Yosemite Valley Plan SEIS, Volume IB Part 2, Chapter 4: Alternative 3

Table 4-68 lists the impacts on each vantage point (vantage points are site-specific locations that have either been designed for or provide specific opportunities for visitors to view the scenery). All impacts would be long term.

Table 4-68 Potential Impacts on Vantage Points
Vantage Point	Major Impacts of this Alternative	Intensity of Impact	Type of Impact
Tunnel View	None	Negligible	Neutral
Bridalveil Fall turnout along Southside Drive	None	Negligible	Neutral
Valley View	None	Negligible	Neutral
Dewey Point	Taft Toe parking and transit facility would be visible.	Major	Adverse
Taft Point	Taft Toe parking and transit facility would be visible.	Major	Adverse
Upper Yosemite Falls	72 acres less development in east Valley. Restoration would principally be located at Camp 6, Upper and Lower River, Lower Pines and North Pines Campgrounds, and Housekeeping Camp. Removal of roads and traffic from Ahwahnee and Stoneman Meadows. Implementation of the River Protection Overlay.	Major	Beneficial
Sentinel Dome	None	None	Neutral
Glacier Point	72 acres less development in east Valley. Restoration would be visible from Glacier Point. New employee housing in Curry Village may be visible. Removal of roads and traffic from Ahwahnee and Stoneman Meadows. Implementation of the River Protection Overlay.	Major	Beneficial
El Capitan Meadow	Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center may be visible.	Moderate	Adverse
Sentinel Meadow turnout along Southside Drive	None	Negligible	Neutral
Sentinel Bridge	None	Negligible	Neutral
Four-Mile Trailhead	None	Negligible	Neutral
Columbia Point	Yosemite Falls parking area would be removed. There would be less development in east Valley.	Moderate	Beneficial
Lower Yosemite Fall View	Views would be improved by removal of adjacent vehicles, reduced traffic, and redesign of area.	Minor	Beneficial
Cook’s Meadow	Views would be improved by removal of the Superintendent’s House (Residence 1) and reduction of vehicles along the road to the north.	Minor	Beneficial

Table 4-69 lists the impacts on the 11 most important scenic features within the Valley. All impacts would be long term.

Table 4-69 Potential Impacts on Scenic Features
Scenic Feature	Major Impacts of this Alternative	Intensity of Impact	Type of Impact
Yosemite Falls	Crowding and traffic would be reduced and parking along Northside Drive could be eliminated.	Minor	Beneficial
Sentinel Rock	None	Negligible	Neutral
Glacier Point	Some views would be improved by removal of traffic through Stoneman and Ahwahnee Meadows, the removal of parking and restoration of Camp 6, and the restoration of the following campgrounds: the former Upper and Lower River, Lower Pines, and North Pines. The south portion of Yosemite Village may be less visible; however, new employee housing in Curry Village may be visible.	Moderate	Beneficial
Half Dome	Views would be improved by removal of traffic from Stoneman and Ahwahnee Meadows; the removal of Camp 6 parking and the implementation of the River Protection Overlay.	Moderate	Beneficial
North Dome	None	Negligible	Neutral
Royal Arches	Vistas near Ahwahnee Meadow would be improved by removal of the tennis courts; removal of traffic from Ahwahnee Meadow; foreground restoration of the former Upper and Lower River Campground and the implementation of the River Protection Overlay.	Moderate	Beneficial
El Capitan	New parking and transit facility would be in the view.	Moderate	Adverse
Bridalveil Fall	None	Negligible	Neutral
Cathedral Rock and Spires	The view from El Capitan would include the parking and transit facility at Taft Toe.	Moderate	Adverse
Washington Column	Vistas near Ahwahnee Meadow would be improved by removal of the tennis courts; removal of traffic from Ahwahnee Meadow; foreground restoration of the former Upper and Lower River Campground and the implementation of the River Protection Overlay.	Moderate	Beneficial
Three Brothers	Traffic would be removed along Northside Drive.	Minor	Beneficial

OUT-OF-VALLEY

Under this alternative, no out-of-Valley parking facilities would be constructed; however, facilities at each entrance station would be expanded, and housing and administrative facilities in El Portal would be increased. In El Portal, the impact of employee parking and administrative facilities would be long-term, minor, and adverse because actions would be visible from Highway 140 as the visitor approaches Yosemite National Park. The expansion of entrance station facilities would be mitigated through design, and the impacts would be long-term, minor, and adverse because they would cause new intrusions to views at already developed locations.

CONCLUSION

This alternative would have a long-term, moderate, beneficial impact on the overall scenic quality of Yosemite Valley. The overall impact intensity would be considered moderate due to the construction of the Taft Toe Visitor/Transit Center in an area that currently has no development. There would be a net decrease of 72 acres in the development footprint within Yosemite Valley. Of the 170 acres of restoration, the majority are within the A Scenic category. The majority of the actions do result in a net improvement of scenic vistas and vantage points, especially in east Valley, where there is the greatest opportunity for scenic vistas from individual locations. This alternative would, however, introduce a new scenic impact in an A Scenic area in the west Valley.

Yosemite Valley would remain one of the world’s premier landscapes. The amount of intrusion into Yosemite Valley scenery would be reduced in the east end, but consolidated parking in the west Valley would add an intrusion that does not exist today in this premier landscape. No visual intrusions would occur from the Tunnel View vantage point. Collectively, there would be long-term, minor, adverse impacts in all out-of-Valley locations because intrusions to these locations would be adjacent to previously developed areas. However, impacts in these areas can be directly related to the improvement of the views within the Valley.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Projects approved or planned that could impact scenic resources within Yosemite National Park or close to park boundaries, and the impacts of those projects, would be the same as those described under Alternative 2. Cumulatively, Alternative 3 would result in a long-term, moderate, beneficial impact.

Cultural Resources

ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Impacts to archeological resources are considered permanent unless otherwise noted.

As described for Alternative 2, every effort would be made to avoid archeological sites through careful project design and subsequent site-specific environmental compliance. If sites could not be avoided, all data recovery to retrieve important information would be conducted in accordance with the Yosemite Programmatic Agreement (see Vol. II, Appendix D).

Yosemite Valley

Yosemite Lodge and Vicinity

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as Alternative 2. With archeological data recovery, the resultant impacts would be permanent, minor, and adverse, as well as long-term, minor, and beneficial.

Yosemite Falls

The impacts would be the same as described in Alternative 2, except that the restroom would be built at the site of the existing parking lot, which would result in additional, direct impacts to one of the two prehistoric/historic American Indian sites with moderate data potential. Data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information about the site prior to construction, and would reduce the intensity of the adverse impact from moderate to minor and adverse.

Yosemite Village

Proposed undertakings include redesigning the National Park Service maintenance area; rehabilitating the Yosemite Village housing area; removing fruit trees from the historic Hutchings Orchard; constructing a new collections storage facility adjacent to the visitor center, a fire station, and rehabilitating a picnic area. These actions would involve grading, trenching, and other earthmoving activities that would potentially disturb portions of two prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation sites and one historic-era archeological site. Site data potential ranges from low to high. Data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor. As described for Alternative 2, the burial area in Yosemite Village that is paved and used for materials staging would be restored to a natural condition and protected from future development. All work in the vicinity of the burial area would be carefully designed to avoid disturbance to intact deposits, and would be monitored by archeologists and representatives of culturally associated American Indian tribes.

The Ahwahnee

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. With archelological data recovery, the resultant impact would be permanent, minor, and adverse.

Housekeeping Camp

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. With archeological data recovery, the resultant impact would be negligible.

Campgrounds

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. With archeological data recovery, the resultant adverse impacts at ten archeological sites would be permanent, minor, and adverse. Beneficial impacts would be long-term and minor.

Curry Village

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. With archeological data recovery, resultant impacts would be negligible.

Merced River Restoration

Removing Sugar Pine Bridge would involve earthmoving that would possibly disturb some intact deposits at a prehistoric American Indian habitation site with high data potential (the same as under Alternative 2). In addition, removing Superintendent’s Bridge would potentially impact a historic-era dump with unknown data potential. If sites could not be avoided, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information prior to construction, and reduce the intensity of the adverse impact from moderate to minor and adverse.

Meadow Restoration

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. With data recovery excavations, the resultant impacts would be minor and adverse, or negligible.

Circulation Changes

Constructing a major parking facility, vehicle check station, visitor center/transit center, shuttle parking, and light maintenance facility at Taft Toe would disturb or destroy three intact prehistoric/historic Indian habitation sites (one with high data potential, and two with low data potential). There are also historic-era deposits with unknown data potential. Any unavoidable impacts to archeological resources would be moderate in intensity, due to the small number of sites and their data potential. However, the impacts would be reduced in intensity from moderate to minor through data recovery in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement.

As described for Alternative 2, widening Southside Drive between El Capitan Bridge and Curry Village (with realignment at the Sentinel Bridge intersection, as well as other minor realignments) would involve grading that would disturb portions of one small prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation site with high data potential; one large prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation site with moderate data potential; and one large prehistoric/historic American Indian and Euro-American site with moderate data potential. If these sites could not be avoided, data recovery prior to construction would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Establishing a new multi-use paved trail between Swinging Bridge and El Capitan Bridge south of and adjacent to Southside Drive would involve minor grading, which would impact portions of two prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation sites (one with historic-era deposits), as described under Alternative 2. One of these sites contains high data potential, and one contains moderate data potential. If these sites could not be avoided through site design, data recovery would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

As described for Alternative 2, realigning the multi-use paved trail between Yosemite Village and Mirror Lake would involve minor grading that would disturb portions of one prehistoric American Indian site with high data potential. If this site could not be avoided, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Establishing a new multi-use paved trail between the northern abutment of Sentinel Bridge and Yosemite Village would involve minor grading that could impact an archeological site exhibiting both prehistoric and historic components with high data potential. The park would strive to avoid adverse impacts by siting the trail in such a way as to avoid affecting the site. However, if such impacts were unavoidable, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Establishing a new multi-use paved trail between The Ahwahnee and the existing bicycle path to Mirror Lake would involve minor grading, that could affect four archeological sites. All four of these sites contain both prehistoric and historic-era deposits. Three of the four have high data potential, while the fourth has moderate data potential. The park would strive to avoid adverse impacts by siting the trail in such a way as to avoid impacting the site. However, if such impacts were unavoidable, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

As described for Alternative 2, placement of multi-use paved trails, picnic areas, and campgrounds within the immediate vicinity of known archeological resources could result in long-term, minor, adverse impacts associated with visitor use, including artifact collection, soil compaction, and accelerated erosion. Given the potential for these impacts, sites subject to such visitor use, would be monitored according to the Visitor Experience and Resource Protection Program, as described in Chapter 2. Through this monitoring program, threats and disturbances would be noted. Every effort would be made to avoid or reduce adverse impacts through changes in visitor access, relocation of facilities, or archeological data recovery carried out according to the stipulations of the Programmatic Agreement.

