Yosemite Valley Plan SEIS, Volume IB, Chapter 4: Alternative 2

Potential Cumulative Impacts on Federal Species of Concern and California Species of Special Concern

Many of the cumulative impact principles given in the conclusion for general wildlife earlier in this alternative also apply to special-status species.

Overall, current and reasonably foreseeable future projects within the cumulative impact assessment area considered in conjunction with the actions under Alternative 2 would have a moderate, beneficial effect on special-status species and their habitats. This is primarily due to the potential effects that would come from implementation of large-scale planning documents that could protect and restore wildlife habitats over much of the Sierra Nevada. These plans would compliment actions under this alternative, which would restore large areas of meadow, riparian, and California black oak habitats that are important to many special-status species.

Under Alternative 2, adverse impacts would affect some special-status species such as valley elderberry longhorn beetle, Sierra Nevada mountain beaver, marten, and Pacific fisher from new development outside of Yosemite Valley. Such impacts would add to the adverse effects of some current and reasonably foreseeable future projects. However, these impacts would be of limited severity, because of the size and type of habitat affected, and would have little effect on the overall cumulative impacts on special-status species under this alternative, which would be moderate beneficial.

Fifty-one special-status plant species within Yosemite Valley and other out-of-Valley areas could potentially be affected by Alternative 2 as presented in this Final Yosemite Valley Plan/SEIS. Refer to table 3-7 (see Vol. Ia, Chapter 3) for a list of these species; their federal, state, and local status; and their general habitat requirements and locations. The impacts that have been identified in this section are generally long term except where noted.

No federal- or state-listed (threatened or endangered) plant species are known to occur in Yosemite Valley. Twelve park rare plant species currently exist in the Valley: sugar stick, round-leaved sundew, stream orchid, fawn-lily, northern bedstraw, Sierra laurel, false pimpernel, azure penstemon, phacelia, wood saxifrage, giant sequoia, and ladies’ tresses. Restoration of large portions of potentially wet meadows and riparian habitat (at Yosemite Lodge, former Upper and Lower River and Lower Pines Campgrounds, and Housekeeping Camp) under Alternative 2 would have a moderate, beneficial impact on round-leaved sundew, northern bedstraw, false pimpernel, phacelia, ladies’ tresses, and Sierra laurel. Removal of food services at Happy Isles could slightly increase natural habitat for the stream orchid, with minor, beneficial effects.

Removal of the Ahwahnee tennis courts would have a major, adverse impact (long term) on the individual planted giant sequoia trees in this area, because these trees would be removed and the site restored to California black oak woodland. Redesign of the Ahwahnee parking lot could have adverse impacts to the planted giant sequoia trees depending on final alignment of parking lots and driveways. Relocation of Superintendent’s House (Residence 1) to the Yosemite Village Historic District could result in removal of one giant sequoia along the access road. Individual trees would be removed in these areas; however, because none of these actions would affect overall sustainability of giant sequoias within the park’s three naturally occurring groves, there would be a negligible impact on the overall sustainability of giant sequoias in the park.

The fawn-lily is currently affected by trampling and picking of its showy flowers. This species would not be further impacted under Alternative 2. The wood saxifrage typically grows on moist cliffs and also would not be affected by the actions of this alternative.

This alternative would have no impacts on rare plant species at South Landing or Henness Ridge, given that no development actions are proposed in these areas.

Currently one federal plant species of concern (Congdon’s lomatium), four state-listed rare species (Yosemite onion, Tompkin’s sedge, Congdon’s woolly-sunflower, and Congdon’s lewisia), and six park rare species (Indian paintbrush, collinsia, pitcher sage, Congdon’s monkeyflower, Palmer’s monkeyflower, and phacelia) occur within the general El Portal area.

Adverse impacts from trampling would continue to occur to all of these species except for Yosemite onion and Congdon’s lomatium, which occur on inaccessible steep slopes in association with poison oak. Impacts on the remaining species from trampling would increase as a result of a substantially increased human population in El Portal. Impacts from habitat loss and competition for resources (i.e., light, water, and nutrients) would continue to adversely affect most species because of the continued high degree of non-native species encroachment expected in this area, as well as the increased potential for new introductions as a result of increased areas of disturbance and landscaping. Potential impacts (including habitat loss and direct loss of plants) would occur to Tompkin’s sedge, Indian paintbrush, collinsia, pitcher sage, Congdon’s monkeyflower, Palmer’s monkeyflower, and phacelia from development of out-of-Valley parking and employee housing. These impacts would be mitigated through avoidance (site selection), salvage and replanting of perennial species (Tompkin’s sedge in particular), and topsoil salvage and re-application after construction, which would protect the seed source of annuals. Impacts to these species in conjunction with mitigation measures would be minor and adverse.

The restoration of habitat at the old sewage treatment plant at Rancheria Flat and sand pit would have moderate beneficial impacts on Congdon’s woolly-sunflower.

No federal- or state-listed plant species occur in Foresta; however, five park rare plant species occur in the area (inconspicuous monkeyflower, pansy monkeyflower, goldenaster, snapdragon, and Small’s southern clarkia). These species would experience slightly greater adverse impacts from radiating use because of increased residential and operational activities with the reconstruction of 14 houses and potential relocation of stables to Foresta. However, direct loss of individual plants or populations from construction is not expected because these species are not known to occur in the development area. There would be a potential increase in impacts to rare plant habitat by encroachment of non-native species associated with landscaping activities as well as increased numbers of residential and horse trailer vehicles, with overall minor, adverse effects.

If parking were constructed in Foresta, overall impacts would be moderate and adverse due to loss of habitat for goldenaster and both monkeyflower species. Radiating impacts from visitors in areas adjacent to the parking area would be minimized by the installation of fences, signs, and other measures to direct visitors away from sensitive habitats.

One federal species of concern (slender-stemmed monkeyflower) and one park rare plant species (Small’s southern clarkia) occur at Hazel Green. These species, which occur in open areas and meadows, could be directly impacted by development of a transit and parking area at Hazel Green. Plants could also be impacted by picnicking, trampling, and random use of sites adjacent to the parking area. These activities would result in minor, adverse impacts on these species.

No federal- or state-listed plant species occur at Badger Pass. The surrounding montane meadow areas are inhabited by one federal species of concern (Bolander’s clover) and two park rare species (dwarf sandwort and Yosemite ivesia). These species would experience adverse impacts from radiating visitor use at the new day-visitor parking area at Badger Pass. Any impacts would be mitigated through design of the Badger Pass parking facility and installation of signs or fencing to direct people away from sensitive areas. Therefore, the long-term impact would be minor and adverse.

No federal-listed plants, one state-listed plant species (Yosemite onion), and eight park rare species occur within the Wawona basin (snapdragon, Child’s blue-eyed Mary, round-leaved sundew, Sierra sweet-bay, Bolander’s skullcap, giant sequoia, trillium, and Hall’s wyethia). New housing development would result in loss of a portion of the trillium population in this area, which would be a moderate, adverse impact. Increased human use in this area during the spring and summer would have potential radiating impacts such as trampling on all of the rare species in the Wawona area. However, these impacts would be minor with the implementation of mitigation measures (such as fencing) to direct visitors away from sensitive plant habitat.

No special-status species are known to exist in the general vicinity of the Big Oak Flat Entrance area, thus no impacts to federal-, state-, or park-listed species would occur at this site under Alternative 2.

No known federal- or state-listed species occur in the South Entrance area. One park rare species (Sierra sweet-bay) is located within the riparian area adjacent to the Wawona road. Expanded parking and visitor center structures in this vicinity would be designed to avoid riparian areas and, therefore, would minimize the potential impact on the Sierra sweet-bay. The impacts of Alternative 2 on this species would be minor and adverse as a result of increased visitor activity in the South Entrance area and the potential loss of a small area of habitat.

One federal species of concern (Tiehm’s rock-cress) and thirteen park rare species occur within hiking distance of Tioga Pass.

