Copan Report 2001 - Natural Resource Management and

RECREATION AND SCENERY
MANAGEMENT FOR COPAN,
HONDURAS
March 2001
RECREATION AND SCENERY MANAGEMENT
FOR THE COPAN PROJECT, HONDURAS
Jerry Wylie and Robert Ross, Jr.
USDA Forest Service
March 2001
Report prepared for the Wildlife Conservation Society and the Honduran Institute of
History and Anthropogy with funding provided by the U.S. Agency for International
Development. Report production and translation by Heritage Design
RECREATION AND SCENERY MANAGEMENT
FOR THE COPAN PROJECT, HONDURAS
I. INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES
This report documents ideas discussed during the second planning workshop for the
Copan master plan revision, March 1-3, 2001, and follow-up field-work March 4-8. It
includes summary information that can be used directly in the master plan, as well as
more detailed information that could be included as annexes to the plan.
There were three main objectives:
1. Conduct a Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) and Visual Quality
Management (VQM) assessments as part of the planning process. Inventory and
map the range of recreation opportunities, from most to least developed, and the
most important visual resources for protection, enhancement, restoration, and
suitability for future modification.
2. Identify recreation/scenic zones of the Park and determine appropriate
management prescriptions for each. Include these zones in the management plan.
3. Assess the needs and opportunities for using the Limits of Acceptable Change
(LAC) methodology to examine visitor impacts.
II. SCENERY MANAGEMENT
The premise of Scenery Management is that scenic quality benefits society and enhances
people’s lives psychologically, physiologically, and economically through successful
outdoor recreation and tourism programs. People want, need and value naturally
appearing and culturally significant scenery; landscape diversity is important and
desirable - - in fact, alteration to provide diversity may be desirable in some cases - - and
landscape character can be defined and managed like other resources. For example,
vistas can be created or improved by careful removal of trees and degraded views can be
rehabilitated by moving buildings, use of paint color, and by planting vegetative screens.
Two levels of assessment were accomplished for this project: one for the Copan Valley
and one for the Principal Group area of Copan Archeological Park. These are
summarized below and included in their entirety as Annexes A and B. There was
insufficient time to conduct an scenery management assessment of the Sepulturas portion
of the Park.
2
Recommended Plan Objectives
1. Consider scenic character as a resource to be managed and protected within the
Park, as well as valley-wide.
2. Explore new methods for protecting archaeological resources that have less
impact on visual quality.
Recommended Activities
Archaeological Park
1. Enhance the visitor’s first impression of the Park by upgrading the visual quality
of the parking lot and entrance to the Visitor Center.
2. Modify the interior of the Visitor Center to take advantage of the potential
indoor/outdoor public spaces provided by the 3 patios.
3. Install native plantings on the old airstrip to create a more natural appearance.
4. Modify the Sacbe entrance to the Principal Group to improve the visual character
and provide a more effective psychological transition from the portal zone to the
main archeological attractions.
5. Explore different ways to protect stellae from weather and human impacts that
have less visual impact.
6. Plant shade trees and improve the trail surface along the highway between the
Visitor Center and Sepulturas.
7. Enhance the existing trail from town to the Visitor Center by planting shrubs and
ground cover to add visual variety, and constructing benches.
Valley-wide
8. Develop a scenic corridor analysis and management plan for highway CA-4 that
runs through the Copan Valley. Integrate and interpret all elements of this
cultural landscape, including stellae, agriculture, the town, Archaeological Park,
and vistas.
9. Designate the highway as a “Scenic Byway” to attract tourists, enhance local
pride, and promote the protection of the valley’s scenic values.
3
III. RECREATION/MANAGEMENT ZONING
The premise of the Recreational Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) is that you can facilitate
or hamper visitor experiences by the way you manage settings, and that maintaining a
broad spectrum of opportunities provides people with important choices. Setting
indicators include: access, remoteness, naturalness/scenic qualities, facilities, site
management, visitor impacts, and visitor management (including interpretation). Despite
its small size, the Archeological Park contains the most highly developed zone (“Urban”)
to one of the most undeveloped (“Semi-primitive non-motorized”).
Utilizing a modified version of the ROS approach, five distinct zones have been
developed to provide designers, planners and managers with a useful framework for
carefully understanding the visitor management aspects of the Archaeological Park. The
zones provide a general spectrum from highly developed to less developed settings and
offer a clear method for realizing the distinctions, relationships and interactions of the 5
zones. The end product in this effort is to provide clearly defined experience
opportunities and thus, expectations for the site visitor.
This approach is an important management tool for the Archaeological Park. It not only
provides for inventory of existing and potential use opportunities, perhaps more
importantly, it has the potential to articulate specific standards and guidelines for site
development activities and programmatic aspects in each of the five zones.
