American Covenant by Michael A. Soukup & Gary E. Machlis

Author:Michael A. Soukup & Gary E. Machlis
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Yale University Press

Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument. A key element in successful park management is continuous investment in science staff for the long-term accumulation and synthesis of basic data into usable knowledge. (Courtesy of the U.S. National Park Service)

7

Correcting Course

America needs a National Park Service ready for tomorrow. Present and future perils and opportunities require the NPS to act in creative, decisive, and effective ways in order to pass America’s covenant on to future generations. The days when it sufficed to provide comfortable visitor services and have worthy generalist rangers watch over resources are gone. Success in protecting our national parks and passing them forward unimpaired will require stellar efforts from a highly sophisticated and professional NPS. To have national parks unimpaired will require a singular vision resolutely shared by the executive branch of our government and Congress in the face of global-scale changes, outside-the-park threats, and entrenched interests. This will require engagement across the entire spectrum of the American public, and it will require leadership from all who have the resources (intellectual, technical, and financial) to push national heritage protection to its highest calling.

These are not trivial or easily met requirements. Each requires surmounting long traditions, negative precedents, locked-in mindsets, and institutional inertia. The difficulties of inter- and intra-organizational change grow with size and complexity, so we begin with a discussion of the retooling needed within the National Park Service.

Future success starts with broadening the agency’s culture to include the attributes necessary to achieve its mission in times of rapid change. This, too, is not easily done, nor is it likely to be lasting unless extraordinary steps are taken. Such steps will not likely come from within the NPS. We have learned this from experience, with successes and setbacks. Here are some of the approaches we believe are most needed.

Science for Parks, Parks for Science

An example of resistance to change is reflected in the NPS history of scientific capability and the role of science in parks. In the last half of the twentieth century over a dozen authoritative critiques exposed the need for an appropriate presence and role for science in national parks. These critiques were most often prompted by significant, widely reported, and embarrassing failures that resulted from not understanding the fundamentals of natural resources issues.

In 1963, the National Academy of Sciences’ National Research Council found: “It is inconceivable to this Committee that property so unique and valuable as the national parks, used by such a large number of people, and regarded internationally as one of the finest examples of our national spirit, should not be provided with sufficient competent research scientists in natural history as elementary insurance for the preservation and best use of parks.” They added: “The Committee was shocked to learn that for the year 1962 the research staff (including the Chief Naturalist and field men in natural history) was limited to 10 people and that the Service budget for natural history research was $28,000—about the cost of one campground comfort station.”1

By 1992, not much had changed.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.