One species, the common juniper, could be directly impacted by construction of a new or expanded entrance/contact station at Tioga Pass. Construction may result in loss of habitat or direct loss of individual plants. There could be indirect effects on Tiehm’s rock-cress and all 13 park rare species from increased foot traffic and associated trampling and soil compaction in the area. There could be increased hiking on Mt. Dana, which is within a day’s hike from the Tioga Pass Entrance Station. The popular hike to the top of Mt. Dana is a cross-country path, without a formal route. Increased use on Mt. Dana could have a long-term, moderate, adverse impact on these rare plant species on Mt. Dana.

Fifty-one species would potentially be impacted in Alternative 2. The proposed actions of this alternative would include mitigation measures to minimize radiating adverse impacts to these species. Radiating impacts from development actions such as trampling, picking, and increases in non-native plant species establishment from increased visitor uses in and out of the Valley would be limited to negligible to minor by managing uses within these sensitive areas and increasing management to control non-native species.

Adverse impacts as a result of habitat loss would occur to trillium in Wawona, to Small’s southern clarkia and slender-stemmed monkeyflower in Hazel Green, to Tompkin’s sedge and six park rare species in El Portal, to Tiehn’s rock-cress at Tioga Pass and to one park rare species in the Valley. These impacts would be mitigated by reasonable designs to avoid these species, as identified in site-specific surveys. For some species, salvaged topsoil at the site would be retained and reused to encourage re-establishment. Consequently, minor to moderate local impacts to individual plants or populations would occur in these areas.

Beneficial impacts would occur to rare species in the Valley (such as northern bedstraw, false pimpernel, and ladies’ tresses), because of the extensive restoration of riparian and meadow habitat, with moderate, beneficial effects. Alternative 2 would have no measurable impacts on the fawn-lily or wood saxifrage. Moderate, beneficial effects would occur in El Portal to Congdon’s woolly-sunflower with restoration of a small area of habitat at the old treatment plant at Rancheria Flat and the sand pit.

The overall impact to special-status plant species would be minor adverse, primarily as a result of habitat loss in Hazel Green, El Portal, and Wawona.

Many of Yosemite’s special-status plant species are fairly widespread (for the most part, they extend well beyond park boundaries) but are limited to specific substrates or other limited habitats. Analysis of the cumulative impacts on these species focuses on identified projects that are or will be occurring on the western slope of the central Sierra Nevada in the foreseeable future (see Vol. II, Appendix H).

Although substantial habitat fragmentation currently exists in vegetation communities as a whole from human development, the relatively discrete populations of rare plants in Yosemite Valley and surrounding areas are little affected by this phenomenon. Rather, the primary effects on rare plants are short-term impacts to habitat, long-term habitat loss through development or shifts in species composition to non-native cover, and loss of both the occurrence and natural frequency of natural processes that many of these species depend upon.

Many of the lower-elevation wet meadows throughout the Sierra Nevada have been altered through channelization of drainages, grazing, encroachment by non-native species, and even permanent flooding through the construction of water storage and hydroelectric dams. Rare species dependent on these areas have undergone declines due to permanent loss of habitat (as a result of projects such as Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and O’Shaughnessy Dam).

Development of roads through lower-elevation riparian corridors throughout the Sierra Nevada have also led to temporary population declines of some species and permanent loss of habitat for others, depending on the magnitude of the project and extent of actual ground disturbance within the critical habitat zone.

Alterations in fire frequency and intensity have also led to short-term losses of some species dependent on frequent low-intensity fires. Some of these species may be more resilient than previously recognized, with the ability to lie dormant (in seed form) until conditions are favorable for germination, including many species of monkeyflowers in Yosemite National Park.

According to the Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project (UC Davis 1996b), of the five habitat types in the Sierra Nevada (Jeffrey and ponderosa pine forests, foothill woodlands, subalpine forests, meadows, and chaparral) that contain the most rare and endemic taxa, foothill woodlands and chaparral are receiving the greatest increase in impacts and fragmentation by urbanization along the western slope of the Sierra Nevada. In chaparral vegetation types, the frequency of fire has been altered to protect other resource values such as timber and homes. Taxa that are dependent on fire as a part of their life history and ecology may be adversely impacted by long-term changes in the management of chaparral vegetation. The changes may include a shift from fall to spring burning, mechanical treatments, or alteration of the fire frequency or intensity of burns.

Impacts from past road construction projects (El Portal Road Improvement and Hetch Hetchy Road Reconstruction projects) on some species confined to riparian, lower montane, and foothill areas within Yosemite have occurred. Mitigation efforts have included protection of rare species within these project sites by salvaging individual plants and replanting them after construction is completed; timing construction activities to periods when annuals have gone to seed; or specifying salvage, treatment, and replacement of soils and materials within known population areas. Future construction projects at and in the vicinity of O’Shaughnessy Dam and at Evergreen Road may temporarily affect both annual and perennial park and state rare plant species. Specifically, these actions would result in minor, adverse, short-term impacts to pansy and slender-stemmed monkeyflowers, assuming implementation of the mitigation measures listed above.

Additional short-term impacts would occur to riparian areas outside the park – specifically, actions planned on the main stem of the Merced River. These direct construction actions (the Briceburg Bridge Reconstruction and the Merced River Canyon Trail Acquisition) would cause minor adverse impacts to rare plant habitat.

Installation of riprap and permanent loss of riparian vegetation as a result of the Yosemite Motels Expansion, El Portal (Mariposa Co.) and the Yosemite View Parcel Land Exchange would lead to loss of habitat in the Merced River corridor, with resulting loss of rare plants growing at those sites. This would be a minor to moderate adverse impact, depending on the site and the species affected by each potential project. Impacts to the special-status species would be partially mitigated by restoration of the sand pit and old treatment plant at Rancheria Flat in El Portal, providing additional rare plant habitat. Projects such as the development of new and additional infrastructure at Evergreen Lodge, Silvertip Resort Village, and Hazel Green Ranch; rehabilitation of Tuolumne Grove trailhead parking, and fuel treatment projects (including logging in Stanislaus National Forest) would lead to long-term loss of habitat for a variety of rare plant species, thereby resulting in minor to moderate adverse impacts.

The addition of lodging units with the Yosemite Motel Expansion, El Portal (Mariposa Co.); Yosemite View Parcel Land Exchange; Silvertip Resort Village; Hazel Green Ranch; and other sites could further limit the management of these areas with natural fire, thereby causing reductions in fire-dependent species at these sites (including state rare Tompkin’s sedge, federal species of concern slender-stemmed monkeyflower, and many lower-elevation chaparral species). These projects would also have the potential for localized minor to moderate and adverse effects on rare species habitat; however, with the implementation of site-specific surveys and state- and federal-required mitigation measures, these localized adverse impacts would be minor. Construction actions to eliminate the threat of flood damage to infrastructure along the South Fork and main stem of the Merced River outside of Yosemite would also lead to a loss of flood frequency. Floods scour out riparian zones and create new available habitat for species such as park rare Sierra sweet-bay.

A number of large-scale planning projects would potentially benefit rare plant species through more comprehensive land use management goals, objectives, and strategies. Some of these planning projects and resulting documents include the Yosemite Fire Management Plan Update, Sierra Nevada Framework for Conservation and Collaboration (USFS), Fire Management Action Plan for Wilderness (USFS, Stanislaus), Merced Wild and Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan, and other wilderness management plans. These reasonably foreseeable future management and planning projects within the cumulative impact assessment area would have regional minor to moderate and beneficial impacts to rare species and their habitats because of their similar management objectives.

As summarized in the conclusions for Alternative 2, this alternative would have potential adverse impacts to two federal species of concern, one state-listed species, and minor, adverse effects on local populations of park rare species due to loss of individuals or habitat in the Valley, as well as in out-of-Valley areas and/or increased visitor use adjacent to newly impacted areas. When looking at impacts of Alternative 2 in conjunction with impacts of other past, present, and foreseeable regional planning and development activities, the cumulative effect on these special-status plant species would be minor and adverse. The beneficial impacts expected for some species from regional planning efforts would be outweighed by the permanent loss of habitat from regional development projects and developments within the park at out-of-Valley areas.