The five zones and their respective sub-zone units along with preliminary guidelines are
as follows:
Zone 1 - Entrance/Administration
Theme: Intensive visitor orientation, developed facilities, and administration
Sub zones:
1a. Primary Portal
1b. Secondary Portal
Within this zone, the setting is characterized by high levels of human activity and by
concentrated development. There are a preponderance of signs and other indications of
regulations. The landscape in zone 1a is dominated by large parking lots, a museum,
visitor center, sales outlet and cafeteria. Zone 1b, while much more less developed and
more natural in character, nevertheless also serves as an obvious portal area and has the
potential to become significantly more developed.
4
Standards and Guidelines:
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Intensive on-site controls are numerous.
Heavy site modifications can be expected.
The natural environment is culturally modified yet should remain attractive with
well-designed plantings using native materials in natural groupings that are well
maintained.
Interaction between large numbers of users can be expected to be high.
Structures that will be newly introduced to the site while somewhat complex in
nature will be expected to be constructed of materials that are in harmony with the
landscape and of a scale and form that are complimentary to the site.
Color schemes for all facilities and structures will be selected to be in harmony
with and subordinate to the natural character of the existing landscape.
Interpretation is through sophisticated exhibits in staffed visitor centers and
walkway side exhibits.
All access and walkways are easy and safe for all users and incorporate paved and
hardened surfaces and with minimal change in grade.
Zone 2 - Archaeological Interpretation (or Intensive Interpretation)
Theme: Intensive interpretation and site conservation
Sub zones:
2a. Principal Group
2b. Las Sepulturas
In this setting, the sights and sounds of human activity are readily evident, though less
pronounced and less concentrated than in zone 1. Levels of use vary, are for the most
part, concentrated in small visitor groups or larger guided groups and do not reach those
levels of intensity found in the previous zone. While the characteristic landscape is often
dominated by the geometric patterns of the ruins and stellae, there is also a strong sense
of open, green-space with occasional commanding views of the surrounding background
mountain ridges.
The landscape character in zone 2a, Principal Group, is much more open and broad in
visual scope as compared to 2b which is more enclosed and intimate.
Standards and Guidelines:
!
!
!
Obvious and numerous on-site controls exist.
Moderate site modifications can be expected.
While the natural environment is obviously culturally modified with the existing
Maya structures, the overall appearance is one of serene order with natural
appearing backdrops of native plant material groups.
5
!
!
!
!
Interaction between users is limited with focus upon larger tour groups and small
self-guided units, which seldom interact.
Few, if any, structures with the possibility of limited directional and interpretive
will be introduced into this zone. Consideration for redesign of the overhead
structures for some stellae need to be further explored. In all instances, material,
shapes, colors and textures need to be utilized that will blend with and
compliment the existing character of the zone.
Interpretive facilities and signage are low key and designed in such away as to not
to dominate views or interrupt views of the ruins.
Trails and walkways are well maintained, safe and easy to use.
Zone 3 - Transitional
Theme: Psychological and physical transition and interpretation of natural and cultural
resources.
Sub zones:
3a. Trail to the pueblo of Copan Ruinas
3b. Entrance to Principal Group
• Sacbe Trail
• Bosque Trail
3c. Principal Group to Las Sepulturas
The 3 sub-parts that characterize this zone serve the common purpose of getting visitors
from one area of interest to another while occasionally providing opportunities to share
information and interpret important views and sites. In this zone the form of
transportation is by foot and the landscape is characterized by predominately natural
appearing settings with moderate sights and sounds of human activities. Evidence of
human activity can vary in the transition zone and can include improved highways,
livestock grazing and other agricultural activities.
Standards and Guidelines:
!
!
!
!
!
Little on-site controls of visitors except at points of ingress and egress at actual
sites.
Small amounts of site modification can be expected.
Vegetation alterations (enhancements and rehabilitations) are accomplished to
maintain desired visual character by repeating elements in the characteristic
landscape
Interaction between user groups is minimal and usually confined to groups and
individuals moving to and from sites.
Few structures, other than limited directional and interpretive signing, can be
expected to be constructed and will be simple and well designed, composed of
rustic, native like materials.
6
!
Grade and surfacing of pathways will afford normal foot traffic use with little
significant grade change.
Zone 4 - Limited Use/Reforestation (or Special Use)
Theme: Conservation and restoration
Sub zones:
4a Bosque
4b-h Reforestation
Zone 4, composed of 8 sub-units, is characterized by heavily modified but predominately
naturally appearing characteristic landscape. Only one subzone, 4a, is covered with
dense forest. All others have been deforested. In most cases the size of these areas give a
strong feeling of remoteness from the more heavily used and developed areas.
