DRAFT

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE PERCEPTIONS AND RESPONSE TO THE DROUGHT OF 1996 – PRESENT

May 13, 2003

The Colorado Plateau contains the largest concentration of National Park Service units in the US outside of the mall in Washington DC. The 32 NPS units range in size from Grand Canyon NP and Glen Canyon NRA to small monuments such as Navajo NM and Hubbell Trading Post. Although many were established to preserve cultural sites and artifacts, all contain significant natural resources affected by climatic cycles such as the present drought.

The NPS perception and response to draught differs from multi-use land management agencies such as the U.S. Forest System and the Bureau of Land Management for several reasons. The overriding goal of the NPS is to preserve or restore the natural ecological processes that have contributed to the diversity of life forms found within parks. Fluctuations in climate is one of those processes. NPS has recognized fire as one of the natural ecological processes and also recognizes the impacts of 70 + years of fire suppression. Many woodlands and forests are in need of restoration before a maintenance regime can be employed. Yet, the management mode remains to let nature take its course. Second, the NPS is historically a bottom-up organization. The assumption has been, if each superintendent takes care of their unit, the National Park System will thrive.

This does not mean that park managers and science practitioners (resource managers) are not concerned with the management implications of a severe and sustained drought. Park managers are very concerned about the high risk of catastrophic fire caused by dense forests and extremely dry fuels including pines killed by bark beetles. They are concerned about the effects of catastrophic fires on both the cultural natural resources, protection of facilities and employee residences, and employee and visitor safety. They are concerned about the publics perception /reaction to high fire danger and the remains of stand replacing fires.

To gather information on the perception, response, and information needs of parks on the Colorado Plateau, a questionnaire was developed by Gary Nabhan and mailed to the superintendent of each Colorado Plateau park unit. The results are summarized in Figure 1. Twenty-nine responses were received. This included multiple responses from several parks including Grand Canyon, Zion, and Petrified Forest. It also included single responses from offices that manage several parks (e.g. Flagstaff Monuments which includes Sunset Crater, Walnut Canyon, and Wupatki and the Southeast Utah Group which includes Canyonlands, Arches, Hovenweep, and Natural Bridges). Six of the questionnaires were completed by the unit superintendent, 21 by resource management/fire management staff, and 2 anonymous.

About Sixty percent of respondents perceive the current drought as severe, 21 % as unprecedented. Over 75 % noted tree and shrub death. Three responses, Bandelier, Cedar Breaks, and the Flagstaff Monuments, indicate tree and shrub mortality exceeding 50 %. Ninety % contribute these die offs to drought with 55 % recognizing insect damage as a major contributor. Flagstaff Monuments and Bandelier see years of fire suppression exacerbating the current situation.

Most park areas do not know what impact the current drought is having on birds, reptiles, fish or amphibians. However, parks with inventories in progress have some indication of change over the last several years and decreasing species richness compared to earlier surveys. Sixty-six percent recognize decreased flow in springs and seeps and 41 % lower water levels in rivers, lakes and reservoirs.

Over ½ perceive drought and the associated high fire risk as effecting park visitation, yet only one park has developed a drought management strategy. Respondents are split on the question if drought has affected there work mix. Slightly less than ½ don’t know what impact the drought is having on invasive plants, the rest seeing increases, decreases, or now change. This is not unexpected as one would expect invasive plants species to respond in various ways. For those units with livestock grazing, slightly less than ½ are aware of reduction in stocking rates.

The last question asked park management what information and assistance they needed from scientist. Only 9 respondents answered this question (Table 1). Responses fall into 4 general themes. Park managers want to know how long the drought will last, how severe it will be, and what the long term implications are. As indicated by Betancort and Dettinger, accurate predictions may not be possible. The other need indicated is for material on this and past droughts to educate park staffs and the public on the implications for management. Third, parks want to know how to manage resources in a drought scenario. What are best management practices? Should we curtail prescribed fire until the drought is over or should we take every opportunity to reduce fuel loads? Finally, parks want to make sure the effects of this drought are documented through inventory and monitoring. The high number of “don’t know” responses to the impacts of drought on bird, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish, and invasive plants also is indicative of research needs and opportunities in Colorado Plateau parks.

Although, not addressed in the questionnaire, an important question is how can the parks of the Colorado Plateau contribute to an understanding of the short and long term impacts of major drought episodes (i.e. parks for science)? First, parks can provide relatively secure long-term monitoring/research plots on lands that have not been subjected to multiple land uses such as logging and livestock grazing. Also, the National Park Service is in the midst of completing biological inventories of vascular plants and vertebrates in all parks. This effort includes searching for and automating legacy data and records and completing inventories. At the same time, the parks have been organized into 2 networks for the purpose of long-term vital-sign monitoring. The Northern Colorado Plateau Network (NCPN) is in the second year of planning., the Southern Colorado Plateau Network (SCPN) in the first year. Both networks have given priority to completion of vegetation maps. NCPN parks that didn’t have current or satisfactory maps were flown the fall of 2002. The scale of the true color photography is 1 – 12,000. The SCPN parks that don’t have vegetation maps will be flown the fall of 2003. Efforts are being made to obtain funds to fly areas that have current vegetation maps and where tree mortality is high (Flagstaff parks and Bandelier). Imagery and maps go well beyond park boundaries. This imagery should provide valuable documentation. In addition, long-term monitoring protocols can be developed so they address indicators of drought impacts. Cooperative monitoring and research across boundaries is welcomed and encouraged.