PURPOSE OF 

AND NEED FOR 

THE PLAN

Tom VandenBerg

Bill Chambers

B. Heyman

Tom VandenBerg

Tom VandenBerg
3 

PURPOSE, NEED, AND SCOPING 

INTRODUCTION 

This General Management Plan/ Environmental 

Impact Statement presents and analyzes three 

alternative future directions for the management 

and use of Big Bend National Park. One of the 

alternatives, alternative B, has been identified as 

the National Park Service’s (NPS) preferred 

future direction. The potential environmental 

impacts of all alternatives have been identified 

and assessed. 

General management plans are intended to be 

long-term documents that establish and articulate a management philosophy and framework 

for decision making and problem solving in the 

parks. General management plans usually 

provide guidance during a 15- to 20-year period. 

Actions directed by general management plans 

or in subsequent implementation plans are 

accomplished over time. Budget restrictions, 

requirements for additional data or regulatory 

compliance, and competing national park system 

priorities prevent immediate implementation of 

many actions. Major or especially costly actions 

could be implemented 10 or more years into the 

future. 

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PARK 

The park was established on June 20, 1935, by an 

act of Congress (see appendix A). Big Bend 

National Park is in south Brewster County in 

southwest Texas in a sparsely populated area of 

the country (see Park Area map). Brewster 

County has 6,204 square miles and a population 

of approximately 13,000 people. Most of the 

population resides in two towns, Marathon and 

Alpine, which lie 69 and 100 miles respectively to 

the north and northwest of park headquarters. 

The western gateway communities of Study 

Butte/Terlingua, and Lajitas have grown in 

recent years but remain less populated than 

Marathon and Alpine. 

The maps in this document are for illustration 

purposes only and are not drawn perfectly to 

scale. 

Big Bend National Park encompasses more than 

801,000 acres. For more than 1,000 miles, the 

Rio Grande forms the international boundary 

between Mexico and the United States; Big Bend 

National Park administers approximately 25% 

of that boundary. Within the 118 twisting miles 

that define the park’s southern boundary, the 

river’s southeasterly flow changes abruptly to 

the northeast and forms the “big bend” of the 

Rio Grande. (The park also administers 125 

miles of the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River, 

which is outside the Big Bend National Park 

boundary.) South of the border, people call the 

Rio Grande by its Spanish name, Rio Bravo del 

Norte. 

Because the Rio Grande serves as an international boundary, the park faces unusual constraints when administering and enforcing park 

rules, regulations, and policies. The park has 

jurisdiction only to the center of the deepest 

river channel; the rest of the river lies within the 

Republic of Mexico. South of the river lie the 

Mexican states of Chihuahua and Coahuila and 

their protected areas for flora and fauna known 

as the Maderas del Carmen and the Cañon de 

Santa Elena. 

Big Bend National Park has national significance 

as the largest protected area of Chihuahuan 

Desert topography and ecology in the United 

States. Along with the Maderas del Carmen and 

Cañon de Santa Elena, Big Bend is part of one of 

the largest trans-boundary protected areas in 

North America. More than 2 million acres of 

Chihuahuan Desert resources, along with more 

than 200 miles of river, are under the national 

protection of the United States and Mexico. Few 

areas exceed the park’s value for the protection 

and study of geologic and paleontologic 

resources. Cretaceous and Tertiary fossil 

organisms exist in variety and abundance. 

Archeologists have discovered artifacts that are 

estimated to be 9,000 years old, and historic 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

4 

buildings and landscapes illustrate life along the 

international border at the turn of the century. 

The park exhibits dramatic contrasts. Its climate 

may be characterized as one of extremes. Dry, 

hot late spring and early summer days often 

exceed 100°F in the lower elevations. Winters 

are normally mild throughout the park, but 

subfreezing temperatures occasionally occur. 

Because the altitude ranges from about 1,800 

feet along the river to 7,800 feet in the Chisos 

Mountains, a wide variation in moisture and 

temperature exists throughout the park. These 

variations contribute to an exceptional diversity 

in plant and animal habitats. 

The 118 river miles that form the southern park 

boundary include the spectacular canyons of 

Santa Elena, Mariscal, and Boquillas. The 

meandering Rio Grande in this portion of the 

Chihuahuan Desert has cut deep canyons with 

nearly vertical walls through three uplifts 

comprised primarily of limestone. Throughout 

the open desert areas, the highly productive Rio 

Grande riparian zone includes various plant and 

animal species and significant cultural resources. 

The vegetation extends into the desert along 

creeks and arroyos. 

Cultural resources in the park range from the 

Paleo-Indian period 10,500 years ago through 

the historic period (mid 1500s to the present) 

represented by American Indian groups, such as 

the Chisos, Mescalero Apache, and Comanche. 

More recently, Spanish, Mexican, and American 

settlers farmed, ranched, and mined in the area. 

Throughout the prehistoric period, humans 

found shelter and camped throughout the park. 

The archeological record reveals an Archaicperiod desert culture whose inhabitants 

developed a nomadic hunting and gathering 

lifestyle that remained virtually unchanged for 

several thousand years. 

In more recent times the park has been used for 

various subsistence or commercial land uses. 

The riparian and tributary environments were 

used for subsistence and irrigation farming. 

Transportation networks, irrigation structures, 

simple domestic residences and outbuildings, 

and planed and terraced farmlands lining the 

streambanks characterize these landscapes. 

Annual visitation to the park has averaged 

300,000 in recent years. The 1992 Visitor 

Services Project determined that most visitors 

were 41 years of age or older. Most visitors came 

to the park in family groups. Visitors from 

foreign countries comprised 10% of park visitation, with 48% of the international visitors coming from Germany. Americans came from Texas 

(65%), with smaller numbers from other states. 

The average length of stay, three days, is higher 

than most other national park system areas. 

PURPOSE OF THE PLAN 

The purpose of this General Management Plan / 

Environmental Impact Statement is to clearly 

define a direction for resource preservation and 

visitor experience at Big Bend National Park. 

The approved plan will provide a framework for 

proactive decision making, including decisions 

on visitor use and on managing natural and 

cultural resources and development. This will 

allow managers to address future opportunities 

and problems effectively. 

This plan will prescribe the resource conditions 

and visitor experiences that are to be achieved 

and maintained in the national park over time. 

Management decisions that must be made where 

law, policy, or regulations do not provide clear 

guidance or limits will be based on the park’s 

purposes, the range of public expectations and 

concerns, resource analysis, and the evaluation 

of the natural, cultural, economic, and social 

impacts of alternative courses of action, 

including long-term costs to the park. 

This document will not describe how particular 

programs or projects will be implemented or 

prioritized. Those decisions will be deferred to 

more detailed implementation planning, which 

will follow the broad, comprehensive decision 

making presented in this document. 
La Linda

Roads

Terrell County

Presidio County

Marfa Alpine

Elephant 

Mountain

Wildlife 

Management

 Area

Big Bend Ranch

State Park

Study 

Butte/

Terlingua

Santa Elena

Cañon de 

Santa Elena

Protected Area

Ojinaga Big 

Bend

National 

Park

Black Gap

Wildlife 

Management 

Area

Boquillas

Maderas 

del Carmen

Protected Area

Presidio

Marathon

0 20 40 60 Miles

North

M E X I C O

U N I T E D S T A T E S

TEXAS

Coahuila

Chihuahua

Big Bend National Park

National Park Service

U.S. Department of Interior

Region

DSC • Dec 2002 • 155/20089

Terrell County

Brewster County

Brewster County

Presidio County

Brewster County
Wilderness (1984 proposed)

Backcountry Nonwilderness

Private Lands

Roads

Study Butte/

Terlingua

Rosillos

Ranch

Texas

Big Bend 

National Park

Big Bend National Park

National Park Service

U.S. Department of Interior

Park Area

0 3 6 9 12 18 Miles

North

North Rosillos/

Harte Ranch

Castolon

and

Cottonwood

Campground

Chisos 

Basin

Panther 

Junction

Rio Grande

Village

Rio

Gr ande

Rio

Grande

Wild and Scenic River

Christmas 

Mountains

Persimmon Gap

Maverick

Entrance

South

Rosillos

Ranch

(private)

DSC • Dec 2002 • 155/20073
Purpose, Need, and Scoping 

7 

NEED FOR THE PLAN 

The previous General Management Plan for Big 

Bend was approved in 1980. It needs to be 

updated. In the absence of an updated plan, park 

managers will continue to follow applicable 

laws, policies, and guidelines as part of its 

standard operating procedures. They include the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA), section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966 (16 USC 470 et seq. as 

amended), and NPS Management Policies.

Each unit in the national park system is guided 

by agencywide and park-specific laws, regulations, and policies. Understanding this guidance 

and how it affects each unit’s mission is fundamental to planning for the future. This section 

highlights the park’s missions (expressed as 

purpose, significance, and mission goals) and the 

legal and policy mandates that guide the 

management of Big Bend National Park. These 

mission and mandate statements define the 

parameters within which all management actions 

and alternatives must fall. 

MISSION AND GOALS 

Big Bend National Park was authorized by Congress in 1935 to preserve and protect a representative area of the Chihuahuan Desert along 

the Rio Grande for the benefit and enjoyment of 

present and future generations. The park 

includes rich biological and geological diversity, 

cultural history, recreational resources, and 

outstanding opportunities for bi-national 

protection of shared resources. 

Park Purpose 

Big Bend National Park’s purpose is threefold: 

• Preserve and protect all natural and nationalregister-eligible cultural resources and values. 

• Provide educational opportunities to foster 

understanding and appreciation of the 

natural and human history of the region. 

• Provide recreational opportunities for 

diverse groups that are compatible with the 

protection and appreciation of park 

resources. 

Park Significance 

The park is significant because it contains the 

most representative example of the Chihuahuan 

Desert ecosystem in the United States. The 

park’s river, desert, and mountain environments 

support an extraordinary richness of biological 

diversity, including endemic plants and animals, 

and provide unparalleled recreation opportunities. The geologic features and Cretaceous and 

Tertiary fossils in Big Bend National Park 

furnish opportunities to study the sedimentary 

and igneous processes. Archeological and 

historic resources provide examples of cultural 

interaction in the Big Bend Region and varied 

ways humans adapted to the desert and river 

environments. The Rio Grande is life-sustaining 

for plants, animals, and human inhabitants 

beyond its banks. Along with the two Mexican 

protected areas for flora and fauna, Maderas del 

Carmen and CaZon de Santa Elena, Big Bend is 

now part of one of the largest transboundary 

protected areas in North America. More than 

two million acres of Chihuahuan Desert 

resources, along with more than 200 miles of 

river, are now under the national protection of 

the United States and Mexico. 

Primary Interpretive Themes 

The Park Service explains the park’s natural, 

cultural, and historical resources to visitors 

through interpretation — so that visitors have an 

understanding of why the park was set aside by 

Congress. An integral part of providing for 

visitor enjoyment of national parks is offering 

them opportunities to forge their own 

intellectual and emotional connections to the 

ideas and meanings inherent in the resources of 

parks. Interpretive themes are ideas, concepts, 

or stories that are central to the park’s purpose, 

significance, identity, and visitor experience. 

The primary interpretive themes define concepts that every visitor should have the opportunity to learn. Primary themes also provide the 

framework for the park’s interpretation and 

educational programs, influence the visitor 

experience, and provide direction for planners 

and designers of the park’s exhibits, publications, and audiovisual programs. Below are the 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

8 

primary interpretive themes (see appendix D for 

the subthemes and visitor experience goals). 

1. Big Bend National Park’s varied ecosystems 

— mountain, desert, and river — support an 

extraordinarily rich biological diversity. 

2. Major resource threats, such as air and water 

pollution, intrusive sounds, and the 

presence of exotic plant and animal species 

as well as vandalism, graffiti, and the illegal 

collection of plants and animals, negatively 

impact both the resources of the park and 

the visitor experience. 

3. Though rarely seen, water constitutes the 

most important resource in the Chihuahuan 

Desert environment. Water is the architect 

of the desert, and its presence or absence 

affects the desert’s appearance, plant and 

animal life, and the ways that humans can 

use it. 

4. The evidence left behind by different 

cultural groups over several thousand years, 

including American Indians, Spanish, 

Mexicans, Mexican-Americans, and AngloAmerican settlers, gives us clues to the past 

and helps us imagine what life was like for 

these early inhabitants of Big Bend. 

5. The Maderas del Carmen Protected Area in 

Coahuila and the Cañon de Santa Elena 

Protected Area in Chihuahua are two 

Mexican federally protected areas adjacent 

to Big Bend National Park and Big Bend 

Ranch State Park. Together with Black Gap 

Wildlife Management Area, these five areas 

preserve millions of acres of important 

habitat, protect biological corridors for 

wildlife migration, and provide unique 

opportunities for the United States and 

Mexico to work together to preserve a 

common ecosystem. 

6. Big Bend National Park provides an 

excellent outdoor laboratory for researchers 

to study the natural world, the interactions 

that occur within, and the impacts of both 

natural events and human activity. 

7. The legacy of human impacts (adverse and 

beneficial) on Big Bend National Park’s 

varied environments exhibits changes from 

past to present, including soil erosion, 

watershed impairment, grasslands decline, 

and species reduction as well as 

conservation. 

THE SCOPING PROCESS — NOTICES, 

NEWSLETTERS, AND MEETINGS 

The notice of intent (NOI) to prepare an 

environmental impact statement was published 

in the Federal Register May 3, 2000, with an 

amended NOI published on April 9, 2001. The 

first opportunity for the public to become 

involved in the development of this plan came in 

May 2000. A series of four public meetings were 

held in Study Butte/Terlingua, Alpine, Sanderson, and Austin. Sixty-three people attended 

these meetings. In addition to these meetings, at 

the end of July, three public meetings were held 

in Boquillas del Carmen, Santa Elena, and San 

Vicente. Several comments responding to the 

meetings and newsletter (spring 2000) were 

received. A number of these comments were 

incorporated into the issues for this general 

management plan. Comments were received in 

the general areas of natural and cultural resource 

protection, wilderness, interpretation and 

orientation, park boundary, and development. 

A second newsletter, containing draft alternative 

concepts for the park, was distributed to the 

public in summer 2001. About 120 electronic 

and written comments were received. The two 

most commonly expressed thoughts were to 

leave things as they are now, alternative A, or to 

make most of the modest changes suggested in 

alternative B with the exception of the relocation 

of facilities at Rio Grande Village. There was no 

support for newsletter alternative C and very 

little for newsletter alternative D. (Note: 

alternative C from the newsletter was dismissed. 

Newsletter alternative D was modified and is 

called alternative C in this document.) 

Objections to second newsletter alternatives C 

and D focused on the idea that the alternatives 

would exclude many people, including the 

elderly and young children, from enjoying the 

park as they have up to now. Many of those 

submitting comments suggested a mix of 

alternatives, primarily A and B. One person 

suggested a mix of C and D. Many commenters 

did not express a preference for any alternative. 

Rather they expressed negative views about 

certain proposed actions, primarily closing 

concessions facilities and campgrounds. Of 

these commenters, the largest number was 
Purpose, Need, and Scoping 

9 

against closing facilities in Chisos Basin. About 

two-thirds as many were against closing facilities 

in Rio Grande Village. Leaving things basically 

as they are now was mentioned more than any 

other issue. 

American Indian consultation occurred 

throughout the planning process. Tribes 

identified as being affiliated with the park were 

sent a letter inviting them to participate in the 

planning process and all newsletters. 

For information on how the preferred 

alternative was developed see appendix B. 

ISSUES 

Several issues were raised by park staff and the 

public in meetings, newsletter responses, and 

discussions with staff from other agencies and 

organizations. 

Issues to Be Addressed 

The following issues will be addressed in the 

planning process. 

Water Quantity. Upstream impoundments and 

diversions, compounded by additional 

development and cultivated lands along the 

Mexican Rio Conchos, and the Rio Grande and 

their tributaries severely reduce river flows 

reaching the park. These conditions, 

exacerbated by recurring droughts, have 

effectively eliminated river recreation for parts 

of the year from 1994 through 2002. 

The park’s previous management plan refers to 

river recreation, but the river’s minimum flow to 

sustain riparian and aquatic habitat and river 

recreation has yet to be determined. 

Water is a Limiting Factor for Development 

and Use. Water sources at Chisos Basin and 

Panther Junction at times produce inadequate 

amounts of water for current development and 

use. 

Floodplains. Flood control structures and 

heavy use on the Rio Grande outside the park 

have severely damaged the riparian woodland 

system. The problem affects all the low elevation 

flatlands along the parks southern border 

including Rio Grande Village and Cottonwood 

Campground. Floodplain values are further 

compromised by the presence of some development in the 100-year floodplain. Irrigation at Rio 

Grande Village causes vegetation to be 

unnaturally lush, facilitates the growth of exotic 

plants, and creates unnatural wildlife habitat. 

Aesthetics. Aboveground powerlines obstruct 

scenic views in Big Bend National Park. Park 

developments and night lighting affect views 

from key resource areas such as Chisos Basin, 

Panther Junction, roads, and trails. 

Visitor Facilities. At Panther Junction, the 

visitor center space is inadequate. The building 

is often crowded. There is insufficient space for 

exhibits to introduce aspects of the primary 

interpretive themes and to provide adequate 

information for visiting sites in the park. The 

bookstore has grown into the lobby space, 

which aggravates the overcrowding. Also, the 

visitor center has no theater for showing audiovisual programs to further highlight elements of 

the interpretive themes, depict the park at 

different times of the year, show geological and 

other natural processes, or re-create scenes and 

events from the past. 

Development. Despite the shortage of park 

housing and the need for improved visitor and 

staff facilities, additional development is of 

concern because of water quality and quantity 

issues and the importance of scenic views. 

The park’s aging infrastructure, including 

deteriorating water and wastewater systems, 

unimproved sections of road, and overcrowded 

campgrounds and parking lots, no longer are 

sufficient to support park operations and visitor 

use. In some cases, inadequate infrastructure 

threatens to degrade park resources. 

Inadequate Staff Facilities. Overcrowding has 

extended to the administrative and operations of 

the Panther Junction headquarters facility. Since 

the facility was constructed, the park staff has 

grown, increasing both office and storage needs. 

The growth of the cooperating association staff 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

10 

and the volume of sales items also have created 

the need for more office and stock storage space. 

The park does not have adequate housing for its 

employees. The problem is compounded by the 

limited amount of land that is suitable for 

housing development within the park. The 

remoteness of the area makes commutes from 

the gateway communities prohibitively long. 

Issues beyond the Scope of this Plan 

The following issues are beyond the scope of 

this general plan because they are not under 

NPS control. However, park staff is continuing 

to work with others to improve conditions 

related to these topics. 

Air Quality. Big Bend National Park, a Class I 

area under the Clean Air Act, at times has the 

dirtiest air in terms of visibility impairment of 

any western national park. The scenic vistas that 

historically encompassed more than 150 miles 

are disappearing. Increased acid deposition from 

sulfur dioxide emissions from coal-fired, 

electricity-generating plants southeast of the 

park could damage natural and cultural 

resources and seriously impact public health. 

Please see the “Impact Topics Dismissed from 

further consideration” and “Laws, Policies, and 

Mandates” sections. 

Water Quality. The Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality has notified the park that 

drinking water at some locations in the park is 

not in compliance with state standards. Please 

see the “Laws, Policies, and Mandates” section. 

Exotic Species. Many species of invasive exotic 

plants and animals have become established 

throughout much of the park and threaten 

native species. In time, these aggressive exotic 

plants and animals can greatly expand their 

populations, alter forest and wildlife habitats, 

and change scenery by smothering and 

displacing native species. These effects, which 

are already occurring in some areas of the park, 

will worsen substantially if left untreated. A 

sustained effort is needed to control these 

internal threats to the native species and their 

natural habitats. Please see the “Laws, Policies, 

and Mandates” section. 

IMPACT TOPICS (RESOURCES 

AND VALUES AT STAKE IN THE 

PLANNING PROCESS) 

Specific impact topics were developed for 

discussion focus and to allow comparison of the 

environmental consequences of each alternative. 

These impact topics were identified on the basis of 

federal laws, regulations, and executive orders; the 

2001 NPS Management Policies; project issues 

identified during scoping, and NPS knowledge of 

limited or easily impacted resources. 

Natural Resource Topics 

The planning team selected seven natural resource 

impact topics. The selection was based on the 

major values or issues the team identified early in

the planning process, as well as on applicable laws 

and executive orders (for example, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, Executive 

Order 11988, “Floodplain Management,” and 

Executive Order 11990, “Protection of 

Wetlands”). The following aspects of the natural 

environment will be impact topics because actions 

of the alternatives may affect them: soils; 

vegetation; wildlife; water quantity; threatened, 

endangered, and candidate species (black-capped 

vireo and Big Bend gambusia); wetlands; and 

floodplains. 