A summary of the traffic air emissions in Yosemite Valley under Alternative 2 is provided in table 4-31. The emissions data noted in table 4-31 show emissions from the following major vehicle fleet categories:

Compared to Alternative 1 in the year 2015, volatile organic compound emissions would decrease by 10%, carbon monoxide would decrease by 45%, nitrogen oxides would increase by 32%, and particulate matter would decrease by about 45% assuming conventional diesel technology is used for shuttle buses. There would be a moderate increase in nitrogen oxides emissions, which would be attributable to the operation of shuttle buses from three out-of-Valley parking areas and in expanded in-Valley shuttle service. Nitrogen oxide emissions would also increase with the use of compressed natural gas in buses, but these emissions would decrease with the use of propane or fuel cell technology in the shuttle bus fleet. A major decrease in particulate matter would occur because of the sharp reductions in vehicle miles traveled and associated reductions in road dust.

Traffic flow was modeled (see Vol. II, Appendix I for additional air modeling information) to perform carbon monoxide and PM₁₀ hot-spot analyses for Northside Drive from Yosemite Lodge to park headquarters. This road segment was chosen because it is the most congested roadway in Yosemite Valley under Alternative 1. During the inbound peak travel hour, the EMFAC model predicted a maximum 1-hour average carbon monoxide concentration of 0.5 parts per million, and a carbon monoxide concentration of 0.6 parts per million during the outbound peak travel hour. When added to a background carbon monoxide concentration of 3.0 parts per million, the estimated carbon monoxide concentrations of 3.5 and 3.6 parts per million for inbound and outbound traffic scenarios, respectively, would not exceed the federal or California 1-hour carbon monoxide standards of 35 parts per million and 20 parts per million, respectively. Based on traffic during the inbound peak travel hour, the calculated maximum 8-hour average carbon monoxide concentration was 2.45 parts per million, and the analogous maximum 8-hour carbon monoxide concentration was 2.52 parts per million for traffic during the outbound peak travel hour. The carbon monoxide concentrations for

Alternative 2 would not exceed the federal or California 8-hour carbon monoxide standard of 9 parts per million. As noted in table 4-32, these carbon monoxide concentrations would represent major reductions in ambient carbon monoxide levels for the inbound and outbound peak hours when compared to Alternative 1.

Based on traffic in the inbound peak travel hour, the maximum 24-hour PM₁₀ concentration would be 27.4 micrograms per cubic meter (m g/m³), and the analogous PM₁₀ concentration would be 28.2 m g/m³ based on traffic in the outbound peak travel hour. The estimated PM₁₀ concentrations for the inbound and the outbound peak hours would not exceed the federal standard of 150 m g/m³ or the California standard of 50 m g/m³. As noted in table 4-33, these PM₁₀ concentrations would represent major reductions in ambient PM₁₀ levels for the inbound and outbound peak hours when compared to Alternative 1.

Air emissions associated with construction activities proposed for Alternative 2 are summarized in table 4-34. A description of the construction-related emissions and the approach used for this analysis is included in the Methodologies and Assumptions section at the beginning of this chapter. These construction-related emissions would represent minor adverse additions to air emissions in the short term.

Compared with Alternative 1, Alternative 2 would produce moderate adverse impacts on nitrogen oxides emissions, moderate beneficial impacts on carbon monoxide and particulate matter emissions, and minor beneficial impacts on volatile organic compounds emissions with the use of diesel fuel in shuttle buses through 2015. There would also be a moderate, beneficial impact on sulfur dioxide emissions. Alternative 2 would achieve a major reduction in PM₁₀ emissions associated with reductions in vehicle miles traveled and road dust. In comparison with diesel fuel for shuttle buses under Alternative 2, the use of fuel cells would result in lower vehicle traffic emissions for all pollutants by 2015. Emission reductions under Alternative 2 would be the greatest for all pollutants with fuel cell technology in the shuttle bus fleet. With the use of diesel, propane, or compressed natural gas in shuttle buses, emissions of three of the four pollutants would be reduced under Alternative 2.

Air emissions associated with construction and demolition projects would be minor and occur over a relatively short-term period.

Air quality in Yosemite National Park is currently affected by internal air pollution sources such as furnaces, boilers, woodstoves, and campfires. Estimates of air emissions from these sources are provided in table 3-12 (see Vol. Ia, Chapter 3). For purposes of this analysis, these air pollution sources would exist into the future, with emission levels remaining relatively similar to existing levels. These emission sources are relatively small when compared to vehicle emissions and overall air emissions in the Yosemite region.

Other actions in the immediate area and greater San Joaquin Valley could have cumulative impacts when viewed in the context of the proposed National Park Service plans. These plans include implementing a regional transit system, such as the Yosemite Area Regional Transportation System (inter-agency), which would provide some visitors and commuting employees with an alternative to driving into the Valley, and would result in overall lower air emissions. A 2-year demonstration of YARTS began in the summer of 2000. According to Madera County Transportation Commission officials, the planned improvements for Highway 41 in both the short term (1999-2000) and long term (2014) are not likely to increase traffic to the Valley because the improvements are directed at relieving congestion and not increasing traffic volume.

Other expansion projects in the Yosemite region would affect air emissions in the region. These projects include the construction of new housing developments, such as the City of Merced General Plan, to accommodate a population expansion from 62,000 to 133,000 by 2015. Other new housing includes the Rio Mesa Area Plan on the east side of Highway 41 in Madera County, with 29,000 housing units over 100 years, and a University of California, Merced campus that would accommodate 31,500 residents and 31,600 students. New lodging projects with approximately 725 new guest rooms are also planned for the Yosemite region. Collectively, these developments would result in additional vehicle travel and associated air emissions in the region.

Growth plans in the Yosemite region represent an approximately 30% increase in the estimated population of Merced County in the region and a 25% increase for Madera County. These population increases would have associated increases in overall vehicle population and in vehicle travel and emissions. Considered with the moderate, adverse impact resulting from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the region, Alternative 2 effects in Yosemite National Park would remain moderate and beneficial

Construction emissions associated with some of the projects under Alternative 2 may be coincidental with emissions generated by the some of the construction associated with development in the Yosemite region. However, this would be a temporary condition only where construction is conducted in the same local area. An example would be new National Park Service and concessioner housing construction in El Portal, which may be conducted concurrently with construction of new commercial lodging in El Portal.

Impacts are described as levels of risk to human life and property, and are based on the facility categories defined in the Yosemite Valley Geologic Hazard Guidelines (see Vol. II, Appendix C) and the presence or absence of geologic hazards (rockfall) as mapped by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS 1998).

This impact analysis was completed for only those areas currently within the talus slope and shadow line zones in the Valley. Rockfall hazards would likely be long term and permanent. The potential for rockfall is ongoing, as this natural process continues to occur in Yosemite Valley. With the exception of the Arch Rock Entrance Station, there are no permanent structures planned for the area between Yosemite Valley and El Portal. Also, traffic along the roadway in this area is considered transitory and not a permanent population. The transitory nature of the traffic allows little exposure at any one time to potential geologic hazards. For these reasons, this area was not included in the analysis of geologic hazards for Yosemite Valley. Out-of-Valley areas were not included in the analysis. The relative risk of rockfall in these areas is negligible due to the lack of evidence of past rockfall events in these areas.

All of the Housekeeping Camp facilities and the LeConte Memorial Lodge are within the talus slope zone. Under this alternative, the occupancy category and location of these facilities would not change. The LeConte Memorial Lodge is standard occupancy and a historic structure; thus, the impact would be adverse and moderate. Housekeeping Camp (standard occupancy) would be reduced by 164 units, thus reducing the density of individuals and facilities within the shadow line zone. The net impact of this action would be beneficial and moderate due to the reduction in density of individuals within the shadow line zone.

Facilities, specifically tent cabins, are proposed to be removed from the talus slope zone. Proposed new development and redevelopment would be both within and outside the shadow line zone. This is consistent with the Yosemite Valley Geologic Hazard Guidelines.

