{ Updated Nov. 7 }
Why not try to approach 'environmental aspects' and other aspects of EMS in as simple a fashion as possible? That way we can start small, focused tightly on what we generally do, then build the system gradually outward toward specific authority/responsibility matches (and more detail) as we more fully flesh-out our EMS, Planning, assessment and other systems in the next few years.
Building from R1's stuff, including, FSM categoreis, I threw together a preliminary list of programmatic systems. It is well known that you can't effectively manage systems unless and until you have explicit, if fuzzy models of those systems. So maybe we can begin with 'systems,' then try to distill aspects, impacts, controls, etc. from them, rather that starting with FSM categories and trying to get to aspects that way.
Note that I grouped things to help facilitate more lumping--I'd prefer to err on the too lumpy side of the divide rather than the too-complex side.
Let me know if you think this has merit, and also any specific recommendations/enhancements, etc. that you think of.
Trial Programmatic Systems List
Roads Systems (including bridges)
Trails Systems (including bridges)
Potable Water Systems
Irrigation Water Systems (including Dams)
Sewage Treatment Systems
Timber Sales Management System
Vegetation Treatment for Timber Stand Improvement Systems
Fire Suppression Systems
Fuels Treatment Systems (to reduce fuel-loading)
Rangeland Improvement Systems
Rangeland Allotment Management Systems
OHV Management and Control Systems
Scenery Management Systems
Recreation Visitors 'Ecological Footprint' Management Systems (Maybe?)
Wilderness Management Systems
Wild and Scenic Rivers Management Systems
T & E Habitat Conservation Systems
Species of Concern/Interest Conservation Systems
Biology Diversity Conservation/Enhancement Systems
Environmental Management (Solid Wastes, Pesticide use, Hazardous Materials, Energy)
Engineering Operations (Fleet management, Buildings and others structures, etc.)
Hard Rock Minerals Exploration/Development Management Systems
Oil and Gas Management Systems
Energy and Power Corridor Management Systems
Invasive Species Management Systems
Land Exchange Management Systems
Stewardship Contracting Systems (This is probably a mis-fit)
Soil Conservation Systems?
Air Quality Systems?
Dave - I like the systems approach, but not sure how it will mesh with contractor's process.... this is my attempt to comment!
We had huge thundering pipe clanging in our house pipes, and it turned out that city water pressure coming in was about 10 times higher than it was supposed to be, and Michael had to do some of that pressure stuff, but it started at the line coming in....
Posted by: Geneen Granger | November 16, 2005 at 09:38 AM
G.
My pressure problem too was solved at the line coming in -- by replacing the pressure reduction valve. The expansion tank may help some, but the real problem was pressure too high on the incoming line.
Nice to see you making an attempt to use our new toy.
The systems approach WILL mesh well with whatever approach 'contractors' may espouse. At least it will mesh well if that's what we want.. Contractors work for us, not the other way around.
About tomorrow I'll post up what we came up with as to "activity categories," "activities" and "impacts" at our multi-forest EMS workshop that winds up today at noon. I'll attempt to tie the description bact to a systems approach.
We eventually abandoned our notion of starting with the Manual, and piggybacked our work off what was done up on the three-forest coalition in R6 (Coville, Okanogan-Wenatchee, Wallowa-Whitman). Thanks go to Dick Phillips and CO. for providing us a lead. Also to R1 for their activities, impacts, etc. which are not all that different.
Posted by: dave iverson | November 16, 2005 at 10:49 AM