Cultural Resource Topics 

Cultural resource impact topics were selected on 

the basis of major values identified in the park’s 

enabling legislation, values identified in the 

scoping process, and applicable laws and 

executive orders pertaining to cultural resources 

(e.g., the 1966 National Historic Preservation Act 

and the National Environmental Policy Act). The 

topics are archeological resources, ethnographic 

resources, historic structures, cultural landscapes, 

and collections. 
Purpose, Need, and Scoping 

11 

Visitor Experience Topics 

The planning team identified visitor experience as 

an important issue that could be appreciably 

affected under the alternatives. Impact topics in 

this category are visitors’ experiences of the park 

resources, orientation and interpretive 

information, and visitor safety. 

Socioeconomic Environment Topics 

Analyzing the local and regional economic 

impacts would show the possible impacts on the 

local and regional area that could result from 

implementation of the alternatives. In addition, 

the national park has neighbors that could be 

affected by plan alternatives. The topics discussed 

are businesses and park neighbors, recreation 

spending, commercial river runners and 

hotel/motel operators, and the local and regional 

economy. 

IMPACT TOPICS CONSIDERED AND 

DISMISSED FROM FURTHER 

CONSIDERATION 

Threatened, Endangered, 

and Proposed Species 

Two federally endangered species, Big Bend 

gambusia (fish) and black-capped vireo (bird) 

are analyzed as impact topics. However, the 

following species have been dismissed from 

consideration. 

The following species listed by the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service in their July 2000 letter as 

occurring in Brewster or Terrell Counties, Texas 

(see appendix C), have been dismissed because 

they are not known to occur in the park. Neither 

are any actions proposed by this plan likely to 

impact them. In the following lists, (E) stands for 

endangered, (T) for threatened, (C) for 

candidate and (SOC) for species of concern. 

Edwards Aquifer species: 

Comal Springs riffle beetle (E) 

Comal Springs dryopid beetle (E) 

Fountain darter (E) 

Peck’s cave amphipod (E) 

San Marcos gambusia (E) 

Texas wild-rice (E) 

Texas blind salamander (E) 

San Marcos salamander (T) 

Migratory species common to many or all 

counties: 

Least tern (E) 

Whooping crane (E) 

Piping plover (T) 

White-faced ibis (SOC) 

Brewster County: 

Golden-cheeked warbler (E) 

Northern aplomado falcon (E) 

Southwestern willow flycatcher (E) 

Davis’ green pitaya (E) 

Nellie cory cactus (E) 

Terlingua Creek cats-eye (E) 

Hinckley’s oak (T) 

Mountain plover (T) 

The bald eagle, a threatened species, does not 

nest at Big Bend. It is occasionally seen in the 

park along the Rio Grande. As a result of its only 

occasional presence in the park, it is very 

unlikely to be affected by any action taken to 

implement any alternative of the General 

Management Plan. Therefore impacts on the 

bald eagle will not be analyzed in this document. 

Impacts on the following species were not 

analyzed because, although found in the park, 

they are not in any of the areas that would be 

affected by actions of any alternative of the 

General Management Plan. Management actions 

described in the “Servicewide Laws and Policies, 

Threatened and Endangered Species”section, 

and in the mitigation listed near the end of this 

chapter, would ensure that these special species 

are inventoried and monitored and that 

mitigating measures would be taken as 

appropriate. 

Bunched cory cactus (also known as Big 

Bend cory cactus) (T) 

Chisos Mountain hedgehog cactus (T) 

Lloyd’s Mariposa cactus (T) 

Tall paintbrush (C) 

Guadalupe fescue (C) 

Loggerhead shrike (SOC) 

Mexican long-nosed bat (E) 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

12 

The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, 

Endangered Resource Branch, provided a 

Special Species List for Brewster County (see 

appendix C). Some species from the state list, 

other than those already described, occur in the 

general area. However, all but one, the common 

black-hawk, are unlikely to be affected because 

they are not known to occur in the immediate 

vicinity of alternative actions. The common 

black-hawk is found at Rio Grande Village 

where some actions are proposed. Management 

actions described in the “Servicewide Laws and 

Policies, Species of Special Concern” section and 

mitigation measures listed at the end of the 

“Alternatives Including the Preferred 

Alternative” chapter would ensure that these 

special species are inventoried and monitored 

and that mitigating measures are taken as 

appropriate. This would make it very unlikely 

that these species would be impacted. Therefore, 

these species have been dismissed from further 

consideration. 

Prime and Unique Farmland 

In August 1980 the Council on Environmental 

Quality (CEQ) directed that federal agencies must 

assess the effects of their actions on farmland soils 

classified as prime or unique by the Natural 

Resource Conservation Service, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture. Prime or unique farmland is 

defined as soil that produces general crops such as 

common foods, forage, fiber, and oil seed. Unique 

farmland produces specialty crops such as fruits, 

vegetables, and nuts. According to the Natural 

Resource Conservation Service, Texas State office 

(pers. comm. 8/7/01), there are no prime or 

unique farmlands in Big Bend National Park; 

therefore, the topic of prime and unique farmland 

has been dismissed as an impact topic in this 

document. 

Air Quality 

Big Bend National Park is designated as a 

mandatory Class I air quality area under the 

National Clean Air Act of 1977. This most 

stringent air quality classification protects 

national parks and wilderness areas from air 

quality degradation. The Clean Air Act gives 

federal land mangers the responsibility for 

protecting air quality and related values, 

including visibility, plants, animals, soils, water 

quality, cultural resources, and public health 

from adverse air pollution impacts. 

The monitoring of air quality at Big Bend began 

in 1982. The most significant air-quality-related 

value for the park is visibility. Air quality parameters are currently monitored through the use of 

the following instruments: automated camera; 

solar-powered satellite downloaded transmissometer; ozone monitoring module package; 

national atmospheric deposition program 

(NADP) sampler (wet side only) along with a 

rainfall event recorder; the IMPROVE particulate sampling system, and a digital camera at 

Panther Junction pointed toward a prominent 

landmark in Mexico. 

Research since 1978 has shown that the park is 

among the NPS units having the most severely 

degraded air quality and visibility in the western 

United States. Threats to visibility and air quality 

include windblown dust, natural aerosols, and 

long-range transport of sulfates. Air quality is 

often degraded due to emissions of air pollutants 

transported from industrial and urban Texas 

Gulf Coast centers, heavy industries (e.g., 

smelters and steel mills) and power plants in 

northeastern Mexico. 

The most current threat to increased visibility 

degradation is the construction of coal-fired 

electrical power plants near Piedras Negras, 

Mexico. These large power plants are designed 

to use a relatively high sulfur, high ash coal. 

Little or no technological engineering design to 

reduce fine particulates has been incorporated 

into the facilities. Negotiations with Mexico are 

currently underway in an attempt to mitigate this 

problem. 

Although the park manages sources of air 

pollution in the park, works cooperatively with 

the Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality regarding park visibility conditions, 

participates with the Air Resources division of 

the National Park Service to address regional 

haze issues in the central United States, and 

cooperates with the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency to monitor air quality, it has 
Purpose, Need, and Scoping 

13 

very little direct control over air quality in the air 

shed encompassing the park. 

There are no general management plan 

proposals that, when considered along with 

required mitigation, would further impact air 

quality. Therefore, alternatives for this topic 

have not been developed and there would be no 

impacts on air quality from implementing any of 

the actions in the alternatives of this general 

management plan. 

Water Quality in the Rio Grande 

Most factors affecting water quality at Big Bend 

originate outside the park, (USDI, U.S.- Mexico 

Border Field Coordinating Committee in “Water 

Resources Issues in the Rio Grande–Rio 

Conchos to Amistad Reservoir Subarea, Fact 

Sheet 3,”April 1998). Many of them require 

coordination with regional or international 

groups. Park staff and others have developed a 

Water Resources Management Plan (NPS1996) 

that describes strategies the park will employ to 

address, among other issues, water quality. The 

water resources plan provides comprehensive 

treatment of this issue and is reaffirmed in the 

“Special Mandates and Administrative 

Commitments,” section of the “Purpose, Need 

and Scoping,” chapter of this document. 

Alternatives of the general management plan 

might impact water quality in the Rio Grande by 

raising fuel storage tanks above the level of the 

500-year floodplain or protecting them from the 

500-year flood. This would reduce the chances 

that fuel would enter floodwaters. Removing 

most development from Rio Grande Village in 

alternative C would reduce the number of 

vehicles in the area thereby reducing hydrocarbons that might drip from vehicles and find 

their way into the river. Therefore, water quality 

is not an impact topic in this document. 

Traffic 

Visitation to the park principally affects traffic 

on U.S. 385 from Marathon, Texas, to the main 

park road and traffic on Texas Route 118 from 

Alpine, Texas, to the main park road. There is 

very little traffic on either of these roads. None 

of the alternatives described would appreciably 

alter traffic on U.S. 385 and Texas 118, so there 

would be no impact on traffic. Therefore, the 

topic of traffic has been considered and 

dismissed. 

Indian Trust Resources 

President Clinton’s April 29, 1994, “Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments 

and Agencies” directs that: 

Each executive department and agency 

shall assess the impact of federal 

government plans, projects, programs, 

and activities on tribal trust resources 

and assure that tribal government 

rights and concerns are considered 

during the development of such plans, 

projects, programs, and activities. 

Also, order 3175 (Secretary of the Interior, 

November 8, 1993) states: 

The heads of bureaus and offices are 

responsible for being aware of the impact 

of their plans, projects, programs or activities on Indian trust resources. Bureaus 

and offices when engaged in the planning 

of any proposed project or action will 

ensure that any anticipated effects on 

Indian trust resources are explicitly 

addressed in the planning, decision and 

operational documents. These documents 

should clearly state the rationale for the 

recommended decision and explain how 

the decision will be consistent with the 

Department’s trust responsibilities. 

One definition of tribal trust resources 

(subsection B, section 3, Secretarial Order 3206, 

Babbitt 6/5/1997) is 

those natural resources, either on or off 

Indian lands, retained by, or reserved by or 

for Indian tribes through treaties, statutes, 

judicial decisions, and executive orders, 

which are protected by a fiduciary [trust] 

obligation on the part of the United States 

None of the lands in Big Bend are trust resources 

according to this definition. Therefore, this topic 

has not been analyzed. 

