Partnerships with your Human Resources Office - The last article I wrote for Ranger was about management accountability in the NPS, due to the release of the draft of Director's Order #54. Our Management Policies 2001 states, "Management accountability is the expectation that managers are responsible for the quality and timeliness of program performance, increasing productivity, controlling costs, and mitigating the adverse aspects of agency operations, and for assuring that programs are managed with integrity and in compliance with applicable law..." Accountability certainly stretches beyond management and applies to all NPS employees.

Here in Yosemite we invited a team of exceptional and experienced NPS human resources managers to come to the park to conduct a review of our human resources office (HRO). The purpose of the review was to help us identify best practices and improve our processes in serving the managers and employees in Yosemite. The final report hasn't been completed, but we are looking forward to making some positive changes and improvements to our operation.

One of our purposes for this review was to validate the importance of a strong partnership among managers, supervisors, employees and the human resources staff and highlight the importance of shared accountability. Too many times HROs are perceived to be "naysayers" and not supportive enough of the needs of the people served. Because federal human resources now have many flexibilities, this perception is generally no longer true and needs to be dispelled. But, perceptions are sometimes hard to overcome, so HROs must work even harder to reach out to customers. The value of partnerships and shared accountability for an effective human resources program becomes even more evident as the NPS strives to get the best workforce in the government. Each of us must understand our role in the success of the HR program.

Human resources management is truly everyone's business. The role of a human resources office has changed. The focus is no longer on serving the individual employee and paperwork processing, but on the effective use of human resources - people - in achieving the NPS mission. It's about achieving organizational excellence, a flexible workforce with the competencies to do the job well, and return on investment. Effective human resources management is too big to be the sole responsibility of the human resources office. Significant management involvement and sharing of expertise are needed to reconceive and reconfigure an HR program. In sum, human resources management accountability is about the responsibility shared by managers, supervisors, employees and the HR staff for ensuring that people are used effectively and in accordance with legal requirements.

I'm looking forward to seeing the final report on best practices for Yosemite's human resources office and would be more than happy to share our results. Administrative divisions in parks rely on sharing of this type of information in order to improve the way we do business and to continue to be accountable for our programs.

Interpretation

Rewarding Great Interpretation - On the wall in my office I have a cork board. It is just like every other cork board on every other office wall in the NPS. Pinned to my board are the usual vital office flotsam - pay period schedules (from each of the last three years; they might be worth something to a collector one day), special event schedules, duty rosters from summers' past, nuggets of wisdom from the regional director on sexual harassment and acceptable computer use, instructions on what to do in the case of a bomb threat, and various trinkets and doodads that I inherited from the office's previous occupants. In addition to these trappings of officialdom, I have a couple of thank-you notes from a family that enjoyed a guided canoe trip (in the space of a paragraph, one young girl remarks that I was both the nicest ranger she had ever met and the only ranger she had ever met). Also present are creatively colored thank-you notes from third grade classes, appreciative notes from high school teachers who have enjoyed an education program in which I was involved and a three-by-five post-it note from my supervisor telling me that I did a good and thorough job on the preparation of an interpretive planning document. It is always nice to know that your work is appreciated by the public or by your supervisor, whether from an informal note or an official pat on the back.

The arrival of the new year, be it fiscal or calendar, heralds the beginning of the new interpretive awards cycle. It is time for the colleagues and supervisors of interpreters to begin the search for this year's finest examples of interpretive excellence for recognition on a regional and national level. Within the NPS there are two ways for interpreters to be recognized for producing exceptional interpretive products: the Freeman Tilden Award and the Sequoia Award. There also are other avenues for officially acknowledging great interpretation.

The Tilden Award is presented annually to recognize an outstanding contribution to interpretation or education by an NPS interpreter. Named for professor, author and interpretive pioneer Freeman Tilden, the award is designed to recognize field interpreters that develop, revitalize or deliver an innovative, pioneering or otherwise worthy interpretive or educational program. Tilden Award nominees are judged based upon four basic criteria:

1. Did the program create an opportunity for the public to form their own intellectual and emotional connections with the park.
2. Was the program creative and original or did it significantly advance the practice of interpretation and education.
3. Did the program move the audience toward higher level concepts such as resource protection and stewardship or enlighten regional or global issues.
4. Was the program a significant effort beyond normal day-to-day operations.

Each region has its own Tilden Award program to solicit nominations and choose its regional representative for the national Tilden Award. The national Tilden Award winner receives a sculpted bust of Freeman Tilden and a cash honorarium, both presented by the NPS director at the annual National Association of Interpretation Workshop. Though superintendents must approve nominations from their parks, individuals may nominate themselves. But nominations are far more meaningful if they come from a supervisor or peer.

