5. Working draft, Yosemite Master Plan, July 31, 1974 (an internal document) 6. Preliminary draft, Yosemite Master Plan, August 12, 1974 (our current proposal) 7. Revised draft environmental statement, Proposed Yosemite Master Plan 8. Environmental Assessment, Development Planning Options, September 4, 1974, Yosemite Valley If you have need for further information, please let us know. Sincerely yours, RUSSELL E. DICKENSON, Deputy Director. [NOTE. The enclosures are in the subcommittees' files.] CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES SUBCOMMITTEE Hon. ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary, Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. DEAR SECRETARY MORTON: On October 21, 1974, Congressman Dingell and I sent you a letter asking a number of questions about the Park Service's operations in Yosemite National Park. We asked for a reply by November 21, 1974. We have not yet received that reply. A telephone call to your office yesterday by our staff elicited the information that your response is in "policy review." But no assurance was given that a reply would be made this week. Today we received a copy of a December 13, 1974, NPS press release announeing that "all planning documents prepared for Yosemite National Park have been rejected and that . . . a new complete process for the Park" was being "initiated immediately." Since we plan to hold hearings on December 30, 1974, on the NPS concession operations, including its planning procedures, we request that your reply to our October 21 letter be furnished to us this week. We will provide more details concerning the December 30 hearings by separate letter to the Director of the National Park Service. Sincerely, HENRY S. REUSS, Chairman, Conservation and Natural Resources Subcommittee. The hearing date was subsequently changed to December 20, 1974. The NPS press release referred to in the letter follows:] [NOTE. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, NPS ORDERS FRESH START ON YOSEMITE PLANNING PROCESS Ronald H. Walker, director of the Interior Department's National Park Service, announced today all planning documents prepared for Yosemite National Park have been rejected and that he has requested a new and complete planning process for the Park be initiated immediately. "After a review by the Park Service headquarters staff and concerned Department of the Interior officials, both the Draft Master Plan for Yosemite and the accompanying Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) have found to be deficient in several respects," Walker said. "The Draft Master Plan is somewhat ambiguous in that it does not address itself specifically to the stated management objectives for the Park," he added. "Accordingly, the EIS fails to describe fully the environmental impacts which could be expected from implementation of the plan." Procedures for the new planning process, as outlined by Assistant Secretary Nathaniel P. Reed, who heads Interior's programs for Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, would include: 1. An environmental assessment which analyzes alternatives for preservation and use of the park. 2. Press releases and public meetings outlining the Service's planning schedule, public involvement provisions, what actions will be taken in the park while the plan is being prepared, short- and long-term management objectives for the park upon which planning alternatives will be based, and a request for public review and comment on Service objectives. 3. A series of public workshops in the region to obtain public and concessioner input on alternatives. An assessment of alternatives will be submitted to the Western Regional Advisory Committee for comment. 4. Public meetings on draft plans and draft EIS. 5. Public meeting, if necessary, on final plans and final EIS. "This process," Reed said, "allows for continuous public participation in the planning process and permits development of a sound plan based on resource data, carrying capacity and an objective analysis of management and visitor needs. I would hope that this effort [would] be accomplished within 18 to 20 months." Construction of new facilities or upgrading of existing developments will not be permitted until the process is completed, he said. Director Walker pointed out that a decision on the proposal of the Yosemite Park and Curry Company to upgrade and winterize 150 sleeping units at Curry Village in the park has been postponed indefinitely. The original schedule had called for final approval of the new Master Plan and a decision on the Curry Village units by January 20, 1975. Walker said the National Park Service has decided to make available for public inspection two preliminary versions of the Master Plan; a draft dated July 19, 1974, including comments on the plan submitted by MCA Recreation Services, a park concessioner, and the preliminary Draft Master Plan, dated August 12, 1974, along with the Draft Environmental Impact Statement analyzing the August 