DOCSLIB.ORG

White Mountain National Forest Figure 1 (Cover)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
White Mountain National Forest Figure 1 (Cover) Monitoring and United States Department of Agriculture Evaluation Report Forest Service Eastern 2009 Region White Mountain National Forest Figure 1 (Cover). Plant monitoring in Tuckerman Ravine. Photo courtesy of Diane Allen. This document is available in large print. Contact the Forest Supervisor’s Office 603 536-6100 TTY 603 536-3665 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program infor- mation (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 USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Printed on Recycled Paper Monitoring and Evaluation Report 2009 Contents From the Forest Supervisor . 4 Introduction . 6 Required Monitoring . 7 Objective Attainment . 14 Standard and Guideline Implementation . 22 Effects of Management Practices . 35 Project Reviews . 38 Other Monitoring . 42 Literature Cited . 53 3 White Mountain National Forest From the Forest Supervisor I am pleased to share with you the most recent White Mountain National Forest Monitoring Report, which summarizes many of our monitoring efforts in fiscal year 2009 (FY09). As in the past, this report considers how well we are imple- menting the management direction in the Forest Plan and what effects our management is having on natural, cultural, and social resources. We remain committed to looking at all of our programs, identifying what is working well and what isn’t, sharing the results, and learning from all that we do. This report shows that we continue to work toward meeting our Forest goals and objectives and most of the standards and guidelines evaluated in FY09 were being implemented and working effectively. As is to be expected when managing a large, complex landscape for multiple uses, there is always more that needs to be done and challenges arise. This report identifies three standards or guidelines that are not working quite as was expected when the Forest Plan was revised. I do not believe we need to amend the Forest Plan to modify any of this direction at this time for the following reasons (see Standard and Guideline Implementation section of this document for more details): • While we have not implemented a personal use permit for recreational mineral collecting yet (Forest Plan p. 2-5, Recreational Mineral Collecting S-3), this report clearly indicates that the standard is appropriate. We will begin the process to establish a mineral collection permit and work with the public to implement it. • The Heritage Resource guideline regarding data management (Plan p. 2-7, G-4) also remains appropriate. We are making considerable progress in our efforts to meet national standards. We will not have all legacy data input this Fiscal Year, but we will continue the work until everything is in the appropriate system, which is consistent with the intent of this guideline. • We are meeting the intent of the slash retention standard (Plan, p. 2-29, Vegetation S-3) to keep nutrients on-site. However we will work with con- tractors to better disperse residual slash across the units to result in more evenly distributed soil nutrient levels, especially on low nutrient soils. I find that the monitoring we did in FY09 and this report meet the intent of both the Forest Plan (Chapter 4) and the planning regulations at 36 CFR 219. The Plan Record of Decision emphasizes that the Forest does not exist in iso- lation; it is part of larger state and regional landscapes, and our management affects surrounding communities and ecosystems. Forest Plan direction helps us make decisions within the context of broader ecological and landscape level considerations. However applying that direction is not enough. Some of the issues that face the forests of the northeast cannot be addressed by looking at just one particular property or jurisdiction. Concerns around climate change, invasive species, air quality, and watershed restoration require working across boundaries. Therefore, when I evaluate how well we are implementing the Forest Plan, I also consider whether we are working with our partners and others in the area to address landscape-scale issues. In FY09, we worked with many partners, state agencies, and others on key topics. A few examples include: 4 Monitoring and Evaluation Report 2009 • Working with State Foresters and sharing data as they develop their strategic plans for managing forests across the states of New Hampshire, • Working with state, federal, and non-government partners to track occur- rences of non-native invasive insects and take measures to prevent their introduction and spread, • Sharing information and ideas with many partners regarding climate change and how it should be considered in land management in northern New England, and • Participating in advisory boards and working groups, such as the Keeping Maine’s Forest’s, New England Governor’s Commission on Land Conservation, New Hampshire’s Legacy Board, Good Forestry in the Granite State review team and many other local and regional efforts. All of this cooperative work helps ensure our actions will contribute to sustain- able management of resources and communities across northern New England and is a critical part of achieving Forest Plan goals. I am proud of the efforts of our employees and the many volunteers and part- ners who make this ongoing monitoring and adaptation effort possible. Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns after reading the document. Thomas G Wagner 5 White Mountain National Forest Introduction Effective monitoring and evaluation help the Agency and the public determine how well a Forest Plan is being implemented, whether Plan implementation is achieving desired outcomes, and whether assumptions made in the plan- ning process are valid. They help us improve our management and determine when we need to adjust desired conditions, goals, objectives, standards, and guidelines. The White Mountain National Forest’s Monitoring Plan (Chapter 4 of the Forest Plan) describes what we will monitor and what we expect to learn from that monitoring. The Monitoring Plan identifies several types of required monitoring, including monitoring of sustainability, outputs, services, and costs, management indicator species, objective attainment, standard and guideline implementation, and effects of management practices (pages 4-8 to 4-10). Our Monitoring Plan also identifies the need to conduct monitoring on a variety of topics or resources to evaluate resource conditions and ecosystem health, and help answer the question “Are we accomplishing the overall goals of the Forest Plan?” Monitoring is not performed on every activity, nor is most of it expected to meet the statistical rigor of formal research. There is monitoring we do, such as construction and timber sale administration, that is difficult to summarize in a report like this, but that is still a valuable part of our land management efforts. Some monitoring is conducted weekly or annually, some is done at longer intervals to track changes over time, and other items are monitored when funds and staffing are available. Monitoring that is specifically required by law or regulation is always given the highest priority. The annual monitoring report summarizes and, at scheduled intervals, evalu- ates monitoring results. It also provides the public and Forest personnel with updated information about Forest Plan implementation. Some monitoring leads to immediate conclusions while other topics require a decade or more of data collection to produce informative results. As a result, our annual monitoring report changes every year and the level of detail provided varies by topic. 6 Monitoring and Evaluation Report 2009 Required Monitoring The Forest Planning regulations (36 CFR 219) under which the WMNF Forest Plan was revised require that we monitor several factors related to the sustain- ability of timber harvest, the levels of outputs and services the Forest provides, and population trends and habitat relationships of management indicator species. While not all of these items need to be evaluated annually, they are covered in every monitoring report to demonstrate our commitment to meeting our responsibilities toward management sustainability, outputs and services, and management indicator species. Sustainability This section addresses topics in Table 4-02 of the Forest Plan. This year, we moni- tored the two annual items, restocking success and insect and disease levels. Are lands adequately restocked following harvest? Monitoring regeneration is a legal requirement to ensure adequate restocking of tree species following regeneration harvests such as clearcut, shelterwood seed cut, single-tree or group selection cut. Within five years following such harvests, we must certify that we expect an adequate number of seedlings to be estab- lished. We typically conduct a field survey about three years after the harvest. Surveys are conducted by Forest staff as they walk through the harvested area. Typically, surveyors establish several sample
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Scanned Using Book Scancenter Flexi
    Fiftk Annual Report OF THE -New Hampskire Timkerland Owners Association II NINETEEN HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN S«cretary-Treasurer’s Report Balance from 1914.................................... $ 255 33 Assessment (%c)..................................... 7,053 33 Sale Deer Mt. Lookout Station................ 238 00 OFFICERS W. R. Brown, President, Berlin Mills Co. $7,546 66 expenditures L. S. Tainter, Vice-President, Publishers Paper Co. Patrol........................................................ $6,059 27 Morrison, W. H. Secretary-Treasurer, Telephone Repairs.................. 101 04 Gorham, N. H. Exchange and Tolls................................. 86 23 Advertising............................................... 25 00 Salary September and October............... 200 00 DIRECTORS Traveling Expense................................... 92 23 Office Expense........................................ i07 55 W. R. Brown, Berlin Mills Co. Miscellaneous Expense........................... 27 75 L? S. Tainter, Publishers Paper Co. C. C. Wilson, Odell Manufacturing Co. $6,699 07 Balance...................................................... 847 59 E. E. Amey, International Paper Co. Due account unpaid assessments........... 5 25 H. G. Philbrook, Connecticut Valley Co. $852 84 The number of members belonging to the Association this season is thirty-two, and the total acreage owned by them is 930,540 acres. The weather conditions having been so unusu­ ally favorable the past season it has been possible' a to limit the total assessment to three-fourths cents per acre, as in 1914. The Conway Lumber Company and the Pub­ lishers Paper Company have paid assessments the The 1915 Fire Season past season on the lands purchased of them by the Owing to the very early spring, a number of Federal Government as the transaction had not the Patrolmen had to be employed much earlier been completed, thereby making the acreage of the than in 1914.
