Recreation Facility Analysis Public Meeting

1
Recreation Facility Analysis Public Meeting

• Nez Perce National Forest
• October 25, 2007
• Soltman Center
• Grangeville, Idaho

2
(No Transcript)
3
Recreation Facility Analysis RFA
Overview
4
Wait! What happened to Recreation Site
Facilities Master Planning (RSFMP)?

• This process was called Recreation Site-Facility
  Master Planning (RS-FMP.) However, the Forest
  Service recognized, as a result of the findings
  of a team chartered specifically to review the
  public participation efforts associated with this
  analysis process, that the term master planning
  could imply that this is a decision-making
  process as opposed to an analytic one. Therefore,
  based on a recommendation from that team, the
  Forest Service decided to refer to the analysis
  of recreation facilities more accurately and
  simply as Recreation Facility Analysis.

5
?
Recreation Facility Analysis
?

• WHAT

A process used to help forests align their
recreation site infrastructure with budgets and
current/expected demands to meet future desired
conditions.
6
Recreation Facility Analysis
?
WHY

• Policy requirements.
• Customer service demands.
• Infrastructure sustainability.

7
Policy Requirements

• Deputy Chiefs 7310 letter, dated May 22, 2002,
  requested each Region to commit to
  Forest-specific FMP completion dates.
• FSM ID 2310-2003-1 requires facility master plans
  be developed for all facilities.
• The 2005 Chiefs Budget Direction requires
  completion of RSFMP on 22 Forests.
• Deputy Chiefs 7310/2310 letter, March 04, 2005,
  requires each Region to submit a schedule by
  July 1, 2005 to complete RS-FMP on all units by
  12/31/2007.

8
Customer Service Demands

• NFs currently have capacity to offer 342 million
  PAOT days at recreation sites in FY04, only 84
  million (25) were funded to be managed at
  standard.

• New EPA operating standards will increase the
  number of recreation site water systems failing
  to meet standards without additional
  expenditures.

• NVUM customer satisfaction data reflects
  consistent dissatisfaction in some areas.
• Visitor preferences and demand have changed since
  the 1960s when many existing recreation sites
  were designed and constructed.

9
Infrastructure Sustainability

• Current deferred maintenance burden at NF
  recreation sites is 346 million in minor
  features, buildings, water and wastewater
  systems. Funding uncertainty exists.
• Competition for appropriated funds continues.
  Facilities funds will drop significantly.
• The new Fee Authority is more restrictive. We
  will be unable to collect fees at some sites
  where fees were collected in the past.

10

WHY RFA?
The hard truth is
our management picture for the developed sites
program is incomplete we must complete the
master planning process to implement professional
management stewardship.
11
Critical Success Factors
Built on measurable results.

• Increase customer satisfaction.
• Be financially sustainable.
• Be environmentally sound.
• Improve operational effectiveness.
• Support local communities.

12
Goals

• Provide recreation opportunities consistent with
  the forest niche.
• Operate and maintain a financially sustainable
  recreation sites program meeting National Quality
  Standards.
• Eliminate deferred maintenance backlog at
  recreation sites.

13
Objectives
Recreation Facility Analysis will

• Focus resources on sites that fit Forest niche.
• Operate and maintain sites to Regionally required
  quality standards with available revenue stream.
• Reduce D-M 20 by 2010 70 by 2015 and
  90 by 2020.
• Produce customer satisfaction factors equal to or
  greater than the customer satisfaction Importance
  Rating for that factor (NVUM).
• Satisfy the requirement for completing recreation
  site facility master plans.

14
6 Steps
of Recreation Facility Analysis
Establish Regional required quality standards.
Prepare financial and site inventory
data. Develop the unit recreation program
niche. Rank sites (includes Management
options). Determine site priority list. Develop
5-year Recreation Site FMP Action Plan. Develop
the FMP Summary.
FLT invites public participation in decisions.
15
What is a Niche?
16
?
What is a Niche?
RFA

• The specific recreation focus of a forest,
  incorporating public expectations (demand) with
• unique social
• and ecological
• features of the
• land (supply).

