We have in the past touched on the possibility of the Blackwater Falls area of West Virginia being added to the National Park System, and an effort to achieve that status is resurfacing.
The February newsletter of the Friends of Blackwater Canyon talks of a High Allegheny National Park that would encompass not just the falls but "the scenic grandeur of Dolly Sods, Canaan Valley, Spruce Knob, Seneca Rocks and the Blackwater Canyon. Some areas will be in the park and others buffered by the park."
As with other efforts to create national parks, the Friends of Blackwater point to the resulting economic benefits such a park would bring to West Virginia. They also note, fortunately, the resource benefits that would be extended.
"High Allegheny National Park will promote clean watershed development and protect the pristine headwaters of the Potomac, Monongahela, and Greenbrier rivers; and will protect endangered species and sensitive ecological habitats," reads the newsletter.
The friends group also points out that no new public lands would be necessary to create a High Allegheny National Park, that it could be "created from existing federal lands, with hoped-for participation by the State of West Virginia. Spruce Knob-Seneca Rocks National Recreation Area will anchor the park. Other public land in the region will be joined together in common management, providing a rich and coordinated tapestry of outdoor experience for visitors from across the nation."
Having spent eight years in West Virginia earlier in my life, I can attest to the beauty of this area, both that of Blackwater Falls specifically as well as the surrounding Monongahela National Forest, the Dolly Sods Wilderness Area, and the Spruce Knob-Seneca Rocks area. This is an incredible outdoor playground, with opportunities for hiking, backpacking, backcountry skiing, climbing, paddling, birding, and more.
The 17,371-acre Dolly Sods Wilderness in the Monongahela National Forest is a particularly interesting landscape, one normally found much farther north in Canada. Here you'll find not only rock outcrops but also bog and heath eco-types, according to forest officials.
Is a national park needed? As Friends of Blackwater notes, the area already is protected to a large degree. But addition to the park system would bring some greater protections for the existing natural resources. It also would bring greater attention to the area, which may or may not be a good thing, depending on your viewpoint.
Comments
Tomp2, I've seen what National Forest versions of National Monuments can be like. Clear cutting like that done in Misty Fjords National Monument would be awful for any forest area you're trying to protect. But perhaps each non-NPS monument can have its own charter specific to that location.
The previous articles were well written and interesting to read. I have just a couple of comments. I hope the land is acquired in Blackwater Canyon and the land is not logged. That would be a shame. As for the other areas mentioned, do they not already enjoy protection from destructive activities? They have been designated as State Parks, or nationally protected areas of some sort or another. I don't understand the remarks of Mr. Ken when he writes " Wilderness and outdoor enjoyment benefits should acrue to all people, not just those that have used the resource before and want to "protect it from others" which is code speech for "discrimination and privilege". The proposed areas are open to all and I am not aware of anyone that has a protectionist attitude toward the proposed National Park status. I believe that the lead question of this article is "Can Blackwater Falls Area of West Virginia Support A National Park? " I read about protecting the area, which is well and good, and the economic viability and return on investment, but what about the area being able to SUPPORT a national park. If it is built....will they come ?
Hi Tomp2,
This is a possibility, and it does provide more permanence. However, as you point out, this approach provides less stringent protection than a National Park and would bring little or no additional resources. Furthermore, I would disagree with you about providing more visibility. With a couple of exceptions, I doubt that many people can name any of the National Monuments and National Recreation Areas under BLM or U.S. Forest Service (USFS) management.
In fact, there is already a USFS National Recreation Area in the proposed park -- Spruce Knob-Seneca Rocks NRA. It is little known, it has minimal public facilities and programs, and it is open to logging, livestock grazing, mineral extraction, and other damaging activities. The failure of the USFS to properly manage this area is why it is in the High Allegheny National Park proposal.
There are other examples of how designating National Monuments, National Recreation Areas, National Scenic Areas, National Conservation Areas, and other special areas and leaving them under their current multiple use land agencies does not work well.