Standards and Guidelines:
!
!
!
!
!
!
Minimum on-site controls and restrictions are present but subtle.
Predominately natural appearing environment.
Low concentration of users but often evidence of others on trails.
Strong probability of experiencing solitude, closeness to nature and tranquility.
Interpretation through very limited on-site facilities. Use of maps, brochures and
guidebooks are main interpretive means.
Trails are rustic and may change surfacing materials and degrees of difficulty
from one location to another.
Zone 5 - Buffer
Theme: Protection of the Archaeological Park
Sub zones:
Archaeological Zone IA
Archaeological Zone III
Archaeological Zone II B-D
Agricultural Zone
Within this zone, the setting varies widely from essentially unmodified natural
characteristic environments to highly developed agricultural spaces consisting of grazing
use and tobacco and corn production. Visitors use in the 4 sub-zones is unlikely and no
facilities are provided for comfort, directional or interpretive signing .
7
Standards and Guidelines:
!
!
!
Minimal to no evidence of other users and therefore low to no interaction exists.
No restrictions or signage exist other than to control ingress.
Other than existing cultural modifications, no site modifications, facilities,
interpretation or maintained trails are in evidence.
IV. LIMITS OF ACCEPTABLE CHANGE AND MONITORING
A short description of the Limits of Acceptable Change and recommendations for
monitoring visitor impact is provided below. A longer version is included in Annex C.
The Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) framework was designed as an alternative to the
traditional “carrying capacity” approach used by many wilderness managers in the USA.
It is a continuous, collaborative process involving all stakeholders that leads to
quantitative and qualitative measures of change rather than the arbitrary limits on
numbers of visitors. It shifts the debate from “how much use is too much?” to “how
much change is acceptable?” (Stankey, McCool, and Stokes 1990). It is widely used as a
method to deal with conflicts between recreation use and natural resource conservation
Recent re-evaluations of the LAC framework by its developers have suggested certain
changes and clarifications to the original approach. In general, experts agree that LAC is
more a continuous and iterative process than a product, and can be a means of resolving
conflicts between opposing goals (Cole and McCool, n.d.). .
Potential Issues, Indicators of Change, and Management Remedies. The 6 examples
listed below were presented at the planning workshop. Participants were also asked to
recommend other indicators. The “remedies” shown in the third column illustrate the
kinds of managerial responses that could be developed for each issue, listed in order of
increasing intensity to suggest how responses could be gradually phased to adjust to more
difficult situations. They are examples of the kinds of actions agreed to in advance which
are ready and waiting “on-the-shelf,” to be automatically triggered once the indicators
reach a pre-determined unacceptable level. These are not actual recommendations; that
should be left to the stakeholders.
Issues
Trash/Litter
LAC Indicators
Pieces/weight
Removal cost
Remedies (in increasing intensity)
Trash cans
Sign messages
Regulations/prohibitions
Visitor Safety
Accidents
Caution signs
Trail redesign
Install barriers
8
Visitor Satisfaction
Complaints
Surveys
Change management as needed
Crowding
Complaints
Numbers of visitors
Size of groups
Parked vehicles
Waiting time
Redesign trails/directional flow
Limit parking
Limit group size
Time guidelines
Time limits
Charge entrance fees
Vandalism
Graffiti
Looting
Damage
Sign messages
Offer alternatives (visitor book)
Law enforcement
Scenic Overflights
Flights
Complaints
Recommended guidelines
Legal regulations
Permit system
For example, if the number of pieces of loose trash (or gross weight or clean up
costs…whichever you wish to measure) exceeded the acceptable limit, management
would respond by first adding more trash cans. If that did not work, signs could be
installed to encourage visitors to properly dispose of their trash, and as a last resort,
eating and drinking could be prohibited or limited to certain areas.
Other Potential Indicators Identified by Workshop Participants. In addition to the
examples presented above, the following were identified by the participants of the second
planning workshop as possible indicators of change.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Trail/soil erosion or compaction
Unauthorized trail formation
Bus noise and air pollution
River pollution (from Park sewage?)
Decline of native species
Numbers of vendors along the highway
Ethnic conflict
Traffic congestion/parking problems
Condition of visitor center
Insufficient guides
Visitor conflicts
Tunnel collapse and visitor impacts to underground archeological resources
Recommended Plan Objective
1. With stakeholders, implement a simplified version of the Limits of Acceptable
Change process to asses impacts at the Copan Archaeological Park.
9
Recommended Actions
1. Identify visitors through a market segmentation process.
2. Select indicators of resource and social conditions (8-10 maximum) and develop
baseline (current) data for all indicators.
