The Lincoln National Forest and the Economic Stability of South Central New Mexico

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Lincoln National Forest and the Economic Stability of South Central New Mexico Range Improvement Task Force • Report 68 The Lincoln National Forest and the Economic Stability of South Central New Mexico Range Improvement Task Force Cooperative Extension Service / Agricultural Experiment Station College of Agriculture and Home Economics The Lincoln National Forest and the Economic Stability of South Central New Mexico Roy D. Seawolf, Nicholas K. Ashcroft Jr., John M. Fowler 1 ABSTRACT of each industry was analyzed according to The Lincoln National Forest is the epi-center the following criteria: of economic activity and an indispensable component of the regional economy of south • What factors affect the growth of the central New Mexico, specifically the counties industry? of Chaves, Eddy, Lincoln and Otero. Were • How does the industry respond the Lincoln National Forest to be closed to to negative internal and external consumptive economic activity, as has been economic shocks? recommended by numerous articles and media broadcasts, how would this affect It was concluded that dispersed the regional economy and New Mexico as a recreation, logging, and livestock grazing can whole? and should co-exist and should not have to It is apparent that the forest economy is compete for consideration within the Lincoln shifting from agrarian to service orientation National Forest. in much the same way as the rest of the The forest genre attracts many diverse western United States. The shift is away from and useful economic activities. Basic consumptive uses such as mining, logging, economic theory dictates that scarce resources and livestock production toward non- should be used to their best advantage. This consumptive uses such as dispersed recreation. report concludes that resources within the If indeed the economy is shifting from Lincoln National Forest are used best by traditional revenue generation to revenue managing livestock grazing, logging, and generation through dispersed recreation, will dispersed recreation in a manner that will this transition result in a stronger economy facilitate and support their continued and for south central New Mexico, or will it be long-term harmonious co-existence. detrimental to the economic well-being of those who live in this rural area? The economy of the Lincoln National INTRODUCTION Forest was analyzed, and essential data were During the administration of Abraham identified that allow quantification of the Lincoln, the Homestead Act was hailed as strengths, weaknesses, and uncertainties of an innovative and effective way to develop each industry competing for land in the western wilderness areas. Many homesteaders Lincoln National Forest; namely livestock during this time found their way to the grazing, logging, and dispersed recreation. region that was to become the Lincoln Data to compare and contrast each industry as to viability and sustainability were quantified. From here the economic stability 1Sr. Economic/Legal Research Specialist ([email protected]); Range Economist; and Professor, respectively; all of the Department of Agricultural Economics and Agricultural Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces. Range Improvement Task Force • Report 68 1 National Forest, setting the stage for the of 2004 to provide insight into county- communities of Mayhill, Russia, Cloudcroft, specific dispersed recreational activity. This and Ruidoso, among others. survey was designed to provide data in the Homesteaders already established in appropriate units for an Input/Output the areas that would someday comprise the (I/O) analysis. The primary goal of the Lincoln National Forest used its renewable survey was to determine the dollar value of a resources as a critical source of fence posts, single recreational visitor day in the Lincoln firewood, and lumber. As time passed, laws National Forest. were enacted that established the National In order to determine the value per day Forest System and granted the Forest Service of recreation, we needed to know how many the power to control forest lands. people were in each visiting group, including The Forest Service was established in both adults and children. Also included the Department of Agriculture in 1905 were simple questions about residency and and the Forest Reserves were moved from willingness to return to the same geographic the Department of the Interior to the area in the future. Each respondent was Department of Agriculture in that same asked what proportion of their expenditure year. In 1907 the former “Forest Reserves” occurred