    [Show full text]
  • VGP) Version 2/5/2009
    Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) VESSEL GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OPERATION OF VESSELS (VGP) AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), any owner or operator of a vessel being operated in a capacity as a means of transportation who: • Is eligible for permit coverage under Part 1.2; • If required by Part 1.5.1, submits a complete and accurate Notice of Intent (NOI) is authorized to discharge in accordance with the requirements of this permit. General effluent limits for all eligible vessels are given in Part 2. Further vessel class or type specific requirements are given in Part 5 for select vessels and apply in addition to any general effluent limits in Part 2. Specific requirements that apply in individual States and Indian Country Lands are found in Part 6. Definitions of permit-specific terms used in this permit are provided in Appendix A. This permit becomes effective on December 19, 2008 for all jurisdictions except Alaska and Hawaii. This permit and the authorization to discharge expire at midnight, December 19, 2013 i Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 William K. Honker, Acting Director Robert W. Varney, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1 6 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, Barbara A.
    [Show full text]
  • September 11, 2009 . Dear Interested Citizen, I Would Like to Thank You For
    United States Forest White Mountain National Forest 1171 NH Route 175 Department of Service Pemigewasset Ranger District Holderness, NH 03245-5031 Agriculture Comm: (603) 536-1315 TTY: (603) 536-3281 File 2320 Code: Date: September 11, 2009 . Dear Interested Citizen, I would like to thank you for your interest in the Pemigewasset Bridge Removal Project. My decision is to move forward with the project. The enclosed Decision Memo provides detail as to the reasons for my decision. These documents are also posted on our White Mountain National Forest web site: www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/white_mountain/projects/projects/. I have reviewed the public comment letters and the analysis documents. I am satisfied that this project is beneficial, and can safely proceed with no significant adverse environmental effect to the National Forest, the Pemigewasset Wilderness or the surrounding area. My planning staff and I have appreciated the public involvement on this project. The goal of public involvement efforts in our programs and projects is to improve decisions. We look forward to your continued involvement in projects on the Pemigewasset Ranger District. Sincerely, /S/ MOLLY FULLER MOLLY FULLER District Ranger Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recycled Paper Pemigewasset United States Department of Agriculture Wilderness Forest Service Eastern Bridge Removal Region Decision Memo Town of Lincoln Grafton County, NH Pemigewasset Ranger District September 2009 For Information Contact: John Marunowski Pemigewasset Ranger District White Mountain National Forest 1171 NH Rte 175 Holderness, NH 03245 Telephone: 603 536-1315 Ext 4016 White Mountain National Forest FAX: 603 536-5147 This document is available in large print.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 White Mountains of Maine
    2018 White Mountains of Maine Summit Handbook 2018 White Mountains of Maine Summit Welcome to the 2018 Family Nature Summit! We are thrilled that you have chosen to join us this summer at the Sunday River Resort in the White Mountains of Maine! Whether this is your first time or your fifteenth, we know you appreciate the unparalleled value your family receives from attending a Family Nature Summit. One of the aspects that is unique about the Family Nature Summits program is that children have their own program with other children their own age during the day while the adults are free to choose their own classes and activities. Our youth programs are run by experienced and talented environmental educators who are very adept at providing a fun and engaging program for children. Our adult classes and activities are also taught by experts in their fields and are equally engaging and fun. In the afternoon, there are offerings for the whole family to do together as well as entertaining evening programs. Family Nature Summits is fortunate to have such a dedicated group of volunteers who have spent countless hours to ensure this amazing experience continues year after year. This handbook is designed to help orient you to the 2018 Family Nature Summit program. We look forward to seeing you in Maine! Page 2 ​ 2018 White Mountains of Maine Summit Table of Contents Welcome to the 2018 Family Nature Summit! 2 Summit Information 7 Summit Location 7 Arrival and Departure 7 Room Check-in 7 Summit Check-in 7 Group Picture 8 Teacher Continuing Education