General Valley Actions

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as Alternative 2. Potential adverse impacts to known archeological sites in Yosemite Valley are shown in table 4-70.

Table 4-70 Potential Adverse Impacts to Known Sites in Yosemite Valley (Alternative 3)
Number of Sites with High Data Potential	Number of Sites with Moderate Data Potential	Number of Sites with Low Data Potential	Number of Sites with Unknown Data Potential
9	14	7	4

Out-of-Valley

El Portal

The following impact analysis is based on general land-use planning actions for the El Portal area. The National Park Service would undertake site-specific design studies and environmental review to evaluate options for new housing and administrative facilities in El Portal. These studies would include, as necessary, additional resource surveys (archeological inventory and testing). The National Park Service would initiate further consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer, culturally associated American Indian tribes, and the public, as stipulated in the Programmatic Agreement. A complete and detailed assessment of impacts to archeological resources would be presented as part of that review.

As described for Alternative 2, several actions at Old El Portal and Village Center (constructing a multi-use trail, employee housing, and support facilities), would disturb or destroy portions of up to 14 prehistoric and historic-era archeological sites (11 of the sites have moderate data potential, 1 has low data potential, and 2 have unknown data potential). If sites could not be avoided, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement prior to construction, would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Developing employee parking in the Middle Road area (as described for Alternative 2), would involve major grading and earthmoving activities, which would disturb potentially major portions of two archeological sites: one prehistoric American Indian habitation site with historic-era deposits containing low data potential, and one historic-era site with unknown data potential. If these sites could not be avoided, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement prior to construction, would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Constructing National Park Service and concessioner administrative facilities at Railroad Flat would involve major grading, trenching, and excavation, actions that have the potential to disturb archeological deposits at portions of one prehistoric/historic Indian habitation site with low data potential. Data recovery would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Constructing housing facilities at Hillside East and West would involve major grading, excavation, and trenching that would destroy major portions of an intact prehistoric/historic American Indian habitation site (with some Euro-American deposits) with high data potential. A site-specific data recovery program, negotiated between the National Park Service, the State Historic Preservation Officer, and local culturally associated American Indian tribes would recover important information, thereby reducing the intensity of adverse impacts from major to moderate.

Development and construction at Rancheria Flat would entail grading, trenching, and excavating, potentially disturbing intact archeological deposits at two archeological sites with moderate data potential. Data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Constructing high-density housing (656 beds) and support facilities at Hennessey’s Ranch would disturb a prehistoric American Indian habitation site and part of a historic-era ranch, both of which were heavily disturbed when the Trailer Village was constructed; data potential of this site is unknown. If these sites could not be avoided, data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of this adverse impact.

As described for Alternative 2, removing an abandoned wastewater treatment plant and restoring the area to natural conditions would be carefully designed to avoid disturbance to intact areas of a prehistoric American Indian habitation site and burial area. Actions would be monitored by archeologists and culturally associated American Indian tribes, in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, and negligible impacts to archeological resources would be anticipated. Since surface conditions at this site would be restored to natural conditions, long-term impacts associated with the presence of this facility would be reduced. This would result in a long-term, minor, beneficial impact.

As described under Alternative 2, the Johnny Wilson Ranch (Riverside area), previously proposed for high-density housing (NPS 1996a), would not be developed. Instead, these archeological sites and burial area would continue to be relatively inaccessible.

Foresta and McCauley Ranch

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2, although no out-of-Valley parking would be constructed. Actions could impact archeological resources of unknown data potential, depending on design of any road improvements, stable facilities, and location of proposed housing. Data recovery excavations would reduce the intensity of any adverse impacts.

Other Out-of-Valley Areas

As described for Alternative 2, reconstructing El Portal Road between the intersection of El Portal Road/Big Oak Flat Road and Pohono Bridge would involve widening the road corridor, potentially removing or disturbing a portion of a large prehistoric/historic Indian habitation site with high data potential. Data recovery, carried out in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would retrieve important information and reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from major to minor.

Removing the four residences at Cascades, as described for Alternative 2, would involve minor grading and trenching that could disturb intact deposits at one prehistoric archeological site with unknown data potential. However, the project would be carefully designed to avoid ground disturbance in intact areas, and would be monitored by archeologists as stipulated in the Programmatic Agreement, to ensure site protection. By implementing these measures, negligible impacts would result.

Removing the Cascades Diversion Dam would not impact any archeological resources (the same as under Alternative 2). Earthmoving and facility removal would be monitored by an archeologist in the event that historic archeological features or artifacts associated with construction and use of the dam were discovered during removal.

As described for Alternative 2, since the location and design of visitor centers associated with park entrance stations are unknown at this time, it is not possible to predict the potential for impacts to archeological resources. The park would conduct archeological inventory, site evaluation, and data recovery as necessary, and further environmental review. In accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, the National Park Service would first seek to avoid impacts to any archeological resources, and would retrieve important scientific information at sites that could not be avoided, thereby reducing the intensity of any adverse impacts.

Archeological Resources Conclusion

Proposed project undertakings would have varied impacts on as many as 59 known archeological sites, with intensities of impact varying depending on the potential of the archeological sites to yield significant information about prehistoric and historic lifeways, and the nature and design of proposed development. See Chapter 3, Cultural Resources, for descriptions of low, moderate, and high data potential.

In all instances, where identified sites could not be avoided and would be disturbed, the park would carry out data recovery in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement to retrieve important scientific information, thereby reducing the intensity of adverse impacts. For some proposed project areas, information regarding the nature and importance of archeological resources is unknown; in these instances, the park would first inventory project areas, test/evaluate the significance of identified sites, and undertake data recovery to retrieve important information, in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, prior to construction disturbance.

Cumulative Impacts

Cumulative impacts would be the same as those described for Alternative 2, except this alternative would contribute to the loss of regional archeological resources as a consequence of the disturbance or degradation of as many as 59 additional known archeological sites. With appropriate mitigation, the cumulative adverse impacts associated with this alternative, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, would be minor.

ETHNOGRAPHIC RESOURCES

As described for Alternative 2, the National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in keeping with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies for impacts to ethnographic resources. Such strategies could include identifying and helping provide access to alternative resource-gathering areas; continuing to provide access to traditional use or spiritual areas; and screening new development from traditional use areas.

Yosemite Valley

Yosemite Lodge and Vicinity

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. With mitigation, the resultant adverse impacts would be negligible; and beneficial impacts would be long-term and minor.

Lower Yosemite Fall

Impacts under this alternative would be essentially the same as under Alternative 2. With mitigation, the resultant adverse impacts would be negligible; and beneficial impacts would be permanent and minor.

Yosemite Village

As described for Alternative 2, rehabilitating the Yosemite Village Historic District housing area would improve habitat conditions for California black oak, a traditionally gathered resource. Conversely, constructing a new emergency facility in this area would disturb a small portion of the same traditional gathering area, a contributing element of the Valleywide ethnographic landscape, thus causing long-term, minor, adverse impacts. Appropriate mitigation strategies, developed in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, would reduce the intensity of impacts from minor to negligible.

The Ahwahnee

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. There would be no impact to ethnographic resources.

Housekeeping

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. There would be negligible impact.

Campgrounds

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. With mitigation, the resultant adverse impacts would be permanent and minor. Beneficial impacts would be long-term and moderate.

Curry Village

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. Impacts would be negligible.

Merced River Restoration

Removing Sugar Pine, Stoneman, Housekeeping, and Superintendent’s Bridges, along with the raised causeway between Sugar Pine and Ahwahnee Bridges, would have long-term, minor, beneficial impacts by partly restoring habitat in a traditional gathering area, a contributing element of the ethnographic landscape. This could allow for recovery of traditionally used plants, and enhance their availability for procurement.

Meadow Restoration

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. Impacts would be long-term, minor, and beneficial.

Circulation Changes

Constructing a visitor center, a transit center, and day-visitor parking at Taft Toe would have long-term, minor, adverse impacts on the ethnographic landscape by disturbing or destroying a traditional gathering area. The National Park Service would consult with culturally associated American Indian tribes, in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, regarding sensitive design guidelines and other appropriate mitigation (such as identifying and helping provide access to alternative resource-gathering areas), to reduce the intensity of the impacts from minor to negligible.

Realigning Southside Drive south of Sentinel Bridge would disturb a portion of a historic village, as described for Alternative 2, resulting in a permanent, minor, adverse impact on the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies for impacts to ethnographic resources. Such strategies could include identifying and helping provide access to alternative resource-gathering areas; continuing to provide access to traditional use or spiritual areas; and screening new developments from traditional use areas. This would reduce the intensity of the adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

Widening Southside Drive between El Capitan Bridge and Curry Village, as described for Alternative 2, would disturb portions of four historic villages, and possibly disturb resources at one traditional gathering area, although it might be possible to avoid this resource through careful site design. This would result in permanent, minor, adverse impacts on the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. Appropriate mitigation strategies would reduce the intensity of the adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

As described for Alternative 2, actions and related impacts associated with constructing multi-use paved trails in the east Valley would not impact any traditional use areas. Constructing a new multi-use paved trail between Swinging Bridge and El Capitan Bridge could disturb two historic village areas, causing permanent, minor, adverse impacts to the Valleywide ethnographic landscape. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in keeping with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies for impacts to ethnographic resources. Such strategies could include recovering important archeological data, as well as using any other measures identified during consultation, which would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts from minor to negligible.

General Valley Actions

Impacts under this alternative would be essentially the same as under Alternative 2. With mitigation, impacts would be negligible.

Out-of-Valley

El Portal

The impact analysis presented below is based on general land-use planning actions for El Portal, and is based on limited information regarding the location and significance of ethnographic properties. The National Park Service would undertake site-specific design studies and environmental review to evaluate options for new housing and administrative facilities. These studies would include, as necessary, additional resource surveys (ethnographic resources inventory and evaluation). The National Park Service would initiate further consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer, culturally associated Indian tribes, and the public, as provided for in the Programmatic Agreement. A complete and detailed assessment of impacts to ethnographic resources would be presented as part of that review.