Though most interpreters have heard of and perhaps strive toward producing a Tilden Award-worthy program, many have never heard of the Sequoia Award. This award recognizes interpreters who have made long-term (five years or more) contributions to NPS interpretation in the areas of professional excellence, evaluation, education, partnerships or interpretive media. Unlike the Tilden Award, the Sequoia Award is not competitive - nominations are accepted and considered throughout the year on a case-by-case basis and up to five awards may be given each year. Recipients are presented with a sequoia cone in a clear plastic embedment mounted on a wooden base engraved with the recipient's name and the date of the award. As with the Tilden Award, nominations can be made by anybody, but it is certainly nice to have your accomplishments recognized by your supervisor or peers.

Outside of the NPS, the National Association for Interpretation also has a bevy of awards for excellence in many facets of interpretation. The NAI awards program provides recognition for Master Field Interpreters, Outstanding New Interpreters, Master Interpretive Managers and several other more specialized awards. NAI membership is generally a prerequisite for receiving consideration for these awards.

Though all of these awards have a national scope and a public cachet, recognition of interpretive excellence may just as easily reside in a less public forum. Most of the Department of Interior awards like On-the-Spot Awards (a cash award between $50 and $500), STAR Awards (a cash award in excess of $925), Quality Step Increases (a merit-based increase in an employee's salary step) and Time Off Awards (time off from work in excess of one hour) may be kept between the supervisor, the employee and the administrative personnel that process the award. While On-the-Spot, STAR and Time Off Awards are one-time honors, a Quality Step Increase is a gift that keeps on giving and thus is a great way to award sustained excellence in the profession. However you choose to use them, all of the above awards are fine and less overt ways to reward great interpretation.

But even if, in this era of flat budgets, you cannot afford monetary awards for your excellent interpreters, anybody can recognize their employees for doing good work. Be it a note of praise, encouragement or thanks, a pat on the back or a kudos at a management team meeting, recognition lets your employees know that their hard work and creativity are being noticed and, above all, appreciated. And knowing that you are not toiling in obscurity is an even better motivator than a plaque or sculpture.

Resource Management

As winter descends and, perhaps, provides for many of us a relative breather from the hectic pace of summer rangering or resource management field work, I wish we may all find time to read something thought-provoking.

Here's a paper that's a good start: "Making the Most of Science in the American West: An Experiment" by Patricia Nelson Limerick and Claudia Puska, 2003, Center of the American West, University of Colorado at Boulder, Report from the Center #5. This report resulted from a workshop on the history of science in the American West, held outside Rocky Mountain National Park in May 2002.

I recommend it to all readers of Ranger; the most salient points are relevant not just to Westerners but to anyone interested in making more of science as it relates to park management. With her characteristic wit, Limerick and her colleague outline "the dream" that scientists would "shine a bright light" on conservation challenges and "lead us to firm ground and solutions," as evidenced by the commitment resource agencies, including the NPS, have made to science-based management.

The reality, they write, is that environmental debates have become a mud bath, and "we have managed to pull (the scientists) into the mud with the rest of us," playing out "repetitive performances of a tedious play we will call Dueling Experts." (Easterners, stop reading now if this does not apply ahead of the 100th meridian.) The authors examine some of the reasons for this reality, including the tendency, perhaps abating in the late 20th century, to ignore the "alternative expertise" of Indian peoples and other locals who have long associations with their native landscapes and associated resources. It also stems, they say, from public (and agency) expectations that scientists should provide firm solutions to tough questions, reveal universal patterns that can be applied across many sites and issues, and do so through good research no matter what arbitrary borders and limited time and dollar budgets they are given.

Part of the inherent challenge comes from the different goals of politics (to achieve through debate a consensus on proper action) and science (to achieve new insight through an ongoing process of questioning, validation, and refutation). One solution, recommended by Daniel Sarewitz, is to adopt a geological perspective, which "has made its peace with the uncertainty and complexity of nature" and which leads to adaptive management policies that are properly viewed as experiments rather than unerring certainties backed by research. The hope is that this could free both policymakers and scientists from public expectations that they accurately predict the future outcomes of their recommendations and decisions. Rather, in the words of Nancy Langston, the territory of science confronts that of culture: "scientists can predict what kinds of outcomes different kinds of disturbances will have, and what early signs we can look for when monitoring to give us a better chance of reaching those goals. Science, however, cannot define the goals for us." That requires scientists, public officials and citizens to blend science into questions of value and culture. It also requires all of us to recognize that scientists, while they try to be objective in their data collection and analysis, have the same tendencies that all humans do, to be attached to their world and the things in it that interest them.

The paper also summarizes the urgent need to move the public and science nearer together, and says to scientists "thou shalt communicate," perhaps by "shutting off the PowerPoint, putting down the microphone, stepping away from the podium, and standing before the audience as an appealing human being . . . to restore soul to science."

