The meetings will be held today and Wednesday along with open houses at the visitor center. Any interested members of the public are encouraged to attend one of the meetings and offer feedback on preliminary alternatives that are likely to be part of the general management plan. Once completed, the plan will serve as the park's guide to the uses of its property over the next 15 to 20 years.
The meetings will be held today and Wednesday from 1 to 3 p.m. and from 6 to 8 p.m.
In August and September of 2004, public meetings were conducted to identify issues and ask for the public's concerns and ideas on the future of the Cumberland Gap National Park. The alternatives to be discussed at the meetings today come from input received on the 2004 meetings.
In the National Park Service planning process, the park assess a range of alternative future conditions and management scenarios. Each alternative describes a possible direction for the future.
There are three alternative plans for the parks facilities.
Alternative A is the “No Action” alternative which is required by the National Environmental Policy Act to be included. This would allow current management policies and procedures to continue in the future. This includes projects and plans approved but not yet constructed.
“This alternative is used as a way to evaluate the effects of the other two alternatives and is also useful in understanding why the National Park Service or the public may believe changes are necessary,” stated officials from the Park in a recent Cumberland Gap Bulletin Newsletter. “Under the No Action Alternative, there would be no major changes in resources management practices, visitor programs, or facilities beyond regular maintenance and operation.”
The newsletter also states that no major new facilities would be constructed. The current park road system would be retrained, and other existing facility management practices would continue into the future.
Alternative B aims to provide expanded access. An example for this plan includes providing increased potential opportunities for visitor access and greater numbers and types of visitor facilities at Fern Lake, as compared to Alternative A.
The plan also explores the possibility of facilities at Fern Lake that could be constructed within a newly created developed zone. That zone at the lake is about 32 acres. Developed zones would also be established in the vicinity of the park headquarters, the existing campground, and the Gap.
Electrical hookups for RVs would be added to one loop in the campground area. A culture resource zone would be established next to the developed zone within the Gap. No development would occur at the Hensley Settlement, but a satellite van parking area could be provided at the base of Brush Mountain to allow for access.
Alternative C would provide expanded access and a formalized education, outreach and partnering program. This alternative would provide the greatest potential to provide additional visitor access and a greater number of facilities.
To increase the potential for more access and visitors at Fern Lake, facilities could be constructed within an 82 acre developed zone at the northern end of the lake. The potential to provide additional access for visitors would also be provided at the Hensley Settlement by designation of a 127 acre developed zone on the west side of the settlement.
The newsletter adds that the developed zones would be established in the vicinity of park, headquarters, the existing campground, and the Gap.
In addition, electrical hookups for RVs could be constructed in one loop in the campground, and 2-3 camp sites could be converted to accommodate campers with horse trailers. A new Cultural Resource Zone would also be established next to the developed zone within the Gap, and a cultural resource zone would be established at the Hensley Settlement.
Under Alternative C, a formalized public outreach education and partnering program could be implemented.
Post a Comment