Constructing single-family homes at Hillside West, studio apartments at Hillside East and West, and employee housing at Village Center would destroy a large portion of a historic village area, similar to Alternative 2, resulting in a permanent, major, adverse impact. The portions of this historic village site that are known to contain human burials would be protected from development. As described in Alternative 2, mitigation would reduce the intensity of adverse impact to moderate. Constructing single-family homes, apartments, and housing support facilities at Rancheria Flat, Hennessey’s Ranch, and Old El Portal, as well as administrative facilities at Railroad Flat, would disturb or destroy portions of at least three traditional gathering areas, resulting in long-term, minor, adverse impacts. With mitigation, the resultant impacts would be negligible.

Removing the abandoned wastewater treatment facility would have permanent, moderate, beneficial impacts on a prehistoric village and burial area by eliminating modern, intrusive development (the same as under Alternative 2). To ensure protection of these intact deposits and burials, which are held in high regard by culturally associated American Indian tribes, this removal would be carefully designed and implemented. The work would be monitored by representatives from culturally affiliated American Indian tribes to ensure protection of any objects or remains subject to Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) provisions.

Other Out-of-Valley Areas

Actions at McCauley Ranch and at the park entrance stations would have unknown impacts on ethnographic resources, since there is not enough information about the location and significance of ethnographic resources to assess the nature and intensity of impacts. The National Park Service, in consultation with culturally associated American Indian tribes, and in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, would develop appropriate mitigation strategies for reducing the intensity of any adverse impacts.

Rehabilitating the Foresta Campground would occur in an area used for traditional ceremonies. This action would be designed to avoid the most sensitive areas, and scheduled administrative use of the campground would not overlap with the campground’s use for traditional activities. As a result, adverse impacts to ethnographic resources would be negligible.

The National Park Service has consulted with the American Indian Council of Mariposa County, Inc., during planning and preliminary design for the reconstruction of El Portal Road. The proposed reconstruction of the easternmost portion of the road, the removal of the Cascades Diversion Dam and screenhouse, and the removal of the four Cascades residences would not impact any known ethnographic resources.

Ethnographic Resources Conclusion

Proposed undertakings would have varied impacts ranging from potentially major to negligible, depending in part on the nature and design of proposed development, and the sensitivity of the different traditional use areas. In Yosemite Valley, proposed actions would disturb or destroy parts of up to eight traditional gathering areas; would add or expand modern development at eight historic village areas; and would add development in at least one area figuring in oral traditions. However, facility removal and ecological restoration would benefit up to five traditional gathering areas by enhancing conditions for plant resources; and would remove modern development from three historic village areas. In general, actions in Yosemite Valley would have minor, adverse impacts to the Valleywide ethnographic landscape.

In El Portal, proposed actions are designed to maximize administrative, park operations, and residential development. The precise nature and intensity of adverse impacts to ethnographic resources in El Portal, Foresta, McCauley Ranch, and other out-of-Valley areas are unknown. In El Portal, however, proposed actions would most likely have permanent, moderate to major, adverse impacts by destroying portions of historic villages and traditional gathering areas, and by adding concentrated residential use in some areas that are currently undeveloped. As in Yosemite Valley and other park areas, known burial areas would be protected from disturbance, and modern facilities in burial areas would be removed. The National Park Service would conduct an ethnographic resources inventory and evaluation of El Portal, as well as other out-of-Valley areas, and would continue consulting with culturally associated American Indian tribes to seek ways to avoid, minimize, and mitigate potential adverse impacts to ethnographic resources. These measures could include setting aside some areas for traditional uses; designing new development to avoid the most sensitive areas; screening development from traditional use areas; and directing visitor and residential use away from sensitive areas.

Cumulative Impacts

Cumulative impacts on ethnographic resources would be the same as those described for Alternative 2. Minor to moderate cumulative, adverse impacts would result from implementing this alternative, in conjunction with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future undertakings.

CULTURAL LANDSCAPE RESOURCES (INCLUDING
INDIVIDUALLY SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES)

Yosemite Valley

Natural Systems and Features

Under Alternative 3, large portions of the natural landscape, which has influenced the physical development in Yosemite Valley, would be rehabilitated and restored to natural conditions. The major focus of this effort would be the long-term restoration of the Merced River corridor and the rehabilitation of eight meadows that are historically significant and contribute to the Valleywide cultural landscape. California black oak woodlands would be rehabilitated and restored to natural conditions, and general environmental restoration would enhance the historic vegetative mosaic of coniferous forest, oak woodlands, and open meadows. These actions would collectively result in a long-term, beneficial, impact to the cultural landscape of the Valley.

Historic Land Use Patterns

Historic land use patterns, which have concentrated visitor services and administration in the east Valley, would be dramatically altered. Construction of day-visitor parking, transit, and visitor facilities at Taft Toe would shift the major focus of arrival and orientation in Yosemite Valley from its historic location at Yosemite Village. This would result in a permanent, major, adverse impact on the spatial organization of the cultural landscape. The National Register Historic Districts and properties of Camp Curry, Yosemite Village, and The Ahwahnee, would remain, and would largely continue to function as they did historically, with the exception of Yosemite Village, as noted above. While camping would remain in the Upper and Lower Pines Campgrounds and Camp 4 (Sunnyside Campground), relocating other Valley campgrounds currently situated along the Merced River would be a change in historic land use patterns, resulting in a permanent, minor, adverse impact.

Historic Circulation Systems

Proposed changes to circulation systems throughout Yosemite Valley would result in removal of one historic road segment, realignment of a portion of Northside Drive, and realignment and widening of a portion of Southside Drive. All three of these historic roads are contributing structures to the proposed Yosemite Valley Cultural Landscape Historic District. The historic road segment currently bisecting Upper and Lower River Campgrounds would be removed. A segment of Northside Drive at Yosemite Lodge would be realigned, and the segment between Yosemite Lodge and El Captain crossover would be closed to motor vehicles. While the lanes would significantly alter the way in which visitors experience this historic "loop" circulation pattern through the Valley, it would not result in any physical changes to this segment of Northside Drive itself. A portion of Southside Drive would be widened to accommodate two-way traffic, and the segment near the Chapel would be realigned, changing the physical structure of this contributing element. Other changes in the circulation system consist of adding new multi-use paved trails, rehabilitating or realigning existing multi-use paved trails, and constructing day-visitor parking at Taft Toe near El Capitan crossover. Collectively, these changes would result in a long-term, moderate, adverse impact to historic circulation systems that contribute to the cultural landscape. Removal or alteration of historic road segments would be partly mitigated by documentation, thus preserving a historical record (although the resource would be changed or would cease to exist). Addition of new (and modification of existing) multi-use paved trails and addition of a traffic check station would be partly mitigated by the use of compatible design; thus, the intensity of these adverse impacts would be reduced from moderate to minor. Removing non-contributing roads from Ahwahnee and Stoneman Meadows would have a minor, beneficial, and permanent impact.

In general, changes to physical features and addition of new structures and facilities within the Valleywide cultural landscape would follow design guidelines consistent with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation (USDOI 1983). In this manner, the potential for impacts resulting from addition of non-historic facilities would be reduced.

Historic Structures

Restoration of the Merced River would result in the removal of Sugar Pine and Stoneman Bridges, both listed in the National Register of Historic Places. This would result in the loss of two individually significant historic structures, resulting in a permanent, major, adverse impact. Although the physical structures would be lost, these impacts would be mitigated through documentation and salvage of historic materials, thus reducing the intensity of adverse impacts from major to moderate. Documentation of Sugar Pine and Stoneman Bridges has been completed, thus preserving a historical record of the resources.

The individually significant Superintendent’s House (Residence 1) and its associated garage would be removed. As in Alternative 1, this would result in the loss of the historic structure; therefore, there would be no additional adverse impact. However, this action would result in immediate, rather than eventual, loss. The structures and their setting have already been documented; therefore, although the physical structures would be removed, a historical record has been preserved. In addition, the National Park Service would salvage historic materials as stipulated in the Programmatic Agreement.

Other historic structures that are not individually significant but contribute to the Valleywide cultural landscape would be removed. These structures consist of Superintendent’s and Housekeeping Bridges, the concessioner stable and its associated structures, three pedestrian bridges at Lower Yosemite Fall, and riprap, wing, and check dams along the Merced River and its tributaries. In addition, three pedestrian bridges at Lower Yosemite Fall would be rehabilitated or rebuilt, and one would be relocated. These actions would result in the loss or change in contributing elements of the Valleywide landscape, resulting in a permanent, moderate, adverse impact. Although the physical structures would be lost or changed, these impacts would be partly mitigated through documentation, thus reducing the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor.

Actions at Yosemite Lodge and Housekeeping Camp would not result in the loss of any historic structures, as there are no historic structures in either of these developed areas.

Historic Districts and Developed Areas

Yosemite Village: The historic design and spatial organization of the Yosemite Village area would be rehabilitated, resulting in the preservation of many of the historic structures; removal of non-contributing structures; redevelopment of non-contributing areas within the district; and restoration of some areas to natural conditions. This would result in a permanent, minor, beneficial impact to the design and spatial organization of the district. However, historic land uses would change significantly (e.g., removing primary visitor arrival and orientation, removing National Park Service stable and parkwide administration), although many of the land uses historically associated with the village, such as museum facilities and employee housing, would remain. In addition, the re-establishment of historic viewsheds from within the village and the protection of the California black oak woodland would enhance the historic character of the developed area, resulting in a permanent, minor, beneficial impact.

Natural resource restoration and redevelopment at Camp 6, Yosemite Village, and Ahwahnee Meadow would result in the removal of several historic structures that contribute to the cultural landscape. These buildings consist of the Concessioner Headquarters Building; the Village Garage and associated apartment and three shop buildings; the "Y" Apartments; the Ahwahnee Row Houses, cottages, converted cabins, laundry room, and garage. These actions would result in the loss of historic structures, resulting in a permanent, moderate, adverse impact to the cultural landscape. The loss of the historic structures would be mitigated by HABS/HAER documentation, and salvage of historic materials as stipulated in the Programmatic Agreement. In this manner, a historical record would be preserved even though the structures themselves would cease to exist; thus, the intensity of adverse impacts would be reduced from moderate to minor. In cases where historic structures would be lost, the National Park Service would first consider the possibility of relocation and adaptive reuse in another location within the park.

Actions at the National Park Service maintenance area would result in the loss of the National Park Service Operations Building (Fort Yosemite) and thirteen additional historic structures that contribute to the cultural landscape, resulting in a permanent, moderate, adverse impact to the cultural landscape. This would be mitigated through documentation and salvage of historic materials, as stipulated in the Programmatic Agreement. Thus, although the structures themselves would cease to exist, a historical record would be preserved, reducing the intensity of adverse impacts from moderate to minor. In cases where historic structures would be lost, the National Park Service would first consider the possibility of relocation and adaptive reuse in another location within the park. The area would be redeveloped for district operational needs, resulting in the addition of non-historic facilities adjacent to the Yosemite Village Historic District. The impact associated with this would be mitigated by using compatible design, thus reducing the intensity of impact from minor to negligible.