within the debarkation county were renamed the now common “National and what proportion at the final destination Forests.” where the primary activity took place. The Lincoln National Forest was once Specifically, respondents were asked how part of five other national forests and was much money was spent on fuel, lodging, officially established on July 26, 1902 with dining, groceries, entertainment, recreational offices in Capitan, New Mexico. The land purchases, rental equipment, and recreational area at that time included only the White fees during the entire recreation trip. and Capitan Mountains. Presidential The number of recreation visitor days proclamations were signed in 1905, 1906, was also accounted for in each survey. A 1907, 1910, and 1919 adding additional recreation visitor day (RVD) consists of lands to the Lincoln National Forest. at least one hour of use by one or more In the latter part of the nineteenth individuals and is calculated using the century and into the twentieth century, following formulas: lumber production and livestock grazing became the two principal industries in 1: # Individuals x # Days what is now the Lincoln National Forest. recreating = # RVDs Generations of Americans raised families 2: RVD per activity/=Total visitor and earned their living on the ranches, days for county = Activity sawmills and timber stands throughout weight. the forest. Today, the Lincoln Forest has 3: Activity weight x Total expanded its economy to include auto expenditures for activity = touring, biking, cultural and historic sites, Weighted RVD expenditure. camping, educational programs, fishing, 4: Weighted RVD expenditure per hiking, horseback riding, hunting, off- activity summed = Expenditure highway vehicles, picnicking, winter sports, across all activities. vacationing and wildlife viewing, to name only a few of the recreational and educational Livestock grazing resources available (Baker, 1988). The United States Forest Service keeps detailed records of all animals grazed on the Lincoln National Forest from 1905 to METHODOLOGY present on card files in the USFS district office in Alamogordo, New Mexico. As part Recreation survey of the research for this report, these records A survey was conducted in the Lincoln were copied onto individual sheets and the Forest during the spring, summer and fall data was manually entered into Excel, where 2 Range Improvement Task Force • Report 68 Figure 1. Livestock on LNF allotments (1970 to 2004) it was quantified and categorized in order Data collection to establish the number of livestock that Data from the extractive industries during were grazed on all allotments in the Lincoln the study period 1970 to 2004 were National Forest from 1970 to 2004, which is quantified and adjusted for inflation; the time period under study (Figure 1). an annual gross contribution was then calculated. This particular time span was Logging data used because it reflected significant changes Logging data were obtained from United as far as annual revenue to the economy was States Forest Service records compiled by concerned. Livestock grazing and logging the Cooperative Extension Service at New were considered to be traditional in so far Mexico State University. This data set spans as they were the original contributors to the from 1900 to 2004 and was invaluable in economy. Mining was not included in the establishing accurate timber harvest numbers study since it never was a major contributor in the Lincoln National Forest. and today is virtually non-existent commercially in the region. IMPLAN Protocol Next, recreation-related revenue IMPLAN is a micro-computer-based, generation and the cumulative impact of Input-Output modeling program. With the decreasing/increasing revenue base IMPLAN, one can estimate I/O affect for was calculated. Using USFS visitor use any economic need, up to 528 sectors for any monitoring survey data, combined with the region consisting of one or more counties. present recreational survey results, economic IMPLAN includes procedures for generating data were identified and quantified. multipliers and estimating impacts by applying final demand changes to the Livestock grazing regression modeled economy. For the category livestock grazing this study The primary database for the hypothesized that the authorized number of construction of the initial I/O models in livestock grazing on pasture in the Lincoln this study was New Mexico county-specific National Forest was a function of the IMPLAN data. For the four-county–specific following factors: previous year rainfall, fuel data, the baseline matrices were constructed price, population, livestock grazing in feed from 2001 databases. This aggregation yards, and livestock prices. In this model, reduced the dimensionality of the analysis two independent variables, specifically the to manageable levels and enabled the sectors periods before and after protected-activity that were affected by direct impacts to be centers (PACs) were in place, are qualitative analyzed. or categorical
