National Park Service Sets Out the Welcome Mat for ScienceAuthor(s): Ellen PaulSource: BioScience, Vol. 49, No. 12 (December 1999), p. 958Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Institute of Biological SciencesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/bisi.1999.49.12.958 .

Accessed: 14/05/2014 01:01

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Oxford University Press and American Institute of Biological Sciences are collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to BioScience.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.89 on Wed, 14 May 2014 01:01:14 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Washington Watch

National Park Service Sets Out

the Welcome Mat for Science ELLEN PAUL

More than once in its 83-year history, the National Park Service

has been criticized for giving short shrift to science in managing the 280 park properties that contain signifi- cant natural resources. NPS natural resources managers have made period- ic efforts to base management deci- sions on scientific information. Now, NPS is trying again, with its "Natural Resources Challenge: The National Park Service's Action Plan for Preserv- ing Natural Resources" (online at www.nature.nps.gov/challengedoc). NPS officials say the plan, released in

August 1999, portends a culture change within the agency.

Neglect of science was profound during NPS' first five decades. In 1929, George Wright, an assistant park natu- ralist in Yosemite, had to persuade NPS to allow him to conduct wildlife sur- veys using his own funds. In the 1930s, NPS employed only nine biologists, and science had essentially no role in the park management of the 1940s and 1950s. Mission 66, a massive park development program initiated in the 1950s, included $1 billion for facilities

development and only $30,000 for sci- ence programs. Two reviews of NPS activities in the early 1960s spoke of the near absence of science in park management.

Recognizing this shortcoming, NPS has developed its new plan to bring science front and center in park man-

agement. The plan calls for preserving and restoring national park resources for future generations, improving park management through greater reliance on scientific knowledge, and broadly promulgating knowledge gained through scientific research in national

parks for the benefit of society. What makes this attempt more

promising than previous efforts, says

Bob Krumenaker, who coordinated the NPS Steering Committee that produced the plan, is the fact that senior leader- ship is engaged in the effort and that this leadership has in turn engaged Congressional interest in park manage- ment. In particular, while the plan was in development, the 105th Congress enacted the National Parks Omnibus Management Act of 1998, which added research to the NPS mandate. The law directs NPS to encourage others to conduct research in the parks for the benefit of park management as well as for its broader scientific value. It also requires the Secretary of the Interior to ensure that park management is enhanced by the availability and use of a broad program of the highest quality science and scientific information.

The House Appropriations Com- mittee's approval of the entire $20 mil- lion requested for the NRC in fiscal year 2000 represents a further vote of confidence for NPS' commitment to, in the words of the committee, "carry out a systematic, consistent, profes- sional inventory and monitoring pro- gram, along with other scientific activ- ities, that is regularly updated to ensure that the Service makes sound resource decisions based on sound sci- entific data."

For scientists who wish to conduct research in the national parks, the new plan promises a warm welcome in

place of the indifference, or even resis- tance, that often greeted requests for research permits. The plan says that "parks can and should be centers for broad scientific research and inquiry. Research should be facilitated in parks where it can be done without impair- ing other park values." NPS is already moving toward this goal by proposing new, uniform guidelines and applica- tion forms for research by outside sci-

entists (to be available online), estab-

lishing a Sabbatical-in-Parks program for visiting scientists, and improving the career track for natural resource managers so that those who issue per- mits are more likely to have scientific

training and expertise. The agency also promises to be

more open to advancing scientists into

management positions, so that in time, parks could even come to be managed by scientists. NPS also plans an aggres- sive effort to recruit new people to its natural resource management work- force.

In addition to enhancing the quality of science in the parks, the changes are intended to increase the role of science in the management of park resources. Indeed, park superintendents will be evaluated in part by trends in resource conditions. To help guide resource

management, a biological inventory and monitoring program is also in

development. Once methods and stan- dards have been approved, the pro- gram will be implemented in all parks, which will be organized into geo- graphical and biome-based networks for better coordination. Each park net- work will work with a university-based Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (a recently developed partnership among NPS, the US Geological Survey, and other federal agencies) to help NPS

protect, manage, and learn from the

public lands. NPS is off to a running start in

implementing the plan, with 14 actions already underway. If NPS achieves all that it has set out to do in this ambitious plan, then the welcome mat for science in the parks may come to resemble a red carpet. O

Ellen Paul is the is public policy representative for AIBS.

958 BioScience * December 1999 / Vol. 49 No. 12

University of California Pressis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve, and extend access to

BioSciencewww.jstor.org

®

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.89 on Wed, 14 May 2014 01:01:14 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions