Decision Memorandum Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Mogollon Rim Ranger District Coconino National Coconino County, Arizona

Introduction Buck Mountain is an early lookout tower that was built in 1939 probably by the Civilian Conservation Corps (Gillio, 1989). It is a working tower that is used seasonally to detect and report . During the years that this tower was used, dozens of “Fire Flashes” have been reported by this tower each wildland fire season. This lookout tower also provides “crosses” for detected and reported from other towers. The Buck Mountain tower is constructed of treated wooden timbers and is 30 feet high and has a 14 foot by 14 foot wooden cab on top (Figure 1). The 42 acres of forest surrounding the lookout tower has grown thicker over the years because of fire suppression and an absence of forest and vegetation management so that the views from the tower are severely limited and obscured by the dense forest and tall . This project would remove trees to open up the forest and remove the taller trees in order to improve the viewshed from the tower. Lookout Towers and the Forest Service The history of towers predates the Forest Service, founded in 1905. Many townships, private companies, and State organizations operated fire lookout towers on their own accord.

The , also known as the Big Blowup, burned more than three million acres (12,000 km2) through the states of , , and . It is still arguably the largest forest fire ever recorded in U.S. history (Egan, 2009). The from this fire drifted across the entire country to Washington D.C. — both physically and politically — and it challenged the five- year-old Forest Service to address new policies regarding fire suppression. The fire also did much to create the fire rules, organizations, and policies that we have today. One of the rules established as a result of the 1910 fire stated "all fires must be extinguished by 10 a.m. the following morning".

To prevent and suppress fires, the U.S. Forest Service made another rule that townships, corporations and States would bear Figure 1. Buck Mountain the cost of contracting fire suppression services, because at the Lookout Tower, 2012. time there was no large agency or interagency fire fighting force that exists today.

— Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 1 of 15

As a result of the above rules, early detection and suppression became a priority. Fire lookout towers began to be built across the country. While earlier lookouts used tall trees and high peaks with tents for shelters, by 1911 permanent cabins and cupolas were being constructed on mountaintops (Gillio, 1989). Project Location Buck Mountain lookout tower is located on the Mogollon Rim Ranger District of the Coconino National Forest (Figure 2, Figure 3). It is north of West Clear Creek, south of Forest Road 229 and west of Forest Highway 3.

Figure 2. Project Vicinity Map Project Purpose The purpose of the project is to:

- Create and maintain an adequate 360-degree viewshed for fire-start detection over the long term at Buck Mountain Lookout Tower by removal of trees that obscure views on the Coconino and adjacent forested lands. - Reduce the crown fire potential and fuels buildup around the tower that could destroy the tower and that compromises the safe escape from the tower by the fire lookout employee in the event of a fire.

— Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 2 of 15

Figure 3. Project Location Map

— Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 3 of 15

Need for Change Improve Visibility to Spot Fires The tower is 30 feet in height and trees in the 42 acre area surrounding the tower have grown to heights where the visibility is obscured (Figure 4). The lookout tower operator cannot see through the trees to adequately spot small fire starts rising from the forest floor. This impairs the ability of dispatch emergency and fire personnel to quickly locate fires and implement fire suppression activities when they are most effective. There is a need to remove the trees surrounding the tower that are obscuring the lookout view over the full 360 degrees that are decreasing the ability to spot wildfires.

Figure 4. View from Buck Butte Lookout Tower in 2014 looking to the north. The height and density of the pine and oak trees are impairing the background and middle ground visibility.

Modify Vegetation Stand Conditions to Reduce Fire Hazard The vegetation of the project area consists of ponderosa pine with a small component of Gambel oak and New locust. The forest structure is multistoried and densely stocked exhibiting a closed canopy. There are approximately 293 trees per acre and the basal area is about 164 ft2 per acre. The current (SDI) is extremely high at about 69% of SDImax. Canopy cover averages about 72% which is dense (Figure 5).The views in all directions from the top of the tower are obstructed by mid- aged ponderosa pine that is less than 24 inches in diameter at Figure 5. Ponderosa pine trees to the north of the breast height (dbh) (Figure 4). tower showing closed canopy and high density of The desired condition is to thin trees per acre. Buck Mountain Lookout 2015 trees and create openings in the stands resulting in a basal area of about 40 ft2 per acre which is within the desired range of 22- — Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 4 of 15

89 ft2 for ponderosa pine at the mid-scale (Reynolds et al. 2013). Thinning would change the SDI to 26% of SDImax which would be less than full site occupancy and allow for intermediate understory production, and intermediate whole volume growth (Long, 1985). This would maintain the desired views for 10 or more years. Thinning and creation of openings would reduce canopy cover to just under 40% which meets the desired condition for mid-aged forest (USDA Forest Service, 1987)(New Page 65-10). The crown fire hazard potential of the project area has increased to unnatural levels by the closed canopy and high stand density. The tower is very susceptible to any type of fire because of all construction. Even a low intensity surface fire would consume the tower if fire personnel are not on site to protect it. The tower location also makes it very vulnerable to wildfire. Like most lookout towers it is at the top of the mountain which allows fires to build more intensity as they move up slope. The timber stand structure is dense but because of past prescribed burning there is relatively less dead and down fuels and higher crown base heights on live trees which make transition into the tree canopy more difficult. The crown fire potential still remains and with slope and wind alignment there would be active torching of groups of trees.

There is one road (FR229B) into and out of the tower administrative site, which is a safety concern for the tower operator in the event of a fast-moving wildfire. The tower and lookout cab are listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), because of the age of the tower (78 years) and the fact that the tower has retained the integrity of its original design, construction, workmanship and materials. Since the tower and cab are made of wood, it is at risk to complete loss in the event of a wildfire there. There is a need to conduct tree thinning to reduce the tree density and make openings in the canopy to reduce crown fire potential, allow for the safe escape of lookout personnel in the event of a fire, and to reduce the potential for fire to destroy the tower which has historical significance. Treat Activity-Generated Fuels and Allow Maintenance Prescribed Burns After thinning treatments there will be large slash piles on landings and smaller piles (10X10X10 feet) within the treated units (Figure 6).These will need to be burned to reduce fuel loading and so that maintenance burns can occur in the area. The Upper Beaver Creek Watershed Fuel Reduction Project (USDA Forest Service, 2010) authorizes prescribed burns on Buck Mountain and in the surrounding area. There is a need to conduct prescribed burning to treat the slash generated from thinning and to Figure 6. Example of a large slash return the area to a more natural fire regime of frequent pile left on a landing that will low severity fire. eventually be prescribed burned. Proposed Action The Mogollon Rim Ranger District proposes to remove conifers and hardwood trees that are currently obscuring the view from Buck Mountain Lookout Tower. Treatment tools include single tree selection, intermediate thinning, and prescribed fire. Tree species expected to be cut, include ponderosa pine, Gambel oak and New Mexico locust. The desired residual stocking level is 40 ft2 per acre. Cut trees will be de-limbed and topped. The limbs and tops will be piled — Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 5 of 15

and burned in the unit or on landings. The trunks will be skidded to a landing and removed either through a timber sale contract or as fuel-wood. Where slopes are greater than 25%, tree trunks may be pulled short distances to the tower or road or otherwise cut, piled and burned in the unit. Within 300 feet of the FR 229B and the lookout administrative site, stumps will be flush cut. Existing roads, landings and skid trails will be used to limit impact on the site and best management practices will be used to prevent degradation of the project area. No new temporary roads will be constructed. This thinning treatment includes periodic maintenance focused on removal of trees that grow and obstruct the view from the tower over time. A post- decisional NEPA review would be conducted at any time in the future prior to maintenance thinning treatment. Resource Protection Measures Resource protection measures have been included in this decision to avoid or minimize potential impacts associated with the Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed project.

Table 1. Project resource protection measures.

Noxious or Invasive Weed Prevention and Management Best Management Practices as outlined in Appendix B of the “Final Environmental Impact Statement for Integrated Treatment of Noxious or Invasive Weeds” (USDA 2005) would be followed to incorporate weed prevention and control in the project. NW1 Prior to the start and after completion of maintenance activities, mud, dirt, and plant parts would be removed from all vehicles and equipment used during project operations to prevent the spread of invasive plant species. NW2 Areas where ground disturbance would occur would be surveyed in the fall and spring for two years following the completion of activities to ensure that invasive plant species do not establish. If are documented during surveys, manual and/or chemical control would be required. Sensitive Plant Protection SP1 Mitigate negative effects from management actions on Flagstaff beardtongue, a Region 3 sensitive plant, during unit layout and implementation. Locate plant populations prior to activities and either avoid them during operations or relocate and plant them. SP2 Prohibit slash pile construction within populations of Flagstaff beardtongue. Construct slash piles at least 10 to 20 feet away from plants to the extent practicable. SP3 Prohibit skid trail construction, log landings, tracked or wheeled vehicles and other ground disturbances within populations of Flagstaff beardtongue. Soil Protection In order to avoid negative impacts to soils, best management practices (BMPs) would be implemented for prescribed fire and vegetation treatment measures. These resource protection measures are derived mainly from the Soil and Watershed Conservation Practices Handbook (FSH 2509.22) and the National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands, Volume 1: National Core BMP Technical Guide (USDA Forest Service, 2012). Resource protection measures are implemented to protect soils and minimize nonpoint source pollution as outlined in the intergovernmental agreement between the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and the Southwest Region (Region 3) of the Forest Service (USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region; State of Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 2008). BMPs would be incorporated in prescribed fire burn plans and timber harvesting or stewardship contracts. Prescribed Burning of Machine or Hand Piles S1 Incorporate prescription elements into the prescribed fire plan including such factors as weather, slope, aspect, soils, fuel type and amount, and fuel moisture in order to minimize high soil burn severity and to minimize burning of retained trees.

— Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 6 of 15

S2 Staging areas and any containment lines would be kept as small as possible while allowing for safe and efficient operation. Thinning and Timber Harvest S3 Restrict skidding and hauling to soil moisture conditions that do not cause excessive soil compaction, displacement or puddling. S4 Restrict timber sale activities to slopes of 25 percent or less on cinder cones under conventional skidding. S5 Equipment would not be operated when ground conditions are such that excessive damage would result as visually monitored through such indicators as soil rutting. This requirement is included in timber sale contract provision B9.3 (Breach). S6 All fueling/servicing of vehicles shall be conducted in a designated staging area. Operators will incorporate spill prevention and containment measures into their activities. S7 Prior to conducting harvesting activities, all skid trails and landings shall be designated on a map and visibly marked by means of flagging or other suitable measures for approval by the timber sale administrator. This requirement is included in contract provision BT6.422 (landings and skid trails). S8 Skid trail design shall not include long, straight downhill segments which would concentrate runoff. S9 Insofar as safety permits, trees shall be felled to angle in the direction of skidding. S10 Machine piling of slash would be done in such a manner as to minimize the construction of new clearings for slash piles through use of natural openings and new or existing landings. S11 Drainage of roads shall be controlled by a variety of methods including but not limited to insloping of the road bed toward an interior drainage ditch with periodic cross drains, outsloping of the road bed, crowning of the road bed, and construction of rolling dips and turn-outs. Drainage from landings and skid trails shall be controlled to prevent concentration of runoff. S12 Skid trails shall be restored after use by a combination of any or all of the following practices in order to prevent the concentration of runoff in skid trails and to protect exposed soil: reshaping the surface to promote dispersed drainage (i.e., create convex vs. concave cross-section), installation of drainage features such as water bars to shed water, and spreading slash across skid trails to protect areas where mineral soil is exposed. Where skid trails intersect existing roads or trails, native materials such as logs, slash, and/or boulders shall be placed along skid trail to line-of-sight or first 300’, whichever is greater. This requirement is described in a standard contract provision BT6.6 (erosion prevention and control), BT6.67 (erosion control structure maintenance). S13 Where visual observation indicates that the above methods of erosion protection are inadequate, a certified weed-free mix of native or naturalized grasses suitable for the area would be broadcast evenly over the inadequately protected surface at the rate 5 pounds per acre after surface scarification. This requirement is included in timber sale contract provision BT6.01. S14 Unless waived in writing, following the completion of skidding and yarding operations in the project area, all landings and skid trails constructed by the contractor shall be scarified by the contractor to a depth of not less than four inches and must effectively prepare the ground for seeding. If deemed necessary by district sale administration staff, the contactor shall seed areas of exposed soil on landings and skid trails, where other erosion control measures will not result in satisfactory control of soil movement. This requirement is included in timber sale contract provisions (WO) CT6.601# (Erosion Control Seeding) and CT6.602. Cultural and Historical Resource Protection H1 The Mogollon Rim Ranger District is responsible for notifying the District or Forest Archaeologist before initiating any activities as part of this project, to ensure the proposed activities have cultural resources clearance and that project personnel are aware of the conditions of this clearance and so that monitoring activities can be scheduled. H2 Features associated with the Buck Mountain Lookout and phone line will be protected from damage by timber harvest, thinning or burning. Trees within the Buck Mountain Lookout Site may be cut but will avoid damage to features and artifact concentrations associated with the lookout.

— Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 7 of 15

The trees and slash will be removed by hand from the site prior to burning. The insulator trees will be avoided during cutting and burning activities. H3 Cut trees may be skidded to the access road, smaller trees and slash will be piled. Slash piling will be allowed within the treatment area outside of site boundaries and away from fire sensitive features. H4 The entire project area may be subject to broadcast burning as long as fuel loadings are at low levels and fire sensitive features are protected. Pile and broadcast burning may occur in the thinning treatment areas. Pile burning will be allowed outside of sites in areas completely surveyed for cultural resources. Any mechanized fire line construction will require review and survey if not already covered and will be documented in an addendum to this report. H5 Previously undocumented archaeological sites, features or artifacts discovered during project activities will be reported to the District or Forest Archaeologist. No activities within 30 meters of such discoveries will take place until such time as the District or Forest Archaeologist can visit the location and determine needed site protection zones. Such protection measures will follow those identified in the R-3 PA, Appendix D, Attachment 3, or other adequate protective measures developed in consultation with the SHPO. H6 Due to the location of the project activities near recorded sites, all activities have been planned to avoid impacts to the historic portions of the sites. Monitoring will be undertaken to ensure inadvertent damage does not occur, protection measures are followed and any undiscovered artifacts or features are quickly identified and protected. A monitoring report will be submitted following the completion of the project. Vegetation Protection V1 Identify staging areas for heavy equipment to protect existing vegetation surrounding project sites from damage from logging activities. V2 Minimize creation of green slash between January and June and monitor the green slash left on site so that if a serious bark beetle (Ips spp.) infestation develops it can be treated. V3 In thin and pile areas, pile slash in openings, outside drip lines of retained trees whenever possible. Recreation and Scenery Protection RS1 After completion of the thinning activities all skid trails and landings shall be restored. RS2 Slash piles will be burned within 3 years. RS3 Stem damage and scarring of retained trees will be minimized by the purchaser or operator.

Public Involvement The project proposal and information has been posted on the Coconino National Forest project planning website and the action has been posted in the Coconino National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) since October 1, 2013. This project was originally part of the Buck Mountain and Baker Butte Lookout Tower Viewshed project. The Baker Butte portion of the project is being analyzed as part of the Cragin Watershed Protection Project. A scoping letter with information on both this proposal and Baker Butte was mailed or emailed to 23 individuals and organizations and also sent out to the District public information email list consisting of more than 600 contacts on May 7, 2014 as part of the scoping efforts. Many of the comments received concerned both towers, but the comments described below are for Buck Mountain Tower only.

Six comments were received from these scoping efforts. Of the comments received, five were wholly supportive of the project. One commenter had several concerns with the proposal, which are addressed here:

— Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 8 of 15

1. Information was requested about the selected CE category. Information about CE categories used can be found at https://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nepa/index.htm

2. There was a concern that would be one of the treatments proposed. The treatments identified for this project include thinning to reduce the tree density and improve the site distance around the , piling of tree slash, and burning of piles. Regeneration harvesting (clearcutting) is not a part of the treatment strategy. 3. There was a concern about Mexican spotted owl habitat. There is no Mexican spotted owl habitat in the project area. 4. There was a concern that neither the cutting prescription, design features nor resource protection measures were described in the scoping document. The description and design features (resource protection measures) have been provided in this decision document because many of them resulted from environmental review of the project by resource specialists. 5. A suggestion was made to build higher towers. This tower is historic and raising the tower would negatively change the architectural and historical integrity of the tower. The Tower is also listed on the NRHP. 6. A question was asked about when and how many fires were detected from Buck Mountain Tower. The tower personnel have located and crossed many wildfires every year of operation. The tower has not been staffed since 2014.

The proposed action has been reviewed by District and Forest specialists participating on the interdisciplinary team. These reviews did not result in the identification of issues leading to the development of an Environmental Assessment or and Environmental Impact Statement. Decision I have decided to implement the proposed action as identified above and in the scoping document dated April 28, 2014. Input has been considered from an interdisciplinary team, through preliminary project analysis, and through public scoping. This action is categorically excluded from analysis in an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) using 36 CFR 220.6 (e)(12) Harvest of live trees not to exceed 70 acres, requiring no more than 1⁄2 mile of temporary road construction.

I find that there are no significant effects to extraordinary circumstances that would warrant further analysis and documentation in an EA or EIS. I took into account resource conditions identified in agency procedures that should be considered in determining whether extraordinary circumstances might exist:

1) Federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for Federal listing or proposed critical habitat, or Forest Service sensitive species The Endangered Species Act (ESA, 16 U.S.C.§§ 1531 – 1544) requires Federal activities not to jeopardize the continued existence of any species federally listed or proposed as threatened or endangered, or result in adverse modification to such species’ designated critical habitat. As required by ESA, potential effects of project activities on listed species have been analyzed and documented in a biological evaluation and assessment. There are no known threatened, endangered, proposed or candidate wildlife, fish or plant species, or their designated critical habitat in the project area. — Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 9 of 15

2) Floodplains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds There are no floodplains, wetlands or municipal watersheds in or near the project area. Buck Mountain Tank, a seasonally flooded wetland identified on the National Wetlands Inventory (https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data /Mapper.html) is about 0.3 miles from the project area and would not be affected by prescribed thinning or burning activities.

3) Congressionally designated areas, such as , wilderness study areas, or national recreation areas The nearest wilderness areas, Wet Beaver and West Clear Creek, are between six and seven miles away from the proposed project. The prescribed thinning aspect of the project is limited to the 42 acres surrounding the tower. This vegetation treatment will not directly affect either wilderness. The indirect effect could be increased protection for the wilderness from the effects of an uncharacteristic wildfire, as these fires would be easier to detect and report from the tower.

There are no national recreation areas or wilderness study areas on the Mogollon Rim District.

4) Inventoried roadless area or potential roadless area There will be no effects to inventoried roadless areas from this project. The nearest inventoried roadless area is Walker Mountain, about 14 miles west of the project area.

5) Research Natural Areas The nearest RNA is the Rocky Gulch RNA which is located about 6.5 miles to the northwest of the project area. There will be no effects from this project because this RNA is located so distant from the treatment area. 6) American Indian and Alaska Native religious or cultural sites There are no American Indian or Alaska Native religious or cultural sites within or near the project area, and therefore there will be no effects from this project. 7) Archaeological sites or Historic properties or areas The Buck Mountain is a historic lookout and is on the National Register of Historic Places. Resource protection measures will be implemented so the tower, cab or other site features will be protected during project activities. Findings Required by Other Laws, Regulations and Policy Forest Plan Consistency This decision is consistent with the 1987 Coconino National Plan as amended (USDA Forest Service, 1987) as required by the National Forest Management Act.

Management Area Direction

The project area is located in Management Area 3, ponderosa pine or mixed conifer forest on less than 40% slopes. The vegetation type is ponderosa pine. The management area emphasizes a combination of multiple-uses including a sustained yield of timber and firewood production, livestock grazing, high quality water and dispersed recreation activities (Forest Plan Replacement page 117). — Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 10 of 15

Fire Management Planning and Analysis, Fire Detection and Fuel Treatment

A fire and fuels report has been prepared for this project. The tower is very susceptible to any type of fire because of its all wood construction. The tower location also makes it very vulnerable to wildfire. By prescribed thinning the identified project area around the lookout tower, effectiveness in detecting a wildfire will increase. Early detection of a wildfire is critical to dispatching resources in a timely manner and aids in the suppression of a wildfire. In addition to improving the viewshed, thinning around the lookout tower will decrease fire intensity and severity, therefore improving the safety of lookout personnel to allow for safer ingress or egress in the event of a wildfire. Tree cutting will be done either by equipment or by hand and slash will be piled or lopped and scattered depending on the volume of woody material. Slash piles will be placed in openings, allowed to dry and then burned after a year or more of curing. Pile burning will take a day. The area will then be maintenance burned as part of the Upper Beaver Creek Fuels Reduction project.

