FORT UNION Administrative History

Certainly, water was another long-forgotten aspect, that required more study. Since the U.S. Geological Survey effort of 1956, the Park Service had shown little interest in water resource management at Fort Union. In the late sixties, the predominant national mood favoring environmental preservation influenced the attitudes of government bureaucrats at every level. Concerning the safety of visitors and the potential for future consumption, the Southwest Region decided to examine both the quality and the quantity of water in the fort area. In 1970, hydraulic engineers suggested that the fort keep records of water use, including domestic consumption and irrigation. The absence of meters, however, made it difficult for the monument to provide accurate data about water use. Without basic cooperation from the local unit, the regional office had no alternative but to postpone water resource research indefinitely. [26]

The 1970s witnessed no activity in hydraulic studies at the fort except for a brief test of the well. After the Red Top Drilling Company installed a new pump, the Park Service did a routine check of the new system. In April 1974, Hydraulic Engineer Garland Moore and his team arrived at the site. They inspected the well and the new pump. Surprisingly, they found that the water table had dropped from 85 feet in 1957 to 91.7 feet. Because the team could not decide why the underground reservoir had shrunk, the test remained inconclusive. To the monument, a comprehensive hydraulic study remained unavailable. [27]

Nevertheless, the quality of the groundwater at Fort Union remained unchanged throughout its history. Beginning in 1960, the park staff collected water samples twice a month for bacteriological tests by a state-approved laboratory. Thorough analyses were made every three years. The chemical quality of the groundwater always met the drinking water standards set by the Public Health Service in 1962. Also, the maintenance crew regularly cleaned the water tank to keep the artisan water pure. [28]

When Fort Union merged with Capulin Mountain National Monument, water resource management received new attention. Both Santa Fe and Capulin bosses requested an inventory of water resources in the fort area. With some assistance from natural specialists from Capulin, unit manager Carol Kruse prepared a detailed report entitled "Water Resources Management Profile for Fort Union National Monument." Based on previous information and recent studies, the document dealt with various aspects of water resources such as physical description, legal rights, problem identification, recommended strategies, and bibliographical references. For the first time, the Regional Office received an overview of the fort's water assets and problems. Despite its primitive nature, the profile reflected a new approach toward resource management, from trouble-shooting to systematic studies. [29]

Although the small number of personnel limited Fort Union ability to conduct any large-scale research, the monument sought to learn more about water resources. In 1984, Carol Kruse requested that Santa Fe do a new examination of the well. The Regional Office brought in Hydrologist William Werrell from Fort Collins, Colorado, who arranged another aquifer test. After his field trip, Werrell compiled a detailed report about his survey. It suggested that a new well be drilled even though the existing one might be productive for a few more decades. His study gave the Park Service a better understanding of the groundwater situation at Fort Union. [30] In addition, the monument employees themselves continued to inquire into water resources. Throughout the 1980s, each management plan or superintendent's annual report showed progress in the field.

Unlike water resource management, which could pause at any time as needed, fire control required constant attention such as personnel training and equipment improvement. Because of its location where water was scarce and grass was abundant, wildfire posed the most dangerous threat to the park. Thus, the park employees were constantly on fire alert. They regularly checked and repaired the old fire-fighting tools. Every few years, new equipment was purchased and fresh ideas surfaced. In 1972, the monument redesigned its four fire hose houses and made them fireproof. [31]

Five years later, all the equipment was upgraded again. In April 1977, workers completed a new fire-resistant fire cache building in the maintenance area. The 300-gallon pump trailer received a new pump, improved hose reels, and other gear. Also, the monument procured a portable, backup fire pump for forest fire control use. Later in the season, four sets of bunker gear, including helmets, gloves, boots, turnout coats and pants, and self-contained breathing units, came to Fort Union to arm its mini-fire department. By the late seventies, with sufficient modern equipment, the monument had greatly increased its fire-fighting capability. [32]

The development of training in fire control went even faster. Wildfires in the neighboring areas offered the park staff good opportunities to acquire real battlefield experiences. In the seventies, natural fires broke out more frequently in the region than they did in previous decades. For example, one fire in April 1974 engulfed 1,500 acres of grassland belonging to the Union Land and Grazing Company. Armed with modern weapons, the park employees responded to calls for help and fought the fire effectively. [33] The only rewards for their sweat and bravery was enhanced skills and experience.

The park's amateur fire fighters also participated in suppressing wildfires in other regions and states. In June 1977, the La Mesa fire at Bandelier National Monument destroyed large portions of the Upper Canyon and Frijoles Mesa areas. Answering an emergency call for assistance, Superintendent Hopkins and ranger Thomas Danton, with their recently acquired equipment, quickly drove to the burning area. Both spent six consecutive days in the blazing forest. No sooner did they put the equipment back into the cache building than a fire broke out at Sequoia National Forest in California in August. Chief Ranger Robert Hoff and battlefield-hardened Danton were assigned to the La Bonita fire. They flew there and stayed on the front line for a week. These airborne fire fighters performed excellently. At the end of the summer, Hopkins, Danton, and Hoff received interagency fire fighting qualification cards. These special occasions helped Fort Union to develop an exceptional fire fighting squad. [34]

Besides reliable equipment and proper training, cooperative activities within government, community, and citizenry were crucial for the suppression of large fires. In 1968, the Southwest Region of the National Park Service and the state of New Mexico reached agreement on mutual aid in the case of natural disasters. Although the agreement covered the Mora Valley, the management sought additional cooperation from the surrounding communities. In 1975, Superintendent Hopkins and Andrew Marshall, then treasurer of the Union Land and Grazing Company signed an agreement on a joint effort to deal with fire disasters. A revised version appeared three years later. During the same period Fort Union and the Watrous Volunteer Fire Department struck a similar deal. With these agreements, the monument bore more responsibilities, but in trade for better fire protection. [35]

The best protective measure was to prevent fires in the first place. After improving its fire control abilities, the monument exhibited a growing interest in scientific studies. In April 1983, Fort Union installed a fire weather station near the visitor center to collect data on wind, precipitation, temperature, and humidity trends. High winds often proved to be a major factor in determining fire hazards. Because the highest recorded winds usually occurred in August, that became the most dangerous month for wildfire threats. So the preparation began before each summer. [36]

Learning from other parks' experiences, Fort Union tried a new fire control method--"prescribed burn." It was an effective tool used to restore the historic scenery and reduce fire hazards by carefully burning small sections of the vegetated area under closely supervised conditions. On April 10, 1985, the maintenance crew burned off five acres at two sites. Minimal pre-burn information was available, but the revegetation was documented with photographs for the following six weeks. The prescribed burn slowed the growth of woody plants and in return, the prairie grass made a comeback. [37]

The monument continued to improve its fire management capabilities in every way. In 1990, the draft of the fire management plan for Fort Union arrived at Santa Fe for review. It showed the maturity of fire control. Recent decisions by the Park Service, however, prohibited any prescribed burn due to "safety" reasons. The maintenance workers returned to more traditional ways of limiting the growth of unwanted plants by regularly cleaning the firebreaks and mowing the overgrown areas. But in general, fire management at Fort Union was successful as no fire has ever damaged any park property since its establishment.