Recommended publications
  • Lincoln National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan September 1986 Table of Contents
    Lincoln National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan September 1986 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION Page Purpose of the Plan 1 Organization of the Proposed Forest Plan Document 2 2. PUBLIC ISSUES AND MANAGEMENT CONCERNS Overview 3 Issues 3 Dispersed, Cave and Developed Recreation 3 Wilderness 4 Range 4 Timber 5 Fuelwood 5 Minerals 6 Lands 6 Fire 6 Insects and Diseases 6 Law Enforcement 6 Transportation 6 Local Residents and Regional Users 7 3. SUMMARY OF THE ANALYSIS OF THE MANAGEMENT SITUATION Overview 9 4. MANAGEMENT DIRECTION Mission 11 Goals 1l Timber 1l Wilderness 1l Wildlife and Fish 1l Range 12 Recreation 12 Minerals 12 Water and Soils 12 Human and Community Development 13 Lands 13 Facilities 13 Protection 13 Objectives 14 Management Prescriptions 25 Management Area Description 25 Management Description 25 Activities 25 Standards and Guidelines 25 How to Apply the Prescriptions 26 Management Prescriptions 28 5. MONITORING PLAN Introduction 155 Timber 1- Acres of Regeneration Harvest 156 Timber 2- Acres of Intermediate Harvest 156 Timber 3- Adequate Restocking of Regeneration Harvests and Other Reforestation Projects 157 Timber 4- Timber Stand Improvement Acres 157 Timber 5- Board Feet of Net Sawtimber Offered 157 Timber 6- Size Limits for Harvest Areas 158 Timber 7- Re-evaluation of Unsuitable Timber Lands 158 Timber 8- Cords of Fuelwood Made Available 159 Range 1- Acres of Overstory Modification in Woodland Type 159 Range 2- Acres of Brush Conservation and/or Reseeding 159 Range 3- Range Development 160 Range 4- Permitted
    [Show full text]
  • National Forest Imagery Catalog Collection at the USDA
    National Forest Imagery Catalog collection at the USDA - Farm Service Agency Aerial Photography Field Office (APFO) 2222 West 2300 South Salt Lake City, UT 84119-2020 (801) 844-2922 - Customer Service Section (801) 956-3653 - Fax (801) 956-3654 - TDD [email protected] http://www.apfo.usda.gov This catalog listing shows the various photographic coverages used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and archived at the Aerial Photography Field Office. This catalog references U.S. Forest Service (FS) and other agencies imagery. For imagery prior to 1955, please contact the National Archives & Records Administration: Cartographic & Architectural Reference (NWCS-Cartographic) Aerial Photographs Team http://www.archives.gov/research/order/maps.html#contact Coverage of U.S. Forest Service photography is listed alphabetically for each forest within a region. Numeric and alpha codes used to identify FS projects are determined by the Forest Service. The original film type for most of this imagery is a natural color negative. Line indexes are available for most projects. The number of index sheets required to cover a project area is shown on the listing. Please reference the remarks column, which may identify a larger or smaller project area than the National Forest area defined in the header. Offered in the catalog listing at each National Forest heading is a link to locate the Regional and National Forest office address and phone number at: http://www.fs.fed.us/intro/directory You may wish to visit the National Forest office to view the current imagery and have them assist you in identifying aerial imagery from the APFO.
    [Show full text]
  • Lincoln National Forest
    Chapter 1: Introduction In Ecological and Biological Diversity of National Forests in Region 3 Bruce Vander Lee, Ruth Smith, and Joanna Bate The Nature Conservancy EXECUTIVE SUMMARY We summarized existing regional-scale biological and ecological assessment information from Arizona and New Mexico for use in the development of Forest Plans for the eleven National Forests in USDA Forest Service Region 3 (Region 3). Under the current Planning Rule, Forest Plans are to be strategic documents focusing on ecological, economic, and social sustainability. In addition, Region 3 has identified restoration of the functionality of fire-adapted systems as a central priority to address forest health issues. Assessments were selected for inclusion in this report based on (1) relevance to Forest Planning needs with emphasis on the need to address ecosystem diversity and ecological