|
National Park Service
U.S. Department of the Interior
Criteria for Parklands
Throughout the Nation, people are working to conserve natural resources,
protect historic sites, and to provide recreational opportunities for
a growing population. Many communities also are looking for ways to combine
conservation with efforts to attract visitors who will help support the
local economy. The National Park Service is responsible for carefully
screening proposals for new park units to assure that only the most outstanding
resources are added to the National Park System. Regardless of economic
considerations or other factors, a new national park area must meet criteria
for national significance, suitability, and feasibility. Various other
management options are also weighed. For those with proposals for consideration,
this page explains the criteria applied by the National Park Service in
evaluating new park proposals, outlines the study process, and lists some
of the other ways to recognize and protect important resources outside
of the National Park System.
Qualifications
How are national parks created? What qualities make an area eligible to
be a national monument, historic site, recreation area, or other units
of the National Park System? These questions are frequently asked by people
throughout the country. Some people think a scenic part of their community
deserves to be a national park. Others want national recognition for their
favorite historic house or geological formation. These sites may deserve
to be protected, but how do we decide if action should be taken at the
state or local level instead of by the federal government, and if federal
action is appropriate what agency should take the lead?
The
National Park Service has established criteria for national significance,
suitability, feasibility, and management alternatives that help answer
these questions. This page presents the criteria and the study process
established by Congress and in the National Park Service's Management
Policies. People with suggestions for new parks can use these criteria
as a yardstick to see if their proposals are likely to merit further consideration.
Units
of the National Park System are managed under mandates differing from
those guiding many other Federal, State, and local agencies. The National
Park Service is responsible for managing areas to provide for public enjoyment
in such a way that will leave resources "unimpaired for the enjoyment
of future generations". Since 1872 the National Park System has grown
to include almost 400 areas. However, the areas managed by the National
Park Service are a small part of the broader system for protecting important
places. Addition to the National Park Service is only one of many alternatives,
and the National Park Service also operates several programs that help
others preserve natural, cultural, and recreational areas outside of the
System.
The
System continues to evolve, reflecting the progression of history, new
understandings of natural systems, and changes in patterns of recreation.
Proposals for additions to the National Park System may come from the
public, state, and local officials, Indian tribes, members of Congress,
or the National Park Service. To be eligible for favorable consideration
as a unit of the National Park System, an area must possess nationally
significant natural, cultural, or recreational resources; be a suitable
and feasible addition to the system; and require direct NPS management
instead of protection by some other governmental agency or by the private
sector.
National Significance
A proposed unit will be considered nationally significant if it meets
all four of the following standards:
• it is an outstanding example of a particular type of resource.
• it possesses exceptional value of quality illustrating or interpreting
the natural or cultural themes of our Nation’s heritage.
• it offers superlative opportunities for recreation for public
use and enjoyment, or for scientific study.
• it retains a high degree of integrity as a true, accurate, and
relatively unspoiled example of the resource.
Resource
Evaluation
The following examples of natural and cultural resources are considered
in evaluating the significance of a proposal for addition to the National
Park System.
Natural Area examples may include:
• an outstanding site that illustrates the characteristics of a
landform or biotic area that is still widespread;
• a rare remnant natural landscape or biotic area of a type that
was once widespread but is now vanishing due to human settlement and development;
• a landform or biotic area that has always been extremely uncommon
in the region or Nation;
• a site that possesses exceptional diversity of ecological components
(species, communities, or habitats) or geological features (landforms,
observable manifestations of geologic processes);
• a site that contains biotic species or communities whose natural
distribution at that location makes them unusual (for example, a relatively
large population at the limit of its range or an isolated population);
• a site that harbors a concentrated population of a rare plant
or animal species, particularly one officially recognized as threatened
or endangered;
• a critical refuge that is necessary for the continued survival
of a species;
• a site that contains rare or unusually abundant fossil deposits;
• an area that has outstanding scenic qualities such as dramatic
topographic features, unusual contrasts in landforms or vegetation, spectacular
vistas, or other special landscape features;
• a site that is an invaluable ecological or geological benchmark
due to an extensive and long-term record of research and scientific discovery.
