FR 502 United States Department of Agriculture

Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Forest Service Tonto National Forest April 2019 For More Information Contact:

Greg Schuster, Recreation Program Manager 2324 E. McDowell Road Phoenix, Arizona 85006 (602) 225-5362

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720- 2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632- 9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected]. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender. Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Gila, Maricopa, Pinal, and Yavapai Counties, Arizona

April 2019

Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service

Cooperating Agencies: Arizona Game and Fish Department

Responsible Official: Neil Bosworth, Forest Supervisor 2324 E. McDowell Road Phoenix, Arizona 85006

Tonto National Forest i

Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Abstract This Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) supplements the Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) released on June 2016. A Draft Record of Decision for the project was released along with the FEIS. The Forest received 13 letters of objection to the draft decision.

A review by the Forest Service Southwest Regional Office determined that additional analysis was required to adequately comply with laws and policy and provide the necessary disclosure for a number of issues brought forward in objections. This SEIS provides that additional analysis and disclosure. Accompanying this document is an interactive map that provides clarity in route designations at both large and small scales.

The purpose and need for the project and the alternatives remain the same, with minor revisions from the draft record of decision and the resolution of objections to alternative C, the preferred alternative. The purpose of the project is to comply with the 2005 Travel Management Rule (36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 212 Subpart B) by designating a system of roads and motorized trails and prohibiting motorized cross-country travel, except in designated motorized areas and fixed-distance corridors solely for the purpose of motorized dispersed camping or motorized big game retrieval. The area affected by the proposal and subject to analysis here includes the entire Tonto National Forest.

In addition to complying with regulations, this action is needed because the increasing number of unmanaged motorized recreationists on the Forest has been contributing to resource damage.

Only those issues and elements identified as needing additional analysis by the regional forester’s objection review will be addressed in the supplemental analysis. All other issues and resource elements were deemed by the regional forester to have been adequately analyzed.

This supplement, the 2016 FEIS, the draft record of decision, and all supporting documents can be accessed online at: https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=28967. We are currently releasing the draft supplemental EIS for public comments. We will analyze comments received, revise the analysis, as necessary, and then release the final supplemental EIS and a new draft record of decision next year. The draft record of decision will be subject to objection, and then the forest supervisor will issue a final record of decision.

Comments on the Draft Supplemental EIS Comments are allowed only for those issues brought forward from the objection review and included in the draft supplemental EIS. Comments must be made in writing, must have a direct relationship to the objection issues, and must include supporting reasons. Comments received, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public record and will be available for public inspection. Pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any person may request the agency to withhold a submission from the public record by showing how the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) allows such confidentiality.

The comment period lasts for 45 days, starting the day following the publishing of the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register. Comments will be accepted the following ways:

Tonto National Forest iii Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Using our Interactive Web Maps: Pop-up boxes will appear on routes and areas that are eligible to receive comments. You will be able to type your comments directly there, and they will be captured in our comment database, anchored to the spatial location.

Using our Online Comment Form: You may submit a general comment, or comments about travel management issues not related to a specific route using the online form available on the project webpage. You can access the comment form by clicking on “Comment/Object on Project” in the right- hand column at https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=28967. Comments submitted electronically must be in plain text (.txt), rich text format (.rtf), Word (.doc or .docx), or portable document format (.pdf).

By U.S. Mail: Tonto National Forest attn.: Greg Schuster 2324 E McDowell Road Phoenix, AZ 85006

Comments may also be hand delivered at the above address between 8:00 am and 4:30 pm.

Comments must be received during the 45-day comment period that follows publication of the Notice of Availability of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement in the Federal Register. Publication is estimated for April 5, 2019, with the comment period running from April 6 through May 21, 2019. This Draft Supplemental EIS and the 2016 FEIS are based on documents in the project record that are available on the project webpage: https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=28967

Tonto National Forest iv Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Contents

Abstract ...... iii Comments on the DSEIS ...... iii Introduction ...... 1 Objection Process ...... 1 Objection Findings ...... 2 Objection Response ...... 5 Identifying Routes and Designations for Motorized Use ...... 5 Changes to Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Class ...... 6 Travel Analysis Process as Basis for Travel Planning ...... 6 Application and Analysis of Minimization Criteria ...... 7 Introduction ...... 7 Methods ...... 8 Results ...... 19 Discussion ...... 25 Literature Cited ...... 27 Route Designation Issues ...... 27 Fishing Access on the Salt River ...... 27 See Canyon Homes Area ...... 28 Cave Creek Ranger District Master Plan Routes ...... 28 Payson Area Trail System ...... 30 Legend for Route Maps ...... 33 Routes 1266 and 974 ...... 34 Horse Mesa Trail System ...... 34 Monument, Cypress, and Boulder Trails ...... 35 Other Routes ...... 41 Summary ...... 51 Motorized Big Game Retrieval ...... 52 Travel Impacts to Wild and Scenic Rivers ...... 54 Introduction ...... 54 Rivers Addressed in this Analysis ...... 55 Summary ...... 80 Literature Cited ...... 81 Air Quality Analysis ...... 81 Introduction ...... 81 Regulatory Framework ...... 82 Issues ...... 85 Resource Indicators and Measures ...... 86 Existing Condition ...... 87 Environmental Consequences ...... 100 Summary ...... 106 Literature Cited ...... 106 Preparers and Contributors ...... 109 Interdisciplinary Team Members ...... 109 Enterprise Program ...... 109 External Consultants ...... 109 Tonto National Forest Staff ...... 109 Federal, State, and Local Agencies ...... 110 Others: ...... 110

Tonto National Forest v Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Distribution of the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement ...... 111

List of Tables

Table 1. Miles of route designations in Alternative C compared with travel analysis recommendations ...... 7 Table 2. Final decision variables included to represent fundamental objectives ...... 13 Table 3. Final decision variables and the values for each alternative ...... 14 Table 4. Decision outcomes using informed weights ...... 19 Table 5. Multi-criteria decision analysis model - initial values, weightings, and normalized values for meeting demands for public use ...... 20 Table 6. Multi-criteria decision analysis model - initial values, weightings, and normalized values for minimizing impacts to environmental resources ...... 21 Table 7. Multi-criteria decision analysis model - initial values, weightings, and normalized values for minimizing user conflicts ...... and final weighted evaluation scores ...... 22 Table 8. Assigned weights used in the representative perspectives and sensitivity analysis ...... 24 Table 9. Changes requested by Tonto Recreation Alliance agreed to by the Tonto Forest Supervisor ...... 29 Table 10. Payson Area Trail System routes showing name, number, and proposed designation . 32 Table 11. Specific routes brought forward in objections ...... 41 Table 12. Acres and estimated annual number of motorized big game retrievals by alternative .. 53 Table 13. Congressionally designated and eligible wild and scenic rivers on the Tonto National Forest...... 56 Table 14. Resource indicators and measures for assessing air quality effects ...... 86 Table 15. Air quality resource indicators and measures for the existing condition...... 88 Table 16. Annual unpaved road dust PM10 emissions ...... 93 Table 17. Annual off-road mobile PM10 emissions ...... 94 Table 18. Annual off-road mobile nitrogen oxide emissions ...... 94 Table 19. Annual off-road mobile volatile organic compounds emissions ...... 94 Table 20. 2011 offroad recreational vehicle travel on unpaved surfaces in Maricopa County ..... 94 Table 21. Annual and typical daily fugitive dust emissions from off road recreational vehicles.. 95 Table 22. 2018 current conditon PM10 emissions estimated to be produced by Tonto National Forest OHV activity in Maricopa County and the Phoenix PM10 nonattainment area ...... 95 Table 23. Annual NEI county unpaved road dust PM10 emissions compared to the alternatives 101 Table 24. Annual NEI off-road mobile nitrogen oxides emissions compared to the alternatives 101 Table 25. Annual NEI off-road mobile volatile organic compounds emissions compared to the alternatives ...... 101 Table 26. Maricopa County annual fugitive dust PM10 emissions from off-road recreational vehicles compared to the alternatives ...... 102 Table 27. Comparison of Tonto National Forest OHV emissions to four counties emissions the Forest occupies ...... 102 Table 28. 2014 NEI PM10 emissions from fires ...... 103 Table 29. Existing condition of Tonto National Forest OHV emissions from public use on unpaved road ...... 103 Table 30. Tonto National Forest OHV emissions for alternative B ...... 104 Table 31. Tonto National Forest OHV emissions for alternative C ...... 104 Table 32. Tonto National Forest OHV emissions for alternative D ...... 105

Tonto National Forest vi Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

List of Figures

Figure 1. Forest manager’s decision space ...... 23 Figure 2. Payson Area Trail System map ...... 31 Figure 3. Legend for route designations ...... 33 Figure 4. Map of routes 1266 and 974 ...... 34 Figure 5. Map of Horse Mesa trails ...... 35 Figure 6. Photo of Monument Trail showing erosion ...... 36 Figure 7. Photo of Monument Trailhead showing limited signage and parking with many ruts .. 37 Figure 8. Photo showing the proposed trailhead location to connect the Monument Trail to Moonlight Drive and adjacent homes ...... 37 Figure 9. Photo of Cypress Trail showing erosion ...... 38 Figure 10. Photo of Cypress Trail showing erosion in trail tread ...... 39 Figure 11. Photo of Boulder Trail showing multiple braided routes in wash, erosion on sides of wash ...... 40 Figure 12. Map showing route 413 ...... 44 Figure 13. Photo of route 413 in wash ...... 44 Figure 14. Photo of UTV on route 2064 ...... 45 Figure 15. Map of routes 2060 and 2064 ...... 46 Figure 16. Map showing routes 393 and 3456 full-size motorized trail ...... 47 Figure 17. Map showing routes 1117 and 2134 full-size motorized trail ...... 48 Figure 18. Map showing routes U3046, U3047, U3053, and U3055 ...... 49 Figure 19. Map of routes 2097, 2097A, 2097C ...... 49 Figure 20. Photos of route 2097A hill climb showing severe erosion ...... 50 Figure 21. Map showing routes 2090 and 513 ...... 51 Figure 22. Motorized big game retrieval area for revised alternative C distinguished for likely and rare use ...... 53 Figure 23. Tonto National Forest and Arizona county boundaries ...... 93 Figure 24. Arizona nonattainment and maintenance areas ...... 95 Figure 25. PM10 nonattainment and maintenance areas (EPA 2018d) ...... 96 Figure 26. Phoenix ozone non-attainment area (EPA 2018d) ...... 99

Tonto National Forest vii

Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Introduction This document supplements the Tonto National Forest Travel Planning Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), released June 7, 2016. The purpose of the project is to comply with the 2005 Travel Management Rule by providing a system of roads, trails, and areas designated open to the public for motor vehicle use by class of vehicle and time of year on the Tonto National Forest. Once the forestwide system of open roads is determined, all roads not specifically declared open to the public will be closed, and off-road cross-country travel will be prohibited, except in limited designated areas.

Four alternatives (A, B, C, and D) were analyzed in the FEIS. Alternative A was the no-action alternative representing the existing motorized travel conditions on the Forest. Alternatives B through D were comprised of different amounts and types of open motorized routes, with alternative B allowing the least amount of motorized access and alternative D allowing the most. All action alternatives include a non-significant forest plan amendment to establish consistency with the Travel Management Rule and travel designations in the respective alternatives. Alternative C remains the preferred alternative. The Tonto National Forest released a draft record of decision (DROD) along with the FEIS, specifying the forest supervisor’s decision to choose alternative C, with minor revisions based on internal analysis that added 38 miles to the open motorized system of roads. Additional analysis to resolve objections has resulted in some additional changes. Collectively, we refer to these changes as “revised alternative C.” See discussion and specific changes in the section titled “Route Designation Issues.” Objection Process Forest Service regulations (36 CFR 218) provide for pre-decisional review of project-level decisions made under the National Environmental Policy Act. Such review allows individuals or entities who have participated during the analysis, by submitting specific written comments, to object to those aspects of the draft decision for which they have previously commented.

These objections are reviewed by the reviewing official, along with the project record, to determine if the objections should be upheld, or if they will be dismissed. Objections are upheld if the analysis and the supporting project record do not adequately disclose the environmental effects of the action, if the analysis is flawed, or if additional information is needed for full disclosure. When the reviewing official finds that the analysis presented in the FEIS was inadequate, instructions may be issued to the responsible official to complete additional analysis.

Thirteen letters of objection for travel planning on the Tonto were received by the Southwest Region regional forester. Some of the issues raised in objections were found to require additional analysis, and the Tonto National Forest supervisor was directed to complete such analysis.

This draft supplemental EIS (DSEIS) presents the additional analysis, as directed in the instructions from the objection review. The FEIS and all supporting documents are incorporated into this supplement by reference. The FEIS and supporting specialist reports, the draft record of decision, and additional supporting documents for this supplement are available on the project webpage: https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=28967

Tonto National Forest 1 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Objection Findings The objection review was completed by an interdisciplinary group of specialists from the Southwest Regional Office, or, if a specialist was not available there, from another region or from the Washington Office.

The review team found the following issues or analyses to be inadequate, and issued specific instructions as to how to remedy each issue. Those issues and instructions are summarized below. They comprise the sub-sections of the Objection Response that follows.

Issue: Lack of clarity in route numbers and designations As the largest national forest in the continental United States, providing adequate maps to show designations for the draft record of decision was challenging. A number of objectors were unclear as to the designations being made, or even the route numbers. The review found that the public could not adequately determine the decision being made.

Instructions: Provide a more detailed map with the decision where call-outs are used to identify road numbers more clearly and designations for motorized use are clear.

We have designed an interactive, web-based “story map” that allows the user to zoom in to identify every route number and the associated designation under revised alternative C, as modified by the draft record of decision and the resolution of route-specific objections. See the section entitled “Identifying Routes and Designations for Motorized Use” below, and the interactive map: http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/tontoTMP.

Issue: Analysis of environmental effects resulting from changes to the recreation opportunity spectrum classifications in the forest plan Instructions: The environmental effects of the proposed change in ROS classification need to be enumerated in the FEIS. If parts of the environmental effects of the TMR project found throughout Chapter 3 of the FEIS are also environmental effects of the proposed change in ROS classification for the amendment, then those effects need to be clearly identified as effects associated with the proposed ROS amendment within the FEIS.

See the section titled “Changes to Recreation Opportunity Spectrum” below.

Issue: Travel analysis process (36 CFR 212 Subpart A) as basis for travel management planning (Subpart B) Forest Service policy and guidance (Forest Service Handbook 7709.55-10) specifies that travel analysis should inform decisions related to the designation of roads, trails, and areas for motor vehicle use under Subpart B.

The Forest completed the travel analysis process (TAP) in 2011, as specified in subpart A of the Travel Management Rule. This process is an inventory of all forest roads and an assessment of the environmental risks, as compared to the public or administrative benefits associated with each route. The result of this inventory is a recommended minimum road system. Rather than using the results of the 2011 TAP, the Forest used a different method for assessing risks and benefits of forest roads. (See appendix B in the FEIS.)

Tonto National Forest 2 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Instructions: The reviewers found that the road-specific rationale used in the development of alternatives and in the motorized use designations made in the DROD are not clear. Provide the criteria used in the FEIS to evaluate the resource impacts in the analysis that was completed at the district level by resource specialists. Demonstrate how all roads being considered for motorized uses were analyzed for impacts to resources and provide the results from this additional analysis.

The Forest has revisited the information from the 2011 travel analysis process and is relying on those detailed, route-specific assessments in reconsidering route designations. An interactive, web-based map displays maps of the recommended minimum road system resulting from the 2011 TAP for each ranger district, along with tables that summarize the findings for each route.

In addition, we present a forestwide comparison of designations in revised alternative C versus the recommendations resulting from the 2011 TAP. See the section entitled “Travel Analysis Process as Basis for Travel Planning” below.

Issue: Application of minimization criteria to motorized areas and trails The review found that the draft ROD does not adequately explain how the minimization criteria was applied to areas and trails. The application of minimization criteria are specified in the Travel Management Rule at 36 CFR 212.55.

Instruction: Add an explanation or clarification of how the minimization criteria were applied to motorized areas and trails to the section of the draft ROD entitled “Designates motorized system that focuses on minimization criteria.”

See the section entitled, “Application and Analysis of Minimization Criteria” below.

Issue: Requests to reconsider and/or justify specific route designations A majority of the objection letters took issue with the designations for specific routes or groups of routes. The review dismissed some of the objections where the Forest had provided adequate rationale for the designation. In cases where the rationale or the designation itself were unclear, the objections were upheld.

Instructions: Reconsider specified routes or groups of routes and provide rationale for the designations.

See the section titled “Route Designation Issues” below.

Issue: Analysis of impacts of motorized big game retrieval An objector took issue with “the lack of information and analysis of site-specific impacts associated with the proposals for motorized big game retrieval.

Instructions: Provide additional detail on site-specificity in all resource sections of the FEIS, Chapter 3 that it’s impossible to determine where a hunter may drive to retrieve their game and so analysis was conducted over a broad portion of the Forest in relation to the likely intensity of this action.

See the section titled “Motorized Big Game Retrieval” below.

Tonto National Forest 3 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Issue: Analysis of travel management impacts on designated and eligible wild and scenic rivers An objection asserted that the project record does not contain specific analysis or information that supports the generalized statements about the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the project on the Verde’s river values, and therefore it is not possible to determine whether the proposed action complies with Section 10(a) of the Wild & Scenic Rivers Act.

The review found that it was not possible to determine whether the proposed action conforms with Forest Service policy requiring that the outstandingly remarkable values associated with each river be protected, or as alleged in the objection, whether this project is biased in favor of motorized use at the expense of eligible wild and scenic rivers.

Instructions: Provide specific analysis on the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the project on the free flow, water quality, ORVs, and classification of the each of the designated and eligible wild and scenic rivers on the Forest, based on baseline conditions at time of designation/determination of eligibility to ensure that the project complies with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and Forest Service policy.

Add a map to the Project Record that shows where all the potential Wild and Scenic Rivers lie in relation to designated Wilderness areas.

See the section titled “Travel Impacts to Wild and Scenic Rivers” and the interactive map: http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/tontoTMP.

Issue: Analysis of the impacts of travel management on air quality An objector asserted that the analysis did not adequately address the impacts from motorized vehicle traffic on air quality, and did not include a quantitative assessment of whether or not there will be impacts to National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The review found that the air quality analysis was not adequate in a number of areas.

Instructions: In order to demonstrate that the Federal action meets conformity requirements, the agency must show that: (1) the action would not result in an increase in emissions within the nonattainment area; (2) the emissions associated with the action occurring within the nonattainment area are below threshold levels (called “de minimis” levels); (3) are otherwise presumed to conform (based on a list of certain types of activities); or (4) are already accounted for within the state implementation plan. The Tonto National Forest must more clearly explain why reductions in emissions in one area (i.e., nonattainment, maintenance, or wilderness) would not result in increases in emissions in others.

See the section titled “Air Quality Analysis.”

Tonto National Forest 4 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Other Instructions In many cases, the regional forester instructed the Forest to augment the response to comments contained in the FEIS Volume II. Rather than alter that document, such additional information or response to comments are included in this document.

Other instructions were to add certain documents to the project record. These instructions did not require any additional analysis that would be included in this supplement.

Objection Response Identifying Routes and Designations for Motorized Use The Tonto National Forest is one of the largest national forests in the continental United States, with over 2.8 million acres and an existing road network of over 6,000 miles (INFRA 2013). Providing clear, readable maps at a scale small enough for recreational road and trail users has been challenging. The desert environment and open nature of the landscape has made this task all the more challenging because, over the years, many unauthorized routes have been created by motorized users. Once created, many of these routes have become “normalized” by use, even though they had no forest route identifier, and are simply know by local names.

Forest-wide travel planning is a comprehensive effort to establish a system of open roads with official identifiers that can be tracked and displayed on a motor vehicle use map, which will implement the travel planning decision. In order to arrive at that decision, interested parties need to be able to accurately determine the proposed designation for routes of interest to them, even when a common identifier has not previously existed.

Employing Internet-based technology using ArcGIS online, the Forest has developed a “story map” that allows a user to zoom to any level from entire forest to individual routes. Routes are color-coded to indicate general designations. By clicking on a route, the number and details about that route open in a pop-up window, allowing clarity in designations. Other areas, such as the area designated for motorized big game retrieval.

The online interactive map may be accessed at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/tontoTMP.

The interactive map is designed to serve several other purposes. Other issues from objections are displayed on other tabs in the map. One tab displays wild and scenic river areas and their locations relative to wilderness areas; another provides links to the recommended minimum road systems maps and tables from the 2011 travel analysis planning process.

The interactive online map also serves as a way to more effectively receive comments from the public. This draft supplemental EIS provides a 45-day comment period, after which we will analyze and respond to the comments, revise our analysis, as necessary, and issue a final supplement and a new draft record of decision. Because the purpose of this supplement is strictly to resolve objections that were upheld by the reviewing official, comments will only be accepted regarding those routes, areas, and objection issues upheld by the regional forester.

Routes that are open for comment under this draft supplemental EIS can be clicked in the interactive map, and an online comment form appears. This form will not only record the

Tonto National Forest 5 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

comment and route number, but also the location clicked on the map, thus allowing stakeholders to identify a specific issue with a particular location (e.g. an intersection), if they so desire.

The online map is also set up to take comments on all other issues subject to objection resolutions via a drop-down menu on one of the tabs. Changes to Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Class As part of the chosen alternative, the draft record of decision was amended the Tonto National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan recreation opportunity spectrum (ROS) classifications to create consistency with the chosen alternative. These changes consisted in changing the percentage of management areas in different ROS, such as “semi-primitive non- motorized” or “roaded natural.” In addition to modifying the current recreation opportunity spectrum, the amendment to the forest plan would strike language allowing cross-county travel on the entire Payson and Pleasant Valley Ranger Districts. All action alternatives required such an amendment. See appendix A (p 513-518) in the FEIS for a complete list of forest plan changes related to travel planning for all action alternatives.

The objection review found that the FEIS did not address the environmental consequences of the proposed change in recreation opportunity spectrum.

The environmental effects of changing recreation opportunity spectrum classifications across the Forest, as specified in the FEIS for alternative C, are the same as the effects of travel planning for all resources areas, as detailed in the FEIS and further in this document. Travel Analysis Process as Basis for Travel Planning Forest Service policy and guidance (Forest Service Handbook 7709.55-20) specifies that travel analysis should inform decisions related to the designation of roads, trails, and areas for motor vehicle use under Subpart B.

The Tonto National Forest completed the travel analysis process (TAP) in 2011, as specified in subpart A of the Travel Management Rule. This process is an inventory of all forest roads and an assessment of the environmental risks, as compared to the public or administrative utility associated with each route. The result of this inventory is a recommended minimum road system. However, travel analysis neither produces decisions nor allocates National Forest System lands for specific purposes. Rather, responsible Officials, with public involvement, make travel management decisions that are informed by travel analysis (FSH 7709.55-20).

The travel analysis process on the Tonto National Forest was completed over a number of years. The basis for all recommendations was a route by route analysis of the risks and benefits associated with each route, conducted by local interdisciplinary teams of resource specialists on each district. Data sheets and all associated documents are on file with the Forest. The full report of the travel analysis process, including tables of route-specific recommendations, and appendices with maps of the minimum road system for each ranger district is available on the Tonto National Forest website (https://www.fs.usda.gov/resources/tonto/landmanagement/resourcemanagement) and also on the project webpage under supporting documents.

Even though the travel analysis process is not expected to result in firm travel management decisions, a comparison of the preferred alternative designations with recommendations from the travel analysis serves as a check for consistency of analysis. We compared all routes that could be

Tonto National Forest 6 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

linked with TAP assessments to assess how many miles of routes were open under revised alternative C, but recommended to be closed in the TAP and how many were closed (either decommission or administrative use only) in alternative C when recommended to be open in the TAP.

Of the over 5,400 miles of routes designated in revised alternative C as open to the public (roads and motorized trails), open to administrative use only, or decommissioned (closed to all use) there were 1,033 miles that had no link in the TAP to allow comparison. For the 4,431 miles of routes that could be compared, revised alternative C has a net total of 125.51 miles of open routes beyond what is recommended in the TAP (table 1). Of the 1,033 miles of routes that could not be linked between alternative C and TAP tables, 454.9 miles are closed in alternative C and 578.5 are open to public motorized use.

Table 1. Miles of route designations in alternative C compared with travel analysis recommendations Revised 2011 TAP Additional Miles Open Designation Alternative C Recommended to Public in Revised (miles)* (miles) Alternative C All Routes Closed to Public – decommissioned, admin, non- 1,403.44 1,460.11 49.33 motorized Roads and Motorized Trails – open to 3,028.36 2,971.69 76.18 public use Total All Routes* 4,431.80 4,431.80 125.51 * Approximately 1,033 miles of routes in alternative C were not analyzed in the travel analysis process, so no comparison could be made.

On a net basis, 97.2 percent of route mile recommendations for open versus closed are consistent with designations in alternative C.

This analysis shows the close correspondence between designations in revised alternative C and the recommendations that resulted from the inventory and assessment of risks and benefits in the travel analysis process that was completed on the Tonto National Forest. Application and Analysis of Minimization Criteria

Introduction One objection to the draft record of decision was that the application of minimization criteria, as outlined in 36 CFR 212.55, was not clear in the decision. Balancing the competing objectives of motorized access and resource impacts is a common but challenging decision problem for forest managers. This need to document and provide transparency in decision making for compliance with the 2005 Travel Management Rule required clarifying the decision making process.

Many forests have struggled with showing how minimization criteria, including impacts to natural resources and conflicts with motorized recreation, are applied to travel management planning. The Tonto National Forest is no exception. Travel management planning on the Tonto is especially complex, given its size (over 2.8 million acres with approximately 5,000 miles of existing motorized roads and trails), and its location next to the fifth largest metropolitan area in the United States. With a population of 4.8 million people within an hour’s drive of the Forest, the

Tonto National Forest 7 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

overall balancing of the demand for public use with resource impacts caused by such use is a critical element of travel management planning decisions.

The courts have recognized that if minimizing environmental impacts were the sole or overriding criteria for travel planning, the simple solution is to eliminate all motorized travel. However, the task before forest managers is not absolute minimization, but optimizing public access while still providing crucial protection for environmental and cultural resources.

Forest managers desired a transparent, objective, and reproducible method for balancing the demand for motorized use with minimizing resource impacts and user conflicts. To satisfy this desire, we pursued a structured decision making process, with the help of consultants from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Cardno (an environmental consulting firm) to evaluate the four travel management plan alternatives presented in the FEIS.

