DOCSLIB.ORG

Big Thicket National Preserve Fire Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Big Thicket National Preserve Fire Management Plan Big Thicket National Preserve 9/13/2004 Fire Management Plan Big Thicket National Preserve Fire Management Plan 2004 Prepared~: ;;;&~ --A /C-J , ,/' t;/tr/oy David F. McHugh v' Fire Management Officer Big Thicket National Preserve Fire Eco gist Big Thicket National Preserve Superintendent Big Thicket National Preserve 1 Big Thicket National Preserve 9/13/2004 Fire Management Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS I Introduction / Overview . 6 II Relationship to Land Management Planning and Fire Policy . 7 A. NPS Management Policies . 7 B. Big Thicket National Preserve Authorization . 8 C. General Management Plan . 9 D. Resource Management Plan . 9 E. Desired Future Condition . 9 III Wildland Fire Management Strategies . 10 A. General Management . 10 B. Wildland Fire Management Goals . 10 C. Wildland Fire Management Options . 12 1. Wildland Fire Suppression 2. Prescribed Fire 3. Wildland Fire Use 4. Non-Fire Applications D. Description of Fire Management Units . 14 EACH CONTAINS: a) Natural and Cultural Resources b) Objectives c) Management Constraints d) Fire History e) Fire Management situation 1) Historical Weather Analysis 2) Fire season 3) Fuel Characteristics 4) Fire Regime Alteration 5) Control Problems 6) Other Elements of the fire environment 7) Values-At-Risk; Urban-Interface 1. General Area . 16 2. Big Sandy Creek . 34 3. Hickory Creek . 43 4. Turkey Creek . 50 5. Beech Creek . 60 6. West Hardin Area . 65 7. Neches River Floodplain . 71 8. Stream Corridors . .77 IV Wildland Fire Management Program Components . 82 A. General Implementation Procedures . 82 B. Wildland Fire Suppression . 82 1) Fire Behavior . 82 2 Big Thicket National Preserve 9/13/2004 Fire Management Plan 2) Preparedness Actions . 87 a) Fire Prevention Activities b) Training c) Readiness d) Fire Weather and Fire Danger e) Preparedness and Staffing Plan 3) Pre-Attack Plan . 90 4) Initial Attack . 90 5) Extended Attack . 96 6) Records & Reports . 97 C. Wildland Fire Use . 98 D. Prescribed Fire . 99 1) Planning and Documentation . 99 2) Exceeding existing Prescribed Fire Burn Plan . 105 3) Air Quality and Smoke Management . 105 E. Non-Fire Fuel Treatments Applications . .107 F. Emergency Rehabilitation and Restoration . 110 V Organization and Budget Parameters . 111 VI Monitoring and Evaluation . 115 VII Fire Research . 117 VIII Public Safety . 118 IX Public Information and Education . 119 X Protection of Sensitive Resources . 119 XI Fire Critiques and Annual Plan Review . 120 XII Consultation and Coordination . 121 3 Big Thicket National Preserve 9/13/2004 Fire Management Plan XIII Appendix Appendix A References Cited . 122 Appendix B Definitions . 125 Appendix C Species List . 126 Appendix D NEPA / NHPA Complience . 165 Appendix E Unit Specific Information 1. Preparedness Inventory . 167 2. Prescribed Fire Prescriptions . 171 3. Sample Prescribed Burn Plan . 172 4. Cooperative Agreements . 185 a. Texas Interagency All-Risk . 186 b. Big Thicket National Preserve & Texas Forest Service . 191 c. National Park Service & Texas Forest Service . 204 d. Big Thicket National Preserve & Alabama-Coushatta Tribe . 212 e. Interpark Agreements . 215 Padre Island National Seashore Lyndon B. Johnson National Historical Park San Antonio Missions National Historical Park Appendix F Fire Monitoring Plan . 224 Appendix G Preattack Plan . 249 Equipment . 249 Fire Call-up List . 250 Run Cards . 251 Fire Size-Up . 258 Pipeline Map and Company Information . 261 Treatment Units and Vegetation Maps . 265 Transition Plan . 278 Delegation of Authority. 284 Appendix H Long-Term Prescribed Fire and Hazardous Fuel Reduction Plan . 286 Appendix I Prevention Plan . 290 Appendix J Equipment Rental Agreements . 312 Appendix K Fire Resource Contracts . 313 Appendix L Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Plan . 314 Appendix M Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy Complience . 315 4 Big Thicket National Preserve 9/13/2004 Fire Management Plan LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Big Thicket Fire Management Unit Map . 