Yellowstone National Park officials, in a draft report to the World Heritage Committee regarding the health of the national park, say they are making strides in reducing impacts tied to pollution and visitation.
The report, currently open to public comments, points to reduced runoff from mine tailings into the park, reduced air pollution tied to over-snow vehicles, and seeming success in beating down Yellowstone Lake's populations of non-native lake trout, a species that has posed a threat to the lake's native cutthroat trout.
The report was required by the World Heritage Committee, which back in 1995 had listed Yellowstone as a World Heritage Site In Danger, a designation stemming from a variety of threats, including those posed by a proposed gold mine just outside Yellowstone's northeast entrance. While the designation was dropped in 2003, the Committee had requested annual reports from the park on various issues, such as wildlife populations and related conservation goals, as well as relations with stakeholders.
The current report notes that:
* More tolerance is being gained for bison moving into Montana during the winter months;
* "There are more grizzly bears today, occupying a larger area in the (Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem), than there were in the late 1960s prior to the closure of the garbage dumps";
* Park staff are working on a "climate change response strategy" that "focuses on monitoring trends in temperature, precipitation, snowpack and runoff throughout the area and integrating that information into ongoing studies about wildlife and vegetation", and;
* Park staff continue to monitor activities inside, and outside, the park that could impact Yellowstone's geothermal resources.
The report states that the Park Service has not set day-use limits for visitation numbers, but notes that "the park is in the process of increasing entrance fees and implementing an overnight backcountry use fee, which may result in increased recreational use costs to visitors."
Public comment on the report is being taken through January 11. You can find the entire report, and comment on it, at this site.
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
Please Gary, give me a clue. On one hand you brag that WHS designation is good because it brings massive visitation to the parks and "billions" of dollars to the states and then on the other hand you argue that all National Parks should be "designated wilderness". How are those two concepts compatible?
Go brush up on the land management uses then come back. Obviously, many of the parks already do have designated wilderness. Mount Rainier, Olympic, Rocky Mountain, and Yosemite are around 90% or more wilderness, and they get millions of visitors a year and rank in the top 10 most visited National Parks. The fact that they have managed wilderness is not having much of an effect on the frontcountry. Yosemite, and Olymic are World Heritage Sites..