The structured-decision making approach described here enabled the decision maker to pursue a non-biased and analytical evaluation of the alternatives in light of considering user demands, resource impacts, and user conflicts. Highlights and results of the analysis are presented below. See the full Decision Analysis Report, under Supporting Documents on the project webpage: https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=28967 for additional details regarding the analysis process, interim steps, and results.

Methods

Decision Framing As described by the U.S. Department of Interior (2011), structured decision making is a general term for carefully organized analysis of problems to reach decisions that clearly focus on achieving fundamental objectives. Application of decision making and analysis has gained acceptance in helping solve a variety of natural resource management concerns in land use planning, forest management, and sustainability evaluation (Mendoza and Martins 2006). Structured decision making in particular has been used to address resource management problems involving consideration of differing perspectives, as in the case with non-native fish management at Glen Canyon Dam (Runge et al. 2011).

Decision analysis involves the use of various tools to assist the decision maker in comparing and evaluating the most beneficial approach and outcome resulting from an array of possible actions. Decision tools include techniques such as alternatives analysis matrices, risk or decision logs, multiple criteria decision analysis, and decision trees. Tools such as these are often used to address: 1) the need for a structured and rational management approach that can integrate key elements of management, 2) the multiple uses or management options, and 3) the presence of multiple stakeholders and interests - each with their own views, goals, and demands on how a resource or project should be managed (Mendoza and Martins 2006). We used the tools of structured decision making to evaluate consideration of the minimization criteria as a method of applying a rigorous and non-biased approach to evaluating the decision.

Structured decision making incorporates the following steps:

1. Problem Framing, including understanding and describing the problem trying to be solved by the decision making process. Problem framing typically involves clearly stating the problem to be solved, and why. As noted previously, the Forest recognized the

Tonto National Forest 8 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

problem as being one of evaluating how forest management balances the demand for public uses, while considering their minimization criteria (for instance, minimizing impacts to environmental resources and conflicts among users). 2. Defining Objectives. Once the problem is understood, defining the objectives fundamental to the problem is essential to understand the key aspects of the decision. For the purposes of this analysis, the objectives were defined by the three primary criteria outlined in 36 CFR 212.55, the criteria for designation of roads, trails, and areas. 3. Defining Alternatives considers defining the alternatives or options available to the decision maker. For the purposes of this analysis, the alternatives considered were limited to the four alternatives described in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest: (a) Alternative A – No Action. This alternative represents motor vehicle use conditions currently existing on the ground. This alternative does not comply with the Travel Management Rule, but serves as a benchmark against which action alternatives may be evaluated. (b) Alternative B – Less Motorized Access, provides substantially less motorized access than the existing condition and the preferred alternative. This alternative was developed to address concerns related to potential impacts to user conflicts and environmental resources and in response to users who prefer non-motorized recreation. (c) Alternative C – Balanced Use. This alternative represents the Forest’s preferred alternative. It was developed with the intention of addressing both public use and environmental resource and user conflict concerns. (d) Alternative D – Increased Motorized Access. This alternative provides more motorized access than all other alternatives and was developed to address issues raised related to increasing demands for public use and access, and in response to users who prefer motorized recreation. 4. Analyzing Consequences and Tradeoffs. The decision analysis conducted here combined use of a multiple criteria decision analysis tool, plus weighting and information elicitation through use of a modified Delphi approach. The methods applied in the analysis are described in more detail within subsequent sections.

Building the Analytical Decision-Making Model

Defining the Objectives We framed the objectives using the criteria outlined for designation of roads, trails, and areas in 36 CFR 212.55(a) and (b):

a) General criteria for designation of National Forest System roads, National Forest System trails, and areas on National Forest System lands. In designating National Forest System roads, National Forest System trails, and areas on National Forest System lands for motor vehicle use, the responsible official shall consider effects on National Forest System natural and cultural resources, public safety, provision of recreational opportunities, access needs, conflicts among uses of National Forest System lands, the

Tonto National Forest 9 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

need for maintenance and administration of roads, trails, and areas that would arise if the uses under consideration are designated; and the availability of resources for that maintenance and administration. b) Specific criteria for designation of trails and areas. In addition to the criteria in paragraph (a) of this section, in designating National Forest System trails and areas on National Forest System lands, the responsible official shall consider effects on the following, with the objective of minimizing: (1) Damage to soil, watershed, vegetation, and other forest resources; (2) Harassment of wildlife and significant disruption of wildlife habitats; (3) Conflicts between motor vehicle use and existing or proposed recreational uses of National Forest System lands or neighboring Federal lands; and (4) Conflicts among different classes of motor vehicle uses of National Forest System lands or neighboring Federal lands. Minimization criteria are required only for designating motorized trails and areas, but because designating roads also requires considering these impacts, we included the entire system of motorized routes in the analysis. Considering the language of the CFR, we refined the intent of the minimization criteria to three distinct and fundamental objectives:

1. Meet Demands for Public Use 2. Minimize Impacts to Environmental Resources 3. Minimize Conflicts between Motorized and Non-Motorized Uses

Information Gathering Analysis of these objectives and how effectively each alternative addresses them requires relating the fundamental objectives to specific, measurable variables that represent aspects of those considerations. For the purposes of this analysis, we acquired data from four distinct sources:

1. The FEIS contains extensive analysis across a wide range of variables related to the three fundamental objectives. It includes the compilation of forest-specific data developed by many resource specialists relevant to the decision being evaluated. For these reasons, the FEIS was the primary source for most data included in the analysis. 2. Specialist reports were used primarily for some variables directly related to special designation areas, including wilderness areas, wild and scenic rivers, and inventoried roadless areas. Typically these variables were described in more detail in specialist reports that ultimately informed the FEIS. 3. Supplemental geospatial analysis was used for several variables that were identified as needs during the decision team’s analysis workshop. Specifically, geospatial analysis was used to describe the miles of roads and trails located in either designated wilderness areas, or location relative to nonattainment areas for air quality. 4. Elicited values were generated for variables that related to the desirability or “utility” of particular alternatives to users. Due to time constraints and some information not being available to us, we elicited relative values for two variables used in the analysis. These

Tonto National Forest 10 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

values were elicited through a facilitated discussion between the decision analysts, forest managers, and the team of resource specialists participating in the decision analysis workshop. Combined, these sources contributed a vast amount of potential information for the analysis. To keep the data analysis to a scale meaningful and understandable to the managers, forest resource specialists, and interested public, we selected variables based on the following criteria:

1. Does the variable represent one of the key resources or considerations included in the minimization criteria? 2. Does the variable inform the analysis? In other words, does the variable embody distinct differences between alternatives? 3. Does the variable avoid redundancy or overlap with other variables already considered in the analysis? Considering these criteria, we selected a suite of variables that we believed best represented the three overarching fundamental objectives to meet the demands of public use, minimize Impacts to environmental resources, and minimize conflicts between motorized and non-motorized uses. This review resulted in 20 individual variables identified across the three fundamental objectives.

Initial Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis Development The problem of how best to balance public use with minimizing environmental impacts and user conflicts requires careful consideration between the three fundamental objectives. Multiple criteria decision analysis tools create a framework by which decision objectives and related variables are normalized, weighted against each other, and evaluated for their relative contribution toward achieving the defined objectives.

Reviewing the data available and their applicability to the selection criteria, we identified draft variables that we felt would inform the analysis. As we identified potential variables, we continually returned to the criteria for inclusion to determine if a variable would be included in the analysis.

Initial Decision Weighting We facilitated a discussion amongst the Tonto National Forest decision makers regarding the fundamental objectives and how they apply to consideration of the minimization criteria for travel management planning. After discussion, we then asked them as a management team to define the relative weight they would apply to each fundamental objective being considered. For example, if a manager making a decision considers 100 percent of all fundamental objectives in making a decision, to what degree (or percentage) does each objective weigh into the decision? Specific to the decision makers, we posed the following question:

• How do you weight the following broad considerations for travel management decisions, as they relate to adhering to considerations within the minimization criteria, while providing public access? If the full consideration of your decision is represented by a value of 100 percent, what percentage of the overall decision would you assign to (a) meet the demands of public use, (b) minimize impacts to environmental resources, and (c) minimize conflicts between motorized and non-motorized uses?

Tonto National Forest 11 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

The initial weighting applied to this question by the decision makers resulted in the following initial decision weights:

Meeting Demands for Public Use 40 percent Minimizing Impacts to Environmental Resources 40 percent Minimizing Conflicts for Motorized Vehicles vs. Non-motorized Uses 20 percent To avoid bias in the analysis, this weighting was conducted outside of the multiple criteria decision analysis framework. This step was intentionally made to avoid the possibility of decision makers considering how their weights would influence the final decision analysis. Discussion between the forest management team during the elicitation yielded insights into the rationale considered in this weighting.

First, the CFR criteria do not account for weighting between these objectives. The regulations only broadly require “considering” criteria in the decision. Next, all alternatives put forth in the final environmental impact statement have roads, so some level of roads will always be necessary. The Forest Service is a multiple use agency. Their mandate, embodied in laws such as the 1960 Multiple Use and Sustained Yield Act, applies broadly to public use and resource conservation. In light of this, the forest management team considered that meeting public use demands is often considered alongside with environmental concerns. Under all alternatives, forest management considered that no environmental regulations would be violated under any action alternative, and that resources are always protected to greater or lesser degrees. Last, the forest management team recognized that minimizing conflict is important, but in itself, it is not necessarily as important as providing for public use, or at the expense of environmental resources.

We then coached the decision makers on how to conduct a swing weighting method on the related decision variables included in the initial analysis. Swing weighting is a weighting method that allows the decision maker to first rank the variables in order of their perceived importance to the fundamental objective. Once ranked, the decision maker then applies a relative weight value (0 to 100, with 100 being of greatest importance) to each variable in the order of rank it was previously assigned. Then the relative weights applied are compared against the others derived, thus comparing the “swing” between weighted variables.

These steps for determining objectives and the relative weighting between were completed primarily by the forest supervisor and deputy forest supervisor, in discussion with recreation program manager and the decision analysts. Such involvement and direction by the ultimate decision maker at this stage assures later confidence in the outcome of the analysis and provides the necessary management perspective that individual specialists, or even groups of specialists, often fail to realize.

Decision Analysis Workshop Prior to the initial weighting exercise, we had scheduled a decision analysis workshop to convene a team of resource specialists, the forest management team, and supporting decision analysts.

The intent of this workshop was to finalize the analysis through use of a modified Delphi approach by which the decision makers could obtain a more informed perspective, discuss competing ideas, and refine their understanding of the fundamental objectives and their representative variables. This discussion generated diverse perspectives and opinions on aspects of the analysis and variables included. Based on the team input, several variables were removed,

Tonto National Forest 12 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and others added. These changes resulted in a net increase in the decision variables, resulting in 22 in all (table 2). The complete list of the decision variables used in the model and their values for each alternative are presented in table 3.

The decision makers were then tasked with re-weighting of the fundamental objectives and the related decision variables using the same methodology used in the initial weighting exercise. The results of this follow-up weighting are described below.

For a list of participants in the decision analysis workshop, please see the full report, available in Supporting Documents on the project webpage: https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=28967

Table 2. Final decision variables included to represent fundamental objectives Meeting Demands of Public Minimize Impacts to Environmental Minimize Conflicts between Use Resources Motorized and Non-Motorized Uses

Total motorized road miles open Miles of roads in areas mapped as Desirability (Utility) of alternative to to public soils with moderate or high risk of forest users erosion.

Motorized Trails (Combines Effects to watershed conditions. Motorized routes within special single track, less than 60", and Number of HUC12 watersheds with designation areas (Wilderness, IRAs, full-size vehicles) road densities rated as "good" (for WSRs) instance, ≤ 1 road mi/sq. mi of watershed).

Areas designated for motor Miles of roads within mapped riparian Travelable area of the Tonto NF >1 vehicle use areas mile from a motorized route

Motorized big game retrieval Maximum average annual sediment access (modeled) entering streams from roads and stream crossings

Motorized personal use Acres of weed infestations along fuelwood gathering motorized routes

Desirability (Utility) of alternative Number of perennial stream crossings for motorized use of dispersed camping sites

Miles of roads and trails in areas Miles of routes within Wild and Scenic restricted as permit zones River areas

Road density within habitat-types for management indicator species

Number of Endangered Species Act- listed species exposed to maximum road density by alternative

Decommissioned routes

Road maintenance costs

Air quality impacts (PM10 contributions) resulting from off- highway vehicle (OHV) use

Tonto National Forest 13 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Table 3. Final decision variables and the values for each alternative

Unit of CFR Preferred Main Objective Variable Alt. A Alt. B Alt. C Alt. D Rationale Notes Measure reference Direction

Meeting Demands for Public Total motorized road miles miles 212.50; Higher 4,959 2,560 3,652 4,859 Includes all roads and routes in the Use (212.55 subpart a) open to public 212.55(a) Forest. Paved and unpaved.

Meeting Demands for Public Motorized Trails (Combines miles 212.50; Higher - 1,666 2,341 1,513 Combines 3 variables for analysis Use (212.55 subpart a) single track, less than 60", 212.55(a) purposes. and full-size vehicles)

Meeting Demands for Public Areas Designated for Motor acres 212.50; Higher 703,618 - 2,089 6,790 Alternative A includes northern Use (212.55 subpart a) Vehicle Use 212.55(a) zone.

Meeting Demands for Public Motorized Big Game acres open 212.50; Higher 703,618 - 1,575,382 2,068,208 Acres assume 1 mile both sides of Use (212.55 subpart a) Retrieval Access 212.55(a) all designated routes. Species include elk, bear in Alternative C. Alternative D includes elk and bear, plus mule deer, whitetail deer. Differences in alternatives and acres is driven by species targeted. Meeting Demands for Public Motorized Personal Use acres 212.50; Higher 1,345,998 132,568 170,296 1,345,998 1.3 million acres is the total area of Use (212.55 subpart a) Fuelwood Gathering 212.55(a) fuelwood areas. Alternatives B and C are reduced to avoid resource impacts. B and C include areas within 300 feet of designated roads in fuelwood gathering area.

Meeting Demands for Public Desirability Utility of Utility scale 212.50; Higher 0.50 0.15 0.80 0.90 Utility scale (0-1), where a score of Use (212.55 subpart a) Alternative for Motorized (0-1) 212.55(a) 0 indicates that the portfolio is not Use of Dispersed Camping desirable for motorized users Sites accessing dispersed camping, and a score of 1 indicates that the portfolio is desirable to motorized users accessing dispersed camping. Intermediate values reflect the degree of desirability. Meeting Demands for Public Miles of roads and trails in miles 212.50; Lower 55.0 300.4 340.1 46.7 Comparison of all routes within Use (212.55 subpart a) areas restricted as permit 212.55(a) permit zones, excludes zones decommissioned and non- motorized.

Tonto National Forest 14 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Unit of CFR Preferred Main Objective Variable Alt. A Alt. B Alt. C Alt. D Rationale Notes Measure reference Direction

Minimize Impacts to Natural Miles of roads in areas miles 212.55(b)(1) Lower 2,879 1,738 2,259 2,734 Resources (212.55 subparts mapped as soils with b.1-2) moderate or high risk of erosion. Minimize Impacts to Natural Effects to watershed number 212.55(b)(1) Higher 67 113 82 70 The number of HUC12 watersheds Resources (212.55 subparts conditions. Number of rated as "good" resulting from b.1-2) HUC12 watersheds with alternative. road densities rated as "good" (i.e., ≤ 1 road mi/sq. mi of watershed)

Minimize Impacts to Natural Miles of roads within miles 212.55(b)(1) Lower 423.0 242.0 314.0 395.0 Miles of roads within mapped Resources (212.55 subparts mapped riparian areas riparian areas. Riparian areas were b.1-2) mapped with the Region 3 RMAP mapping project. Minimize Impacts to Natural Maximum average annual tons/year 212.55(b)(1) Lower 42,990 22,000 23,075 32,680 Used maximum value of range Resources (212.55 subparts sediment (modeled) presented in EIS. Assumes intent is b.1-2) entering streams from roads in minimizing maximum delivery of and stream crossings sediment potential.

Modeling is based on contributions from roads mapped within 200 feet of stream channels.

Minimize Impacts to Natural Acres of weed infestations acres 212.55(b)(1) Lower 24,802 4,336 20,739 25,803 Numbers based on total acres of Resources (212.55 subparts along motorized routes infested weed infestations affected by all b.1-2) motorized uses.

Minimize Impacts to Natural Number of perennial stream number 212.55(b)(1) Lower 579 305 399 529 Assumes impacts to perennial Resources (212.55 subparts crossings streams are higher impact than b.1-2) ephemeral and intermittent. Also relatively redundant with ephemeral and intermittent impacts across alternatives. Use of perennial streams focuses analysis on minimizing the maximum amount of impact possible.

Presence of riparian species and low-water stream crossings are a biological issue directly related to crossings. Variable overlaps a little with other water resource variables.

Tonto National Forest 15 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Unit of CFR Preferred Main Objective Variable Alt. A Alt. B Alt. C Alt. D Rationale Notes Measure reference Direction

Minimize Impacts to Natural Miles of routes within Wild miles 212.55(b)(1) Lower 93.9 51.8 62.2 76.9 Includes all segments within all Resources (212.55 subparts and Scenic River areas designated WSR. Includes existing b.1-2) designated segments, plus those eligible for wild, recreational, or scenic designations.

Miles in Potential/Eligible routes: A = 91.9; B = 49.8; C = 60.2; D = 74.9 Miles in Designated/Existing: A = 1.96; B = 1.96; C = 1.96; D = 1.96 Minimize Impacts to Natural Road density within habitat- Average 212.55(b)(1) Lower 3.84 2.13 1.62 3.64 Cumulative average across all Resources (212.55 subparts types for management density and/or habitat types for management b.1-2) indicator species (mi/mi2) 212.55(b)(2) indicator species. across all habitat types. Minimize Impacts to Natural Number of listed species Number of 212.55(b)(2) Lower 8.0 1.0 1.0 17.0 A total of 22 species are listed. Resources (212.55 subparts exposed to maximum road species Compared to indicator species, b.1-2) density by alternative exposed to management of listed species is maximum focused on minimizing impacts to density individual species. Minimize Impacts to Natural Decommissioned Routes miles 212.55(b)(1) Higher - 2,367 1,276 201 More decommissioned routes Resources (212.55 subparts assumes less potential for impacts. b.1-2)

Minimize Impacts to Natural Road maintenance costs dollars 212.55(a) Lower 9.7 5.4 7.4 10.9 Road upkeep is required to Resources (212.55 subparts (millions) minimize impacts to resources. b.1-2) For trails (millions of USD): A = 0.0 ; B = 0.99; C = 1.4; D = 0.91 For roads (millions of USD): A = 9.7; B = 4.4; C = 6.0; D = 10.0

Minimize Impacts to Natural Air quality impacts (PM10 miles 212.55(b)(5) Lower 2,450 1,387 1,825 2,186 Assumes less miles open in Resources (212.55 subparts contributions) resulting from nonattainment areas will result in a b.1-2) OHV use corresponding reduction in air quality impacts.

Includes highways, roads, routes (authorized and non), trails, admin routes.

Tonto National Forest 16 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Unit of CFR Preferred Main Objective Variable Alt. A Alt. B Alt. C Alt. D Rationale Notes Measure reference Direction

Minimize Conflicts Among Desirability (Utility) of Utility scale 212.55(a) Higher 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.5 Estimated usefulness (utility) of Uses (212.55 subparts b.3-4) Alternative to Forest Users (0-1), alternative to forest users. One of 0 = portfolio CFR criteria is for providing for not favored public access (CFR 212.55(a)). by most Useful access cannot be reduced forest users; simply to miles or acres. Usefulness 1 = portfolio for recreation needs to account for acceptable routes and access. to all users. Intermediate Utility scale (0-1), where a score of values = 0 indicates that the travel levels of management portfolio (i.e. acceptance. Alternative) is not acceptable for any forest users, and a score of 1 indicates that the portfolio is acceptable to all users. Intermediate values reflect the degree of acceptability.

Difficult to measure conflict amongst users due to variations in user base, availability of opportunity. Utility scale was evaluated to convey overall utility to the diversity of users and desires.

Minimize Conflicts Among Motorized Routes within miles 212.55(b)(3) Lower 126.5 54.8 106.9 156.7 Category combines miles within Uses (212.55 subparts b.3-4) Special Designation Areas wilderness areas, inventoried (Wilderness, IRAs, WSRs) roadless areas, and wild and scenic rivers. Minimize Conflicts Among Travelable Area of the percent 212.55(b)(3) Higher 22.3 38.2 24.8 23.0 Increased availability of recreation Uses (212.55 subparts b.3-4) Tonto NF >1 mile from a away from roads allows for more Motorized Route solitude and non-motorized recreational use opportunity.

Tonto National Forest 17 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Finalization We reviewed the follow-up analysis outcome with the team to again verify variables used, share follow-up weightings applied, and discuss the rationale for the weighted values. Discussion verified that the appropriate variables and weights were included, based on decision team feedback and decision maker rationale.

We then conducted a devil’s advocate review with the intent of pushing the team to avoid biases, groupthink, or other mental shortcuts that might impact the thoroughness of the analysis. We discussed a series of competing perspectives, or scenarios, under which the decision makers may be challenged in their thinking and the analysis. Based on this review, the group identified no additional concerns. The methods used in the workshop helped transparently reveal tradeoffs between minimization and public use objectives, how the minimization criteria were applied to the decision, and which is the optimal alternative and why.

Addressing Bias Since this decision analysis was requested as a supplement to the FEIS, we made intentional steps to prevent inadvertent preferences for the previous preferred alternative. We adopted standard steps and specific measures to reduce confirmation bias, and other insidious biases, throughout the analysis.

First, we identified the language of 36 CFR 212.55 as the fundamental objectives required of the decision. By relying on outside criteria (regulations) for decision framing, we prevented objectives being defined in a manner that favors the preferred alternative. Using the CFR criteria as the framework for our fundamental objectives, we then constructed the analysis through the lens of those objectives and their relation to the minimization criteria. We believe this contributed to an objective framing of the problem.

We then encouraged diverse input and perspectives to inform the process. We allowed the forest interdisciplinary team to comment on the analysis framework. We also facilitated multiple rounds of open discussion around the objectives, their representative variables, and weighting considerations. The workshop agenda was focused around incorporation of this group evaluation and critique of the analysis.

At the workshop, we guided the participants and decision makers in an adaptation of the Delphi Method (Rowe and Wright 2001). We refined each version of the analysis after a facilitated discussion that subjected the analysis to critique by the workshop participants. This list of participants included knowledgeable people with diverse technical skills, frames of reference, and levels of management. Any changes to the analysis were agreed upon by consensus, with manager approval.

When we elicited decision weights from the decision makers, we did so blindly. We presented the objectives and their representative variables outside of the multiple criteria decision analysis context. In doing so, we attempted to unhinge the direct association between weighting and model outcome. We discussed the context of the objectives, their relation to the minimization criteria, and the variables themselves. This blind weighting on the part of the managers elicited valuable discussion regarding management beliefs and perspectives.

We think the methods we employed helped reduce biases that can impact decisions like this one. The forest managers and all participants were made aware that reducing bias was one of the

Tonto National Forest 18 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement analysis goals, and it was a front and center consideration throughout the workshop. The spirit of all the discussions was to bring out issues and concerns in an honest and safe setting to help the managers make the best decision possible. The devil’s advocate review at the end of the workshop helped raise minor concerns not previously voiced. However, in practice, the modified Delphi discussions between updated versions of the analysis functioned similarly.

Results

Analysis of Forest Managers Perspective As described above, the decision makers conducted their follow-up weighting based on team input and discussion. We considered this to be the informed weighting, as it reflects the informed perspective of the decision makers based on team input. The results of this follow-up weighting are included in the final analysis multiple criteria decision analysis.

Table 4 presents the resulting numerical values of the relative weights applied to the fundamental objectives in the follow-up analysis.

Table 4. Decision outcomes using informed weights

Alternative Weighted Evaluation Scoring

A 0.34

B 0.56

C 0.60

D 0.42

This analysis using the informed manager’s perspective suggests that alternative C is the best performing alternative to ultimately achieve the fundamental objectives identified for the decision problem. Under both the initial and informed follow-up, alternative C has consistently performed as the preferred alternative. Table 5, table 6, and table 7 show the complete multiple criteria decision analysis model. We ran the model in one Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, which has been broken into three tables here for readability. The final weighted evaluation scores appear in table 7.