3. Establish minimally acceptable levels for each indicator.
4. Identify management actions to bring conditions up to minimum standards.
5. Implement management actions when indicators fall below acceptable levels.
6. Continue to monitor conditions on a regular basis and modify management to
respond to changing conditions (increase intensity).
10
ANNEX A
ENHANCING VISUAL QUALITY WITHIN THE PRINCIPAL
GROUP
Robert W. Ross, Jr.
March 15, 2001
Annex B Scenery Management Analysis, Opportunities and Recommendations for the
Copan Valley outlines the modified visual analysis process (Visual Management System)
used to determine the visual quality objectives (VQO's) for the entire Copan Valley view
shed. The majority of the study area fell into the Retention VQO that calls for allowing
modifications to the landscape with features that are not visually evident and would
repeat the form, line, color and texture of the surrounding characteristic landscape; in this
case, a heavily modified cultural landscape. The entire Principal Group, including the
Grand Plaza falls into this VQO.
The VMS also provides opportunities to both Rehabilitate sites (restore landscapes
containing undesirable visual impacts) and Enhance sites (actions to increase positive
visual variety where little exists).
The following four sites are specifically identified as benefiting from Rehabilitation
and/or Enhancement activities and, with relatively little investment, would result in
greatly improved visual integrity of the area and thus improve the visitor's experience.
Visitor Center and Adjacent Spaces: The entire experience when arriving at the
parking area and making one's way to the Visitor Center is unfocused and disruptive. In
short, it leaves the arriving visitor (either on foot or in a vehicle) without clear definition
and little sense of clarity or direction. The parking area lacks clear demarcations, no
pedestrian pathways and directional signing is non-existent. Where plantings and groups
of plant materials could provide direction and a sense of comfort and invitation, none
exist. The building itself is sterile in appearance, does not extend a feeling of welcome
and is painted a color that is out of synch with the natural color schemes in the
surrounding landscape.
Recommendations:
!
Remove and re-set the existing stone units that define the edges of the existing
parking lot. The stone units are elegant and of the correct scale, color and texture.
However, many of sunk to a point of not being seen and are of little value. This
was probably due to poor initial installation techniques. It is also suggested that
while the stones are removed, minor grading be accomplished and following reinstallation of the edging, a new layer of small diameter gravel be rolled on.
!
Provide new under story plants and well-defined pathways in parking area plant
areas. Currently, several larger trees exist in these spaces. Addition of several
11
lower growing shrubs and groundcovers will add visual variety, interest, and a
sense of enclosure.
!
Add directional, low key signing targeted to both foot traffic and vehicular users.
!
Develop a planting scheme for the approach to and the entrance into the Visitor
Center. The current situation is difficult with a great expanse of deteriorating
sidewalks and potential planting areas that have been filled with rock paving. It is
suggested that the concrete approach be redesigned to more effectively work as a
'welcoming' feature that is in scale with the building and the obvious purpose if
inviting visitors into the site. The rock fill area should also be eliminated and
groupings of native plants installed. Some plantings in large, freestanding pots
for use adjacent to the portals to the building.
!
Repaint the exterior of the building to blend more completely with the colors in
the existing landscape.
!
Open 'Winged Patios' in the Center. Three of these small patios exist to the north
and east of the building and if opened could make excellent spaces for rest and
possible meeting and gathering space for tours and guides. By simple removal of
a few ornamental iron barriers, these spaces with added furniture and plant
materials would greatly expand the usable space of the Visitor Center.
Plantings in Old Airstrip: The existing plantings in the rehabilitated airstrip are
'plantation like' and give an almost park appearance. If allowed to mature in the current
scheme, the entire area will evolve into a rather sterile looking expanse of large trees in a
few years with no visual relationship to the surrounding natural landscape that exists on
nearly all sides.
Recommendations:
!
Develop and install a native plant material planting plan comprised of
groundcovers, shrubs, under story trees and some additional over story trees. The
plan should be designed in such a way as to create natural appearing openings
with enclosed small and limited view sheds and occasional longer views to create
a strong sense of variety and depth. The plantings should begin upon immediate
egress from the Visitor Center and continue across the entire length of the airstrip
to the intersection with the Sacbe
Sacbe Route: While intriguing as currently maintained, the visual character of this
stretch of the ancient walkway could be greatly improved. All under story trees and
groundcovers have been removed for several meters on either side of the walkway, thus
creating a cathedral like effect with large overhead trees and a rather a barren floor
appearance that extends well beyond the limits and needs of the foot trail. The one
existing picnic site along this route is open to the walkway with no sense of privacy.
12
Recommendation:
!
Develop a planting scheme similar to the one proposed for the airstrip that would
result in a more intimate space and stronger tie to the existing natural landscape.
