SECTIONS
Introduction
Purpose and NeedPetersburg National Battlefield is located in south central Virginia, 20 miles south of Richmond and 50 miles north of the Virginia/ North Carolina border. The park is comprised of 2659.19 acres that lay in four management units configured in a semi-circle east, south and west of the city of Petersburg, Virginia. The park is situated within four jurisdictions: the cities of Hopewell and Petersburg, and the counties of Dinwiddie, and Prince George.
Grant's Headquarters at City Point (approximately 21 acres) at City Point, located in the city of Hopewell, is set on a peninsula overlooking the confluence of the James and Appomattox rivers. This area has been the site of human occupation for more than 10,000 years. It was also the home of the Epps family for 344 years. Their plantation residence, Appomattox Manor, dominates the setting. This area served as General Grant's Headquarters, logistics center, and base of supply during the siege of Petersburg.
The Eastern Front is the largest section of the park (approximately 1444 acres) and represents its administrative center. It lies to the east of the city of Petersburg, between two tributaries of the Appomattox River (Harrison Creek and Poor Creek) within the city limits and Prince George County. The unit shares a boundary with the city of Petersburg and the Ft. Lee U.S. Army base. Prominent earthen structures in this unit that may still be seen on the battlefield today include; six Union and Confederate Batteries, Colquitt's, Elliott's and Gracie's Salients, and Forts Haskell and Steadman.
The Western Front (approximately 117 acres) includes the Gowen and Pennsylvania Monuments (two individual sites that total .13 acres) located within the city limits of Petersburg, and six sites west of Petersburg that follow the battle siege lines as established during the time of the conflict in those locations. These sites, all in Dinwiddie County include; Union Ft. Wadsworth (10.5 acres), Long Flank (22 acres), Short Flank (3.4 acres), the Fishhook (14.4 acres), Ft. Wheaton (1.3 acres) and Confederate Ft. Gregg. The Poplar Grove National Cemetery, where 6,181Union soldiers are interned, is also located in this unit.
The Five Forks Battlefield (approximately 1115 acres) lies approximately 17 miles southwest of the city of Petersburg in Dinwiddie County. It is still a relatively rural area of fields and forest that is located at the junction of roads that, during the Civil War period, connected the South Side Railroad with the county seat at Dinwiddie Courthouse.
Petersburg National Battlefield (PETE) was established by an act of Congress on July 3, 1926. At that time it was designated as Petersburg National Military Park. The enabling legislation identified 185 acres and a tour road (approximately 21 miles in length) as the original park land base. As additional land was added through a series of legislative boundary changes and land acquisition, the park increased in size to its present 2, 659.19 acres. There is potential for additional land acquisition (perhaps as much as 7,000 acres) as historic property becomes available in the future. Twelve areas relating to the conflict at Petersburg have been identified as potential additions to the Battlefield boundary. The potential additions are:
The location, acreage, and a brief description of each of the four management units are as follows:
Boydton Plank Road
Crater
Five Forks
Fort Stedman
Globe Tavern
Hatcher's Run
Jerusalem Plank Road
Peeble's Farm
Petersburg - The Assault
Petersburg - The Breakthrough
Ream's Station
White Oak Road
At the present time, the entire park is registered on the National Register of Historic Places.
The following purpose has been established for Petersburg National Battlefield and constitutes the interpretation of the PETE authorizing legislation. It states, in part, that the purpose of Petersburg National Battlefield is to:
Commemorate the campaign, siege, and defense of Petersburg, Virginia in 1864 and 1865;
Preserve the breastworks, earthworks, walls, or other defenses or shelters used by the armies;
Educate the American people about the campaign…….impacts and legacy in the full context of the Civil War and American history…;
Preserve Poplar Grove National Cemetery and the memorials within Petersburg National Battlefield.
This purpose is based upon the authorizing legislation of 1926; the Historic Sites, Buildings, and Antiquities Act of 1935; and the mandate of the 1916 National Park Service Organic Act to preserve, protect, and interpret cultural and natural resources (Petersburg National Battlefield DRAFT General Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement, 2004).