Vegetation Management

A vegetation report has been prepared for this project. The forest cover type is Ponderosa pine. Ponderosa pine is the dominant tree species, with small inclusions of Gambel oak and New Mexico locust. Thinning and prescribed fire treatments will improve forest health and resiliency, tree growth and vigor by reducing inter-tree competition for resources such as light, water, and soil nutrients and concentrating the site’s growth potential onto fewer trees. Improved vigor will also increase the tree’s ability to respond to insect attacks and reduce the potential for epidemic loss bark beetles such as the western bark beetle. Dwarf mistletoe will be reduced in intensity. Canopy gap openings, if large enough, should naturally regenerate with ponderosa pine within 10 years, allowing for the introduction and maintenance of a younger age class. However, the number of these younger trees may be reduced by continued prescribed burning to reduce both surface and ladder fuels. Noxious and Invasive Weeds A botany and weeds report has been prepared for this project. Implementation of the noxious and invasive weeds mitigation measures will avoid or eliminate introduction or spread of weeds (NW1-2). Survey and monitoring of the project area following project activities would ensure that invasive plant species do not establish. If invasive species are found, they would be treated by manual or chemical methods. Recreation and Scenery Management

A recreation and scenery report has been prepared for this project. The project area contains several small dispersed camp sites. There are no developed recreation sites, trails or user- created trails or roads. The Recreational Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) of the area is Roaded Natural, described as an area characterized by predominately natural-appearing environments with moderate evidences of the sights and sounds of people. Resource modifications such as the Lookout Tower are evident, but harmonize with the natural environment. There is a higher probability of social interactions at or near the Buck Mountain Lookout because it is an attraction site and offers a significant historical structure as well as views across the forest. Project activities are compatible with the classified ROS setting and will not diminish the ROS setting from its current classification as long as the resource protection measures are implemented (RS1-3). The Scenic Integrity Objective (SIO) of the area is Moderate which is defined as the “valued scenery appears slightly altered”. The SIO of Moderate will be altered from the project, — Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 11 of 15

but not changed to Low by the thinning activities and once the slash piles are burned, skid trails are rehabilitated (RS1-2) and the understory grows, and the SIO will be fully at the Moderate level. Using the Scenery Management System analysis, the Concern Level of FR229B is level “Three” which has the following attributes: low to moderate traffic volume, typically connects to arterial roads, has a combination of dips and culverts that provide drainage, may include some dispersed recreation roads, and potholing and wash boarding may occur. During project implementation, the dispersed camping and recreational opportunities along the road and at the lookout may be affected by short term closures when logging is occurring. After treatment, the road should be graded to the condition it was at the beginning of the project and normal access to the area can be resumed. Once slash piles are burned the area will quickly will recover and the forest will be much more open and viewshed from the tower will be restored with improved foreground, middle ground and background views of the forested lands. Though recreational access may be restricted during logging activities, the Concern level of FR229B will not be changed, the scenery value from the lookout will be greatly improved and the thinning and prescribed burning around the lookout will reduce fuels and better protect this attraction site from wildfire effects.

Soil and Geology Resources

A soils and geology report has been prepared for this project. The bedrock in the project area consists of a basalt cinder cone and the soils derived from this parent material have a severe erosion hazard. These soils are subject to compaction, puddling, and displacement when wet. These problems can be mitigated by restricting logging and skidding activities along with road use to when the soils are dry (S4, S5). In addition, restricting ground-based mechanized equipment to operating on slopes less than 25% can reduce impacts to soils such as rutting and compaction (S3). Application of the soils resource protection measures (S1-14) would minimize negative impacts to soils from the project thinning and prescribed burning activities and would be consistent with Forest Plan standards and guidelines. These measures include BMPs which are largely equivalent to contract provisions in timber harvesting or stewardship contracts that when implemented protect soils and minimize nonpoint source pollution (USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region; State of Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 2008). National Forest Management Act

NFMA requires that all forested lands in the National Forest System be maintained in appropriate forest cover with species of trees, degree of stocking, rate of growth, and conditions of stand designed to secure the maximum benefits of multiple use sustained yield management in accordance with land management plans. Buck Mountain Viewshed Project will maintain the appropriate forest cover and stocking within the project area. Endangered Species Act, Region 3 Sensitive Species, Management Indicator Species, (MIS) Bald and Golden Eagles and Migratory Birds

A Biological Assessment and Evaluation report has been prepared and there will be no effect on any federally threatened, endangered, proposed or candidate species or designated critical habitat. This project would not impact any Region 3 Sensitive wildlife species. Two locations of Flagstaff beardtongue (Penstemon nudiflorus) a Region 3 Sensitive plant, have previously been located near to the edge of the project boundary. Potential impacts to this plant would be mitigated by locating the plants and avoiding them during project operations. Loss of these plants at either of — Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 12 of 15

the two locations may affect the individuals of Flagstaff beardtongue but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability. During project layout and marking, these plants can be located and tree removal may not need to occur in the areas near the plants if the trees are not affecting the view from the tower. Application of the sensitive plant resource protection measures (SP1, 2 and 3) would minimize impacts to Flagstaff beardtongue.