In the Yosemite Village Historic District, individually contributing structures would be retained and some would be rehabilitated for adaptive reuse. The National Park Service Administration Building would be rehabilitated for a new use as a natural history museum. The Museum/Valley District Building would be rehabilitated for use solely as a cultural history museum. Rehabilitation of these structures would follow the Secretary’s Standards (USDOI 1983), and thus would have negligible impacts on the historic structures and the district itself. The Visitor Center and auditoriums would be rehabilitated for use as part of the educational function in Yosemite Village (to house the Yosemite Museum collections, including the research library and archives, and provide space for theater productions and special programs). Two new facilities would be constructed within the historic district: a new museum collection storage facility adjacent to the Visitor Center auditoriums and a fire station adjacent to the residential area. This would result in a permanent, minor, adverse impact to the historic district. This impact would be mitigated by designing the new facilities to be compatible with the district in terms of scale, massing, materials, orientation, and design; thus, the intensity of this adverse impact would be reduced to negligible.

Curry Village and the Camp Curry Historic District: Actions proposed for the Curry Village developed area and the Camp Curry Historic District would result in the loss of historic structures; construction of new facilities within the historic district; and construction of an employee housing area adjacent to the historic district. Collectively, these actions would result in permanent, major, adverse impacts as described below.

The historic Curry Orchard, the Curry Orchard parking area, 277 historic guest tent cabins, some historic comfort stations, the Tresidder Residence, Cabin 90A/B, and the Huff House would be removed, resulting in a permanent, major, adverse impact to the historic district. The intensity of this impact would be reduced through site design, by retaining, to the extent possible, the general configuration of the remaining 150 tent cabins around the central core of the village, in keeping with the historic design and extent of Camp Curry. The intensity of this impact would also be reduced by documentation of historic structures as described in the Programmatic Agreement. In this manner, although the physical structures would be lost, a historical record would be preserved. The resultant intensity of these adverse impacts would therefore be moderate.

Other actions in the Curry Village developed area would result in the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of several individual historic structures. These structures consist of Mother Curry Bungalow, Stoneman Lodge, the 48 cabins-with-bath, Cottage 819, the Lounge, and the Registration Building. Rehabilitation would be accomplished in keeping with the Secretary’s Standards (USDOI 1983); thus, there would be a negligible impact on historic structures.

Construction of 54 new lodging units (4-plex bungalows), a cafeteria, and two new parking areas (one at the west end to serve the bungalows, and one at the east end to serve the tent cabins) would add non-historic facilities within the historic district, resulting in a permanent, major, adverse impact. This impact would be partly reduced through the use of compatible design, retention of original Camp Curry cluster arrangement, and use of compatible materials, thus reducing the intensity of adverse impacts from major to moderate. Construction of employee housing facilities, a fire station, and the campground check station and recreational vehicle dump station would introduce non-historic facilities adjacent to the historic district, potentially resulting in a moderate, adverse impact. This impact would be reduced through use of compatible design and appropriate screening, thus reducing the intensity of the impact from moderate to minor.

The Ahwahnee: Impacts under this alternative would be the same as Alternative 2. With mitigation, the resultant adverse impact would be permanent and negligible.

Historic Sites

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as Alternative 2, although fewer new campsites would be added to Camp 4 (Sunnyside Campground). With mitigation, the resultant adverse impact would be permanent, minor, and adverse.

Historic Orchards

Lamon, Hutchings, and Curry Orchards would be removed. As in Alternative 1, this would result in loss of the historic resources; therefore, there would be no additional adverse impact. However, this action would result in immediate (rather than eventual) loss. The loss of these resources would be mitigated through initiation of a genetic conservation program and documentation of the orchards; thus, a historical record and representative plants would be preserved, although the orchards would cease to exist.

Out-of-Valley Resources

El Portal

The impact analysis presented below is based on general land-use planning actions for El Portal. The National Park Service would undertake site-specific design studies and environmental review to evaluate options for new housing and administrative facilities in El Portal. The National Park Service would initiate further consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer, culturally associated American Indian tribes, and the public, as provided for in the Programmatic Agreement. A complete and detailed assessment of potential impacts to historic properties would be presented as part of that review.

As described for Alternative 2, the construction of single-family homes in Old El Portal would not impact any historic structures, nor would constructing housing and a day care center at Rancheria Flat (the three historic Barium Mine houses would be retained).

Similar to Alternative 2, the construction of single-family homes at Hillside West and studio apartments at Hillside East and West would not impact any historic structures. Structures built adjacent to El Portal Chapel (the old school) would be designed to be compatible with the historical setting. Constructing high-density housing and support facilities at Hennessey’s Ranch would not impact any historic structures. Prior to design, the National Park Service would inventory and evaluate the importance of potential cultural landscape features at this location, remnants of Hennessey’s farming operation. If any significant resources could not be avoided in site design, further environmental review and impact mitigation would be undertaken prior to construction.

Constructing employee and day-visitor parking in the Middle Road area, as well as administrative facilities for the National Park Service and concessioner at Railroad Flat, and a multi-use trail between Rancheria Flat and Village Center (through Hennessey’s Ranch), would not impact any historic structures (as described for Alternative 2).

Similar to Alternative 2, the construction of apartments and other community and commercial facilities, at El Portal Village Center could impact historic resources (such as the El Portal Market, the Railroad residences, the old El Portal Store, and El Portal Hotel). The precise nature of impacts on historic resources is unknown, pending the siting and design of the facilities, which would be the subject of future, tiered, site-specific environmental compliance. Every effort would be made to avoid or otherwise mitigate adverse impacts, (e.g., through sensitive, compatible design, and the screening of modern development from historic structures and documentation), thus reducing the intensity of the adverse impacts.

As described for Alternative 2, the historic El Portal Hotel would be adaptively rehabilitated or removed. Adaptive rehabilitation would be undertaken in accordance with the Secretary’s Standards (USDOI 1983). Because removal of the individually significant historic structure would be a permanent, major, adverse impact, the National Park Service would document the structure and salvage historic materials, in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, to reduce the intensity of the adverse impact.

Foresta and McCauley Ranch

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. There would be no impact as a result of construction of single-family homes. Impacts resulting from other actions, such as road widening, are unknown. The National Park Service would conduct inventory and evaluation studies to identify any significant resources. The National Park Service would avoid adverse impacts to the extent possible, and any potential adverse impacts would be mitigated according to stipulations of the Programmatic Agreement.

Merced River Gorge

Impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. With mitigation, the resultant impacts would be permanent, moderate, and adverse.

Other Areas

As described for Alternative 2, constructing new visitor centers at park entrance stations would have an unknown impact on historic resources. Historic properties would be inventoried and evaluated for National Register eligibility, according to stipulations of the Programmatic Agreement. The National Park Service would avoid adverse impacts to the extent possible, and would mitigate any potential adverse impacts according to the stipulations of the Programmatic Agreement.

Cultural Landscape Resources Conclusion

Proposed undertakings would have varied impacts on historic sites, structures, and cultural landscape resources. Major to minor, adverse impacts would result from the removal or modification of historic buildings and structures, or from the introduction of modern facilities and development either within historic districts or within sight. Designing new facilities to be compatible with historic structures, and carrying out standard mitigation measures (e.g., HABS/HAER documentation) under the Programmatic Agreement would reduce the intensity of adverse impacts.

Beneficial impacts would result from measures intended to restore native vegetation communities in patterns more in keeping with the cultural landscape and historic setting. The removal of non-contributing facilities and development from historic areas would also have beneficial impacts. The adaptive use of historic buildings would assist their long-term preservation, and would be carried out in accordance with the Secretary’s Standards (USDOI 1983).

In Yosemite Valley, the new development at Taft Toe under this alternative would result in permanent, major, adverse impacts to many of the significant characteristics of the Valleywide cultural landscape. Historical patterns of land use, circulation, and spatial organization at the Valleywide scale would be dramatically altered. This alternative would also result in adverse impacts to individual features, such as the loss of Superintendent’s House (Residence 1), as well as the loss of the Sugar Pine, Stoneman, Superintendent’s, and Housekeeping Bridges due to ecological restoration of the Merced River corridor. Other historic structures would be removed, such as the Ahwahnee Row houses, NPS maintenance complex, and the concessioner stable. Beneficial impacts to the Valleywide cultural landscape would result from such actions as meadow restoration, the removal of non-contributing structures, and the ecological restoration of the riparian corridor along Yosemite Creek and the Merced River south of Yosemite Lodge. New development would be designed to be compatible with existing historic districts or settings to the greatest extent possible, and adverse impacts to individual features would be mitigated according to stipulations of the Programmatic Agreement. The impact to the overall character of the Valleywide cultural landscape with mitigation would be reduced from major to moderate.

For some project areas, the impacts on historic properties are unknown until further site-specific historic resource studies have been undertaken, and project designs have been more fully developed. In these instances, the park would carry out any necessary inventories; evaluations of National Register significance; consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer, culturally associated American Indian tribes and the public; and treatment/mitigation as stipulated in the Programmatic Agreement prior to any construction disturbance.

Cumulative Impacts

Cumulative impacts on historic resources would be the same as under Alternative 2. In Yosemite Valley, implementation of this alternative would result in cumulative, minor, adverse impacts in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. In a regional context, cumulative, minor, adverse impacts would result from implementing this alternative in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions.

MUSEUM COLLECTION (INCLUDING ARCHIVES AND
RESEARCH LIBRARY)

Under this alternative, a new collections storage facility, with appropriate environmental and security control systems, would be constructed adjacent to the present Valley Visitor Center, and one of the visitor center’s two auditoriums would be rehabilitated to serve as a repository for the park’s museum collection and archives. The research library would be moved to the new collections storage facility, which would have beneficial impacts on the collections and materials. Eliminating or reducing the need to transport materials from outlying facilities (which often raises the risk of handling or in-transit damage) would further enhance resource protection.

As described for Alternative 2, housing materials in a centralized facility near the park museums would permit more effective management by park staff, facilitating their ability to monitor and maintain the collections and exhibits. This action would also maintain the historic association between the collections and the Yosemite Museum, the first museum in the National Park System. It would also allow park staff to better assist researchers and other staff. Public and research access space would also be greatly improved, and would enhance the visitor experience. Implementing these measures would have overall long-term, moderate to major, beneficial impacts on the materials and public/staff use.