The purpose of this Environmental Assessment is to ensure that Petersburg National Battlefield fulfills the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 in the course of implementing the actions described in National Park Service (NPS) Director's Order #18 (DO-18). DO-18 requires that each NPS unit capable of sustaining fire develops a Fire Management Plan (FMP) describing the long-range actions required to prevent destructive wildfires. The park has no existing fire management plan (FMP). Within this Environmental Assessment, all reasonable alternatives or options for the development of an FMP are explored and the potential impacts of each are described. Analysis of the alternatives outlined in this document will provide a basis for decision-making at the park and regional level and will provide an opportunity for public involvement in the planning process.
Wildland fires occur today through both human-induced and natural means. The proposed fire management plan must define the levels of preparedness and procedural actions for wildland fires that would provide for human safety and the protection of park resources, both natural and cultural.
Fire is an ecological factor that has forever been present in many North American ecosystems. The lands encompassed by Petersburg National Battlefield are no exception. Due largely to the absence of fire, the landscape at Petersburg National Battlefield has shifted away from one dominated by mature oak-hickory forests and open fields towards a landscape characterized by pine and oak-pine forests and diminishing open fields and meadows; a condition not representative of the landscape during the time of the Civil War. In addition, as old trees have died and time has passed, fuels have accumulated on the forest floor. The ignition of these fuels in an uncontrolled situation, such as by human occurrence or by lightning could be devastating to the sensitive resources of the park as well as to adjacent lands. In addition, this type of fire poses a real threat to human life.
A variety of fire management activities may be utilized to achieve the protection of park resources. The proposed suitability and implementation of these methods, singularly or in combination, is analyzed in this document. These techniques include: the use of prescribed fire and mechanical, manual, and chemical applications to reduce hazardous fuels; perpetuate the proliferation of native vegetation, and enhance forest and ecosystem health.
The objective for the writing of a Fire Management Plan is to address park issues related to fire management as discussed in the previous paragraph. As previously described, the park must also comply with the requirements of DO-18 and the National Environmental Policy Act in meeting these objectives.
The National Park Service's Management Policy (2001) and Director's Order 18 - Wildland Fire Management, require that each park area with vegetation capable of sustaining fire develop a plan to manage fire on its lands. Petersburg National Battlefield needs to have a comprehensive fire management plan and program to protect natural and cultural resources, the public and employees, and park facilities.
This Environmental Assessment has been prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended; the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) (40 CFR 1508.9); the NPS Director's Order 12 and accompanying Handbook, and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended (36 CFR 800).
Petersburg National Battlefield is mandated by the National Park Service agency mission to maintain long term protection and preservation for all resources found within its boundaries. The park has also been tasked to prepare and implement a fire management program that supports this legislative mandate. The objectives of the fire management program that relate directly to the core mission of the park are:
1. Identify, evaluate, protect and preserve park cultural resources, including historic structures, monuments, grave sites, cemeteries, archeological sites, ethnographic resources and artifacts important to the understanding of the military actions during the campaign in and around Petersburg (General Management Plan, 2004).
2. Provide a historic context that will foster public understanding of battlefield actions resulting from the significant events leading up to, during and arising from the campaign, siege and defense of Petersburg and their impacts on the nation in the full context of American history (General Management Plan, 2004).
3. To manage natural resources in a manner that complements and protects the cultural resources and historic scenes (Resource Management Plan, 1999).
4. Conduct a safe and vigorous wildland fire management program with the highest professional and technical standards. (RM-18).
5. Efficiently accomplish resource management objectives through the application and management of prescribed and wildland fires. (RM-18)
Corollary objectives specific to fire management as mandated through the National Fire Plan (2000) and RM-18 are:
6. Suppress all unscheduled ignitions.
7. Ensure smoke production does not violate state and federal standards; and minimize smoke impacts to park neighbors.
8. Assess and reduce hazardous fuels that pose potential threats to resources to be protected (values at risk).
9. Cooperate with partners and other interested parties on fire management issues.
Issues and concerns affecting this plan were identified by NPS specialists as well as from the input of cooperating and interested parties. Internal scoping was conducted in November 2003, as well as in subsequent discussions. The assembled group of interdisciplinary experts evaluated a variety of different strategies with which to effectively implement a fire management plan for the park. Discussions relating to the development of a fire management plan for the park were centered upon core management objectives that have been identified in a variety of park management documents and that were discussed in the previous section on objectives.