This basically would call for the addition of groupings of under story plant
materials that would be arranged in such a way as to create a more gently
transition to the background natural groupings.
Stella Enclosures (ground level): Currently, the wire strands connected to 3-inch
diameter wooden posts placed in the ground are the sole means of providing protection to
the steles and other artifacts found in the Grand Plaza area. This technique, while
appearing to serve a useful purpose, falls short of a solution that might be more visually
acceptable.
Recommendation:
!
Explore and test the use of ground covers planted around these artifacts that
could, in effect, create a buffer that visitors would not cross. These could be
materials native to the area and selected for complimentary color so as to not
create a substantial contrast when added to the site.
!
If additional deterrence is desired, short sections of rebar (metal bars used to
reinforce concrete) could be used to prevent visitors from stepping into the
vegetation. If placed carefully, these stakes could be invisible from a distance.
!
Perhaps together with ground cover idea above, test the use of a shallow “moat”
around the base of a stella to act as a psychological barrier. The plantings could
be placed inside the 6-12 deep depression and trimmed to ground level. Rebar
“spikes” spaced 2-3 inches apart would physically prevent anyone from stepping
into the moat.
Stellae Roofs: The roof and structures that currently provide some level of weather
protection to many of the Stellae within the Principle Group are visually discordant and
not in harmony with the serene nature and character of this beautiful setting. It is
suggested that a long-term design solution that results in a less visually obtrusive and
simpler superstructure, while still providing adequate protection from the elements, be
undertaken. One possible solution might be the use of some of the newer stretch awning
materials that are finding their way to the market. These are much more ‘organic’ in
nature and allow for a wide variety of color selections that would work much more in
concert with the backdrop natural landscape.
Staircase Canvas Awning: The design (visual character, form and color) of the
existing canvas structure in place over the staircase could be greatly improved when it is
13
time to replace the unit. It is suggested that a solution for an awning structure similar to
the explanation in the previous paragraph regarding Stellae Roofs be further examined.
14
ANNEX B
SCENERY MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS, OPPORTUNITIES AND
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE COPAN VALLEY
Robert W. Ross, Jr.
March 12, 2001
Approaching the Copan Valley from Santa Rita, via highway CA-4, one is immediately
taken with the overwhelming beauty and variety of this rugged, undulating and culturally
vibrant landscape. Once the home of a large and productive Mayan community that left
permanent records with magnificent stone edifices, the physical attributes of the valley
reflect intensive and strongly modified landscapes extending from the valley floor to the
top edges of the enclosing mountain ridges that reach elevations of over 1100 meters.
One can easily argue that few places in the entire Copan Valley have not received some
form of light to rather intensive manipulation, resulting in both significant and noticeable
vegetation alteration and landform modification. Yet taken as a whole, the combined
effect of these alterations creates a charming and visually stimulating set of view sheds,
points of interest and intrigue.
In applying a modified visual analysis (due to the presence of an intensely modified
cultural landscape) approach utilizing the USDA Forest Service’s Visual Management
System (VMS) to determine acceptable levels of change to a natural appearing landscape,
we were able to determine that much of the valley fell into the Visual Quality Objective
(VQO) of Retention. See map titled Visual Quality Objectives. The Retention VQO calls
for allowing modifications to the landscape and the introduction of features into the
landscape, which are not visually evident and would repeat the form, line, color and
texture which are frequently found in the surrounding characteristic landscape. In this
case, the heavily modified cultural landscape. This area includes the majority of the view
shed as approached from the east portal area heading into the community of Copan
Ruinas, with the exception of a few acres lying south of the Copan River directly across
from the Principal Group and Sepulturas which is rated as a Partial Retention VQO. An
additional block of several acres directly West of Copan Ruinas also is designated with a
VQO of Partial Retention. The Partial Retention VQO also calls for repeating the form,
line, color and texture of introduced features but allows changes in size, shape, intensity
and patterns, with the intent that while they may become evident, they should remain
subordinate to the existing cultural landscape.
However, many areas along the highway and specific sites and points demand attention
with significant need for rehabilitation (a short term management tool used to restore
landscapes containing undesirable visual impacts to a level of desired visual quality) or
opportunities for enhancement (a set of actions and designs to increase positive visual
variety where little variety currently exists). Several of these are specifically listed in the
following recommendations as a first level, cursory analysis of the corridor in a quick and
not in-depth review that took place during the week of March 4, 2001. However, it is
strongly suggested that a formal Scenic Corridor Analysis and Management Plan, similar
to those created for National Forest and other State designated Scenic Byways in the
15
United States and other countries be developed for the entire length of highway CA-4.