    [Show full text]
  • Border Security Threatens Northern Border Wildernesses
    Wilderness In Peril: Border Security Measures Threaten Wilderness along the Northern Border with Canada An Analysis Prepared by Wilderness Watch October 2012 Wilderness Watch P.O. Box 9175 Missoula, MT 59807 406-542-2048 www.wildernesswatch.org For more information, contact: George Nickas, Executive Director Kevin Proescholdt, Conservation Director [email protected] [email protected] 406-542-2048 612-201-9266 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary………………………………………………...…………….Page 3 Introduction………………………………………………………..………..….....Page 4 Background…………………………………………………..………………....…Page 4 A. Early 20th Century Border Easements B. International Boundary Treaties with Canada C. 2005 REAL ID Act D. 2006 Interagency Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Border Patrol Practices on the Southern Border and Lessons for the North……………………………………………………………….Page 9 A. Border Wall Construction B. Illegal Roads and Vehicle Routes C. Border Security Infrastructure D. Motorized Patrols Emerging Major Threats to Wildernesses near the Northern Border……...…Page 13 A. Congressional Legislation B. Northern Border Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement C. 2006 MOU and Motorized Patrols D. Administrative Waiver of Federal Laws E. Clearing and Construction in Border Reservations F. Conclusion Needed Actions to Reestablish and Affirm Wilderness Protections Along the Northern Border……………………………………….……………..Page 17 A. Existing Homeland Security Laws B. 2006 MOU C. Northern Border PEIS D. Pending Legislation E. Restore Wilderness Protection Appendix - Wildernesses at Risk along the Northern Border………………....Page 18 3 Executive Summary Under the guise of border security, a plethora of new and proposed laws, policies, memoranda, and other governmental actions pose an unprecedented threat to Wildernesses, including in many national parks, along our nation’s Northern Border. This whitepaper describes the threats and presents several recommendations for securing the protection of Wilderness and parks along the Northern Border.
    [Show full text]
  • The Curtis L. Ivey Science Center DEDICATED SEPTEMBER 17, 2004
    NON-PROFIT Office of Advancement ORGANIZATION ALUMNI MAGAZINE COLBY-SAWYER Colby-Sawyer College U.S. POSTAGE 541 Main Street PAID New London, NH 03257 LEWISTON, ME PERMIT 82 C LBY-SAWYER CHANGE SERVICE REQUESTED ALUMNI MAGAZINE I NSIDE: FALL/WINTER 2004 The Curtis L. Ivey Science Center DEDICATED SEPTEMBER 17, 2004 F ALL/WINTER 2004 Annual Report Issue EDITOR BOARD OF TRUSTEES David R. Morcom Anne Winton Black ’73, ’75 CLASS NOTES EDITORS Chair Tracey Austin Ye ar of Gaye LaCasce Philip H. Jordan Jr. Vice-Chair CONTRIBUTING WRITERS Tracey Austin Robin L. Mead ’72 the Arts Jeremiah Chila ’04 Executive Secretary Cathy DeShano Ye ar of Nicole Eaton ’06 William S. Berger Donald A. Hasseltine Pamela Stanley Bright ’61 Adam S. Kamras Alice W. Brown Gaye LaCasce Lo-Yi Chan his month marks the launch of the Year of the Arts, a David R. Morcom Timothy C. Coughlin P’00 Tmultifaceted initiative that will bring arts faculty members to meet Kimberly Swick Slover Peter D. Danforth P’83, ’84, GP’02 the Arts Leslie Wright Dow ’57 with groups of alumni and friends around the country. We will host VICE PRESIDENT FOR ADVANCEMENT Stephen W. Ensign gatherings in art museums and galleries in a variety of cities, and Donald A. Hasseltine Eleanor Morrison Goldthwait ’51 are looking forward to engaging hundreds of alumni and friends in Suzanne Simons Hammond ’66 conversations about art, which will be led by our faculty experts. DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT Patricia Driggs Kelsey We also look forward to sharing information about Colby-Sawyer’s Beth Cahill Joyce Juskalian Kolligian ’55 robust arts curriculum.