21 version. All documents will be available for inspection during normal business hours at the following locations: National Park Service headquarters in the Department of the Interior building at 18th and "C" Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C., Room 1210. The Department of the Interior's Regional Solicitor's Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA. The Western Regional Office Headquarters of the Service at 450 Golden Gate Ave., San Francisco, CA. The field office of the Service at Room 2202, New Federal Building, 300 N. Los Angeles St., Los Angeles, CA 90012 Yosemite National Park Headquarters, Yosemite National Park, CA. Walker said that a limited number of copies of the August 12 version of the Draft Master Plan, in printed form, are available upon request. However, since neither the 177-page draft EIS nor the 52-page July 19 version of the Draft Master Plan have been printed, persons wanting copies of those documents will be required to pay the standard 25-cents-per-page reproduction fee. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES SUBCOMMITTEE Hon. ROGERS C. B. MORTON, DEAR SECRETARY MORTON: At our request, the National Park Service's Deputy Director, Mr. Russell E. Dickenson, provided to us on October 17 various drafts (including the August 12, 1974 "current proposal") of the NPS proposed "Yosemite Master Plan," the proposed environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Master Plan, and a document entitled "Development Planning Options/ Environmental Assessment," (DPOEA). Our preliminary review of the August 12 "current proposal" raises serious doubts about its adequacy. It has numerous vague and ambiguous statements and contains insufficient and, at times, questionable data. We understand that the NPS plans to release the proposed Master Plan, the EIS, and the DPOEA soon, hold public meetings thereon within 30 days thereafter, and have the Master Plan printed by December 20 and approved by January 20, 1975. On July 25, 1974, NI'S Director Ronald H. Walker made a "personal commitment" to the concessioner in Yosemite National Park, Music Corporation of America, that the Master Plan and related documents "will be completed in a timely fashion and the management's decision will be completed by January 20, 1974." Such a timetable and "commitment" are unreasonably precipitous in view of the size and complexity of these documents, and the widespread public interest in the issues they involve. The NPS, having worked on these documents for several years, certainly can afford the public more adequate time to read and study them before hearings are held. We recommend that NPS allow the public at least 90 days for this purpose, and promptly make available, for review and copying by the public at the Service's office in Yosemite, at an appropriate regional office, and in Washington, D.C., copies of all the documents provided to us on October 17, 1974. I. The 1971 Master Plan draft stated (p. 11) that the "park offers about 2,350 developed campsites which will accommodate about 12,000 campers a night; 1150 sites accommodating 5000 are located in Yosemite Valley." It also states: "Many visitors stay overnight in the park at hotel, lodge, cabin, or tent units operated by the Yosemite Park and Curry Co. About 5500 persons can be accommodated each night during the summer season and about 1500 persons in off-season periods. In addition to the principal concessioner facilities, there are rental cabins and houses available on privately owned lands at Wawona which can handle about 400 park visitors." The second (February 8, 1974) version (pp. 15-16) contains quite different figures. It states (p. 15) that the "park offers about 2450 developed campsites which will accommodate about 12,000 campers a night; 1000 sites accommodating up to 4600 are located in Yosemite Valley." It also states that "about 5,000 persons can be accommodated each night during the summer season and about 1,500 persons in off-season periods," *** It further adds (p. 16) that overnight lodging "is available" at El Portal, as well as at Yosemite Valley and Wawona. The third draft proposal dated July 1974 has blank spaces where those figures should be. It adds, however, that there "are also 6 motels, totalling 70 units, on private lands adjacent to the El Portal administrative site." The fourth version, dated July 19, 1974, states (p. 17) that the "park offers about 2,463 developed campsites, which accommodate about 10,000 campers a night; approximately 965 sites accommodating about 4,000 persons are located in Yosemite Valley." The fifth version, dated July 31, 1974, uses almost identical figures (p. 23). *** The fourth (July 19) version contains the following statement concerning camping (p. 17): "For the whole park, camping is near capacity on most holiday weekends during the summer and during about two weeks in late July and early August; valley campgrounds fill to capacity nearly every night during the entire