Tonto National Forest 19 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Table 5. Multi-criteria decision analysis model - initial values, weightings, and normalized values for meeting demands for public use Tonto National Forest Total motorized Motorized Trails Areas Motorized Big Motorized Desirability Utility Miles of Travel Management Planning road miles open (Combines Designated Game Retrieval Personal Use of Alternative for roads and MCDA to public (miles) single track, less for Motor Access (acres Fuelwood Motorized Use of trails in Meeting Demands for Public Use than 60", and Vehicle Use open) Gathering Dispersed Camping areas full-size (acres) (acres) Sites* restricted as vehicles) (miles) permit zones (miles) Preferred Direction Higher Higher Higher Higher Higher Higher Lower Alternative Considered Alternative A 4,959 - 703,618 703,618 1,345,998 0.50 55.0 Alternative B 2,560 1,666 - - 132,568 0.15 300.4 Alternative C 3,652 2,341 2,089 1,575,382 170,296 0.80 340.1 Alternative D 4,859 1,513 6,790 2,068,208 1,345,998 0.90 46.7

Best Case 4,958.58 2,340.67 703,618.00 2,068,208.00 1,345,998.00 0.90 46.70 Worst Case 2,559.57 - - - 132,568.00 0.15 340.10 Target Higher Higher Higher Higher Higher Higher Lower Weight 8.2% 7.4% 5.8% 4.9% 6.6% 6.6% 0.4%

Importance of Overarching Objective (0-1) 0.4 Importance of Variable (Ranked 1-?) 1 2 5 6 3 4 7 Relative Weight (1-100) 100 90 70 60 80 80 5 Decision Weight 0.082 0.074 0.058 0.049 0.066 0.066 0.004 Total motorized Motorized Areas Motorized Big Motorized Desirability Utility Miles of road miles Trails Designated Game Personal Use of Alternative for roads and open to public (Combines for Motor Retrieval Fuelwood Motorized Use of trails in Criteria Normalization single track, Vehicle Use Access Gathering Dispersed areas less than 60", Camping Sites restricted and full-size as permit vehicles) zones

Alternative Considered Alternative A – No Action 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.34 1.00 0.47 0.97

Alternative B - Reduced/Least amount of motorized access 0.00 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 Alternative C - Modified preferred alternative 0.46 1.00 0.00 0.76 0.03 0.87 0.00

Alternative D - Increased/Most motorized access 0.96 0.65 0.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Tonto National Forest 20 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Table 6. Multi-criteria decision analysis model - initial values, weightings, and normalized values for minimizing impacts to environmental resources

Tonto National Forest

Travel Management Planning d t

MCDA

Minimize Impacts to Environmental l

Resources Miles of in roads areas mapped as Effects to watershed conditions. of Number Miles of within roads mapped Maximum average annual sediment Acres of weed infestations of Number perennial stream Miles of routes within Wild Road density within h bit t of Number listed species Decommissi oned Routes Road maintenanc e costs qualityAir impacts (PM10 contribution Preferred Direction Lower Higher Lower Lower Lower Lower Lower Lower Lower Higher Lower Lower Alternative Considered Alternative A 2,879 67 423.0 42,990 24,802 579 93.9 3.84 8.0 - 9.7 2,450 Alternative B 1,738 113 242.0 22,000 4,336 305 51.8 2.13 1.0 2,367 5.4 1,387 Alternative C 2,259 82 314.0 23,075 20,739 399 62.2 1.62 1.0 1,276 7.4 1,825 Alternative D 2,734 70 395.0 32,680 25,803 529 76.9 3.64 17.0 201 10.9 2,186

Best Case 1,738.00 113.00 242.00 22,000.00 4,336.00 305.00 51.76 1.62 1.00 2,367.03 5.39 1,387.00 Worst Case 2,879.00 67.00 423.00 42,990.00 25,803.00 579.00 93.86 3.84 17.00 - 10.91 2,450.00 Target Lower Higher Lower Lower Lower Lower Lower Lower Lower Higher Lower Lower Weight 4.5% 5.6% 4.2% 4.2% 2.8% 2.8% 3.4% 3.9% 3.9% 1.1% 0.8% 2.8%

Importance of Overarching Objective (0-1) 0.4 Importance of Variable (Ranked 1-?) 2 1 4 3 9 8 7 5 6 11 12 10 Relative Weight (1-100) 80 100 75 75 50 50 60 70 70 20 15 50 Decision Weight 0.045 0.056 0.042 0.042 0.028 0.028 0.034 0.039 0.039 0.011 0.008 0.028 ** Average density (mi/mi2) across all habitat types. *** Number of species exposed to maximum density.

Criteria Normalization

Alternative Considered Alternative A – No Action 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.22 0.00 Alternative B - Reduced/Least amount of motorized access 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Alternative C - Modified preferred alternative 0.54 0.33 0.60 0.95 0.24 0.66 0.75 1.00 1.00 0.54 0.64 0.59 Alternative D - Increased/Most motorized access 0.13 0.07 0.15 0.49 0.00 0.18 0.40 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.25

Tonto National Forest 21 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Table 7. Multi-criteria decision analysis model - initial values, weightings, and normalized values for minimizing user conflicts and final weighted evaluation scores Tonto National Forest Travelable Area of the Travel Management Planning Motorized Routes within Special Desirability (Utility) of Tonto NF >1 mile from a MCDA Designation Areas (Wilderness, Alternative to Forest Users**** Motorized Route Minimize Conflicts Between Motorized IRAs, WSRs) (miles) (percent) Vehicles and Non-vehicular Uses Preferred Direction Higher Lower Higher

Alternative Considered Alternative A 0.5 126.5 22.3 Alternative B 0.3 54.8 38.2 Alternative C 0.7 106.9 24.8 Alternative D 0.5 156.7 23.0

Best Case 0.70 54.80 38.20 Worst Case 0.30 156.70 22.30 Target Higher Lower Higher Weight 8.2% 6.9% 4.9%

Importance of Overarching Objective (0-1) 0.2 Importance of Variable (Ranked 1-?) 1 2 3 Relative Weight (1-100) 100 85 60 Decision Weight 0.082 0.069 0.049

****Utility scale (0-1), where a score of 0 indicates that the portfolio is not acceptable most forest users, and a score of 1 indicates that the portfolio is acceptable to all users. Intermediate values reflect the degree of appropriateness. Desirability Motorized Routes within Travelable Area of the Weighted Alternative (Utility) of Special Designation Areas Tonto NF >1 mile from Evaluation Scoring Criteria Normalization and Alternative to (Wilderness, IRAs, WSRs) a Motorized Route Evaluation Forest Users**** (miles) (percent)

Alternative Considered

Alternative A – No Action 0.50 0.30 0.00 0.34 Alternative B - Reduced/Least amount of 0.56 motorized access 0.00 1.00 1.00

Alternative C - Modified preferred alternative 1.00 0.49 0.16 0.60 Alternative D - Increased/Most motorized 0.42 access 0.50 0.00 0.04

Tonto National Forest 22 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Sensitivity Analysis After the decision makers were comfortable with their decision and analysis results, we then considered the robustness of the analysis and its recommended outcome. We were interested in learning whether the analysis would still prefer alternative C under differing weighting or perspectives. To do this, we considered several decision points-of-view to evaluate model sensitivity: the manager’s decision space, as well as representative weighting for a pro- environmental focus, a pro-recreation focus, and a non-decisional, model-determined focus.

For the purposes of testing the analysis and decision sensitivity, we analyzed the following weighting perspectives:

Figure 1. Forest manager’s decision space

• Manager’s decision space within this analysis is defined as the decision space within which a forest or district manager is expected to make a decision. Due to the range of uses and resources considered, most manager decisions related to travel management and minimization criteria require a balance of the competing values represented by the objectives. This is expected for an agency naturally focused on balancing multiple uses. The elicited weights and accompanying rationale generated by the decision makers in both the initial and final weighting exercises reflected this need for balance amongst competing values. To test the manager decision space we compared the manager-elicited weights and outcomes to other moderate weightings that included variations of a 50/50 split of consideration between public use and minimization objectives. Because the 50/50 split resulted in stronger tendencies for the analysis to select alternative C, no other manager decision space scenarios were tested.

• Pro-environmental protection focus is represented by assigning preference to the minimizing environmental impacts fundamental objective. This favored environmental impact and user conflict minimization (70 percent) at the expense of public use (30 percent). • Pro-recreation focus is represented by assigning preference to the meeting public demand fundamental objective. This view favored public use demand (70 percent) at the expense of minimizing environmental impact and user conflict (30 percent). • Non-decisional, model-determined focus was a neutral perspective used to evaluate the natural bias of the multiple criteria decision analysis itself. Under this scenario, we assigned

Tonto National Forest 23 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

an equal weight to all three objectives (33 percent), plus an equal weight to all representative variables. The assigned weights for each representative perspective are summarized in table 8.

When the multiple criteria decision analysis was weighted equally across all three objectives, it represented a favoring of minimization and environmental impacts and conflict reduction (a 66 percent combined decision weight) over meeting demands for public use (33 percent). This resulted in the non-decisional model run favoring alternative B, but only slightly.

Table 8. Assigned weights used in the representative perspectives and sensitivity analysis Meeting Minimize Minimize Decision Demands Impacts to Conflicts Alternative Considered Outcome Perspective for Public Natural Among Use Resources Uses

Alternative A – No Action 0.34 Alternative B - Reduced 0.56 Managers motorized access 0.4 0.4 0.2 Elicited Alternative C - Preferred 0.60 Decision alternative Alternative D - Increased 0.42 motorized access Alternative A – No Action 0.38 Alternative B - Reduced 0.52 50/50 motorized access Preference Use 0.5 0.4 0.1 Alternative C - Preferred 0.59 vs. Minimization alternative Alternative D - Increased 0.48 motorized access Alternative A – No Action 0.40 Alternative B - Reduced 0.48 50/50 motorized access Preference Use 0.5 0.3 0.2 Alternative C - Preferred 0.58 vs. Minimization alternative Alternative D - Increased 0.48 motorized access Alternative A – No Action 0.29 Alternative B - Reduced 0.65 Environmentally motorized access focused (30% 0.3 0.5 0.2 Alternative C - Preferred 0.61 use vs. 70% alternative minimization) Alternative D - Increased 0.36 motorized access Alternative A – No Action 0.49 Alternative B - Reduced 0.35 Recreation- motorized access focused (70% 0.7 0.2 0.1 Alternative C - Preferred 0.56 use vs. 30% alternative minimization) Alternative D - Increased 0.60 motorized access

Tonto National Forest 24 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Meeting Minimize Minimize Decision Demands Impacts to Conflicts Alternative Considered Outcome Perspective for Public Natural Among Use Resources Uses Alternative A – No Action 0.34 Alternative B - Reduced 0.58 Non-decisional, motorized access model baseline 0.33 0.33 0.33 Alternative C - Preferred 0.54 (equal value alternative across all) Alternative D - Increased 0.38 motorized access

We discussed this outcome with the team, which resulted in the recognition that the multiple criteria decision analysis, due to the variables and objectives analyzed, favored alternative B as a default. This reinforced the unbiased approach attempted by our analysis.

The forest management team also recognized that the selection of alternative B would not be supported by a majority of forest users, due to a loss of opportunity across many uses in many areas across the Forest. Thus, while alternative B is primarily focused on environmental protection, it does not conform to the forest management team’s desire to balance use and the environment.

When reviewing individual variables used to inform the analysis, the team recognized that even with alternatives B and C being nearly tied, the value of alternative C was greater in terms of meeting public use demands, while minimizing impacts and conflicts.

Discussion

Recommended Outcome Our review of the manager’s elicited decision weighting and the subsequent sensitivity analysis of other alternative weightings suggest that Alternative C is robust. This alternative consistently performed as the top result under both the initial and final weighting conducted by decision makers. It similarly resulted as the top performer under the sensitivity analysis scenarios conducted within the manager’s decision space. The robustness of the decision, in light of the forest management decision space, was confirmed through sensitivity testing. The two other scenarios demonstrating an equal consideration of minimization and public use resulted in a stronger preference for Alternative C than what was elicited by managers. This indicates that management perspective related to our analysis was slightly more preferential to minimization than other management perspective scenarios available under alternative C.

Under the sensitivity analysis, even when the outcome is other than alternative C, it is still a closely competing score compared to the preferred outcome. Under these “tiebreaking” scenarios, a manager must consider all benefits, risks, and outcomes of their decision. Under these conditions, considering the constraints on public use or resource impacts, posed by alternatives B and D respectively, alternative C then still likely poses a preferential approach to avoid unnecessary conflict. As noted, when reviewing individual variables used to inform the analysis, the team recognized that even when alternatives B, C, and D nearly tied each other, the value of alternative C was greater in terms of meeting public use demands, while minimizing impacts and conflicts.

Tonto National Forest 25 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Efficacy of the Analysis The structured decision making process and accompanying analysis we conducted was intended to demonstrate an objective-driven management decision on how best to conduct travel management planning at the Tonto National Forest in light of the minimization criteria, as specified in the travel management regulations. The decision process and analysis were conducted in a manner that attempted to reduce bias and analyze the suite of alternatives in light of the fundamental objectives underlying the decision.

As demonstrated by the decision analysis, social, environmental, and conflict considerations related to the minimization criteria weigh heavily into decisions related to travel management. . The decision weighting and rationale provided by the forest management team revealed the desire to balance competing public interests in meeting public demand for motorized and non-motorized uses, protecting the environment, and minimizing user conflict. The sensitivity analysis in particular demonstrated that a manager’s perspective needs to weigh in on the relative importance of objectives or specific variables. Moreover, if a manager overly considers a single objective relative to others (for instance, decides a particular objective is more than 60 percent of the decision consideration), then a decision in line with other alternatives becomes the best performing. Considering the combination of social, environmental, and conflict considerations, alternative C was found to be the best performing alternative to balance the travel management needs of the Tonto National Forest.

Specific Applications of Minimization Criteria The above analysis allowed a forestwide assessment of the alternatives, as desired by the forest management team. Other, more specific applications of the minimization criteria were used as the rationale for specific route designations. Examples of such considerations included damage, such as erosion, or redundant routes that could be eliminated, thus reducing disruption of wildlife. See the section entitled “Route Designation Issues.”

In analyzing effects of travel planning on wild and scenic river corridors, minimization criteria are explicitly applied to the effects analysis for individual routes within the river corridors. See the “Analysis of Impacts to Wild and Scenic Rivers.”

Finally, the travel analysis process compiles individual route assessments for the known road system, detailing environmental risks for each and recommending a management action. The consistency between alternative C and the 2011 TAP recommendations provides further evidence of minimization criteria being used in route designations. See the discussion above on the travel analysis process.

Meeting the Requirements of the Travel Management Rule The courts have found that “the Forest Service is not necessarily required to conduct a route by route specific analysis as to how it has applied the minimizing criteria in every case in order to satisfy these provisions of law… There must be some discussion, beyond conclusory statements, as to how the Forest Service’s decisions were made ‘with the objective of minimizing’ the effects of the program’s uses.” (Friends of the Clearwater v. USFS).

With this forestwide analysis for the optimally performing alternative and additional analyses for specific routes or areas of concern, the Tonto National Forest has fully demonstrated compliance with the directions of the 2005 Travel Management Rule at 36 CFR 212.55 for considering and

Tonto National Forest 26 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

minimizing impacts to natural and cultural resources and conflicts among uses in designating a system of roads, trails, and areas for motorized use on the Forest.

Literature Cited Friends of the Clearwater v. USFS, No. 3:13-cv-00515 (D. Idaho March 11, 2015)

Mendoza, G.A., and H. Martins. 2006. Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modeling paradigms. Forest Ecology and Management. Volume 230, Issues 1–3, 15. pp. 1–22.

Rowe, G. and G. Wright. 2001. Expert opinions in forecasting: Role of the Delphi technique. J. S. Armstrong (ed.). Principles of Forecasting. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Press. Available online at: https://www3.nd.edu/~busiforc/handouts/Other%20Articles/expertopinions.pdf

Runge, M.C., E. Bean, D.R. Smith, and S. Kokos. 2011. Non-native fish control below Glen Canyon Dam—Report from a structured decision-making project: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011–1012. 74 p. Available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1012/.

U.S. Department of Interior (DOI). 2008. Introduction to Structured Decision Making Fact Sheet. Handout from CSP3171 Introduction to Structured Decision Making Course. National Conservation Training Center. Available online at: https://www.fws.gov/science/doc/structured_decision_making_factsheet.pdf

Route Designation Issues

Fishing Access on the Salt River The Arizona Game and Fish Department (AZGFD) raised the concern for fishing access and dispersed camping on the Salt River. This premier flathead catfishing area is also designated critical habitat for the southwestern willow flycatcher, an endangered species. Under the existing condition, motorized access and increased heavy use of the area has resulted in detrimental impacts to critical habitat for the southwest willow flycatcher.

The Forest and AZGFD agreed during objection resolution discussions to convene an interagency workgroup, to include personnel from the Salt River Project and Fish and Wildlife Service. The goal of this workgroup is to provide reasonable access to this area while protecting critical habitat for southwestern willow flycatcher. The Tonto Basin district ranger has convened an interagency group that will evaluate previously disturbed spur routes and campsites that will be reasonably easy to map and enforce, while avoiding or minimizing adverse effects to critical habitat.

The specificity and potential for resource conflicts necessitates that resolution for this issue be designed and analyzed at the project level with an interdisciplinary team. The environmental analysis for this, and other such projects will be pursued once the forestwide travel planning is complete.

The 2005 Travel Management Rule specifically intends that travel planning should be an iterative process (36 CFR 212.54), with designations being revised and fine-tuned, as needed, to meet

Tonto National Forest 27 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

changing conditions or to address unresolved issues. The environmental analyses for such changes, and compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), will occur at the project level.

See Canyon Homes Area Homeowners in the See Canyon area requested that the Forest Service review rationale for all closures around this development and reconsider or provide additional rationale for closures. All routes in the vicinity of the See Canyon Homes have been evaluated through the travel management process. Specifically, route N005, which runs under the power line on the north side of the development, is proposed to be an administrative road.

Arizona Public Service holds a special use permit for route N005, based on the need to access the route with their equipment to maintain the lines. Arizona Public Service has maintenance responsibilities for the lines, for the right-of-way, and for access routes associated with the lines.

Public use along a power-line road presents liabilities for the utility company that holds the special use permit for access, and posed the potential for conflicts with mitigation measures required by the special use permit. It also increases the potential for vandalism of utility infrastructure. In addition, forest access is readily available from State Route 260, which borders the development on the south side. For these reasons, the power-line access route N005 will remain as administrative use only.

The objector also took issue with decommissioning and closing off several unnamed spur roads in the area. This area has been open to cross-country travel in the existing condition, and many redundant routes have been created as a result of unrestricted cross-country travel in the past. The Forest intends to eliminate redundant routes and limit motorized travel to fewer routes to reduce resource damage and disruption of wildlife.

Cave Creek Ranger District Master Plan Routes The Cave Creek Ranger District Master OHV Plan is a series of route proposals submitted by the Tonto Recreation Alliance, also known as TRĀL, and other local volunteers. TRĀL has been working cooperatively with the district for many years, assisting with trail maintenance, mapping, and safety issues.

The purpose of the master plan is to design a sustainable system of roads and trails that will provide positive user experiences, while protecting natural resources and meeting other agency goals. The Forest has developed a cooperative planning process whereby partner groups, such as the Tonto Recreation Alliance, assist by gathering data on motorized recreation routes, identifying problems and opportunities, and suggest changes to the route system within their geographic area of interest. The Cave Creek OHV Master Plan has been developed and proposed following this process.

The Forest is responsible for evaluating the recommendations in the master plan to determine if they meet the needs of forest users, address potential conflicts, comply with the forest plan, are compatible with objectives for resource protection, and can be accomplished within budgetary constraints. The proposals that meet these conditions are then carried through environmental analysis, public involvement, and decision. Forestwide travel management is an appropriate venue, though not the only one, for such analysis and decisions.

Tonto National Forest 28 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Recent cooperative projects were unintentionally excluded from route designations. The proposed travel management system is the beginning of travel management. The Forest anticipates working with partners and the public to evaluate the system, and make changes as warranted. Cave Creek Ranger District will ensure that the intent of recent grant work is incorporated into updated maps.

The Tonto forest supervisor met with objectors on September 6, 2016, to discuss recommendations for specific route changes in the Wildcat, 144th Street, and St. Clair areas of the Cave Creek Ranger District. One unauthorized route at issue in the Wildcat area appears to be outside the Forest boundary, and, therefore, the Tonto National Forest has no jurisdiction to designate this route. For many other routes the forest supervisor found that the objector’s recommendations were consistent with the Cave Creek OHV Master Plan, and therefore agreed to include the recommended changes as part of a revised alternative C. The requested changes that have been accepted by the forest supervisor are listed in table 9.

Table 9. Changes requested by Tonto Recreation Alliance agreed to by the Tonto Forest Supervisor Agreed Upon Affected Route Number Area DROD Designation Change Miles U3085 Wildcat Decommission 60-inch Trail 0.5 U3089 Wildcat Single Track Trail 60-inch Trail - 0.4 U3088 Wildcat Single Track Trail 60-inch Trail 0 U3089 Wildcat Single Track Trail 60-inch Trail 0 U3088 Wildcat Decommission 60-inch Trail 0.6 U4001 Wildcat Single Track Trail Decommission - 0.1 Unauthorized Wildcat Unauthorized Single Track Trail 0.2 U3052/U3053 Wildcat Full Size Trail Single Track Trail 0 U3052 Wildcat Full Size Trail Single Track Trail 0 U3051 Wildcat Decommission Single Track Trail 0.5 Unauthorized Wildcat Unauthorized Full Size Trail 0.3 Unauthorized Wildcat Unauthorized Decommission - 0.1 U2268 Wildcat Decommission Single Track Trail 1.0 FR513 Wildcat Full Size Trail 60-inch Trail 0 FR290 Wildcat Full Size Trail 60-inch Trail 0 Unauthorized Wildcat Unauthorized Full Size Trail 2.1 U3073 Wildcat Decommission Single Track Trail 0.3 U3035 Wildcat Decommission Single Track Trail 0.3 U3075 Wildcat Decommission Single Track Trail 0.1 Unauthorized Wildcat Unauthorized Single Track Trail 0.3 Unauthorized Wildcat Unauthorized Decommission - 0.4 U2256A Wildcat Unauthorized Single Track Trail 1.3 Unauthorized Wildcat Unauthorized Single Track Trail 0.4 Unauthorized Wildcat Unauthorized Single Track Trail 0.3 Unauthorized Wildcat Unauthorized Single Track Trail 0.2 Unauthorized Wildcat Unauthorized Single Track Trail 0.1 Unauthorized Wildcat Unauthorized Single Track Trail - 2.0 Wildcat Net Increase for Area 6.7

Tonto National Forest 29 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Agreed Upon Affected Route Number Area DROD Designation Change Miles Unauthorized 144th Street Unauthorized Single Track Trail 1.3 Unauthorized 144th Street Decommission 60-inch Trail 0.2 Unauthorized 144th Street Unauthorized Change route # to 0.7 FR2123 Unauthorized 144th Street Decommission Single Track Trail 0.6 Unauthorized 144th Street Unauthorized Single Track Trail 3.0 FR2115 144th Street Full Size Track Decommission - 0.6 Unauthorized 144th Street Unauthorized 60-inch Trail 3.0 Unauthorized 144th Street Full Size Track Decommission - 0.7 144th Street Net Increase for Area 7.5 FR388 St. Clair Administrative Trail Decommission - 2.0 Unauthorized St. Clair Decommission 60-inch Trail 1.5 Unauthorized St. Clair Decommission Full Size Trail 1.1 Unauthorized St. Clair Decommission Administrative Trail 0.2 FR2064 St. Clair Single Track Full Size Track 0 Unauthorized St. Clair Full Size Trail `Non-motorized Trail - 1.3 FR1117/FR2133 St. Clair Decommission Full Size Track 0 Unauthorized St. Clair Decommission Administrative Trail 0.7 Unauthorized St. Clair Seasonal Trail Full Size Track 0 FR1064 St. Clair Decommission Administrative Trail 0.3 Unauthorized St. Clair Decommission 60-inch Trail 1.1 Unauthorized St. Clair Single Track Full Size Track 0 St. Clair Net Increase for Area 4.1 Total Net Increase 18.3

Some of these changes to the preferred alternative resulted in closing routes originally intended to be open, in changing the width class (e.g., full size to single track), and in opening routes originally slated for closure. The net change is an additional 6.7 miles of open motorized routes in the Wildcat area, 7.5 miles in the 144th Street area, and 4.1 miles in the St. Clair area, for a net addition of 18.3 miles to open motorized routes in alternative C.

Payson Area Trail System The Payson Area Trail System (PATS) is a system of routes surrounding the community of Payson. Figure 2 displays the official trail system map.

Tonto National Forest 30 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Figure 2. Payson Area Trail System map

Tonto National Forest 31 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

These routes are on National Forest System land and on lands of other ownership. The routes on National Forest System lands overlay 30 routes in the Tonto National Forest transportation system. The objection instructions recommended comparing route designations from the draft record of decision with the official PATS map to reflect the relationship between PATS routes and Forest Service designations. Table 10 provides a cross-walk between Forest Service route numbers and PATS trail names, along with the designations for all routes on National Forest System land.

All routes that compromise the Payson Area Trail System that are located on the Forest were evaluated in the DROD, except for two routes. The unevaluated routes were Cypress and Boulder which the Forest proposed to be non-motorized trails, and are covered in the next section along with the Monument Trail. Two routes, 3074 and S004, have been proposed to be decommissioned, all other routes are open to motorized travel.

Table 10. Payson Area Trail System routes showing name, number, and proposed designation Route Designation in Type of route PATS trail name Comments Number DROD in DROD 199 Houston Mesa Road ML4 road 1173 access to Houston Mesa motorized admin full-size trail Trailhead 1260 Round Valley Trail motorized admin full-size trail 1264 access to Houston Trail motorized admin full-size trail 1324 Houston Trail motorized admin full-size trail 1325 Houston Trail motorized admin full-size trail 1361 Houston Trail motorized admin full-size trail 1588 Houston Loop Trail motorized admin full-size trail 1589 Houston Loop Trail motorized admin full-size trail 3074 decommission Parallel to Beeline Hwy - redundant 3078 Houston Loop Trail motorized admin full-size trail 412 motorized admin full-size trail just south of S004, which could be used to complete the Round Valley Trail 433 access to Houston Trail ML2 road 435 Granite Dells ML2 road 441 Peach Orchard Trail motorized admin full-size trail 475 American Gulch Trail motorized admin full-size trail 476 access to Houston Trail ML road 508 American Gulch Trail motorized admin full-size trail 510 Peach Loop Trail motorized admin full-size trail 543 Round Valley Trail motorized admin full-size trail 633 Peach Orchard Trail motorized admin full-size trail N002 Houston Loop Trail motorized admin full-size trail N003 Houston Loop Trail motorized admin full-size trail N004 access to Houston Trail motorized admin full-size trail

Tonto National Forest 32 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Route Designation in Type of route PATS trail name Comments Number DROD in DROD S002 Monument Trail decommission Erosion and sustainability issues – see discussion S004 Round Valley Trail decommission Just south is route 412, which is open to full size vehicles - redundant U1159B decommission Parallel to Beeline Hwy U1325B Houston Trail motorized admin full-size trail W002 Peach Loop Trail motorized admin full-size trail - Cypress Trail - - Erosion and sustainability issues – see discussion - Boulder Trail - - Erosion and sustainability issues – see discussion

Legend for Route Maps The following route discussions focus on specific locations for which map illustrations are needed. All maps display routes according to the legend in figure 3. Open roads and full size trails are black; roads for high clearance vehicles are yellow; 60-inch wide motorized trails are dashed black; single track motorized trails are pink. All these routes are open to public use. Decommissioned routes are red and administrative use only are orange; both those categories are closed to public use. Figure 3. Legend for route designations

Tonto National Forest 33 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Routes 1266 and 974 An objector requested clarification and rationale for the designation of routes 1266 and 974, which connect Star Valley to the Diamond Point Shadows subdivision and also to motorized trails to the east. Route 1266 is proposed to be open to full- size motorized vehicles from 1265 to 1372. West of the intersection with 1372 the route will be decommissioned as it leads to private property. 1372 is open to full-size vehicles and connects to 371, which is open to high clearance vehicles. 974 connects between 1266 (decommissioned portion) and 371. Route 974 is proposed to be decommissioned, as it is a redundant route to 1372.