15 Figure 2. Rainfall Pattern 1998-2003 . 17 Figure 3. Annual Prescribed Burn Acreage 1980-2003 . 32 Figure 4. Wildfire Occurance by month . 33 Figure 5. Big Sandy Fire Management Unit Map . 34 Figure 6. Hickory Creek Fire Management Unit Map . 43 Figure 7. Turkey Creek Fire Management Unit Map . 50 Figure 8. Beech Creek Fire Management Unit Map . 60 Figure 9. West Hardin Fire Management Unit Map . 65 Figure 10. Neches Floodplain Fire Management Unit Map . 71 Figure 11. Stream Corridor Fire Management Unit Map . 77 Figure 12. Appropriate Management Response . 93 Figure 13. Prescribed Fire History 1976 – 2003 . .104 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Area of Fire Management Units . 16 Table 2. Acreage by vegetation Type . 25 Table 3. Relative Abundance of dominate species by vegetation type . 28 Table 4. Correlation of fire behavior Fuel Models with vegetation types . 83 Table 5. Comparative fire behavior predictions . 84 Table 6(a-g). Boundary Statistics . (at the end of each FMU description) Table 7. Preparedness level schedule . 89 Table 8. Approximate fire response times . 95 Table 9. Records and Reports . 98 Photographs Photo 1. Tyler County – Doucette 1907-08 . 30 Photo 2. Tyler County 1907 . 31 5 Big Thicket National Preserve 9/13/2004 Fire Management Plan I. INTRODUCTION The primary objective of the fire management program is to allow fire to function in its natural ecological role (a goal of the 10 Year Plan), restore ecosystem balance (stand structure and diversity) of phyric communities, and manage hazardous fuels in the Urban Interface (a goal of the Cohesive Strategy) through the use of prescribed fire and mechanical treatments. Wildland fire response is based on ecological, social, and legal consequences. The plan describes a range of appropriated management actions that are consistent with resource management objectives, public health issues, firefighter and public safety, environmental laws and regulations, activities of the area, and is based upon the best available science. It incorporates mitigation, burned-area rehabilitation, hazardous fuel reduction, and restoration activities. It satisfies Directors Order 18’s requirement that all areas with vegetation capable of sustaining fire will develop a Fire Management Plan. The preserve’s first Fire Management Plan was approved in 1982, and quickly developed initial attack capabilities and an active prescribed fire program through collaboration with local interagency partners, principally the Texas Forest Service, US Fish & Wildlife, National Forests of Texas, and Texas Nature Conservancy. Over twenty years of interaction with preserve resource management staff and managers has defined land management goals. The national FIREPRO program in the early 1990’s provided non-ONPS funding, creating staff positions dedicated to fire management actions (not collateral duty assignments). The severe fire season of 2000, and subsequent years, provided the impetus for the Presidential Report on Managing the Impact of Wildfires on Communities and the environment, a National Fire Plan, the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy (and Implementation Plan), and the Healthy Forest Initiative. This impetus also resulted in a standardized format requirement for fire management plans, and increased collaboration. On December 17, 2002 the preserve conducted Internal NEPA scoping, invited members of local government (Tyler County Commissioners), other land management agencies (Bureau of Indian Affairs, Alabama - Coushatta Tribe, The Nature Conservancy, USDA Southern Research Station, Texas Parks & Wildlife, US Fish & Wildlife) and local conservation groups (Stephen F. Austin University, Big Thicket Association), to develop a list of impact topics. An interdisciplinary group was formed to create fire management alternatives and determine the level of fire effects (see NEPA Compliance section). All persons that attended scoping sessions and local land management agencies will be sent a draft copy of the Fire Management Plan for comment. It will also be posted on the