Visitor Center
Copyright 2005-2013
National Park Advocates LLC
Follow the Traveler
Recent comments
-
Zebulon
on
Ride Your Bike Through The World's...
3 hours 39 min ago
-
Megaera
on
Dining In The Parks: Healthy Parks,...
3 hours 49 min ago
-
Rick B.
on
Let's Be Careful Out In The...
5 hours 48 min ago
-
Bogator
on
Let's Be Careful Out In The...
7 hours 53 min ago
-
Rebecca Latson ...
on
Dining In The Parks: Healthy Parks,...
12 hours 24 min ago
-
Lee Dalton
on
2012 Offered Mixed Bag For Crime In...
16 hours 20 min ago
-
Quiet please
on
Capitol Reef National Park: The...
1 day 7 hours ago
-
Ilex_Opaca
on
Capitol Reef National Park: The...
2 days 5 hours ago
-
Traveler Park
on
Investigation: Multiple Errors...
2 days 6 hours ago
-
ecbuck
on
Sequestration Cuts To Reduce Staff,...
2 days 12 hours ago


















The present Tribal Chair, at a public meeting held in Flagstaff Arizona this February, stated the Tribe intended to take Grand Canyon National Park to court, in order for the Tribe to expand north into land now managed by Grand Canyon National Park. Chairman Vaughn would like the Tribe to have control of the Colorado River in Grand Canyon.
The Tribes development plans at Grand Canyon West are ambitious, from a golf course and business park on the rim, to a cable car (since you mentioned the Albright-Mather discourse), and, if successful in pushing back the borders and management of Grand Canyon National Park, jet-ski and jet boat rides on the Colorado River.
We can only hope the country, while acknowledging the need for sustainable economies on our First American lands, will stand by Grand Canyon National Park and not allow our countries Parks to be physically degraded by tourism development.
On Wednesday, while at the Park headquarters, I noticed an informational handout at the information desk on the Skywalk. Yes, people are asking.
By Mike Di Paola on April 17. http://www.bloomberg.com/ap...
At the same time these parks are claiming poverty when it comes to funding free interpretative services that have always been a hallmark of the national park experience. With entrance fees averaging $25 per park you have to wonder how much longer the paying public will tolerate more for less? I think the recent downward trend in park visitation is an accurate indicator of what that type of business model will ultimately yield.
It's going to take more than podcasts to get the public coming back as regular visitors to these increasingly over-priced, over regulated and elitist parks with their high priced institute tours and over burdensome and meddling mountains of governmental red tape.
National parks have been great for increasing the visitation levels of BLM and Forest Service lands. Keep up the good work green & gray!
Scott Dunn tells of internal turmoil within the program that distressed Bill. All of this could have been resolved easily and painlessly if addressed directly by the new Director, with open communications and a willingness to begin a dialogue focused on working together to improve the program. Bill was quick to get in touch with instructors to coordinate their course of study and address problems immediately. Communications between staff and the director must be two way and focused on benefiting the students and following required guidelines. Mandates by email and failure to address issues directly will adversely affect any program. I am sorry if I offended Scott Dunn, as he is one of the many dedicated and experienced instructors currently with the program.
In my earlier exposure to the students during practical exercises at the end of the course of study, I felt there needed to be more instances involving the use of weapons and deadly force when students practiced and displayed their skills for testing purposes. Due to the serious nature of the law enforcement job in today's parks, I worried that we may be letting people graduate after 9 weeks as certified LE rangers who may not be up to pulling a gun and shooting a felon should that be required. We had instances in the past when students 'freeze up' or refuse to use lethal force when confronted with scenarios requiring action. This is simply unacceptable and led to changes being required.
Andrew's response shows that felony exercises have been added back into the final testing scenarios. In addition, after-hour practices have been added during the last class intended to expose recruits to more practice time doing simulated visitor contacts and arrests. These changes should improve the students' performance and allow the extra time needed to become proficient.