 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

14 

Environmental Justice 

Executive Order 12898, “General Actions to 

Address Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income Populations,” 

requires all federal agencies to incorporate 

environmental justice into their missions by 

identifying and addressing disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or environmental 

effects of their programs and policies on 

minorities and low-income populations and 

communities. No alternative would have health or 

environmental effects on minorities (including 

American Indian tribes) or low-income populations or communities as defined in the Environmental Protection Agency’s Environmental Justice 

Guidance (1998). Environmental justice has been 

dismissed as an impact topic in this document.
15 

LAWS, POLICIES, AND MANDATES 

SPECIAL MANDATES AND 

ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITMENTS

This section identifies what must be done at Big 

Bend National Park to comply with federal laws 

and NPS policies. Many park management 

directives are specified in these mandates and 

are therefore not subject to alternative 

approaches. Big Bend has many other current 

plans and ongoing planning efforts. Those most 

directly related to the general management plan 

or potentially affected by it are listed below. 

International Boundary and Water 

Commission, United States and Mexico 

(IBWC) 

The following information came from a July 25, 

2003, letter from the International Boundary and 

Water Commission United States and Mexico to 

John A. King, Superintendent at Big Bend 

National Park. 

The mission of the International Boundary and 

Water Commission, United States and Mexico 

(IBWC), is to apply the rights and obligations 

that the governments of the United States and 

Mexico assumed under numerous boundary and 

water treaties and related agreements. The 

United States section of the IBWC (USIBWC) by 

virtue of the Treaty of February 3, 1944 (the 

1944 Water Treaty) for “Utilization of Waters of 

the Colorado and Tijuana Rivers and of the Rio 

Grande” (TS 994; 59 Stat 1219), and agreements 

concluded thereunder by the United States and 

Mexico is responsible for ensuring that the 

United States government meets the obligations 

incurred in those agreements. 

Implementation of the 1944 Water Treaty 

required the IBWC to keep a record of the Rio 

Grande waters belonging to each country. The 

IBWC operates and maintains two gauging 

stations in Big Bend National Park on the main 

channel of the Rio Grande at Johnson Ranch 

and on the measured tributary Terlingua Creek. 

As required by USIBWC, continued access to 

these stations by established roads in the park 

will continue to be provided under the general 

management plan. 

The Treaty to Resolve Pending Boundary 

Differences and Maintain the Rio Grande and 

Colorado River as the International Boundary 

between Mexico and the United States, 

November 23, 1970 (23 U.S.T.371, T.I.A.S. No. 

7313), prohibits the construction of works that 

may cause deflection or obstruction of the 

normal flow of the river or its flood flows. The 

USIBWC required that proposed construction 

or tree planting activities be accomplished in a 

way that does not impede or change flows in the 

Rio Grande or alter historic surface runoff 

characteristics at the international border. This 

requirement is intended to ensure that 

developments in one country will not cause 

damage to lands or resources in the other 

country. Accordingly, all engineering drawings 

and any necessary supporting calculations will 

be submitted to USIBWC for review and 

approval before beginning work. The drawings 

and calculations will show that the activities and 

construction will be undertaken without 

changing historic surface runoff characteristics. 

The National Park Service will continue to 

assure USIBWC that structures constructed 

along the United States/Mexico border are 

maintained in an adequate manner and that 

liability issues created by these structures are 

addressed. 

The USIBWC and the National Park Service do 

not anticipate that any management strategies 

discussed in this general management plan 

conflict with the mission of the IBWC. The two 

agencies will continue to work together to 

ensure the preservation of the international 

boundary along the Rio Grande boundary of Big 

Bend National Park and to achieve the desired 

management goals for the area. 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

16 

Letter of Intent Between The Department of 

the Interior (DOI) of the United States and 

The Secretariat of Environment, Natural 

Resources and Fisheries (SEMARNAP) of the 

United Mexican States for Joint Work in 

Natural Protected Areas on the United StatesMexico Border 

Under this agreement, the two agencies plan to 

expand cooperative activities in the conservation of contiguous natural protected areas in the 

border zone and to consider new opportunities 

for cooperation in the protection of natural 

protected areas on the United States-Mexico 

border. Among the listed areas are the wildlife 

protection areas in Mexico of Maderas del 

Carmen in Coahuila and CaZon de Santa Elena 

in Chihuahua, and the adjacent protected area in 

the United States, Big Bend National Park in 

Texas. Nothing in this General Management Plan

would conflict with this letter of intent. 

Wildfire Prevention 

Agreement with Mexico 

An agreement with Mexico on the prevention of 

wildfires was signed in 1999. None of the actions 

proposed in this General Management Plan will 

conflict with the agreement. 

Proposed Wilderness Classification 

In 1984, as required by the Wilderness Act of 

1964 (PL 88-577), the National Park Service 

published a Final Environmental Impact 

Statement, Proposed Wilderness Classification, Big 

Bend National Park, Texas. It proposed that 

533,900 acres of the park be designated as 

wilderness and that an additional 25,700 acres be 

designated as potential wilderness addition. 

Until Congress acts on this proposal, the 

National Park Service will manage those lands as 

wilderness. 

Water Resources Management Plan, 

Wildland Fire Management Plan, 

Backcountry Management Plan, Castolon 

Long-Range Interpretive Plan, Drought 

Contingency Plan, Water Conservation Plan 

The “Water Resources Management Plan” was 

published in February 1995, the “Wildland Fire 

Management Plan” was approved in 1994, the 

“Backcountry Management Plan” was published 

in 1995, and the “Castolon Long Range 

Interpretive Plan” in 1997. A “Drought 

Contingency Plan” and a “Water Conservation 

Plan” are in draft form in fall 2003.This General 

Management Plan reaffirms these plans. No 

alternative of this plan suggests revisions. 

Rio Grande Wild and Scenic 

River Management Plan 

A segment of the Rio Grande was designated a 

national wild and scenic river in 1978 under the 

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 USC 28 page 

1274), making it a unit of the national park 

system. The unit is administered by Big Bend 

National Park. The National Park Service wrote 

a general management plan/development 

concept plan for the river in 1981, however, it 

was never approved. A river management plan is 

in progress for the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic 

River. Among other things, the plan evaluates 

segments that are not part of the wild and scenic 

river for designation. A draft plan / environmental impact statement for the river is expected 

to go on public review in 2003. This General 

Management Plan proposes no actions that 

could adversely affect the values that qualify the 

Rio Grande River for the national wild and 

scenic river system. None of the actions 

proposed in this General Management Plan

conflict with the draft river management plan. 

Wild and Scenic River Assessment 

Parks that contain one or more river segments 

listed in the national rivers inventory maintained 

by the National Park Service, or that have 

characteristics that might make them eligible for 

the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, will 

comply with section 5 (d) (I) of the Wild and 

Scenic Rivers Act, which instructs each federal 

agency to assess whether those rivers are 

suitable for inclusion in the system. Other than 

the Rio Grande, there are no rivers in Big Bend 

National Park that meet wild and scenic river 

criteria. There are arroyos, which only have 
Laws, Policies, and Mandates 

17 

water at times of heavy rains, and some small 

nonnavigable creeks and spring areas, but none 

of these could be considered a wild and scenic 

river. In conclusion, water sources for the Rio 

Grande Wild and Scenic River have been 

considered in the planning effort for Big Bend 

National Park, and no other eligible river than 

the Rio Grande exists in park boundaries. 

Wilderness Suitability Assessment 

A “Draft Wilderness Suitability Assessment of 

North Rosillos/Harte Ranch in Big Bend 

National Park” was conducted by the National 

Park Service in December 2001 (see appendix E. 

This is the first required step in determining if all 

or part of this land is suitable for inclusion in the 

congressionally designated national wilderness 

preservation system. NPS regulations require the 

assessment of all national park system lands for 

wilderness suitability. Most of Big Bend 

National Park has already been studied for 

wilderness suitability, but the land in question 

was acquired in 1987 after the original park 

wilderness study was completed. 

When the “Wilderness Suitability Assessment” 

has been approved by the Director of the 

National Park Service in Washington, D.C., the 

final determination of the area’s suitability or 

nonsuitability as wilderness will be published in 

the Federal Register. If the area, or parts of the 

area, is determined suitable, a wilderness study 

will be conducted. 

Commercial Visitor Services Assessment 

Public Law 105-391, The Concessions 

Management Improvement Act of 1998 states that 

“the development of . . . services in units of the 

National Park Service shall be limited to those 

accommodations, facilities, and services that . . . 

are necessary and appropriate for public use and 

enjoyment of the unit of the National Park 

System.” 

A service is necessary if 

• it is needed to accomplish the purpose 

of the park 

• it does not have significant resource 

impacts 

• it assists in managing visitor use 

• it generally is not available nearby 

A service is appropriate if 

• there are no significant resource impacts 

• it enhances visitor experience 

• it is consistent with laws, regulations, 

and policy, 

• it doesn’t interfere with other park uses 

• it does not exclude the general public 

from participating in the same 

recreational opportunities 

Because of the size and isolation of Big Bend 

National Park, a variety of services and facilities 

are necessary and appropriate. These include 

accommodations (lodging, campgrounds, and 

recreational vehicle parking), food, gasoline, 

and sundry items (suntan lotions, first-aid 

items, etc.). 

SERVICEWIDE LAWS AND POLICIES 

As with all units of the national park system, the 

management of Big Bend National Park is 

guided by the 1916 Organic Act (which created 

the National Park Service), the General 

Authorities Act of 1970, the act of March 27, 

1978, relating to the management of the national 

park system, and other applicable federal laws 

and regulations, such as the Endangered Species 

Act and the National Historic Preservation Act. 

Actions are also guided by the National Park 

Service’s Management Policies (NPS 2001a). Also 

see “Appendix A: Legislation.” 

Many resource conditions and some aspects of 

visitor experience are prescribed by these legal 

mandates and NPS policies. This plan is not 

needed to decide, for instance, whether or not it 

is appropriate to protect endangered species, 

control exotic species, protect archeological 

sites, provide access for visitors with disabilities, 

or conserve artifacts. The plan will not explore 

alternatives because these things must be done. 

Although attaining some of these conditions set 

forth in these laws and policies has been 

temporarily deferred in the park because of 

funding or staffing limitations, the National Park 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

18 

Service will continue to strive to implement 

these requirements with or without a new 

general management plan. 