preserve’s web page for public comment. The Texas Forest Service has the primary initial attack responsibility in the Big Thicket area, and increasing collaboration on all fire management activities will be pursued. The plan will implement fire management policies and help achieve resource management and fire management goals as defined in: the Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and Program Review, Managing Impacts of Wildfires on Communities and the Environment, and Protecting People and Sustaining Resources in Fire Adapted Ecosystems – A Cohesive Strategy (USDOI/USDA), and A Collaborative Approach for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks to Communities and the Environment: 10- Year Comprehensive Strategy Implementation Plan. This Fire Management Plan meets National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements through the use of the Categorical Exclusion for Fire Management Plans published in the Federal Register (Vol 68, NO.108, pages 33814-33824). The standard Environmental Screening form and decision memorandum (per Environmental Statement Memorandum ESM03-2) is in Appendix C. National Historical Preservation Act (NHPA) requirements have been meet through an initial assessment of structures by Dethloff and Treat [1975] and clearance by the Texas State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO). The authority for fire management is broadly stated in the "Organic Act" of the National Park System (Title 16 USC 1), dated August 25, 1916: 6 Big Thicket National Preserve 9/13/2004 Fire Management Plan "...The service thus established shall promote and regulate the use of the Federal areas known as national parks, monuments, and reservations...by such means and measures as conform to the fundamental purpose of the said parks, monuments, and reservations, which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations." Authorities for procurement, personnel, and other administrative activities necessary to accomplish wildland fire suppression missions are contained in the.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Vegetation Map of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, New
    ______________________________________________________________________________ A Vegetation Map of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, New Mexico ______________________________________________________________________________ A Vegetation Map of Valles Caldera National Preserve, New Mexico 1 Esteban Muldavin, Paul Neville, Charlie Jackson, and Teri Neville2 2006 ______________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY To support the management and sustainability of the ecosystems of the Valles Caldera National Preserve (VCNP), a map of current vegetation was developed. The map was based on aerial photography from 2000 and Landsat satellite imagery from 1999 and 2001, and was designed to serve natural resources management planning activities at an operational scale of 1:24,000. There are 20 map units distributed among forest, shrubland, grassland, and wetland ecosystems. Each map unit is defined in terms of a vegetation classification that was developed for the preserve based on 348 ground plots. An annotated legend is provided with details of vegetation composition, environment, and distribution of each unit in the preserve. Map sheets at 1:32,000 scale were produced, and a stand-alone geographic information system was constructed to house the digital version of the map. In addition, all supporting field data was compiled into a relational database for use by preserve managers. Cerro La Jarra in Valle Grande of the Valles Caldera National Preserve (Photo: E. Muldavin) 1 Final report submitted in April 4, 2006 in partial fulfillment of National Prak Service Award No. 1443-CA-1248- 01-001 and Valles Caldrea Trust Contract No. VCT-TO 0401. 2 Esteban Muldavin (Senior Ecologist), Charlie Jackson (Mapping Specialist), and Teri Neville (GIS Specialist) are with Natural Heritage New Mexico of the Museum of Southwestern Biology at the University of New Mexico (UNM); Paul Neville is with the Earth Data Analysis Center (EDAC) at UNM.
