Yosemite National Park
Country
United States of America (USA)
Inscribed in
1984
Criteria
(vii)
(viii)
The conservation outlook for this site has been assessed as "good with some concerns" in the latest assessment cycle. Explore the Conservation Outlook Assessment for the site below. You have the option to access the summary, or the detailed assessment.
Yosemite National Park lies in the heart of California. With its 'hanging' valleys, many waterfalls, cirque lakes, polished domes, moraines and U-shaped valleys, it provides an excellent overview of all kinds of granite relief fashioned by glaciation. At 600–4,000 m, a great variety of flora and fauna can also be found here. © UNESCO
Summary
2020 Conservation Outlook
Finalised on
02 Dec 2020
Good with some concerns
Current state and trend of VALUES
Low Concern
Overall THREATS
Overall PROTECTION and MANAGEMENT
Full assessment
Description of values
Exceptional natural beauty
Criterion
(vii)
Yosemite has exceptional natural beauty, including five of the world's highest waterfalls, a combination of granite domes and walls, deeply incised valleys, three groves of giant sequoia, numerous alpine meadows, lakes and a diversity of life zones (World Heritage Committee, 2018).
Unique and pronounced landform features and a unique example of the effects of glaciation on granitic domes
Criterion
(viii)
Glacial action combined with the granitic bedrock has produced unique and pronounced landform features including distinctive polished dome structures, as well as hanging valleys, tarns, moraines and U-shaped valleys. Granitic landforms such as Half Dome and the vertical walls of El Capitan are classic distinctive reflections of geologic history. No other area portrays the effects of glaciation on underlying granitic domes as well as Yosemite does (World Heritage Committee, 2018).
Rich terrestrial and aquatic biota
The variety of flora is reflected in the existence of six distinct vegetation zones which are governed by altitudinal variation. Notable are three groves of the giant sequoia tree and extensive alpine meadows. There are 1,200 species of flowering plant along with various other ferns, bryophytes and lichens. There is one endemic and eight threatened or endangered species of plant. The park has 67 mammalian species, of which 32 are rodents, 221 species of bird, 18 reptile, 10 amphibian and 11 fish, of which 6 are endemic (IUCN, 1984). Bighorn sheep were declared extinct in Yosemite in 1914 but were reintroduced in 1986.
Assessment information
Current threats to the integrity of the Yosemite National Park World Heritage site include over-development, unregulated day use, air pollution, invasive species and altered fire regimes. Although 94% of Yosemite is Congressionally designated wilderness, the remaining 6% has serious problems with over-development and over-crowding, especially in Yosemite Valley. This creates a congested urban environment which encroaches on the natural beauty of the valley, impacting natural ecosystems and wildlife. Between four and five million people visit the park each year and there are no limits on the number of people that can enter the park each day. With excessive visitor use, a rare and valuable quality - the ability to experience seclusion and tranquillity - can diminish or even disappear. High levels of air pollutants have adversely affected certain tree species and the park's aesthetics. Fire management is a vexing issue in which the legacy of undesirable suppression policies is colliding with the impacts of climate change.
Air Pollution
(Air pollution)
Inside site
, Widespread(15-50%)
Outside site
Air pollution is currently recognized as one of the most significant threats to the resources of the Sierra Nevada (National Park Service, 2020a). Ozone levels are a threat to the site (Kohut 2007). Yosemite has 8-hour ozone concentrations that are consistently at or above the standard of 75 ppb. The ozone W126 index values at 28 ppm-hours during 2007. National Park Service (2009) and NPCA (2017a) say that ozone levels warrant significant concern. Yosemite also experiences haze levels well above estimated natural conditions, affecting views of iconic landmarks such as Half Dome and El Capitan (NPCA 2017a). Significant tracts of the ponderosa and Jeffrey pine trees in the park show evidence of injury by ozone (Durisco 1987, NPCA 2017a). These levels of air pollutants adversely affect the park's aesthetics. Unfortunately, Congress recently voted to delay implementation of standards aimed at reducing ozone pollution in the USA (NPCA 2017b). The issue is being contested in the courts (NPCA 2018a).
Residential Areas, Commercial & Industrial Areas, Recreation & Tourism Areas
(Over-development)
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
Although 94% of Yosemite is Congressionally designated wilderness, the remaining 6% has serious problems with over-development, especially in Yosemite Valley. Over a thousand buildings are crowded into one end of the 1,428 ha valley (National Park Service, 2012). There are, for example, 1,504 campsites in 18 camp grounds, 210 picnic sites in 24 picnic areas, 3 visitor centers, 6 museums and major exhibits, 2 amphitheaters, 8 Ranger stations and 6 entrance stations (National Park Service, 2012). There are 344 km of paved roads; there are 1200 buildings within the park; and over 2000 employees of the National Park Service and hospitality industry work in the park over summer (National Park Service, 2020b). Within Yosemite Valley itself, this development has created a congested urban environment, which encroaches on the natural beauty of the valley and impacts natural ecosystems and wildlife. Park congestion therefore requires mitigation strategies (National Park Service, 2020a).