The park has never had a fire management plan nor has it had access to fire management expertise for the purpose of planning fire management activities. As a result, a wide variety of issues relating to park management and fire were discussed at great length by the participants. The results of internal scoping and impact topic development are summarized below.
Impact Topics Selected for Consideration
Provide for safety as the paramount objective during all fire management activities including safety for firefighters, park visitors, and the adjacent public. This emphasis on safety is mandated by DO-18 and is the highest single priority in any activity involving wildland fire management.
Comply with state and federal air quality regulations in all fire related actions. Air quality was adopted as an impact topic.
The protection and preservation of cultural resources and properties is critical to the park mission. As a result, cultural resource protection was adopted as an impact topic and includes historic structures, archeological sites, cultural landscapes, and museum collections.
Improve the overall ecological functioning and health of oak and mixed pine-oak forests, as well as open fields found within the park. The potential exists for impacts, both positive and negative, upon vegetative species in both of these ecosystems. As a result, vegetation was adopted as an impact topic.
Because the use of prescribed fire and hazardous fuel reduction to achieve management objectives are new management tools being considered for use in the park, it is important to assess the effect the implementation of these management tools may have on local landowners and adjacent communities. Consequently, the effects of these management practices on local landowners and adjacent communities have been considered as an impact topic.
The potential impact of fire management plan alternatives on soils is of concern to park managers and was selected as an impact topic.
The presence of floodplain and wetland areas, though limited in size and scope, is important to efforts linked to the park mission of preservation and protection. As a result, they were selected for discussion as an impact topic.
The presence of a federally threatened and endangered species, the American bald eagle, as well as an occurrence of a unique vegetation community (granitic flatrock), are the basis for park management's selection of threatened and endangered species as an impact topic.
Impact Topics Dismissed from Further Consideration
The rationale for dismissing specific topics from further consideration is given below.
PRIME AND UNIQUE FARMALNDS
In August, 1980, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) directed that federal agencies must assess the effects of their actions on farmland soils classified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) as prime or unique. Prime or unique farmland is defined as soil that particularly produces general crops such as common foods, forage, fiber, and oil seed; unique farmland produces specialty crops such as fruits, vegetables, and nuts. According to the NRCS, none of the lands contained within Petersburg National Battlefield are designated as prime and unique farmlands. None of the management activities proposed by this fire management plan in any way are in derogation of the Farmland Protection and Policy Act which states that "….projects are subject to FPPA requirements if they irreversibly convert farmland (directly or indirectly) to non-agricultural use…" Therefore the topic of prime and unique farmlands was dismissed as an impact topic in this document.
SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
The proposed action would neither change local and regional land use nor impact local businesses or other agencies. Implementation of the proposed action, particularly prescribed burning, may require temporary closures of project areas which may, in turn, inconvenience some park visitors. Such closures, however, are likely to be small in size and of very short duration. The impacts to park visitors are regarded as negligible. Therefore, the socioeconomic environment will not be addresses as an impact topic in this document.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Executive Order 12898, "General Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations," requires all federal agencies to incorporate environmental justice into their missions by identifying and addressing disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs and policies on minorities and low-income populations and communities. The proposed action would not have disproportionate health or environmental effects on minorities or low-income populations or communities as defined in the Environmental Protection Agency's Environmental Justice Guidance (1998). Therefore, environmental justice was dismissed as an impact topic in this document.
OVERVIEW OF PREDOMINANT FIRE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
The primary goals of fire management are the preservation and protection of human life, property, and resources. In developing a reasonable range of alternatives for implementing a fire management plan, it is important to understand the types of fire strategies that are available to land managers. A discussion of each of the predominant fire management strategies is provided below. Because there are a limited number of strategies available, each alternative may be composed of a combination of strategies as defined in this section.
Wildland fire suppression (aggressive) - This strategy utilizes a variety of tactics in order to achieve control of a wildland fire in the most expeditious manner possible. Primary emphasis is upon limiting the fire to the smallest possible perimeter size. This may entail the use of mechanized equipment (dozers, tractor plows, engines, handcrews, and aerial resources that utilize retardants.