    [Show full text]
  • The National Park System
    January 2009 Parks and Recreation in the United States The National Park System Margaret Walls BACKGROUNDER 1616 P St. NW Washington, DC 20036 202-328-5000 www.rff.org Resources for the Future Walls Parks and Recreation in the United States: The National Park System Margaret Walls∗ Introduction The National Park Service, a bureau within the U.S. Department of the Interior, is responsible for managing 391 sites—including national monuments, national recreation areas, national rivers, national parks, various types of historic sites, and other categories of protected lands—that cover 84 million acres. Some of the sites, such as Yellowstone National Park and the Grand Canyon, are viewed as iconic symbols of America. But the National Park Service also manages a number of small historical sites, military parks, scenic parkways, the National Mall in Washington, DC, and a variety of other protected locations. In this backgrounder, we provide a brief history of the Park Service, show trends in land acreage managed by the bureau and visitation at National Park Service sites over time, show funding trends, and present the challenges and issues facing the Park Service today. History National parks were created before there was a National Park Service. President Ulysses S. Grant first set aside land for a “public park” in 1872 with the founding of Yellowstone. Yosemite, General Grant (now part of Kings Canyon), and Sequoia National Parks in California were created in 1890, and nine years later Mount Rainier National Park was set aside in Washington. With passage of the Antiquities Act in 1906, the President was granted authority to declare historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and sites of scientific interest as national monuments.
    [Show full text]
  • 417 US National Parks, Historical Sites, Preserves, Seashores and More!
    417 US National Parks, Historical Sites, Preserves, Seashores and more! Alabama o Birmingham Civil Rights National Monument o Freedom Riders National Monument o Horseshoe Bend National Military Park o Little River Canyon National Preserve o Russell Cave National Monument o Tuskegee Airmen National Historic Site o Tuskegee Institute National Historic Site Alaska o Alagnak Wild River o Aniakchak National Monument o Aniakchak National Preserve o Bering Land Bridge National Preserve o Cape Krusenstern National Monument o Denali National Park o Denali National Preserve o Gates of the Arctic National Park o Gates of the Arctic National Preserve o Glacier Bay National Park o Glacier Bay National Preserve o Katmai National Park o Katmai National Preserve o Kenai Fjords National Park o Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park (also Washington) o Kobuk Valley National Park o Lake Clark National Park o Lake Clark National Preserve o Noatak National Preserve o Sitka National Historical Park o World War II Valor in the Pacific National Monument (also California, Hawaii) o Wrangell-St. Elias National Park o Wrangell-St. Elias National Preserve o Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve Courtesy of ParkRangerJohn.com Arizona o Canyon De Chelly National Monument o Casa Grande Ruins National Monument o Chiricahua National Monument o Coronado National Memorial o Fort Bowie National Historic Site o Glen Canyon National Recreation Area (also Utah) o Grand Canyon National Park o Hohokam Pima National Monument o Hubbel Trading Post National Historic Site
    [Show full text]
  • Mojave National Preserve California
    A fact sheet from 2017 Dougall Photography/iStockphoto Mojave’s $131.8 million maintenance backlog includes repairs to historic buildings such as the Kelso Depot. Shane McMurphy/iStockphoto Mojave National Preserve California Overview Two hours from the hustle and bustle of Las Vegas and 100 miles from the nearest lodging lies California’s Mojave National Preserve. The Las Vegas Review-Journal dubbed this vast desert in San Bernardino County the “perfect escape for those seeking serenity.” The preserve spans 1.6 million acres, making it the third-largest National Park Service (NPS) unit in the contiguous United States. Mojave is ecologically and geologically diverse, with towering sand dunes, dun-colored mesas, and volcanic formations providing habitat for its abundant plants and wildlife. In addition to the densest forest of Joshua trees in the world, visitors can see bighorn sheep, bobcats, golden eagles, and breathtaking displays of seasonal wildflowers. The preserve also has a rich cultural heritage. Lands first inhabited by the Chemehuevi and Mojave tribes attracted gold miners in the late 19th century and were later crossed by several railroad lines. Visitors can learn more about this history through exhibits at the visitor center and by exploring archaeological sites, abandoned mines, and preserved homesteads and other buildings. The ghost town of Kelso, which once served as a Union Pacific Railroad depot and mining outpost, is one of the park’s most popular destinations. Unfortunately, Mojave faces over $131 million in deferred maintenance. Maintenance challenges Nearly all of Mojave’s needed repairs are for its road network. Severe deterioration of some sections of pavement has prompted the NPS to warn visitors of dangerous potholes.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Cover Mapping of the National Park Service Northwest Alaska Management Area Using Landsat Multispectral and Thematic Mapper Satellite Data
