DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Assessment for the Coronado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Assessment for the Coronado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southwestern Region April 2015 Biological Assessment for the Coronado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Cochise, Graham, Pima, Pinal, and Santa Cruz Counties, Arizona and Hidalgo County, New Mexico Prepared By: Janet Moser Biologist, TEAMS Enterprise Approved By: Joshua D. Taiz District Biologist, Santa Catalina Ranger District Coronado National Forest [1] EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A Land and Resource Management Plan is being proposed for the Coronado National Forest. This biological assessment considers the potential effects of the proposed Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) (Preferred Alternative) on a total of twenty-seven species; this includes twenty-one listed species, four candidate species, and two species that have been extirpated but are either close and/or have habitat within the boundary of CNF. The proposed action may affect, likely to adversely affect twenty listed species that include the Jaguar, Mount Graham red squirrel, Ocelot, Lesser long-nosed bat, Mexican long-nosed bat, Mexican spotted owl, Western yellow-billed cuckoo, Sonoran tiger salamander, Chiricahua leopard frog, Northern Mexican gartersnake, New Mexico ridge-nosed rattlesnake, Gila chub, Yaqui chub, Gila topminnow, Gila trout, Apache trout, Sonora chub, loach minnow, spikedace, Huachuca water umbel and Pima pineapple cactus; and may affect, not likely to adversely affect one listed species: Canelo Hill’s ladies-tresses. For the extirpated Mexican gray wolf within the proposed 10j area and Northern Aplomado falcon a determination of not likely to jeopardize was made.. For the five Candidate species considered in the BA a determination of may affect, likely to adversely affect was made. The five Candidate species are the Arizona treefrog (Huachuca/Canelo DPS), Sonoran desert tortoise; roundtail chub, Stephan's heterelmis riffle beetle, and Huachuca springsnail. Critical Habitat: The proposed action may affect, likely to adversely affect critical habitat for the Jaguar, Mount Graham red squirrel, Mexican spotted owl, Chiricahua leopard frog, Gila chub, and Sonora chub, loach minnow, spikedace and Huachuca water umbel. If proposed critical habitat becomes designated for the Western yellow-billed cuckoo, the proposed action may affect, likely to adversely affect critical habitat. If proposed critical habitat becomes designated for the Northern Mexican gartersnake, the proposed action may affect, likely to adversely affect critical habitat. [2] Table 1. Federally listed, and candidate species and designated or proposed critical habitats addressed in this BA Common Name Scientific Federal Determination Name Status Mammals Jaguar Panthera onca Endangered May affect, likely to adversely affect Jaguar critical habitat May affect, likely to adversely affect Tamiasciurus Endangered May affect, likely to adversely affect Mount Graham red hudsonicus squirrel grahamensis Mount Graham red squirrel critical habitat May affect, likely to adversely affect Leopardus Endangered May affect, likely to adversely affect Ocelot pardalis Lesser long-nosed Leptonycteris Endangered May affect, not likely to adversely affect bat yerbabuenae Mexican long- Leptonycteris Endangered May affect, not likely to adversely affect nosed bat nivalis Canis lupus Not likely to jeopardize within proposed 10(j) Mexican gray wolf Extirpated baileyi area. Birds Strix May affect, likely to adversely affect Mexican spotted occidentalis Threatened owl lucida Mexican spotted owl critical habitat May affect, likely to adversely affect Coccyzus May affect, likely to adversely affect Western yellow- americanus Threatened billed cuckoo occidentalis Western yellow-billed cuckoo proposed critical habitat May affect, likely to adversely affect Non-essential Not likely to jeopardize Northern Falco femoralis experimental Aplomado falcon septentrionalis in AZ and NM Amphibians/Reptiles Ambystoma May affect, likely to adversely affect Sonoran tiger mavortium Endangered salamander stebbinsi [3] Arizona treefrog (If listed) May affect, likely to adversely affect Hyla (Huachuca/Canelo Candidate wrightorum DPS) Chiricahua leopard Lithobates May affect, likely to adversely affect Threatened frog chiricahuensis Chiricahua leopard frog critical habitat May affect, likely to adversely affect Northern Mexican Thamnophis May affect, likely to adversely affect Threatened gartersnake eques megalops Northern Mexican gartersnake proposed critical habitat May affect, likely to adversely affect Crotalus May affect, likely to adversely affect New Mexico ridge- willardi Threatened nosed rattlesnake obscurus Sonoran Desert Gopherus (If listed) May affect, likely to adversely affect Candidate tortoise morafkai Fish Gila chub Gila intermedia Endangered May affect, likely to adversely affect Gila chub critical habitat May affect, likely to adversely affect Yaqui chub Gila purpurea Endangered May affect, likely to adversely affect Poeciliopsis Endangered May affect, likely to adversely affect Gila topminnow occidentalis Oncorhynchus Threatened