    [Show full text]
  • Spiritual Dimensions Wilderness Stewardship Movement of Wildlife in Wilderness Botswana, South Africa INTERNATIONAL Journal of Wilderness
    Spiritual Dimensions Wilderness Stewardship Movement of Wildlife in Wilderness Botswana, South Africa INTERNATIONAL Journal of Wilderness DECEMBER 2006 VOLUME 12, NUMBER 3 FEATURES 30 Developing Wilderness Character Monitoring EDITORIAL PERSPECTIVES A Personal Reflection 3 Wilderness Is a Bipartisan Cause BY PETER B. LANDRES BY VANCE MARTIN 32 Chief’s Excellence in Wilderness Stewardship SOUL OF THE WILDERNESS Research Science Award 4 The Spiritual Dimensions of Wilderness A Secular Approach for Resource Agencies EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION BY ROGER KAYE 33 Components of and Barriers to Building Successful Interagency Wilderness Citizen Stewardship STEWARDSHIP Programs 9 One Week in the Life of Wilderness RangerJim Leep BY CONNIE G. MYERS and DON HUNGER BY LES JOSLIN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES 11 A Backcountry Ranger in the White Mountain 37 Walking with Magqubu National Forest Adult Reflections on Boyhood Memories BY NATHAN PETERS BY DOUG WILLIAMSON 13 Out of the Office and on the Ground WILDERNESS DIGEST Eastern Sierra Wilderness Stewardship Corps 42 Announcements BY JAMIE ANDERSON Book Reviews SCIENCE AND RESEARCH 45 Last Great Wilderness: The Campaign to Establish the Arctic NEWS FROM THE ALDO LEOPOLD National Wildlife Refuge WILDERNESS RESEARCH INSTITUTE BY ROGER KAYE 16 Wilderness Stewardship in an Era of Global Changes Reviewed by Chad Dawson BY DAVID J. PARSONS 45 Wilderness Forever: Howard Zahniser and the Path to the 17 The Effects of Veterinary Fences on Wildlife Wilderness Act BY MARK HARVEY Populations in Okavango Delta, Botswana Reviewed by John Shultis BY JOSEPH E. MBAIWA and ONALETSHEPHO I. MBAIWA 46 Beyond Conservation: A Wildland Strategy 24 Modeling Encounters between Backcountry BY PETER TAYLOR Recreationists and Grizzly Bears in Glacier Reviewed by John Shultis National Park 47 NOLS Wilderness Ethics: Valuing and Managing Wild Places BY NICK SANYAL, EDWIN E.
    [Show full text]
  • Fire in the White Mountains 61
    The original table with metric values and the original color figures have been appended to the end of this document. Correction: An error was introduced into the text at some point during production. The bottom of p. 69 states “May 1903 was extremely dry; with less than two inches of precipitation, it is the driest May and third driest month ever recorded (1893-1997) at Bethlehem, New Hampshire.” The correct precipitation for May 1903 is 0.75 cm (0.3 inches). W g E o Fire W b in the e c White Mountains m g p A Historical Perspective a Christine L. Goodale he White Mountain National Forest (WMNF) owes its existence, Tin part, to its fiery history. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, debris from unprecedented logging fueled fires across the region. This disrup- tion inflamed public ire, and concern over the potential loss of these beloved forests—and, influentially, concern by downstream manufac- turers that deforestation would dry up their river power—eventually brought about the Weeks Act in 1911. The Weeks Act authorized the federal purchase of forestland and established the WMNF. The public outrage at logging-era fires contrasts with public appreciation of the scenic side effects of some fires long past: enhanced views of and from such peaks as Chocorua, Crawford, Moat, Welch, Hale, the Sugarloaves, and the Baldfaces. On these and other mountains, forest fires cleared the low summits of view- blocking trees, and subsequent erosion washed away much of the soil that might have supported regrowth. Elsewhere, picturesque stands of paper birch owe their origin to fires from a century ago.
    [Show full text]
  • Updates to Published Amc Books and Maps
    UPDATES TO PUBLISHED AMC BOOKS AND MAPS From time to time, information covered in our books may Page 45, Edmands Path change in the field. For example, a trail may be relocated. In 2019, Mt. Clinton Rd. was closed between the Edmands Since a new edition of the book may not be immediately avail- Path trailhead and the Cog Railway Base Rd. The Edmands able, this page will regularly offer updates to our most pop- Path trailhead can only be accessed via Mt. Clinton Rd. from ular AMC books. Bookmark this page and check here often, US 302 just north of the AMC Highland Center. especially before heading out on a trip. If you find that a route described in one of our guides has changed or a description Page 51, Dry River Trail contains an error, please email [email protected]. An October 2017 storm caused additional major washouts on the lower part of the Dry River Trail. The trail may be very TRAIL GUIDES difficult to follow in places. Page 60, Rocky Branch Trail MAINE MOUNTAIN GUIDE, 11TH EDITION (2018) Page 339 Due to storm damage, the northern section of Rocky Branch Rd. (FR 27) has been closed indefinitely by the WMNF. The Molly Lockett’s Cave is named for Molly Ockett, an Abenaki road is gated at 2.5 mi. from US 302. To reach the southern woman who was baptized and given the name Mary Agatha. end of Rocky Branch Trail, hikers must park by this gate and This could have been pronounced “Molly Agat” or “Molly walk 1.6 mi.