    Land Cover Mapping of the National Park Service Northwest Alaska Management Area Using Landsat Multispectral and Thematic Mapper Satellite Data By Carl J. Markon and Sara Wesser Open-File Report 00-51 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey LAND COVER MAPPING OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE NORTHWEST ALASKA MANAGEMENT AREA USING LANDSAT MULTISPECTRAL AND THEMATIC MAPPER SATELLITE DATA By Carl J. Markon1 and Sara Wesser2 1 Raytheon SIX Corp., USGS EROS Alaska Field Office, 4230 University Drive, Anchorage, AK 99508-4664. E-mail: [email protected]. Work conducted under contract #1434-CR-97-40274 2National Park Service, 2525 Gambell St., Anchorage, AK 99503-2892 Land Cover Mapping of the National Park Service Northwest Alaska Management Area Using Landsat Multispectral Scanner and Thematic Mapper Satellite Data ABSTRACT A land cover map of the National Park Service northwest Alaska management area was produced using digitally processed Landsat data. These and other environmental data were incorporated into a geographic information system to provide baseline information about the nature and extent of resources present in this northwest Alaskan environment. This report details the methodology, depicts vegetation profiles of the surrounding landscape, and describes the different vegetation types mapped. Portions of nine Landsat satellite (multispectral scanner and thematic mapper) scenes were used to produce a land cover map of the Cape Krusenstern National Monument and Noatak National Preserve and to update an existing land cover map of Kobuk Valley National Park Valley National Park. A Bayesian multivariate classifier was applied to the multispectral data sets, followed by the application of ancillary data (elevation, slope, aspect, soils, watersheds, and geology) to enhance the spectral separation of classes into more meaningful vegetation types.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change and Florida's National Parks
    Climate Change and Florida’s National Parks Florida is among the most climate change-threatened states in the United States. Florida’s treasured national parks—spanning the Greater Everglades ecosystem northward into Gulf Islands National Seashore and beyond—are being impacted by our changing climate. Climate change is the greatest threat science-based policies that enhance the Florida’s economy. NPCA’s Sun Coast America’s national parks have ever faced. resilience of our incredible system of region is systematically assessing, through Nearly everything we know and love about national parks. With Florida’s low elevation, research and analysis, the most serious the parks—their plants and animals, rivers national park sites in the state are especially climate impacts threatening national and lakes, beaches, historic structures, susceptible to the threats associated with park landscapes. This regional climate and more—is already under stress from climate change. Sea level rise, changing dispatch thus serves a twofold purpose: to our changing climate. As America’s ocean conditions, and shifting weather shine a light on climate case studies across leading voice for our national parks, patterns are impacting our landscapes. iconic Floridian places, and to share what National Parks Conservation Association All of these climate impacts converge to NPCA’s Sun Coast team is doing to help (NPCA) is at the forefront of efforts to present unprecedented challenges to park address and adapt to climate threats to address climate impacts and promote management, preservation, tourism, and our treasured national park ecosystems. Above: Florida Bay in Everglades National Park ©South Florida Water Management District NATIONAL PARK Rising Sea Levels Threaten THREAT Biodiversity & Cultural Resources While all national park units in Florida Importance, Everglades National Park are threatened by sea level rise, some protects an abundance of biodiversity parks are more vulnerable than others.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Sexual Abuse Claims in Chapter 11 Cases of Boy Scouts of America
    Summary of Sexual Abuse Claims in Chapter 11 Cases of Boy Scouts of America There are approximately 101,135sexual abuse claims filed. Of those claims, the Tort Claimants’ Committee estimates that there are approximately 83,807 unique claims if the amended and superseded and multiple claims filed on account of the same survivor are removed. The summary of sexual abuse claims below uses the set of 83,807 of claim for purposes of claims summary below.1 The Tort Claimants’ Committee has broken down the sexual abuse claims in various categories for the purpose of disclosing where and when the sexual abuse claims arose and the identity of certain of the parties that are implicated in the alleged sexual abuse. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a chart that shows the sexual abuse claims broken down by the year in which they first arose. Please note that there approximately 10,500 claims did not provide a date for when the sexual abuse occurred. As a result, those claims have not been assigned a year in which the abuse first arose. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a chart that shows the claims broken down by the state or jurisdiction in which they arose. Please note there are approximately 7,186 claims that did not provide a location of abuse. Those claims are reflected by YY or ZZ in the codes used to identify the applicable state or jurisdiction. Those claims have not been assigned a state or other jurisdiction. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is a chart that shows the claims broken down by the Local Council implicated in the sexual abuse.