Recreational Activities
(Impact of tourism)
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
There are no current limits on the number of people that can enter the park each day. Visitor numbers to the park have stabilised at around the 4-5 million mark in recent years, with a peak of 5.2 million in 2016 (National Park Service, 2020b). Approximately three quarters are day visitors (Blotkamp et al. 2010). Private automobiles were used by 69% of all users, while 30% used rental automobiles. This number of vehicles results in serious gridlock on many summer weekends; statistics that enumerate traffic accidents, road fatalities and collisions with bears note around 25 a year (National Park Service, 2020b). With excessive visitor use, a valued resource, such as a sense of solitude, can diminish or even disappear. Overcrowding has been identified as a problem (NPCA 2018b). The park manager has identified the site's natural 'soundscape' as a characteristic worth protecting, has measured noise coming from mechanised sources and identified means of mitigating noise from artificial sources (National Park Service, 2020a). In March 2020, the National Park Service website reported that Yosemite National Park was closed due to coronavirus (National Park Service, 2020j); while this may provide some respite for the park's assets, it does not constitute a desirable or long-term solution.
Fire & Fire Management
(Fire and fire suppression)
Inside site
, Widespread(15-50%)
One of the most vexed issues facing park management (as it is for many of the world's large protected areas) is that of fire. On the one hand, ecologists have identified the lack of fire due to decades of deliberate suppression as a major problem (National Park Service, 2020a, Miller et al. 2012, van Wagtendonk and Lutz 2007). On the other, climate change is intensifying the extent and severity of fires, necessitating emphatic responses during the height of summer in a state that is world-renowned for savage wildfires. New policies, measures and tools have been introduced to address this threat. In 2017, the National Park Service amended its fire-management plan with a 'community and infrastructure protection policy' aimed at increasing the organisation's flexibility in dealing with fires (National Park Service, 2020c).
Invasive Non-Native/ Alien Species
(Invasion by non-native species in susceptible parts of the site)
Other invasive species names
New Zealand Mud Snail (Potamopyrgus antipodarum), Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), Yellow Star Thistle ( Centaurea solstitialis), and various 'forest pests' (National Park Service, 2015).
Inside site
, Scattered(5-15%)
Invasive species have been identified as an environmental issue affecting the site and it has implemented programs to reduce the prevalence of some of these (National Park Service, 2020a). Currently there are 177 non-native plant species in the park, of which 5 are considered invasive (National Park Service, 2012). Efforts are being taken to mitigate those 5 species, but it is estimated that additional non-native plant species will invade the park each year. There are 9 species of non-native fish in 1,939 km of streams in 2 major river systems and in 245 lakes (National Park Service, 2012). Management of invasive species has been successful but with funding in all USA national parks under pressure, the program may have difficulties in the future.
The major impending threat to Yosemite National Park World Heritage site is climate change. Changes in the distribution of some species, including degradation of some, have been documented. High-altitude species are in jeopardy. Climate-induced decreases in snowpack and associated decreases in moisture levels suggest that fires may become more frequent and more severe, as has been occurring in adjacent parts of California. The large scale bushfires in Australia in 2020 show that large World Heritage landscapes can be severely impacted by fire over the course of just a few weeks, with even forest-types previously too wet to burn now becoming susceptible to fire.
Habitat Shifting/ Alteration, Temperature extremes
(Climate change and altered fire regimes)
Inside site
, Throughout(>50%)
Outside site
Climate change and associated alterations to the site's fire regime constitute the major potential threat. The issue has been identified by the park manager (National Park Service, 2020a) and NGOs (NPCA 2018c). A resurvey of sites first established in the 1920s indicates that climate induced changes to small mammal populations might be occurring; formerly low-elevation species expanded their ranges and high-elevation species contracted theirs, leading to changed community composition at mid- and high elevations; though some high-elevation species are threatened, protection of elevation gradients allows other species to respond via migration (Moritz et al. 2008). Climate-induced decreases in snowpack (Roche et al. 2018) and the associated increase in fire severity suggest that existing assumptions may be understated – fires may become more frequent and more severe (Lutz et al. 2009). Reduced snowpack also leads to reduced run-off and reduced volumes in waterfalls, potentially impacting on a critical part of the site's awe-inspiring scenery. Some changes identified as consistent with but not formally attributable to climate change include: higher-elevation tree shift (Dolanc et al., 2013), large tree decline, (McIntyre et al. 2015, Nesmith et al. 2018), upslope fire shift (Schwartz et al. 2015), and earlier spring (Monahan et al. 2016, Gonzalez et al. 2010b, Drexler et al. 2015), among other changes.