Cultural
Areas may be districts, sites, structures, or objects that possess exceptional
value or quality in illustrating or interpreting our heritage and that
possess a high degree of integrity of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association.
Specific examples include:
• a resource that is associated with events that have made a significant
contribution to and are identified with, or that outstandingly represent
the broad national patterns of United States history and from which an
understanding and appreciation of those patterns may be gained;
• a resource that is importantly associated with the lives of persons
nationally significant in the history of the United States;
• a resource that embodies distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural type specimen, exceptionally valuable for study of a period,
style, or method of construction, or represents a significant, distinctive
and exceptional entity whose components may lack individual distinction;
• a resource that is composed of integral parts of the environment
not sufficiently significant by reason of historical association or artistic
merit to warrant individual recognition but collectively composes an entity
of exceptional historical or artistic significance, or outstandingly commemorates
or illustrates a way of life or culture;
• a resource that has yielded or may be likely to yield information
of major scientific importance by revealing new cultures, or by shedding
light upon periods of occupation over large areas of the United States.
Ordinarily
cemeteries, birthplaces, graves of historical figures, properties owned
by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that
have been moved from their original locations, and reconstructed historic
buildings and properties that have achieved significance within the past
50 years are not considered to be appropriate as additions to the National
Park System unless they have transcendent importance, unless they possess
inherent architectural or artistic significance, or unless no other site
associated with that theme remains.
Many
units of the national park system have been established to recognize their
important role in providing recreational opportunities. The potential
for public use and enjoyment is an important consideration in evaluating
potential new additions to the National Park System. However, recreational
values are not evaluated independently from the natural and cultural resources
that provide the settings for recreational activities.
Suitability and Feasibility
An area that is nationally significant also must meet criteria for suitability
and feasibility to qualify as a potential addition to the National Park
System. To be suitable for inclusion in the System an area must represent
a natural or cultural theme or type of recreational resource that is not
already adequately represented in the National Park System or is not comparably
represented and protected for public enjoyment by another land-managing
entity. Adequacy of representation is determined on a case-by-case basis
by comparing the proposed area to other units in the National Park System
for differences or similarities in the character, quality, quantity, or
combination of resources, and opportunities for public enjoyment.
To
be feasible as a new unit of the National Park System an area's natural
systems and/or historic settings must be of sufficient size and appropriate
configuration to ensure long-term protection of the resources and to accommodate
public use. It must have potential for efficient administration at a reasonable
cost. Important feasibility factors include landownership, acquisition
costs, access, threats to the resource, and staff or development requirements.
Management Options
Alternatives to National Park Service management might adequately protect
resources even if they are significant, suitable, and feasible additions
to the System. Studies of potential new park units evaluate management
alternatives that may include continued management by state or local governments,
Indian tribes, the private sector, or other federal agencies; technical
or financial assistance from established programs or special projects;
management by others as a designated national natural landmark, a national
historic landmark, a national wild and scenic river, a national trail,
a biosphere reserve, a state or local park, or some other specially designated
and protected area. Alternatives involving other federal agencies include
designation of federal lands as wilderness, areas of critical environmental
concern, national conservation areas, national recreation areas, marine
or estuarine sanctuaries, and national wildlife refuges. Some areas have
been recognized by Congress as being affiliated with the National Park
System and are managed by others under terms of a cooperative agreement
with the National Park Service, but are not “units” of the
system. Additions to the National Park System will not usually be recommended
if another arrangement can provide adequate protection and opportunity
for public enjoyment.
Procedures
Areas are usually added to the National Park System by an act of Congress.
However, before Congress decides about creating a new park it needs information
about the quality of the resource and whether it meets established criteria.
The National Park Service answers such questions by conducting studies
that gather basic data about an area to determine its level of significance.