    [Show full text]
  • A Water Year to Remember: Fire to Flood Reflections
    A Water Year to Remember: Fire to Flood Reflections Panelists: Jeremy Lancaster Supervising Engineering Geologist California Geological Survey Rachael Orellana Flood Risk Program Manager U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Tom Fayram Deputy Director County of Santa Barbara Pubic Works Department Moderator: Melissa Weymiller Jon Frey Project Manager Engineering Manager Flood Risk Management Program Santa Barbara County U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood Control District A Water Year to Remember: Fire and Flood Reflections Floodplain Management Association Annual Conference Reno, Nevada Wednesday, 2018 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Jeremy Lancaster – Sup. Engineering Geologist California Geological Survey 2017 Wildfires – Historic Context California Wildfires Years over 1 million acres since 1987 Year Fires Acres 2017 9,133 1,248,606 2008 6,255 1,593,690 2007 6,043 1,520,362 1999 11,125 1,172,850 1987‐2016 average: 555,700 acres Source: CAL FIRE http://www.cnrfc.noaa.gov/radarArchive.php Post‐Wildfire Hazards to Life and Property PHYSICAL HAZARD EXPOSURE CHEMICAL HAZARD EXPOSURE • Flooding – 2 to 3 Times the • Incinerated household and Water industrial waste • Debris Flow – 20 Foot thick • Runoff laden with toxic soil boulder laden surge fronts • Degradation of water quality • Rockfall – Can be triggered by wind after a fire! • Hazard Trees – They fall on things! Public knowledge of these hazards generally lacking! Atlas Fire Napa/Solano Counties January 9, 2018; 5pm 2.6 inches, January 8‐ 10 • 1 Death ‐ debris slide/debris flow on CA‐121 ~5pm at Wooden Valley Road • CA‐121 Closed for one day Detwiler Fire March 22, 2018; 6:15p Mariposa County • 2 Deaths • 2 Residences flooded • High School flooded • Elementary School flooded • 11 Roadway Crossings Flooded Slinkard Fire May 21, 2018; 6:27p Mono County • U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality in Big Cypress National Preserve and Everglades National Park—Trends and Spatial Characteristics of Selected Constituents
    Water Quality in Big Cypress National Preserve and Everglades National Park—Trends and Spatial Characteristics of Selected Constituents By Ronald L. Miller, U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg, Florida; Benjamin F. McPherson, U.S. Geological Survey, Tampa, Florida; and Robert Sobczak, and Christine Clark, Big Cypress National Preserve, Ochopee, Florida Water Resources Investigations Report 03-4249 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virgina: 2004 For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to repro- duce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. iii Contents Abstract. 1 Introduction . 2 Data Sources . 4 Objective and Scope . 4 Data Analysis . 4 Problems in Long-Term Trend Analyses. 5 Statistics . 5 Trends in Rainfall, Water Levels, and Flows . 6 Water Quality in South Florida . 8 Water Quality Changes Over Time. 9 Eastern Everglades . 9 Taylor Slough Bridge. 9 Shark River Slough. 11 Western Everglades and Big Cypress Swamp . 11 Site P-34 . 15 Bridge 105 Site. 15 Spatial Patterns in Water Quality . 18 Park Boundary Water-Quality Conditions .