A Curry Village fire station, an essential category facility, and one of two to replace the existing Yosemite Village fire station in the talus slope zone, would be located outside talus slope and shadow line zones. This action would be beneficial and would reduce the risk to negligible.

Numerous visitor and employee facilities are located within Curry Village. This alternative calls for the removal of 253 tent cabins and many other cabins from the talus slope zone, which would be a beneficial impact. The redevelopment of the guest parking areas in the talus slope and shadow line zones would also reduce risk to life and property and adhere to the Yosemite Valley Geologic Hazard Guidelines because new miscellaneous structures (parking) may be placed in any area. Employee housing proposed for the area would be constructed within the shadow line zone. All of these facilities are considered standard occupancy, except the Curry Pavilion, which is considered special occupancy. The Curry Pavilion is within the shadow line zone. Consequently, these actions would be beneficial and would reduce levels of risk to beneficial and minor, except at the Curry pavilion, where risks would remain adverse moderate.

The majority of the existing campgrounds, as well as new campsites and facilities, would be located outside of both the talus slope and the shadow line zone. A small portion of Upper Pines Campground would remain in the talus slope zone. Campgrounds are considered miscellaneous structures, and those portions of the campgrounds located in the talus slope and shadow line zones would remain, which is consistent with the Yosemite Valley Geologic Hazard Guidelines. Risks to life and property would remain as they are currently: adverse and minor.

The Ahwahnee and associated support facilities, which are considered to be in the special occupancy category, are within the shadow line zone. A small portion of the hotel parking lot is within the talus slope zone. Retaining existing conditions would be an adverse effect. This action is consistent with the Yosemite Valley Geologic Hazard Guidelines; thus, risk to life and property would remain as they are currently: adverse and moderate.

The entire Yosemite Village development is within the shadow line zone, and approximately one-half of the area is within the talus slope zone. This alternative would relocate several essential facilities (law enforcement, jail, communication center) and special occupancy facilities (visitor center and auditoriums) from the talus slope zone to areas outside of the shadow line zone; and would eliminate the dental clinic and one hazardous facility category (fuel storage). The essential category facilities, the medical clinic and court, would remain within the talus slope zone, because there are no practicable alternative locations; however, the Yosemite Village fire station would be relocated from the talus slope zone to the shadow line zone. These adverse risks would remain major. Numerous standard occupancy facilities would remain both within the talus slope and shadow line zones (employee housing, maintenance facilities, retail sales, post office), which would be consistent with the Yosemite Valley Geologic Hazard Guidelines. Under this alternative, actions would lower the density of facilities within both the talus slope and shadow line zones. A portion of parking at Yosemite Village would be within the shadow line zone. Actions within the Yosemite Village area are considered beneficial, and would reduce risks to moderate.

Existing and proposed new lodge buildings are considered standard occupancy facilities. Proposed buildings would be in the shadow line zone, and their location and functions would be consistent with the Yosemite Valley Geologic Hazard Guidelines. These actions would be adverse due to the increase in density within the shadow line zone, but risks would remain moderate.

Existing conditions at Camp 4 (Sunnyside Campground) and the proposed expansion of the campground are within the shadow line zone. This is consistent with the Yosemite Valley Geologic Hazard Guidelines. Although the density of individuals within the shadow line zone would increase, the adverse risks would remain minor.

All existing, rebuilt, and proposed facilities at Yosemite Falls (i.e., trails, bridges, comfort station, and shuttle bus stop) can be located anywhere; therefore, their location is not a geologic hazard issue. However, the majority of the development would be outside the talus slope and shadow line zones. The parking lot would be removed, and the comfort station would be relocated outside the shadow line zone, thus reducing the risk to life and property. Under this alternative, actions would be beneficial, and risks would be minor.

Currently no facilities are within the talus slope or shadow line zones in this area. Consequently, risk of adverse effects from rockfall would be negligible.

Under this alternative, a traffic check station may be developed, a miscellaneous facility, which would be within the shadow line zone. Consequently, the impact would be adverse, and risks would be minor.

As previously stated, regardless of the number of relocations or removal of facilities proposed, there would always be potential for adverse impacts on life and property due to geologic hazards within the Valley. However, under Alternative 2, the level of risk to life and property would be reduced by decreasing the density of standard occupancy structures from the talus slope zone, primarily from the Curry Village and Housekeeping Camp areas. In addition, essential facilities, one hazardous facility, and two special occupancy facilities would be relocated out of the talus slope and shadow line zones. Overall, actions would be considered beneficial, and major risks would be reduced to moderate due to a reduction in the density of individuals and facilities in the talus slope zone.

Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects could have a cumulative effect, in conjunction with impacts of Alternative 2, if such projects would affect the characteristics of the geologic resource; specifically, the steep granite walls and drainage systems within Yosemite Valley. Risks associated with the Indian Cultural Center cannot be evaluated because the occupancy category has not yet been determined; however, it would be located within the shadow line zone. These buildings are likely to be categorized as standard occupancy, and their placement would be consistent with the Yosemite Valley Geologic Hazard Guidelines. Past and present actions, which at times require the use of explosives for trail maintenance or road work, could potentially trigger rockfall events; this would be an adverse impact. Risks of such impacts would be evaluated before decisions concerning the type of work to be undertaken would be made. No reasonably foreseeable future projects (see Vol. II, Appendix H) would impact or change the geologic structure of the granite walls within Yosemite Valley. The park uses explosives guidelines; if these guidelines are applied consistently and effects of blasting are monitored, the cumulative impacts would not increase the level of risk at facilities in the Valley.

Under this alternative, a total of 140 acres of developed land would be restored to natural conditions, thus improving the scenic quality of Yosemite Valley. Proposed restoration and development (in acres) within each scenic category are found in table 4-35 (see Vol. Ic, plate F). The primary improvements within the A Scenic category would be the restoration of a large tract of highly valued resources along the Merced River, specifically the former Upper and Lower River Campgrounds, North Pines Campground, portions of Lower Pines Campground, and Housekeeping Camp. Roads would also be removed from Ahwahnee and Stoneman Meadows . These actions would result in long-term, major, beneficial impacts.

New development (71 acres) that would be developed outside of existing development, would principally be in and adjacent to the Yosemite Village, Yosemite Lodge, and Curry Village areas in the east Valley. In the west Valley, new development would include the establishment of a picnic area in the vicinity of El Capitan (North American Wall) and a traffic check station on Southside Drive at El Capitan crossover, all of which are within the A Scenic category. These facilities would be constructed in a manner to minimize intrusions on scenic features. New development would result in long-term, moderate, adverse impacts.

Although there would be 71 acres of new development within the Valley, there would be a net decrease in the amount of development in the Valley of 71 acres. The overall impact of this alternative on scenic resources would be long-term, moderate, and beneficial due to this large-scale restoration, mostly within the A Scenic category.

Table 4-36 lists the impacts on each vantage point (vantage points are site-specific locations that have either been designed for or provide specific opportunities for visitors to view the scenery). All impacts are long term in duration. Table 4-37 lists the impacts on the 11 most important scenic features within the Valley. All impacts would be long term.

Under this alternative, three out-of-Valley parking facilities would be constructed (Badger Pass, El Portal, and Hazel Green or Foresta); facilities would be expanded at each entrance station; housing at Wawona would be increased; and housing and administrative facilities in El Portal would be increased. The parking facility at Badger Pass would have a long-term, minor, adverse impact, since a parking facility already exists there. The construction of the Hazel Green parking facility would not be visible from the Big Oak Flat Road or any scenic turnouts along the road, and thus would have a localized, long-term, minor, and adverse impact. A Foresta parking facility would have a long-term, moderate impact. Increased housing in the Wawona area would have a long-term, adverse, yet minor impact, because it could be viewed only from nearby locations. In El Portal, the impact of placing parking and administrative facilities would be long-term, minor, and adverse, because actions would be visible from Highway 140 as the visitor approaches Yosemite National Park. The expansion of entrance station facilities would be mitigated through design, and the impacts would be long-term, minor, and adverse because they would cause new intrusions to views at already developed locations.