Museum Collection Conclusion

Housing the collection and archival materials in a central facility would have moderate to major, beneficial impacts on the materials, and would significantly improve the park’s effectiveness in managing and protecting these resources. Access to the materials would be enhanced for researchers and others, with ample space to carry out research and other activities. The park would be able to comply with the National Park Service Museum Handbook (NPS 1990a) and Director’s Order 28 — Cultural Resource Management (NPS 1998l), as well as the Draft Director’s Order - 24, Standards for National Park Service Museum Collections Management (NPS 1999e). This alternative also minimizes risk to the collection while in transit by reducing the distance between curation facility and exhibit area.

Cumulative Impacts

Implementing this alternative would have cumulative, minor, beneficial impacts on the museum collection in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably future undertakings. Housing the resources in a central, rehabilitated facility with adequate environmental and security control systems would assist their protection and long-term preservation. No adverse impacts to the resource would be expected. It is not reasonable to compare the Yosemite Museum Collection with that of other repositories or sites, because of the extent and unique nature of this collection. Facility upgrades and improved management of museum collection and archives within the park would incrementally add to the overall effectiveness of regional curation efforts.

SECTION 106 SUMMARY

As described for Alternative 2, under regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (36 CFR 800.9) addressing the criteria of effect and adverse effect, undertakings proposed under this alternative have the potential to adversely affect significant historic properties. Ethnographic resources would be disturbed or destroyed by construction occurring in traditional plant-gathering areas, former village sites, and/or places holding special sacred and spiritual significance to American Indians. Historic sites, structures, districts, and cultural landscape features would also be adversely affected by undertakings entailing substantial facility alteration or removal, or the introduction of modern non-contributing development within or in proximity to historic districts and sensitive landscape areas. To mitigate adverse effects, the park would carry out HABS/HAER documentation, the salvage of historic materials, cooperative agreement provisions for traditional plant gathering, or other suitable mitigation in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement.

Many archeological resources having varied potential to yield prehistoric and historic information would be affected by ground disturbing activities. To avoid adverse effects to archeological resources, the park would carry out data recovery to retrieve important information, in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement.

No adverse effects to the park’s museum collection and archives would result from housing materials in a central facility with adequate environmental and security controls. The rehabilitation and adaptive use of historic buildings, the restoration of vegetation contributing to historic settings and the cultural landscape, and the removal of non-contributing structures and landscape elements would also have no adverse effect on historic properties. Rehabilitation would be carried out in accordance with the Secretary’s Standards (USDOI 1983)

For project areas lacking sufficient cultural resource data or design information to adequately assess effects, the park would carry out inventories, evaluate identified resources for national register significance, and recommend avoidance or appropriate treatment/standard mitigation measures prior to construction disturbance.

Merced Wild and Scenic River

This assessment is based on the Merced Wild and Scenic River Plan Comprehensive Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement (Merced River Plan) and its management elements. The applicable Merced Wild and Scenic River segments are 2 (Yosemite Valley), 3A and 3B (Impoundment and Gorge), 4 (El Portal), and 7 (Wawona). See Vol. Ia, Chapter 3, Merced Wild and Scenic River, for further discussion on the management elements of the Merced River Plan.

Alternatives have been assessed within a river segment with regard to their: (1) impacts on the Outstandingly Remarkable Values (the values for which the river was designated by Congress; (2) compatibility with classifications; (3) compatibility with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act Section 7 determination process; (4) consistency with the River Protection Overlay; and (5) consistency with management zoning. The Merced River Plan, which established the River Protection Overlay, management zoning, Wild and Scenic Rivers Act Section 7 determination process, and the Visitor Experience and Resource Protection framework (within the wild and scenic river boundaries), is discussed as a cumulative project.

Consistency of the Yosemite Valley Plan alternatives with the wild and scenic river boundaries are analyzed through the analysis of Yosemite Valley Plan consistency with the Merced River Plan management zoning.

YOSEMITE VALLEY (SEGMENT 2)

Outstandingly Remarkable Values Impacts

Outstandingly Remarkable Values for this segment are scenic, geologic processes/conditions, recreation, biological, cultural, and hydrologic processes. A description of Outstandingly Remarkable Values are found in Vol. II, Appendix B. Potential impacts of this alternative to these Outstandingly Remarkable Values are shown in table 4-71 below.

Actions to implement the River Protection Overlay would have beneficial impacts to the scenic, recreation, biological, cultural, and hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Values. The River Protection Overlay prescription would be an important parameter in implementing the actions listed in table 4-71.

The campground-related actions would have an overall beneficial effect on the scenic Outstandingly Remarkable Value due to restoration of areas visible from the river. These actions would not adversely impact the recreation Outstandingly Remarkable Value because camping opportunities would be retained. The campground-related actions would have an overall beneficial impact on the biological and hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Values because of restoration of riparian areas and campsites would be removed from highly valued resources and close proximity to the river.

The Housekeeping Camp-related actions would have a long-term, beneficial effect on the scenic Outstandingly Remarkable Value due to restoration of areas visible from the river. Removal of Housekeeping Camp units could have an adverse effect on cultural Outstandingly Remarkable Values due to potential disturbance of river-related archeological resources. The actions at Housekeeping Camp would have a beneficial impact on the biological and hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Values because of restoration of riparian areas and because Housekeeping Camp lodging units would be removed from highly valued resources and from close proximity to the river. These actions would not have an adverse impact on the recreational Outstandingly Remarkable Value because some Housekeeping units would be retained.

Actions at Yosemite Lodge would have beneficial and adverse impacts on the Outstandingly Remarkable Values. The removal of Yosemite Lodge units, and restoration of the former cabins area and the area between Yosemite Lodge and the Merced River would have a beneficial impact on the biological and hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Values. The relocation of Northside Drive and construction of parking would have a minor, adverse impact on the hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Value because they would be placed in the 100-year floodplain, and would interfere with the 100-year flood event, but also an indirect, beneficial impact because lodging units (which impede flood flow more so than roads and parking lots) can be constructed outside of the boundary. As described in the Water Resources section of this chapter, impacts on hydrologic processes would be minimal because flood flow in this area is low velocity, and is not appreciably affected by parking areas or roads. The construction of lodging units would result in minor, adverse radiating impacts on the meadow and riparian communities inside the boundary.