Figure 4. Map of routes 1266 and 974

Horse Mesa Trail System The Horse Mesa trail system north of Star Valley consists of: 1264, 3078, 1588, 1589, 1324, 1325, 1587, 3093, 3093A. At least one of these needs to be designated as a motorized trail to connect N003/433A with 1161.

All routes listed in objection are open to full-size vehicles (1264, 3078, 1588, 1589, 1324, 1325, 1587, 3093, 3093A). It is possible to drive a full-size motorized vehicle from 433a and N003 to 1161; however, it is not a direct route. Riders can use route 433 north to 1602 to 1258 to 1161 (approximately 5.5 miles) or 433 south to 476 to N004 to N003 to 1589 to 3086 to 1588 to 1324 to 1587 to 1324 to 1587 to 1258 to 1161 (approximately 5 miles).

Tonto National Forest 34 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Figure 5. Map of Horse Mesa trails

Monument, Cypress, and Boulder Trails The Tonto National Forest proposes to incorporate the three trails into the non-motorized trail system. The three trails were not designed for motorized use, which is likely why they are causing resource concerns such as erosion, and are not sustainable, see the following photos of resource impacts.

Monument Trail The objections raised related to the Monument trail concern the proposal to not include the trail in the motorized system and a request to connect the trail to other motorized trails.

Tonto National Forest 35 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

The objector states: The Monument Trail is a loop that does not connect to any other trails. This trail should be connected to the Boulder Trail to provide a connection (i.e., network) to Payson. The Boulder Trail was deleted in the FEIS, and the Monument Trail was only included in alternative D. The Monument Trail should be included in the decision and designation.

The Monument Trail was analyzed by an interdisciplinary team during both the travel analysis process and the EIS as route S002. Connecting the Monument Trail to the Boulder Trail using existing routes would require utilizing the portion of Road 435, which is gated for administrative use, as it leads to private property. The private property owner has reported many cases of trespass from forest recreationists. In addition, resource damage has been occurring from use of the trail. See figure 6.

Figure 6. Photo of Monument Trail showing erosion

Tonto National Forest 36 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Figure 7. Photo of Monument Trailhead showing limited signage and parking with many ruts

It was proposed to connect the Monument Trail to Moonlight Drive in Star Valley. Currently, there is no route that connecting the Monument Trail and Moonlight Drive. To create the connector, as well as a trailhead, a site-specific environmental analysis would be required, especially since the proposed location is in a neighborhood of homes.

Figure 8. Photo showing the proposed trailhead location to connect the Monument Trail to Moonlight Drive and adjacent homes

Tonto National Forest 37 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Cypress and Boulder Trails The Cypress and Boulder trails were not analyzed in the FEIS. Forest Service staff examined the trails and identified them as areas of resource concern due to erosion.

Figure 9. Photo of Cypress Trail showing erosion

Tonto National Forest 38 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Figure 10. Photo of Cypress Trail showing erosion in trail tread

Tonto National Forest 39 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Figure 11. Photo of Boulder Trail showing multiple braided routes in wash, erosion on sides of wash

Tonto National Forest 40 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Other Routes Through the objection process several routes were specifically brought forward by partners and members of the public. These specific routes and associated issues are summarized in table 11 and discussed in more detail following the table.

Table 11. Specific routes brought forward in objections Route Issue District Designation Response to Objections and Numbers Clarifications 160 Consider Cave Motorized trail There will be administrative access to designating this Creek full size - 160 across the Verde river. The final road for seasonal seasonal route is not yet determined, but motor vehicle use; resembles the north loop that connects clarify decision 2150 with 407 and 160 Junction. and provide Southern routes are not feasible and rationale are decommissioned. 388 Document Cave Motorized trail 388 can be signed so that riders will consideration of Creek full size know that the Bartlett Lake Rd is potential safety ahead. Riders can choose other trails issues in the area to connect to in order to extend their ride without traveling on Road 19 393 Inconsistency in Cave Motorized trail Full-size vehicles can access 393 off width designation: Creek full size and of 3460 and can travel 2.39 miles. No single track vs. and admin use legal way for full-size vehicles to full-size Mesa access the remainder of 393, as portion that goes through Mazatzal Wilderness is proposed to be decommissioned (0.62 mile), section past wilderness is proposed for high clearance vehicles (10.54 miles), section past 3456 is proposed to be administrative use only from that point to river(4.32 miles). 398 Provide rationale Cave These routes do not access 413. as to why the 398 Creek Where 398 would meet 413, a cliff lies road and the road between them. There is a user made identified for single track that does access 413, but decommission is not sustainable and unsafe. directly to the north are not designated to provide connectivity with FR 413 404 Document Cave Motorized trail 404 will be managed for vehicles consideration of Creek 60 inches or 60 inches or less. The trail starts wide potential safety less then narrows to 50 to 60 inches and it issues goes through a narrow slot canyon. This trail can be signed prior to the short hill leading to road 19 so that riders will know that the Bartlett Lake Rd is ahead. Riders can choose other trails in the area to connect to in order to extend their ride without traveling on Road 19.

Tonto National Forest 41 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Route Issue District Designation Response to Objections and Numbers Clarifications 413 Provide rationale Cave Motorized trail The intersection with 2060 is not for designations Creek full size conducive for full-size vehicles to turn and demonstrate around, as it would cause safety minimization of issues with vehicles performing user conflicts due multiple point turns, also potential to 413 ending near resource impacts of vehicles leaving falls, should end at the trail. Farther toward the falls 2060 (0.5 mile) at the proposed dead end, there appears to be room in the wash for full-size vehicles to turn around safely. 502 Correct the project Payson Motorized trail 502 is proposed to be a full-size trail record to indicate full size from 406 to the East Verde River. The that FR 502 dead section that crosses the river and ends in section continues 0.85 mile prior to dead PB42 as opposed ending is proposed to be to being decommissioned, along with several decommissioned side trails that do not connect to other trails. The objector is incorrect. 1095 A & Re-examine Cave Decommission Field inspection of these routes found B designation of Creek the intersection/entry to 1095A to be these routes in narrow and posed a risk of light of asserted sliding/rolling off the embankment and resource damage. the road tread was grown over with Coordination w/ brush and heavily bouldered, making it district personnel unusable to most vehicle classes. needed 1117 and Clarify why these Cave Motorized trail Erosion issues in tread 2134 roads are not Creek full size designated as motorized 1828 Add or label this Mesa Decommission Road is in the Superstition Wilderness road on Alt. A and – any other designation would be Alt. C maps illegal. 2034 Clarify why these Cave 2034A - ML2, 2034B - decommission roads not Creek designated as motorized 2060 Clarify single track Cave Motorized Single track or full size; provide Creek single track rationale 2064 Clarify single track Cave Motorized trail Full size or full size; provide Creek full size rationale 2090 Revisit width Cave Motorized trail The southern 0.2 mile is proposed to designations and Creek full size be decommissioned as the Scottsdale provide rationale preserve closed the route on their for changing or property, while rest is open to full-size. keeping as in At the point of recommended DROD decommission, is a route (U2266) that connects to 513 and will make full-size loop. 2097 Clarify designation Cave Motorized trail There is a full-size motorized trail where 2097 meets Creek full size connection between 2097 and 136th 136th street street

Tonto National Forest 42 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Route Issue District Designation Response to Objections and Numbers Clarifications 2097A & Clarify which Cave Motorized trail Only 2097A is proposed to be C segments are Creek full size and decommissioned. 2097C is proposed open, which are decommission to be a full size motorized trail closed and provide rationale 2097A hill climb has severe erosion, as the trail is not laid out in sustainable manor. Fall line trails such as this allow water to channel down the tread, creating erosion problems. 2098 Clarify single track Cave motorized Single track or full size; provide Creek single track rationale 3456 Inconsistency in Mesa Motorized trail Single track width designation: single track single track vs. full-size 3713 Specify the Mesa decommission Route 3713 starts at 1904 and ends at rationale for why 252. 1904 connects to 252 this route is to be approximately 0.5 mile from the 3713 decommissioned and 252 intersection. 3713 is a redundant route. 3783 Rationale and Cave Motorized trail The route was analyzed as U3067. documentation for Creek full size The route is in Wildcat riding area. It designation and passes directly alongside Wildcat application of staging area where it intersects with minimization 2095. It is proposed to be designated criteria for full-size vehicles. 3784 Resolve Cave motorized trail Analyzed as routes U3046, U3047, designation of Creek 60 inches or U3053, and U3055. single track vs. less less than This route is proposed to be 60 inches designated as a motorized trail less than 60 inches 513 Revisit width Cave Motorized trail Connects to other full-size trails designations and Creek full size provide rationale for changing or keeping as in DROD

Tonto National Forest 43 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Route 413 Intended turn around Route 413 north of Bartlett Lake Rd (19), is proposed to dead-end past route 2060. This is proposed as many forest visitors would like to view the falls, which is near the end of the full- size motorized trail (413). The intersection with 2060 is not conducive for full-size vehicles to turn around, as it would cause safety issues with vehicles performing multiple point turns, also potential resource impacts of vehicles leaving the trail. Farther north toward the falls (0.5 mile) at the proposed dead end, there is room in the wash for full-size vehicles to turn around safely.

The staging area for motorized users is on the south side of the intersection with Bartlett Lake Rd (19). To address safety concerns of riders entering roadway, the Forest can post signage alerting riders that the trail is ending and they are entering a staging area. Figure 12. Map showing route 413

Figure 13. Photo of route 413 in wash

Tonto National Forest 44 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Routes 2060 and 2064 The objector was concerned regarding the designation of routes 2060 and 2064 and the consistency of those routes with the Cave Creek Ranger District OHV Master Plan.

The designations suggested by the objector for routes 2060 and 2064 are indeed consistent with the Cave Creek Ranger District OHV Master Plan, and those changes have been made. Route 2060 is designated as a single-track route and route 2064 as a full-size route.

Figure 14. Photo of UTV on route 2064

Tonto National Forest 45 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Figure 15. Map of routes 2060 and 2064

Tonto National Forest 46 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Routes 393 and 3456 Full-size vehicles can access the northeastern section of 393 off the 627 and can travel 2.39 miles. The portion that goes through Mazatzal Wilderness will be decommissioned (0.62 mile). The section between the wilderness boundary and route 3456 is proposed for high clearance vehicles (10.54 miles). The objector requested that route 393 be open through the wilderness, but that request would violate the Wilderness Act. Providing a connection would require building a new section of road outside of the wilderness. Such a proposal could be addressed later as a separate project. If Congress removes wilderness prohibitions on 393, the remainder would revert to being designated for high clearance vehicles.

The section southwest of 3456 is proposed to be administrative use only from that point to river (4.32 miles). The only proposed full-size motorized route to connect to 393 south of the wilderness boundary is Route 3456. This route was previously miscoded as a single track; the designation will be full-size motorized trail.

Figure 16. Map showing routes 393 and 3456 full-size motorized trail

Tonto National Forest 47 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Routes 1117 and 2034 The objector asserts that 1117 and 2034 are part of a grant to rebuild trails in an area, closed by a fire, in preparation to opening to the public. Route 2034 is not in the area closed to fire, but 2134 is in this area and connects to 1117. Therefore, it is assumed that the objector intended to highlight 2134, not 2034.

The Forest will designate 1117 and the 2134 loop as full-size motorized routes as indicated in the Cave Creek Ranger District OHV Master Plan. Spurs off 2134 (routes 2133 and 2135) will remain decommissioned. Route 2034A (not shown) is proposed to be a motorized trail open to full-size vehicles, 2034B is proposed to be decommissioned.

Routes 1117 and 2134 will be designated as full-size motorized trails.

Figure 17. Map showing routes 1117 and 2134 full-size motorized trail

Tonto National Forest 48 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Route 3784 This route was not in the draft ROD, however, the Forest agrees that the route should be a motorized trail 60 inches or less, as that is the current state of the route. The route was analyzed under user-created route numbers U3046, U3047, U3053, and U3055.

Figure 18. Map showing routes U3046, U3047, U3053, and U3055

Route 2097 Two objections have been raised regarding route 2097. One concern relates to connectivity to 136th Street for full-size vehicles on the southern end of 2097, while the other concern is that 2097A is proposed to be decommissioned on the northern end of 2097.

The southern end of route 2097 does not directly connect with 136th Street; however, it is accessible by using routes U2273A, 3264, and U3021. The northern end of the route is 2097A, which is proposed to be decommissioned. Route 2097A is a hill climb with severe erosion, as the trail is not laid out in a sustainable manor. Fall line trails such as this allow water to channel down the tread, which creates erosion, as well as safety concerns. Such hill climbs often erode to the point that they take the shape of a “V,” which is both erosive and difficult for many vehicles to traverse. If a wheel slips into the bottom of the “V,” the vehicle will become hard to maneuver and possibly become entrenched. The v-shaped trail and the accompanying erosion are visible in figure 20, showing the closed hill climb with severe erosion. Figure 19. Map of routes 2097, 2097A, 2097C

Tonto National Forest 49 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Figure 20. Photos of route 2097A hill climb showing severe erosion

Route 205 An objector requested that the Forest consider changing a section of FR 205 between 1058 and 1104 to a motorized route for all vehicles. Cave Creek Ranger District is working on finalizing designs for the staging area at route 1058 and will include designs for providing safe crossing to 1104. This design and designation process will be done outside of this travel management effort, as part of project-level travel planning.

Routes 2090 and 513 An objector raised a concern regarding the designation of routes 2090 and 513. The trails had previously been designated as full-size and 60-inch trails, respectively. A concern was also raised regarding the potential impacts of having a full-size trail dead end due to the closure on lands of other ownership.

The southern 0.2 mile of each road is proposed to be decommissioned, as the Scottsdale preserve closed the route on their property, while the rest is open to full-size vehicles. At the point of recommended decommission, is a route (U2266) that connects to 513 and 2090 to make a loop. The full-size trail loop allows users of all vehicle types to access the area, while preventing a dead-end situation that often leads to users utilizing trails that are not authorized for that vehicle type, thus creating negative resource impacts. Full-size vehicle access into this area will allow for emergency personnel and vehicles to access areas more easily and allow for vehicles that have mechanical problems to exit the area either under their own power or by power of another vehicle. The closure of the Scottsdale preserve and the conversion of route 2088 to administrative use only necessitated the need for the full-size motorized trail loop.

Tonto National Forest 50 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Figure 21. Map showing routes 2090 and 513

Summary In the DROD, the motorized routes open to the public totaled 3,690 miles. A total of 130.6 miles of routes were brought forward in objection. Of these routes, 49 miles were on Payson, 13.7 on Mesa, and 67.7 on Cave Creek Ranger Districts.

Of the specific routes cited in objections, designations have changed from the draft record of decision for 32.8 miles on the Cave Creek Ranger District and 9 miles on the Mesa Ranger District. No other districts had changes from the DROD resulting from objections. Designations changed from open to closed, as well as closed to open, and some involved only a change of vehicle type (full size to single track, or single track to less than 60 inches). The net change from the DROD is an additional 18.4 miles of open routes, or 0.5 percent increase for a total of 3,708 miles.

Some of the concerns expressed in objections require site-specific design and analysis. The resolution of such concerns will be addressed at project-level travel planning, once forestwide travel management planning is finished. Designation of a forestwide system of motorized roads, trails, and areas open to the public is the first step in complying with the 2005 Travel Management Rule. The rule explicitly intends (36 CFR 212.54) that travel planning should be an iterative process, with designations being revised as needed to meet changing conditions or to address unresolved issues. Once the basic system of public access roads is established, fine-tuning can occur.

Tonto National Forest 51 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

The nearby Coconino National Forest serves as an example of such ongoing fine tuning of travel management. The final record of decision for the Coconino National Forest was signed in September 2011, and they issue a current motorized vehicle use map (MVUM) each year. That map is updated, as needed, based on input gathered from both internal and external sources. The Forest consolidates all input and proposes changes to motor vehicle use designations, then completes an environmental analysis and decision to effect the changes desired. Motor vehicle use designations may also be changed in conjunction with other projects in a given area, such as vegetation management or stream restoration. Motorized Big Game Retrieval The DROD designated a corridor for motorized big game retrieval for legally harvested elk and bear for one mile on either side of all designated motorized routes. Motorized retrieval for deer would not be allowed. Elk hunting takes place in August through December, and black bear seasons occur in spring, March through May, and fall, August through December. During these times, a hunter may travel cross country up to 1 mile from an open road or motorized trail to retrieve an elk or bear that has been legally harvested.

Under the existing condition (alternative A) motorized big game retrieval is allowed anywhere on the Payson and Pleasant Valley Ranger Districts for deer, elk, and bear. Under alternative D, motorized big game retrieval would be allowed for deer, elk, and bear for one mile on either side of all designated motorized routes; under alternative B no motorized big game retrieval would be allowed on the Forest. Alternative C would allow motorized retrieval for one mile on either side of designated motorized routes for elk and bear only.

In rechecking the geodatabase for the project, we have determined that the total acreage reported in the FEIS for the motorized big game retrieval area was erroneous. The polygon for alternative C motorized big game retrieval in the FEIS is 1,905,014 acres, as compared to 1,575,382 acres reported. The figure reported represents the approximate area where big game retrieval is likely to occur, as opposed to the area defined by the 1-mile buffer. This area was derived by assessing elk and bear habitat and occurrence for the Tonto National Forest, relative to the defined motorized big game retrieval area (T. Holt, AZGFD, personal communication 2018).

The 2015 Arizona Game and Fish Department Travel Management Report (table 8, page 39) notes that elk hunts do not occur in game management units 24B and 37B, and that nearly 100 percent of the elk in game management unit 21 occur on the Prescott National Forest, with little to no elk harvest expected on the Tonto National Forest. Similarly, for bear, the expected number of motorized retrievals for game management units 21 and 24B is less than one per year, and zero per year for 37B (table 11, page 40 in the Arizona Game and Fish Department report, available on the project website). Table 12 shows the number of acres for which motorized big game retrieval is allowed, the acres where it is likely to occur, and the estimated number of retrievals per year for each of the four alternatives, as described in the FEIS.

Figure 22 displays the full area where motorized big game retrieval is allowed, distinguished between likely and rare use.

Changes made between the FEIS and the DROD added 38 miles of open routes, and changes resulting from route-specific objections added another 18 miles, for a total of 3,708. These changes together result in adding 30,837 acres, for a total of 1,935,851 acres open to motorized big game retrieval in revised alternative C, an increase of 1.6 percent over the FEIS. All of these

Tonto National Forest 52 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement additional acres occur on Cave Creek and Mesa Ranger Districts within game management units where motorized big game retrieval is expected to be minimal. The effective acreage is unchanged.

Table 12. Acres and estimated annual number of motorized big game retrievals by alternative Alternative A* Alternative B Alternative C^ Alternative D* Acres designated for motorized 703,618 0 1,905,014 2,068,208 big game retrieval Effective acres where motorized 703,618 0 1,575,382 2,068,208 big game retrieval is likely Number of estimated retrievals per 550 0 209 550 year * Estimates are for retrieval of deer, elk, and bear ^ Estimates are for retrieval of elk and bear only

Figure 22. Motorized big game retrieval area for revised alternative C distinguished for likely and rare use

The estimated number of retrievals per year is based on regularly gathered hunter success data. See the Arizona Game and Fish Department Travel Management Report in Supporting Documents on the project webpage: https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=28967

Tonto National Forest 53 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Although the estimated number of retrievals appears to be fairly reliable, the exact location of the retrievals cannot be predicted or determined. Hunter success is not likely to be spread evenly over the entire area available for motorized big game retrieval, so the number of retrievals cannot be evenly parsed over all acres to arrive at a measure of impact. In fact, areas of more concentrated success, and thus hunters driving off-road to retrieve game, likely varies from year to year according to wildlife locations, terrain, weather, and other factors. Nonetheless, conclusions may be drawn regarding the relative impact of the three alternatives that allow motorized big game retrieval based on the assumptions used in the analysis for motorized big game retrieval on the Tonto National Forest. See appendix A of Arizona Game and Fish Department Travel Management Report.

Alternative A would be expected to have the highest intensity of impacts, as the variety of species allowed for motorized retrieval results in a higher number of retrievals occurring over less than one-quarter of Tonto National Forest acres. Alternative D would see the same number of retrievals, because it includes the same species as alternative A; however, these retrievals would potentially occur over almost three times the number of acres as in the existing condition. In contrast, the number of trips estimated under alternative C is less than 40 percent the numbers expected under alternatives A and D, while the number of acres over which this activity may occur is more than twice as many as alternative A and over 75 percent as great as in alternative D.

The forest cannot determine exactly where a hunter may drive to retrieve their harvested game animal, and thus, cannot determine site-specific impacts to soils, vegetation, wildlife, and other natural and cultural resources. Nonetheless, we can reasonably conclude that alternative C limits the potential impacts, relative to other alternatives that allow the activity for more species and/or across more acres. By limiting the game species for which the use is allowed, the expected annual number of trips declines, and the impact is potentially spread over more than half of the Forest, while moving the conditions for wildlife and wildlife habitat toward the desired future condition (see Arizona Game and Fish Department Travel Management Report). Travel Impacts to Wild and Scenic Rivers

Introduction In response to an objection to analysis in the FEIS and DROD, staff at the Southwest Regional Office found deficiencies in the analysis of impacts from travel planning to the outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs) for designated and eligible wild and scenic river segments on the Tonto National Forest.

Specifically, the instructions to the Forest in September 2016 stated:

Provide specific analysis on the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the project on the free flow, water quality, ORVs, and classification of the Verde Wild and Scenic River and each candidate [aka eligible] wild and scenic river based on baseline conditions at time of designation/determination of eligibility to ensure that the project complies with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, Forest Service policy, and other guidance as described above.

A re-evaluation of wild and scenic eligibility of all named streams on the Forest began in June 2016, and a draft eligibility study was released in October 2017, as part of forest plan revision efforts. However, until the record of decision is signed for forest plan revision, this study is not

Tonto National Forest 54 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

considered final and regional office staff advised the Forest to use the 1993 inventory as the basis for assessing impacts. Therefore, the analysis of impacts for travel planning looked at the two designated wild and scenic rivers, along with all rivers deemed eligible during the 1993 inventory (USDA Forest Service 1993).

Some of the rivers that were deemed eligible in the 1993 inventory were found to no longer have ORVs in the 2016 study. Nonetheless, they were included in the travel management analysis of impacts to the ORVs that were identified in 1993, using that year as the baseline condition. River segments deemed no longer eligible in the 2016 study are noted in the description of current conditions.

Forest specialists with expertise for each of the identified ORVs contributed to the analysis conducted in June 2018, with facilitation by a Forest Service Enterprise Program environmental coordinator and landscape architect with expertise in wild and scenic river assessment. GIS specialists provided support in overlaying travel route designations for each alternative with the identified wild and scenic river corridors, to allow viewing on a large screen and identification of specific routes. They also performed analysis that provided accurate cumulative miles by designation type (road, motorized trail, decommissioned, non-motorized, etc.) for each alternative. The analysis used revised alternative C and the original alternatives A, B, and D.

The spatial and quantitative data, combined with the local knowledge and experience of forest specialists put forth in an interdisciplinary setting, allowed the team to carefully assess the impact to the various ORVs for each river segment. While the assessment focused on the river segments and ORVs identified in 1993, we also incorporated updated information on resource condition from interdisciplinary assessments conducted in August 2016 and January 2017, where pertinent.

An interactive map of the designated and eligible wild and scenic river corridors and the routes within those corridors appears in the online map package for this project. The map may be zoomed in or out to examine specific routes, and comments on the analysis for effects of travel planning on wild and scenic rivers may be submitted directly on the interactive map.

Rivers Addressed in this Analysis Table 13 displays the congressionally designated rivers and the eligible rivers from the 1993 inventory, the classification of included segments, and the total miles of routes within the wild and scenic corridor. Where these rivers extend beyond the boundaries of the Tonto National Forest, only the portion on the Tonto is displayed. The wild and scenic river corridor for both designated and eligible rivers extends one-quarter mile from the edge of each side of the river.

The two designated wild and scenic rivers on the Tonto National Forest are Fossil Creek and the Verde River. For Fossil Creek, of the 16.8 miles included in the designation, 7.5 miles are classified as recreational and are situated on the boundary between the Coconino and Tonto National Forests. The eastern portion is on the Tonto and the western portion is on the Coconino. The remaining 9.3 miles, classified as wild, occur within wilderness solely on the Coconino, and are thus not affected by travel planning on the Tonto National Forest.

The Verde River is designated for a total of 40.5 miles on parts of the Coconino, Tonto, and Prescott National Forests. On the Tonto, 22.2 miles of the Verde River classified as “wild” are entirely within the Mazatzal Wilderness. No roads exist, and travel planning has no impact on the Tonto portion of the river. An additional 2.2 miles on the Tonto are designated as scenic.

Tonto National Forest 55 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Thirteen rivers were determined to be eligible for wild and scenic designation in the 1993 assessment, as listed in table 13. Different segments of eligible rivers were found to qualify for different classifications. “Wild” segments are the most pristine and primitive, free of impoundments and generally accessible only by trails; “scenic” segments are free of impoundments and largely primitive, but accessible in places by roads; “recreational” segments may have some impoundments, are readily accessible by roads, and may have some development along their shorelines (definitions from the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, PL 90-542).