This alternative would have an overall long-term, major, beneficial impact on the scenic quality of Yosemite Valley. Although there would be 71 acres of new development, that development would be adjacent to existing developed areas that may overshadow new development. Mitigation measures (see Vol. IA, Chapter 2, Scenic) would be applied to lessen impacts where practicable. There would be a net decrease of 71 acres in the development area within Yosemite Valley. Of the 140 acres of restoration, the majority are within the A Scenic category. The majority of the actions would result in a net improvement of the scenery associated with viewing scenic features and the scene as viewed from vantage points, especially in east Valley, where there is the greatest opportunity to view the greatest number of scenic features from individual locations. No visual intrusions would occur from the Tunnel View vantage point. Collectively, there would be long-term, adverse, and minor impacts in all out-of-Valley locations; however, impacts in these areas contribute directly to the improvement of the scenery within the Valley.

Yosemite Valley would remain one of the world’s premier landscapes. The amount of intrusion into Yosemite Valley scenery would be reduced and consolidated in the east Valley.

In the analysis of cumulative impacts on scenic resources, scenic impacts in Yosemite Valley are evaluated as part of the larger set of scenic resources that lie within Yosemite National Park and in proximity to park boundaries. Impacts on scenic resources outside of Yosemite Valley were determined by considering the number, nature, and scale of human developments that would interrupt the natural scene.

The visitor could expect to encounter a considerable number of construction projects when approaching Yosemite Valley by major access roads. These projects would have short-term, construction-related impacts on scenic resources and are not expected to have long-term, adverse impacts. There could be permanent, moderate, adverse impacts on scenic resources outside the park border on major access roads due to proposed construction of new guest lodging and conference facilities.

Projects approved or planned that could impact scenic resources within Yosemite National Park or close to park boundaries include:

The amount of human development could increase substantially just outside of park borders near entrance stations due to proposed construction of new guest lodging and conference facilities.

In Yosemite Valley, the Merced River at Eagle Creek Ecological Restoration Project would restore degraded riparian habitat. This would be a long-term, beneficial effect on scenic resources in Yosemite Valley, though of minor benefit due to the localized nature of the project.

The El Portal Road Improvement project would have a short-term, major, adverse impact on scenic resources between El Portal and Yosemite Valley. This impact is expected to be temporary, because cut-and-fill slopes revegetate.

In El Portal, the Yosemite View Parcel Land Exchange (NPS) could result in a loss of undeveloped riverside land. This would be a long-term, moderate, adverse effect on scenic resources due to the development of a site that is currently in a natural state.

The Mariposa Grove Roadway Improvement and Giant Sequoia Restoration (NPS), the Tuolumne Meadows Water and Wastewater Improvements (NPS), and the South Fork Merced River Bridge Replacement (NPS) are expected to have short-term, major, and adverse construction-related impacts on scenic resources, and long-term, minor, adverse impacts.

Definitive actions in the Merced River Plan, Fire Management Plan Update, Tuolumne Meadows Development Concept Plan, the Tuolumne Wild and Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan, and the Mariposa Grove Roadway Improvement and Giant Sequoia Restoration (NPS) cannot be determined, because it is unclear to what extent these plans would be implemented or impact scenic resources in the park. Actions within these plans are likely to cause long-term, beneficial impacts because these efforts would generally consider scenic values when evaluating a range of alternatives.

Alternative 2, in conjunction with the impacts of reasonably foreseeable areawide projects, would result in a long-term, major, beneficial, cumulative impact, primarily due to the restoration of A and B Scenic resources in the Valley.

Impacts to archeological resources are considered permanent, unless otherwise noted.

Undertakings proposed in the vicinity of Yosemite Lodge would involve major grading, trenching, and other earthmoving activities that would likely disturb intact deposits at all or portions of four archeological sites (prehistoric/historic Indian habitation sites with moderate to high data potential). Actions include constructing parking lots and lodging units, realigning access roads and Northside Drive, placing utilities, and rehabilitating natural areas. Data recovery carried out in accordance with the Yosemite Programmatic Agreement (see Vol. II, Appendix D) would retrieve any important information from disturbed archeological resources, thereby reducing the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Proposed undertakings consist of constructing a shuttle stop and restroom, realigning/rehabilitating trails and bridges, and removing the parking area and restroom. The proposed actions would involve varying degrees of grading, excavation, and trenching, with the potential to disturb up to four known archeological sites. The sites consist of two prehistoric/historic Indian sites with moderate data potential, and two historic sites (a historic dump and the Hutchings Sawmill site) with unknown data potential. Imported fill material could cover one of the archeological sites, thereby protecting it from additional disturbance. Through careful project design and subsequent site-specific environmental compliance, every effort would be made to avoid known archeological sites. Should this prove impossible, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information prior to construction, thereby reducing the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor or negligible.

Surface conditions on a portion of one site would be restored to natural conditions with the implementation of this action. As such, impacts associated with visitor use would be avoided or reduced. This would ultimately result in a long-term, minor, beneficial impact.

Relocating the Superintendent’s House (Residence 1) could disturb an intact prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation site with high data potential. Careful project design, archeological monitoring, and possible data recovery carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Proposed undertakings also include redesigning the National Park Service Maintenance area; rehabilitating the Yosemite Village housing area; constructing a new fire station; removing picnic areas; and constructing a day-visitor parking lot, transit facility, and visitor center. These actions would involve grading, trenching, and other earthmoving activities that would potentially disturb portions of two prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation sites. Site data potentials range between low and high. Data recovery to retrieve important information, conducted in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor. The burial area in Yosemite Village that is currently paved and used for materials staging would be restored to a natural condition and protected from future development. All work in the vicinity of the burial area would be carefully designed to avoid disturbing intact deposits, and would be monitored by archeologists and representatives of culturally associated American Indian tribes. Thus, negligible impacts would occur.

Surface conditions on a portion of one site would be restored to natural conditions with the implementation of this action. As such, long-term impacts associated with visitor use would be avoided or reduced. This would ultimately result in a minor, beneficial impact.

Redesign of the parking lot and rehabilitation of the employee dormitory at The Ahwahnee would involve grading and trenching that would potentially disturb a portion of an intact deposit at a prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation site with high data potential. Any unavoidable impacts to archeological resources would be major in intensity; however, impacts would be reduced in intensity from major to minor through data recovery in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement.

Removing 164 units from Housekeeping Camp would involve grading and trenching that would potentially disturb intact deposits at a prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation site with moderate data potential. Careful project design and data recovery in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Intact archeological deposits at 10 sites could be disturbed by: grading, trenching, and other earthmoving activities associated with redeveloping Lower Pines and Upper Pines Campgrounds; constructing a new amphitheater at the location of the concessioner stable parking lot; constructing new walk-in, backpacker, and group campgrounds; and removing the existing Backpacker and Group Campgrounds and restoring these areas to natural conditions. These sites consist of prehistoric and historic American Indian habitation sites, ranging in data potential from low to high. Careful site design and data recovery to retrieve important information, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would reduce the intensity of long-term, adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Surface conditions at two of these sites and on a portion of a third would be restored to natural conditions with the implementation of this action. As such, long-term impacts associated with visitor use would be reduced. This would ultimately result in minor, beneficial impacts to these resources.

Placement of campground facilities within the immediate vicinity of known archeological resources could result in long-term, minor, adverse impacts associated with visitor use, including artifact collection and accelerated soil loss. Given the potential for these impacts, sites subject to these actions would be monitored according to the Visitor Experience and Resource Protection Program as outlined in Chapter 2. Through this monitoring program, threats and disturbances would be noted. Every effort would be made to avoid or reduce adverse impacts through changes in visitor access, relocation of facilities, or archeological data recovery carried out according to the stipulations of the Programmatic Agreement.