summer. In the past five years, camping use in Yosemite has been marked by increasing numbers of self-contained recreation vehicles." The fifth (July 31) version of this paragraph contains (p. 23) different wording (shown by the words we here underline): "In the past, camping has been reported as near capacity on most holiday weekends during the summer and during about two weeks in late July and early August; valley campgrounds reportedly fill to capacity nearly every night during the entire summer. Intensive management is essential to the fullest use of the existing campsites. In the past five years, camping use in Yosemite has been marked by increasing numbers of self-contained recreation vehicles." The fourth version then states (p. 18): "Many visitors stay overnight in the park at hotel, lodge, cabin, or tent units operated by the Yosemite Park and Curry Co. During the summer there is a total of 1,708 units in the entire park at an average occupancy rate of 4,600 people. Of these, 1,494 units at an occupancy rate of 4,000 people are in Yosemite Valley. During the winter season there are about 600 units at an average occupancy rate of 1,600 people. In addition, about 400 people can be lodged in rental cabins and houses available as privately owned lands in Section 35 at Wawona. There are also 8 motels, totalling 70 units, on private lands adjacent to the El Portal administrative site, and units at Yosemite West, just outside the park near Chinquapin. "Although maximum overnight park use at any given time is controlled by the number of facilities, changes in the distribution of visitors throughout the year are occurring. Day use is continuing to increase despite a limit on overnight use. At the present time, on peak weekends, overnight use represents only 40 percent of the visitation and day use 60 percent; the reverse was true 20 years ago. "The growing popularity of winter sports and possibility of year-round school terms increase the potential for non-summer visitation.” The figures used in the fifth version (p. 24) concerning overnight lodging at Yosemite Park and Curry Co. units differ significantly from the fourth and earlier versions. It states: "Many visitors stay overnight in the park at hotel, lodge, cabin, or tent units operated by the Yosemite Park and Curry Company. During the summer there is a total of 1,864 authorized units in the entire park at an average occupancy rate of 5,130 people. Of these, 1,598 units at an occupancy rate of 4,350 are located in the Valley. This leaves 266 overnight lodging units outside Yosemite Valley. During the summer, these facilities are normally filled too. * * * During the winter season there are about 600 units at an average occupancy rate of 1,600 people. These are normally filled to capacity on weekends. * * * In addition, about 400 people can be lodged in rental cabins and houses available as privately owned lands in Section 35 at Wawona. There are also 8 motels, totalling 70 units, on private lands adjacent to the El Portal administrative site, and 48 units at Yosemite West, just outside the park near Chinquapin." This fifth version then recognizes that "day use has increased," but adds, without offering any supporting data, that "overnight lodging remained constant" up through late 1973. Page 23 is missing from the copy NPS furnished us of the sixth version (NPS "current proposal"). Hence, we cannot comment on the campground statistics discussed therein. Its discussion of overnight accommodations is identical to that of the fifth version, except that the number of "overnight lodging units outside Yosemite Valley" is listed at 266 in the fifth version and 226 in the sixth version. We cannot understand why the National Park Service appears to have so much difficulty in ascertaining the precise number of Yosemite Park and Curry Co. units and their use. Moreover, we are puzzled by the qualifier "authorized" which was first used in the fifth version in listing the number of the Company's units in the park. Until now, we had assumed that all such units were in place and useable, not merely "authorized." The "current proposal" contains, without any supporting data, the following conclusion, which was first mentioned in the fifth version (p. 24): "Consideration should be given to winterizing more units when they are scheduled for improvement." But the "Development Planning Options" document indicates that the NPS has gone beyond giving "consideration" to winterizing more units and has apparently already decided to do so. Thus, that document states that the "preferred" NPS option is to build 150 "winterized multi-story cluster lodge-type units with baths" to "replace a like number of the existing cabin-tents at Curry Village." (p. 147.) In addition, we note that the second (February 8, 1974) version of the Master Plan concerning Yosemite Valley, stated (p. 34): "Maintain overnight capacities at their current level, that is, 1000 campsites accommodating up to 4,600 visitors and overnight