Invasive Non-Native/ Alien Species
(Invasive species)
Inside site
, Throughout(>50%)
Currently there are only 177 non-native plant species in the park, of which 5 are considered invasive (National Park Service, 2012). Efforts are being taken to mitigate those 5 species, but it is estimated that 10 new non-native plant species occur in the park each year. Efforts are also underway to eliminate the bull frog from park waters, but this effort is not sufficiently reducing frog populations. The wild turkey appears to be spreading into the park, and no efforts are currently underway to stop its spread. There are 9 species of non-native fish in 1,939 km of streams in 2 major river systems and in 245 lakes (National Park Service, 2012). Invasive species management has been successful under current funding levels. With some funding cuts being considered, the program may have difficulties in the future.
The National Park Service remains an exemplary management body - one of the best in the world - thanks to dedicated staff and a strong internal culture. The management system in place is adequate to maintain the site's Outstanding Universal Value. However, it is beyond the capability of the park authority to influence off-site air pollution sources, fires entering the park from off-site, or the globally ubiquitous effects of climate change.
The park has a General Management plan approved in 1980 that requires updating, particularly when it comes to climate change and fire. In the meantime, the park authority has shown the agility necessary to adapt to changing circumstances by updating planning documents for particular issues, such as fire (National Park Service, 2020c). Management prescriptions vary according to the park's zoning, with the wilderness areas, for example, covered by a comprehensive set of regulations (National Park Service, 2020d).
The boundary encompasses two nearly complete watersheds and the park's shape means that its perimeter encompasses a large area. The spectacular landscapes and glacial landforms that form the essence of the site's Outstanding Universal Value are well protected by the park's boundaries (it should be noted, however, that the Hetch Hetchy valley, a spectacular part of the park, was inundated by an artificial reservoir in 1923 - a campaign to restore this part of the site continues to this day). From an ecological point of view, the boundaries could be improved by including upper parts of one of the catchments. However, because the park's eastern and northern edges abut designated wilderness areas, Yosemite forms part of an extremely well protected wider landscape of about one million ha in extent (NPS and US Department of the Interior 2020).
No information could be found on the National Park Service website regarding the integration of park planning for Yosemite with state and municipal jurisdictions.
Although key stakeholders have been identified, they are not directly involved in site management. The National Park Service uses a Parkwide Programmatic Agreement as a means of furthering consultation with local native tribes and groups (National Park Service, 2020e). Indigenous hunting and gathering and spiritual ceremonies have been carried out and the park manager's relationship with indigenous people has been described as 'fair' (UNESCO 2013). Other local communities are primarily concerned about sustaining and increasing visitation to the park because their economies have grown dependent on park visitors. This leads to some conflicts with minimizing the impacts of high visitation rates.
The legal framework applying to the Yosemite National Park consists of federal laws and the park regulations set out in the Superintendent's Compendium that cover issues such as campfires, road closures, rock climbing, traffic, permits etc (National Park Service, 2020f). The site is governed by federal statutes that established the Yosemite National Park, the Yosemite Wilderness, the Tuolumne Wild and Scenic River, and Merced Wild and Scenic River. Other general federal acts cover establishment of the National Park Service, air quality, water quality, environmental policy, wild and scenic rivers, wilderness, endangered and threatened species, historic preservation, and archaeological resources protection. These statutes are generally effective in maintaining the Outstanding Universal Value of the site.
The park manager has substantial law-enforcement capabilities to protect the park's natural assets. The park employs 1,300 rangers during summer (National Park Service, 2020b) and also has the use of helicopters to help enforce the laws (NPS 2020 / Aviation Management). The National Park Service website has published examples of prosecution of poachers and the eradication of marijuana plantations within the park.
There have been no substantive decisions on management of the property by the Committee since inscription so this topic has not been applicable.
The long-term increase in visitor numbers (consistently over 4 million visitors pa) combined with reports of congestion and over-crowding in the Yosemite valley raise questions about the sustainability of the park's tourism industry. Visitors are encouraged to use the park's extensive public transport system, which provides access to the park's main visitor nodes (YARTS 2020), though encouraging visitors to use public transport in favour of travelling by car is challenging. Attempts are being made to reduce water consumption and solid waste, to conserve energy, and to use sustainable products. Steps have been taken to install solar collectors, a biodiesel fuel station and the addition of hybrid vehicles to the park’s fleet. The park has initiated a Zero Landfill Project to increase recycling parkwide (National Park Service, 2020g). The management of the 94% of the park that is designated wilderness is effectively carried out through a permit system and associated regulations (National Park Service, 2020d).