Wildland fire suppression (appropriate management response) - This strategy employs tactics where fire suppression resources utilize opportunities to allow fires to burn into areas where fuels are non-existent or reduced. These areas are typically represented by pre-existing natural and man-made features on the landscape (i.e. streams, trails, roads, rockslides, riparian areas, or any area with light fuels). This strategy may result in more acreage burned. However, it reduces or precludes the necessity of placing suppression resources in areas where park values at risk may be damaged by their presence, thus preventing a situation where more damage may be caused by suppression efforts than by the effects of the fire itself.
Prescribed fire - Fire intentionally ignited by fire management professionals under specific pre-determined conditions (a prescription) in order to meet specific objectives related to hazardous fuels reduction or habitat improvement. A written, approved prescribed fire plan or burn plan is prepared for each separate prescribed fire project application. This burn plan provides the information needed to implement an individual prescribed burn project, and includes measurable criteria, or prescriptions, that define the conditions under which a prescribed fire may be ignited, guides selection of appropriate management responses, and indicates other required actions. Criteria may include safety, economic, public health, environmental, geographic, administrative, social, or legal considerations, each of which is specific to the project being implemented.
A key component of the use of prescribed fire is the requirement of the preparation of a Fire Effects Monitoring Plan. This plan would describe quantifiable fire effects and methods for monitoring vegetation to determine if the desired outcomes were being achieved. If, in the course of implementation of a Fire Management Plan (FMP), Fire Effects Monitoring yields data that reflects negative impacts to the resources of the park, a new plan would be written to reduce or cease the use of prescribed fire within the park (the adaptive management technique).
Prescription - A pre-defined range of environmental variables that must be present in order for a prescribed fire to be implemented. (For example; ambient air temperature, relative humidity, fuel moisture, mixing heights, transport speeds, wind direction, fuel loading).
Hazardous fuel reduction - Hazardous fuels accumulations accrue through a variety of environmental processes. The most common is the natural accumulation of fuels over a long period of time, usually exacerbated by the total suppression of wildland fire. These accumulations can also be created through the cumulative action of such events as wind, insect damage, and ice and snow. Heavy fuel loadings create a significant wildland fire hazard since any fires occurring in these areas burn with intensities and spread rates that often are beyond the capabilities of suppression resources to effectively manage. In addition, fires of this type are much more prone to damage vegetation, soils, and forest resources through the intense heat they generate and the longer residence times they produce during the life of the fire. Fuel loading can be quantitatively measured and then reduced to safe levels through the use of a variety of techniques. Depending upon location and amount of excess fuel, manual hazard fuel reduction methods or prescribed fire may be utilized effectively, either individually or in combination. In addition, herbicide application may also be a part of the treatment regime. This process is referred to as integrated fuels management. For example, an extremely effective tool in the maintenance of some vegetation communities is the manual hazard fuel reduction and removal of excess fuel through hand-cutting, accompanied by application of low intensity prescribed fire. Hazardous fuel accumulations may also be manually cut, piled, and then burned when environmental conditions are favorable for their removal.
Integrated Fuels Management - See above (hazardous fuel reduction).
Chemical treatments - The use of herbicides to kill unwanted vegetation, such as invasive species, is an effective treatment. Herbicide use is often carried out under the guidance of an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) plan; however, there can be a beneficial overlap between IPM and fire management. Chemical treatments are often used as a follow-up to an application of prescribed fire or mechanical cutting in order to eliminate stump and root sprouting that may occur after treatment. For example, the use of prescribed fire to place stress on black locust saplings followed by a treatment of individual stumps with an indicated herbicide is very effective in reducing the proliferation of this species in those areas where the management objective is to maintain open vistas for historic scene preservation.
Herbicides may also be effectively used in broadcast application in order to eliminate selected invasive species. Re-seeding with a desired species is then undertaken, followed by an application of prescribed fire in order to aid and maintain the proliferation of native species. This technique is most commonly used in the restoration of native warm season grass communities that occur in areas where the restoration of historic grass communities is a priority. Herbicide use will be consistent with the guidelines established in the National Park Service Natural Resource Management Guideline, NPS-77 and the Exotic Plant Team Operations Manual.
Wildland Fire Use - Natural ignitions (lightning) are allowed to burn under prescribed environmental conditions in order to meet park management objectives.
In each of the alternatives that follow, predominant fire management strategies are discussed as they relate to operational implementation of each alternative. Each of the alternatives discussed will address the park's need for fire management preparedness as governed by DO-18.