    [Show full text]
  • White Mountain National Forest Reg E S Fore a of Dep Un a Er Gric S I T V Tern Ed a I on I S C U R T T E L
    Eastside Road and Trail Repair Project United States Department of Lincoln, Grafton County, NH Agriculture Forest Forest Service Environmental Analysis Eastern Region Pemigewasset Ranger District December 2012 National Mountain For Information Contact: Stacy Lemieux White Mountain National Forest 71 White Mountain Drive Campton, NH 03223 Phone: 603 536-6222 Fax: 603 536-3685 www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/white_mountain White Eastside Road and Trail Repair Project Environmental Assessment This document is available in large print. Contact the Pemigewasset Ranger District White Mountain National Forest 603-536-6222 TTY 603-536-3665 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activi- ties on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (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 USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720- 5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Printed on Recycled Paper Cover photo: Culvert on Eastside Road/Trail washed out by Tropical Storm Irene. WMNF photo. 2 Eastside Road and Trail Repair Project
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter November 2005 Caring for the Sandwich Range Since 1892
    WONALANCET OUT DOOR CLUB Newsletter November 2005 Caring for the Sandwich Range since 1892 Creating a New WMNF Wilderness Bill: 1997-2005 Fifteen years have passed since the most recent area of designated Wilderness was established in the White Mountain National Forest. Between 1964 when the Wilderness Act was passed by Congress and 1990 when the Caribou-Speckled Mountain Wilderness was designated by the Maine Wilderness Act, five areas, totaling 114,000 acres in the 800,000-acre National Forest, have been declared Wilderness. The 23,155 Sandwich Range Friends of Sandwich Range and Wild River journey to Washington, DC to Wilderness was established by The New Hampshire discuss new Wilderness with our representatives. Photo: H. Dowey Wilderness Act of 1984. That’s where things have stood ever since. Although timber harvesting has Also in this issue . continued and snowmobile trails and other recreational uses have expanded in the WMNF, not one additional acre of NH wilderness has been designated since 1984. Trails Report Page 2 Annual Meeting Page 3 Beginnings of a Plan Tom Wessels Page 3 In 1998, twelve years into the current WMNF Forest Plan, a group of WODC members, many of whom are still active on the trails and committees, began to realize Lawrence Trail Page 6 that the time had come to protect more of the Sandwich Range as Wilderness. The effort began in 1997 when Fred Lavigne and Evelyn MacKinnon happened upon a The Outlook Page 8 timber sale near the Algonquin Trail in an area of the WMNF abutting the Sandwich Range Wilderness.
    [Show full text]
  • Hiking Checklist
    HIKES: A Checklist to Help You Pick a Hike 1) When picking hikes from the table above and list below, look at the “climb,” the “difficulty” & the required “agility level,” not just the distance! Know your limitations….. 2) ….If in the past year or so you have not done at least a three hour hike, then please do not sign up for any of our all-day hikes (all ~five hours or more of actual hiking)…. out of respect for your fellow hiking Summiteers…. 3) Every trail bend might seem perfect for photo taking, and we’ll all be snapping photos like crazy….Just please not so much as to be to the detriment of your fellow hikers or denying all of them the time to actually reach our hiking destinations! Thanks. 4) Traditionally, we call these “regular” Summit hikes listed below “destination hikes.” Natural and/or historical interpretation is not the focus of these hikes, unlike rambles and most other Summit programs. While your leader will often offer some interpretation, if you want the primary focus to be on ecosystems, plants, history, geology, birds, photography, environmental issues, etc., we recommend Summit rambles and other Summit programs. The Roost, Goose Eye Brook, Lost Pond, Table Rock, and the all-day Blueberry Mtn. hikes will over more interpretation than most hikes (historic on the first, natural on the others.) 5) Some veteran hikers, especially in the Appalachians, disdain mind-numbing, needlessly lengthy, often 2% grade (poorly designed) switchbacks, and hate flights of stone stairs replacing natural trails, both obsessions in recent decades by certain trail clubs.
    [Show full text]