lodge accommodations to a maximum of 1,550 units of 4,600 persons." However, the "current proposal" cuts back on campsites (from 1,000 to 965) and increases the concession units (from 1,550 to 1,598) as follows (p. 51): "Until a carrying capacity study for the Valley is completed, the capacities for these facilities will be limited to 1,598 units (including units removed because of age), provided by the concessioner accommodating about 4,350 persons per night and 965 campsites provided by the National Park Service serving about 4,000 persons." The revised draft EIS which the NPS also provided to us indicates (p. 9) that under the "current proposal" the "unit capacity allows the construction of 104 units which had been removed during previous upgrading and rebuilding of facilities of Curry Village, Yosemite Lodge, and elimination of the Stoneman Housekeeping section." The DPOEA document, however, indicates that these 104 units, plus 25 others, would be a part of a "winterized 129-unit wing at the Ahwahnee." However, neither document states such additional construction is needed. Please explain the foregoing discrepancies and omissions. 1. Please provide to us: II. (a) the names of all NPS and other Interior Department personnel who (i) participated in the preparation of each version of the Yosemite Master Plan and the DPOEA document, and (ii) provided written comments on each version of the plan and DPOEA; and provide to us a copy of those comments. (b) the names and affiliation of all non-Federal personnel who (i) participated in the preparation of each version of the Yosemite Master Plan and the DPOEA document and in meetings with NPS officials concerning such plan and/or document, and indicate how and when each person participated therein, or (ii) provided written comments on each version of the plan and DPOEA; and provide to us copies of those comments. (c) a copy of all studies used in the preparation of each verision of the Yosemite Master Plan and the DPOEA. (d) a copy of all transcripts of earlier public hearings or meetings held by the NPS on the proposed Yosemite Master Plan, the EIS, the DPOEA, and related documents. (e) the total number of Yosemite Park and Curry Company units currently in operation at Yosemite in each of its type of accommodations (i.e. hotel, lodge, cabin, and tent), and their location, maximum design capacity, average occupancy rate, and the charge for each type of unit. (f) the total number of Yosemite Park and Curry Company "authorized" units which are not now useable, for each type of accommodation, and indicate when and in what manner they were authorized. (g) We understand that until recently the NPS used pillow counts, not units, when considering upgrading or replacement of facilities. Why did the NPS change to the unit concept? 2. We noted above that 104 units were "removed" during previous upgrading and rebuilding and, in some cases, eliminated. (a) When did this occur and why was this done? (b) The DPOEA (p. 147) refers to these units as: "bank units." What is the contractual or other basis for such "banking"? 3. The fifth and sixth versions state (p. 24): "The need for additional units should be considered within the limits of public use capacity." However, none of the documents furnished to us indicates that the NPS has determined and stated what are "the limits of public use capacity." (a) Why hasn't the NPS conducted a study of the "public use capacity" of all areas in Yosemite? (b) When will such a study be conducted and what is the estimated cost thereof? (c) Until such a study is made, what is the basis for concluding that 129 units should be added at the Ahwahnee? (d) The sixth version of the Master Plan states (p. 45) that interim capacity levels have been established in Yosemite Valley and the back-country "for overnight use." When was this done, and what are those levels? 4. The fifth and sixth versions state the following policy (p. 51): "Any upgrading of concession facilities must insure that there will be a range of accommodations available to middle and low income groups." The term "range of accommodations" is vague and ambiguous. It could mean that there must be a mix in price of all types of units, even the winterized units, which will attract middle and low income groups, or it could mean that there must be a sufficient mix of units (i.e. hotel, lodge, cabin, and tent) so that low and middle income groups can be accommodated. If it means the latter mix, then the low and middle income people will apparently be relegated in the summer to the cabin and tent accommodations, and could not in the winter utilize Yosemite at all, because they probably cannot afford the more costly winterized hotel and lodge facilities. Thus, it appears that the NPS preferred alternative to replace "89 existing cabins without baths at Yosemite Lodge" with "modern winterized cabins with baths," and 150 "existing cabin tents at Curry Village" and 150 "winterized multi-story cluster lodge-type units with |