White Space
Feral horses at Cape Lookout National Seashore are managed under a congressionally legislated partnership between the National Park Service and the Foundation for Shackleford Horses, Inc. Begun in 1999, the partnership is working well and has the goal of maintaining the herd size in the range of 100-110 animals.
sue_stuska@nps.gov
Wildlife Biologist, Horses; Cape Lookout National Seashore, North Carolina
Lessons from NEPA lawsuits
by Jake Hoogland
What can the National Park Service do about air quality problems?
by Christine Shaver
National Park Service prevails in court; environmental impact statement on schedule
by John D. Varley with Ann Deutch
National Natural Landmarks Program: Up and running ... and raring to go
by Steve Gibbons
by Sue Stuska, Ed.D.
Partnerships with citizen groups to manage park natural resources are nothing new. Such public partnerships are extremely beneficial in that they pool resources and enable more progress than either the National Park Service or an independent organization could achieve on its own. In 1999, however, Congress mandated a partnership for the management of feral horses on Shackleford Banks at Cape Lookout National Seashore, North Carolina (P.L. 105-202 and 105-229). Legislated resolution to management issues is uncommon, and it is perhaps not the preferred method of coming to agreement on a partnership. The Cape Lookout legislation came about when the public felt the park was not addressing their concerns and input regarding management of the horses. Perhaps an agreement could have been reached without legislation, perhaps not. What is important is that now a partnership is in place, and it is working well to everyone's advantage.
The legislation specified a partnership with "the Foundation for Shackleford Horses, Inc., ... or another qualified nonprofit entity." This foundation, a private, local, nonprofit organization, is Cape Lookout's partner in management of the horses. A memorandum of understanding (MOU), a common and valuable document for partnerships, is now in place, and a jointly drafted Horse Management Plan has been implemented. The legislation, the MOU, the Horse Management Plan, and the partnership now structure the day-to-day and long-term management of the horses.
"Legislated management can create other challenges by restricting the ability to adapt ? to future unknowns."
One difficulty with legislated partnerships is that the battle surrounding the creation of legislation can engender negativity between the parties. This complicates management issues, and negative feelings can persist even after the legislation is in place. Strained community relations can occur when one group is chosen as a partner to the exclusion of others, and science can even be overridden during decision making. Additionally, legislated management can create other challenges by restricting the ability to adapt management to future unknowns.
For example, the Shackleford Banks legislation specifies a minimum of 100 horses with a target population range of 100-110 animals. This range provides a clear and appropriate goal to work toward at this time. The legislation also specifies that the natural resources on Shackleford Banks must not be adversely impacted by the horses. Presently, the 9-mile-long, 1/2- to 1-mile-wide barrier island supports a herd of this size on existing vegetation. However, the dynamic nature of barrier islands is likely to result in changes in the availability of vegetation in the future, suggesting the need to adapt the target size of the herd.
Although this partnership is working remarkably well at Cape Lookout, parks faced with similar issues might reflect on the processes that brought it about. The following steps will help provide a solid basis for making management decisions. Parks should: (1) identify early those issues that are likely to create intense interest by the public; (2) obtain timely scientific information from peer-reviewed literature and incorporate it into park planning and National Environmental Policy Act documents; (3) include expert opinion and available information from works in progress, particularly when rapid changes to resources are likely; (4) seek review (possibly including independent peer review) to validate the interpretation and application of the scientific information; (5) strive to reach agreement and consider using a third-party mediator if needed; and (6) work proactively with the public to involve them and include their input. The goal is to benefit the resource, which ultimately benefits everyone.
White Space
This material is from Natural Resource Year in Review--1999; published by the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, August 2000 (publication D-1406)
/YearInReview/yir/yir99/pages/challenges/01stuska_feral.htm
Last Updated: 09/26/00
Webmaster: jeff_selleck@nps.gov