Table 4-71 Impacts to Outstandingly Remarkable Values for Segment 2 (Yosemite Valley)
Action	ORV Affected	Impact to Outstandingly Remarkable Value	Impact Duration	Mitigation	Impact Magnitude and Type
Actions to Implement River Protection Overlay
Remove Sugar Pine, Housekeeping, Superintendent’s, Stoneman Bridges, and Yosemite Creek (pedestrian) bridges Remove campsites, and campground infrastructure from River Protection Overlay at Upper Pines, Lower Pines, North Pines, Upper River, Lower River, and Backpacker’s campgrounds Remove Housekeeping Units from River Protection Overlay Remove parking from River Protection Overlay at Camp 6 Remove former Superintendent’s House (Residence 1) from River Protection Overlay Remove picnic area at Swinging Bridge Restore areas where development is removed from the River Protection Overlay Restore River Protection Overlay near Yosemite Lodge	Scenic Biological Cultural Hydrologic Processes	Potentially improves view of waterfalls, cliffs, and forest/meadow interface from the river by encouraging restoration Condition of river-related habitats (e.g., riparian areas and meadows) would be monitored and visitor use managed; restoration of damaged habitat is encouraged River Protection Overlay specifically accommodates preservation and protection of significant archeological sites, ethnographic resources, historic structures, and landscape features Contributes to restoration of natural flood regime, limits unnatural erosion, stabilizes banks (where applicable); allows for the main channel to link with backwater areas, tributaries, and groundwater systems; and allows river to meander more freely (where applicable) by limiting and potentially removing facilities	Long-term Long-term Long-term Long-term	NA NA NA NA	Minor, beneficial Moderate, beneficial Minor, beneficial Major, beneficial
Campgrounds
Upper and Lower River, North Pines, Yellow Pines and a portion of Lower Pines Campgrounds would be removed and restored Former Group Campground (currently abandoned) and Backpackers Campground restored	Scenic Scenic Scenic	Removal of facilities (i.e., construction equipment) would be visible from river Some new walk-in and drive-in sites would be visible from the river Restoration of these areas to natural conditions enhances scenic interface of river, meadow, and forest	Short-term Long-term Long-term	None None NA	Minor, adverse Minor, adverse Moderate, beneficial
New walk-in sites at Upper Pines, Camp 4 (Sunnyside Campground), Tenaya Creek, and Backpackers/ South Camp New drive-in sites at Upper Pines	Biological Biological	Restoration of riparian, meadow, wetland, and river-related vegetation where campgrounds are removed; visitor use of river originating from campgrounds would decrease, resulting in less trampling of riparian habitat Removal of facilities (restrooms, lateral sewer lines, etc.) would result in disturbance to vegetation communities	Long-term Short-term	NA Revegetation, trenching guidelines	Moderate, beneficial Negligible, adverse
	Biological	River-related vegetation at new campsites would be degraded; impacts associated with visitor use/travel would radiate from the new campsites	Long-term	Fence sensitive areas, campsite definition, path definition	Minor, adverse
	Cultural	Construction of new campground facilities could result in damage to river-related archeological resources	Long-term	Archeological excavation	Minor, adverse
	Cultural	Removal of Upper and Lower River Campgrounds and restoration to natural conditions would result in improved conditions for traditional gathering	Long-term	NA	Minor, beneficial
	Cultural	Construction of new campground facilities could damage traditional use areas	Long-term	Consultation	Minor, adverse
	Hydrologic Processes	Removal and restoration of campgrounds would allow the river to meander more freely; removal of facilities would contribute to restoration of the flood regime	Long-term	NA	Major, beneficial
	Hydrologic Processes	Concentration of visitors at the new campsites would have radiating impacts on the riverbanks due to trampling, resulting in bank destabilization and unnatural erosion	Long-term	Fence sensitive areas, campsite definition, path definition	Minor, adverse
	Hydrologic Processes	Some new walk-in sites and pathways at Upper Pines would be in floodplain	Long-term	Pathways and campsites designed to minimally affect flood flow	Minor, adverse
Lodging
Remove 212 Housekeeping Camp units and restore area Redevelop Yosemite Lodge area Remove Maple, Juniper, Laurel, Hemlock, and Alder units at Yosemite Lodge from the 100-year floodplain Area where Yosemite Lodge cabins were removed is restored to natural conditions	Scenic Scenic Recreation Biological	Construction and deconstruction at Yosemite Lodge, Curry Village, and Housekeeping Camp would be visible from the river Restored area at Housekeeping Camp and near Yosemite Lodge would be visible from the river, providing enhanced views of interface of river, meadow, and forest The diversity of recreational opportunities is maintained because of retention of lodging opportunities Removal of Housekeeping Camp from the River Protection Overlay would allow restoration of riparian vegetation, visitor use of river originating from Housekeeping Camp would decrease, resulting in less trampling of riparian habitat	Short-term Long-term Long-term Long-term	None NA None NA	Minor, adverse Minor, beneficial Minor, beneficial Moderate, beneficial
Redevelop Curry Village area, including new lodging, housing, and parking areas	Biological Biological Biological	Retention of Housekeeping Camp units would result in continued radiating impacts to sensitive riparian areas and habitat fragmentation There would be restoration of river-related vegetation at Yosemite Lodge Construction of lodging units would have radiating impacts (associated with visitor use) to the meadow and riparian communities nearby	Long-term Long-term Long-term	Fence sensitive areas; direct use to more resilient areas NA Fence sensitive areas; direct use to more resilient areas	Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue Moderate, beneficial Minor, adverse
	Cultural	Construction and demolition activities at Housekeeping Camp, Yosemite Lodge, and Curry Village could result in damage to archeological resources	Long-term	Archeological excavation	Minor, adverse
	Hydrologic Processes	Removal of Yosemite Lodge units from the floodplain would contribute to the restoration of the natural flood regime	Long-term	NA	Major, beneficial
	Hydrologic Processes	Construction of lodging units would have radiating impacts (associated with visitor use) to the riverbanks nearby, including bank destabilization and unnatural erosion	Long-term	Fence sensitive areas; direct use to more resilient areas	Minor, adverse
	Hydrologic Processes	Small portion of Housekeeping Camp would continue to impede flood flow	Long-term	None	Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue
Roads
Remove roads and restore at: - Stoneman Meadow - South Ahwahnee Meadow Close Northside Drive to motor vehicles from Yosemite Lodge to El Capitan crossover and convert to multi-use trail Northside Drive rerouted south of Yosemite Lodge, closed to vehicles and converted to multi-use trail west of Yosemite Lodge	Scenic Scenic Scenic Biological	Removal of roads from Ahwahnee and Stoneman Meadows improve scenic views of the meadows Conversion of segment of Northside Drive to multi-use trail improves scenic views from the river due to removal of automobile traffic Retained roads, and the vehicles on them, are visible from riverbank and river; meadows are specifically identified in the scenic Outstandingly Remarkable Value, and roads through meadows impact their scenic quality Construction associated with road relocation and conversion to multi-use trails would result in disturbance to river-related vegetation communities	Long-term Long-term Long-term Short-term	NA NA None Revegetation	Major, beneficial Minor, beneficial Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue Minor, adverse
Retain roads at: - Southside Drive in the Bridalveil Fall area - Sentinel Meadow - Cook’s Meadow - El Capitan Meadow	Biological	Restoration of riparian, meadow, wetland, and river-related vegetation will occur at Stoneman and south Ahwahnee Meadows. Visitor use of river originating from roads and turnouts would decrease, resulting in less loss of vegetative cover	Long-term	NA	Major, beneficial
	Biological	Where roads remain, loss of riparian vegetation and river-related habitats would continue; roads interfere with water movement	Long-term	None	Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue
	Cultural	Removal of roads from meadows restores open character of meadows, an important feature of the cultural landscape	Long-term	NA	Moderate, beneficial
	Cultural	Road relocation and multi-use trail conversion could disrupt archeological resources	Long-term	Archeological excavation	Minor, adverse
	Hydrologic Processes	Removal of impediments to flood flow from Stoneman and south Ahwahnee Meadows would contribute to the restoration of the natural flood regime	Long-term	NA	Major, beneficial
	Hydrologic Processes	Existing roads and infrastructure in meadows affect flood flow	Long-term	None	Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue
	Hydrologic Processes	Rerouted Northside Drive at Yosemite Lodge would be in 100-year floodplain and would slightly impede flood flows (see Water Resources section of this chapter for more information)	Long-term	None	Minor, adverse
El Portal Road between Cascades Diversion Dam and Pohono Bridge Reconstructed
[Note: see Segment 3A/3B for Outstandingly Remarkable Value impacts associated with removal of Cascades Diversion Dam]	Scenic	The road is visible from riverbank and river	Long-term	None	Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue
	Scenic	Construction activities would be visible from the river	Short-term	None	Major, adverse
	Recreation	Improvement of the El Portal Road would decrease the possibility of its failure, and the loss of recreational opportunity that would result from road failure	Long-term	NA	Moderate, beneficial
	Recreation	During construction, approximately 1 mile of the river would be closed to recreational use	Short-term	None	Minor, adverse
	Biological	Retention of this road would continue loss of river-related vegetation	Long-term	None	Adverse actions described in No Action Alternative continue
	Biological	Construction activities would result in a temporary loss of vegetation at staging areas	Short-term	Revegetation of staging areas	Minor, adverse
	Biological	Bank stabilization of road could result in permanent loss of river-related vegetation	Long-term	Sustainable design that allows riparian vegetation to become largely re-established	Minor, adverse
	Cultural	Reconstruction would result in loss of historic features associated with the El Portal Road, and would potentially result in damage to archeological resources	Long-term	Documentation of features and archeological excavation; pursue designs that maintain road’s historic character	Minor, adverse
	Hydrologic Processes	Bank stabilization materials that support portions of this road segment are currently in the river channel, and interfere with the free-flowing condition of the river; these materials would remain in the river channel after the road is reconstructed	Long-term	Pursue designs that minimize impacts to the free-flowing condition of the river	Major, adverse
	Hydrologic Processes	Construction activities would result in temporary impediments to river and/or flood flow	Short-term	Construction occurs during low flow; banks are stabilized	Minor, adverse
Bridges
Remove the following bridges: - Housekeeping - Sugar Pine - Stoneman - Superintendent’s - pedestrian/ bicycle bridge north of and parallel to the current Yosemite Creek Bridge	Biological Biological Biological	Where bridges are retained, loss of riparian vegetation and river-related habitats would continue At Sugar Pine, Stoneman, Superintendent’s and Housekeeping Bridges, river-related environments and habitats would be restored At the pedestrian/bicycle bridge north of and parallel to the current Yosemite Creek Bridge, river-related environments and habitats would be restored	Long-term Long-term Long-term	None NA NA	Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue Major, beneficial Minor, beneficial
Retain the following bridges: - Ahwahnee - El Capitan - Sentinel - Clark’s - Happy Isles (vehicle) - Swinging - Tenaya Creek - Pohono - Happy Isles (footbridge)	Biological Cultural Cultural	Displacement of riparian vegetation would occur during construction, but riparian vegetation would be restored Removal of Sugar Pine, Stoneman, Superintendent’s, and Housekeeping Bridges would result in loss of important historic structures and change in historic circulation patterns Removal of Sugar Pine Bridge may result in damage to archeological resources	Short-term Long-term Long-term	NA Structures would be documented Archeological documentation	Negligible, beneficial Moderate, adverse Minor, adverse
Construct new vehicle bridge at: - Yosemite Creek (south of existing vehicle bridge) Convert Yosemite Creek vehicle bridge to a multi-use path bridge	Hydrologic Processes Hydrologic Processes	At Ahwahnee and Swinging Bridges, the river is prevented from meandering; scouring and unnatural channeling continues; flood flow is impeded At Sentinel, Clark’s, Happy Isles, El Capitan, Yosemite Creek (vehicle) and Tenaya Creek Bridges, the river is prevented from meandering; scouring and unnatural channeling continues; flood flow is impeded	Long-term Long-term	None None	Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue
[Note: See Water Resources section of this chapter for additional information on bridges and the different impact of each bridge].	Hydrologic Processes Hydrologic Processes Hydrologic Processes Hydrologic Processes	At Pohono Bridge, the river is prevented from meandering; scouring and unnatural channeling continues; flood flow is impeded Removal of Housekeeping, Sugar Pine, Stoneman, and Superintendent’s Bridges, and conversion of Yosemite Creek vehicle bridge to a multi-use trail bridge contributes to the restoration of the natural flood regime; reduces scouring; and allows the river to more freely meander A new bridge across Yosemite Creek could impact the creek bank and could impede flood flow During bridge removal or construction, river flows would be affected	Long-term Long-term Long-term Short-term	None NA Design would minimize hydrologic impacts None	Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue Major, beneficial Minor, adverse Minor, adverse
Lamon Orchard
Fruit trees removed Area restored	Scenic	Removal of facilities (i.e., construction equipment) would be visible from river	Short-term	None	Minor, adverse
	Biological	Area restored to natural conditions, with restoration of river-related vegetation	Long-term	NA	Major, beneficial
	Cultural	The Lamon Orchard historic site would be lost	Long-term	Orchard would be documented	Moderate, adverse
	Hydrologic Processes	Restoration of drainage patterns would contribute to restoration of natural flood regime	Long-term	NA	Moderate, beneficial
Stock Use and Facilities
Concessioner stable removed Private stock use discontinued in Yosemite Valley Guided trail rides eliminated	Recreation Biological Cultural Hydrologic Processes	Diversity of river-related recreational opportunities is diminished by discontinuation of private stock use Stock use spreads non-native invasive plant species and contributes to water quality degradation, which impacts riparian vegetation and river-related environments — these impacts would be nearly eliminated (administrative use of stock would continue) Removal of facilities (stable) would result in a loss of historic structures Stable facilities would be removed, contributing to the restoration of the natural flood regime	Long-term Long-term Long-term Long-term	None NA Structures would be documented NA	Moderate, adverse Moderate, beneficial Minor, adverse Moderate, beneficial
Historic Superintendent’s House (Residence 1) Removed and Area Restored
	Biological Cultural Hydrologic Processes	Removal of buildings and restoration of site would benefit adjacent river-related vegetation Removal would result in the loss of an important river-related historic structure Removal of buildings would contribute to restoration of flood regime	Long-term Long-term Long-term	NA Structures would be documented NA	Minor, beneficial Moderate, adverse Major, beneficial
Camp 6 No Longer Used for Parking, Area Restored
	Scenic Biological Hydrologic Processes	Parking at Camp 6 would no longer be visible from river Riparian and river-related vegetation communities would be restored Parking facility is removed from floodplain; removal would contribute to restoration of natural flood regime	Long-term Long-term Long-term	NA NA NA	Moderate, beneficial Major, beneficial Major, beneficial
Yosemite Village
Redevelop substantial portion of Yosemite Village	Scenic	Construction activities at Yosemite Village would be visible from the river	Short-term	None	Minor, adverse
	Biological	As a center of visitor activity, there would be radiating impacts to river-related habitats from visitor use	Long-term	Fence sensitive areas; direct use to more resilient areas	Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue
	Cultural	Redevelopment of Yosemite Village could disturb river-related archeological resources	Long-term	Archeological excavation	Minor, adverse
	Hydrologic Processes	In the portion of Yosemite Village closest to Camp 6, structures in the floodplain would be removed (e.g., Concessioner Headquarters Building)	Long-term	None	Minor, beneficial
	Hydrologic Processes	Fewer visitors in the Yosemite Village area would reduce radiating impacts on the riverbanks due to trampling	Long-term	NA	Negligible, beneficial
Picnic Areas (East Yosemite Valley)
Retain Sentinel Picnic Area Remove Swinging Bridge Picnic Area	Scenic	Sentinel Picnic Area is visible from the river	Long-term	None	Adverse impacts described in No Action continue
	Biological	Degradation of riparian vegetation and river-related habitats would continue at Sentinel Picnic Area	Long-term	None	Adverse impacts described in No Action continue
	Biological	Removal and restoration of Swinging Bridge Picnic Area would benefit river-related environments and habitats	Long-term	NA	Moderate, beneficial
	Hydrologic Processes	Removal and restoration of Swinging Bridge Picnic Area would stabilize the riverbank and restore hydrologic processes by allowing restoration of riparian vegetation	Long-term	NA	Moderate, beneficial
Parking (East Yosemite Valley)
Retain administrative parking at Sentinel Bridge Parking for Lodge guests constructed in previously disturbed area in floodplain	Scenic Biological	Sentinel Bridge parking area is visible from the riverbank Parking at Sentinel Bridge would continue to affect riparian area and fragment habitat	Long-term Long-term	None None	Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue
	Cultural	Some new parking at Yosemite Lodge would disturb traditional gathering areas	Long-term	Consultation	Minor, adverse
	Hydrologic Processes	Parking at Sentinel Bridge is in floodplain and would imperceptibly alter flood flow	Long-term	None	Adverse impacts described in No Action Alternative continue
	Hydrologic Processes	New parking at Yosemite Lodge would be in 100-year floodplain and would alter flood flow (see Water Resources section of this chapter for more information)	Long-term	None	Minor, adverse
Trails
Construct/realign trails: - along Southside Drive between Swinging Bridge and El Capitan crossover - along Merced River between Ahwahnee Bridge and bicycle path to Mirror Lake	Biological Biological	Loss of vegetative cover and habitat fragmentation associated with new/realigned trails Construction of new bicycle path could result in loss of river-related vegetation; increase in habitat fragmentation would be slight, given the proximity of Southside Drive	Long-term Long-term	None None	Minor, adverse Minor, adverse
- from The Ahwahnee to bicycle path to Mirror Lake - between Ahwahnee Bridge and Upper Pines Campground - in Upper and Lower River Campgrounds area	Cultural Hydrologic Processes	Grading for multi-use trail would disturb archeological deposits Segments of the new multi-use paved trail would be within the floodplain near Sentinel Creek, although impact to flood flow would be imperceptible	Long-term Long-term	Archeological excavation None	Minor, adverse Negligible, adverse
West Yosemite Valley Parking
Construct parking facility and support facilities (e.g., visitor center) for day visitors at Taft Toe (1,622 spaces)	Biological Biological	Construction of parking facility would permanently displace river-related vegetation Concentration of visitors in the Taft Toe area would have radiating impacts on river-related vegetation due to trampling	Long-term Long-term	Facility design Fence sensitive areas; direct use to more resilient areas	Moderate, adverse Minor, adverse
	Cultural	Construction of parking facility would damage or destroy archeological deposits and historic American Indian village, and gathering area	Long-term	Archeological excavation	Moderate, adverse
	Hydrologic processes	Concentration of visitors in the Taft Toe area would have radiating impacts on the riverbanks due to trampling, resulting in bank destabilization and unnatural erosion	Long-term	Fence sensitive areas; direct use to more resilient areas	Minor, adverse
West Yosemite Valley Development (West of Yellow Pine)
(see also River Protection Overlay Trails, Traveler Information and Traffic Management System, and El Portal Road) Parking at Bridalveil Fall, Southside Drive in the Bridalveil Fall area, Northside Drive through El Capitan Meadow, and other smaller areas discontinued Cathedral and El Capitan Picnic Areas redeveloped; new picnic area constructed at base of El Capitan in the vicinity of the North American Wall	Biological Biological Cultural	Redevelopment of Cathedral Picnic Area could disturb riparian vegetation Loss or degradation of river-related vegetative cover increases at some designated trails, social trails, roads (i.e., radiating impacts) Constructing picnic area at North American Wall could disturb river-related archeological deposits and historic American Indian village	Long-term Long-term Long-term	Revegetate Fence sensitive areas; direct use to more resilient areas Archeological excavation	Minor, adverse Minor, adverse Minor, adverse
Traveler Information and Traffic Management System Developed
Multi-lane traffic check station constructed on Southside Drive near El Capitan crossover	Biological Cultural	Construction of traffic check station would result in loss of river-related vegetation Construction of traffic check station would damage archeological deposits and gathering areas	Long-term Long-term	None Archeological excavation	Minor, adverse Moderate, adverse

