG471); the site of the former Richmond & Petersburg Railroad depot (44PG472); a domestic site spanning the eighteenth- through twentieth centuries in the vacant lot at 301 Rolfe Street (44PG473); the former site of the early twentieth- century Pocahontas Distilling Co. whiskey distillery at 343 Rolfe Street, which also included a nineteenth-/twentieth-century domestic component (44PG474); and one previously inventoried site (44PG5) with prehistoric Native-American and historic domestic components. In general, the investigated sites retained a high degree of physical integrity, and yielded significant concentrations of artifacts and evidence of intact cultural layers and features. Individually, the six sites retained sufficient integrity and research potential to be considered eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D.
    [Show full text]
  • Siege of Petersburg
    Seige Of Petersburg June 9th 1864 - March 25th 1865 Siege Of Petersburg Butler”s assault (June 9) While Lee and Grant faced each other after Cold Harbor, Benjamin Butler became aware that Confederate troops had been moving north to reinforce Lee, leaving the defenses of Petersburg in a vulnerable state. Sensitive to his failure in the Bermuda Hundred Campaign, Butler sought to achieve a success to vindicate his generalship. He wrote, "the capture of Petersburg lay near my heart." Petersburg was protected by multiple lines of fortifications, the outermost of which was known as the Dimmock Line, a line of earthworks 10 miles (16 km) long, east of the city. The 2,500 Confederates stretched thin along this defensive line were commanded by a former Virginia governor, Brig. Gen. Henry A. Wise. Butler”s plan was formulated on the afternoon of June 8, 1864, calling for three columns to cross the Appomattox and advance with 4,500 men. The first and second consisted of infantry from Maj. Gen. Quincy A. Gillmore”s X Corps and U.S. Colored Troops from Brig. Gen. Edward W. Hinks”s 3rd Division of XVIII Corps, which would attack the Dimmock Line east of the city. The third was 1,300 cavalrymen under Brig. Gen. August Kautz, who would sweep around Petersburg and strike it from the southeast. The troops moved out on the night of June 8, but made poor progress. Eventually the infantry crossed by 3:40 a.m. on June 9 and by 7 a.m., both Gillmore and Hinks had encountered the enemy, but stopped at their fronts.
    [Show full text]
  • The 'Pennsylvania Crailroad'>S Southerncrkail Empire
    The 'Pennsylvania cRailroad'>s c Southern Rkail Empire N the decade of the 1870's, the expanding Pennsylvania Railroad put together a loosely joined rail empire consisting of a dozen railroads in seven southern states stretching from Virginia to I 1 Mississippi and Tennessee. While many southerners in the postwar years had eagerly sought northern capital for their stricken railways, their entreaties up to 1870 had rarely resulted in more than visits of railroad carpetbaggers. Now, in the new decade, the Pennsylvania Railroad offered the South a pattern of railroad progress supported by the stable financial backing of a successful corporation, rather than the dreams and promises of penniless politicians and promoters. In the postwar years, the Pennsylvania Railroad continued a prosperity well established before and during the Civil War. Both during and after the war, President John Edgar Thomson's road paid cash dividends ranging from eight per cent to ten per cent.2 When the Pennsylvania started to look southward it was already a giant com- pared to the railways of the South. It had a capital structure (capital stock and funded debt) one quarter as large as the total railroad investment in the ten southern states from Virginia to Louisiana. The road's gross earnings of $22,000,000 in 1872 were half as great as the total for the seventy major lines in the South.3 Clearly, the Pennsylvania Railroad had both the size and the financial stature necessary for an adventure in southern railroading. The adventure started in Maryland. The Pennsylvania had earlier acquired entry into Baltimore with its acquisition of the Northern 1 Fairfax Harrison, A History of the Legal Development of the Railroad System of the Southern Railway Company (Washington, D.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Guidebook to Richmond