May affect, likely to adversely affect Gila trout gilae Oncorhynchus Threatened May affect, likely to adversely affect Apache trout apache Spikedace Meda fulgida Endangered May affect, likely to adversely affect Spikedace critical habitat May affect, likely to adversely affect Loach minnow Tiaroga cobitis Endangered May affect, likely to adversely affect Loach minnow critical habitat May affect, likely to adversely affect Sonora chub Gila ditaenia Threatened May affect, likely to adversely affect Sonora chub critical habitat May affect, likely to adversely affect Roundtail chub Gila robusta Candidate (If listed) May affect, likely to adversely affect Invertebrates Stephan's (If listed) May affect, likely to adversely affect Heterelmis heterelmis riffle Candidate stephani beetle [4] Huachuca Pyrgulopsis (If listed) May affect, likely to adversely affect Candidate springsnail thompsoni Plants Canelo Hills Spiranthes Endangered May affect, not likely to adversely affect ladies'-tresses delitescens Lilaeopsis May affect, likely to adversely affect Huachuca water schaffneriana Endangered umbel var. recurva Huachuca water umbel critical habitat May affect, likely to adversely affect Coryphantha Endangered May affect, likely to adversely affect Pima pineapple scheeri var. cactus robustispina List of Acronyms ADEQ – Arizona Department of Environmental Quality AZGFD – Arizona Game and Fish Department BA – Biological assessment BLM – Bureau of Land Management BMPs – Best management practices BO – Biological opinion BO/CO – Biological opinion/Conference opinion CH - Critical habitat ESA – Endangered Species Act LRMP – Land and resource management plan MVUM – Motor vehicle use map NF – National forest NEPA – National Environmental Policy Act NFMA – National Forest Management Act NFS – National Forest System OHV – Off-highway vehicle PAC – Protected activity center PCE – Primary constituent element PNVT – Potential natural vegetation type SWWF – Southwestern willow flycatcher T&Cs – Terms and conditions USFS – U.S. Forest Service USFWS – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service WSR – Wild and scenic river WUI – Wildland-Urban Interface and Landscape-scale Fire [5] TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Species List Consultation History o Consultation History o Regulatory Framework . Program Management Direction Existing Condition o Geographic Ecosystem Management Areas (EMA’s) . Chiricahua . Dragoon . Peloncillo . Santa Rita . Tumacacori . Huachuca . Whetstone . Galiuro . Pinaleño . Santa Teresa . Winchester . Santa Catalina o Vegetation (PNVT) . Desert Communities . Grasslands . Interior Chaparral . Madrean Encinal Woodland . Madrean Pine-Oak Woodland . Ponderosa Pine-Evergreen Shrub . Dry Mixed Conifer Forests . Wet Mixed Conifer Forests . Spruce-Fir Forests . Montane Meadows . Wetlands . Riparian Areas o Biophysical Features . Aquatic Resources Natural Waters Constructed Waters o Climate Change Proposed Action [6] o Programs Species Evaluations Mammals Jaguar, Ocelot, and Mexican gray wolf Mount Graham red squirrel Lesser long-nosed bat and Mexican long-nosed bat Birds Mexican spotted owl Western yellow-billed cuckoo Northern Aplomado falcon Amphibians/Reptiles Sonoran tiger salamander, Arizona treefrog (Huachuca/Canelo DPS), and Chiricahua leopard frog, and Northern Mexican gartersnake New Mexico ridge-nosed rattlesnake, and Sonoran Desert tortoise Fish Gila Chub, Yaqui chub, Gila topminnow, Gila trout, Apache trout, Spikedace, Loach minnow, Sonora chub, and Roundtail chub. Invertebrates Stephan's heterelmis riffle beetle and Huachuca springsnail Plants Canelo Hills ladies'-tresses, Huachuca water umbel, and Pima pineapple cactus Literature Cited Appendix A: All CNFs Plan Components Appendix B: Definitions [7] INTRODUCTION The proposed action (preferred alternative) analyzed in this BA is the implementation of the management direction provided in a revised LRMP. The proposed LRMP provides Forest-level direction to meet the Forest Service’s mission for program management activities. It is largely strategic in nature, but does address types of activities to be conducted on the Forest. The proposed LRMP does not specifically authorize individual projects or activities. Site-specific actions will be subject to future and separate ESA section 7(a) (2) consultations. In this BA, the Forest is consulting on the LRMP’s program administration (effects of recreation, engineering, range management, fire management, etc.), as well as “plan
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana Chiricahuensis)
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana chiricahuensis) Final Recovery Plan April 2007 CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG (Rana chiricahuensis) RECOVERY PLAN Southwest Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and are sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director, or Director, as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Literature citation of this document should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana chiricahuensis) Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, NM. 149 pp. + Appendices A-M. Additional copies may be obtained from: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arizona Ecological Services Field Office Southwest Region 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 500 Gold Avenue, S.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Birds of Coniferous Forest on Mount Graham, Arizona