The 2019 operating budget for the park was 29 million USD, providing for a workforce of 800 employees in summer and 478 in winter (National Park Service, 2020b). Additional funding for specific projects is available through a friends association. NGOs frequently express alarm and frustration about proposed and/or actual budget cuts on all parks (NPCA 2019); at Yosemite, one report in 2017 identified a $582 million backlog in maintenance of park infrastructure (Bachmann, 2018). Given the requirement of the National Park Service to service the needs of the 4 million visitors per annum, it is not clear whether the park's funding is sufficient to maintain the property's Outstanding Universal Value over the long term.
Staffing levels and capacity of the USA National Park Service have been adversely in recent years (many reports online, such as Koebler 2017, Repanshek 2017 and Bachmann 2018). The regular deadlocks in Congress over the federal budget have also been disruptive. Spokespeople for the National Park Service have reported there to be enough staff to successfully manage the property (Bachmann 2018), although civil societies have expressed their serious concerns for the impacts of budget cuts on staffing levels of all parks (NPCA 2019). The National Park Service, however, has a strong internal culture of dedication to national parks and, by world standards, the staff capacity, training and development remain good.
The National Park Service has an excellent program of interpretation and education about Yosemite that can be accessed online (National Park Service, 2020h), in brochures, in visitor centres, and on the trails.
Overcrowding and congestion are common in the Yosemite Valley. Despite the problems, the visitor numbers remain on an upward trajectory, with up to five million park visitors per annum. Impacts include additional pollution in the park, noise and the loss of seclusion and tranquillity. The National Park Service promotes the park's excellent bus-transport system (YARTS, 2020) and has taken other measures to reduce the impacts of over-crowding (National Park Service, 2020g). The 94% of the park designated as wilderness has an effective system of permits and policies (National Park Service, 2020d). In March 2020, the park website Yosemite National Park was closed due to COVID-19, but has subsequntly re-opened.
The park manager systematically monitors visitor impacts and water values associated with its officially designated wild and scenic rivers (NPS 2020 / Visitor Use and Impact Monitoring Program [online]). Characteristics that are regularly measured include informal trails, the amount of bare soil within meadows, landscape, hydrology, and physical and biotic structures. The results of monitoring trigger management actions that include increased monitoring, secondary measurements and studies, visitor education and outreach, and ecological restoration. Additional monitoring pertains to birds, fire ecology, air quality (including smoke levels), invasive plants and various forms of visitor activity.
There are over 100 staff carrying out resource management and scientific research (National Park Service, 2020i). The park serves as a public meeting place for scientific symposiums, with topics including fire science, hydro-climatology, archeology, and bird surveys, with scientific papers presented at the monthly Yosemite Forum. The park also processes hundreds of research permits every year for its staff and outside interests. The park sponsors a park-based social science branch, which serves as a model for work in visitor use and user capacity issues. Particular areas of research include flora, fauna and snowpack. The park manager administers the Yosemite Research Library, a specialized library focusing on human and natural history.
Assessment of the effectiveness of protection and management in addressing threats outside the site
Some Concern
Threats to the World Heritage site that originate from outside the site's boundaries include air pollution, fire and climate change. The park management collaborates with other land-management agencies and fire-fighting services regarding fire management. Its capacity to deal with air pollution and the globally ubiquitous phenomenon of climate change is rather more limited.
Good practice examples
Solar collectors at the El Portal Administrative site produce 305 of the Yosemite maintenance facility electrical needs. The Zero Landfill Project should greatly reduce the need for landfill facilities. Research, monitoring, interpretation and education in Yosemite are all world class.
Assessment of the current state and trend of World Heritage values
Stable
Assessment of the current state and trend of other important biodiversity values
High Concern
Data Deficient
The escalating impacts of climate change, altered fire regimes and invasive exotic species threaten (and in some cases have already damaged) the site's biological assets and ecological integrity. A comprehensive program of research and monitoring documents the state and trends of critical biological attributes. It is not clear whether the management actions triggered by these programs are sufficient to protect these values into the long term.
Additional information
Water provision (importance for water quantity and quality)
The 302,881 ha Park, of which 94% is federally designated wilderness, includes two relatively pristine watersheds. These watersheds make a significant contribution to the water supplies of the San Francisco Bay area and the cities and irrigation districts of California’s central valley. However, the reservoirs that store this water are an intrusion upon the park's natural characteristics and if alternative means of utilising these catchments' water resources were implemented, a landmark example of environmental restoration could occur.
Recent droughts reduced water quantity and quality. There is concern that global warming will exacerbate drought conditions affecting all species in the future.