    SIA RVA SOCIETY FOR INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY 47th ANNUAL CONFERENCE MAY 31 - JUNE 3, 2018 RICHMOND, VIRGINIA GUIDEBOOK TO RICHMOND SIA RVA SOCIETY FOR INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY 47th ANNUAL CONFERENCE MAY 31 - JUNE 3, 2018 RICHMOND, VIRGINIA OMNI RICHMOND HOTEL GUIDEBOOK TO RICHMOND SOCIETY FOR INDUSTRIAL ARCHEOLOGY MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY 1400 TOWNSEND DRIVE HOUGHTON, MI 49931-1295 www.sia-web.org i GUIDEBOOK EDITORS Christopher H. Marston Nathan Vernon Madison LAYOUT Daniel Schneider COVER IMAGE Philip Morris Leaf Storage Ware house on Richmond’s Tobacco Row. HABS VA-849-31 Edward F. Heite, photog rapher, 1969. ii CONTENTS Acknowledgements ..................................................................................iv INTRODUCTION Richmond’s Industrial Heritage .............................................................. 3 THURSDAY, MAY 31, 2018 T1 - The University of Virginia ................................................................19 T1 - The Blue Ridge Tunnel ....................................................................22 T2 - Richmond Waterfront Walking Tour ..............................................24 T3 - The Library of Virginia .....................................................................26 FRIDAY, JUNE 1, 2018 F1 - Strickland Machine Company ........................................................27 F1 - O.K. Foundry .....................................................................................29 F1 & F2 - Tobacco Row / Philip Morris USA .......................................32 F1 &
    [Show full text]
  • Legislating the Danville Connection, 1847-1862: Railroads and Regionalism Versus Nationalism in the Confederate States of America
    Virginia Commonwealth University VCU Scholars Compass Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2014 Legislating the Danville Connection, 1847-1862: Railroads and Regionalism versus Nationalism in the Confederate States of America Philip Stanley Virginia Commonwealth University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd Part of the United States History Commons © The Author Downloaded from https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/3510 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at VCU Scholars Compass. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of VCU Scholars Compass. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ©Philip W. Stanley 2014 All Rights Reserved Legislating the Danville Connection, 1847-1862: Railroads and Regionalism versus Nationalism in the Confederate States of America A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts at Virginia Commonwealth University. by Philip William Stanley Bachelor of Arts, Virginia Commonwealth University, 2011 Director: Dr. Kathryn Meier Associate Professor, Virginia Commonwealth University Department of History Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond, Virginia August 2014 ii Acknowledgments No major work is completed without the help of others. I would like to thank the following people for their assistance, support, and friendship during the past year while I completed this project. To David L. Bright, creator of csa-railroads.com, for responding to my emails in a timely fashion, for his suggestions, and his help tracking down the elusive Fifteenth Annual Report of the Richmond and Danville Railroad Company. To Sally S. Dickinson at the Watkinson Library at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, for her assistance and willingness to scan all one hundred pages of the Fifteenth Annual Report.
    [Show full text]
  • Tampa Bay's Railroad History
    Tampa Bay’s RailRoad HisToRy all aboard: Tampa Bay’s railroad history Silvery-sleek, on sun-bleached tracks With barrel-chested engines, Dolomite black “Those were the trains of yesterday! “ But where might smoke and thunder stay? 71st New York Where might great metro-liners rest, Volunteers arrive in Port Tampa, As they rumble ’cross-the-country with their smoke-filled crests? 