The project would not have any effect to the forest-wide population or habitat trends of any MIS. The project would not result in any take of bald or golden eagles as described in the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The project would not result in a change in population trend for any migratory bird species.

National Historic Preservation Act

A cultural resource report along with an inventory, standards and accounting report have been prepared for the project. The project area and local vicinity has been surveyed for cultural and historical resources. Resource protection measures (H1-H6) will be implemented so that Buck Mountain Lookout Tower and associated features along with other sites will be avoided and undisturbed by project activities.

Executive Order #12898, Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

The project is consistent with this executive order because the proposed activities will not degrade the environment or cause adverse impacts to minority or low-income populations. Currently and since 2014, the lookout tower has been closed to the public. Portions of FR229B may be temporarily closed to the public during logging and prescribed burning operations. These closures would be short term in nature during logging and burning operations. If the road is not closed during operations, signs will be posted to alert the public to haul trucks, vehicles and equipment, smoke, and prescribed burning operations. The public will only be limited from access to the area for a short period of time.

Clean Air Act

All pile or maintenance burning would be coordinated daily with the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). Burning would not take place on any portion of the project without prior approval from ADEQ. Coordination with ADEQ would take place through the Coconino National Forest Zone Dispatch Center and the Prescribed Burning Boss. Smoke management techniques would be employed to minimize impacts to the Verde River Airshed, Lake Mary Road (FH-3) and the Discovery Channel Lowell Observatory Telescope. The public, smoke sensitive individuals, telescope manager and private landowners would be notified through the media or other methods prior to prescribed burns. Because the project area is of limited size (42 acres) the burning is expected to meet Federal and State air quality standards, implementation and monitoring requirements.

Clean Water Act

A soils and geology report has been prepared for this project. There will be no direct or indirect effects to streams or riparian areas because neither occur in the project area. Implementing resource protection measures (S1- S14) would minimize erosion and sedimentation of the soils on site so that there would be no indirect effects to stream channels or water quality off site. — Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 13 of 15

Administrative Review (Appeal) Opportunities This decision is not subject to an administrative review or appeal as a result of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014 (Pub. L. No. 113-76) signed into law on January 17, 2014 and the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Farm Bill) (Pub. L. No. 113-79) signed into law on February 7, 2014. The Forest Service does not offer appeal opportunities pursuant to 36 CFR 215 or objection opportunities pursuant to 36 CFR 218 for categorically excluded projects. Implementation Date This decision may be implemented immediately. Contact For additional information regarding this project please visit the project website at, https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=42985, or contact: Mary Price, District Silviculturist, 8738 Ranger Road, Happy Jack, AZ 86024, 928-477-2255, email: [email protected].

LINDA L. WADLEIGH DATE

Mogollon Rim District Ranger

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.

— Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 14 of 15

References Egan, T. (2009). The big burn: Teddy Rossevelt and the fire that saved America. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Gillio, D. A. (1989). Lookouts in the Southwestern Region. USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region.

Long, J.N. 1985. A practical approach to density management. Forestry Chronicle 61:23-27.

Reynolds, R. T., Meador, A. J. S., Youtz, J. A., Nicolet, T., Matonis, M. S., Jackson, P. L.,& Graves, A. D. (2013). Restoring composition and structure in southwestern frequent-fire : a science-based framework for improving ecosystem resiliency. RMRS GTR- 310. Fort Collins, CO. 76 p.

USDA Forest Service. (2010). Upper Beaver Creek Watershed Fuel Reduction Project. Online: https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=442.

USDA Forest Service. (2012). National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on National Forest System Lands, Volume 1: National Core BMP Technical Guide, FS-990a. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.

USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region; State of Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). Memorandum of Understanding for Water Quality Management.

— Decision Memorandum — Buck Mountain Lookout Tower Viewshed Project Page 15 of 15