This would extend from first entry into the valley near Stella #13, running the entire
length of the valley, past the ruins, through the community of Copan Ruinas and
terminating at a point near Stella #10 where the roadway exits the valley proper,
approximately 14 kilometers. The great value of this type of study is that it will provide
to the community, IHAH and all planning efforts a detailed and focused long range
Scenery management plan with specific recommendations, guidelines, and action plans to
assure the retention of visual integrity in the Copan Valley.
Some specific recommendations based upon initial field review, March 6, 2001 follow.
Please note that these are preliminary suggestions, either/or rehabilitative or enhancing in
nature and will gain further clarity in a Scenic Corridor Analysis and Management
Plan.
!
Stella 13. The location of this Stella is the first opportunity to park and view the
Copan Valley as one approaches from Santa Rita. This is an excellent
observation point that calls for several levels of interpretation when first exposing
the visitor to the unique landscape that they are about to enter. Several messages
including Mayan history, interpretation of views of the landscape, cultural
features and first exposure to native plant systems are suitable here. Much facility
design work needs to be accomplished including design of a parking area,
adequate trail system to the Stella, redesign of the structure over the Stella,
protective fencing and view/orientation stations into the valley.
!
Stella Without Number. This Stella located above the road cut on the north side
of the road and within 1 kilometer of Stella 13 is obviously of significant
importance. Easily visible from key observer positions as one drives the highway
after leaving the first Stella and from the eastern vistas from the Hotel Posada
Real property (rooms and grounds), there is no obvious access to it from the
roadway. When viewed from afar with field glasses, one can easily pick out
several stone features surrounding the monument, indicating a need for further
exploration. It is suggested that further study be undertaken to determine if access
can be provided from the roadway – either by vehicle or foot with appropriately
designed pull offs, directional and interpretive signage, and proper protective and
well designed fencing that would be subordinate to the surrounding landscape.
!
Viewing Tobacco Fields Interpretive Opportunity. Within 1 kilometer of the
turnoff to the north for the Hotel Posada Real, a significant opportunity exists to
provide basic interpretation and spectacular views regarding the tobacco growing
and drying activities that become dominate features in the valley bottoms. A
natural widening in the roadbed affords the chance for a well-designed pull off
and signing scheme directly across the road from an existing and historic tobacco
leaf smoking structure. The background scene of vast stretches of tobacco fields,
additional drying and smoking units and air drying structures provide exceptional
opportunities for explanations of the extensive agricultural undertakings in this
area.
16
Additional information and discussion regarding hillside agricultural uses, the
heavy removal of timber products for various uses could also be explored.
Further interpretation could explore the hillside indigenous people’s communities
and their connection to Maya culture.
!
Vegetative Rehabilitation Opportunities. For approximately 2 kilometers from
the last mentioned site up to and including the entrance into the Group Principal,
there are many opportunities to provide roadside plantings to both screen
undesirable views as well as increase variety and interest with the introduction
and use of combinations of native plant materials in natural planting schemes. It
is strongly suggested that do to the highly sensitive nature of this stretch of the
highway, that some plantings are inaugurated as soon as possible. By utilizing the
more natural groupings of materials ranging from groundcovers, under story and
some over story varieties, one can easily design a natural appearing visible buffer,
cutting away undesirable views and adding to the mystic of the approaching
Entrada Principal and what awaits beyond.
!
Foot Trail from Entrada Principal to Las Sepulturas. Currently a trail does
exist in various levels of condition and repair on the south side of the road,
providing the main foot traffic opportunities between the Principal Group and Las
Sepulturas. In casual observations during the week of March 4, 2001, the trail
does appear to receive some level of moderate use both from visitors to Copan as
well as locals. Additional plantings of native plant materials to provide shade,
visual variety and buffering as well as well as clearing at key points to open
important vistas exist. Trail surfacing work and in some areas, relocation of trail
centerline further away from the roadway, will enhance the users experience and
safety. Signage, both directional and interpretive needs to be explored in this area
as well.
!
Walkway from Entrada Principal to Copan Ruinas. Many opportunities for
enhancing the visual integrity of the excellent paved walkway into the town exist.
Currently, the over story trees do provide much needed shade along the path. It is
suggested that by simple addition of under story plantings of shrubs and
groundcovers would add visual variety and enhanced experiences for the foot
traveler. There are also 2 or 3 excellent location for simple benches for rest and
observations.
Significant opportunities also exist for interpretation of the 2 Stellae that are
located near each other as one approached the community. Low key/low profile
interpretative signing, simplified structure overhead design and appropriate
organic fencing solutions all needed to be explored.
!