sustainability, (2) suitability to address restoration of Region 3’s major vegetation systems, and (3) suitability to address ecological conditions at regional scales. We identified five assessments that addressed the distribution and current condition of ecological and biological diversity within Region 3. We summarized each of these assessments to highlight important ecological resources that exist on National Forests in Arizona and New Mexico: • Extent and distribution of potential natural vegetation types in Arizona and New Mexico • Distribution and condition of low-elevation grasslands in Arizona • Distribution of stream reaches with native fish occurrences in Arizona • Species richness and conservation status attributes for all species on National Forests in Arizona and New Mexico • Identification of priority areas for biodiversity conservation from Ecoregional Assessments from Arizona and New Mexico Analyses of available assessments were completed across all management jurisdictions for Arizona and New Mexico, providing a regional context to illustrate the biological and ecological importance of National Forests in Region 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Southwestern Region Map Order Form
    Southwestern Region Map Order Form National Forest and Grassland Visitor Maps Wilderness Maps Arizona Arizona Location Qty Price Total Location Qty Price Total Apache-Sitgreaves $14 Blue Range (Apache) $14 Coconino $14 Granite Mountain (Prescott) $14 Coronado (Santa Catalina & Safford Districts) $14 Juniper Mesa/Apache Creek (Prescott) $14 Coronado (Sierra Vista & Nogales Districts) $14 Mazatzal (Tonto) $14 Coronado (Douglas District) $14 Mt. Baldy (Apache) $14 Coronado N. Chiricahua Mountains. & Chiricahua National $14 Mt. Wrightson and Pajarita (Coronado) $14 Monument Pusch Ridge (Coronado) $14 Kaibab (North) $14 Superstition (Tonto) $14 Kaibab (Tusayan & Williams Districts) $14 Sycamore Canyon Wilderness (Coconino, Kaibab, and Prescott) $14 Prescott $14 Tonto $14 New Mexico Location Qty Price Total New Mexico Apache Kid/Withington (Cibola) $14 Location Qty Price Total Aldo Leopold (Gila) $14 Carson $14 Capitan Mountains (Lincoln) $14 Cibola (Magdalena District) $14 Cruces Basin (Carson) $14 Cibola (Mt. Taylor District) $14 Gila $14 Cibola (Mountainair District) $14 Latir Peak/Wheeler Peak (Carson) $14 Cibola (Sandia District) $14 Manzano Mountains (Cibola) $14 Cibola (Kiowa/Rita Blanca National Grasslands – New Mexico, $14 Pecos (Santa Fe) $14 Oklahoma, Texas) San Pedro Parks (Santa Fe) $14 Cibola (Black Kettle National Grasslands - Oklahoma) $14 White Mountain (Lincoln) $14 Gila $14 Lincoln (Smokey Bear & Sacramento Districts) $14 Lincoln (Guadalupe District) $14 Totals Santa Fe $14 Quantity Total Other Map Products Location Qty Price Total Name: _________________________________________________________________ AZ Big Game Hunting Unit Topographic Map Index $2 Address: ________________________________________________________________ NM Big Game Hunting Unit Topographic Map Index $2 City, State, Zip ___________________________________________________________ Gila Day Hikes near Gila Visitor Center $2 Phone __________________________________________________________________ Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • Timeline for Long Term Monitoring
    Timeline for long term monitoring Project (Grant #, and Treatment National Forest 5 Year 10 Year 15 Name) Start Date Management Unit Post Post Year Post 16-01 MRGCD Bosque 2003 Cibola NF 2008 2013 2018 06-02 San Juan Bosque 2003 Santa Fe NF 2008 2013 2018 03-01 La Jicarita 2005 Carson NF 2010 2015 2020 36-04 Turkey Springs 2005 Lincoln NF 2010 2015 2020 Ruidoso 27-04 Santa Fe FD WUI 2005 Santa Fe NF 2010 2015 2020 28-05 Ensenada 2006 Carson NF 2011 2016 2021 01-05 Bluewater 2006 Cibola NF 2011 2016 2021 21-04 Sierra SWCD Black 2006 Gila NF 2011 2016 2021 Range 39-05 SBS II -Cedar Creek 2006 Lincoln NF 2011 2016 2021 11-01 LTRR Monument 2006 Santa Fe NF 2011 2016 2021 Canyon 02-05 P&M Thunderbird 2007 Cibola NF 2012 2017 2022 05-07 Santa Ana Juniper II 2007 Cibola NF 2012 2017 2022 2007 Lincoln NF 13-07 Ruidoso Schools 2012 2017 2022 15 Project (Grant #, and Treatment National Forest 5 Year 10 Year Year Name) Start Date Management Unit Post Post Post 33-05 Taos Pueblo 2008 Carson NF 2013 2018 2023 16-07 FG III Santa 2008 Carson NF 2013 2018 2023 Cruz/Embudo 22-04 Gallinas -Tierra y 2008 Santa Fe NF 2013 2018 2023 Montes 22-07 Barela Timber 2008 Santa Fe NF 2013 2018 2023 25-07 Santa Clara Pueblo 2008 Santa Fe NF 2013 2018 2023 - Beaver 28-07 Santa Domingo 2008 Santa Fe NF 2013 2018 2023 Forest to Farm 29-07 SWPT Ocate State 2008 Santa Fe NF 2013 2018 2023 Lands Source: Derr, Tori, et.
