6 Credit Capstone Project Proposal

Master of Natural Resources

6 Credit Capstone Project Proposal

Canyonlands National Park River Management Plan

I) Problem Statement

The river management plan at Canyonlands National Park (CNP) needs to be updated. The existing plan was developed and implemented in 1981 (NPS, 1981). Now, over thirty years later, recreational river use and best management practices have changed significantly from the 1980s (Wood, 2007; NPS, 2013; Webb, Belnap, and Weisheit, 2004) and the 1981 plan is outdated. It no longer adequately protects park resources or manages recreational river use (S. Young, K. Carpenter, H. Wiley, S. Henry, and M. Miller, personal communication, 9/2013).

CNP is preparing to update the river management plan. The overall goal of the plan is to manage use of the Green and Colorado Rivers and their canyons in order to preserve their primitive character (NPS, 1981; NPS, 1978). While there are many forces that affect the river environment in CNP (incoming river flow, invasive species, light pollution, aircraft noise, etc…), the scope of this plan is to manage recreational river use and associated impacts.

This project will analyze the management situation and propose updated alternatives for river recreation management. The purpose of these alternatives will be to protect wilderness resources through appropriate use limits, zoning, monitoring, and other management actions. Both physical resources and experiential resources will be addressed. CNP staff will use this analysis to inform development of NEPA documents and the final revised river management plan.

II) Audience

CNP planning and management staff requested this analysis of the management situation in order to update the plan. Involved parties include the assistant superintendent, planning and compliance specialist, chief ranger, chief of natural resources, river district ranger, and concessions specialist. The report generated through this analysis will be turned over to Sabrina Henry; CNP planning and compliance specialist. She will utilize it as she coordinates the NEPA process for the updated plan beginning in 2014.

III) Background information

Canyonlands National Park was established in 1964. Recreational use on the Green and Colorado rivers within the park grew significantly during the 1960’s and 1970’s (Webb et al, 2004; Schmieding, 2008). The majority of river use during that time was whitewater Cataract Canyon use and an annual hard-hulled motorboat event called the “Friendship Cruise” (Webb et al, 2004; Wood, 2007). Increased recreational use impacted resource conditions. In response the NPS implemented river management plans, most recently in 1981.

River use changed significantly over time and now includes thousands of flat-water canoe trips on the calm upper stretches of the rivers before Cataract Canyon (USDI, NPS, 2013). Hybrid trips that combine backpacking, mountain biking, and packrafting are growing in popularity. Because of these changes CNP made several starts at updating the river management plan including a 1998 visitor use study (Warzecha, Lime, Manning, and Freimund), and a 2007 draft river management plan (Wood). The 2007 plan never made it past internal review because it was deemed too complex; it created three different river management zones with six management alternatives each (S. Henry, personal communication, 9/2013).

CNP plans to use the results of this capstone project to inform the NEPA process for the plan update beginning in 2014. If for some reason CNP is forced to halt the NEPA planning process due to budget constraints, competing priorities or other circumstances, this project would still be a valuable resource for park managers who could use the information provided to make management changes through other means. The other means available to park management include changes to permit requirements and other river regulations promulgated in the Canyonlands Superintendent’s Compendium, which does not undergo the intensive NEPA process for a full scale plan update. While an updated plan is the ultimate goal, these other means make this project viable and useful to the NPS on multiple levels.

IV) Project goals and objectives

The overall goal of this project is to provide information needed by the NPS to update the Canyonlands river management plan. At this juncture, the project will remain in-house and will serve to inform later scoping with stakeholders and the public. This goal will be achieved through the following objectives:

·  Analyze data on river use.

·  Review law and policy applicable to Canyonlands river management including NPS policy, Canyonlands enabling legislation, the Wilderness Act, and Canyonlands general management plan.

·  Analyze the economic impact of river recreation both to CNP and the surrounding communities.

·  Review planning approaches for river management in parks and wilderness focusing on the NPS Visitor Experience and Resource Protection (VERP) planning framework.

·  Review scientific literature regarding recreation and resource conditions on the rivers in Canyonlands in particular and river recreation management in general including Blahna and Reiter (2001), Allred (2012), and Shelby, Danley, Gibbs, and Petersen (1982).

·  Review the 1998 Rivers of Canyonlands visitor use study and 2007 draft management plan.

·  Interview NPS staff to gather additional information about management needs, resource concerns, and necessary plan components.

·  Synthesize the aforementioned information into an analysis of the management situation document that presents a range of possible management alternatives. Submit this to NPS planning staff.

·  Draw upon all the MNR core disciplines: quantitative methods, ecological foundations, human dimensions, spatial information management, policy, economics, and administration in order to produce a robust interdisciplinary analysis of the river management situation.

·  Meet the author’s educational objectives: 1) Apply knowledge gained through MNR coursework to a practical problem in my field of work. 2) Enhance knowledge of NPS wilderness and recreation policy and planning frameworks. 3) Build a knowledge base that will inform all aspects of my career in the NPS.

V) Methods

This project will meet the objectives specified above through rigorous analysis of multiple data sources and synthesis into management recommendations.

·  Obtain and analyze official river use statistics from the last four decades from Canyonlands National Park.