Vista Point beyond Copan Ruinas. Between 3.5 and 4 kilometers beyond the
Pueblo heading west and approximately ! of a kilometer short of the approach to
Stella #10, the new road construction has provided for a large, flat area that would
17
serve as an exceptional overlook and interpretative site for travelers either leaving
the valley or approaching from Guatemala. The stunning view from this vantage
point, while providing limited visual access to the actual community of Copan
Ruinas provide excellent opportunities for many topics of interpretation including
agricultural influences in the valley bottoms, the importance of the Rio Copan,
steep, hillside farming techniques and the role of indigenous people.
!
Stella 10. This monument defines the western entrance into the Copan Valley
and most likely the most western boundary of the valley Maya culture. A
commanding view from the Stella location affords, once again several
opportunities for both explaining views and key points of interest to the east as
well as many chances for other key interpretative messages.
Significant work (both design and construction) needs to take place regarding
parking and access from the point of entrance along the newly constructed
highway. Parking, signing, and steps and handrail systems need to be provided
to assure even a minimal level of safety for the hiker to the site. The trail itself
which extends several hundred meters could be greatly enhanced with minimal
surface reconstruction and the “protected” area around the Stella should be redesigned to become more visitor friendly and visually attuned to the surrounding
natural landscape.
18
ANNEX C
LIMITS OF ACCEPTABLE CHANGE FOR THE
COPAN ARCHAEOLOGICAL PARK, HONDURAS
Jerry Wylie, March 14, 2001
The LAC Framework
The Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) framework was designed as an alternative to the
traditional “carrying capacity” approach used by many wilderness managers in the USA.
It is a continuous, collaborative process involving all stakeholders that leads to
quantitative and qualitative measures of change rather than the arbitrary limits on
numbers of visitors. It shifts the debate from “how much use is too much?” to “how
much change is acceptable?” (Stankey, McCool, and Stokes 1990). It is widely used as a
method to deal with conflicts between recreation use and natural resource conservation.
In its classic form, the LAC methodology involves the following nine steps (Stankey, et
al. 1985):
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
Identify the concerns and issues
Define and describe opportunity classes
Select indicators of resource and social conditions
Inventory resource and social conditions
Specify standards for resource and social conditions
Identify alternative opportunity class allocations
Identify management actions to respond to unacceptable change
Evaluate and select an alternative
Implement actions and monitor conditions
Recent re-evaluations of the LAC framework by its developers have suggested certain
changes and clarifications to the original approach. In general, experts agree that LAC is
more a continuous and iterative process than a product, and can be a means of resolving
conflicts between opposing goals (Cole and McCool, n.d.).
They also recognize that institutional support for monitoring is always difficult and that
“low precision can be acceptable if indicators and standards are written appropriately.”
Qualitative standards may now be used if they clearly show when standards are being
violated. The general lack of attention to monitoring protocols and a concern over the
reliability of most monitoring data are considered two of the most serious weaknesses of
the LAC process.
The reviewers examined the application of LAC outside formally established wilderness
areas and beyond recreational activities (the traditional LAC areas). They noted that
there must be at least three conditions for LAC to be useful:
19
1) LAC is a planning system for resolving conflict. There must be at least two
conflicting goals, such as maximizing use and maximizing environmental
protection, and management must be willing to compromise all goals.
2) Management must be willing to consider one or more goals to ultimately
constrain the others.
3) Minimum standards must be written which quantify the minimally acceptable
state of the ultimately constraining goal(s).
Therefore, if there is no conflict or there is no room for compromise, then there is no
need for LAC. Managers can merely state desired conditions and implement
management to achieve it. If an activity, use or condition is considered “good” under any
circumstance, there is no need for LAC (for example, erosion control on steep trails.)
Application of LAC to Management of the Copan Archaeological Park
The LAC process was developed for use in formally designated wilderness areas in the
USA. These are established protected areas with well-defined boundaries,
comprehensive management plans, and which are generally well funded and staffed. Yet
even there, the LAC process has not always been successful, often due to a failure of the
monitoring process.
The usefulness of the LAC process outside wilderness areas and where there are few
competing uses, especially in developing countries, has not been extensively studied. In
addition, most LAC indicators in North America deal with the impacts of overnight
camping and trail use built and maintained primarily for recreational purposes.