The conditions prescribed by laws, regulations, 

and policies most pertinent to the planning and 

management of the park are summarized in this 

chapter. 
Laws, Policies, and Mandates 

19 

Natural Resource Management Requirements 

SOILS

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved in the park:

Desired Condition Source 

The Service will actively seek to understand and preserve the soil resources of 

parks, and to prevent, to the extent possible, the unnatural erosion, physical 

removal, or contamination of the soil, or its contamination of other resources. 

NPS Management 

Policies

Management action will be taken by superintendents to prevent — or if that is not 

possible, to minimize — adverse, potentially irreversible impacts on soils. Soil 

conservation and soil amendment practices may be implemented to reduce 

impacts. Importation of offsite soil or soil amendments may be used to restore 

damaged sites. Offsite soil normally will be salvaged soil, not soil removed from 

pristine sites, unless the use of pristine site soil can be achieved without causing 

any overall ecosystem impairment. Before using any offsite materials, parks must 

develop a prescription, and select the materials that will be needed to restore the 

physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of original native soils without 

introducing any exotic species. 

NPS Management 

Policies

When soil excavation is an unavoidable part of an approved facility development 

project, the Park Service will minimize soil excavation, erosion, and offsite soil 

migration during and after the development activity.

NPS Management 

Policies

When use of a soil fertilizer or other soil amendment is an unavoidable part of 

restoring a natural landscape or maintaining an altered plant community, the use 

will be guided by a written prescription. The prescription will be designed to 

ensure that such use of soil fertilizer or soil amendment does not unacceptably 

alter the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of the soil, biological 

community, or surface or ground waters. 

NPS Management 

Policies

Compliance Actions

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements 

related to soils: 

• Update soils map of the park in digital format that can be used in the park’s geographic information 

system (GIS). 

• Whenever possible, park staff would educate visitors about soils. 

• Research soil properties including nutrients, microorganisms and soil crusts to learn how to restore 

native plant communities. 

• Determine source of soil nutrients and the effects of atmospheric pollution on soils and soil biological 

crusts. 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

20 

NATIVE VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE 

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved in the park: 

Desired Condition Source 

The National Park Service will maintain as parts of the natural 

ecosystem, all native plants and animals in the park. 

NPS Management Policies 2001;

NPS-77 “Natural Resources 

Management Guideline” 

Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions (listed in priority order) to meet legal and 

policy requirements related to native wildlife and vegetation: 

• Complete an inventory of plants and animals in the park and regularly monitor the distribution and 

condition (e.g., health, disease) of selected species that are (a) indicators of ecosystem condition and 

diversity, (b) rare or protected species, (c) invasive exotics, (d) native species capable of creating 

resource problems (e.g., habitat decline due to overpopulation). 

• Develop methods to restore native grasslands and stabilize eroding areas. 

• Develop and institute annual mountain lion and bear population monitoring strategies. 

• Develop and institute a food source monitoring strategy to identify periods when insufficient food is 

available. 

• Determine the frequency and extent of human-caused lion mortality in the park lion population due to 

administrative actions. 

• Determine genetic integrity and viability of the mountain lion population through DNA analysis 

(already done for bears). Establish and implement bear and lion genetic monitoring strategies for cyclic 

implementation. 

• Monitor bighorn population movements, habitat use, reproduction and predation. Determine threats to 

population growth and recolonization of park habitat. 

• Develop methods to restore native biological communities. 

• Minimize human impacts on native plants, animals, populations, communities and ecosystems and the 

processes that sustain them. 

• Restore native plant and animals populations in the park that have been extirpated by past humancaused action, where feasible. 

• Whenever possible, natural processes will be relied upon to maintain native plant and animal species, 

and to influence natural fluctuations in populations of these species. 

• Protect a full range of genetic types (genotypes) of native plant and animals populations in the park by 

perpetuating natural evolutionary processes and minimizing human interference with evolving genetic 

diversity. 
Laws, Policies, and Mandates 

21 

WATER RESOURCES 

Current laws and policies require that the conditions delineated below be achieved in the park:

Desired Condition Source 

Surface water and groundwater will be restored or enhanced. Clean Water Act; Executive Order (EO) 

11514; NPS Management Policies

NPS and NPS-permitted programs and facilities will be 

maintained and operated to avoid pollution of surface water and 

groundwater. 

Clean Water Act; EO 12088; Rivers and 

Harbors Act; NPS Management Policies

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions (listed in priority order) to meet legal and 

policy requirements related to water resources: 

• Determine which methods can be used to ensure minimum flows under state and federal law and/or 

international efforts. 

• Determine minimum flow needs to sustain aquatic life and provide recreational boating opportunities. 

• Investigate and monitor water quality including salinity and trace elements. Study the effects of the water 

quality on aquatic life. 

• Determine methods to restore the Rio Grande to a sustainable river ecosystem with a native riparian 

vegetation community and natural river geomorphology. 

• Promote water conservation by the Park Service, concessioner, visitors, and park neighbors. 

• Apply best management practices to all pollution-generating activities and facilities in the park, such as NPS 

maintenance and storage facilities and parking areas; minimize the use of pesticides, fertilizers, and other 

chemicals and manage them in keeping with NPS policy and federal regulations. 

• Continue to monitor water flows and quality and to participate in the Texas Watch program. 

• Continue to work with the Rio Grande Compact Commission, the International Boundary and Water 

Commission, the U.S. Geological Survey, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality to explore long-term strategies to ensure minimum flow levels and treaty 

compliance. 

• Work with other entities to determine the impact on local aquifers of Big Bend National Park, Big Bend 

Ranch State Park, Black Gap Wildlife Management Area, and gateway communities. 

• Work through or with other entities to ameliorate known water quality problems. 

• Promote, with the assistance of other agencies, the development of pretreatment programs for existing and 

new maquiladora facilities along the Rio Grande and Rio Conchos. 

• Press for continued and expanded monitoring to fulfill the database requirement and thus reveal any 

unknown water quality problems. 

• Continue to follow the recommendations of the 1996 Water Resources Management Plan for Big Bend 

National Park (National Park Service). 

• Work with interested groups along the border to achieve cooperative ecosystem management of the Rio 

Grande corridor through a long-term, comprehensive plan for conservation and use. 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

22 

EXOTIC SPECIES 

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved in the park:

Desired Condition Source 

The management of populations of exotic plant and animal species, up to and 

including eradication, are undertaken wherever such species threaten park 

resources or public health and when control is prudent and feasible. 

NPS Management Policies 

2001; EO 13112, 

“Invasive Species”; NPS77, “Natural Resources 

Management Guidelines” 

Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions (listed in priority order) to meet legal and 

policy requirements related to exotic species. 

• Complete an inventory of plants and animals in the park and regularly monitor the distribution and 

condition (e.g., health, disease) of selected species that are (a) invasive exotics or (b) native species 

capable of creating resource problems (e.g., habitat decline due to overpopulation). 

• Develop a long-term program for reversing the destructive effects of exotic species. 

• Study the environmental and ecological effects of exotic species invasion to assess threats and prioritize 

management actions. 

• Undertake research to assess the methods by which exotic species become established and spread into 

native plant communities so that strategies for preventing introduction and establishment can be 

developed and implemented. 

• Manage exclusively for native plant species in pristine and primitive management prescriptions. In other 

management prescriptions, limit planting of nonnative species to noninvasive plants that are justified by 

the historic scene or operational needs. 

• Control or eliminate exotic plants and animals, exotic diseases, and pest species where there is a 

reasonable expectation of success and sustainability. Base control efforts on: 

• the potential threat to legally protected or uncommon native species and habitats 

• the potential threat to visitor health or safety 

• the potential threat to scenic and aesthetic quality 

• the potential threat to common native species and habitat 

• Manage exotic diseases and pest species based on similar priorities. 

• Provide interpretive and educational programs on the preservation of native species for visitors and for 

residents neighboring the park. 
Laws, Policies, and Mandates 

23 

THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES 

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved in the park:

Desired Condition Source 

Federally listed and state-listed threatened and 

endangered species and their habitats will be 

sustained. 

Endangered Species Act; NPS Management Policies 

2001

Native species populations that have been severely 

reduced in or extirpated from the park will be 

restored where feasible and sustainable. 

NPS Management Policies 2001

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions (listed in priority order) to meet legal and 

policy requirements related to species of special concern: 

• Complete an inventory of plants and animals in the park and regularly monitor the distribution and 

condition (e.g., health, disease) of selected species that are (a) indicators of ecosystem condition and 

diversity, (b) rare or protected species, (c) invasive exotics, (d) native species capable of creating 

resource problems (e.g., habitat decline due to overpopulation). 

• Develop a long-term program for reversing the destructive effects of exotic species. 

• Study the environmental and ecological effects of exotic species invasion to assess threats and prioritize 

management actions. 

• Undertake research to assess the methods by which new species become established and spread into 

native plant communities so that strategies for preventing introduction and establishment can be 

developed and implemented. 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

24 

FLOODPLAINS 

Current laws and policies require that the conditions delineated below be achieved in the park:

Desired Condition Source 

Natural floodplain values will be preserved or restored. EO 11988; Rivers and Harbors 

Act; NPS Management Policies; 

Special Directive 93-4 

Long-term and short-term environmental effects associated with the 

occupancy and modification of floodplains will be avoided. 

DO 77-2, “Floodplain 

Management”; National Flood 

Insurance Program (44 CFR 60); 

When it is not practicable to locate or relocate development or 

inappropriate human activities to a site outside the floodplain or where the 

floodplain will not be affected, the National Park Service will 

• Prepare and approve a statement of findings in accordance with DO 

77-2. 

• Use nonstructural measures as much as practicable to reduce hazards 

to human life and property while minimizing impacts on the natural 

resources of floodplains. 

• Ensure that structures and facilities are designed to be consistent with 

the intent of the standards and criteria of the National Flood Insurance 

Program (44 CFR 60). 

• Avoid direct or indirect support of new construction in wetlands 

unless there are no reasonable alternatives and the preferred 

alternative includes all practicable measures to minimize harm to 

wetlands. 

• Compensate for remaining unavoidable adverse impacts on wetlands 

by restoring wetlands that have been previously destroyed or 

degraded. 

NPS Management Policies

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements related 

to floodplains: 

• Continue to follow the recommendations of the 1996 Water Resources Management Plan for Big Bend National 

Park (National Park Service). 

• Prepare a quantitative analysis of flood depth to allow park staff to develop appropriate mitigation measures for 

the flash flood prone area at Panther Junction. 