    [Show full text]
  • State No. Description Size in Cm Date Location
    Maps State No. Description Size in cm Date Location National Forests in Alabama. Washington: ALABAMA AL-1 49x28 1989 Map Case US Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service. Bankhead National Forest (Bankhead and Alabama AL-2 66x59 1981 Map Case Blackwater Districts). Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Side A : Coronado National Forest (Nogales A: 67x72 ARIZONA AZ-1 1984 Map Case Ranger District). Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. B: 67x63 Side B : Coronado National Forest (Sierra Vista Ranger District). Side A : Coconino National Forest (North A:69x88 Arizona AZ-2 1976 Map Case Half). Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. B:69x92 Side B : Coconino National Forest (South Half). Side A : Coronado National Forest (Sierra A:67x72 Arizona AZ-3 1976 Map Case Vista Ranger District. Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. B:67x72 Side B : Coronado National Forest (Nogales Ranger District). Prescott National Forest. Washington: US Arizona AZ-4 28x28 1992 Map Case Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Kaibab National Forest (North Unit). Arizona AZ-5 68x97 1967 Map Case Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Prescott National Forest- Granite Mountain Arizona AZ-6 67x48.5 1993 Map Case Wilderness. Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Side A : Prescott National Forest (East Half). A:111x75 Arizona AZ-7 1993 Map Case Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. B:111x75 Side B : Prescott National Forest (West Half). Arizona AZ-8 Superstition Wilderness: Tonto National 55.5x78.5 1994 Map Case Forest. Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Arizona AZ-9 Kaibab National Forest, Gila and Salt River 80x96 1994 Map Case Meridian.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to the Carlsbad-Guadalupe Mountains Area of New Mexico And
    a guide to the Carlsbad-Guadalupe Mountains area Guadalupe of New Mexico and Texas Journal 1985-86 •PUBLISHED BY THE CARLSBAD CAVERNS NATURAL HISTORY ASSOCIATION. Visitor Canter • Information and Exhibit Area Desert Nature Walk - One-half mile long, self- Carlsbad Caverns Telephone 505/785-2232. Open daily guiding. Starts near cave entrance. 7:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. June thru August, Walnut Canyon Desert Drive - 9.5 mile, one-way, 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. September thru May gravel road. Begins one-half mile from visitor center, National Park (Mountain Time). Closed December 25. travels along the top of a ridge to edge of Carlsbad Cavern Trips - Leaving continuously, Rattlesnake Canyon and back down through upper 7:30 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. June thru August Walnut Canyon to main entrance road. 8:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m. September thru May Backcountry Hiking • All hikers are requested to (Mountain Time). See schedules, back page register at the visitor center information desk. Trails Guided Tours December 218, 1985 and January 6- are poorly defined, but can be followed by using a February 7, 1986. topographic map. Short day hikes or extended trips. Guided Lantern Trips - Through undeveloped New No water in the backcountry. Permits required for Cave in Slaughter Canyon. By reservation only. overnight hikes. Make reservations at visitor center or by telephone Picnicking - Rattlesnake Springs Picnic Area. 505/785-2232. Daily trips May 24 thru Labor Day. Grassy, tree shaded area with water, picnic tables, Weekend trips Labor Day thru May.