I also work with the regular police academy, evaluating recruits that have spent 16 weeks solely devoted to law enforcement training. Even after this extended period, we find certain individuals lacking the skills and personal fortitude required during lethal encounters. As I now look at the issue of ranger academy graduate preparedness, I wonder if we are expecting too much of our graduates after just 9 weeks training. The addition of CA 832 training by the former Director, although a great idea to reduce time and money spent by CA parks to send recruits to another week of LE training, causes additional strain on the program which is already hard pressed to prepare our recruits properly in our short time frame. Because our time to train the recruits is so short, we must work harder to ensure they graduate with the skills and information needed to keep both themselves, and the public safe when performing their LE duties.
In conclusion, I want to make clear ' my beef is with the current Director who I hope will learn from the discussion and address areas of concern. The SRJC Ranger Academy has a tremendous team of dedicated and experienced instructors and staff who remain in the program and work in a new, well appointed and equipped facility. I apologize for starting the conversation on a negative bent, and want to encourage the Director and all instructors to work together closely to ensure this program resembles what Bill Orr intended, a quality ranger training program, always seeking ways to improve itself and continue offering excellent training and guidance to students aspiring to work in our local and national parks.
How many programs have the learning environment we have at the Santa Rosa Public Safety Training Center' on-site range, EVOC course, simulators, computers and a scenario village complete with a visitor center and campground. Bill Orr was very proud of this program, and taught as long as his health would allow. Bill's pride, was illustrated in the letter submitted to the NPS Signpost, days before he lost his battle with cancer.
Yes there has been some internal turmoil with the program. Much of this has been spawned by instructors who were resistant to complying with way the program is now being administered. A program meeting compliance with new regulations and adult learning concepts. The director's requirement of instructors to update and submit resumes, lesson plans, and handout materials brought an amazing amount of resistance from many of the long-term instructors. Why? Perhaps because they were reluctant to change their old fashion ways, outdated materials and stale lectures. Many of which were still using materials dated from the 70's. One who was even telling students to remove a bottle out of a drunk's hand with a Bruce Lee style spin kick'. It appalls me to see the petty undermining and backstabbing occur due to this resistance to change. During my visits with Bill, weeks before his death, I know this pettiness saddened him too. I see a small group of sour grapes trying to spoil the program because they refuse to get with the program and get with the times.
PS. I do know Mr. Foster and have always gotten along well with him. He is entitled to his opinion, but I don't believe he is speaking for the majority.
However, my experience was not entirely congruous with Captain Foster's article in that my scenario training did include the extensive use of firearms.
One scenario involved a report of a woman attempting to break into a building with a crowbar. The nature of the scenario necessitated responding with our weapons drawn and arresting and removing concealed weapons from the suspect.
Other scenarios where we drew our sidearms involved a suspicious person with a knife and a search of building for robbery suspects. We also participated in felony vehicle stop scenarios, during both night and day, that required the use of firearms, including the shotgun.
Outside of scenario training, we had other forms of training involving the use of firearms. We had extensive instruction on the range, training with both sidearms and shotguns. Along with many other tactics, defensive tactics training taught us weapon retention and felony arrest procedures, both involving drawn weapons.
We trained with the F.A.T.S., or Firearms Training Simulator, which puts the trainee into a multitude of real-life situations and forces him or her to make instantaneous decisions whether or not to use deadly force.
Perhaps the most realistic training involving firearms was the live-fire simunitions training. This involves the use of a real sidearm fitted to fire 9mm "paint" round while responding to various scenarios including hostage situations and armed and intoxicated park guests. During these scenarios, we actually "shot" the actors playing suspects.
I did not write this response to undermine Captain Foster's concern for the quality of training for the rangers. I wrote it to clarify the instruction I received at the Santa Rosa Training Center during my time there, which was overwhelmingly positive.
Andrew Douglass
andydouglass@gmail.com