History and tradition,
Wilderness and iconic features,
Sacred natural sites or landscapes
Yosemite has been home to Native Americans for millennia. It encompasses sacred sites and landscapes and continues to be part of their spiritual heritage. In addition, the park is an outstanding area for contemplative reflection, one of the most important values of a protected area. Yosemite Valley and the Wilderness that surrounds it are among the world’s most evocative scenery.
Outdoor recreation and tourism
As the over 4 million visitors per year can attest, Yosemite is extremely important for recreation and tourism. It is a major destination for travellers from California, the US, and the world. It contributes substantially to the local and regional economy.
Importance for research
The relatively pristine ecosystems of Yosemite represent an outstanding opportunity to advance society’s understanding of ecological processes and functions. The opportunity to study the ecological role of fire in an area where lightning ignitions can burn under prescribed conditions is very rare in temperate zones. The great exposure of geological formations and land forms make Yosemite a destination for earth scientists to better understand the processes that shape the landscape.
Impacts of roads and other small-scale exploitation in the Yosemite valley detract from the scientific value of this part of the site.
Carbon sequestration
The vast expanses and ranges of elevations in the park make it ideal for climate change mitigation and impact amelioration. The fire program has been successful shifting biomass from smaller trees to larger trees, thereby contributing to carbon sequestration.
There is a concern that climate change could cause large tree decline limiting carbon sequestration, altering biological diversity and exacerbating the spread of invasive species (Gonzalez et al. 2010b, Bradley et al. 2009).
2014 cumulative benefits to local communities were estimated at $535 million USD, supporting 6,261 jobs.
The Yosemite National Park World Heritage site provides many benefits for local, regional, national and international communities, including nature conservation, spiritual values, and outdoor recreational opportunities. Its status as an international icon of natural beauty and wilderness conservation is uncontested. In 2018, visitors to Yosemite National Park were found to have spent $495,245,000 in nearby communities, supporting an estimated 6,184 jobs in the local area and had a cumulative benefit to the local economy of $624,129,000 (National Park Service, 2019).
| № | Organization | Brief description of Active Projects | Website |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Yosemite National Park | The purpose of the Invasive Plant Program is to protect Yosemite National Park’s natural and cultural resources from displacement by non-native invasive plants. Yosemite’s large size, just over 302,881 ha (748,436 acres), can make surveying for and treating invasive plants logistically difficult. This is especially true in remote wilderness. The threat from invasive species is growing and new invasive plant species and populations are found and treated each year. Limited operational resources for invasive plant control make it critical that treatments are efficient and effective and guided by a strategically sound plan. This is a long term program. |
http://www.nps.gov/yose/naturescience/upload/2012IPPWorkPlan.pdf
|
| 2 | Yosemite National Park | The Fire Management Program reduces risk to park wildland urban interface communities within six to eight years, and to restore park ecosystems within 15 to 20 years. Some of the work which will be done to reduce the risk of unwanted wildland fire in and adjacent to wildland urban interface communities will involve mechanical methods. The primary methods to reduce wildland fire risk and to restore park ecosystems, however, will be prescribed and wildland fire. This program implements the Park’s Fire Management Plan. |
http://www.nps.gov/yose/parkmgmt/fireplan.htm
|
| 3 | Sierra Nevada Network | The Sierra Nevada Network Inventory and Monitoring Program is one of 32 National Park Service Inventory & Monitoring networks across the country established to facilitate collaboration, information sharing, and economies of scale in natural resource monitoring. The Sierra Nevada Network comprises Yosemite, Sequoia, and Kings Canyon national parks and Devils Postpile National Monument. Network personnel work closely with each park's natural resources program to develop and implement long-term monitoring and provide sound scientific information to park managers |
http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/sien/index.cfm
|
| 4 | Yosemite National Park | The Air Quality Monitoring Program in Yosemite National Park, in cooperation with state and other federal agencies, monitors the damage caused by air pollution with a comprehensive, science-based air resources program. This program targets major air pollutants and impacts potentially affecting Yosemite's visitors and ecology. |
http://www.nps.gov/yose/naturescience/airquality.htm
|
| 5 | Yosemite National Park | The High Elevation Aquatic Ecosystem Recovery and Stewardship Plan will guide the next 15 years of National Park Service management actions to protect and restore the park's high elevation aquatic ecosystems. Management actions will be designed to protect these ecosystems from future threats and will restore the diversity and distribution of species to increase the resiliency of these ecosystems. |