    [Show full text]
  • Allium Gooddingii) Was Selected As One of the Top 20 Species in the Region for Development of Conservation Documents
    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Goodding’s Onion Conservation Assessment and Strategy and the Goodding’s Onion Cooperative Agreement were developed through the mutual efforts of personnel from the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The principal Forest Service participants were Terry Myers, Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests; Mima Parra-Falk, Coronado National Forest; Margaret Kirkeminde, Gila National Forest; Linda Barker, Lincoln National Forest; Heather Hollis, Southwestern Region Regional Office; and Teresa Prendusi, formerly of the Southwestern Region Regional Office. The principal Fish and Wildlife Service participants were Angela Brooks, Arizona Ecological Services Field Office and Charlie McDonald, New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office. Peter Warren of the Arizona Nature Conservancy was helpful during the early stages of strategy development through his in-depth knowledge of Goodding’s onion. Numerous individuals listed in Appendix 3 were helpful in document review and editing. ii CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................ ii CONTENTS ........................................................... iii PART I ) GOODDING’S ONION CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT .............1 I. INTRODUCTION ................................................2 II. REVIEW OF SPECIAL STATUS DESIGNATIONS AND PROTECTIONS . 3 III. NOMENCLATURE AND MORPHOLOGY ...........................5 IV. DISTRIBUTION .................................................6 V. HABITAT AND ECOLOGY .......................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Southwestern Region New Mexico Congressional Briefing
    United States Department of Agriculture 2018 Southwestern Region New Mexico Congressional Briefing Photo: West Fork Gila National Forest Carson National Forest • Cibola National Forest & National Grasslands Gila National Forest • Lincoln National Forest • Santa Fe National Forest Forest Service Southwestern Region April 2018 Message from the Regional Forester We designed this briefing packet to be your quick reference guide to the Southwestern Region of the Forest Service. Organized by forest and by program area, the most up-to-date information is at your fingertips. This is intended as one tool to bolster our working relationships, as we continue to engage with you on a variety of issues that are of interest to your constituents. Under the direction of Secretary Sonny Perdue, the Forest Service was, for the first time, named in the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s priorities: to foster productive and sustainable use of our National Forest System Lands. Our agency strategic plan is in alignment with the department’s priorities, and our Southwestern Region (also known as Region 3) priorities, the R3’s 3Rs, are in concert with both. Our first priority is Restoration at the landscape scale, to provide livelihoods and valued products. The second is Recreation, sustaining the connection to nature for health and economic vitality. The third is Relationships, both externally with those we serve, and internally with our workforce. It is through our relationships with tribes, stakeholders, partners, other agencies, and the public that we are able to restore landscapes and provide for sustainable recreation opportunitites. We also value our internal relationships and are actively taking steps to provide a safe, rewarding and resilient workplace for all Forest Service employees.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 50000000 Forest Service 2 01000000 Northern Region R1 3
    Incident Qualification and Certification System Agency Hierarchy Agency: FS000 Lvl Org Code and Description 1 50000000 Forest Service 2 01000000 Northern Region R1 3 01000009 Fire, Aviation & Air 3 0100GNC Great Northern Crew R1 3 0100MTDC Missoula Tech and Development 3 01020000 Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest 4 01020001 Dillon Ranger District 4 01020002 Wise River Ranger District 4 01020003 Wisdom Ranger District 4 01020004 Butte Ranger District 4 01020006 Madison Ranger District 4 01020007 Jefferson Ranger District 4 01020008 Pintler Ranger District 3 01030000 Bitterroot National Forest 4 01030001 Stevensville Ranger District 4 01030002 Darby Ranger District 4 01030003 Sula Ranger District 4 01030004 West Fork Ranger District 4 