Rocky Mountain National Park undergoing eco-alteration

Northern Colorado’s crown jewel is a few years from its first century, but a new era is already beginning for Rocky Mountain National Park.

Although no one can say what the park’s next 100 years will look like, there’s little question that changes are already under way thanks to a global phenomenon: climate change.

Last week, the National Park Service and the Center of the American West, a think tank at the University of Colorado-Boulder, released the results of a a two-day workshop last fall on the ecological implications of climate change for Rocky. At first glance, the anticipated changes appear drastic and long-lasting.

The park’s glaciers are shrinking, for instance, though not as rapidly as those in Glacier National Park in Montana. And the park’s signature alpine tundra, one of the key features that attract tourists along Trail Ridge Road, is also at risk as the permafrost starts melting. That could affect stream flows at lower elevations and damage the celebrated mountain highway.

Higher temperatures will likely result in quicker spring snowmelt, reduced snowpack and fewer wetlands, according to the study, the first coordinated attempt to document information about climate change in the park.

“Though we are left with more questions than answers, we now have an informed direction to focus our research and monitoring energy,” wrote Ben Bobowski, chief of resource stewardship at Rocky, in the report’s introduction.

Researchers believe the park will see what scientists call “novel communities” of plants and animals. That means park managers will have to redefine what a healthy ecosystem actually is.

“The challenge will be to balance the inevitable transformations associated with climate change with the National Park Service mission to preserve resources in perpetuity,” said park ecologist Judy Visty.

Dramatic changes would not be new to Rocky. At one time, Columbian mammoths, sabertooth tigers and even camels lived in the area. The passing of those creatures reminds us that those ecosystems are by no means static, the report says.

Preserving current park resources means different things to different people, notably demonstrated in the debate about wildfires in Yellowstone National Park 20 years ago.

The park service’s policy was to let nature take its course, so fires were allowed to rage over thousands of acres of protected forest. But some, primarily landowners, felt the park service should have done more to prevent the fires from destroying so much.

A similar debate is possible about climate change. Questions arise about what should be done to protect climate-sensitive alpine species like the furry mountain pika, for instance, or the Colorado state fish, the greenback cutthroat trout.

These questions are not addressed in current park management laws.

“The 1916 (creation of the National Park Service), environmental laws of the 1960s and 1970s, and the 1998 National Parks Omnibus Management Act did not anticipate anthropogenic climate change, and in some cases their conception of the natural world may be inadequate in an era of rapid transformation,” the report reads.

New policies are needed to determine whether efforts should be devoted to protecting individual species and current ecosystems, rather than embracing new ones, the report says.

At the same time, a different report about the state of America’s national parks shows the need for increased funding and staffing to maintain those current resources.

The National Parks Conservation Association compiled information from assessments of nearly 60 national parks, including Rocky, and found many parks need improvement.

Rocky’s assessment was completed in 2002, said Kyle Patterson, spokeswoman for the park.

“That was six years ago, so some of the things that they put as recommendations in that report we have moved forward on,” she said, including updating the elk management plan and other changes. She said implementing those recommendations hinged on having adequate funding.

“Anytime you’re looking at ... improving some of your natural resources and cultural resources,” she said, “a lot of that has to do with funding and staffing.”

And in that regard, at least, things are going fairly well, said Larry Frederick, chief of interpretation and education for Rocky.

This fiscal year, under a program called the Centennial Initiative, the park service got a $100 million funding increase to help pay for improvements and new workers. Rocky was able to hire 27 employees, Frederick said.

“When we’re looking at a tight budget and tough economic times, for the National Park Service to get a $100 million base increase is pretty remarkable. That shows America’s love for their national parks and the strong support from Congress and the (Bush) administration,” he said.

A related funding initiative, called the Centennial Challenge, would provide another $100 million to be used for grants matched by nonprofit groups. U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., is a key sponsor, but that legislation is still lingering in Congress.

In the meantime, the Bush administration gave the park service another $30 million this year, Frederick said. A youth rangers program at Rocky was one of 110 projects nationwide that were approved for matching funds, which will be used for youth programs, student internships and an environmental education specialist.

The park won the money thanks to efforts with the nonprofit Rocky Mountain Nature Association, which started an endowment campaign two years ago. The Next Generation Fund will ultimately amount to $10 million.

“We’re well on our way,” Frederick said, “but meanwhile, we want to show our success by expanding and experimenting with youth education programs in the park.”



Help the park

Residents can learn more and donate to the Rocky Mountain Nature Association’s Next Generation Fund by visiting Nextgenerationfund.org.

Learn more about the Centennial Initiative at nps.gov/2016/.