·  Analyze applicable law and policy, the VERP planning process, and applicable scientific literature on recreation, river, and wilderness management (NPS, 1964; NPS, 1978; NPS, 1997; Cole, 2000; Cole, Manning, and Lime, 2005; Shelby et. al., 1982: Blahna and Reiter, 2001, etc…).

·  Analyze the economic impact of recreational river use to both CNP and the surrounding communities (Archie, Terry, and Rasker, 2009).

·  Analyze research on physical and social resource conditions in the river corridor (Allred, 2012; Haden, Shannon, Wilson, and Blinn, 2003; Painter, Deems, Belnap, Hamlet, and Landry, 2010; Papauchis, Singer, and Sloan 2001; etc…)

·  Analyze previous work on the issue including the 1998 visitor use study (Warzecha et al) and 2007 draft river management plan (Wood).

·  Interview CNP staff regarding river management issues and potential solutions including the planning and compliance specialist, chief of resource management, chief ranger, river district ranger and river staff, backcountry reservations staff, concessions specialist, and park botanist.

·  Develop a range of management alternatives to address issues identified in the analysis process. Vet these alternatives through park staff.

VI) Expected Results

Deliver a capstone project report to the author’s graduate committee members and also to CNP to aid the river management planning effort beginning in 2014. The report will include:

A) Abstract

B) Table of Contents

C) List of Figures: figures will include graphs on use statistics and park maps.

D) List of Tables: tables will include proposed management zone regulations.

E) List of Appendices: including use statistics for the last four decades.

E) Glossary of Terms and Acronyms

F) Introduction: This section will include a problem statement, background information, and goals and objectives. These sections will be similar in topic but more in depth when compared to the same sections in this proposal.

G) Methods of Analysis and Description of the Study Site: The methods of analysis will be similar to the same section in this proposal, but more in depth. The study site will be described and mapped using GIS.

H) Findings of Analysis: the expected findings will be current resource conditions in the river corridor, visitor-use statistics, current policy and planning framework guidance, current wilderness, recreation, and river management approaches and research, and resource concerns and management goals from interviews with park staff.

I) Conclusions: this section will emphasize the main findings of the analysis and summarize relationships between the core MNR disciplines as they relate to this project.

J) Solutions: the solutions section will suggest a range of management alternatives in response to the issues identified.

K) References

VII) References

Allred, E. C. (2012). Knowledge, Norms and Preferences for Tamarisk Management in the Green and Colorado River Corridors of the Colorado Plateau. All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1224. Retrieved from: http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/1224.

Archie, M. L., Terry, H. D., Rasker, R. (2009). The Economic Influence of National Parks in Southeast Utah. National Parks Conservation Association Survey. Retrieved from http://www.npca.org/assets/pdf/Utah_Parks_Economic_Report.pdf.

Blahna, D. J., and Reiter, D. K. (2001) Whitewater Boaters in Utah; Implications for Wild River Planning. International Journal of Wilderness 7(1): 39-43.

Cole, D. N. (2000). Managing campsite impacts on wild rivers. Are there lessons for wilderness managers? International Journal of Wilderness 6(3): 12-16.

Cole, D., Manning, R., Lime, D. (2005). Addressing visitor capacity of parks and rivers. Parks and Recreation 40(3): 8, 10, 12.

Haden, A., Shannon, J. P., Wilson, K. P., Blinn, W. (2003). Benthic Community Structure of the

Green and Colorado Rivers through Canyonlands National Park, Utah, USA. The Southwester Naturalist 48(1): 23-35.

Painter, T. H., Deems, J. S., Belnap, J., Hamlet, A. F., Landry, C. C., Udall, B. (2010). Response

of Colorado River runoff to dust radiative forcing in snow. Proceedings of the National

Academy of Science of the United States of Amercia 107(40) 17125-17130.

Papouchis, C. M., Singer, F. J., Sloan, W. B. (2001). Responses of Desert Bighorn Sheep to

Increased Human Recreation. Journal of Wildlife Management 65(3): 573-582.

Schmieding, S. J. (2008) Administrative History of Canyonlands National Park. National Park Service. Retrieved from http://www.nps.gov/cany.

Shelby, B., Danley, M. S., Gibbs, K. C., Petersen, M. E. (1982). Preferences of Backpackers and River Runners for Allocation Techniques. Journal of Forestry 80(7):416-419.

U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. (2013). River Use Statistics. Canyonlands National Park Reservation Office.

U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. (1978). General Management Plan; Canyonlands National Park. USDI 7p.

U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. (1981). River Management Plan; Canyonlands National Park. USDI 26p.

U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. (1997). Visitor Experience and Resource Protection (VERP) Framework. USDI 103p.

Warzecha, C. A., Lime, D. W., Manning, R. E., Freimund, W. A. (1998). Rivers of Canyonlands National Park: 1998 Visitor Use Study. University of Minnesota, 109p.

Webb, R. H., Belnap, J., Weisheit, J. S. (2004) A Human and Environmental History of the Rivers in Canyonlands. University of Utah Press.

Wood, D. (2007). Draft River Management Plan, Canyonlands National Park. U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. 37p.