    Wilson Bull., 107(4), 1995, pp. 719-723 SHORT COMMUNICATIONS Birds of coniferous forest on Mount Graham, Arizona.-Because of interest in the effect upon the biota of Mount Graham by current development for astronomy, I repeated observations and censuses made there forty years ago. Avifaunal changes have occurred. Unlike my companion study in the Sierra Nevada (Marshall 1988), the losses at Mount Graham of nesting species-all at the lower altitudinal limit of Pinus Zeiophylla chihuahuana and P. ponderosa arizonica-lack an obvious connection to human interference with the environment. Study area.-Mount Graham, in southeastern Arizona, is capped with old growth Engel- mann spruce and alpine fir from 3000 m to the summit at 3267 m. This boreal forest of 8 km* is at its southernmost limits on the North American continent. Descending, one passes through other vegetation zones in sequence: Douglas firs and white firs mixed with spruce, and then mixed with Mexican white pines; south slopes of New Mexican locust and Gambel oak; ponderosa pine with Gambel oak, ponderosa pine mixed with silver-leaf oak; and finally Chihuahua pine with Arizona oak (Martin and Fletcher 1943, Hoffmeister 1956, Marshall 1957, Mohlenbrock 1987). From memory, notes, and photographs I detect no change in vegetation during the forty-year study period. Specifically, the trees at the mapped census area in Wet Canyon (Fig. 1) have not closed ranks about the little openings suitable for those foothill birds that forage among grasses, boulders, manzanitas, and nolinas. The mesic luxuriance of Mount Graham’s vegetation is shown by running streams sup- porting tall groves of maples, by the enormous Douglas firs that remain, by the profusion of understory flowers and green forbs, and by the gigantic stature of clear-trunked alders dominating Wet Canyon.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 04/01/2021 to 06/30/2021 Coronado National Forest This Report Contains the Best Available Information at the Time of Publication
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 04/01/2021 to 06/30/2021 Coronado National Forest This report contains the best available information at the time of publication. Questions may be directed to the Project Contact. Expected Project Name Project Purpose Planning Status Decision Implementation Project Contact Projects Occurring Nationwide Gypsy Moth Management in the - Vegetation management Completed Actual: 11/28/2012 01/2013 Susan Ellsworth United States: A Cooperative (other than forest products) 775-355-5313 Approach [email protected]. EIS us *UPDATED* Description: The USDA Forest Service and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service are analyzing a range of strategies for controlling gypsy moth damage to forests and trees in the United States. Web Link: http://www.na.fs.fed.us/wv/eis/ Location: UNIT - All Districts-level Units. STATE - All States. COUNTY - All Counties. LEGAL - Not Applicable. Nationwide. Locatable Mining Rule - 36 CFR - Regulations, Directives, In Progress: Expected:12/2021 12/2021 Sarah Shoemaker 228, subpart A. Orders NOI in Federal Register 907-586-7886 EIS 09/13/2018 [email protected] d.us *UPDATED* Est. DEIS NOA in Federal Register 03/2021 Description: The U.S. Department of Agriculture proposes revisions to its regulations at 36 CFR 228, Subpart A governing locatable minerals operations on National Forest System lands.A draft EIS & proposed rule should be available for review/comment in late 2020 Web Link: http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=57214 Location: UNIT - All Districts-level Units. STATE - All States. COUNTY - All Counties. LEGAL - Not Applicable. These regulations apply to all NFS lands open to mineral entry under the US mining laws.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Findings on Petitions
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 10/06/2016 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2016-24142, and on FDsys.gov DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [4500090022] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Findings on Petitions To List 10 Species as Endangered or Threatened Species AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition findings. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce 12-month findings on petitions to list 10 species as endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). After a review of the best available scientific and commercial information, we find that listing the Huachuca-Canelo population of the Arizona treefrog, the Arkansas darter, black mudalia, Highlands tiger beetle, Dichanthelium (=panicum) hirstii (Hirst Brothers’ panic grass), two Kentucky cave beetles (Louisville cave beetle and Tatum Cave beetle), relict leopard frog, sicklefin redhorse sucker, and Stephan’s riffle beetle is not warranted at this time. However, we ask the public to submit to us at any time any new information that becomes available concerning the stressors to any of the 10 species listed above or their habitats. DATES: The findings announced in this document were made on [INSERT DATE OF FEDERAL REGISTER PUBLICATION]. ADDRESSES: Detailed descriptions of the basis for each of these findings are available on the Internet at 1 http://www.regulations.gov