http://www.nps.gov/yose/parkmgmt/aquatic.htm
|
| 6 | Yosemite National Park | Meadow restoration has taken place in numerous locations throughout Yosemite Valley. Since the early 1990s efforts have been made to remove multiple trails, replace asphalt trails with boardwalks in seasonally flooded areas, eliminate old drainage ditches, and remove old road beds. The actions improved the crucial hydrologic function of the wet meadows. Additionally, park resource managers and volunteers have removed numerous invasive plants, most notably Himalayan blackberry, allowing for resurgence of native plants. The Stoneman Meadow asphalt removal project and the Stoneman Meadow boardwalk building project encompass a total restoration area of 10.5 ha (26 acres). The Cook's Meadow project restored 17 ha (42 acres). A large restoration of the Mariposa sequoia grove has recently been initiated. |
http://www.nps.gov/yose/parknews/restoration1012.htm
|
| 7 | Yosemite Conservancy and the National Parks Service | Mariposa Grove Restoration The purpose of this project is to restore the grove's dynamic ecology and increase its resilience. Once the project is completed, visitors to the Mariposa Grove will notice a consolidated parking area and information station at South Entrance, many of the roads within the grove converted into hiking trails, over a half-mile of new accessible trails and boardwalks providing universal access for all visitors to the grove, flush toilets replacing vault toilets in the grove, and the removal from the grove of commercial activities such as the gift shop and tram tours. |
https://yosemite.org/projects/restoring-the-mariposa-grove-of-giant-sequoias/
|
| 8 | Meadow Carbon Sequestration | This most recent ecological conservation project includes a study of meadow carbon sequestration in the Tuolomne Meadow. | |
| 9 | Yosemite National Park | Yosemite Research Library Collections The Yosemite Research Library is a specialized library focusing on human and natural history. It preserves Yosemite's documented history and serves the research needs of Yosemite National Park staff and partners. Collections include primary and secondary source materials. Document Types Primary Sources Oral history recordings and manuscripts Photographs Photographic negatives Government documents and reports Maps Relevant materials published by Yosemite staff and partners Historical biographic materials Secondary Sources Anthologies Manuscripts Serials Published travel narratives Documentary films Works of poetry and literature |
https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/historyculture/yrlcollections.htm
|
| 10 | Yosemite Conservancy | Yosemite Valley Welcome Centre The new Yosemite Valley Welcome Center will vastly improve the arrival experience. To create the welcome center, the park is remodeling a 3,000-square-foot building at the southern end of the village into a spacious, versatile visitor hub just a short stroll from accessible parking. |
https://yosemite.org/projects/welcoming-visitors-to-yosemite-valley/
|
| 11 | Yosemite Conservancy | The Restoration of Bridalveil Fall The project to restore Bridalveil Fall will enhance the visitor experience and protect surrounding habitat, based on a design informed by a public process and a shared vision for the area. Potential improvements include a redesigned parking area with better drainage and more efficient traffic circulation, accessible pathways and upgraded restrooms, accessible viewpoints and restored historic vistas, a realigned loop trail to reduce crowding, and new signs to help visitors navigate and learn about the area. |
https://yosemite.org/projects/the-restoration-of-bridalveil-fall/
|
| 12 | University of California Merced | A variety of projects, including: - Water Yield from Forest Thinning Depends on How, Where and How Much - Students Engineer Art from Trash for Annual Yosemite Facelift Event - New Program Offers Veterans a Way to Realign with Civilian Life - UC Merced Leads Way in National Park Leadership through NPI Seminar |
https://www.ucmerced.edu/news-tag/yosemite-0
|
References
| № | References |
|---|---|
| 1 |
Bachmann, D. (2018). The Budget Crunch at America’s National Parks - with increased attendance and crumbling infrastructure, national parks need money. [online] The Revelator, 2 July. Available at: https://therevelator.org/budget-crunch-national-parks [Accessed 16 March 2020].
|
| 2 |
Blotkamp, A., Meldrum, B., Morse, W. and Hollenhorst, S.J. (2010). Yosemite National Park visitor study, summer 2009 . Park Studies Unit, Visitor Services Project Report 215. Moscow, Idaho, USA: University of Idaho.
|
| 3 |
Bomberg, E. (2017). Environmental politics in the Trump era: an early assessment. Environmental Politics, 26(5), 956-963.
|
| 4 |
Bradley, B. A., Oppenheimer, M., & Wilcove, D. S. (2009). Climate change and plant invasions: restoration opportunities ahead?. Global Change Biology, 15(6), 1511-1521.
|
| 5 |
Dolanc, C.R., Thorne, J.H. and Safford, H.D. (2013). Widespread shifts in the demographic structure of subalpine forests in the Sierra Nevada, Clifornia, 1934 to 2007. Global Ecology and Biogeography 22, 264-276.
|
| 6 |
Drexler, J. Z., Fuller, C. C., Orlando, J., & Moore, P. E. (2015). Recent rates of carbon accumulation in montane fens of Yosemite National Park, California, USA. Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research, 47(4), 657-669.
|
| 7 |
Duriscoe, D.M., (1987). Evaluation of ozone injury to ponderosa and Jeffrey pines in Yosemite National Park, 1985 survey results. Denver, USA: National Park Service, Air Quality Division.