Two small, disturbed archeological sites at Curry Village (one prehistoric site and one historic dump) with unknown data potential, could be impacted by removing facilities. Through careful design and archeological monitoring, it may be possible to avoid site impacts. If sites could not be avoided, data recovery carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Removing Sugar Pine Bridge would involve earthmoving activities that would possibly disturb a prehistoric American Indian habitation site with high data potential. Data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Removing the roads through Stoneman Meadow would not impact any known archeological resources. Depending on final project design, realigning or reconstructing the roads and utilities through Bridalveil, El Capitan, and Cook’s Meadows would involve grading and trenching that would potentially disturb portions of up to four prehistoric American Indian sites (one with a historic-period Indian component) and three historic sites. The data potential of the prehistoric sites ranges from low to high, and the data potential of the historic sites is unknown. Every effort would be made to avoid known archeological sites. If sites could not be avoided, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor or negligible.

Constructing a vehicle check station near El Capitan crossover would involve grading that would disturb portions of a prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation site with high data potential, including historic-era deposits with unknown data potential. Through careful project design, every effort would be made to avoid known archeological sites. If sites could not be avoided, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Widening Southside Drive between El Capitan Bridge and Curry Village (with realignment at the Sentinel Bridge intersection, as well as other minor realignments) would involve grading that would disturb portions of one small prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation site with high data potential; one large prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation site with moderate data potential; and one large prehistoric/historic American Indian and Euro-American site with moderate data potential. If sites could not be avoided, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Establishing a new multi-use paved trail between Swinging Bridge and El Capitan Bridge south of and adjacent to Southside Drive would involve minor grading that would impact portions of two prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation sites (one with historic-era deposits). One of these sites contains high data potential, and one contains moderate data potential. Data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Establishing a new multi-use paved trail between the northern abutment of Sentinel Bridge and Yosemite Village would involve minor grading that could impact an archeological site exhibiting both prehistoric and historic components with high data potential. The park would strive to avoid adverse impacts by siting the trail in such a way as to avoid impacting the site. However, if such impacts were unavoidable, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Realigning the multi-use paved trail between Yosemite Village and Mirror Lake would involve minor grading that would disturb portions of one prehistoric American Indian site with high data potential. Data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Establishing a new multi-use paved trail between The Ahwahnee and the existing bicycle path to Mirror Lake would involve minor grading that could impact four archeological sites. All four of these sites contain both prehistoric and historic components. Three of the four have high data potential, while the fourth has moderate data potential. The park would strive to avoid adverse impacts by siting the trail in such a way as to avoid impacting the site. However, if such impacts were unavoidable, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Placement of multi-use paved trails within the immediate vicinity of known archeological resources could result in long-term, minor, adverse impacts associated with visitor use, including artifact collection and accelerated soil loss. Given the potential for these impacts, sites subject to these actions would be monitored according to the Visitor Experience and Resource Protection program as outlined in Chapter 2. Through this monitoring program, threats and disturbances would be noted. Every effort would be made to avoid or reduce adverse impacts through changes in visitor access, relocation of facilities, or archeological data recovery carried out according to the stipulations of the Programmatic Agreement.

Only one of the proposed Valley picnic area actions could potentially impact a known archeological resource, a prehistoric American Indian habitation site with high data potential. The park would strive to avoid or minimize impacts to this resource during the site-specific design phase. However, if impacts could not be avoided, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible. Given that this particular action ultimately restricts visitor use in the site vicinity, long-term impacts associated with current conditions (e.g., vandalism, increased erosion) would be lessened. This action thus results in minor, beneficial impacts on the resource. Potential adverse impacts to know archeological sites in Yosemite Valley are shown in table 4-38.

Table 4-38 Potential Adverse Impacts to Known Sites in Yosemite Valley (Alternative 2)
Number of Sites with High Data Potential	Number of Sites with Moderate Data Potential	Number of Sites with Low Data Potential	Number of Sites with Unknown Data Potential
11	13	5	4

Out-of-Valley

El Portal

The impact analysis presented below is based on general land-use planning actions for El Portal. The National Park Service would undertake site-specific design studies and environmental review to evaluate options for new housing and administrative facilities in El Portal. As necessary, these studies would include additional archeological inventory and testing. The National Park Service would initiate further consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer, the culturally associated American Indian tribes, and the public as provided for in the Programmatic Agreement. A complete and detailed assessment of impacts to archeological resources would be presented as part of that review.

Several actions at Old El Portal and Village Center (e.g., constructing a multi-use paved trail, employee housing, and support facilities), would disturb or destroy portions of up to 14 prehistoric and historic-era archeological sites (11 of the sites have moderate data potential, one has low data potential, and two have unknown data potential). If sites could not be avoided, data recovery prior to construction, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Developing day-visitor and employee parking in the Middle Road area would involve extensive grading and earthmoving activities, which would disturb major portions of two archeological sites, one prehistoric American Indian habitation site with historic-era deposits containing low data potential, and one historic-era site with unknown data potential. If these sites could not be avoided, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor or negligible.

Constructing National Park Service and concessioner administrative facilities at Railroad Flat would involve extensive grading, trenching, and excavation, with the potential to disturb archeological deposits at portions of one prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation site with low data potential. Data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Constructing housing facilities (134 beds) at Hillside East and West would involve extensive grading, excavation, and trenching that would destroy major portions of an intact prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation site (with some Euro-American deposits) with high data potential. Any unavoidable impacts to archeological resources would be major in intensity; however, the impacts would be reduced in intensity from major to moderate through a site-specific data recovery program, developed in consultation with the National Park Service, the State Historic Preservation Officer, and with local, culturally associated American Indian tribes.

Constructing single-family homes and a day care center at Rancheria Flat would entail grading, trenching, and excavation, potentially disturbing intact archeological deposits at two archeological sites with moderate data potential. Data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Constructing high-density housing and support facilities at Hennessey’s Ranch would disturb a prehistoric American Indian habitation site and part of a historic-era ranch, both of which were impacted when the Trailer Village was constructed; data potential of this site is unknown. If sites could not be avoided, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of any adverse impacts.

Removing an abandoned wastewater treatment plant and restoring the area to natural conditions would be carefully designed to avoid disturbing intact areas of a prehistoric American Indian habitation site and burial area. These actions would be monitored by archeologists and representatives from culturally associated American Indian tribes, in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, and negligible impacts to archeological resources would be anticipated. Since surface conditions would be restored to natural conditions, long-term impacts associated with the presence of this facility would be reduced. This would ultimately result in a long-term, minor, beneficial impact.

The Johnny Wilson Ranch (Riverside area), previously proposed for high-density housing (NPS 1996a), would not be developed. Instead, these archeological sites and burial area would continue to be relatively inaccessible.

Foresta and McCauley Ranch

Constructing National Park Service and concessioner stables, and National Park Service parkwide trails operational facilities at McCauley Ranch, would disturb archeological deposits at a portion of a large prehistoric site and historic-era ranch with unknown data potential. Widening the road and possibly replacing the bridge over Crane Creek would disturb archeological deposits at portions of five prehistoric sites and one historic dump, all with unknown data potential. Grading and trenching associated with constructing new single-family homes to replace those destroyed in the 1990 A-Rock Fire at Foresta could possibly disturb intact resources, depending on location (rehabilitating the Foresta Campground would also disturb archeological deposits at a portion of an intact American Indian habitation site). Possible development of a day-visitor parking facility would not impact any known archeological sites. If sites could not be avoided, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of any adverse impacts.

Wawona

There are no archeological resources in the area proposed for additional housing development, so there would be no impacts on sites as a result of this construction.

Other Out-of-Valley Areas

Since there are no known archeological resources at Badger Pass, the trenching and grading necessary to construct day-visitor parking, as well as restroom facilities and interpretive exhibits, would not impact any archeological resources at that location.

Hazel Green is the preferred out-of-Valley parking location along the Big Oak Flat Road. The National Park Service would undertake site-specific design studies and environmental review for constructing the road from the Big Oak Flat Road to Hazel Green. If possible, the road would be designed to avoid disturbance to any archeological resources. Actions would be monitored by archeologists and associated American Indian tribes, in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement. If avoidance of archeological resources is not possible, the National Park Service would conduct archeological data recovery excavations in keeping with stipulations of the Programmatic Agreement, to retrieve important information, and thereby reduce the intensity of any adverse impacts.