• Remove from the 500-year floodplain or protect from the 500-year flood the diesel, gasoline, and propane 

storage tanks that are marginally within the 100-year floodplain at Rio Grande Village, or protect them as 

required by NPS policy. Should an alternative such as constructing an embankment be chosen, a statement of 

findings would be prepared and approved. 

• Establish a flood awareness, preparedness and warning system to evacuate the most flood and erosion prone 

structures at Panther Junction, Rio Grande Village, and Cottonwood Campground at times of imminent danger. 

• Any future construction on the Panther Junction alluvial fan would be accompanied by a statement of 

findings describing the need to develop within the maximum estimated flood (Qme), the flood hazard 

associated with the proposed development site, and the plans for mitigation of this flood hazard. 

• Visitors, including those hiking, parking and picnicking in or near small channels, would be made aware of 

hazards associated with flash flooding and informed of what to do when water is flowing in low-water road 

crossings. 

• The camping area at Terlingua Abaja, an area susceptible to flash flooding, will be relocated a few hundred 

feet away on higher ground, and/or visitor instructions will be provided describing necessary action in the 

case of extreme flooding. 

• At Castolon, unstable bank areas will be clearly marked in order to reduce risk to visitors. 
Laws, Policies, and Mandates 

25 

WETLANDS 

Current laws and policies require that the conditions delineated below be achieved in the park:

Desired Condition Source 

The natural and beneficial values of wetlands will be preserved 

and enhanced. 

Clean Water Act; EO 11990; NPS 

Management Policies; DO 77-1, “Wetland 

Protection”; Rivers and Harbors Act 

The National Park Service will implement a “no net loss of 

wetlands” policy and strive to achieve a longer-term goal of net 

gain of wetlands across the national park system through the 

restoration of previously degraded or destroyed wetlands. 

DO 77-1, “Wetland Protection”; EO 11514 

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements related 

to wetland resources: 

• Conduct a wetlands inventory of the park using the Cowardian system. 

• Determine methods to restore the Rio Grande to a sustainable river ecosystem with a native riparian 

vegetation community and natural river geomorphology. 

• Continue to follow the recommendations of the 1996 Water Resources Management Plan for Big Bend 

National Park (National Park Service). 

• All facilities would be located to avoid wetlands if feasible. If avoiding wetlands was not feasible, other 

actions would be taken to comply with Executive Order 11990 (“Protection of Wetlands”), the Clean Water 

Act, and Director’s Order 77-1 (“Wetland Protection”). 

• A statement of findings for wetlands will be prepared if the selected alternative would result in adverse 

impacts on wetlands. The statement of findings would include an analysis of the alternatives, delineation of 

the wetland, a wetland restoration plan to identify mitigation, and a wetland functional analysis of the 

impact site and restoration site. 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

26 

WILDERNESS

The National Park Service will manage wilderness areas including those proposed for wilderness designation 

for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such a manner as will leave them unimpaired for future 

use and enjoyment as wilderness.

Desired Condition Source 

Each park containing wilderness resources will develop and maintain a wilderness 

management plan or equivalent planning document to guide the preservation, 

management and use of these resources. The wilderness management plan will 

identify desired future conditions, as well as establish indicators, standards, 

conditions, and thresholds beyond which management actions will be taken to 

reduce human impacts to wilderness resources. 

NPS Management 

Policies, DO 41 

“Wilderness 

Preservation and 

Management” 

If new areas of 5,000 acres or more are added to a park, a wilderness suitability 

assessment will be undertaken. 

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions (listed in priority order) to comply with 

the policies mentioned above. 

• A wilderness suitability assessment of the North Rosillos/Harte Ranch will be undertaken and included 

in Appendix E of this General Management Plan. 

• Managers contemplating the use of aircraft or other motorized equipment or mechanical transportation 

within wilderness must consider impacts to the character, aesthetics, and traditions of wilderness before 

considering the costs and efficiency of the equipment. 

• In evaluating environmental impacts, the National Park Service will take into account wilderness 

characteristics and values, including the primeval character and influence of the wilderness; the 

preservation of natural conditions (including the lack of man-made noise); and assurances that there 

will be outstanding opportunities for solitude, that the public will be provided with a primitive and 

unconfined type of recreational experience, and that wilderness will be preserved and used in an 

unimpaired condition. Managers will be expected to appropriately address cultural resources 

management considerations in the development and review of environmental compliance documents 

for actions that might impact wilderness resources. 

• Scientific activities will be encouraged and permitted when consistent with NPS responsibilities to 

preserve and manage wilderness. 
Laws, Policies, and Mandates 

27 

AIR QUALITY 

The park is a class I air quality area. Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved 

in the parks. 

Desired Condition Source 

Inventory the air quality-related values associated with each park. 

Monitor and document the condition of air quality and related values. 

Evaluate air pollution impacts and identify causes. 

Minimize air quality pollution emissions associated with park operations, 

including the use of prescribed fire and visitor use activities. 

Ensure healthful indoor air quality at NPS facilities. 

Clean Air Act, NPS Management 

Policies

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions (listed in priority order) to meet legal and 

policy requirements related to air quality.

Although the National Park Service has very little direct control over air quality in the air shed encompassing the 

park, park managers will continue to cooperate with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to monitor air quality and ensure that air quality is not impaired. 

• Research effects of atmospheric deposition on plants, soils and wetlands in Big Bend National Park. 

• Determine changes in ecosystem function caused by atmospheric deposition and assess the resistance and 

resilience of native ecosystems in the face of these external perturbations. 

• Participate in federal, regional, and local air pollution control plans and drafting of regulations and review 

permit applications for major new air pollution sources 

• Conduct operations in compliance with federal, state, and local air quality regulations. 

• Maintain constant dialogue with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality regarding visibility 

conditions at the park. 

• Participate with the Air Resources Division on the regional planning group that includes the Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality that was formed to address regional haze issues in the central United 

States. 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

28 

GEOLOGIC RESOURCES

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved in the park:

Desired Condition Source 

Preserve and protect geologic resources as integral components of park 

natural systems. The Park Service will (1) assess the impacts of natural 

processes and human-related events on geologic resources (2) maintain and 

restore the integrity of existing geologic resources; (3) integrate geologic 

resource management into Service operations and planning; and (4) 

interpret geologic resources for park visitors. 

NPS Management Policies

Paleontological resources, including both organic and mineralized remains 

in body or trace form, will be protected, preserved and managed for public 

education, interpretation, and scientific research. Superintendents will 

establish programs to inventory paleontological resources and systematically 

monitor for newly exposed fossils, especially in areas of rapid erosion. 

NPS Management Policies

The Park Service will manage caves in accordance with approved cave 

management plans to perpetuate the natural systems associated with the 

caves. 

NPS Management Policies

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions (listed in priority order) to meet legal and 

policy requirements related to geologic resources: 

• Update geologic map of the park in digital format that can be used in the park’s geographic information 

system (GIS). 

• Update geologic history of the park, using modern theory and techniques. 

• Update geologic interpretations of localities that are the subject of interpretive stops or displays. 

• Prepare a geologic inventory, including the identification of the significant geologic processes that shape 

park ecosystems and the identification of the human influences on those geologic processes (i.e., 

“geoindicators”); identification of geologic hazards; inventory of type sections or type localities within 

the park; inventory of “textbook” localities that provide particularly good or well-exposed examples of 

geologic features or events, and that may warrant special protection or interpretive efforts; and, 

identification of interpretive themes or other opportunities for interpreting the significant geologic 

events or processes that are preserved, exposed, or occur in the park. 

• Prepare a cave survey, including maps, locations, and assessments of park caves, using NPS protocols. 

• Prepare a cave management plan. 

• Undertake a paleontological inventory and survey, including information on paleontological research 

that has already been performed in the park, lists of fossil species found in the park, maps of high 

probability areas expected to produce fossils, recommendations for future research, identification of 

threats to fossil resources, and strategies for their protection. 

• Prepare a paleontology site layer for the park’s GIS (i.e., database of fossil localities that have been 

excavated or are known to contain fossils). 
Laws, Policies, and Mandates 

29 

NATURAL SOUNDS

An important part of the NPS mission is to preserve or restore the natural soundscapes associated with 

national parks. The sounds of nature are among the intrinsic elements that combine to form the 

environment of our national parks. Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be 

achieved in the park:

Desired Condition Source 

The National Park Service will preserve the natural ambient soundscapes, 

restore degraded soundscapes to the natural ambient condition wherever 

possible, and protect natural soundscapes from degradation due to humancaused noise. Disruptions from recreational uses will be managed to provide a 

high-quality visitor experience in an effort to preserve or restore the natural 

quiet and natural sounds. 

NPS Management Policies, 

DO 47,“Sound Preservation and Noise Management” 

Noise sources are managed to preserve or restore the natural soundscape. Executive memorandum 

signed by President 

Clinton on April 22, 1996 

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions (listed in priority order) to comply with 

the policies mentioned above. 

• Actions will be taken to prevent or minimize unnatural sounds that adversely affect park resources or 

values or visitors’ enjoyment of them. 

• The National Park Service will work with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), tour operators, 

commercial businesses, and general aviation interests to encourage aircraft to fly outside the park, 

especially for flights where the presence of the park is incidental to the purpose of the flight (i.e., transit 

between two points). Actions that might be considered to encourage pilots to fly outside the park 

include identifying the park on route maps as a noise-sensitive area, educating pilots about the reasons 

for keeping a distance from the park, and encouraging pilots to comply with FAA regulations and 

advisory guidance, in a manner that will minimize noise and other impacts. 

• The park staff will continue to require tour bus companies to comply with regulations designed to 

reduce noise levels (e.g., turning off engines when buses are parked). 

• Noise generated by NPS management activities will be minimized by strictly regulating administrative 

functions such as the use of motorized equipment. Noise will be a consideration in the procurement and 

use of equipment by the park staff. 

NIGHT SKY

The park’s night sky is a feature that contributes to visitors’ experiences. Current laws and policies require 

that the following conditions be achieved in the park:

Desired Condition Source 

The National Park Service will cooperate with park neighbors and local 

government agencies to find ways to minimize the intrusion of artificial light 

into the night scene in the park. In natural areas, artificial outdoor lighting will 

be limited to basic safety requirements and will be shielded when possible. 

NPS Management Policies

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to comply with the policy mentioned 

above: 

• The park staff will work with local communities and other agencies to encourage the protection of the 

night sky. 

• The park staff will evaluate the impacts on the night sky caused by park facilities. If light sources in the 

park are affecting night skies, the staff will study alternatives such as shielding lights, changing lamp 

types, or eliminating unnecessary sources. 

