Bill Overview
Title: Chiricahua National Park Act
Description: This bill redesignates the Chiricahua National Monument in Arizona as the Chiricahua National Park. The Department of the Interior shall ensure the protection of traditional cultural and religious sites in the park. Interior shall allow an enrolled member of any Indian tribe that is culturally affiliated with the land located within the boundaries of the park to collect plants, including parts or products of plants, and mineral resources within the park for noncommercial traditional, religious, customary, and cultural uses. Interior shall establish a tribal commission for the park in order to ensure that its management reflects the expertise and traditional and historical knowledge of members of applicable Indian tribes. The land located within the boundaries of the park is withdrawn from location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and geothermal leasing. Any land or interest in land that is acquired by the United States for inclusion in the park shall be immediately withdrawn as specified above.
Sponsors: Rep. Kirkpatrick, Ann [D-AZ-2]
Target Audience
Population: People impacted by the change of Chiricahua National Monument to a National Park
Estimated Size: 50000
- The Chiricahua National Monument is becoming a National Park, which implies increased conservation efforts and potential changes in park management.
- Local communities near the Chiricahua area, including residents of Arizona, will likely experience changes regarding usage and economic benefits associated with a National Park.
- Traditional, cultural, and religious practices of affiliated Indigenous tribes will be impacted as they are given explicit rights to gather plants and minerals for non-commercial purposes.
- Introduction of a tribal commission allows for Indigenous tribes to have an influence on park management reflecting historical and cultural perspectives.
- Environmental groups and conservationists may be impacted due to the shift in designation, providing stronger protection measures for the land.
- Land withdrawal from mining and geothermal leasing impacts industry stakeholders who might have interests in these activities within the park area.
Reasoning
- The target population includes residents of Arizona, Indigenous tribes culturally affiliated with the Chiricahua land, visitors, and conservationists.
- With a limited budget, focus on key groups directly affected by the policy: local residents, Indigenous tribes, and conservationists.
- Not everyone in these groups will experience high impact, but we must identify those who might perceive changes in cultural practices, environmental protection, or economic opportunities associated with the park.
- Consideration of cost constraints implies focusing on qualitative improvements tied to tribal involvement, environmental protection, and enhanced visitor experience.
Simulated Interviews
Environmental Lawyer (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm excited to see enhanced conservation efforts.
- It is vital to see Indigenous voices actively participating in park management.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Local Business Owner (Willcox, Arizona)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The change to a National Park could boost local tourism.
- I have concerns about how increased visitors might affect the local environment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Historian (New York City, New York)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Including tribal perspectives in park management is a valuable step forward.
- This policy recognizes and respects the historical significance of these lands.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Mining Engineer (Tucson, Arizona)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The withdrawal of land for mining affects the industry negatively.
- I understand the need for conservation, but it's important to balance economic interests.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 8 |
Tribal Cultural Specialist (Chiricahua Apache Nation, New Mexico)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy empowers our community by recognizing our cultural practices.
- Having a say in park management is a significant positive change.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Adventure Blogger (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The shift to National Park status will likely increase interest and visits.
- I hope the park maintains its natural beauty despite more visitors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired Park Ranger (Dallas, Texas)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Conservation of land is essential for the future.
- Honored to see a park I worked at receive this designation of protection.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Gardening Enthusiast (San Francisco, California)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Preserving traditional plant collection is intriguing and vital for diversity.
- I'm supportive of measures that safeguard biodiversity.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
College Student (Flagstaff, Arizona)
Age: 19 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Turning the area into a National Park shows commitment to environment protection.
- I plan to engage more with such spaces for my fieldwork and leisure.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Cultural Anthropologist (Albuquerque, New Mexico)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The inclusion of Indigenous voices in park management is a meaningful change.
- I view this policy as a positive step towards rectifying historical exclusions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 2: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 3: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 5: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 10: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 100: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Key Considerations
- The park's re-designation is likely to increase visitor numbers and tourism-related economic activities.
- Land withdrawal from industrial use could prevent potential negative environmental impacts.
- Partnership with tribes strengthens cultural heritage preservation but demands ongoing collaboration and funding.