Construction of a day-visitor parking lot at Hazel Green would avoid impacts to known archeological sites, based on current information. If further study indicates sites would be impacted, and that these impacts are unavoidable, the National Park Service would conduct data recovery excavations in keeping with stipulations of the Programmatic Agreement, to retrieve important information and thereby reduce the intensity of adverse impacts.

If negotiations do not work out with the private landowner, an out-of-Valley parking lot would be constructed at Foresta. This construction would not impact any known archeological resources.

Reconstructing El Portal Road between the intersection of El Portal Road/Big Oak Flat Road and Pohono Bridge would involve widening the road corridor, potentially removing or disturbing a portion of a large prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation site with high data potential. Data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from major to minor.

Removing residences at Cascades would involve minor grading and trenching that could disturb one prehistoric archeological site with unknown data potential. However, the project would be carefully designed to avoid ground disturbance in intact site areas, and would be monitored by archeologists, as stipulated in the Programmatic Agreement, to ensure site protection, and negligible impacts to archeological resources would be anticipated.

Removing the Cascades Diversion Dam would not impact any known archeological resources. Earthmoving and facility removal would be monitored by an archeologist, as stipulated in the Programmatic Agreement, in the event that historic archeological features or artifacts associated with construction and use of the dam were discovered during removal.

Since the location and design of visitor centers associated with park entrance stations are unknown at this time, it is not possible to predict the potential impacts on archeological resources. The park would conduct archeological inventories, site evaluations, and data recovery as necessary, as well as further environmental review. In accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, the National Park Service would first seek to avoid impacting any archeological resources, and would retrieve important information at sites that could not be avoided, thereby reducing the intensity of any adverse impacts.

Archeological Resources Conclusion

Proposed project actions would have varied impacts on as many as 58 archeological sites with varying intensities of impact, depending on the potential of the sites to yield significant information about prehistoric and historic lifeways, and on the nature and design of proposed development. Descriptions of low, moderate, and high data potential are included in Chapter 3, Cultural Resources (see Vol. Ia).

In all instances where identified sites could not be avoided and would be disturbed, the park would undertake data recovery in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement to retrieve important information, thereby reducing the intensity of adverse impacts. For some proposed project areas, information regarding the nature and importance of archeological resources is unknown; in these instances the park would first inventory project areas, test and evaluate the significance of identified sites, and carry out appropriate data recovery, in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, prior to construction disturbance.

Cumulative Impacts

Archeological resources are subject to damage from development, vandalism, visitor access, and natural processes. For example, 57 sites in Yosemite Valley are considered at risk from existing facility development, and the 1997 flood exposed portions of two significant sites in El Portal. Thirteen current or reasonably foreseeable design and construction projects in Yosemite (consisting of facility redesigns, construction of the Indian Cultural Center, road realignments, and utility and bridge replacements) could disturb additional archeological resources. The proposed Yosemite View Parcel Land Exchange (NPS) could remove one archeological site from federal protection, potentially leading to its destruction.

Eight additional projects under the control of surrounding state/federal agencies or communities include the construction of resort lodging (e.g., Evergreen Lodge Expansion [Tuolumne Co.], the Hazel Green Ranch [Mariposa Co.] development, Double Eagle Resort Construction at June Lake [Mono Co.]), improvements of transportation facilities (i.e., Highway 41 Extension [Madera Co.], YARTS [inter-agency]), and fire/wilderness management planning (NPS). Even though any or all of these could disturb archeological resources by the extensive grading and ground disturbance required to upgrade facilities in archeologically sensitive areas (such as river valleys and mountain meadows), the impacts on archeological resources cannot be evaluated until resource inventory and design information are available.

This alternative would contribute to the loss of regional archeological resources as a consequence of the disturbance or degradation of as many as 58 additional known archeological sites. To mitigate adverse impacts, important information contained in these sites would be recovered according to stipulations of the Programmatic Agreement. Therefore, the cumulative, adverse impacts associated with this alternative, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects would be minor.

ETHNOGRAPHIC RESOURCES

Yosemite Valley

Yosemite Lodge and Vicinity

New facility construction in previously undisturbed areas and redevelopment within existing developed areas near the Yosemite Lodge and Camp 4 (Sunnyside Campground) would disturb two traditional gathering areas, depending on site design. The proposed redesign and reconstruction of components of the main lodge complex would also continue to intrude on a historic village site. These actions would result in long-term, minor, adverse impacts on the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies for impacts to ethnographic resources. Such strategies, which could include identification of and assistance in providing access to alternative resource-gathering areas, continuing to provide access to traditional use or spiritual areas, and screening new development from traditional use areas, would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts to negligible.

The ecological restoration of the riparian corridor along Yosemite Creek and the Merced River south of Yosemite Lodge would have long-term, minor, beneficial impacts on ethnographic resources by improving conditions for the recovery of traditionally used plants.

Lower Yosemite Fall

Removing the parking lot and restroom and adding informal seating and interpretive displays would enhance the historic setting of a historic village by removing intrusive modern development. This would result in a permanent, minor, beneficial impact to a contributing element of the Valleywide ethnographic landscape.

Trail rehabilitation, bridge removal and/or rehabilitation, and shuttle bus stop and restroom construction would concentrate and potentially increase visitor use, disturbing portions of a traditional gathering area that is a contributing element of the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. This would result in long-term, minor, adverse impacts. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies to reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible. Mitigation strategies could include identifying and helping provide access to alternative resource-gathering areas; continuing to provide access to traditional use or spiritual areas; and screening new development from traditional use areas. Appropriate mitigation strategies would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Yosemite Village

Rehabilitating the historic district housing area would improve habitat conditions for California black oak, a traditionally gathered resource. Conversely, relocating the Superintendent’s House (Residence 1) to the historic district housing area would disturb a small portion of the same traditional gathering area, a contributing element of the Valleywide ethnographic landscape, thus causing long-term, minor, adverse impacts. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement would develop appropriate mitigation strategies to reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible. Such strategies could include identifying and helping provide access to alternative resource-gathering areas; continuing to provide access to traditional use or spiritual areas; and screening new development from traditional use areas.

Constructing day-visitor parking, a transit facility, and a new visitor center at Yosemite Village could disturb or destroy two small gathering areas, depending on site design. This would be a long-term, minor, adverse impact on a contributing element of the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. It may be possible to avoid destruction through careful site design; however, the resultant changed land use in this area could make access and traditional use difficult. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies to reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible. Such strategies could include identifying and helping provide access to alternative resource-gathering areas; continuing to provide access to traditional use or spiritual areas; and screening new development from traditional use areas. Appropriate mitigation strategies would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Removing picnicking facilities at Church Bowl would remove non-historic facilities from a historic American Indian village site, resulting in permanent, minor, beneficial impacts to ethnographic resources.

Removing some facilities and redesigning the NPS Maintenance area would restore a known burial area to natural conditions, resulting in a minor, beneficial impact to ethnographic resources.

The Ahwahnee

No ethnographic resources at The Ahwahnee would be disturbed by the proposed undertakings.

Housekeeping Camp

Removing some non-historic lodging units would have negligible impacts on ethnographic resources by removing some modern intrusions from a historic village.

Campgrounds

Removing campsites at Upper River, Lower River, Lower Pines, North Pines, Backpackers, and Group Campgrounds would have long-term, moderate, beneficial impacts on the ethnographic landscape by removing concentrated visitor use and restoring natural habitat at two traditional gathering areas, contributing elements of the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. Redesigning the Lower Pines Campground would perpetuate development and visitor use in a portion of a traditional gathering area. Constructing new Backpacker and Group Campgrounds and a corral would bring new development to an area figuring in oral tradition as home to spirits, a contributing element of the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. Constructing a new walk-to campground near Tenaya Creek would disturb a small portion of one traditional gathering area; both are contributing elements of the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. Redeveloping Upper Pines Campground would perpetuate modern development at a historic village site. All these actions would have long-term, moderate, adverse impacts on the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies to reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor or negligible. Such strategies could include identifying and helping provide access to alternative resource-gathering areas; continuing to provide access to traditional use or spiritual areas; and screening new development from traditional use areas.