• A new Brewster County ordinance protects the night skies and the park will work with the county to 

reduce or eliminate the impacts of artificial outdoor lighting. 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

30 

WILDLAND FIRE

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved in the park:

Desired Condition Source 

Park fire management programs will be designed to meet resource 

management objectives prescribed for the various areas of the park 

and to ensure that the safety of firefighters and the public are not 

compromised.

NPS Management Policies; DO 41, 

“Wilderness Preservation and 

Management” 

All fires burning in natural or landscaped vegetation will be classified 

as either wildland fires or prescribed fires. All wildland fires will be 

effectively managed, considering resource values to be protected and 

firefighter and public safety, using the full range of strategic and 

tactical operations as described in an approved fire management plan. 

Prescribed fires are those fires ignited by managers to achieve resource 

objectives. To provide information on whether specified objectives are

met, monitoring programs will be instituted for such fires to record fire 

behavior, smoke behavior, fire decisions, and fire effects. 

NPS Management Policies

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements 

related to management of wildland fire: 

Periodically revise the “Fire Management Plan” to reflect changes in wildland fire policy, fire use 

applications, and the body of knowledge on fire effects within the park’s vegetation types. 

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS 

Current laws and policies require that the conditions delineated below be achieved in the park:

Desired Condition Source 

The values that qualify the river for designation under the act will 

be preserved. 

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act; NPS 

Management Policies

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements 

related to wild and scenic rivers: 

The park will ensure that no management actions are undertaken that could adversely affect the values that 

qualify the Rio Grande for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. 
Laws, Policies, and Mandates 

31 

BACKCOUNTRY

The National Park Service will manage backcountry areas for the use and enjoyment of the American people 

in such a manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment.

Desired Condition Source 

Backcountry use will be managed in accordance with a backcountry management 

plan (or other plan addressing backcountry uses) that is designed to avoid 

unacceptable impacts on park resources or adverse affects on visitor enjoyment of 

appropriate recreational experiences. The Park Service will seek to identify 

acceptable limits of impacts, monitor backcountry use levels and resource 

conditions, and take prompt corrective action when unacceptable impacts occur. 

NPS Management 

Policies

Compliance Actions

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to comply with the policies mentioned 

above. 

• The park’s backcountry management plan will be updated to avoid unacceptable impacts on park 

resources or adverse affects on visitor enjoyment of appropriate recreational experiences. 

• Special attention will be paid to occupancy limits in primitive road sites and the zone areas. 

LAND PROTECTION

The National Park Service will manage for protection of park lands.

Desired Condition Source 

Land protection plans should be prepared to determine and publicly document 

what lands or interests in land need to be in public ownership, and what means of 

protection are available to achieve the purposes for which the unit was created. 

NPS Management 

Policies

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to comply with the policies mentioned 

above.

Prepare a land protection plan for the park. 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

32 

Cultural Resource Management Requirements 

ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved in the parks:

Desired Condition Source 

Archeological sites will be identified and inventoried 

and their significance determined and documented. 

Archeological sites will be protected in an 

undisturbed condition unless it is determined 

through formal processes that disturbance or natural 

deterioration is unavoidable. When disturbance or 

deterioration is unavoidable, the site will be professionally documented and excavated and the 

resulting artifacts, materials, and records curated 

and conserved in consultation with the Texas 

Historical Commission (state historic preservation 

office) and American Indian tribes. Some 

archeological sites that could be adequately 

protected might be interpreted to the visitor. 

National Historic Preservation Act; EO 11593; 

Archeological Resources Protection Act; the 

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines 

for Archeology and Historic Preservation;

programmatic memorandum of agreement among 

the National Park Service, the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation, and the National Council of 

State Historic Preservation Officers (1995); NPS 

Management Policies, DO 28 “Cultural Resource 

Management Guideline” 

Compliance Actions

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions (listed in priority order) to meet legal and 

policy requirements related to archeological sites:

• Conduct a parkwide cultural resource inventory. 

• Identify and inventory archeological sites park wide, determine and document their significance. The 

most critical area for study is park land where development or visitor activity is planned. 

• Determine which archeological sites should be added to the Archeological Sites Management 

Information System (ASMIS) and the National Register of Historic Places. 

• Educate visitors on regulations governing archeological resources and their removal and transport. 

• Monitor archeological sites. 

• Treat all archeological resources as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places pending 

a formal determination by the National Park Service and the Texas Historical Commission (state historic 

preservation office) as to their significance. 

• Protect all archeological resources eligible for listing or listed on the national register; if disturbance to 

such resources is unavoidable, conduct formal consultation with the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation, as appropriate, and the Texas Historical Commission (state historic preservation office) 

and Indian tribes in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act and implementing 

regulations. 
Laws, Policies, and Mandates 

33 

ETHNOGRAPHIC RESOURCES

Certain contemporary American Indian and other communities are permitted by law, regulation, or policy to 

pursue customary religious, subsistence, and other cultural uses of NPS resources with which they are 

traditionally associated. Recognizing that its resource protection mandate affects this human use and 

cultural context of park resources, the National Park Service plans and executes programs in ways to 

safeguard cultural and natural resources while reflecting informed concern for contemporary peoples and 

cultures traditionally associated with them.

Desired Condition Source 

Appropriate cultural anthropological research will 

be conducted in cooperation with groups associated 

with the park. 

National Historic Preservation Act; Advisory 

Council for Historic Preservation implementing 

regulations; NPS Management Policies, DO 28 

“Cultural Resource Management Guideline” 

All agencies, including the National Park Service, are 

required to accommodate access to and ceremonial 

use of Indian sacred sites by Indian religious 

practitioners and avoid adversely affecting the 

physical integrity of these sacred sites. 

EO 13007 on American Indian Sacred Sites; 

American Indian Religious Freedom Act 

NPS general regulations on access to and use of 

natural and cultural resources in parks will to the 

extent practicable, permitted by law, and not clearly 

inconsistent with agency functions be applied in an 

informed and balanced manner consistent with park 

purposes. Also, the Park Service will not 

unreasonably interfere with any American Indian 

use of traditional areas or sacred resources that does 

not result in the degradation of resources. 

Consumptive use of sacred resources is permitted 

only to the extent authorized by 36 CFR subsections 

2.1(c) and 2.1(d). 

EO 13007 on American Indian Sacred Sites; 

American Indian Religious Freedom Act; NPS 

Management Policies

Other federal agencies, state and local governments, 

potentially affected American Indian and other 

communities, interested groups, the state historic 

preservation officer, and the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation will to the greatest extent 

practicable, and to the extent permitted by law, be 

given opportunities to become informed about and 

comment on anticipated NPS actions at the earliest 

practicable time. 

National Historic Preservation Act; programmatic 

memorandum of agreement among the National 

Park Service, the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation, and the National Council of State 

Historic Preservation Officers (1995); EO 11593; 

American Indian Religious Freedom Act; Native 

American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act; 

EO 13007 on American Indian Sacred Sites, Presidential memorandum of April 29, 1994, on 

government-to-government relations with tribal 

governments; NPS Management Policies

All agencies are required to consult with tribal 

governments before taking actions that affect 

federally recognized tribal governments. These 

consultations are to be open and candid so that all 

interested parties may evaluate for themselves the 

potential impact of relevant proposals. Parks 

(including Big Bend National Park) must regularly 

consult with traditionally associated American 

Indians regarding planning, management, and 

operational decisions that affect subsistence 

activities, sacred materials or places, or other 

ethnographic resources with which they are 

historically associated. 

American Indian Religious Freedom Act; 

Presidential memorandum of April 29, 1994, on 

government-to-government relations with tribal 

governments; National Historic Preservation Act; 

Advisory Council for Historic Preservation 

implementing regulations 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

34 

ETHNOGRAPHIC RESOURCES (cont.)

Desired Condition Source 

The identities of community consultants and 

information about sacred and other culturally 

sensitive places and practices will be kept 

confidential when research agreements or other 

circumstances warrant. 

National Historic Preservation Act; NPS 

Management Policies

American Indians and other individuals and groups 

linked by ties of kinship or culture to ethnically 

identifiable human remains, sacred objects, objects 

of cultural patrimony, and associated funerary 

objects will be consulted when such items may be 

disturbed or are encountered on park lands. 

NPS Management Policies; Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act 

Compliance Actions 

To accomplish the above goals, the National Park Service will do the following (listed in priority order):

• Prepare a cultural affiliation study to determine which tribes should be consulted for actions at Big 

Bend. 

• Prepare an ethnographic overview and assessment. 

• Continue to provide access to sacred sites and park resources by American Indians when the use is 

consistent with park purposes and the protection of resources. 

• Survey and inventory ethnographic resources and document their significance. 

• Treat all ethnographic resources as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places 

pending a formal determination by the National Park Service and the state historic preservation officer 

as to their significance. 

• Protect all ethnographic resources determined eligible for listing or listed on the national register. If 

disturbance of such resources is unavoidable, conduct formal consultation with the Advisory Council 

for Historic Preservation, as appropriate, with the state historic preservation officer, and with American 

Indian tribes. This consultation will be in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act and 

the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation implementing regulations and programmatic agreement. 

• Conduct regular consultations with affiliated tribes to continue to improve communications and resolve 

any problems or misunderstandings that occur. 

• Continue to encourage the employment of American Indians on the park staff to improve 

communications and working relationships and encourage cultural diversity in the workplace. 
Laws, Policies, and Mandates 

35 

HISTORIC BUILDINGS/STRUCTURES

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved for historic properties (e.g., 

buildings, structures, roads, trails, or cultural landscapes):

Desired Condition Source 

Historic structures and cultural 

landscapes will be inventoried and their 

significance and integrity evaluated 

under National Register of Historic 

Places criteria. The qualities that 

contribute to the listing or eligibility for 

listing of historic properties on the 

national register will be protected in 

accordance with the Secretary of the 

Interior’s Standards (unless it is 

determined through a formal process 

that disturbance or natural deterioration 

is unavoidable). 

National Historic Preservation Act; EO 11593; Archeological 

and Historic Preservation Act; the Secretary of the Interior’s 

Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic 

Preservation; Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the 

Treatment of Historic Properties, with Guidelines for the 

Treatment of Cultural Landscapes; programmatic memorandum 

of agreement among the National Park Service, the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation, and the National Council of 

State Historic Preservation Officers (1995); NPS Management 

Policies, DO 28 “Cultural Resource Management Guideline.” 