NA = Not Applicable

At Curry Village, cultural Outstandingly Remarkable Values could be adversely affected due to potential disturbance of river-related archeological resources during Curry Village redevelopment. There would be no impact on the hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Value, because Curry Village is located outside of the floodplain. In the wild and scenic river corridor, there would be minor, adverse radiating impacts to river-related vegetation due to trampling.

The road-related actions would have an overall beneficial effect on scenic Outstandingly Remarkable Values due to the removal of roads from South Ahwahnee and Stoneman Meadows and improvements to scenic views from the river due to the conversion of a segment of Northside Drive to a multi-use trail. The road-related actions (the rerouting of Northside Drive in the Yosemite Lodge area is covered above) would have an overall beneficial impact on the biological and hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Values because some roads would be removed from highly valued resources, and their removal would contribute to the restoration of the natural flood regime. These actions also beneficially impact the cultural Outstandingly Remarkable Value because they contribute to the restoration of the cultural landscape.

Reconstruction of the El Portal Road between Pohono Bridge and Cascades Diversion Dam, and removal of Cascades Diversion Dam would have both beneficial and adverse impacts on the Outstandingly Remarkable Values (see discussion of dam removal in Segment 3A/3B. The existing road has localized, adverse impacts on the biological Outstandingly Remarkable Value because it displaces river-related vegetation, and to the hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Value because riprap that supports the road is partially in the river channel. However, since this road segment provides a critical visitor access link, its reconstruction would also be beneficial to the recreation Outstandingly Remarkable Value by maintaining access to Yosemite Valley. [Note: These two actions span river Segments 2, 3A, and 3B.]

Removal of bridges would have both beneficial and adverse impacts on the Outstandingly Remarkable Values. These actions would have beneficial impacts on the biological Outstandingly Remarkable Value because the riverbank can be restored, and substantial beneficial impacts to the hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Value because the free-flowing condition of the river would be improved, and the river would have increased ability to meander. These actions would have adverse impacts on the cultural Outstandingly Remarkable Value because they result in the loss of important historic structures, and change historic circulation patterns.

Removal of parking at Camp 6 would have beneficial impacts on the scenic Outstandingly Remarkable Value by eliminating a facility visible from the river; a beneficial impact on the hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Value by eliminating a facility from an area that floods relatively frequently (more frequently than the 100-year flood event); and a beneficial impact to the biological Outstandingly Remarkable Value by permitting restoration of river-related (riparian and wetland) vegetation communities.

Redevelopment of visitor services and National Park Service operations in the Yosemite Village area, largely outside of the Merced Wild and Scenic River boundary but in close proximity, would have both beneficial and adverse impacts on the Outstandingly Remarkable Values. Radiating impacts from the concentration of visitors in the area would have a minor, adverse impact on the biological and hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Values through trampling of river-related habitats.

A major development would be introduced in west Yosemite Valley with the construction of a parking facility and visitor center at Taft Toe. As a result of the construction of the parking facility, adverse effects on the hydrologic processes and biological Outstandingly Remarkable Values would increase along this segment, largely due to the displacement and degradation of riparian vegetation and radiating impacts associated with visitor use.

Yosemite Valley (Segment 2) Conclusion

Segment-wide, this alternative would be a long-term, moderate, beneficial impact on the scenic Outstandingly Remarkable Value because of the removal of many facilities visible from the river or riverbank, and improvement of the scenic interface of river, rock, meadow, and forest via restoration, campground removal, and road removal/relocation. However, for facilities that are to remain or be redeveloped, some adverse scenic impacts would continue, although at a lesser degree than under the No Action Alternative.

Segment-wide, there are no impacts to the geologic processes/conditions Outstandingly Remarkable Value, because of the absence of actions affecting the U-shaped valley, and moraines of Yosemite Valley. Impacts related to the meandering river are discussed in the Water Resources section of this chapter.

Segment-wide, there would be a long-term, minor, adverse impact on the recreation Outstandingly Remarkable Value because the diversity of recreational opportunities is diminished by the discontinuation of private stock use.

Segment-wide, there would be a long-term, moderate, beneficial impact on the biological Outstandingly Remarkable Value because of the reduction of facilities in general, and the restoration of riparian areas and meadows in particular. Although construction of several new facilities (parking facility, roads, bicycle paths, and picnic areas) would pose some adverse, localized impacts on the biological Outstandingly Remarkable Value, these impacts are outweighed by the substantial restoration actions that would take place throughout this segment.

Segment-wide, there would be a long-term, minor to moderate, adverse impact on the cultural Outstandingly Remarkable Value because of the removal of river-related historic structures and potential disturbance of river-related archeological resources. The historic structures that are being removed, particularly bridges, adversely affect the hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Value, and their removal would have major, long-term, beneficial impacts on the hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Value, and contribute substantially to the restoration of the free-flowing condition of the river.

Segment-wide, there would be a long-term, moderate, beneficial impact on the hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Value, because of the removal of structures that impede flood flow or inhibit the natural meandering of the river and the restoration of riparian areas in the Wild and Scenic River corridor. Removal of structures would contribute substantially to the restoration of the free-flowing condition of the river and would further the policy established by Congress in the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to preserve designated rivers in their free-flowing condition. New facilities within the floodplain would have minimal, adverse impacts on the flood regime.

The National Park Service would exert its best efforts to design and reconstruct the El Portal Road between Cascades Diversion Dam and Pohono Bridge with few, if any, additional impacts on the free-flowing condition of the river. If it proves infeasible to design and construct the road in a manner that would avoid direct and adverse impacts to the values for which the river was designated, the National Park Service would report to Congress in accordance with Section 7 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. In either case, further site-specific environmental compliance, including compliance with Section 7 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, would be undertaken for this project.