    [Show full text]
  • Clay Mineralogy of the Willcox Playa and Its Drainage Basin, Cochise County, Arizona
    Clay mineralogy of the Willcox Playa and its drainage basin, Cochise County, Arizona Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Pipkin, Bernard W. Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 09/10/2021 08:05:33 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/565620 CLAY MINERALOGY OF THE WILLCOX PLAYA AND ITS DRAINAGE BASIN, COCHISE COUNTY, ARIZONA Bernard W/ Pipkin A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 1964 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE I hereby recommend that this dissertation prepared under my direction by Bernard W. Pipkin entitled MClay Mineralogy of the Willcox Playa and its Drainage Basin, Cochise County, Arizona'* be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. _____________ ss e/tat ion Director DateFa7^ / After inspection of the dissertation, the following members of the Final Examination Committee concur in its approval and recommend its acceptance:* ♦This approval and acceptance is contingent on the candidate's adequate performance and defense of this dissertation at the final oral examina­ tion. The inclusion of this sheet bound into the library copy of the dissertation is evidence of satisfactory performance at the final ex­ amination.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Regional Haze 308
    Arizona State Implementation Plan Regional Haze Under Section 308 Of the Federal Regional Haze Rule Air Quality Division January 2011 (page intentionally blank) TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Overview of Visibility and Regional Haze..................................................................................2 1.2 Arizona Class I Areas.................................................................................................................. 3 1.3 Background of the Regional Haze Rule ......................................................................................3 1.3.1 The 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments................................................................................ 3 1.3.2 Phase I Visibility Rules – The Arizona Visibility Protection Plan ..................................... 4 1.3.3 The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments................................................................................ 4 1.3.4 Submittal of Arizona 309 SIP............................................................................................. 6 1.4 Purpose of This Document .......................................................................................................... 9 1.4.1 Basic Plan Elements.......................................................................................................... 10 CHAPTER 2: ARIZONA REGIONAL HAZE SIP DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ......................... 15 2.1 Federal
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Framework of the Catalina Foothills, Outskirts of Tucson (Pima County, Arizona)
    GEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK OF THE CATALINA FOOTHILLS, OUTSKIRTS OF TUCSON (PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA) W.R. DICKINSON Emeritus, Dept. of Geosciences University of Arizona ARIZONA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CONTRIBUTED MAP CM-99-B MAY 1999 31 p., scale 1 :24,000 TIus report is preliminary and has not been edited or reviewed for confonnity with Arizona Geological Survey standards. ARIZONA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CONTRIBUTED MAP CM-99-B (31 pp., 1 Plate) Geologic Framework of the Catalina Foothills, Outskirts of Tucson (Pima County, Arizona) [Text and Legend to Accompany 1:24,000 Map] William R. Dickinson, Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona May 1999 Introduction and Purpose Past geologic maps and accounts of the sedimentary, geomorphic, and structural geology of the piedmont of the Santa Catalina Mountains in the outskirts of Tucson by Voelger (1953), Pashley (1966), Davidson (1973), Creasey and Theodore (1975), Banks (1976), Anderson (1987), Pearthree et al. (1988), McKittrick (1988), and Jackson (1989) raised questions about the sedimentary evolution of the foothills belt that were left open or unresolved. Multiple dissected alluvial fans and pediments overlie much older faulted and tilted strata to form Cenozoic sedimentary assemblages of considerable stratigraphic and structural complexity. As a contribution to improved understanding of urban geology in the Tucson metropolitan area, systematic geologic mapping of the piedmont belt was undertaken to establish the overall geologic framework of the Catalina foothills (~ 175 2 km ) at a common scale (1 :24,000). The area studied extends from Oracle Road on the west to the vicinity of Rinconado Road on the east, and from the Rillito River and Tanque Verde Wash northward to the limit of bedrock exposures at the base of the Santa Catalina Mountains.