1898, courtesy USF Library from The Epic of Tampa Union Station Special Collections by James E. Tokley Sr., Hillsborough County Poet Laureate Sanford-St. Petersburg train, 1893, courtesy Tampa-Hillsborough County Public Library System Henry Plant supervising the transport of Army troops by railroad to Tampa, where they boarded ships to fight the Spanish-American War in Cuba, 1898; Tampa Bay Times photo Newspaper in Education NIE staff LAFS.4-5.L.1.2; LAFS.4-5.L.1.3; LAFS.4-5.L.1.4; LAFS.4-5.L.1.5; LAFS.4- The Tampa Bay Times Newspaper in Jodi Pushkin, manager, [email protected] 5.L.1.6 Education (NIE) program is a cooperative Sue Bedry, development specialist, [email protected] effort between schools and the Times Hillsborough County Historic Preservation Challenge Grant to encourage the use of newspapers in © Tampa Bay Times 2014 This project was supported by a Historic Preservation Challenge Grant print and electronic form as educational awarded by the Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners. The resources. Credits Hillsborough County Historic Preservation program aims to foster planning Our educational resources fall Researched and written by Jodi Pushkin and Sue Bedry, Tampa Bay Times that “encourages the continued use and preservation of historic sites and into the category of informational Designed by Stacy Rector, Fluid Graphic Design LLC structures.” The Historic Preservation Challenge Grant program was founded in text.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography of Petersburg Research Resources
    Toward an Online Listing of Research Resources for Petersburg This listing was developed by Dulaney Ward about 2008 in connection with the Atlantic World Initiative at Virginia State University. As with all bibliographies, it remains a "work in progress." It is being made available for use by those who recognize and wish to learn more about Petersburg's rich history. _____. Acts of the General Assembly Relative to Jurisdictions and Powers of the Town of Petersburg To Which Are Added the Ordinances, Bye-Laws, and Regulations of the Corporation. Petersburg: Edward Pescud, 1824. _____. Act to Incorporate the Petersburg Rail Road Company. Petersburg, 1830. _____. A Guide to the Fortifications and Battlefields around Petersburg. Petersburg: Daily Index Job Print, for Jarratt’s Hotel, 1866. [CW; Postbellum.] _____. Annual Register and Virginian Repository for the Year 1800. Petersburg, 1801. _____. Charter and By-Laws of the Petersburg Benevolent Mechanic Association. Revised October, 1900. Petersburg: Fenn & Owen, 1900. _____. Charter, Constitution snd By-Laws. Petersburg Benevolent Mechanic Association. Petersburg, 1858, 1877. _____. City of Petersburg, Virginia: The Book of Its Chamber of Commerce. Petersburg: George W. Englehardt, 1894. Rare. PPL. [Photographs and etchings of local businessmen and their buildings, with brief company history.] _____. Civil War Documents, Granville County, N.C. 2 vols. Oxford, North Carolina: Granville County His- torical Society, n.d. [CW.] _____. Contributions to a History of the Richmond Howitzer Battalion.Baltimore: Butternut and Blue, 2000. [CW.] _____. Cottom’s New Virginia and North Carolina Almanack, for the Year of Our Lord 1820, Calculated by Joseph Case, of Orange County, Virginia.; Adapted to the Latitude and Meridian of Richmond.
    [Show full text]
  • NCPHS Journal Issue 38 (Fall 1991)
    NCPHS Newsletter~~. <:r--1-1 ~ Volume 10, No. 4 Fal11991 Wbole38 ·. ·2 .. ... if'~ . Affiliate # 155 of the American Philatelic Society Scott Troutman President's Message_.. Scott Troutman 2 Greetings, fellow collectors, A Railroad One Day, A Cannon the Next I hope your collecting is turning up ever more Tony L Crumbley 2 interesting material and that you will report your finds with The Pre~ivil War Railroads of North Carolina an article fortheNewsletter. We canalwaysuse goodmaterial. Scott Troutman 3 Despite being trapped in Oklahoma, I have turned up a hoard Wilmington & Fayetteville River ROute Marking of early material from Tally Ho, N.C., so you never know Greg Homesly 19 what you will find or where you will find it! As a group, we have been finding some very A RAILROAD ONE DAY, A CANNON THE NEXT interesting material, and our New.sletter reflects this. We Tony L. Crumbley · think that this is one of the best postal history journals anywhere. It is no wander that we have been asked to In 1860, a 48-mile stretch ofrailroad from Charlotte participate in PhiLITex 92, the First International Philatelic to Statesville was completed and called the "Statesville Literature Exhibition in North America. This will be held Line." By 1864, this rail line had been tom up to provide war November 4- 14 at the Philatelic Foundation in New York materials for the Confederacy. City. If you think that a particular issue over the last few years On May 19; 1870, Mecklenburg County voted was espesciallymeritorious, let me, Tony Crumbley or Vernon ·$200,000 in bonds to build the Atlanta & Charlotte Railway Stroupe know, as we need to send in our entry before January and $100,000 to rebuild this old "Statesville Line".