Table 13. Congressionally designated and eligible wild and scenic rivers on the Tonto National Forest Segment Name Status Classification Route Miles in Corridor Verde River designated wild 0 Verde River designated scenic 2.0 Fossil Creek designated recreational 2.1 Arnett/Telegraph eligible scenic 3.7 Canyon Creek eligible recreational 7.9 Cherry Creek 1a, 1b eligible wild, scenic 16.5 East Verde River 2, 3 eligible recreational, scenic 10.2 Lower Salt River 1, 2 eligible recreational, recreational 18.4 Parker Creek eligible scenic 8.7 Pinto Creek eligible scenic 2.4 Salome Creek eligible wild 3.9 Spring Creek 1, 2 eligible recreational, wild 7.1 Tonto Creek 2, 3 eligible wild, scenic 5.9 Upper Salt River 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b eligible scenic, wild, wild, scenic 3.2 Upper Verde River 2a, 2b eligible wild, scenic 5.2 Workman Creek 1, 2 eligible recreational, wild 11.6 Total route miles within wild and scenic 108.8 river corridors

The following sections of designated or eligible rivers with a “wild” classification are within declared wilderness areas and have no motorized routes, including unauthorized routes, to be designated open or closed to public use. Fossil Creek has 9.5 miles designated as wild, most of which is within wilderness. These segments have no potential effects to ORVs, either positive or negative, from any of the proposed alternatives or the travel planning decision. There are no potential effects to the free-flowing character or water quality for the stream segments. They will not be discussed further in this analysis and have no contribution toward cumulative effects for wild and scenic rivers. Fossil Creek, wild segment – Fossil Springs Wilderness Verde River, wild segment – Mazatzal Wilderness East Verde River, segment 3 – Mazatzal Wilderness Spring Creek, segment 2 – Hellsgate Wilderness Tonto Creek, segment 2 – Hellsgate Wilderness Upper Salt River, segment 1a – Salt River Canyon Wilderness Workman Creek, segment 2 – Salome Wilderness

Tonto National Forest 56 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

The recreational section of Fossil Creek and the scenic section of the Verde River, along with other eligible river segments, are presented below as to the effects from public motorized travel designations on the free-flowing character and effects to the outstandingly remarkable values for direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts. Alternative A represents the existing condition - no action; proposals and effects will then be discussed for the other three alternatives. Information on water quality is excerpted from the water report for the FEIS. Please refer to that report for additional detail, available on the project website under “Supporting Documents.”

Fossil Creek (Designated) – Recreational 7.5 miles ORVs for Fossil Creek include:

Wildlife: Eighty-three special status species are potentially present within the Fossil Creek drainage. The diverse habitat, along with portions free of non-native fish and crayfish, support regionally important populations of species such as the common black hawk and the lowland leopard frog. The high diversity and abundance of wildlife and rare species and the regional importance of the riparian area for several rare species exemplify the ORVs offered by Fossil Creek. Fossil Creek is the only intact perennial system with continuous flow without any water diversions in Arizona. This unfragmented system provides contiguous habitat for species that can only survive in riparian habitat; it also provides a contiguous corridor for wildlife species during dispersal or migration.

Fisheries: Fossil Creek is home to a diverse native fish community, presently composed of 10 endangered, threatened, candidate, or Forest Service sensitive species. This diverse community is unique in Arizona, and is largely due to being free of nonnative fish. High quality and diverse habitats for native fish contribute to the finding of outstandingly remarkable.

Recreation: The wild and scenic river corridor contains exceptional opportunities to camp, swim, wade, hike, appreciate the history of the area, and it is rare for all of these opportunities to exist in one place. Visitors enjoy the shade and cooler temperatures from the dense riparian canopy, and there is an abundance of deep, clear pools in which to wade, swim, and snorkel. The springs that form Fossil Creek keep the water flow constant throughout the year, which is an uncommon and welcome attribute for visitors in the Desert Southwest. Calcium carbonate dissolved in the water gives it a beautiful blue-green color, which adds to the enjoyment of the area. Geology: The travertine formations in Fossil Creek are the fourth largest in North America. The travertine formed natural dams that created a number of impressive pools. In 1909, a dam was built across Fossil Creek and the entire baseflow was diverted through a flume system for hydropower generation at the Irving and Childs power plants. After diversion of the baseflow, the in-channel travertine structures were breached and largely destroyed by episodic floods and debris flows. The decommissioning of the hydroelectric project and return of full flows to Fossil Creek have triggered rapid regrowth of these travertine dams (USDA Forest Service 2011).

Water: for the magnitude of discharge from the springs forming the perennial reach of Fossil Creek, the uncommon magnitude and uniform nature of baseflows in Fossil Creek, the unique water quality characteristics with respect to supersaturation with calcium carbonate, the unusual clarity of the water, and the recognition of Fossil Creek as an Outstanding Arizona Water.

Historic: uses for the Childs-Irving hydroelectric site, Southern Sinagua prehistoric sites, and traditional uses by the Yavapai-Apache Nation.

Tonto National Forest 57 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Current Condition Road 708 is the only currently motorized route within the Fossil Creek wild and scenic river corridor and includes 2.1 miles. The road is rough and dangerous, and currently receives little use. It provides access to Fossil Creek. Access is currently limited via permit to reduce overcrowding.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B and C Under both alternatives B and C, this road would be closed to public access. The road is proposed to be decommissioned under alternative B, and changed to administrative use only under alternative C.

Direct effects of closing this road to public access would provide additional protection and reduced disturbance for all natural and cultural resources values listed above. Closing this road to public use would also alleviate a safety hazard, while leaving the road open for administrative use will facilitate emergency response and law enforcement. Indirectly, such changes would improve the recreational experience by reducing user conflicts. Free-flow characteristics of the stream would be maintained and water quality would improve with reduced recreational access.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives A and D Under alternatives A and D, this road would remain open. Recreation use would remain steady unless the number of permits to access the road were increased, which could lead to potential impacts to multiple values, including cultural, fish, wildlife, and recreation experience.

Free-Flow Character Free-flow characteristics of the stream would be maintained and water quality would improve with reduced recreational access.

Cumulative Effects The cumulative effect under alternatives B and C would be enhancement of each of the ORVs, whereas under alternatives A and D, user conflicts with values may continue, leading to potential impacts to cultural, fish, wildlife, and recreation values.

Verde River (Designated) – Scenic 2.2 miles ORVs for the Verde River include:

Fisheries: for high-quality habitat that the river provides for native fish species, including several federally endangered and threatened species and their critical habitats. Periodic natural flooding, a diversity of aquatic habitats, and a native fish assemblage make the Verde River a unique and valuable resource in the Southwest. Federally listed fish species in the river area include the razorback sucker (endangered), Colorado pikeminnow (experimental nonessential), and the roundtail chub (proposed as threatened). There is also designated critical habitat for the razorback sucker throughout the reach of the Verde River, and for the spikedace and loach minnow from Beasley Flat to the Fossil Creek confluence.

Tonto National Forest 58 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Wildlife: for high-quality habitat that serves as a refuge for wintering waterfowl, seasonally migrating birds, and year-round riparian-dependent species. Currently, there are 51 threatened, endangered, sensitive or special status wildlife species potentially present within the river corridor.

Historic/Cultural: for evidence of occupation by Hohokam and Southern Sinagua cultures; site of the first hydroelectric plant and one of the first tourist developments in Arizona.

Scenic: for qualities of the landform, mesquite bosques, cottonwood galleries, and open and expansive vistas.

Current Condition Currently, approximately 2.0 miles of high clearance road are located within the Verde scenic river corridor: Forest Roads 16, 16B, and 57B. These roads access day use and dispersed camping within the scenic segment. The diversion of water through the Central Arizona Project currently influences the free-flow characteristics and water quality. The Verde River was assessed as impaired for sediment and turbidity in the 2006–2008 assessment, but was not identified as impaired in the 2012–2014 statewide assessment. Impacts from road segments on water quality are negligible. All action alternatives propose to maintain these routes within the Verde Wild and Scenic River corridor. Unauthorized motor vehicle use within this corridor has been limited, mostly due to terrain and road conditions. In addition, no cross-country travel within the corridor is permitted per the Act, resulting in no effects associated with motor vehicle access for big game retrieval or fuelwood gathering.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ in their designations for dispersed camping: • Alternative A is limited to the roadside and end of road locations; • Alternative B proposes to designate one dispersed campsite; • Alternative C will designate four full-size motor vehicle routes, totaling less than 1/10 of a mile, to access existing dispersed camping sites; • Alternative D proposes 2 miles of corridors for dispersed camping with 300 feet allowed on either side (136.6 acres).

Potential Impacts to ORVs under Alternatives B and C Alternatives B and C both reduce the area for dispersed camping from the current situation. When the Verde Wild and Scenic River was designated by Congress in 1984, the Childs Power Plant was still operating. Various roads, as well as the site of the old Childs plant, now listed on the National Register of Historic Places, can still be seen on aerial imagery within the river corridor. The burned out remains of one of Arizona’s first tourist developments, the Verde Hot Springs Resort, was also present when the river was designated. Thus, a certain level of development was present, and the open roads and dispersed camping allowed under these alternatives would not be expected to degrade the river’s values relative to their condition at the time of designation (USDA Forest Service 2004).

Tonto National Forest 59 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Both of these alternatives would be expected to have slightly positive effects to the values for fish, wildlife, scenic, and cultural values through a decrease in the current level of dispersed camping.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative D The increase in dispersed camping under alternative D would be expected to decrease scenic values and increase wildlife disturbance in the corridor, and could possibly result in increased impacts to cultural sights. Fish values and water quality may also be indirectly impacted somewhat by higher and more widespread impacts of dispersed camping.

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of the river would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects Cumulatively, the one other ongoing activity that affects the Verde Wild and Scenic River is the diversion of water through the Central Arizona Project. This use is authorized in the designating legislation and would most affect the fish values and potentially water quality by raising water temperature, as a result of reduced flows. Alternatives B and C are not likely to negatively impact fish and would reduce wildlife disturbance, enhance scenic values, and increase opportunities for solitude; alternative C is marginally less beneficial in these areas. Alternative D, by designating substantially greater areas for dispersed camping, could result in some impacts to fish and wildlife habitat, scenery, and cultural values. Alternatives B and C conform with the nondegradation and enhancement policy that allows existing uses to continue where they do not adversely impact or degrade river values.

Arnett/Telegraph – Scenic 3.5 miles ORVs identified in the 1993 inventory for the Arnett/Telegraph Creek eligible river corridor include:

Scenic: for complicated geology, distinctive broad gorges with vertical walls, and novel rock forms and vegetation in the area. Riparian/Ecological: for unique large willow forests and dense, diverse riparian vegetation. Ecological for uniquely diverse and high-quality habitat for native fish species, especially those indigenous to Arizona, and riparian habitats that support diverse species. Fisheries: uniquely diverse and high-quality habitat for fish species indigenous to Arizona. Currently, longfin dace occur in the creek, and multiple threatened or endangered fish species have been reintroduced to the area.

Current Condition Currently, there are 3.7 miles of road within the eligible river corridor. Forest Road 4 is located at the head of Telegraph Canyon at the upstream edge of the eligible corridor and above the perennial reach of Arnett Creek at the upstream edge of the corridor. Three additional unauthorized crossings exist. Forest Road 4 was present when Arnett/Telegraph Creeks were first deemed eligible and crossings are cited as the boundary for the scenic corridor (USDA Forest Service 1993).

Tonto National Forest 60 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Water quality in Arnett Creek is listed by the State of Arizona as impaired due to dissolved copper from past mining. The vegetation is currently impacted by a 10-acre infestation of non-native oleander, which likely washed down from the town of Superior and established in the riparian area (Nicholas 2018). Restoration efforts are under way. Streambank development includes fences and stock tanks. This segment is easily accessible with roads viewable within the river corridor.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternatives B and C • Open road- 1.4 miles (FR 4) • Decommission- 0.7 mile in 2412 and 2416. • Administrative use- 0.5 mile: Motorized trail 2411, which is within the 0.25-mile scenic corridor but outside of the watershed, would be open to administrative use only and closed to the public; the portion of motorized trail 2412 not being decommissioned would be open for administrative use only. Road 2418 remains administrative use only.

Alternative D • Open road- 1.4 miles (FR 4) • Administrative use- Motorized trail 2411, which is within the 0.25-mile scenic corridor but outside of the watershed, would be open to administrative use only and closed to the public; motorized trail 2412 would be open for administrative use only. Road 2418 remains administrative use only.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B and C Road 2411 has little impact to the scenery value, as it is situated on the plateau above Telegraph Canyon and does not drop below the rim, approximately 0.25-mile horizontal distance from the creek. This road would be visible from elsewhere on the rim, but not from the creek canyon, and thus, does not impact the scenic values identified. The decommissioning of roads 2412 and portion of 2416 would benefit the fisheries and riparian values by reducing sediment runoff and motorized access to the riparian area. It would also reduce the risk of invasive plant infestation, decrease sediment into the stream, and improve the view for the creek in that area enhancing scenery values. Managing the remainder of the roads and motorized trails as administrative only would maintain the values in their current condition.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative D Of the 1.4 miles of Forest Road 4 that would be open to the public under all action alternatives, approximately 0.25 mile occurs within sight of the stream in the upper end of Telegraph Canyon. The remainder occurs outside of the canyon and has minimal to no effect to scenic, riparian, and ecological values. One-half mile of this road crosses private land, and would not be designated for motorized use, effectively reducing direct access to the corridor from the nearby town of Superior.

Tonto National Forest 61 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Impacts to riparian and ecological values from road 2412 would continue unabated under alternative D, which leaves this road and 2416 open as motorized trails.

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of the river would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects Cumulatively, proximity to a popular equestrian area and botanical gardens has resulted in degradation of the plant community by invasive species. The restriction of most of the riparian area from any motorized access under alternatives B and C would reduce the likelihood of new infestations that may be brought in by vehicles; however, invasive propagules may still enter from washing downstream or from equestrian and foot traffic, potentially impacting all values. No cumulative benefit would occur under alternative D.

Canyon Creek – Recreational 7.2 miles ORVs from the 1993 inventory for Canyon Creek eligible river corridor include:

Wildlife: Canyon Creek has been identified as having outstandingly remarkable wildlife value. The potential river corridor provides good riparian habitat for a variety of threatened wildlife species that occur along Canyon Creek. Threatened species may include Mexican spotted owl, narrow-headed garter snake, and northern leopard frog. The western red bat is a Forest Service sensitive species.

Ecological: Canyon Creek has been identified as having outstandingly remarkable ecological values. Habitat composition within the potential river area includes, or is suitable for goshawks and Blumer's dock, both Forest Service sensitive species.

Current Condition At the time Canyon Creek was identified as an eligible stream in 1993, the existing native surface roads maintained for passenger vehicles were 188, 33, 3172. Road 188 parallels the creek. The Rodeo-Chediski Fire burned within the river corridor. Goshawk and Mexican spotted owl habitat are no longer present after the fire. There are 7.9 miles of motorized routes along Canyon Creek.

A diversion near the OW Ranch includes a few cement structures and a low bridge crossing. Dispersed campsites and evidence of human activity occur in the river corridor. There are multiple road crossings along this segment, making it very accessible. No known water quality issues exist on this segment.

The Upper Canyon and Airplane Flat campgrounds are in the river corridor. Valentine Ridge Campground is just outside of the river corridor. Presence of the campgrounds and the creek make this area a recreation destination.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternative B • Open road- 2.7 miles (188A and 33A)

Tonto National Forest 62 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

• Decommission- 3.7 miles (roads 33, 188; trails 757, 761, 2230, 2236, 2239, 2243, 3172, PV1001, PV1058) • Administrative use- 0.5 mile road (3172A); motorized trail 0.5 mile (2723, PV100, PV1059, PV1061)

Alternative C • Open road- 3.8 miles (roads 33, 33A, 33B, 3172, 188A) • Decommission- 2.2 miles (trails 757, 761, 2230, 2236, 2239, 2243) • Administrative use- 0.5 mile road (3172A); motorized trails 0.9 mile (2230, 2242, and 2723)

Alternative D • Open road- 3.9 miles (33, 33A, 33B, 3172, 188A) • Open motorized trail- 2.1 miles (757, 761, 2230, 2236, 2239, 2243) • Decommission- none • Administrative use- 0.5 mile road (3172A); motorized trails 0.9 mile (2230, 2242, and 2723)

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B and C The proposed actions would reduce access and related impacts, including sedimentation, resulting in enhancement of the wildlife and ecological values.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative D Activities under alternative D could lead to additional recreation use, as the majority of roads and trails would be open to public use, leading to potential impacts on the wildlife and ecological values over time.

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of Canyon Creek would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects Cumulatively, camping and other dispersed recreation activities would continue within and adjacent to the creek corridor. Alternatives B and C would restrict recreation use, which would maintain the wildlife and ecological values when considered with the ongoing recreation activities. Under alternative D, increased visitor use may impact the wildlife and ecological values over time.

Cherry Creek –Wild (1a) 14.3 miles, Scenic (1b) 6.4 miles ORVs from the 1993 inventory for Cherry Creek eligible river corridor include:

Scenery: Cherry Creek Segment 1a has been identified as having outstandingly remarkable scenic value. Nice side canyons with lush riparian vegetation intersect Cherry Creek on the southern end. The adjacent spectacular Sierra Ancha mountain range has upturned edges of limestone, sharp angular peaks, and steep canyons. Pinyon-juniper woodlands predominate on the canyon slopes, while mixed conifer may suddenly be encountered around a corner on a north slope.

Tonto National Forest 63 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Fisheries: The fisheries in Cherry Creek have been identified as having ORVs because the stream has been known to contain a stable population of Gila chub for many years. Presently the Gila chub is an endangered species, and the Fish and Wildlife Service has proposed Cherry Creek as critical habitat for the endangered razorback sucker.

Wildlife: Segment 1a has been identified as having outstandingly remarkable wildlife value because the potential river area contains two threatened species, and also because it provides fair to excellent riparian habitat for a variety of species. Western yellow-billed cuckoo and the Mexican garter snake are listed as threatened. Peregrine falcon also occurs there.

Current Condition Since the 1993 study, a large fire has burned much of the area and the introduction of non-native species (aquatic and terrestrial) has affected the presence of key fish and wildlife species as well as scenic resource values. In 2016, this creek was found to be no longer eligible for wild and scenic river status.

Approximately 16.5 miles of routes exist in this eligible corridor. Roads 329 and 2812 cross Cherry Creek with a ford, and road 203 parallels the river corridor near the confluence of China Spring Creek. A portion of road 2808 is within the northern end of the creek corridor.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternative B • Open road- 2.0 miles (203C, 203D) • Open motorized trail- 3.0 miles (2908, 54, 329, 2909, 2910, 3183) • Decommission- 11.3 miles (203B, 2807, 2808, 2812-2815, 2886, 2909, 2911, 2038, 2806A, 2812A, 2814A)

Alternative C • Open road- 2.0 miles (203C, 203D) • Decommission- 10.9 miles (203B, 2806, 2807, 2808, 2812, 2815, 2886, 2909, 2911) • Open motorized trail- 2.7 miles (54, 329, 2908, 2909, 3183)

Alternative D • Open road- 8.3 miles (54, 203, 329, 2812, 2815, 2908) • Decommission- 5.2 miles (2806, 2812, 2814, 2886) • Open motorized trail- 2.9 miles (2807, 2808, 2813, 2909, 2910, 2911, 3183)

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B and C Activities in alternative B would enhance all of the values and reduce the potential for future impacts. Route 2812 would be decommissioned, decreasing stream sedimentation and impacts to fish and wildlife habitat along with improving the scenery ORV.

Tonto National Forest 64 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives C Activities in alternative C would enhance all of the values and reduce potential of future impacts, but not to the same extent as alternative B.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative D Activities proposed in alternative D would maintain all values, as the amount of open routes is less than the existing condition.

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of Cherry Creek would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects Cumulatively, recreation visitation levels are anticipated to remain steady or increase within the vicinity of Cherry Creek. The activities proposed in all alternatives would help to maintain all of the values as recreation use increases over time. Alternative B would provide the highest level of protection for the ORVs, followed by alternative C, and alternative D would provide the least protection.

East Verde River – Recreational (2) 20 miles ORVs from the 1993 inventory for East Verde River eligible river corridor include:

Wildlife: fair to excellent habitat for a variety of threatened and endangered and special status species: bald eagle, peregrine falcon, southwestern willow flycatcher, Mexican garter snake, Arizona southwestern toad, Swainson’s hawk, occult little brown bat, southwestern cave myotis, narrow-headed garter snake, loggerhead shrike, Chiricahua leopard frog, western yellow-billed cuckoo, lowland leopard frog, belted kingfisher, western red bat, common black-hawk, ringtail, and the zone-tailed hawk.

Riparian/Ecological: Segment 2 of the East Verde River has been identified as having outstandingly remarkable riparian value. In the vicinity of Doll Baby Ranch, the riparian vegetation is a Fremont cottonwood-Goodding willow, which is the rarest riparian community type on the Tonto National Forest.

Current Conditions Riparian and wildlife resources were identified as outstandingly remarkable in the 1993 study, but do not meet current study criteria when compared with similar resources across the state of Arizona. Currently, the river is artificially maintained due to operations (water pumped over rim) related to the CC Cragin reservoir/powerplant, and it was deemed ineligible for wild and scenic river status in the 2016 study. Approximately 10.2 miles of routes are located within segment 2 of the East Verde River corridor, of which 0.9 mile is non-motorized trail under all action alternatives. These routes access day use and dispersed camping within the scenic segment. Road 502E crosses the East Verde River. The river is artificially maintained by operations (water pumped over rim) related to the CC Cragin reservoir/powerplant.

Tonto National Forest 65 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Unauthorized motor vehicle use within this corridor has been limited, mostly due to terrain and road conditions. In addition, no cross-country travel within the corridor is permitted per the Act, resulting in no effects associated with motor vehicle access for big game retrieval or fuelwood gathering.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ in their designations for dispersed camping and by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternative A • Dispersed camping is limited to the roadside and end of road locations

Alternative B • Proposes to designate one dispersed campsite • Open road- 3.2 miles (209A, 209B) • Decommission- 2.2 miles (406, 502D, 502E) • Open motorized trail- motorized trail 2.0 miles (502, 67D, 354, 503, 3627, 67E) • Administrative use- 1.3 miles road (406B); motorized trail 0.5 mile (478)

Alternative C • Would designate four full-size motor vehicle routes, totaling less than 1/10 of a mile, to access existing dispersed camping sites • Open road- 4.2 miles (209, 209A, 406) • Decommission- 1.2 mile (502D, 502E) • Open motorized trail- 2.0 miles of (67D, 67E 354, 478, 502, 503, 3627) • Administrative use- 1.3 miles road (406B); motorized trail 0.5 mile (478)

Alternative D • 2 miles of corridors for dispersed camping with 300 feet allowed on either side (136.6 acres). • Open road- 7.0 miles (209, 354,406,502, 503, 3627, 209A, 67D, 67E) • Decommission- none • Open motorized trail- 0.3 mile of motorized trail (502D) • Administrative use- 1.3 miles road (406); 0.5 mile motorized trail (478)

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B and C Alternatives B and C reduce the area for dispersed camping from the current situation. Both of these alternatives would be expected to have slightly positive effects to the values for fish, wildlife, scenic, and cultural values through a decrease in the current level of dispersed camping.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative D The increase in dispersed camping under alternative D could lead to decreased scenic values and increased wildlife disturbance in the corridor, and could possibly result in increased impacts to

Tonto National Forest 66 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

cultural sites. Fish and water quality values may also be indirectly impacted somewhat by a potential for increased sedimentation with the large number of acres open for dispersed camping.

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of the river would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects Flow in the East Verde River is maintained during summer and fall by a transbasin diversion out of the Blue Ridge Reservoir that imports water from the Little Colorado River Basin to compensate for withdrawals from the Salt River Basin. These withdrawals do not directly affect the free-flowing character of the river, but they affect the volume and water quality. The East Verde River was also listed as impaired for water quality for arsenic and selenium. The effects of travel management would neither benefit nor exacerbate these conditions.

Lower Salt River – Recreational (1 and 2) 13.2 miles ORVs from the 1993 inventory for the eligible Lower Salt River corridor include:

Recreation: The river corridor is one of the most heavily used rivers for non-motorized recreation activities in the United States. Flowing through a Sonoran Desert landscape, flanked by native mesquite bosques, this river provides excellent recreation opportunities for the 4.5 million Phoenix-area residents, and surrounding communities, who are within a 1-hour drive. Up to 30,000 people visit this area during each hot summer weekend. Tubing is the most popular activity, but visitors enjoy a wide variety of other activities.

Wildlife: The area is especially important for bald eagle foraging, and the cottonwood gallery at Blue Point contains a rookery for wading birds. The river corridor provides good riparian habitat for a variety of threatened and endangered wildlife species, and diverse populations of waterfowl, song birds, and raptors. Species of conservation concern include bald eagle, lesser long-nosed bat, and Yuma clapper rail.

Cultural: Forty-four known sites occur within the potential river area. A prehistoric Hohokam occupation dating from around AD 800 to about 1100, consisting of shard and lithic scatters, suggests pithouse villages. Historic use of the area is associated with small-scale mining, homesteading, water reclamation, Forest Service administration, and government-sponsored work projects by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC).

Riparian/Ecological: The predominant riparian community on the Lower Salt River is the Fremont cottonwood-Goodding willow association. This is one of the rarest riparian communities on the Tonto National Forest. This community makes up small stands along the Lower Salt River dominated by Fremont cottonwood and Goodding willow. Other species include salt cedar, arrowweed, and seepwillow. The mature mesquite bosque, characterized by large mesquite stem size and dense canopy, has high value for recreation uses and as wildlife habitat. The mature bosque stands on the Salt River may be relics of the free-flowing Salt River, predating the construction of dams.

Tonto National Forest 67 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Current Condition The flow rate of the Lower Salt River is controlled by the Salt River Project. There are many developed recreation sites along this segment. Evidence of human activity occurs throughout the corridor. This segment is easily accessible with roads running parallel, reaching, and crossing the river. The river is impaired due to dissolved oxygen. The developed recreation sites along the river all have paved roads; state highway 204 is paved. There are 14.1 total miles of Forest Service routes in the river corridor, plus 4.2 miles of state highway. A significant percentage of the corridor is heavily infested with tamarisk; other areas are more pure bosque.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternatives B and C • Open road- 2.2 miles (158, 169, 3555, 3556, 3557, 204A, 204E, 204G) • Decommission- 2.9 miles (169, 3501, 1529, 1525A, 1527A, 1527B, 1527C, 3559, 204D, 204F, 204H) • Administrative use- roads 1.9 miles (1525, 3557, 3743, 204B, 204C, 3557A, U158A, U204E, U204G, U3560A); motorized trails 5.5 miles (3502, 3560, 3560B, 3743B, U204A, U204B, U3507a, U3557A, U3743A, U3743B)

Alternative D • Open road- 2.7 miles (158, 169, 3555, 3556, 3557, 204A, 204E, 204F, 204G, 204H) • Open motorized trail- 1.6 miles (1525, 3743, 1527A, 1527B, 1527C, 204D) • Decommission- 2.8 miles (3501, 3502, 3560) • Administrative use- roads 0.4 mile (204B and 204C); motorized trail 5.0 miles (1525, 3502, 204B, U3560B)

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B and C Decommissioning almost 3 miles of routes and restricting nearly 7.5 miles to administrative use only would decrease the use of these routes, which would maintain and enhance all of the values. The reduction of public access to cultural sites would increase the level of protection for this ORV. The recreation ORV would be enhanced by limiting access to the corridor, which could improve the quality of the recreation experience. Riparian/ecological values and wildlife habitats would be enhanced by the decreased access to the river corridor.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative D Under alternative D the benefits of decommissioning routes and restricting to administrative use only would maintain and possibly enhance all the ORVs, but to a lesser extent than alternatives B and C.