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2013, the Kaibab NF Experienced a Large Increase in Timber Volume Sold, from 8,000 Ccf (Cubic Feet) in 2012 to 43,875 Ccf, in 2013
    Kaibab National Forest Forest Plan Monitoring Report Fiscal Year 2013 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. All cover photos credit U.S. Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Kaibab National Forest. Clockwise from top left:. Introduction The Monitoring Plan for the Kaibab National Forest (NF) outlined in the original 1988 Forest Plan identifies 58 items in 11 categories (timber, protection, range, recreation, heritage resources, wilderness, visual resources, soil, land management planning, wildlife, and facilities) to be tracked as measures of the effectiveness of management actions under the Plan. Each year, select items from the above categories are discussed in the monitoring report in order to provide information on monitoring efforts and accomplishments by resource or concern area. This report documents activities occurring during fiscal year (FY) 2013. Monitoring reports from previous years can be accessed at http://fs.usda.gov/goto/kaibab/planning or provided upon request.
    [Show full text]
  • Big Thicket Bulletin, Issue
    BIG THICKET BULLETIN April . May . June 2015 Issue #126 BIG THICKET SCIENCE CONFERENCE ATBI slime mold researcher Plenary speaker Dr. Kirk Winemiller Tonkawa Sand Hills trip leader Plenary speaker Julie Shackleford Katie Winsett Dr. James Van Kley (front lef) checking his species list. Te 2015 Big Ticket Science Conference: Biodiversity Live music was provided by the Sawmill Vagrants from and Ecology of the West Gulf Coastal Plain Landscape Kennard, Texas. On Saturday research presentations was hosted at Stephen F. Austin University’s Student were given in a concurrent session format. Results of Center in Nacogdoches, April 17-19. Afer a welcome 33 ecologic and management studies were presented by the Conference hosts, two Plenary speakers led of Saturday morning and afernoon. Tese included one by the conference on Friday morning. Julie Shackleford of Big Ticket National Preserve ATBI slime mold researcher, Te Conservation Fund presented an overview of Te Katie Winsett, a Lecturer in the Environmental Studies Conservation Fund’s mission in East Texas and provided Program at North Carolina State University. an update of recent land acquisitions made by the Fund. A choice of three feld trips was ofered on Sunday. Dr. Dr. Kirk Wine-miller, a Regents Professor in Texas A&M’s James Van Kley led a trip to the Tonkawa Sandhills Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, presented a talk north of Nacogdoches where natural springs and sandy based on his ecological research. soils derived from the 45+ million-year-old beach sands A poster session followed with 21 posters on a variety of the Carrizo Sand formation provide both moist and of research topics conducted across the Western Coastal dry habitats for unique foras.
    [Show full text]
  • Noatak National Preserve Foundation Statement 2009
    Noatak National Preserve National Park Service Alaska U.S. Department of the Interior NOATAK NATIONAL PRESERVE FOUNDATION STATEMENT This page left intentionally blank. Noatak National Preserve Foundation Statement July, 2009 Prepared By: Western Arctic National Parklands National Park Service, Alaska Regional Office National Park Service, Denver Service Center This page left intentionally blank. Table of Contents Noatak National Preserve – Foundation Statement Elements of a Foundation Statement…2 Establishment of Alaska National Parks…3 Summary Purpose Statement…4 Significance Statements…4 Location Regional Map…5 Purpose Statement…6 Significance Statements / Fundamental Resources and Values / Interpretive Themes 1. Arctic-Subarctic River Basin Ecosystem…7 2. Scientific Research...8 3. Subsistence …9 4. Arctic Wilderness…10 Special Mandates and Administrative Commitments…11 Workshop Participants…12 Appendix A - Legislation Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act – Selected Excerpts …14 Appendix B – Legislative History Proclamation 4624 – Noatak National Monument, 1978…24 Elements of a Foundation Statement The Foundation Statement is a formal description of Noatak National Preserve’s (preserve) core mission. It is a foundation to support planning and management of the preserve. The foundation is grounded in the preserve’s legislation and from knowledge acquired since the preserve was originally established. It provides a shared understanding of what is most important about the preserve. This Foundation Statement describes the preserve’s
    [Show full text]