|
| 8 |
Gonzalez, P., Neilson, R. P., Lenihan, J. M., & Drapek, R. J. (2010). Global patterns in the vulnerability of ecosystems to vegetation shifts due to climate change. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 19(6), 755-768.
|
| 9 |
Koebler, J. (2017). Trump's Hiring Freeze Will Devastate Our National Parks. [online] Vice, 26 January. Available at: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/8qmn9k/trumps-hiring-fre… 16 March 2020].
|
| 10 |
Kohut, R. (2007). Assessing the risk of foliar injury from ozone on vegetation in parks in the U.S. National Park Service's Vital Signs Network. Environmental Pollution, 149, 348-357.
|
| 11 |
Lutz, J.A., van Wagtendonk, J.W., Thode, A.E., Miller, J.D. and Franklin, J.F. (2009). Climate, lightning ignitions, and fire severity in Yosemite National Park, California, USA. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 18, 765-774.
|
| 12 |
McIntyre, P.J., Thorne, J.H., Dolanc, C.R., Flint, A.L., Flint, L.E., Kelly, M. and Ackerly, D.D. (2014). Twentieth-century shifts in forest structure in California: Denser forests, smaller trees, and increased dominance of oaks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(5), 1458-1463.
|
| 13 |
Miller, J. D., Collins, B. M., Lutz, J. A., Stephens, S. L., van Wagtendonk, J. W., & Yasuda, D. A. (2012). Differences in wildfires among ecoregions and land management agencies in the Sierra Nevada region, California, USA. Ecosphere, 3(9), 1-20.
|
| 14 |
Monahan, W. B., Rosemartin, A., Gerst, K. L., Fisichelli, N. A., Ault, T., Schwartz, M. D., ... & Weltzin, J. F. (2016). Climate change is advancing spring onset across the US national park system. Ecosphere, 7(10).
|
| 15 |
Moritz, C., J.L. Patton, C.J. Conroy, J.L. Parra, G.C. White, and S.R. Beissinger. (2008). Impact of a century of climate change on small-mammal communities in Yosemite National Park, USA. Science, 322, 261-264.
|
| 16 |
NPCA (2017a). Yosemite’s Dirty Air Secret [online] National Parks Conservation Association. Available at: https://www.npca.org/articles/1640-yosemite-s-dirty-air-sec… [Accessed 14 March 2020].
|
| 17 |
NPCA. (2017b). House Votes to Weaken Clean Air Protections for Parks, Visitors [online] National Parks Conservation Association, 18 July. Available at: https://www.npca.org/articles/1594-house-votes-to-weaken-cl… 14 March 2020].
|
| 18 |
NPCA. (2018a). Clean Air Victory for San Joaquin Valley, Yosemite and Sequoia [online] National Parks Conservation Association, 25 October. Available at: https://www.npca.org/articles/1991-clean-air-victory-for-sa… [Accessed 14 March 2020].
|
| 19 |
NPCA. (2018b). Mike Reynolds Named Superintendent of Yosemite National Park. [online] National Parks Conservation Association, 24 January. Available at: https://www.npca.org/articles/1739-mike-reynolds-named-supe… 14 March 2020].
|
| 20 |
NPCA. (2018c). Willfully Ignoring Climate Change Is a Disaster for National Parks. [online] National Parks Conservation Association, 5 January. Available at: https://www.npca.org/articles/1724-willfully-ignoring-clima… [Accessed 14 March 2020].
|
| 21 |
NPCA. (2019). President’s Budget Proposal Damaging to National Parks as They Continue to Recover from Government Shutdown. [online] National Parks Conservation Association, 11 March. Available at: https://www.npca.org/articles/2130-president-s-budget-propo… [Accessed 16 March 2020].
|
| 22 |
NPS and US Department of the Interior (2020). Foundation Document Overview Yosemite National Park California. [online] National Park Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/getinvolved/upload/yose_foundation… [Accessed 14 March 2020].
|
| 23 |
Narional Park Service. (2020i). Research and Studies. [online] National Park Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/nature/research-and-studies… [Accessed 17 March 2020].
|
| 24 |
National Park Service (2017). Park Statistics. [online] National Park Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/management/statistics.htm [Accessed 5 May 2017].
|
| 25 |
National Park Service, Air Resources Division (2013). Air quality in national parks: trends (2000–2009) and conditions (2005–2009). Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/ARD/NRR—2013/683. Denver, Colorado, US: National Park Service.
|
| 26 |
National Park Service. (2009). Air Quality in National Parks 2008 Annual Performance & Progress Report. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/ARD/NRR—2009/151. Denver, USA: Natural Resource Program Center.