The report is free at www.centerwest.org or for $5 from the Center of the American West, University of Colorado-Boulder, Macky 229, 282 UCB, Boulder, CO 80309-0282; 303-492-4879.

~ Sue Consolo Murphy, Yellowstone

Protection

On the Cutting Edge of High Angle Rescue - A small cluster of rangers gathers near the brink of a 90-foot drop-off, crouching over what appears to the untrained eye as a spaghetti-like mess of ropes, webbing, and hardware. Most of them, students, listen with deep concentration. Another, an instructor, masterfully explains the finer points of the load-sharing anchor system to which each of the students will, in short order, entrust their lives.

It is May in New River Gorge and good things are happening in the world of NPS high-angle rescue. Meanwhile, halfway across the country, the same good things are happening at Canyonlands. Every year in spring, both parks host the NPS Basic High Angle Rescue Course, an intense week of on-the-cliff, hands-on training covering a wide spectrum of skills. Students begin on day one with knots and rope handling, and by the final day, are responding to a real-time mock rescue involving every skill station covered throughout the week.

The course is fast-paced with long hours and little down time. There's simply too much to do. Students are keenly aware that having a firm grasp on the subject matter will enable them to one day save a life. They know the tasks required on a full-scale high angle rescue fit easily into the category of perishable skills - rusty skills soon perish. But in this case, there's a deeper meaning to the term with consequences of a much greater finality.

It's this finality that motivates the class' collective devotion to an uncompromising attention to safety, a core tenet of any rescue training. The classroom is the vertical environment, where gravity, falling rocks and cutting edges are unforgiving school marms. Even the most seemingly petty mistake could get a person killed, both in training and on an incident.

That is why redundancy is a recurring theme. An anchor is not a single point, but several working together as a system; each point backs up the others. Main lines are accompanied by a belay. Ten-to-one ratio safety factors are incorporated into every rescue system built. Instructors hammer home the point that if any one component in a system fails, the system itself remains safe. Everything is checked and then rechecked by another rescuer before systems are loaded.

Another recurring theme is consistency. One would think a consistent standard would be the norm for operations that involve inherent dangers such as those encountered in the high angle environment. Such is certainly the case for our other hazardous duties like law enforcement, EMS, firefighting and aviation. But for many years technical rescue teams throughout the NPS have conducted high angle rescues employing a wide variety of tools, techniques and systems in the absence of an accepted standard.

Historically, operations have been influenced by region, institutional memory of those rangers who initiated rescue programs in their parks, trends in commercial and private sectors, and local non-NPS rescue squads who respond to in-park incidents. Typically the techniques were effective, but the result has been a lack of servicewide consistency. A raising operation done one way at Acadia might be executed using different means at Yosemite.

In recent years many milestones have been achieved toward the establishment of that much-needed consistency. The Canyon-lands and New River Gorge training have been designed by a dedicated corps of course coordinators building upon a solid foundation provided long ago by the forefathers of NPS SAR. With WASO's continuing support, as well as that of home parks releasing students and instructors, these courses will not only continue, but continue achieving milestones.

Both courses teach methods outlined in the NPS Basic Technical Rescue manual. Students receive their own copy and refer to them often during training. Instructors teach techniques using "the Park Service way" and using equipment recommended in the manual. The results of this consistency are already being seen: course graduates transfer to new parks and assimilate easily into existing rescue teams because they already know the NPS standard.

At each station students learn to master a given skill, whether it's a pre-tensioned back-tie, stranded patient pick-off, mid-face changeover or rigging a litter. A crawl-walk-run pace is established with much repetition - another theme - programmed into every station. Students perform each skill as often as is necessary for them to feel comfortable with it. By week's end, they graduate with a comprehensive skill set.

Students learn much more than hands-on skills. They learn concepts. They learn to think conceptually, to approach every incident with a situational awareness. Instructors encourage students to analyze each rescue with a trained eye, to size up the situation and develop the best possible action plan. Students learn that several solutions may be available, and they learn to choose the safest, most effective one.

Students are shown a "toolbox" of equipment and techniques and taught the pros and cons of each. The cadre develops scenarios and allows the students to manage them. They cultivate a mindset of problem solving among the students. They ask the students what they plan to do in a given situation, and then challenge their answer with a "why?"

The course is designed to be "how-to" training, but it goes far beyond that - it's also a "why?" course. The point isn't to cause doubt in the students, but confidence. By helping them to make solid judgment calls and then justify their decisions out loud, instructors instill in the students a personal confidence. Students leave the course knowing that, when called to their next rescue, they will know what to do.

That type of confidence is priceless, and its possession is of paramount importance to members of any rescue team. It's even more important to team leaders, and many of the course graduates will go on to become leaders of their home park rescue teams.

This course gets them headed in that direction: They return as something more than a rescuer - they return as a skilled rescuer, and they do so knowing there is a difference.

~ Kevin Moses, Big South Fork