Compliance Actions 

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions (listed in priority order) to meet legal and 

policy requirements related to historic properties:

• Update and certify the list of classified structures (LCS) and complete the Level 2 cultural landscape 

inventory. 

• Determine the appropriate level of preservation for each historic property formally determined to be 

eligible for listing or listed on the National Register of Historic Places (subject to the Secretary of the 

Interior’s Standards). 

• Implement and maintain the appropriate level of preservation for such properties. 

• Analyze the design elements (e.g., materials, colors, shape, massing, scale, architectural details, and site 

details) of historic structures and cultural landscapes in the park (e.g., intersections, curbing, signs, and 

roads and trails) to guide the rehabilitation and maintenance of sites and structures. 

• Before modifying any historic properties on the National Register of Historic Places, such as Barker 

Lodge at Rio Grande Village or the Castolon Historic District, the Park Service will consult with the 

state historic preservation officer and the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation, as appropriate. 

• Before modifying any structures associated with “Mission 66,” the structures would be evaluated for 

listing on the national register in consultation with the state historic preservation office. 

COLLECTIONS

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved in the park for museum 

collections:

Desired Condition Source 

All museum objects and manuscripts will be identified and 

inventoried, catalogued, documented, preserved, protected, 

and provision made for their access to and use for exhibits, 

research, and interpretation. 

The qualities that contribute to the significance of 

collections will be protected in accordance with established 

standards. 

National Historic Preservation Act; American Religious Freedom Act; Archeological 

and Historic Preservation Act; Archeological 

Resources Protection Act; Native American 

Graves Protection and Repatriation Act; 

NPS Management Policies, DO 28 “Cultural 

Resource Management Guideline” 

Compliance Actions 

To accomplish the above goals, the National Park Service will do the following (listed in priority order): 

• Inventory and catalog all park museum collections in accordance with standards in the NPS Museum 

Handbook.

• Develop and implement a collection management program according to NPS standards to guide the 

protection, conservation, and use of museum objects. 

• Remove collections from the floodplain at Panther Junction or protect them against flooding as 

required by NPS policy. 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

36 

Other Requirements 

VISITOR UNDERSTANDING AND PARK USE REQUIREMENTS

Current laws, regulations, and policies leave considerable room for judgment about the best mix of types and 

levels of visitor use activities, programs, and facilities. For this reason, most decisions related to visitor 

experience and use are addressed in the section “What Might Be Achieved,” below, and in the alternatives. 

However, the authority to charge fees is dictated by law and is therefore the same for all alternatives.

Desired Condition Source 

Visitor and employee safety and health will be 

protected. 

NPS Management Policies

Visitors will understand and appreciate park 

values and resources and have the information 

necessary to adapt to the park’s environments; 

visitors will have opportunities to enjoy the 

national park in ways that leave the resources 

unimpaired for future generations. 

NPS Organic Act; NPS Management Policies; DO 22, “Fee 

Collection” 

Recreational uses will be promoted and 

regulated, and basic visitor needs will be met in 

keeping with park purposes. 

NPS Organic Act; Title 36 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR); NPS Management Policies.

All reasonable efforts will be made to make 

buildings and facilities of the NPS accessible to 

and usable by all people including those with 

disabilities. 

Architectural Barriers Act of 1968; Americans with 

Disabilities Act of 1990; 28 CFR Part 36 on 

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public 

Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities (ADAAG 

— ADA Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and 

Facilities); Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards of 

1984 (UFAS); US Access Board Draft Accessibility 

Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas of 1999; NPS 

Management Policies; DO 42 — Director’s Orders: 

Accessibility for Visitors with Disabilities in NPS 

Programs, Facilities, and Services 

All reasonable efforts will be made to make 

programs and services of the NPS accessible to 

and usable by all people including those with 

disabilities. 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973; Secretary of the Interior’s 

regulation 43 CFR 17 — Enforcement on the Basis of 

Disability in the Interior Programs; NPS Management 

Policies; DO 42 — Director’s Orders: Accessibility for 

Visitors with Disabilities in NPS Programs, Facilities, and 

Services 

Visitors who use federal facilities and services 

for outdoor recreation may be required to pay a 

greater share of the cost of providing those 

opportunities than the population as a whole. 

NPS Management Policies; 1998 Executive Summary to 

Congress; Recreational Fee Demonstration Program, 

Progress Report to Congress, vol. 1: Overview and 

Summary (U.S. Department of the Interior, National 

Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of 

Land Management; U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service) 

The park will identify implementation 

commitments for visitor carrying capacities for 

all areas of the unit. 

1978 National Parks and Recreation Act (PL 95-625), 

NPS Management Policies
Laws, Policies, and Mandates 

37 

VISITOR UNDERSTANDING AND PARK USE REQUIREMENTS (cont.) 

Compliance Actions

The National Park Service will take the following kinds of actions to meet legal and policy requirements 

related to visitor understanding and use of the national park unit: 

• Give visitors the opportunity to understand, appreciate, and enjoy the park (management directions 

within this broad policy are discussed in the alternatives). 

• Continue to enforce the regulations governing visitor use and behavior in Title 36 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (36 CFR). 

• Undertake an updated visitor survey (by the park staff) that would define visitor expectations. 

• Prepare a comprehensive interpretive plan. 

• Architectural and Site Access. The National Park Service would develop strategies to ensure that all 

new and renovated buildings and facilities, including those provided by concessioners, are designed and 

constructed in conformance with applicable rules, regulations and standards. Existing buildings and 

facilities would be evaluated to determine the degree to which they are currently accessible to and 

usable by people with disabilities, and to identify barriers that limit access. Action plans would be 

developed identifying how barriers would be removed. Action plan elements and funding strategies 

would be included within annual and strategic (5-year) plans. 

• Programmatic Access. The National Park Service would develop strategies to ensure that all services 

and programs, including those offered by concessioners, volunteers, cooperating associations, and 

interpreters, are designed and implemented in conformance with applicable rules, regulations and 

standards. Existing programs, activities, and services (including interpretation, telecommunications, 

media, and web pages) would be evaluated to determine the degree to which they are currently 

accessible to and usable by people with disabilities, and to identify barriers to access. Action plans would 

be developed identifying how barriers would be removed. Action plan elements and funding strategies 

would be included within annual and strategic (5-year) plans. 

• The park will continue to monitor visitor comments on issues such as crowding, encounters with other 

visitors in the backcountry, availability of campsites at busy times of the year, availability of parking and 

visitor encounters with bears. Should bear encounters increase to a level unacceptable to the park, 

actions such as seasonal closures, moving trails, reduction of visitor numbers in the area and increased 

education would be taken. Should any of the trends increase to levels unacceptable to park 

management, the National Park Service will undertake detailed planning to establish visitor carrying 

capacity strategies and monitoring programs. Studies will determine what levels of visitation will be 

consistent with the experiences that visitors desire and preservation of park resources. 
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PLAN

38 

SUSTAINABLE DESIGN/DEVELOPMENT 

Sustainability can be described as the result achieved by managing units of the national park system in ways 

that do not compromise the environment or its capacity to provide for present and future generations. 

Sustainable practices minimize the short- and long-term environmental impacts of developments and other 

activities through resource conservation, recycling, waste minimization, and the use of energy-efficient and 

ecologically responsible materials and techniques.

Desired Condition Source 

NPS and concessioner visitor management facilities 

will be harmonious with park resources, compatible 

with natural processes, aesthetically pleasing, 

functional, as accessible as possible to all segments of 

the population, energy-efficient, and cost-effective. 

NPS Management Policies; EO 13123, “Greening the 

Government through Efficient Energy 

Management”; EO 13101, “Greening the 

Government through Waste Prevention, Recycling, 

and Federal Acquisition”; NPS Guiding Principles of 

Sustainable Design; DO 13, “Environmental 

Leadership”; DO 90, “Value Analysis.” 

Compliance Actions 

The NPS Guiding Principles of Sustainable Design (1993b) directs NPS management philosophy. It provides a 

basis for achieving sustainability in facility planning and design, emphasizes the importance of biodiversity, 

and encourages responsible decisions. The guidebook articulates principles to be used in the design and 

management of tourist facilities that emphasize environmental sensitivity in construction, the use of 

nontoxic materials, resource conservation, recycling, and integrating visitors with natural and cultural 

settings. Sustainability principles have been developed and are followed for interpretation, natural resources, 

cultural resources, site design, building design, energy management, water supply, waste prevention, and 

facility maintenance and operations. The Park Service also reduces energy costs, eliminates waste, and 

conserves energy resources by using energy-efficient and cost-effective technology. Energy efficiency is 

incorporated into the decision-making process during the design and acquisition of buildings, facilities, and 

transportation systems emphasizing the use of renewable energy sources. 

In addition to following these principles, the following also will be accomplished: 

• The staff of the national park will work with appropriate experts to make park facilities and programs 

sustainable. Value analysis and value engineering, including life cycle cost analysis, will be performed to 

examine the energy, environmental, and economic implications of proposed developments. 

• The park staff will support and encourage suppliers, permittees, and contractors to follow sustainable 

practices. 

• Interpretive programs at the national park will address sustainable practices within and outside of the 

national park unit. 
Laws, Policies, and Mandates 

39 

RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND TELECOMMUNICATION INFRASTRUCTURE

Current laws and policies require that the following conditions be achieved in the national park:

Desired Condition Source 

Park resources or public enjoyment of the park will not be 

denigrated by nonconforming uses. Telecommunication structures 

will be permitted in the park to the extent that they do not 

jeopardize the park’s mission and resources. No new 

nonconforming use or rights-of-way will be permitted through the 

park without specific statutory authority and approval by the 

director of the National Park Service or his representative, and will 

be permitted only if there is no practicable alternative to such use of 

NPS lands. 

Telecommunications Act; 16 USC 

79; 23 USC 317; 36 CFR 14; NPS 

Management Policies; DO 53A, 

“Wireless Telecommunications”; 

Reference Manual 53, “Special Park 

Uses.” 

Compliance Actions

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 directs all federal agencies to assist in the national goal of achieving a 

seamless telecommunications system throughout the United States by accommodating requests by 

telecommunication companies for the use of property, rights-of-way, and easements to the extent allowable 

under each agency’s mission. The National Park Service is legally obligated to permit telecommunication 

infrastructure in the parks if such facilities can be structured to avoid interference with park purposes. 

The management of Big Bend National Park has determined that because of the scenic and ethnographic 

significance of the park’s resources, there are no appropriate locations for telecommunication infrastructure 

in Big Bend National Park.