Curry Village

Redesigning and relocating lodging facilities would have negligible additional impacts on the historic village area in an existing disturbed site.

Merced River Restoration

Removing Sugar Pine and Stoneman Bridges, and the raised causeway between Sugar Pine and Ahwahnee Bridges, would have long-term, minor, beneficial impacts by partly restoring habitat in a traditional gathering area, a contributing element of the ethnographic landscape. This might allow the recovery of traditionally used plants and enhance their availability for procurement.

Meadow Restoration

Removing or realigning roads and utilities through Cook’s, Stoneman, Bridalveil, and El Capitan Meadows would potentially enhance habitat for traditionally gathered plants, having minor beneficial, impacts to the Valleywide ethnographic landscape.

Circulation Changes

Constructing a traffic check station near El Capitan crossover would have permanent minor, adverse impacts on the ethnographic landscape by disturbing a portion of historic village area. Realigning Southside Drive south of Sentinel Bridge would also disturb a portion of a historic village area. These actions would result in permanent, minor, adverse impacts to the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies for impacts to ethnographic resources. Such strategies would include recovering important archeological data, as well as any other measures identified during consultation to reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Widening Southside Drive between El Capitan Bridge and Curry Village would disturb portions of four historic villages, and possibly disturb resources at one traditional gathering area, although it might be possible to avoid this resource through careful site design. These actions would result in permanent, minor, adverse impacts to the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies for impacts to ethnographic resources. Such strategies, which could include identifying and helping provide access to alternative resource-gathering areas, continuing to provide access to traditional use or spiritual areas, and screening new development from traditional use areas, would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Actions and related impacts associated with constructing multi-use paved trails in the east Valley would disturb portions of two gathering areas, and constructing a new multi-use trail between Swinging Bridge and El Capitan Bridge could disturb two historic village areas, causing both long-term and permanent minor, adverse impacts to the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in keeping with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigating strategies for impacts to ethnographic resources. Such strategies could include recovering important archeological data, as well as any other measures identified during consultation, which would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

General Valley Actions

Removing parking lots and constructing multi-use paved trails and some group picnic sites at Sentinel Beach, El Capitan, and Cathedral Beach Picnic Areas would concentrate visitor use near and possibly disturb part of a traditional site for gathering, which is a contributing element of the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. These actions would result in a long-term, minor, adverse impact. Establishing a new picnic area in the vicinity of El Capitan would add facilities and increase visitor use in proximity to a historic village site, resulting in permanent, minor, adverse impacts to the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies for impacts to ethnographic resources. Such strategies could include identifying and helping provide access to alternative resource-gathering areas; continuing to provide access to traditional use or spiritual areas; designing and screening sites carefully; recovering important archeological data; and using any other measures identified during consultation, which would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Out-of-Valley Resources

El Portal

The impact analysis presented below is based on general land use planning actions for El Portal, and is based on incomplete information about the location and significance of ethnographic properties. The National Park Service would undertake site-specific design studies and environmental review to evaluate options for new housing and administrative facilities in El Portal. These studies would include, as necessary, additional resource surveys (e.g., ethnographic resources inventory and evaluation). The National Park Service would initiate further consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office, the culturally associated American Indian tribes, and the public, as provided for in the Programmatic Agreement. A complete and detailed assessment of impacts to ethnographic resources would be presented as part of that review.

Constructing housing facilities at Hillside East and West would destroy a large portion of historic village area. The portions of this historic village site that are known to contain human burials would be protected from development. a site-specific data recovery program, negotiated between the National Park Service, the California State Historic Preservation Office, and local culturally associated American Indian tribes would recover important archeological information. In addition, the park would undertake any other measures identified during consultation that would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts. Thus, the intensity of permanent, adverse impacts would be reduced from major to moderate.

Constructing single-family homes, apartments, and housing support facilities at Rancheria Flat, Hennessey’s Ranch, and Old El Portal, as well as administrative facilities at Railroad Flat, would disturb or destroy portions of at least three traditional gathering areas. These actions would result in long-term, minor, adverse impacts on ethnographic resources. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies to reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Removing the abandoned wastewater treatment facility would have permanent, moderate, beneficial impacts on a prehistoric village and burial area by eliminating modern, intrusive development. To protect these intact deposits and burials, which are held in high regard by culturally associated American Indians, removal of the facility would be carefully designed and implemented. The work would be monitored by representatives from culturally associated American Indian tribes to ensure protection of any objects or remains subject to Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) provisions.

Other Out-of-Valley Areas

The proposed undertakings in Foresta, McCauley Ranch, Wawona, Hazel Green, Badger Pass, and at the park entrance stations would have unknown impacts on ethnographic resources, since there is not enough information about the location and significance of ethnographic resources to assess the nature and intensity of impacts. However, rehabilitating the Foresta Campground would occur in an area used for traditional ceremonies. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies to reduce the intensity of any adverse impacts. In addition, this undertaking would be designed to avoid the most sensitive areas, and scheduled administrative use of the campground would not overlap with the campground’s use for traditional activities. Therefore, the intensity of adverse impacts would be negligible.

The National Park Service consulted with the American Indian Council of Mariposa County, Inc. during planning and preliminary design for El Portal Road reconstruction. The proposed reconstruction of the easternmost portion of the road, the removal of the Cascades Diversion Dam and screenhouse, and the removal of the Cascades residences would not impact any known ethnographic resources.

Ethnographic Resources Conclusion

Actions proposed in this alternative would have varied adverse and beneficial impacts (from potentially major to negligible), depending in part on the nature and design of proposed development and the sensitivity of the different traditional use areas. In Yosemite Valley, proposed actions would disturb or destroy parts of up to eleven traditional gathering areas; add or expand modern development at ten historic village areas; and add development in at least one area figuring in oral traditions. However, facilities removal and ecological restoration would benefit up to five traditional gathering areas by enhancing conditions for plant resources; and would remove modern development from two historic village areas. In general, actions in Yosemite Valley would have long-term, minor, adverse impacts to the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. In El Portal, proposed actions are designed to maximize administrative, park operations, and residential development. The precise nature and intensity of adverse impacts to ethnographic resources in El Portal, Wawona, Foresta, McCauley Ranch, and other out-of-Valley areas are unknown.

In El Portal, however, proposed actions would most likely have long-term or permanent, moderate to major, adverse impacts by destroying portions of historic villages and traditional gathering areas, and by adding concentrated residential use in some areas that are currently undeveloped. As in Yosemite Valley and other park areas, known burial areas would be protected from disturbance, and modern facilities in burial areas would be removed. The National Park Service would conduct an ethnographic resources inventory and evaluation for El Portal, as well as other out-of-Valley areas, and would continue consulting with culturally associated American Indian tribes to seek ways to avoid, minimize, and mitigate potential adverse impacts to ethnographic resources. These measures could include setting aside some areas for traditional uses; designing new development to avoid the most sensitive areas; screening development from traditional use areas; and directing visitor and residential use away from sensitive areas.

Cumulative Impacts

The cumulative impacts on ethnographic resources would be similar to those described for Alternative 1, except seven current or reasonably foreseeable future management plans, and design/construction projects in Yosemite National Park (construction of the Indian Cultural Center, redesign of facilities, utility replacement, road realignment, and fire management planning) could result in both adverse and beneficial impacts to additional ethnographic resources. Implementing this alternative would add to the loss of ethnographic resources in the region through the disturbance or degradation of traditional plant-gathering areas, historic village sites, and sacred/spiritual locations. It is possible that impacts to gathering areas in El Portal would have a more profound regional impact, due to the potential loss of these relatively unique resources, although a formal inventory and evaluation of these resources is necessary. Adverse impacts would be mitigated as much as possible through careful site design; ongoing consultations with culturally associated American Indian tribes; and the possible designation of alternative gathering areas. Therefore, minor to moderate, cumulative impacts would accrue from implementing this alternative, in conjunction with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future undertakings.