010300AD Bitterroot NF ADs 4 0103HELI Bitterroot Helitack Crew 4 0103IHC2 Bitterroot IHC 3 01040000 Idaho Panhandle National Forests 4 01040001 Coeur d'Alene River Ranger District 5 0104IHC Idaho Panhandle IHC 4 01040004 St. Joe Ranger District 4 01040006 Sandpoint Ranger District 4 01040007 Bonners Ferry Ranger District 4 01040008 Priest Lake Ranger District 4 0104AD Idaho Panhandle AD Employee 4 0104HELI IPNF Helitack 3 01100000 Flathead National Forest 4 01100001 Swan Lake Ranger District 4 01100004 Spotted Bear Ranger District 4 01100006 Hungry Horse Ranger District 4 01100008 Tally Lake Ranger District 4 0110FIHC Flathead Hotshot Crew 4 0110HELI Flathead NF Helitack 3 01110000 Custer Gallatin National Forest 4 01110003 Gardiner Ranger District 4 01110004 Yellowstone Ranger District 4 01110006 Bozeman
    [Show full text]
  • Monument Springs Fatality Facilitated Learning Analysis
    Monument Springs Fatality Facilitated Learning Analysis Lincoln National Forest Sacramento Ranger District Monument Springs Fatality – Facilitated Learning Analysis Page 1 Contents 1. Leader’s Intent………………………………...………………… 3 2. Executive Summary………………………………...…………… 4 3. Background……………………………...……………………… 5 4. The Accident Narrative…………………………………………. 8 5. Monument Springs FLA Timeline……………………………… 15 6. Lessons Learned and Observations – Shared by the Participants……………………………………… 16 7. Organizational/Process Improvements – Lessons Learned………………………………………… 19 8. Facilitated Learning Analysis Team Members…………………. 20 9. Process Coach……………………………...…………………….20 10. Appendices Appendix A – Six Minutes for Safety: Fatigue/Stress…. 21 Monument Springs Fatality – Facilitated Learning Analysis Page 2 2. Leader’s Intent On May 14, 2013 Gilbert Zepeda, Acting Regional Forester of the Southwestern Region, requested a Complex Facilitated Learning Analysis (CFLA) be conducted to investigate the death of Daniel Davidson while on duty on the Lincoln National Forest, Southwestern Region according to the FLA process including: Follow the procedures displayed in the 2013 Facilitated Learning Analysis Implementation Guide. A review and description of the conditions leading up to the accident. Lessons Learned from the accident. Recommendations on how to prevent such an event or improve outcomes and processes. Monument Springs Fatality – Facilitated Learning Analysis Page 3 2. Executive Summary The involved participants took swift action to save the life of their Crewmember, and in the aftermath, took measured steps to ensure that the family and coworkers of the fallen Crewmember were cared for. On May 5, 2013, while on a patrol hike in the Sacramento Mountains, a Crewmember from a Type 6 Engine collapsed and became unresponsive while ascending a hill in the Monument Canyon drainage.
    [Show full text]
  • Acknowledgments
    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I express my appreciation to Public Lands Interpretive Association (PLIA) for publishing this guide. It provides, for the first time, a comprehensive publication detailing all the usable official trails on Lincoln National Forest. Special appreciation is due Stephen G. Maurer, PLIA's Publications Director, for his continued encouragement. This guide would not have been possible without the help of many individuals. Foremost, I thank my wife, Joanne, who gave unselfishly of her time to accompany me while developing field data. She saved untold hours and miles of hiking by delivering me to trailheads, then driving countless miles, often on very rough roads, to pick me up at my destination where she waited, sometimes hours, for my arrival. Friends who accompanied me on some of those early hikes to obtain information were Tracy Penney, John Mangimeli, and Cathy Luna. Personnel from the Lincoln’s Recreation Division determined which trails would be featured. Later they reviewed the manuscript and provided many helpful comments. Those instrumental in helping substantially with the First Edition, including non-forest employees, were Linda Barker, John Brown, Richard Carlson, Linda Cole, Erin Connelly, Peg Crim, Jean Fulton, Len Hendzel, Renee Galeano-Popp, Merle Glenn, Douglas Holcomb, Mickey Mauter, Tim Meyer, Norma Palomino, Danney Salas, Sam Tobias, and Ransom Turner. For the Second Edition, I wish to especially thank Brad Orr, Recreation Specialist for Sacramento Ranger District, who has taken a profound interest in the trails of his district. He accompanied me on numerous hikes, and as a result, 15 additional trails and changes to others were recommended for inclusion.
    [Show full text]