Cumulative Impacts

Impacts to the Outstandingly Remarkable Values would occur as a result of other past and reasonably foreseeable future actions (see Vol. II, Appendix H for the list of cumulative projects considered in this analysis).

Past Actions

The Merced Wild and Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan (NPS) established the River Protection Overlay, management zoning, and the Visitor Experience and Resource Protection framework inside the wild and scenic river boundaries. The River Protection Overlay is implemented through this plan, and its beneficial impacts to the Outstandingly Remarkable Values have been assessed as part of the impacts of this alternative. This project also establishes management zoning, which does not directly impact the Outstandingly Remarkable Values. The Visitor Experience and Resource Protection process was designed to protect resources and the visitor experience, and would have a beneficial impact by focusing on protection of Outstandingly Remarkable Values. The Visitor Experience and Resource Protection framework would have a long-term, moderate, beneficial effect on Outstandingly Remarkable Values in this segment.

In 1991, the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management developed a joint South Fork and Merced Wild and Scenic River Implementation Plan (USFS and BLM) for the segments of the main stem and South Fork of the Merced River that are under their jurisdiction. The plan is a general management plan with many prescriptive goals and few actions. The South Fork and Merced Wild and Scenic River Implementation Plan does not affect the Outstandingly Remarkable Values of this segment.

Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions

The National Park Service proposes to reconstruct the trail from Happy Isles to Vernal Falls (NPS). This project would have a beneficial impact on the recreation Outstandingly Remarkable Value due to the provision of an improved trail between Happy Isles and Vernal Falls, which contributes to a spectrum of river-related recreational activities. The net effect of this project would be a long-term, minor, beneficial impact on Outstandingly Remarkable Values.

The Eagle Creek Ecological Restoration project (NPS) would restore the confluence of Eagle Creek with the Merced River and remove riprap at the confluence and along the creek. This project would have a long-term, moderate, beneficial impact on the hydrologic processes and biological Outstandingly Remarkable Values.

The past and reasonably foreseeable future projects would have a long-term, moderate, beneficial effect on Outstandingly Remarkable Values due to the establishment of the Merced River Plan Visitor Experience and Resource Protection framework, improved river-related recreation opportunities from Happy Isles to Vernal Falls, and restored riparian habitat and hydrologic processes at the Eagle Creek and Merced River confluence.

For the actions of this alternative, a long-term, moderate, beneficial impact is described for the Outstandingly Remarkable Values, largely due to the removal of facilities that impede flood flow and inhibit the natural meandering of the river; the restoration of substantial areas of high-value resources in the River Protection Overlay and wild and scenic river corridor; the improvement of the scenic interface of river, rock, meadow, and forest; and the maintenance of the diversity of river-related recreational opportunities. The beneficial impact of this alternative is somewhat offset by the adverse impact to the cultural Outstandingly Remarkable Value resulting from the removal of historic structures, as well as the adverse impacts to biological, cultural, and hydrologic processes Outstandingly Remarkable Values associated with the development of the parking facility at Taft Toe. The cumulative projects would have a long-term, moderate, beneficial effect on Outstandingly Remarkable Values due to the establishment of the Merced River Plan Visitor Experience and Resource Protection framework, improved river-related recreational opportunities from Happy Isles to Vernal Falls, and restored riparian habitat and hydrologic processes at the Eagle Creek and Merced River confluence. When the impacts of all of the past and reasonably foreseeable future actions described above are considered in combination with the anticipated impacts to the Outstandingly Remarkable Values from this alternative, long-term, moderate, beneficial effects on the Outstandingly Remarkable Values of this segment would likely result.

Consistency with the Merced River Plan

Similar to Alternative 2, the actions of this alternative in this segment of the Merced Wild and Scenic River would comply with the Merced River Plan and are consistent with its management elements. The collective actions are consistent with the classification of this segment because accessibility by road or trail would be essentially unchanged and the amount of development in the watershed and on the shorelines would not substantially change, although development on the shorelines would be reduced through removal of facilities in the River Protection Overlay. The individual actions that are considered to be water resources projects, such as removal of bridges, would be subject to the Section 7 determination process. The River Protection Overlay would be implemented and individual actions would be compatible with the River Protection Overlay prescription, with many facilities being removed from the River Protection Overlay. The individual actions would be consistent with the respective management zones established in the Merced River Plan. Some actions, such as the removal of infrastructure from the former Rivers Campgrounds, remove facilities or uses that do not conform with the corresponding management zone prescription.

IMPOUDMENT (SEGMENT 3A) AND
GORGE (SEGMENT 3B)

Outstandingly Remarkable Values Impacts

Outstandingly Remarkable Values identified for the recreational impoundment segment of the river are geologic processes/conditions, and biological. Outstandingly Remarkable Values identified for the scenic gorge segment of the river are scenic, geologic processes/conditions, recreation, biological, cultural, and hydrologic processes.

The impacts of this alternative to the Outstandingly Remarkable Values for this segment would be the same as under Alternative 2 (see Alternative 2, table 4-40, for details).

Impoundment (Segment 3A) and Gorge (Segment 3B) Conclusion

The impacts of this alternative to the Outstandingly Remarkable Values for this segment would be the same as under Alternative 2. This alternative would have a long-term, moderate to major, beneficial impact on Outstandingly Remarkable Values, largely because the removal of Cascades Diversion Dam and implementation of the River Protection Overlay would substantially improve the free-flowing condition of the river; enhance riparian habitat and rainbow trout movement; and improve views of waterfalls and cliffs. This beneficial impact is somewhat offset by adverse impacts to cultural Outstandingly Remarkable Values associated with the increased risk of damage to historic engineering projects resulting from Cascades Diversion Dam removal, and the removal of Cascades Houses (refer to Alternative 2 for more details).

Cumulative Impacts

Cumulative impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. For the actions of this alternative, a long-term, moderate to major, beneficial impact is described for these Outstandingly Remarkable Values, largely because the removal of Cascades Diversion Dam and implementation of the River Protection Overlay would substantially improve the free-flowing condition of the river; enhance riparian habitat and rainbow trout movement; and improve views of waterfalls and cliffs. The cumulative projects would have a long-term, minor, adverse impact, largely through introduction of stabilization materials and loss of riparian vegetation. When the impacts of all past and present actions described above are considered in combination with the anticipated impacts on the Outstandingly Remarkable Values from this alternative, long-term, moderate, beneficial effects on the Outstandingly Remarkable Values of these segments would likely result (see Alternative 2 for more detail).

Consistency with the Merced River Plan

The consistency analysis for this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. Similar to Alternative 2, the actions of this alternative in this segment of the Merced Wild and Scenic River comply with the Merced River Plan and is consistent with its management elements. The collective actions are consistent with the classification of this segment because accessibility by road or trail is essentially unchanged, and the amount of development in the watershed and on the shoreline does not substantially change. The removal of the Cascades Diversion Dam is consistent with the recreational classification of the impoundment segment, and would allow this small segment of river to be classified as scenic. The individual actions that are considered to be water resources projects, such as removal of the Cascades Diversion Dam, would be subject to the Section 7 determination process. The River Protection Overlay is being implemented and individual actions are compatible with the River Protection Overlay prescription, including the removal of the Cascades Diversion Dam. The individual actions are consistent with the respective management zones established in the Merced River Plan.

EL PORTAL (SEGMENT 4)

Outstandingly Remarkable Values identified for this recreational segment of the river are geologic processes/conditions, recreation, biological, cultural, and hydrologic processes. A description of the Outstandingly Remarkable Values are found in Appendix B.

Outstandingly Remarkable Values Impacts

The impacts of this alternative to the Outstandingly Remarkable Values for this segment would be the same as under Alternative 2, with one exception. No parking would be constructed for day visitors in El Portal; therefore, no loss of riparian vegetation and river-related habitats in the vicinity of Middle Road and Village Center would occur.

El Portal (Segment 4) Conclusion

For the actions of this alternative, a long-term, minor, beneficial impact is described for the Outstandingly Remarkable Values of this segment, largely because implementation of the River Protection Overlay would limit development on the riverbank, and contribute to the restoration of sensitive riparian vegetation communities (e.g., at Hennessey’s Ranch). In addition, the recreation Outstandingly Remarkable Value would be beneficially affected by improved hiking opportunities along the river. The beneficial impact on Outstandingly Remarkable Values for this segment has been offset by the adverse impacts on the cultural Outstandingly Remarkable Value due to possible loss of historic structures and possible disturbance of archeological sites (standard cultural resource mitigation measures lessen the magnitude of the cultural resources impacts) (see Alternative 2 for more details).

Cumulative Impacts

Cumulative impacts under this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. For the actions of this alternative, a long-term, minor, beneficial impact is described for the Outstandingly Remarkable Values of this segment, largely because implementation of the River Protection Overlay would limit development on the riverbank, and contribute to the restoration of sensitive riparian vegetation communities (e.g., at Hennessey’s Ranch). In addition, the recreation Outstandingly Remarkable Value would be beneficially affected by improved hiking opportunities along the river. The past and reasonably foreseeable future projects would have a long-term, minor, adverse effect on Outstandingly Remarkable Values due to the adverse impacts to biological and cultural Outstandingly Remarkable Values resulting from the Yosemite View Parcel Land Exchange, largely due to motel construction in close proximity to the river. The adverse impacts resulting from the loss of riparian vegetation associated with the Yosemite View Parcel Land Exchange would outweigh the potential beneficial impact of this alternative resulting from the enhancement/restoration of existing (albeit degraded) riparian habitat in the River Protection Overlay. Consequently, when the impacts of all of the past and reasonably foreseeable future actions described above are considered in combination with the anticipated impacts to the Outstandingly Remarkable Values from this alternative, long-term, negligible, adverse effects to the Outstandingly Remarkable Values of this segment would likely result (see Alternative 2 for more details).

Consistency With The Merced River Plan

The consistency analysis for this alternative would be the same as under Alternative 2. Similar to Alternative 2, the actions of this alternative in this segment of the Merced Wild and Scenic River comply with the Merced River Plan and are consistent with its management elements. The collective actions are consistent with the classification of this segment because accessibility by road or trail is essentially unchanged, and the amount of development in the watershed and on the shoreline does not substantially change. The individual actions that are considered to be water resources projects, such as construction of pedestrian bridges, would be subject to the Section 7 determination process. The River Protection Overlay is being implemented, and individual actions are compatible with the River Protection Overlay prescription, including the removal of Cascades Diversion Dam. The individual actions are consistent with the respective management zones established in the Merced River Plan. Some actions, such as the restoration of the sand pit, remove existing facilities that do not conform with the corresponding management zone prescription.