17
Niche RFA
18
Niche Why
Helps to narrow our focus.
Creates the most public value with limited
resources.
19
RFA Niche Design
Uses NVUM and NSRE use data to develop current
demand
Demand.
Uses US Census data to develop market analysis
tools
Demand.
Uses Infra site inventory data to develop
financial tools
Supply.
20
Niche Product

• Narrative and maps

Context Settings Special Places Activity-opportuni
ties Primary Visitors
21
Niche Bridge
Description of site types and sizes by
development scale and setting that are
appropriate for the forests niche.
22
Management Options

• District recommends actions to
• Come in line with niche
• Decrease costs
• Increase revenues
• Disinvest in some facilities
• So that sites conform to niche and the program is
  financially sustainable

23
Site Ranking

• Districts rank sites based on
• Conformance to niche
• Environmental sustainability
• Financial sustainability
• Degree of support to/by communities

24
RFA Tier Categories

• Non-discretionary (concession, partner operated)
• Open (sufficient priority and funds)
• Closed (needed, but insufficient funds)
• Decommission (Non-niche conforming, low use, high
  cost, low priority, etc.)

25
RFA Tier Categories

• Sites may move between open and closed categories
  annually based on changes in funding, revenues,
  partnerships, concessions, or volunteer
  availability.
• Sites which remain closed for three or four years
  typically will be moved to the decommission
  category.

26
Determine Site Priorities

• FLT proposes actions for a financially
  sustainable developed recreation program that
  meets user demands and expectations by
  considering additional social and community
  concerns to attain a desired future condition.

27
Next involving our neighbors and constituents

• FLT meets with local communities and constituents
  reviewing the Action Plan proposals with the list
  of sites and facilities that face significant
  changes in management to attain a desired future
  condition.

28
RFA Results

• All sites conform to the forest recreation niche
  by 2015
• Recreation opportunities meet demand and customer
  expectations
• D-M is reduced then eliminated
• Annual OM costs do not exceed the revenue stream

29
RFA Results

• Data and information generated through RS-FMP
  will be used for Forest Planning, capital
  investment decisions, etc.

30
RFA Execution

• Successful test of the national process on 4
  National Forests in 2004
• Target 22 Forests in 2005. Field acceptance is
  high sufficient to produce volunteers to fill
  all 22 subscriptions
• Plan to complete the rest of the NFs in 2006 and
  2007.

31
What did WE come up with?
32
Nez Perce National Forest Niche

• Where Wild Country
• Meets Wild Water
• Wilderness and Whitewater Rivers offer visitors
  an escape to quiet, remote natural surroundings.
  The Nez Perce NF provides freedom to choose
  between a variety of dispersed recreation
  activities that are the fruit of pristine
  watersheds, clean air, and healthy fish
  wildlife populations. The remoteness of the
  Forest adds to its allure, requiring a commitment
  of time from visitors along with backcountry and
  recreation skills. Embedded in the name of the
  Forest, the Nez Perce tribes history, culture
  and knowledge are integral values. Stories of
  early settlers, miners, and Forest Service
  history are told in romantic settings of historic
  ruins and travel ways. Backcountry elk hunting,
  salmon and steelhead fishing opportunities
  contribute to the economic and social vitality of
  the community for residents and visitors alike.

33
Nez Perce NF Public Involvement

• Dont Change too much
• Keep some non- fee sites
• We like dispersed camping
• We like un-crowded sites
• We dont mind paying a nominal fee for clean,
  well maintained sites.
• Emphasize World Class resources (rivers and
  Wilderness)

34
Nez Perce NF Public Involvement (cont)

• The NPNF should grow their recreation program
  to provide more opportunities.
• Could use more snow park and winter recreation
  opportunities.
• Public use/demand for developed recreation sites
  is increasing.
• Closed sites may increase damage to open sites.

35
Nez Perce National Forest RFA Site Inventory
36
(No Transcript)
37
What Can We Do?

• B. MANAGEMENT OPTION CODE LIST
• A DECOMMISSION
• B - CLOSURE
• C - CHANGE SEASON
• D REMOVE OR ELIMINATE A COST SOURCE or SERVICE
  SEASON
• E - REDUCE SERVICE FREQUENCY SEASON
• F INCREASE/IMPROVE SERVICES
• G CONSTRUCT A NEW AREA
• H CHANGE OPERATOR or WORKFORCE
• I CHANGE FEES
• J CHANGE CAPACITY (PAOT) K -- SITE CONVERSION
• L REPLACEMENT/REPAIR
• NC NO CHANGE (i.e., none of the above site
  specific changes apply)
• Note A site can have more than one code

38
PROPOSED MANAGEMENT ACTION SUMMARY
39
(No Transcript)
40
Conclusion?

• In addition to meeting the RSFMP objective to
  operate and maintain sites to standard within the
  available revenue stream, the Forest surpassed
  the objective of reducing deferred maintenance by
  20 over the 5 year life of the program of work.
  The Forest will reduce DM by 422,474, an 82
  reduction.

41
Any Questions? Call Anthony Botello 208-983-1950