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of the river would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Tonto National Forest 68 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Cumulative Effects This river corridor is a major destination for Phoenix and other Arizona residents. Visitation levels are anticipated to remain steady or increase. The activities proposed in all alternatives would help to maintain all of the outstanding values as recreation use increases over time.

Parker Creek – Scenic 8.5 miles ORVs from the 1993 inventory for Parker Creek eligible river corridor include:

Scenery: The narrow gorge that is passes through in its middle is recognized as a spectacular landscape feature. This perennial stream crosses a diverse variety of vegetation. Its headwaters start in a mixed pine/fir forest, and the river ends in a palo verde/saguaro Sonoran Desert. The terrain is moderately varied with broad slopes, rolling hills, and dissected plateaus.

Wildlife: The area provides potential habitat for the southwestern willow flycatcher (listed as endangered), and the western red bat, the peregrine falcon, and the common black-hawk, which are Forest Service sensitive species. Excellent habitat is provided for the many resident and migratory birds.

Riparian/Ecological: Upper Parker Creek is within the Sierra Ancha Experimental Forest, and is ungrazed. It has very high value as a benchmark for comparison with other Tonto National Forest alder communities for establishing grazing management objectives.

Current Condition During the 2016 re-assessment of potential wild and scenic rivers, when using ORV criteria and comparing with similar resources within the established region of comparison, we determined that no ORVs were present. No listed wildlife species occur in Parker Creek and many other segments and rivers provide better wildlife habitat. The riparian and ecological resource values were evaluated and did not meet criteria for being outstandingly remarkable when compared with similar ecological/riparian resources across the state of Arizona.

Approximately 8.7 miles total routes are in the Parker Creek corridor, including 1.8 miles of State Route 288 (not subject to Forest Service control) and 2.8 miles of non-motorized trail.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternative B • Decommission- 0.5 mile (490, 2823, 3294) • Open motorized trail- 3.4 miles (50, 140, 488, 2818, 2819, 243,1769) • Administrative use- road 0.2 mile (2837)

Alternative C • Decommission- 0.3 mile (243, 2823) • Open motorized trail- 3.4 miles (50, 140, 488, 2818, 2819) • Administrative use- 0.4 mile road (490 and 2837)

Tonto National Forest 69 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Alternative D • Open road- 3.7 miles (50, 140, 243, 488, 1769, 2818, 2837, 3294) • Decommission- 0.1 mile (2823) • Administrative use- 0.2 mile (490)

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B and C Few changes in travel result in little change from existing condition. Roads currently have little impact on identified values. Restrictions for administrative use only would maintain all ORVs.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative D This alternative has the highest mileage of open routes that would provide visitor access to the creek corridor. This could lead to increased dispersed recreation within the corridor, potentially impacting riparian/ecological, wildlife, and scenery values.

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of Parker Creek would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects Recreation visitation levels are anticipated to remain steady or increase in the vicinity of Parker Creek. The activities proposed in all alternatives would help to maintain all of the values, as recreation use increases over time. Alternative B would provide the highest level of protection for the ORVs, followed by alternative C, and alternative D would provide the least protection.

Pinto Creek – Scenic 8.4 miles ORVs from the 1993 inventory for Pinto Creek eligible river corridor include:

Scenery: Lush and diverse riparian vegetation provides a stark contrast to the surrounding chaparral country. The medium to tall overstory trees provide filtered shade over the babbling stream. Varied steep to broad canyon walls above the stream with numerous rock outcrops meeting the stream banks.

Riparian/Ecological: Pinto Creek supports a Fremont cottonwood-Goodding willow plant association. Pinto Creek has been identified as having outstandingly remarkable ecological values, in that this is the rarest riparian community on the Tonto National Forest. This riparian area has high value as a benchmark for documenting recovery of this rare community, and for use in a comparison with other Tonto National Forest cottonwood-willow communities for setting livestock management objectives.

Current Condition In 2016, resource specialists determined that no ORVs were present in Pinto Creek. Scenic values did not meet criteria of being spectacular and/or not common to other rivers in the region of comparison, and the perennial nature of the stream is at least temporarily compromised by groundwater pumping for a nearby copper mine. Drawdown of groundwater is affecting ecological values through die off of cottonwood, willows, sycamore, and other riparian species.

Tonto National Forest 70 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Approximately 2.2 miles of routes run through Pinto Creek corridor.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternative B • Open road- 1.2 miles road (242, 287C) • Decommission- 0.8 mile (1020, 3149, 287D) • Administrative use- road 0.2 mile (287C)

Alternative C • Open road- 1.2 miles (242, 287) • Decommission- 0.5 mile (287, 3149) • Administrative use- 0.5 mile (287, 1020)

Alternative D • Open road- 1.4 miles (242, 287) • Decommission- none • Open motorized trail 0.5 mile (287, 3149) • Administrative use- 0.3 mile (1020)

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B, C, and D Under the action alternatives, the current state of scenery and riparian/ecological values would be maintained.

Free-Flow Character The water flows and water quality (temperature) of Pinto Creek are being impacted by the drawdown of groundwater associated with a nearby copper mine. If the mine stopped pumping water, these values would be expected to recover.

The free-flowing character of the river would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects Drawdown of groundwater is affecting ecological values with a die-off of cottonwood, willows, sycamore, and other riparian species. The ORVs cannot be maintained in the condition that existed in 1993. The range in recreation access by alternative would neither harm nor effectively protect the ORVs.

Salome Creek – Wild 19.6 miles ORVs from the 1993 inventory for Salome Creek eligible river corridor include:

Scenery: The canyon winds through the Salome Wilderness and along the base of Dutchwoman Butte. This creek is interrupted by water slide rocks, cascades, deep seasonal pools, and many

Tonto National Forest 71 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

water falls, including one over 30 feet tall. The deep gorge is so narrow in places that the solid rock walls of each side can be touched with outstretched arms. The sheer, narrow, water-smoothed canyon walls create an unusual configuration.

Wildlife: Game species known to occur within the river corridor include deer, bear, doves, quail, and collared peccary. Salome Creek has been identified as having outstandingly remarkable wildlife values. The potential river area provides moderate to good riparian habitat for a variety of special wildlife species that may occur along Salome Creek.

Current Condition Outside of the Salome Wilderness boundary, FR 60 runs through the southern tip of the Salome Creek corridor. Most of the year, the creek is dry in that area. Roads were present and in use in 1993, when ORVs and eligibility were determined. There are 3.9 miles of routes within the corridor, of which 1.5 miles (61 and 284) are non-motorized in all action alternatives.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternative B • Open road- 1.4 miles (60 and 135) • Decommission- 1.0 mile (2747 and 2749) • Administrative use- none

Alternative C • Open road- 1.4 miles (60 and 135) • Decommission- 0.2 mile (2749) • Open motorized trail- 0.9 mile (2747)

Alternative D • Open road- 1.4 miles (60 and 135) • Decommission- none • Administrative use- none • Open motorized trail- 1.0 mile (2747 and 2749)

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B The scenery and wildlife values would be enhanced by decommissioning 1 mile of routes.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives C and D The roads were present and in use in 1993, when ORVs and eligibility were determined; therefore, the presence of open roads does not negatively impact the outstanding values for which the river was deemed eligible.

Tonto National Forest 72 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of Salome Creek would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects Recreation visitation levels are anticipated to remain steady or increase in the vicinity of Salome Creek. Alternative B would enhance ORVs by decommissioning 1 mile of routes and decreasing recreation access. Alternatives C and D are expected to maintain ORVs as recreation use increases.

Spring Creek – Recreational (1) 12.4 miles ORVs from the 1993 inventory for Spring Creek eligible river corridor include:

Fisheries: contains one of the best populations of roundtail chub in the state. The quality of the fish habitat far exceeds any other creek on the Tonto National Forest. The habitat is in excellent condition with stable undercut banks, excellent riparian vegetation in most reaches, and excellent instream cover. The fish habitat is dominated by large, stable pools. The chubs dominate the fish community and are reproducing at a stable rate.

Riparian/Ecological: The riparian community in the upper half of segment #1 of the potential river area supports a healthy, vigorous alder community. Alder, Bonpland willow, sycamore, and box elder are dominant species. Sedges and scouring rush are abundant herbaceous components.

Current Condition In 2016, staff from the Native Aquatics Program conducted headwater chub (Gila nigra) surveys at Spring Creek near Brady Canyon and below Spring Creek Ranch as a part of the Gila River Basin Monitoring Program. Many non-native and native fish were found during the surveys. Due to the abundance of non-native species present in this stream, specialists determined it did not meet criteria for being outstandingly remarkable when compared with similar resources across the state of Arizona.

Spring Creek corridor has 7.1 miles of routes, of which 0.95 mile occurs on lands of other ownership and is not subject to Forest Service control.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternative B • Open road- 1.7 miles (131, 134, 4840) • Open motorized trail- 0.8 mile (134, 923) • Decommission- 3.1 miles (486, 919, 2727, 131A, 923A, PV3020, PV4018, PV4021) • Administrative use- road 0.2 mile (2222); motorized trail 0.4 mile (2222, 134, 923)

Alternative C • Open road- 2.3 miles (131, 134, 484, 486)

Tonto National Forest 73 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

• Open motorized trail- 0.9 mile (131, 134, 923) • Decommission- 2.3 miles (919, 923, 2727) • Administrative use- road 0.2 mile (2222A); motorized trail 1.3 miles (2222, 131)

Alternative D • Open road- 4.4 miles (131, 134, 484, 486, 923, 2222) • Open motorized trail- 1.2 miles (131, 919, 923, 2222) • Decommission- 0.5 mile (2727) • Administrative use- none

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B and C Closing roads by decommission and reducing recreation access by administrative use only would enhance fisheries and riparian values.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative D Fisheries and riparian values would likely be maintained under alternative D, which changes little from the existing condition.

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of Spring Creek would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects Recreation visitation levels are anticipated to remain steady or increase in the vicinity of Spring Creek. Alternatives B and C would enhance ORVs by decommissioning 3.1 and 2.3 miles of routes, respectively, and decreasing recreation access. Alternative D is expected to maintain ORVs as recreation use increases.

Tonto Creek– Scenic (3) 9.1 Miles ORVs from the 1993 inventory for Tonto Creek eligible river corridor include:

Riparian/Ecological: Much of this segment is dominated by the cottonwood-willow community. This community has been frequently scoured by major floods during the past decade, maintaining it in an early seral (sapling and pole) stage. Dominant species include Fremont cottonwood, Goodding willow, and sycamore. Ash and alder are also present. The herbaceous component includes many important wetland species such as knotgrass, hardstem bulrush, cattail, scouring rush, plus other sedge and rush species.

Wildlife: This segment provides extremely important habitat for bald eagle nesting and foraging. Special wildlife species known to occur along Tonto Creek Segment #3 may include: bald eagle southwestern willow flycatcher, Maricopa tiger beetle, Yavapai leopard frog, spotted bat, southwestern cave myotis, and common black-hawk.

Tonto National Forest 74 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Current Condition There is evidence of grazing in this area. Access to this area is limited through private property only. Approximately 5.9 miles of routes are present in the Tonto Creek corridor, including 2.3 miles of non-motorized trail.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternative B • Open road- 0.4 mile (1387) • Open motorized trail- 2.2 mile (1553, 1434A, 894, 1390, 3417, 184D) • Decommission- 0.8 mile (1446, 3415, 3802, 1625A, 184D, U1391A)

Alternative C • Open road- 0.4 mile (1387) • Open motorized trail- 2.4 miles (184D, 894, 1390, 1434A, 1553, 3414, 3417, 3802) • Decommission- 0.4 mile (184D, 1446, 3415)

Alternative D • Open road- 3.1 miles (894,1387, 1390, 1446, 1553, 3414, 3417, 3802, 1434A, 184D) • Open motorized trail- 0.2 mile (3415) • Decommission- none

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B and C Closing roads by decommission and reducing recreation access by administrative use only would enhance wildlife and riparian ORVs.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative D Wildlife and riparian ORVs would likely be maintained under alternative D, which changes little from the existing condition.

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of Tonto Creek would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip-rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects Recreation visitation levels are anticipated to remain steady or increase within the vicinity of Tonto Creek. Alternatives B and C would enhance ORVs by decommissioning 0.75 and 0.4 mile of routes respectively, along with decreasing recreation access. Alternative D is expected to maintain ORVs as recreation use increases.

Tonto National Forest 75 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Upper Salt River – Scenic (1a) 15 miles, Wild (2a) 32.1 miles, Scenic (2b) 0.1 mile ORVs from the 1993 inventory for Upper Salt River eligible corridor include:

Scenery: a wide range of spectacular water scenery, from huge waves to quiet pools. It represents one of the very few rivers to flow through the saguaro cactus forest of the Arizona Sonoran Desert. The Salt River has cut a deep gorge with sheer walls through these blocks. Steep slopes, cliffs, and many unique rock forms are common. Sandy beaches, desert pavement, and barren rock are also common to the area.

Recreation: Upper Salt River provides recreation opportunities that draw people from across the state and region. River-related opportunities include whitewater river running, fishing, long distance hiking, and backpacking. River running is so popular that a lottery is used to allocate a limited number of permits. Running the Upper Salt River is comparable to running the Grand Canyon, and it is one of only a very few comparable opportunities in the state and country.

Geologic: The river segment is located southwest of the Colorado Plateau Province, flowing through the Transition Zone, and Basin and Range Provinces of Arizona. The geology is complex and the Upper Salt River canyons offer excellent exposures, which help define the geological evolution of southern Arizona. Geologic attractions within the canyon include a monocline with fully exposed structural features, and salt-bank accumulations to which the Salt River owes its name. A clear view of the nature of the Precambrian basement is available. The upper Salt River has been referred to as one of the most imposing scenic and geologic entities in all of Arizona.

Historic/Cultural: The river received both pre-historic and historic use. Available site data indicate prehistoric use of the area by the Salado during the period 1150–1400 AD. Types of sites range from small detached masonry rooms to continuous multi-room pueblos. Historic usage is primarily associated with ranching dating from the late 19th century to the present. The river corridor contains the site of one of the last battles of the Apache War and many hilltop defensive sites are known from the area.

Wildlife: This segment provides vital nesting and foraging habitat for the bald eagle. Special wildlife species occurring along the Upper Salt River may include: bald eagle, peregrine falcon, southwestern willow flycatcher and narrow-headed garter snake.

Current Condition Evidence of human activity is apparent in the portions with scenic and recreational classifications, where the river borders the Indian Reservations. Roads reach, run parallel to, and cross the river in both the scenic and recreational portions. There are areas within the recreational and scenic portions of this segment that likely do not meet water quality standards. There are 3.15 miles of routes in scenic and recreational sections. No routes are within the wild segment.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternative B • Open road- 0.4 mile (303Ba) • Decommission- 2.2 miles (2297, 2506, 2508, 219, 303A, 303B, 473A, 644A)

Tonto National Forest 76 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

• Administrative use- motorized trail 0.1 mile (219)

Alternative C • Open road- 0.9 mile (219 and 303B) • Decommission- 1.6 miles (2297, 2506, 2508, 303A, 303B, 473A, 644A) • Administrative use- road 0.2 mile (219); motorized trail 0.11 mile (219)

Alternative D • Open road- 2.3 miles (219, 303A, 303B, 473A) • Open motorized trail- 0.4 mile (2297, 2506, 2508) • Decommission- 0.1 mile (644A) • Administrative use- road 0.1 mile (219)

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B and C Decommissioning 1.6 to 2.2 miles of routes and limiting access in the river corridor would enhance all ORVs.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative D Scenery, recreation, geologic, cultural and wildlife values would likely be maintained under alternative D, which decreases open routes by about 1 mile compared to the existing condition.

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of the Upper Salt River would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip- rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects Recreation visitation levels are anticipated to remain steady or increase within the vicinity of the Upper Salt River. Alternatives B and C would enhance ORVs by decommissioning 2.2 and 1.6 miles of routes, respectively, along with decreasing recreation access. Alternative D is expected to maintain ORVs as recreation use increases.

Upper Verde River – Wild (2a) 8.8 miles, Scenic (2b) 1.1 miles ORVs from the 1993 inventory for the Upper Verde River eligible river corridor include:

Recreational: for challenging whitewater, spectacular scenery, wilderness challenge, and solitude. The eligible river area is almost entirely within the Mazatzal Wilderness. Dispersed recreation activities occur year-round, including hiking, backpacking, camping, horseback riding, hunting, fishing, and river running. The Verde River Sheep Bridge, a unique feature in the state, is located just below the wild section with an adjacent hot springs.

Riparian: for the variety of riparian-dependent plant and animal species found on the Verde River. The presence of this array of riparian community types along a medium to large perennial free-flowing river system within the Sonoran Desert makes this a remarkable riparian resource.

Tonto National Forest 77 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Ecological: for the rarity of the riparian environment in the Desert Southwest and its importance to the continued existence of wildlife and fish, especially the numerous threatened, endangered, and sensitive species: southwestern willow flycatcher, Mexican garter snake, western yellow- billed cuckoo, western red bat, lowland leopard frog, Parker’s riffle beetle, razorback sucker, roundtail chub, loach minnow, Colorado pikeminnow, and spikedace. The Verde River is also one of the primary breeding areas for bald eagles in the state of Arizona.

Current Condition Approximately 5.2 miles of routes are present in the corridor, of which 4.4 miles is non- motorized trail in the wilderness. Roads total 0.8 mile (18 and 269) in Section 2b.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternative B • Open road- none • Decommission- 0.8 mile (18 and 269) • Administrative use- none

Alternative C • Open road- 0.6 mile (269) • Decommission- 0.2 mile (18) • Administrative use- none

Alternative D • Open road- 0.8 mile (18 and 269) • Decommission- none • Administrative use- none

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative B Riparian and ecological values would be enhanced by decommissioning all roads within the potential scenic section. However, recreational values may be diminished by limiting access to this popular area on the edge of the wilderness. Such decommissioning would also restrict access to the Sheep Bridge trailhead.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative C Riparian and ecological values would be marginally enhanced by decommissioning 0.2 mile of route 18. Access to the Sheep Bridge would be maintained along with recreational values.

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternative D All ORVs would be maintained in the current state as when this segment was determined eligible; no values would be enhanced.

Tonto National Forest 78 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of the Upper Verde River would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip- rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects The potential wild section has no motorized routes and would have no effects from any alternatives for travel planning. Recreation use of both the wild and scenic sections is expected to increase with the increasing population of the Phoenix metro area. Increasing recreation use presents the possibility for some degradation of water quality, though none is expected from travel planning, per se.

Workman Creek – Recreational (1) 6 miles ORVs from the 1993 inventory for Workman Creek eligible river corridor include:

Scenic: Workman Creek Falls (the tallest known falls on the Tonto National Forest and one of the tallest perennial waterfalls in the state) is a central feature on the eastern end of the canyon, dropping into stunning solid rock pools. Workman Creek occurs in an eco-tone (transition area between two biomes), resulting in diverse vegetation with a mixture of pine and fir created by the microclimate of the narrow canyon. The combination of the unique plant and animal species, in conjunction with its high scenic quality, create a unique stream environment.

Riparian/Ecological: The creek falls sharply as it descends, moving through many transitional areas, different slope aspects, and elevation bands, creating unique habitats that harbor a diverse suite of plants and unique plant groupings. The creek has two riparian-dependent Forest Service sensitive species: Blumer's dock and Arizona bugbane. The habitat has the potential to harbor more rare and narrowly distributed plant species, due to its unique environment.

Current Condition Currently, Workman Creek experiences a lot of human activity, as appropriate for a recreational classification. There are multiple day-use sites within the river corridor, and FR 487 runs parallel to the creek along this segment. State highway 288 leads to Young. About 11.6 miles total routes are in the Workman Creek corridor, of which 1.8 are outside of Forest Service control and 0.9 are non-motorized trail.

Travel Management by Alternative The alternatives differ by the amount of open or closed public access within the corridor.

Alternative B • Open road- 2.4 miles (487) • Decommission- 5.2 miles (671, 2850, 3221, 3222, 3221A, 3221B, 3221C, 3223A, 3223B, 3223D, 3223E, 3223F, 322L, 487B, PV3003) • Administrative use- 1.0 mile (95)

Alternative C • Open road- 3.1 road (487)

Tonto National Forest 79 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

• Decommission- 4.4 miles (2850, 3221, 3222, 3221A, 3221B, 3221C, 3223, 3223A, 3223B, 3223D, 3223E, 3223F) • Administrative use- 2.3 mile (95), motorized trail 0.2 mile (671)

Alternative D • Open road- 3.1 miles (487) • Open motorized trail- 1.1 miles (3222 and 3221C, 671) • Decommission- 3.5 miles (2850, 3221, 3221A, 3221B, 3223A, 3223B, 3223D, 3223E, 3223F) • Administrative use- 1.0 mile (95)

Potential Impact to ORVs under Alternatives B, C and D Decommissioning 5.2, 4.3 and 3.5 miles of routes and limiting access in the river corridor would enhance the scenic and riparian/ecological values.

Free-Flow Character The free-flowing character of the Workman Creek would not be impacted by any action alternative, as none would result in any new impoundments, diversions, straightening, rip- rapping, or other modification of the waterway.

Cumulative Effects Recreation visitation levels are anticipated to remain steady or increase within the vicinity of the Workman Creek. Alternatives B, C, and D would enhance ORVs by decommissioning 5.2, 4.4, and 3.5 miles of routes, respectively, along with decreasing recreation access.

Summary Designated and eligible wild and scenic river segments contain 120 miles of total routes. Of these, 14.6 miles are currently non-motorized trails, and another 11.4 miles are state highway or private roads not subject to Forest Service control. Thus, the net miles of routes in designated and eligible wild and scenic river corridor subject to travel planning is 89.9 miles out of almost 5,000 miles of motorized routes in the existing condition on the Forest.

In the existing condition, 1.8 percent of open motorized forest routes occur within designated and eligible wild and scenic river corridors. Under the preferred alternative C, total motorized routes in wild and scenic corridors open to the public is reduced to 42.9 miles, with 22.7 miles open to administrative use only, and 24.3 miles to be decommissioned. All routes within wilderness areas are non-motorized.

This down-scaled, route-specific analysis for potential impacts from travel management planning for each river corridor shows that the ORVs are overwhelmingly maintained or enhanced by the preferred alternative. Of the 15 rivers analyzed, alternative C would enhance the ORVs in 11 and maintain those values in the remaining 4.

In a forestwide analysis, miles of motorized routes within designated and eligible wild and scenic river corridors was 1 of 12 variables used in the overall assessment of minimizing environmental impacts relative to meeting demands for public access on the Forest. (See Application and Analysis of Minimization Criteria, above.) This variable was included in the model because of the

Tonto National Forest 80 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

importance of preserving the ORVs on wild and scenic rivers. Given the few miles of motorized routes in these corridors, the effects of motorized routes could easily be “washed out” in considering the broader decision. However, Forest leadership had a strong desire to ensure that impacts on wild and scenic rivers were well represented in the broader travel planning analysis and decision.

In the final model, the wild and scenic rivers variable had a relative weight of 60, while other variables’ weights ranged from 15 to 100. Thus, the effects of motorized travel figured prominently in the overall minimization assessment, relative to the proportion of miles involved. This forestwide analysis integrates all salient resource characteristics with demands for access and the desire to minimize user conflicts to provide a cumulative assessment of the relative merits of each alternative, with the value of minimizing impacts from travel planning to wild and scenic rivers figuring prominently in the assessment.

At both the route-specific and forestwide analyses, we have demonstrated that the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of travel management to the ORVs for which these rivers are recognized will be predominantly beneficial under the preferred alternative.

Literature Cited Nicholas, R. 2018. Ecologist, Tonto National Forest. Personal communication during interdisciplinary team meeting. June 12, 2018.

USDA Forest Service. 1993. Resource Information Report: Potential Wild Scenic Recreational River Designation, National Forests of Arizona. Southwestern Region. Albuquerque, NM. 383 pp.

USDA Forest Service. 2004. Verde Wild and Scenic River Comprehensive River Management Plan. Southwestern Region. Albuquerque, NM. 74 pp.

USDA Forest Service. 2011. Fossil Creek Wild and Scenic River Resource Assessment, March 28, 2011. Tonto National Forest. Phoenix, AZ. Air Quality Analysis

Introduction Two primary types of air quality effects occur on the Tonto National Forest: (1) the effects of regional air pollution on forest natural resources and human health; (2) the effects of forest emissions on forest natural resources, human health, and regional air sheds.

Air quality on the Forest is dependent on the type and amount of pollutants emitted into the atmosphere, the background or existing emissions, the size and topography of airsheds, and the prevailing meteorological and weather conditions. Sources of pollution within the Tonto are produced from timber and mining operations, prescribed and wildland fire, forest administrative operations and recreational use, including off highway vehicles. The Forest’s mountains, hills and valleys may create areas of high pollutant concentrations by hindering dispersion and may be directly affected by air pollutants. Loose soils lifted by high winds may transport dust away from its origin, causing indirect impacts to other areas. Dust from forest roads may contribute to fine particulates in the air. However, fugitive road dust is composed of mostly larger size particles, which generally fall back to the ground relatively quickly. Particulates emitted from burning

Tonto National Forest 81 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

(prescribed burning or vehicle exhaust) are smaller in size and can travel great distances before falling back to Earth. Vehicle exhaust can also contribute to ground-level ozone formation.