Based on the revisions proposed by the developers of LAC and the needs of the Copan
Archaeological Park, the following modifications to the original LAC process are
recommended:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
Identify visitors through a market segmentation process
Identify goals and purposes (conditions desired)
Identify concerns and issues
Select indicators of resource and social conditions (outputs and outcomes)
Inventory existing resource and social conditions
Set minimally acceptable limits for resource and social indicators
Identify management actions to bring conditions up to minimum standards
Implement actions and monitor conditions
Repeat the process as necessary
Step #1 is not a traditional part of the LAC process but is included here because, as noted
by Sam Ham, Copan users may be a complex group composed of different geographic
and sociological markets. “Depending on how one segments these markets, we might
20
expect significant differences in their perceptions of the kinds of changes that might be
important to monitor at Copan, and we would probably expect some disagreement on the
levels of impacts they might be willing to accept. I think the LAC public involvement
process will need to respond to this complexity. I would suggest starting with a market
segmentation process through which the key constituency groups are identified and then
developing ideas for how to involve them…For example, local Copañecos might not
even consider the level of noise as a critical factor in their experience. But North
American or European visitors might be very sensitive to noise levels…So it will be
important that the LAC process at Copan involve a representative cross section of the
who user population, not just local people.” (Sam Ham, personal communication)
Steps 2 and 3 have already been accomplished and are documented in the Management
Plan. Step 4 involves identification of specific indicators of resource and social
conditions, which are then dealt with in steps 5 through 8. It might also be useful to
involve representatives from parks in other countries who have experience in dealing
with similar management problems, particularly in steps 3 and 4 where concerns and
issues are identified and indicators of resource and social conditions are selected for
monitoring.
Potential Issues, Indicators of Change, and Management Remedies
The examples listed below - trash, visitor safety, visitor satisfaction, crowding, vandalism
and scenic overflights - were presented at the planning workshop. Participants were also
asked to recommend other indicators. The “remedies” shown in the third column
illustrate the kinds of managerial responses that could be developed for each issue, and
they are listed in order of increasing intensity to suggest how responses could be
gradually phased to adjust to more difficult situations. They are examples of the kinds of
actions agreed to in advance which are ready and waiting “on-the-shelf” to be
automatically triggered once the indicators reach a pre-determined unacceptable level.
These are not actual recommendations; that should be left to the stakeholders as part of
the formal LAC process (step #6).
Issues
Trash/Litter
LAC Indicators
Pieces/weight
Removal cost
Remedies (in increasing intensity)
Trash cans
Sign messages
Regulations/prohibitions
Visitor Safety
Accidents
Caution signs
Trail redesign
Install barriers
Visitor Satisfaction
Complaints
Surveys
Change management as needed
Crowding
Complaints
Numbers of visitors
Redesign trails/directional flow
Limit parking
21
Size of groups
Parked vehicles
Waiting time
Limit group size
Time guidelines
Time limits
Charge entrance fees
Vandalism
Graffiti
Looting
Damage
Sign messages
Offer alternatives (visitor book)
Law enforcement
Scenic Overflights
Flights
Complaints
Recommended guidelines
Legal regulations
Permit system
For example, if the number of pieces of loose trash (or gross weight or clean up
costs…whichever you wish to measure) exceeded the acceptable limit, management
would respond by first adding more trash cans. If that did not work, signs could be
installed to encourage visitors to properly dispose of their trash, and as a last resort,
eating and drinking could be prohibited or limited to certain areas.
Other Potential Indicators Identified by Workshop Participants
In addition to the examples presented above, the following were identified by the
participants of the second planning workshop as possible indicators of change:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Trail/soil erosion or compaction
Unauthorized trail formation
Bus noise and air pollution
River pollution (from Park sewage?)
Decline of native species
Numbers of vendors along the highway
Ethnic conflict
Traffic congestion/parking problems
Condition of visitor center
Insufficient guides
Visitor conflicts
Tunnel collapse and visitor impacts
Recommendations
With stakeholders, a simplified version of LAC should be immediately implemented:
1) Identify visitors through a market segmentation process
2) Select indicators of resource and social conditions (8-10 maximum)
3) Develop baseline (current) data for all indicators.
22
4) Establish minimally acceptable levels for each indicator.
5) Identify management actions to bring conditions up to minimum standards.
6) Implement management actions.
7) Continue to monitor conditions on a regular basis.
8) Modify management to respond to changing conditions (increase intensity).
9) Consider involving representatives from parks in other countries who have
experience in dealing with similar management problems.
23
REFERENCES CITED
Cole, David N. and George H. Stankey
1979 The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum: A Framework for Planning,
Management, and Research. General Technical Report PW-96, USDA Forest
Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station.
Cole, David N. and Steve F. McCool
n.d. The Limits of Acceptable Change Process: Modifications and Clarifications.
Unpublished manuscript (work in progress.)
Stankey, George H., David Cole, Robert Lucas, Margaret Petersen, and Sidney Frissell
1985 The Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) System for Wilderness Planning.
General Technical Report INT-176, USDA Forest Service, Intermountain
Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah.
Stankey, George H, Stephen F. McCool, and Gerald Stokes
1990 Managing for Appropriate Wilderness Conditions: The Carrying Capacity
Issue. Chapter 9 in Wilderness Management, edited by John C. Hendee,
George Stankey and Robert C. Lucas. North American Press, Golden, CO.
24