    [Show full text]
  • Pinellas County Historical Background
    Pinellas County Historical Background Pinellas County PINELLAS COUNTY HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Prepared and Published by: THE PINELLAS COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT For the PINELLAS COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Calvin D. Harris, Chairman Karen Seel, Vice-Chairman Robert S. LaSala, County Administrator Brian Smith, Planning Director Third Edition December, 2008 PREFACE & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS he purpose of the Pinellas County Historical Background document is to provide a unified natural and cultural history T of the area that now constitutes Pinellas County. The historical background aims to serve both as an educational tool for the County’s citizens and as a support instrument in the continued implementation of the “Protecting and Restoring Pinellas County’s Natural and Cultural Heritage” agenda, as set forth in the Pinellas County Comprehensive Plan. The first two editions of this document were prepared and published by the Pinellas County Planning Department in 1986 and in 1995. The Planning Department acknowledges the assistance provided by Heritage Village in the preparation of this report. The Planning Department also wishes to thank the cities of St. Petersburg, Dunedin, and Oldsmar for their photographic contributions. TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary Significant Dates in Pinellas County History ....................................1-4 Pinellas County: A Historical Perspective People of Pinellas and What Brought Them Here..........................2-3 Major Economic Influences...............................................................2-3
    [Show full text]
  • Nomination Form
    NPS Form 10-900 0MB No. 1024-0018 {Rev. Aug. 2002) United States Department of the Interior V1l- 4/:/1 National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES N~1Jf 11/t /r REGISTRATION FORM This form is for use in nominating or requesting determin at,ons for 1nd1vidual properties and distncls See instructions 1n How to Complete /ho Nal1onal Regis/er of H1 sloric Places Regis/ration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each 1lem by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the in(ormalion requested. If any1tem does not apply to the property being documented, enter "NIA" for "not applicable " For funcl!ons, architectural classiflralion, materi als. and areas of s1gn 1ncance. enter only categones and subc.ategones from the instructions Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a) Use a lypewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all 11ems ========================================================================-==-====--=--=----- 1. Name of Property ============================================================================-==-==-=--=--=- historic name ____B_e_lf_ie_ld_-_E_m~p..._o~r_ia_H_is_t_o_ri_c_D_i_s_tr_ic_t ____ (_1 _09_-_0_0_2_0~) _________ other names/site number ___N-' o~rt_h_ E_m~p..._o~r_ia_________________ _ ========================================================================-==========-==-==-= 2.Location ==================================================================================-==-===== street & number Roughly bounded by the Petersburg & Danville
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Landscapes Inventory: Crater Battlefield, Richmond National
    National Park Service Cultural Landscapes Inventory 2017 Crater Battlefield Petersburg National Battlefield Table of Contents Inventory Unit Summary & Site Plan Concurrence Status Geographic Information and Location Map Management Information National Register Information Chronology & Physical History Analysis & Evaluation of Integrity Condition Treatment Bibliography & Supplemental Information Crater Battlefield Petersburg National Battlefield Inventory Unit Summary & Site Plan Inventory Summary The Cultural Landscapes Inventory Overview: CLI General Information: Purpose and Goals of the CLI The Cultural Landscapes Inventory (CLI) is an evaluated inventory of all significant landscapes in units of the national park system in which the National Park Service has, or plans to acquire any enforceable legal interest. Landscapes documented through the CLI are those that individually meet criteria set forth in the National Register of Historic Places such as historic sites, historic designed landscapes, and historic vernacular landscapes or those that are contributing elements of properties that meet the criteria. In addition, landscapes that are managed as cultural resources because of law, policy, or decisions reached through the park planning process even though they do not meet the National Register criteria, are also included in the CLI. The CLI serves three major purposes. First, it provides the means to describe cultural landscapes on an individual or collective basis at the park, regional, or service-wide level. Secondly, it provides a platform to share information about cultural landscapes across programmatic areas and concerns and to integrate related data about these resources into park management. Thirdly, it provides an analytical tool to judge accomplishment and accountability. The legislative, regulatory, and policy direction for conducting the CLI include: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 USC 470h-2(a)(1)).
    [Show full text]