How have national park management plans changed over the last 20 - 30 years??

Question

How have national park management plans changed over the last 20 - 30 years??

Answer 1

Management is having to make do with smaller budgets.  Management on a shoestring budget compromises the habitat for wildlife and for humans.  

That said, the science is better and there's several decades worth of good data available so hopefully better decisions are being made based on this information.

Answer 2

they have become more REact rather than PROact.

More and more parks are working on skelaton crews because of the cost of workers' salaries, healthcare etc.

It's a very sad state of affairs .  Where there are not enough employees to keep the parks in the pristine shape they were made parks for in the first place.

Answer 3

Since fire seems to be a topic of choice, there is a lot more Rx (Prescribed) fire now, to help areas from having out of control wildfires.  Management plans have the Rx fire plan written into them as well as the management of endangerend flora and fauna and the land that these species occupy.

Goals for the parks in question are listed as well, such as, we hope to complete a certain project by this date (whether or not it actually happens).  Within the Fl State Parks we update our Unit Mangement Plans every 10 years  They include soil types, ecosystems, historical and cultural information.

Answer 4

The policy on wildfires  in National Parks has changed a few times from put it out to let it burn now I think the policy is  let it bur but control it.

Answer 5

To answers this in detail would take about 40 paragraphs, so I'll just toss out the basics here.

Fire management has obviously gone through a great deal of change the last 20 years.  There was a significant shift in the mid 80s to allow naturally started fires (i.e. fires started by lightning strikes) to burn unchecked and "run their course."  This nearly lead to Yellowstone going up in smoke.  The measure the Park Service employs now is to allow natural fires to burn "when beneficial to the restoration and health of the involved eco-systems."

In that same approach they have begun to do what they can to restore eco-systems to the natural order and condition they had once existed in -- this includes returning native species previously driven out or eliminated.  Like wolves.  Which in two parks has generated massive controversy.

One of the surprising things the re-introduction of wolves has had for Yellowstone is the improvement in the quality and condition of creeks and streams.  Elk no longer "lounge" around at one drinking spot -- which is hard on the stream beds and bottom flow causing erosion.  With wolves back in the picture the elk are moving more frequently, so they  no longer over use on spot along the water.

Over the last two seasons parks have been taking a hard look at tourist volume, site usage, accessibility, programs, etc.  This is an ongoing and ever evolving aspect of the national parks.  The goal being to make sure the parks serve the public interest, while being preserved for future generations.