This air quality analysis documents potential air quality impacts associated with the range of alternatives presented in chapter 2 of the Travel Management Plan FEIS. It identifies areas within the Tonto National Forest that are not meeting current air quality health standards and evaluates emissions from off-highway vehicles (OHV) to determine:

• The current, existing condition of air pollutants emitted by OHV from use on Forest roads that have been used for many decades

• If the proposed action would increase or decrease emissions in air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas or Class I wilderness areas, and effects to the State of Arizona’s ability to attain air quality health standards

Since the release of the Tonto National Forest Land Management Plan in 1985, the plan’s air quality health standards have been superseded by more stringent standards issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). See appendices A and C in the Air Quality Report available in Supporting Documents on the project webpage: https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=28967. That report contains additional details and data, incorporated here by reference.

Regulatory Framework

Clean Air Act The primary Federal law regulating air quality is the Clean Air Act, first passed in 1955 and amended in 1967, 1970, 1977, and 1990. The act is a legal mandate designed to protect public health and welfare from air pollution. Although this policy creates the foundation for air quality regulation, states and counties are often responsible for implementation of the air quality standards. The Clean Air Act establishes human health and welfare standards for air quality and affords Class I wilderness areas protection from air pollution. The EPA and Federal land managers work closely with state air regulators to protect air quality for the benefit of human health and the natural environment.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for ambient concentrations of criteria air pollutants that are considered harmful to public health and the environment. The NAAQS have two forms: primary and secondary. The primary standard sets limits for the protection of public health, including the health of sensitive populations, such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. The secondary standard sets limits for the protection of public welfare, including visibility impairment and damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. Criteria pollutants for both forms of the NAAQS include: particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), and lead (Pb) (See appendix A in the Air Quality Report for the current list of NAAQS.) Geographic areas not meeting the NAAQS are designated as nonattainment areas based on the ambient criteria pollutant concentration.

An exceedance of the NAAQS is defined in 40 CFR 50.1 as “one occurrence of a measured or modeled concentration that exceeds the specified concentration level of such standard for the

Tonto National Forest 82 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

averaging period specified by the standard.” A violation of the NAAQS consists of one or more exceedances of the NAAQS. The precise number of exceedances necessary to cause a violation depends on the form of the standard and other factors, including data quality, defined in Federal rules such as 40 CFR 50.

Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas The EPA designates nonattainment areas based upon air quality monitoring data or modeling studies that indicate an area violates, or contributes to violations of the NAAQS. States are required to submit a state implementation plan (SIP), which defines the strategies used to control air pollution, to bring air quality into attainment. After air quality improves and no longer violates the NAAQS, the EPA may re-designate the area as achieving attainment, and these areas then become classified as maintenance areas. The Clean Air Act and EPA regulations impose requirements for Federal agencies to work with state and local governments in nonattainment and maintenance areas to ensure that Federal actions conform to the initiatives established in the applicable SIP. These regulations are defined under the Clean Air Act General Conformity Rule.

General Conformity 42 U.S.C. 7571-7574 The Clean Air Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that actions they undertake in nonattainment and maintenance areas are consistent with federally enforceable air quality management plans for those areas. Under the General Conformity Rule, Federal agencies must work with state and local governments in nonattainment and maintenance areas to ensure that Federal actions conform to the initiatives established in the applicable state implementation plan. General conformity is typically addressed during the environmental analysis process. The preamble to EPA’s rulemaking on general conformity states that conformity “should be viewed in a manner that fits within a broader view including NEPA activities,” and that “EPA expects the conformity analysis to be coupled with the NEPA analysis and, thus, not result in undue delays” (58 FR 63214, November 30, 1993). Consistent with the requirements of the rule, a Federal agency must make its own general conformity determination, indicating that its actions will conform to the appropriate state implementation plan. However, a general conformity determination is not required for Federal actions that are considered de minimis, meaning where the total of direct and indirect emissions are below the emissions levels specified under 40 CFR 93.153(b)(1) and (2). For the Tonto National Forest Motorized Travel Management Plan to comply with the General Conformity Rule, a general conformity applicability analysis is completed to determine if the net change in PM10 emissions, attributable to each alternative, will not exceed the de minimis levels defined under 40 CFR 93.153(b), in which case requirements of the General Conformity Rule are satisfied and no further review is necessary.

1999 Regional Haze Rule 40 CFR Parts 51 and 52 (RHR) The 1999 Regional Haze Rule mandates that states address control of human-made air pollution that impacts visibility in designated Class I areas. Class I areas include wilderness, national parks, and national monuments greater than 5,000 acres that existed as of August 7, 1977. On the Tonto National Forest, Class I areas include the Mazatzal, Pine Mountain, Sierra Ancha, and Superstition Wilderness Areas. The goal of the Regional Haze Rule is to return visibility conditions in Class I areas to natural background conditions by the year 2064. EPA defines “regional haze” as visibility impairment produced by sources and activities that emit fine particles and their precursor emissions across a broad geographic area, which can interfere with the scenic vistas integral to our national parks, forests, and wilderness areas.

Tonto National Forest 83 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) The Clean Air Act requires Federal land managers “…to preserve, protect, and enhance the air quality in national parks, national wilderness areas, national monuments, … and other areas of special national or regional natural, recreational, scenic, or historic value.” PSD addresses resource protection through the establishment of ceilings on additional amounts of air pollution over base-line levels in “clean” air areas, the protection of the air quality-related values of certain special areas, and additional protection for the visibility values of certain special areas. The PSD Program sets emission limitations for major new or modified stationary sources of air pollution, such as coal-fired electrical power generation plants, and sets limits to the increase of pollutants in Class I and Class II areas. A permittee wishing to build a major new (or significantly modify an existing) facility in a clean air region must obtain a PSD permit from the state. Where emissions from new or modified facilities might affect Class I areas, the Federal land manager must be notified by the air quality regulator having jurisdiction (state or local authorities). The Tonto National Forest Motorized Travel Management Plan SEIS concerns area sources of air pollution from motorized vehicles and is, therefore, not covered by the PSD Program.

State and Local Law The EPA has delegated authority to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and three Arizona counties to regulate sources of air pollution in the state. Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal counties have authority over air pollution control programs for sources within their boundaries.

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Under state law, Arizona Revised Statutes Title 49 §49-401 provides the basis for air quality planning and regulation in Arizona independent of Federal regulations, and establishes ambient air quality standards for the same criteria pollutants as the Federal Clean Air Act. This statute is administered and enforced by the ADEQ.

State of Arizona Conformity Rules Under state rule R18-2-1438, Arizona General Conformity Rule incorporates by reference: 40 CFR 93 (Clean Air Act General Conformity Rule).

Maricopa County Air Quality Department The Phoenix metropolitan area, along with parts of Tonto National Forest, falls within the boundaries of Maricopa County. This area has been designated serious nonattainment for 24-hour PM10. To comply with Federal air quality regulations, the County has adopted fugitive dust regulations, including Rule 310 Fugitive Dust Generating Operations and Rule 310.01 Fugitive Dust from Non-Traditional Sources of Fugitive Dust to help reduce particulate emissions within its jurisdiction.

Maricopa Association of Governments The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) is a council of governments that serves as the regional planning agency for the Phoenix metropolitan area. MAG is the regional air quality planning agency and metropolitan planning organization for transportation for Maricopa County. This includes the Phoenix area and the neighboring urbanized area in Pinal County, containing the Town of Florence and City of Maricopa. MAG’s Environmental Programs division develops air quality plans for carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3), and particulate matter (PM) and helps implement them region-wide (MAG 2010).

Tonto National Forest 84 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Issues This analysis addresses findings and instructions from the regional forester and 2016 FEIS objections review. A list of these comments and instructions appear in appendix E of the Air Quality Report. The major air quality issues are:

1. The air quality analysis should provide a clear description of project alternatives including use and miles of roads (and miles driven) and types of vehicles; assumptions about changes over time; and affects to nonattainment and Class I areas in relation to the project area

2. Complete an emissions inventory for NEPA impacts requirements

3. Show effects to Class 1 Areas and air quality related values

4. Complete a conformity analysis (emissions inventory) for:

a. Ozone (NOx and VOCs – not ozone emissions)

b. Particulates (PM) for all nonattainment areas. Determine if de minimis is met (if below, get ADEQ agreement).

c. Request documentation from the ADEQ that shows the proposed action is conforming to the state implementation plan.

5. If above de minimis, complete a conformity determination with the state plan. Consult with ADEQ on SIP and the OHV emissions inventory for nonattainment areas. Request documentation from the ADEQ that shows the proposed action is conforming to the SIP.

Tonto National Forest 85 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Resource Indicators and Measures Relevant air quality resource indicators and measures include OHV emissions affecting the entire forest area, OHV emissions produced within five nonattainment areas for PM10 and ozone, and OHV emissions that may affect wilderness air quality.

Table 14. Resource indicators and measures for assessing air quality effects Resource Resource Indicator Measure Area of Concern Reference Element Air Pollution NAAQS: tons per year OHV Air Pollution Clean Air Act from OHV PM10, NOx, VOCs Emissions within Activity (NOx and VOCs are Tonto National Forest Forest Service contributors to ozone Policy formation) 3 Air Pollution NAAQS PM10 150 μg/m OHV PM10 emissions Clean Air Act from OHV 24-hour standard within: Activity Not to be State law primary and secondary exceeded more Hayden Planning Area than once per for 24-hour PM10 ADEQ/County/MAG General Conformity year on average rules and Emissions Threshold over 3 years Miami Planning Area regulations 24-hour PM10

Payson Planning Area for 24-hour PM10

Phoenix Planning Area for 24-hour PM10 Air Pollution NAAQS Nitrogen Oxide 100 ppb OHV NOx emissions Clean Air Act from OHV (NOx) 1-hour standard within the Phoenix Activity 98th percentile, planning area for State law Primary averaged over 8-hour ozone 3 years ADEQ/County/MAG General Conformity rules and Emissions Threshold regulations Air Pollution NAAQS: 0.07 ppm OHV NOx and VOC Clean Air Act from OHV Ozone 8-hour standard emissions within the Activity Annual fourth- Phoenix planning area State law primary and secondary highest daily for 8-hour ozone maximum 8-hr ADEQ/County/MAG General Conformity concentration, rules and Emissions Threshold averaged over 3 regulations years Class I Airshed - Pine Mountain Visibility and OHV Qualitative Clean Air Act Wilderness PM10, NOx and assessment of air - Mazatzal Wilderness VOC emissions quality impacts Wilderness Act - Sierra Ancha Wilderness effects to - Superstition Wilderness wilderness areas State law

ADEQ Regional Haze Plan

Tonto National Forest 86 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Data were obtained from the most recent air quality emissions inventory and monitoring data available online. A detailed explanation about how we determined the emissions produced by Forest OHV activities is provided in appendix D of the Air Quality Report.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis for Indirect and Cumulative Effects The air quality spatial analysis area includes forestwide, county, and regional scales, including air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas covering portions of and adjacent to the Forest, plus Class I areas located inside the Tonto National Forest boundary. The temporal boundary is the lifespan of the Travel Management Plan, tied to the Forest Land and Resource Management Plan planning cycle. Forest Service policy sets a forest plan revision cycle of 10 years.

Air quality effects are accounted for on a daily, seasonal, and annual basis. For the purposes of comparing Forest OHV emissions to air quality standards, emissions are compared to emissions estimates covering an entire year period.

Existing Condition According to their annual report, monitoring data collected by ADEQ in 2017 showed decreasing trends in many of the criteria pollutants, including CO, NO2, O3, PM2.5, and PM10 monitors. There was a continued decreasing trend in SO2 at the urban monitor; however, the other SO2 monitors showed an increasing trend. There was a slight decreasing trend in O3 concentrations since 2008. Trends in lead concentrations will be further analyzed with additional years of data, however, exceedances of the 3-month rolling average continue to be observed. The total average of the Air Quality Index values for monitors operated by ADEQ indicated that 83 percent of the days in 2016 were “Good” days (ADEQ 2017). The county-level data shows decreasing air pollution trends similar to the ADEQ 2017 report.

Tonto National Forest 87 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Table 15. Air quality resource indicators and measures for the existing condition Resource Resource Resource Indicator Measure Existing Condition Element Indicator and Measure

Air Quality NAAQS PM10, tons per year Particulate Matter-PM10 Conditions in NOx, ozone According the 2014 National Emissions Inventory (NEI), in Arizona, 53 percent Tonto National of all PM10 emissions come from dust; 22 percent from industrial processes; Forest and the NOx and VOC 10 percent from wildfires and wood burning; 7 percent from agriculture; 3 Region Around are contributors percent from mobile sources, including diesel trucks and off highway vehicles; the Forest to ozone 3 percent miscellaneous; and 2 percent from fuel combustion. formation Nitrogen Oxides – Nox In the 2014 NEI, Arizona NOx emissions were led by the transportation sector with 68 percent of the emissions from mobile sources such as cars and trucks; 20 percent came from fuel combustion processes such as utility power plants; 1 and 12 percent from other sources, including fires, biogenic emissions from soil, stationary combustion sources, and other industrial processes.

Ozone According to the 2014 NEI, VOC emissions in Arizona are: 89 percent biogenic emissions (grass, shrubs, trees); 3 percent fires (wildfire and wood burning); 3 percent mobile sources (cars and trucks, off-road vehicles and equipment such as lawn mowers); 3 percent industrial solvent processes; and 1 percent miscellaneous. Nitrogen oxides are: 68 percent mobile sources; 20 percent fuel combustion (power plants, industrial processes); 7 percent biogenic emissions; 2 percent industrial processes; 2 percent fires; and 1 percent miscellaneous. 3 Particulate Air NAAQS PM10 150 μg/m - not to Tonto National Forest Acreage Inside Hayden Planning Area: Pollution from 24-hour standard be exceeded more Gila County 27,193 acres Forest OHV than once per year Pinal County 23,285 Activity within primary and on average over 3 the Hayden secondary years High PM10 levels are caused by fugitive dust from paved roads and unpaved 2 Planning Area roads, construction sites and windblown dust from agricultural fields, disturbed Classified as General General Conformity areas and vacant lots. Moderate Conformity Emissions Nonattainment Emissions Threshold: 100 Tonto National Forest OHV emissions are approximately 48 PM10 tons per year. Threshold tons PM10 per year

Tonto National Forest 88 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Resource Resource Resource Indicator Measure Existing Condition Element Indicator and Measure 3 Particulate Air NAAQS PM10 150 μg/m - not to Tonto National Forest Acreage Inside Payson Planning Area: Pollution from 24-hour standard be exceeded more Gila County 91,581 acres Forest OHV than once per year Activity within primary and on average over High PM10 levels are caused by fugitive dust from paved roads, construction the Payson secondary 3 years sites, and unpaved roads and windblown dust from agricultural fields, disturbed 3 Planning Area areas on construction sites and vacant lots. Classified as General General Conformity Attainment/Limit Conformity Emissions Tonto National Forest OHV emissions are approximately 80 PM10 tons per year. ed Maintenance Emissions Threshold: Threshold 100 tons PM10 per year 3 Particulate Air NAAQS PM10 150 μg/m - not to Tonto National Forest Acreage Inside Hayden Planning Area: Pollution from 24-hour standard be exceeded more Maricopa County 154,504 acres Forest OHV than once per year Pinal County 14 Activity within primary and on average over the Phoenix secondary 3 years High PM10 levels are caused by fugitive dust from paved roads and unpaved 4 Planning Area roads, construction sites and windblown dust from agricultural fields, disturbed Classified as General General Conformity areas and vacant lots. Serious Conformity Emissions Nonattainment Emissions Threshold: Tonto National Forest OHV emissions are approximately 80 PM10 tons per year. Threshold 70 tons PM10 per year 3 Particulate Air NAAQS PM10 24- 150 μg/m - not to Tonto National Forest Acreage Inside Hayden Planning Area: Pollution from hour standard be exceeded more Gila County 69,119 acres Forest OHV than once per year Pinal County 15,492 Activity within primary and on average over the Miami secondary 3 years High PM10 levels are caused by fugitive dust from paved roads and unpaved 5 Planning Area roads, construction sites and windblown dust from agricultural fields, disturbed Classified as General General Conformity areas and vacant lots. Moderate Conformity Emissions Nonattainment Emissions Threshold: Tonto National Forest OHV emissions are approximately 64 PM10 tons per year. Threshold 100 tons PM10 per year

Tonto National Forest 89 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Resource Resource Resource Indicator Measure Existing Condition Element Indicator and Measure Ozone Air NAAQS Ozone Comparison of Tonto National Forest Acreage Inside Hayden Planning Area: Pollution from 8-hour standard forest OHV Gila County 4 acres OHV Forest emissions to county Maricopa County 690,381 acres Activity in the primary and and nonattainment/ Pinal County 21 Phoenix secondary maintenance area Planning Area emissions Nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) are precursor Classified as General inventories pollutants to ozone formation. Main sources of NOx and VOC emissions include: Moderate Conformity electrical generation, industrial and mobile sources. However, peak afternoon O3 Nonattainment Emissions 0.07 ppm - annual is also a function of sunlight and NOx and VOC mixing ratios. For example, Threshold fourth-highest daily areas that are NOx-sensitive (typically rural areas) are associated with high 6 maximum 8-hr reactivity-weighted VOC/NOx ratios. Adding more VOC to NOx-sensitive areas concentration, may have little or no effect on ozone production. On the other hand, adding averaged over 3 small amounts of NOx to the mixture can have a large effect on ozone years production.

General Conformity Tonto National Forest OHV emissions are approximately 15 NOx and 150 VOC Emissions tons per year. Threshold: 100 tons NOX or VOC per year Class I Airshed Pine Mountain Visibility Based on data from 2000 to 2010, Mazatzal and Pine Mountain Wilderness Wilderness Areas are not experiencing improvements in regional haze at the uniform rate of Mazatzal progress required to meet natural background conditions by 2064. Wilderness Sierra Ancha Sierra Ancha Wilderness Area is experiencing improvements in regional haze 7 Wilderness faster than the uniform rate of progress required to meet natural background Superstition conditions by 2064. Wilderness Superstition Wilderness Area is experiencing improvements in regional haze, but not at the uniform rate of progress required to meet natural background conditions by 2064.

Tonto National Forest 90 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Resource Indicator and Measure 1

Particulates, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and ozone (O3) are the criteria air pollutants most relevant to the Tonto National Forest travel management plan air quality analysis.

Particulate Sources

PM10 emissions in Arizona are mostly geological in origin and are dominated by dust from three activities: the constant grinding (re-entraining) of dust from paved roads, driving on unpaved roads, and earth moving associated with construction. On days with winds in excess of 15 miles per hour, wind erosion of soil may contribute to this loading. According the 2014 National Emissions Inventory (NEI), 53 percent of all PM10 emissions come from dust; 22 percent from industrial processes; 10 percent from wildfires and wood burning; 7 percent from agriculture; 3 percent from mobile sources, including diesel trucks and off highway vehicles; 3 percent miscellaneous; and 2 percent from fuel combustion.

PM10 concentrations are not spatially distributed evenly across Arizona because each monitoring site is strongly influenced by the degree of localized emissions of particulates. PM10 maximum concentrations can occur in any season, provided nearby sources of coarse particulates are present or when strong and gusty winds suspend soil disturbed by human activities. Hourly concentrations of particulates tend to peak during those hours of the worst distribution, which is from sunset to midmorning (ADEQ 2016)

Nitrogen Dioxide Sources

Combustion emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) are 95 percent NO and 5 percent NO2. NO2 concentrations often serve as the indicator for the larger group of nitrogen oxides, since NO rapidly oxidizes to NO2.

In the 2014 NEI, Arizona NOX emissions were led by the transportation sector, with 68 percent of the emissions from mobile sources, such as cars and trucks; 20 percent came from fuel combustion processes such as utility power plants; 12 percent came from other sources, including fires, biogenic emissions from soil, stationary combustion sources, and other industrial processes.

NO and NO2 concentrations are highest near major roadways. NO concentrations decrease rapidly with distance from the roadway, whereas NO2 concentrations are more evenly distributed because of their formation through oxidation and their subsequent transport. Concentrations of NO2 are highest in the late afternoon and early evening of winter, when rush hour emissions of NO are converted to NO2 under relatively stable atmospheric conditions. Because NO reacts rapidly with O3, nocturnal O3 concentrations in cities are often reduced to near zero levels, while concentrations at background sites remain higher (ADEQ 2016).

Ozone Sources High O3 concentrations are a phenomenon caused when sunlight, emissions from plant life, and evaporating fuel emissions peak. Fuel emissions consist of VOCs and NOx and are two of the main components of O3 formation.

According to the 2014 NEI, VOC emissions in Arizona are: 89 percent biogenic emissions (grass, shrubs, and trees); 3 percent fires (wildfire and wood burning); 3 percent mobile sources (cars and trucks, off-road vehicles and equipment such as lawnmowers); 3 percent industrial solvent processes; and 1 percent miscellaneous.

Tonto National Forest 91 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Nitrogen oxides are: 68 percent mobile sources; 20 percent fuel combustion (power plants, industrial processes); 7 percent biogenic emissions; 2 percent industrial processes; 2 percent fires; and 1 percent miscellaneous.

Ozone has relatively high background levels, with the daily maximum in remote areas being about one-half to three-quarters of the daily maximum in urban areas. In these areas, the highest O3 concentrations tend to occur on the downwind edge, although high concentrations do occur less frequently in the central city. Urban O3 concentrations are low to near zero at night and rise rapidly through the morning and peak in the afternoon (ADEQ 2016).

National Emissions Inventory The NEI is a comprehensive and detailed estimate of air emissions of criteria pollutants, criteria precursors, and hazardous air pollutants from air emissions sources. The NEI is released every three years based primarily upon data provided by state, local, and tribal air agencies for sources in their jurisdictions and supplemented by data developed by the EPA (EPA 2018a).

To be able to compare the Forest’s OHV emissions between the alternatives, and compare OHV emissions to regional emissions in the Forest area, the NEI is used to show estimates of OHV-related emissions at the county level. NEI emissions estimates are not available at the nonattainment/maintenance area level (EPA 2018a). The Phoenix (Maricopa County) PM10 nonattainment area has emission estimates prepared by the MAG as part of the association’s attainment planning process for PM10. The estimate provides county wide PM10 emissions and PM10 emissions from inside the nonattainment area (MCAQD 2011).

Non-road emissions from recreational vehicles are calculated using EPA’s NONROAD 2008 model for the 2011/2014 inventories; the next issuance will likely use the MOVES2014 model. This is done on a county by county basis, so in order to get an estimate of the emissions rates in the Forest, we use the county level emissions as a surrogate (land area) to calculate the total percentage for the Forest located in Maricopa, Gila, Yavapai, and Pinal counties (Lucke, C., Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, personal communication, April 26, 2018). Figure 1 shows the location of the Tonto National Forest in the four counties.

The NEI and MAG inventories’ PM10 emissions estimates vary widely. As an example, for Maricopa County, the NEI estimate for unpaved road dust is approximately one-half of the MAG off-highway recreational vehicle estimate shown below.

Tonto National Forest 92 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Figure 23. Tonto National Forest and Arizona county boundaries

The following tables show the 2014 NEI estimates of OHV-related emissions in the four counties the Forest is located in, compared to the 2018 Forest current condition emissions (methodology described in detail Air Quality Report appendix D). Table 16 shows the annual county level PM10 emissions from unpaved roads (fugitive dust). Table 16 through table 19 show annual county level mobile PM10, NOx, and VOC emissions from off-road mobile (vehicle exhaust) sources. Off-road mobile sources include vehicles, engines, and equipment used for construction, agriculture, recreation, and many other purposes. Therefore, the emissions shown in table 16 through table 19 are overestimates, because OHV emissions are one of several sources in the estimates (EPA 2018b).

Table 16. Annual unpaved road dust PM10 emissions Total County-Wide Emissions Estimated Baseline Tonto NF County (tons/year) Emissions (tons/year) Gila 4,211 1,008 Maricopa 6,796 240 Pinal 17,000 80 Yavapai 14,029 80

Tonto National Forest 93 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Table 17. Annual off-road mobile PM10 emissions

County PM10 Emissions (tons/year) Gila 60 Maricopa 1,991 Pinal 210 Yavapai 164

Table 18. Annual off-road mobile nitrogen oxide emissions Total County-Wide Emissions Estimated Baseline Tonto NF County (tons/year) Emissions (tons/year) Gila 382 63 Maricopa 19,868 15 Pinal 2,831 5 Yavapai 2,204 5

Table 19. Annual off-road mobile volatile organic compounds emissions Total County-Wide Emissions Estimated Baseline Tonto NF County (tons/year) Emissions (tons/year) Gila 1,850 630 Maricopa 13,287 150 Pinal 1,435 50 Yavapai 1,316 50

Maricopa County Emissions Inventory

Table 20 shows the Maricopa County 2011 Periodic Emissions Inventory PM10 emissions estimates for off-road recreation vehicles. The inventory assumed that 75 percent of the annual travel by off-road recreational vehicles occurs on unpaved surfaces inside Maricopa County, with the remaining 25 percent occurring on paved surfaces within Maricopa County and paved and unpaved surfaces outside of Maricopa County. The product of the mileage, number of vehicles, and 75 percent produces the annual vehicle miles of travel (VMT) on unpaved surfaces, is shown in table 20. For comparison purposes the current, existing estimated use of unpaved roads open to the public in the Maricopa county portion of the Tonto NF is also shown.

Table 20. 2011 offroad recreational vehicle travel on unpaved surfaces in Maricopa County Annual Tonto Number 2011 2011 Miles NF Tonto NF Vehicle Type of Annual Daily Per Annual Daily VMT Vehicles VMT VMT Vehicle VMT All-terrain vehicle 1,608 35,255 42,517,530 116,486 136,875 375 Off-road motorcycle 1,600 8,390 10,068,00 27,584 Specialty Vehicles/Carts 650 1,755 855,563 2,344 Unknown Unknown (Non-Diesel) Specialty Vehicles/Carts 4,350 161 525,263 1,439 Unknown Unknown (Diesel)

Table 21 shows the annual and daily off-road recreational vehicle particulate emissions in Maricopa County and the Phoenix (Maricopa County) PM10 nonattainment area, based on multiplying the VMTs and the emissions factors above (MCAQD 2011).

Tonto National Forest 94 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Table 21. Annual and typical daily fugitive dust emissions from off road recreational vehicles

Geographic Area Annual Emissions (tons/yr)

PM10 PM2.5 Maricopa County 14,533 1,444 Phoenix PM10 Non-Attainment Area 2,593 258

Table 22 shows the amounts of PM10 emissions that are estimated to be produced by Tonto National Forest OHV activity in Maricopa County and the Phoenix PM10 nonattainment area.