If an area meets the standards of national significance, additional information
is gathered about its suitability and feasibility as a park unit and alternatives
for management and protection. If an area does not meet the standards
of national significance, the National Park Service will suggest other
appropriate state, local, or private actions. The following summary outlines
basic steps in the study process, including opportunities for public involvement,
the role of Congress in setting park boundaries and deciding what uses
will be allowed in a new park, and other special designations that may
be available for resources of state, local, or national significance.
Study Process
Criteria for parklands are applied by the professional staff of the National
Park Service. The first step is usually a reconnaissance survey to collect
basic information about a proposal and assess the resource's significance.
If the area appears to have some potential as a unit of the National Park
System, Congress will be asked to authorize a detailed study of management
options.
The
1998, National Parks Omnibus Management Act established a new process
for identifying and authorizing studies of new units. The National Park
Service periodically sends a list of study candidates to Congress. Individual
members of Congress propose study authorizations, and Congress decides
which studies should be conducted. The National Park Service can collect
some basic information to determine if an area is a good candidate for
study, before a complete study for inclusion in the National Park System
is initiated it must be authorized by a specific act of Congress.
Studies
are conducted in consultation with other interested federal, state, and
local agencies, Indian tribes, and the public. The format for public involvement
is determined by the study team considering the type of resource and level
of interest in the proposal. The public may be invited to participate
through informal contacts, workshops, meetings, and opportunities to review
draft documents. At least one public meeting in the vicinity of the study
area is required.
Boundaries
Studies of potential new park units discuss various boundary configurations.
Selection of a park boundary is often a compromise between the ideal and
what is practical considering costs and other factors. The National Park
Service also considers the need for boundary adjustments as part of the
planning process for existing units of the National Park System. The National
Park Service has broad authority to study potential adjustments in the
boundaries of existing parks and does not need specific authority from
Congress to evaluate boundary adjustments.
Boundary
studies are often similar to studies of potential new parks but apply
somewhat different criteria. Boundary revisions may be recommended to
include significant features or opportunities for public enjoyment related
to the purposes of the park, to address operational and management issues
such as access and boundary identification along topographic or natural
features or roads, or to protect park resources critical to the park's
purposes. Boundary studies discuss management options and whether lands
will be feasible to administer considering size, configuration, ownership,
costs, and other factors.
A
boundary study is usually appropriate only when the resources being considered
are directly related to the purposes of an existing unit of the National
Park System. Even if a resource is adjacent to an existing unit, it might
be considered as a “new area” study if it is not directly
related to the purpose and significance of the existing unit. For example,
evaluating a prehistoric archeological site next to a civil war battlefield
would most likely involve the “new area” criteria rather than
the boundary adjustment study process.
Authorizations
Congress decides if an area should be added to the National Park System
or if some other action might be appropriate. Congressional committees
usually hold hearings on proposed additions to the System and ask the
Secretary of the Interior for recommendations. Studies by the National
Park Service provide information to help the Secretary develop a position
and to help Congress decide what action to take. Study reports prepared
by the National Park Service, however, present information about the resources
and what management alternatives are most efficient or effective. Recommendations
are usually provided in the letter transmitting the study to Congress.
Legislation authorizing a new area will explain the purpose of the area
and outline any specific directions for additional planning, land acquisition,
management, and operations.
Congress
has used more than 20 different designations in adding areas to the National
Park System. These titles are usually descriptive: seashore, lakeshore,
historic site, battlefield, and recreation area, for example. The designations
have not always been used consistently, but they reflect certain precedents
that have been followed by Congress. The title of national park has traditionally
been reserved for the most spectacular natural areas with a wide variety
of features. Hunting, mining, and other consumptive uses such as grazing
are generally prohibited in National Parks. National Monuments are usually
smaller areas established primarily to protect historic, scientific, or
natural features containing fewer diverse resources or attractions than
national parks. Legislation authorizing National Preserves, Recreation
Areas, Seashores, and Lakeshores sometimes allows for a wider range of
activities such as oil and gas development, grazing, and hunting subject
to certain limits. Despite these differences, all units of the National
Park System are managed so as to "leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment
of future generations".