|
| 27 |
National Park Service. (2012). Yosemite National Park. [online] National Park Service. Available at: http://www.nps.gov/yose/parkmgmt/statistics.htm. [Accessed 12 December 2012].
|
| 28 |
National Park Service. (2015). Forest Pests. [online] National Park Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/nature/forest-pests.htm [Accessed 30 November 2020].
|
| 29 |
National Park Service. (2019). Tourism to Yosemite National Park Creates $624,129,000 in Economic Benefits. [online] National Park Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/news/tourism-to-yosemite-nat… [Accessed 30 November 2020].
|
| 30 |
National Park Service. (2020a). Environmental Issues. [online] National Park Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/nature/environmentalfactors… 14 March 2020].
|
| 31 |
National Park Service. (2020e). Parkwide Programmatic Agreement. [online] National Parks Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/getinvolved/parkwidepa.htm [Accessed 15 March 2020].
|
| 32 |
National Park Service. (2020f). National Parks Service: Laws and Policies. [online] National Park Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/management/lawsandpolicies.h…; [Accessed 15 March 2020].
|
| 33 |
National Park Service. (2020g). Zero Landfill Initiative. [online] National Park Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/getinvolved/zlf.htm [Accessed 15 March 2020].
|
| 34 |
National Park Service. (2020j). Yosemite National Park: Closures [online] National Park Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/management/closures.htm [Accessed 31 March 2020].
|
| 35 |
National Park Service. (2020b). Park Statistics. [online] National Park Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/management/statistics.htm [Accessed 14 March 2020].
|
| 36 |
National Parks Service. (2020c). Fire management. [online] National Parks Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/nature/wildlandfire.htm [Accessed 14 March 2020].
|
| 37 |
National Parks Service. (2020d). Wilderness Regulations. [online] National Park Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/wildregs.htm [A… 15 March 2020].
|
| 38 |
National Parks Service. (2020h). Learn About the Park. [online] National Parks Service. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/index.htm [Accessed 16 March 2020].
|
| 39 |
Nesmith, J., Wright, M., Jules, E., & McKinney, S. (2019). Whitebark and Foxtail Pine in Yosemite, Sequoia, and Kings Canyon National Parks: Initial Assessment of Stand Structure and Condition. Forests, 10(1), 35.
|
| 40 |
Popovich, N., Albeck-Ripka, L. and Pierre-Louis, K. (2018). 78 Environmental Rules on the Way Out Under Trump. [online] The New York Times. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/05/climate/trum… [Accessed 14 March 2020].
|
| 41 |
Repanshek, K. (2017). President Trump's Freeze On Federal Hiring Will Impact National Parks. [online] National Parks Traveller, 23 January. Available at: https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2017/01/president-tru… 16 March 2020].
|
| 42 |
Roche, J. W., Bales, R. C., Rice, R., & Marks, D. G. (2018). Management Implications of Snowpack Sensitivity to Temperature and Atmospheric Moisture Changes in Yosemite National Park, CA. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 54(3), pp.724-741.
|
| 43 |
Schwartz, M. W., Butt, N., Dolanc, C. R., Holguin, A., Moritz, M. A., North, M. P., ... & van Mantgem, P. J. (2015). Increasing elevation of fire in the Sierra Nevada and implications for forest change. Ecosphere, 6(7), 1-10.
|
| 44 |
UNESCO. (2013). Periodic Report - Second Cycle Section II-Yosemite National Park. [online] Paris, France: UNESCO. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/308/documents/ [Accessed 14 March 2015].
|
| 45 |
USA (2017a). Deputy Secretary of the Interior, Washington. ORDER NO. 3360 Subject: Rescinding Authorities Inconsistent with Secretary's Order 3349, "American Energy Independence" [online] Accessed 14 March 2020. https://www.eenews.net/assets/2018/01/05/document_gw_04.pdf
|
| 46 |
USA. (2017b). U.S. withdraws from UNESCO. [online] Share America. Available at: https://share.america.gov/u-s-withdraws-unesco/ [Accessed 2 February 2020].
|
| 47 |
Wiezcorek, G.F., and J.B. Snyder (2004). Historical Rock Falls in Yosemite National Park, California. US Geological Survey Open-File Report 03-491. US Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia, USA.
|
| 48 |
World Heritage Committee. (2018). Decision 42 COM 8E. Adoption of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value- Yosemite National Park (USA). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/7164 [Accessed 10 October 2019].
|
| 49 |
YARTS. (2020). Public Transport to Yosemite. [online] Yosemite Area Regional Transportation System. Available at: https://yarts.com/ [Accessed 15 March 2020].
|
| 50 |
van Wagtendonk, J. L., and J. A. Lutz (2007). Fire regime attributes of wildland fires in Yosemite National Park. Fire Ecology, 3(2), 34-52.
|