Table 22. 2018 current conditon PM10 emissions estimated to be produced by Tonto National Forest OHV activity in Maricopa County and the Phoenix PM10 nonattainment area

Area within Tonto National Forest Annual PM10 Emissions (tons/yr) Maricopa County 240 Phoenix PM10 Non-Attainment Area 80

Portions of the Tonto National Forest are located in five criteria air pollutant nonattainment or maintenance areas for PM10 and ozone. Figure 24 shows the locations of the areas.

Figure 24. Arizona nonattainment and maintenance areas

Tonto National Forest 95 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Figure 25. PM10 nonattainment and maintenance areas (EPA 2018d)

Resource Indicator and Measure 2

Hayden 24-hour PM10 Moderate Nonattainment Area Geographic Scope within the Forest: This area includes the northern portion of the Hayden PM10 nonattainment area and portions of the Globe Ranger District of the Tonto National Forest. See figure 25.

Administrative History: Hayden was designated as a PM10 nonattainment area effective on November 15, 1990, and classified as “Moderate.” Currently, this area is in nonattainment status. The Hayden PM10 SIP was submitted to EPA on October 16, 1989, and was given limited approval in 1994. Hayden area PM10 monitoring data indicate that the area has not exceeded the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS since 1997.

Air Quality Stress Factors: High PM10 levels are caused by fugitive dust from paved roads and unpaved roads, construction sites and windblown dust from agricultural fields, disturbed areas, and vacant lots.

Trends: The Hayden PM10 nonattainment area has been classified as moderate nonattainment since 1994 and currently remains classified as moderate nonattainment.

General Conformity Emissions Threshold: 100 tons PM10 per year.

Tonto National Forest 96 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Resource Indicator and Measure 3

Payson 24-hour PM10 Attainment/Limited Maintenance Area Geographic Scope: This area is located within the Tonto National Forest boundaries.

Administrative History: Gila County (part): Payson was designated as a PM10 nonattainment area effective on January 20, 1994, and classified as “Moderate.” Currently, this area is in Maintenance status. ADEQ submitted the Payson Moderate Area PM10 Maintenance Plan and Request for Re-designation to Attainment to EPA in March 2002. EPA approved the plan and re- designation in August 2002. The area is currently in compliance for PM10 NAAQS.

Air Quality Stress Factors: High PM10 levels are caused by fugitive dust from paved roads, construction sites, and unpaved roads and windblown dust from agricultural fields, disturbed areas on construction sites and vacant lots.

Trends: Air quality within the Payson PM10 maintenance area is good. The area is currently attaining the NAAQS for 24-hour PM10.

General Conformity Emissions Threshold: 100 tons PM10 per year.

Resource Indicator and Measure 4

Phoenix (Maricopa County) 24-hour PM10 Serious Nonattainment Area

Geographic Scope: This area includes the northwestern portion of the Phoenix PM10 nonattainment area and portions of the Mesa and Cave Creek Ranger Districts of the Tonto National Forest, figure 25.

Administrative History: Maricopa and Pinal Counties, Phoenix planning area was designated as a PM10 nonattainment area effective on November 15, 1990, and classified as “Serious” (61 FR 21372). Currently, this area is in nonattainment status. On June 10, 1996, EPA reclassified the Maricopa County PM10 nonattainment area to serious nonattainment. In February 2000, the State submitted a revised State Implementation Plan based on new most stringent measures, and requested a 5-year extension on the attainment date. However, even under the more stringent plan, the area still failed to attain the NAAQS for PM10.

Air Quality Stress Factors: High PM10 levels are caused by fugitive dust from paved roads and unpaved roads, construction sites and windblown dust from agricultural fields, disturbed areas and vacant lots.

Trends: The Phoenix PM10 nonattainment area has been classified as serious nonattainment since 1996, and currently remains classified as serious nonattainment.

General Conformity Emissions Threshold: 70 tons PM10 per year.

Resource Indicator and Measure 5

Miami 24-hour PM10 Moderate Nonattainment Area

Geographic Scope within the Forest: This area includes the a majority of the Miami PM10 nonattainment area excluding the Miami and Globe metropolitan areas and portions of the Globe Ranger District of the Tonto National Forest.

Tonto National Forest 97 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Administrative History: Miami was designated as a PM10 nonattainment area effective November 15, 1990, and classified as “Moderate.” Currently, this area is in nonattainment status.

Air Quality Stress Factors: High PM10 levels are caused by fugitive dust from paved roads and unpaved roads, construction sites and windblown dust from agricultural fields, disturbed areas and vacant lots.

Trends: Air quality within the Miami nonattainment area is moderate and improving.

General Conformity Emissions Threshold: 100 tons PM10 per year.

Resource Indicator and Measure 6

Phoenix 8-hour Ozone Moderate Nonattainment Area Geographic Scope within the Forest: This area includes the northwestern portion of the Phoenix 8-hour ozone nonattainment area and portions of the Mesa and Cave Creek Ranger Districts of the Tonto National Forest. See figure 26.

Administrative History: Phoenix-Mesa, Arizona, was designated as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area effective on July 20, 2012 (77 FR 30088) and classified as "Moderate" (77 FR 30088). Currently, this area is in nonattainment status. In 2004, the EPA designated portions of Maricopa and Pinal Counties as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. A plan to demonstrate attainment of the standard by the 2008 ozone season was developed by the MAG and submitted to the EPA in 2007. A maintenance plan and re-designation request for the Maricopa nonattainment area was developed by MAG and submitted to the EPA in March 2009. On March 12, 2008, the EPA revised the 8-hour primary ozone standard to 0.075 parts per million (ppm).

Air Quality Stress Factors: Nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) are precursor pollutants to ozone formation. Main sources of NOx and VOC emissions include: electrical generation, industrial, and mobile sources. However, peak afternoon O3 is also a function of sunlight and NOx and VOC mixing ratios. For example, areas that are NOx-sensitive (typically rural areas) are associated with high reactivity-weighted VOC/NOx ratios. Adding more VOC to NOx-sensitive areas may have little or no effect on ozone production. On the other hand, adding small amounts of NOx to the mixture can have a large effect on ozone production.

Trends: The Phoenix 8-hour ozone nonattainment area has been classified as moderate nonattainment since 2004, and currently remains classified as nonattainment.

General Conformity Emissions Threshold: 100 tons of VOC or NOx per year.

Tonto National Forest 98 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Figure 26. Phoenix ozone non-attainment area (EPA 2018d)

Resource Indicator and Measure 7

Class I Wilderness Areas Air pollution affects the natural quality of forest lands, particularly wilderness areas or Air Quality Related Values (AQRV) or Wilderness Air Quality Values (WAQV). High ozone concentrations can injure sensitive vegetation. Fossil fuel burning emits sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) into the atmosphere. Certain types of agricultural activities, such as livestock grazing and dairy production, emit ammonia (NH3) to the atmosphere. Such emissions can lead to atmospheric deposition of sulfuric acids, nitric acids, and ammonium to national forest ecosystems above critical load thresholds.

Atmospheric deposition can cause lake body acidification, eutrophication, and hypoxia; soil nutrient changes; and vegetation impacts. Deposition of toxic metals such as mercury and lead can be harmful to both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Visibility in most national forests is obscured some portion of the year by anthropogenic (human-caused) haze of fine pollutant particles. Fire smoke emissions is the greatest source of pollution affecting visibility in wilderness areas in and around the Tonto National Forest. In addition, the Clean Air Act requires Forest Service operations, visitor use, including OHV, and permitted operations such as prescribed burning, fossil fuels development and production, and mining to comply with NAAQS and protection of AQRV/WAQV.

Tonto National Forest 99 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

There are four Class I areas within the Forest:

• Pine Mountain Wilderness • Mazatzal Wilderness • Sierra Ancha Wilderness • Superstition Wilderness ADEQ is developing a SIP to remedy existing and prevent future visibility impairment at mandatory Class I Federal areas. The SIP is required under 40 CFR Part 51 Section 300 through 309 of the Regional Haze Rule and will provide reasonable progress and long-term strategies for Arizona's 12 Class I areas. The Regional Haze Rule requires state agencies to make Best Available Retroactive Technology (BART) determinations for stationary sources located near Class I areas. The BART determinations dictate whether a source must comply with emission limits or implement technology-based control measures to reduce pollutants that weaken visibility. Arizona currently has several stationary sources subject to control requirements under BART.

Each area is given a reasonable progress goal for the 20 percent best and 20 percent worst days, which is reevaluated during each SIP revision. The reasonable progress goals incrementally reduce the amount of pollutants in an effort to ultimately reach a physical state termed “natural conditions” by 2064. Visibility values are expressed in deciviews, or a measurement based on perceptible change to the human eye. The Regional Haze Rule also includes requirements for periodic plan revisions and progress reports. Arizona’s first progress report was due to be submitted to the EPA in February 2016.

According to IMPROVE data, the primary contributor to visibility impairment on the worst days for the wilderness area in and around the Tonto National Forest is organic matter, which is often due to fire sources that are difficult to predict or control, but regulatory efforts can still have a positive impact on visibility by reducing other pollution sources.

Based on data from 2000 to 2010, Mazatzal and Pine Mountain Wilderness Areas are not experiencing improvements in regional haze at the uniform rate of progress required to meet natural background conditions by 2064. Many emission reductions that are required as part of the Regional Haze SIP will occur over the next several years, so significant improvements in visibility should be seen in the next decade.

Sierra Ancha Wilderness Area is experiencing improvements in regional haze faster than the uniform rate of progress required to meet natural background conditions by 2064.

Superstition Wilderness Area is experiencing improvements in regional haze, but not at the uniform rate of progress required to meet natural background conditions by 2064.

Environmental Consequences

Estimating Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled and Emissions For all alternatives, the assumptions used in the Tonto National Forest OHV emissions estimate methodology (appendix D of the Air Quality Report) assumes that a daily average of 89 OHVs drive 25 miles each on unpaved roads open to the public at 45 miles per hour. The emissions factors used results in each vehicle producing 3.61 pounds of PM10, 0.25 pound of NOx, and

Tonto National Forest 100 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

2.25 pounds of VOC per mile. This is a conservative overestimate compared to the Maricopa County (Phoenix nonattainment area) methodology that used a PM10 emission factor for All Terrain Vehicles and Specialty Vehicles/Carts of 0.594 pound per vehicle mile traveled.

The Forest does not have survey data showing the distribution or locations of OHV use across the Forest. Therefore, we cannot definitively determine OHV use in the various nonattainment areas. Rather, we distribute daily use based on the amount of unpaved roads open to the public in the nonattainment areas compared to total unpaved roads forestwide. In other words, under alternative A there are 4,653 miles of forestwide unpaved roads open to the public and 255 miles in the Phoenix PM10 serious nonattainment area or 5 percent of the forestwide total. Therefore, on an average daily basis, we assume 5 OHVs use the forest roads in the nonattainment area.

Direct and Indirect Effects

Effects Common to All Alternatives

Table 23, table 24, and table 25 show emissions estimate comparisons of the amounts of PM10, NOx and VOC emissions in the counties the Forest is located in to Forest OHV emissions for all alternatives. Based on the emissions from an average of 89 OHVs per day described above (32,485 per year) approximately 1,424 tons PM10, 89 tons of NOx and 890 tons of VOC are produced forestwide per year. The methodology described above is used to distribute the Forest emissions into the counties. The tables show that Forest OHV emissions are well within the NEI estimates.

Table 23. Annual NEI county unpaved road dust PM10 emissions compared to the alternatives Total County- Wide NEI Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D County Emissions (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) Gila 4,211 1,008 1,024 976 1,024 Maricopa 6,796 240 224 304 240 Pinal 17,000 80 64 64 80 Yavapai 14,029 80 80 96 80

Table 24. Annual NEI off-road mobile nitrogen oxides emissions compared to the alternatives Total County- Wide NEI Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D County Emissions (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) Gila 382 63 64 61 72 Maricopa 19,868 15 14 19 15 Pinal 2,831 5 5 4 5 Yavapai 2,204 5 5 6 5

Table 25. Annual NEI off-road mobile volatile organic compounds emissions compared to the alternatives Total County-Wide Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D County NEI Emissions (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) Gila 1,850 630 640 610 720 Maricopa 13,287 150 140 190 150 Pinal 1,435 50 50 40 50 Yavapai 1,316 50 50 60 50

Tonto National Forest 101 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Table 26 shows a comparison of the amounts of off-road recreational vehicles’ PM10 emissions in Maricopa County and the Phoenix (Maricopa) nonattainment area compared to Forest OHV emissions for all alternatives based on the emissions estimate methodology used by the county. The tables show that Forest OHV emissions are well within the Maricopa County emissions inventory.

Table 26. Maricopa County annual fugitive dust PM10 emissions from off-road recreational vehicles compared to the alternatives Annual Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative Geographic Area Emissions A B C D (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) Maricopa County 14,533 240 224 304 240 PM10 Nonattainment Area 2,593 80 80 96 80

Potential for impacts to Class I areas from Tonto National Forest OHV emissions is very low. Table 27 shows a comparison of Tonto National Forest OHV emissions to all emission sources, except fire, in the four counties the Forest is located in. The county emissions are based on data from the 2014 NEI. The Tonto’s OHV emissions are 1.3 percent of PM10, 0.08 percent of NOx, and 0.1 percent of VOC. The vast majority of the pollutants that may affect Class I areas are from sources outside of the Forest area.

Table 27. Comparison of Tonto National Forest OHV emissions to four counties emissions the Forest occupies

Area PM10 tons/year NOx tons/year VOC tons/year Tonto NF TMP FEIS 1,424 89 890 Alternatives A, B, C, D (1) Gila County 8,216 (2) 2,814 (3) 93,463 (4) Maricopa County 33,648 (2) 73,134 (3) 262,417 (4) Pinal County 42,368 (2) 14,777 (3) 122,568 (4) Yavapai County 28,007 (2) 12,714 (3) 130,653 (4) Total Counties 112,239 (2) 103,439 (3) 609,101 (4) Comparison of Tonto NF 1.3% 0.08% 0.1% to Counties (percent) (1) Includes all National Forest System lands in Gila, Maricopa, Pinal and Yavapai Counties. (2) Dust, industrial processes, agriculture, mobile, miscellaneous, fuel combustion. (3) Mobile, biogenics, industrial processes, fuel combustion, miscellaneous. (4) Biogenics, mobile, solvent, miscellaneous, industrial process, fuel combustion, agriculture. The primary contributor to visibility impairment on the worst days for the wilderness areas in and around the Forest is organic matter, which is often due to fire sources. Table 28 shows fire PM10 emissions for the four county areas based on the 2014 NEI. Annual fire emissions vary widely from year to year.

Tonto National Forest 102 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Table 28. 2014 NEI PM10 emissions from fires

Area PM10 tons Gila County 2,149 Maricopa County 198 Pinal County 53 Yavapai County 879

Cumulative Effects Common to All Alternatives In table 23 through table 27, the data show that the contribution of air pollutants from Tonto National Forest OHV is far less than from other sources outside of the Forest. Under all of the action alternatives, there is generally a reduction of OHV emissions in each alternative with some minor increases in three nonattainment areas. These increases can be attributed to a higher proportion of open unpaved roads in the nonattainment areas, even though the total miles of open roads decreases. Overall, implementation of the proposed action would reduce air pollution from OHVs in Tonto National Forest, contribute to improving air quality, and reduce cumulative effects.

Alternative A – No Action Under alternative A, 4,653 miles of unpaved roads would remain open to public OHV use.

Table 29 shows the current, existing condition of Tonto National Forest OHV emissions from public use of open unpaved roads. The roads have been in use for many decades. The action alternatives are compared to table 29, baseline emissions, in the following tables.

Table 29. Existing condition of Tonto National Forest OHV emissions from public use on unpaved road Total Total Total Miles of Percent Average Estimated Estimated Estimated Area Unpaved of Total Daily Emissions Emissions Emissions OHV Roads Miles OHV PM10 NOx VOC (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) Tonto National Forest- 4,653 100 89 1,424 89 890 Wide

Hayden PM10 151 3 3 48 N/A N/A Moderate Nonattainment Area

Payson PM10 211 5 5 80 N/A N/A Attainment/ Limited Maintenance Area

Phoenix PM10 Serious 255 5 5 80 N/A N/A Nonattainment Area

Miami PM10 Moderate 183 4 4 64 N/A N/A Nonattainment Area Phoenix Ozone 814 17 15 N/A 15 150 Moderate Nonattainment Area

Tonto National Forest 103 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Alternative B Under alternative B, 2,343 miles of unpaved roads would be open to public OHV use.

Table 30 shows a reduction of forestwide unpaved OHV roads and reductions in road miles in the nonattainment areas. For the Payson PM10 area there is an increase of 16 tons per year of PM10 and the increase is well below the conformity threshold level of 100 tons per year.

Table 30. Tonto National Forest OHV emissions for alternative B Total Total Total Miles of Percent Average Estimated Estimated Estimated Unpaved Area of Total Daily Emissions Emissions Emissions OHV Miles OHV PM10 NOx VOC Roads (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) Tonto National Forest- 2,343 100 89 1,424 89 890 Wide (-2,310) (-50%)

Hayden PM10 Moderate 83 3 3 48 N/A N/A Nonattainment Area (-68) (+-0) (-45%) (+-0%)

Payson PM10 143 6 6 96 N/A N/A Attainment/Limited (-68) (+16) Maintenance Area (-32%) (+17%)

Phoenix PM10 Serious 126 5 5 80 N/A N/A Nonattainment Area (-129) (+-0) (-51%) (0%)

Miami PM10 Moderate 47 2 2 32 N/A N/A Nonattainment Area (-136) (-32) (-75%) (-50%) Phoenix Ozone Moderate 376 16 14 N/A 14 140 Nonattainment Area (-438) (-1) (-10) (-54%) (-7%) (-7%)

Alternative C Under alternative C, 3,376 miles of unpaved roads would be open to public OHV use.

Table 31 shows a reduction of forestwide unpaved OHV roads and reductions in road miles in the nonattainment areas. For the Phoenix PM10 area there is an increase of 16 tons per year of PM10 and the increase is well below the conformity threshold level of 70 tons per year. For the Phoenix Ozone area there is an increase of 4 tons per year of NOx, and an increase of 40 tons per year of VOC. Both increases are well below the conformity threshold level of 100 tons per year.

Table 31. Tonto National Forest OHV emissions for alternative C Total Total Total Miles of Percent Average Estimated Estimated Estimated Unpaved Area of Total Daily Emissions Emissions Emissions OHV Miles OHV PM10 NOx VOC Roads (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) Tonto National 3,376 100 89 1,424 89 890 Forest-Wide (-1,277) (-27%)

Tonto National Forest 104 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Total Total Total Miles of Percent Average Estimated Estimated Estimated Unpaved Area of Total Daily Emissions Emissions Emissions OHV Miles OHV PM10 NOx VOC Roads (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year)

Hayden PM10 82 3 3 48 N/A N/A Moderate (-69) (+-0) Nonattainment Area (-46%) (+-0%)

Payson PM10 160 5 5 80 N/A N/A Attainment/Limited (-51) (+-0) Maintenance Area (-24%) (+-0%)

Phoenix PM10 238 7 6 96 N/A N/A Serious (-17) (+16) Nonattainment Area (-7%) (+17%)

Miami PM10 62 2 2 32 N/A N/A Moderate (-121) (-32) Nonattainment Area (-61%) (-50%) Phoenix Ozone 702 21 19 N/A 19 190 Moderate (-112) (+4) (+40) Nonattainment Area (-14%) (+21%) (+21%)

Alternative D Under alternative D, 4,042 miles of unpaved roads would be open to public OHV use.

Table 32 shows a reduction of forestwide unpaved OHV roads and reductions in road miles in the nonattainment areas. There are no increase in emissions in any of the nonattainment areas.

Table 32. Tonto National Forest OHV emissions for alternative D Total Total Total Miles of Percent Average Estimated Estimated Estimated Unpaved Area of Total Daily Emissions Emissions Emissions OHV Miles OHV PM10 NOx VOC Roads (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) Tonto National Forest- 4,042 100 89 1,424 89 890 Wide (-611) (-14%) Hayden PM10 Moderate 134 3 3 48 N/A N/A Nonattainment Area (-17) (+-0) (-12%) (+-0%) Payson PM10 187 5 5 80 N/A N/A Attainment/Limited (-24) (+-0) Maintenance Area (-11%) (+-0%) Phoenix PM10 Serious 182 5 5 80 N/A N/A Nonattainment Area (-73) (+-0) (+-0%) (+-0%) Miami PM10 Moderate 117 3 3 48 N/A N/A Nonattainment Area (-66) (-16) (-36%) (-25%) Phoenix Ozone Moderate 668 17 15 N/A 15 150 Nonattainment Area (-146) (+-0) (+-0) (-18%) (+-0%) (+-0%)

Tonto National Forest 105 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Summary Under all of the action alternatives there is generally a reduction of OHV emissions in each alternative with some minor increases in three nonattainment areas. None of the increases would exceed conformity threshold levels. Overall, implementation of the proposed action (alternative C) will reduce air pollution from Forest OHV and contribute to improving air quality and reduce cumulative effects to the airsheds in the region.

The primary contributor to visibility impairment on the worst days in the Class I areas in and around the Forest is organic matter, which is often due to fire sources that are difficult to predict or control, but regulatory efforts can still have a positive impact on visibility.

Literature Cited ADEQ 2016. Annual Ambient Air Assessment Report 2016. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Air Quality Division. Air Assessment Section August 2017 Publication Number: EQR-17-06.

ADEQ 2017a. Annual Ambient Air Assessment Report 2017. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Air Quality Division. Air Assessment Section August 2018 Publication Number: EQR-18-06.

ADEQ 2017b. Arizona Regional Haze Plan. Website accessed January 4, 2018. http://azdeq.gov/regional-haze-plan

EPA 2018a. 2014 National Emissions Inventory. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, DC. Website accessed May 15, 2018: https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions- inventories/national-emissions-inventory-nei

EPA 2018b. Basic Information about the Emission Standards Reference Guide for On-road and Nonroad Vehicles and Engines. Emission Standards Reference Guide. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, DC. Website accessed April 19, 2018: https://www.epa.gov/emission-standards-reference-guide/basic-information-about- emission-standards-reference-guide-road

EPA 2018c. County level Air Quality Index data 1993-2018. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, DC. Website accessed April 19 and May 18, 2018: https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/air-data-multiyear-tile-plot

EPA 2018d. Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants (Green Book). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, DC. Website accessed May 15, 2018: https://www.epa.gov/green-book

IMPROVE IKBA1. 2013. Triepke, Jack. Visibility Data Summary: Mazatzal and Pine Mountain Wilderness, AZ. USDA Forest Service. 2013.

IMPROVE SIAN1. 2013. Triepke, Jack. Visibility Data Summary: Sierra Ancha Wilderness, AZ. USDA Forest Service. 2013.

IMPROVE TONT1. 2013. Triepke, Jack. Visibility Data Summary: Superstition Wilderness, AZ. USDA Forest Service. 2013.

Tonto National Forest 106 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Lucke, C. 2018. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, personal communication April 26, 2018.

Maricopa County Air Quality Department (.MCAQD). 2011. 2011 Periodic Emissions Inventory for PM10 for the Maricopa County, Arizona, PM10 Nonattainment Area. January 2014.

Rule 310.01. Fugitive Dust from Non-Traditional Sources of Fugitive Dust. Maricopa County Air Quality Department.

Tonto National Forest 107

Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Preparers and Contributors Interdisciplinary Team Members Specialists from the Enterprise Program and external consultants were primarily responsible for completing analyses and preparing reports. Participation by specialists, line officers, and staff officers in two workshops and multiple reviews of reports and data were critical to the success of the project

Enterprise Program Shannon Downey – project lead and environmental coordinator

Amanda Walker – recreation specialist

Jan Spencer – wild and scenic rivers specialist

Scott Williams – air quality specialist

Lucretia Smith – GIS specialist

Chip Fisher – GIS specialist

External Consultants Dan Salas – Cardno decision analyst

Steve Morey – US Fish and Wildlife Service decision analyst

Tonto National Forest Staff Neil Bosworth – forest supervisor

Tom Torres – deputy forest supervisor

Greg Schuster – recreation program manager and line officer surrogate

Debbie Cress – Payson district ranger

Micah Grondin – Cave Creek district ranger

Mike Martinez – ecosystems staff officer

Rebecca Hoffman – public services staff officer

Christine Crawford – forest engineer

Carrie Templin – public affairs officer

Dave Bailey – GIS specialist (retired)

Frank Williams – GIS specialist

Tonto National Forest 109 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Justin Eddinger – GIS specialist

Anne Thomas – environmental coordinator

Jill Holderman – forest wildlife biologist

Ryan Nichols – forest ecologist

Kris Hill – forest archaeologist

Grant Loomis – forest hydrologist

Tony Bush – Tonto Basin wildlife biologist

Ron Sherron – air quality specialist

Dave Franquero – transportation engineer

Kenna Belsky – forest planner

Beth Rumpza – assistant forest planner

Eric Norman – Cave Creek recreation specialist

Clint Randall – Payson recreation and lands specialist

Federal, State, and Local Agencies Kriselle Colvin – Arizona Game and Fish Department wildlife biologist

Kelly Wolff-Krauter – Arizona Game and Fish Department wildlife biologist

Catherine Lucke – Arizona Department of Air Quality

Others: The following provided assistance in verifying geospatial information regarding routes under objection:

Rich Smith – Tonto Recreation Alliance

Steve Speak – Tonto Recreation Alliance

Jeff Gursch – Arizona Off-Highway Vehicle Coalition

Tonto National Forest 110 Travel Management on the Tonto National Forest Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Distribution of the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement A notice of the availability of this draft supplemental environmental impact statement was published in the Federal Register. In addition, a legal notice of the comment period was published in the newspaper of record, The Arizona Republic. The DSEIS and relevant announcements were also posted to the Tonto National Forest website (https://www.fs.usda.gov/resources/tonto/landmanagement/resourcemanagement).

A notice that this draft supplemental environmental impact statement is available on the project website has been mailed to each of the objectors, along with the executive summary of the document. News releases were also sent electronically to State and local government entities and to local newspapers, television, and radio stations. In addition, emails providing notice of the availability of the DSEIS and links to access the documents and story map were sent to over 3,000 individuals or businesses who have, at some point since the original environmental analysis started, indicated they wished to receive updates on the project.

In addition, a notice and executive summary of the DSEIS have been distributed to other Federal agencies, as required by 40 CFR 1502.19.

Tonto National Forest 111