Assistance and Evaluation
Besides running the National Park System, the National Park Service also
manages or participates in several programs that offer recognition or
assistance for areas that do not become units of the System. Resources
that are nationally significant may be eligible for special titles or
designations while they continue to be managed by states, local governments,
other federal agencies, or private owners. Resources of state or local
significance also may benefit from technical or financial assistance programs.
Some titles, distinctions, and funding sources require action by Congress
while others can be provided without site-specific legislation.
Cultural
resources of State, local, or national significance may be listed by the
National Park Service in the National Register of Historic Places as being
worthy of preservation and special consideration in planning for Federal
projects. Nationally significant places may be designated National Natural
Landmarks or National Historic Landmarks by the Secretary of the Interior.
Congress may also authorize financial or technical assistance for nationally
significant areas that are affiliated with the National Park System but
remain under private, state, or local jurisdiction subject to National
Park Service oversight. Resources with international importance may be
designated as a world heritage site or biosphere reserve. Rivers may be
designated by Congress or the Secretary of the Interior as components
of the wild and scenic rivers system. Trails on Federal, State, local
or private lands may be designated as national recreation trails by the
Secretary of the Interior. Trails meeting standards for scenic and historic
quality may be designated by Congress as National Scenic Trails or National
Historic Trails.
State
and local governments may apply for grants through the National Park Service
to support historic preservation and acquisition or development of recreational
facilities when funds are available.
The
National Park Service can provide technical assistance to State and local
governments in conservation of rivers, trails, natural areas, and cultural
resources. Other partnerships may be established involving recognition,
technical assistance, and coordination with the National Park Service
for special resources and programs that are not necessarily of national
significance. National Heritage Areas and Corridors are other examples
of Congressional recognition that does not involve creating a new unit
of the National Park System, and where the role of the National Park Service
is primarily to assist State and local initiatives to preserve resources.
Further Information
Questions about the criteria and the study process not answered by this
information should be directed to:
Division
of Park Planning and Special Studies
National Park Service -2510
U.S. Department of the Interior
1849 C Street N.W.
Washington, DC 20240
Inquiries
about specific sites or proposals should be directed to the appropriate
National Park Service regional office:
Alaska
Region
National Park Service
2525 Gambell Street
Room 107
Anchorage, AK 99503-2892
Intermountain
Region
National Park Service
12795 West Alameda Parkway
Denver, CO 80225
COLORADO, MONTANA, UTAH, and WYOMING, ARIZONA, NEW MEXICO, OKLAHOMA, TEXAS
Midwest Region
National Park Service
1709 Jackson Street
Omaha, NE 68102
ILLINOIS, INDIANA, IOWA, KANSAS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MISSOURI, NEBRASK,
OHIO, and WISCONSIN, NORTH DAKOTA, SOUTH DAKOTA, ARKANSAS
National
Capital Region
National Park Service
1100 Ohio Drive, SW
Washington, DC 20242
METROPOLITAN AREA OF WASHINGTON, D.C., with some units in MARYLAND, VIRGINIA,
and WEST VIRGINIA
North East Region
National Park Service
200 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
CONNECTICUT, MAINE, MASSACHUSETTS, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK,
RHODE ISLAND, and VERMONT, MARYLAND, VIRGINIA, WEST VIRGINIA, DELAWARE
Pacific
West Region
National Park Service
1111 Jackson Street
Oakland, CA 94607
IDAHO, OREGON, and WASHINGTON, CALIFORNIA, NEVADA, HAWAII, and PACIFIC
TERRITORIES
Southeast Region
National Park Service
100 Alabama Street, SE Atlanta, GA 30303
ALABAMA, FLORIDA, GEORGIA, KENTUCKY, MISSISSIPPI, NORTH CAROLINA, PUERTO
RICO, SOUTH CAROLINA, TENNESSEE, and the VIRGIN ISLANDS |