In New Mexico, Valles Caldera National Preserve is being proposed for transfer from the U.S. Forest Service to the National Park Service because it is allowing livestock grazing, allowing only limited public use, and commercializing the area. See /2010/01/missing-system-valles-caldera-national-preserve5178
In Washington, citizens are proposing the transfer of Mount St. Helens National Volcanic Preserve from the USFS to the NPS because the Forest Service has cut back its already inadequate funding for public education and recreation programs. This is an example of an area that is well known, but it is because of Mount St. Helens; I'll bet hardly anyone outside the area knows that it is not a National Park System unit. See http://www.npca.org/magazine/2009/spring/from-the-ashes.html
Finally, in Utah, Grand Staircase National Monument is the "crown jewel" of the BLM National Landscape Conservation System. This, and the controversy surrounding its designation, makes it another fairly well-known area. Unfortunately, the area is not well protected. The National Monument is threatened by logging, livestock grazing, oil and gas development, and uncontrolled off-road motor vehicles. The BLM's proposed Upper Kanab Creek Watershed Vegetation Management Project would destroy old-growth pinon and juniper trees on over 50,000 acres, including lands proposed for wilderness designation. The BLM plans to use toxic herbicides, hand tools, and large mechanical equipment to eliminate 90 to 100 percent of the trees in the area. A coalition of conservation organizations opposes this project, strongly disputing BLM claims that it would reduce catastrophic wildfire and “rehabilitate” vegetation. See http://www.grandcanyontrust.org/news/2010/02/conservation-groups-ask-blm...
Off-road vehicle abuse is another big problem at Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. The Monument has 553 miles of off-road motor vehicle “trails.” Moreover, off-road use is poorly regulated. In 2009, off-road vehicle advocates staged an illegal rally and drove up the Pariah River corridor, a roadless area proposed for wilderness designation. With its inadequate staff and weak mandate, the BLM was unable to stop the rally. See http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2009/05/raucous-offroad-rally...
As you can see, I am not a big supporter of USFS and BLM National Monuments and other special areas. I think they actually undermine the National Park System by giving people the impression of protection while being only somewhat better than the status quo. I think High Allegheny deserves nothing less than full National Park protection.
Best regards,
Michael
Whenever I drive through West Virginia, I think, "Man, how can this state not have a national park?" A beautiful place. I hope this happens.
Michael, thanks for the informative post--that was a great read.
I say make it a park! I agree with Michael Kellett in that the area is not very well protected. There are many endemic species of plants and animals living in that are that receive no protection. There is a species of salamander that is declining because of the clear-cutting practices of the USFS. I may be a little biased because I do work for the NPS, but I do feel that we are better equipped to protect that area, and it does need protection! I know that we need trees, goodness knows I love my books, but not at the cost of losing so many species that can never be replaced. I grew up in that area, visiting Blackwater Falls every year, and I do not want it lost.
Hi justinh,
You're welcome!
Best,
Michael
addressing the comment, "Man, how can this state not have a national park?"
The state has Harpers Ferry National Historical Park and the New River Gorge National River (which also oversees the Gauley River National Recreation Area and the Bluestone National Scenic River- although not technically a "park" designation)
I know that you are being positive and I love that, just want to clarify that WV does have NPS land, not sure about HFNHP but as for the NRGNR there is at least 90,000 acres within the boundaries.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment and question this proposal. When I
first saw the region now proposed as the High Allegheny National Park 43 years
ago, I thought, "This area should be a national park!" But there is a huge
problem that has not been mentioned. At
http://www.rpa.org/northeastlandscapes/initiative.php?id=153 you'll find a nice
general map of the proposed park. Looks good! But when I spread out my
Monongahela NF map out, I see that about half of this area is private land. It
includes towns, villages, farms and major developments. How do you propose to
deal with this fact? Are you proposing for the feds to condemn and purchase all
that land? Or are you proposing a spotty, Swiss-cheese park riddled with
inholdings? Wouldn't the latter be a travesty of a national park, considering
that elsewhere, great efforts are made to acquire inholdings to prevent the kind
of development that already exists in the proposed High Allegheny
Park?
Another problem is hunting. I would love to see a national park
with reintroduced wolves and cougars to control the present overpopulation of
deer. But would local residents support a ban on human hunting? A national
preserve has been suggested as an alternative, but IMHO a poor alternative
because being able to get up close to wild animals because they are not hunted
is a major attribute of national parks.