    [Show full text]
  • Coronado National Forest Draft Land and Resource Management Plan I Contents
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Coronado National Forest Southwestern Region Draft Land and Resource MB-R3-05-7 October 2013 Management Plan Cochise, Graham, Pima, Pinal, and Santa Cruz Counties, Arizona, and Hidalgo County, New Mexico The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TTY). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Front cover photos (clockwise from upper left): Meadow Valley in the Huachuca Ecosystem Management Area; saguaros in the Galiuro Mountains; deer herd; aspen on Mt. Lemmon; Riggs Lake; Dragoon Mountains; Santa Rita Mountains “sky island”; San Rafael grasslands; historic building in Cave Creek Canyon; golden columbine flowers; and camping at Rose Canyon Campground. Printed on recycled paper • October 2013 Draft Land and Resource Management Plan Coronado National Forest Cochise, Graham, Pima, Pinal, and Santa Cruz Counties, Arizona Hidalgo County, New Mexico Responsible Official: Regional Forester Southwestern Region 333 Broadway Boulevard, SE Albuquerque, NM 87102 (505) 842-3292 For Information Contact: Forest Planner Coronado National Forest 300 West Congress, FB 42 Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 388-8300 TTY 711 [email protected] Contents Chapter 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    TABLEGUIDELINES OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 12: CONTACT INFORMATION AND MAPS 12.1 ADOT CONTACT INFORMATION……………………………………………….......122 12.2 BLM CONTACT INFORMATION…………………………………………………......123 12.3 USFS CONTACT INFORMATION………………………………………………….....124 12.4 FHWA CONTACT INFORMATION…………………………………………………....130 12.5 GIS INFORMATION..............................................................................................131 12.6 MAPS...................................................................................................................132 121 12.1 ADOT CONTACT INFORMATION ADOT web link azdot.gov/ ADOT maps azdot.gov/maps General Information 602-712-7355 OFFICE ADOT DIRECTOR 602.712.7227 Deputy Director of Transportation 602.712.7391 Deputy Director of Policy 602.712.7550 Deputy Director of Business Operations 602.712.7228 Multimodal Planning Division (MPD) Director 602.712.7431 MPD Planning and Programming Director 602.712.8140 MPD Planning and Environmental Linkages Manager 602.712.4574 Infrastructure Delivery and Operations Division (IDO) 602.712.7391 State Engineer, Sr. Deputy State Engineer and Deputy State Engineer Offices 602.712.7391 DISTRICT ENGINEERS Northcentral azdot.gov/business/district-contacts/northcentral 928.774.1491 Northeast azdot.gov/business/district-contacts/northeast 928.524.5400 Central Construction District azdot.gov/business/district-contacts/central 602.712.8965 Central Maintenance District azdot.gov/business/district-contacts/central 602.712.6664 Northwest azdot.gov/business/district-contacts/northwest 928.777.5861
    [Show full text]
  • Galiuro Mountains Unit, Graham County, Arizona MLA 21
    I MI~A~J~L M)P~SAL OF CORONADO I NATIONAL FOREST, PART 9 I Galiuro Mountains Unit I Graham County, Arizona I Galiuro Muni~Untains I i A IZON I,' ' I BUREAU OF MINES UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR f United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF MINES INTERMOUNTAIN FIELD OPERATIONS CENTER "m II P.O. BOX 25086 II BUILDING 20, DENVER FEDERAL CENTER DENVER, COLORADO 80225 November 22, 1993 Nyal Niemuth Arizona Department of Mines and Mineral Resources 1502 West Washington Phoenix, AZ 85007 Dear Mr. Niemuth: Enclosed are two copies of the following U.S. Bureau of Mines Open File Report for your use: MLA 21-93 Mineral Appraisal of the Coronado National Forest, Part 9, Galiuro Mountains Unit, Graham County, Arizona If you would like additional copies, please notify Mark Chatman at 303-236-3400. Resource Evaluation Branch I i I MINERAL APPRAISAL OF THE CORONADO NATIONAL FOREST PART 9, GALIURO MOUNTAINS UNIT, I GRAHAM COUNTY, ARIZONA I I by. I S. Don Brown I MLA 21-93 I 1993 I I, i Intermountain Field Operations Center I Denver, Colorado I UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR I BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary BUREAU OF MINES I HERMANN ENZER, Acting Director I I I PREFACE I A January 1987 Interagency Agreement between the U.S. Bureau of Mines, U.S. Geological Survey, and U.S. Forest Service describes the purpose, authority, and I program operation for the forest-wide studies. The program is intended to assist the I Forest Service in incorporating mineral resource data in forest plans as specified by the National Forest Management Act (1976) and Title 36, Chapter 2, Part 219, Code of i Federal Regulations, and to augment the Bureau's mineral resource data base so that it can analyze and make available minerals information as required by the National I Materials and Minerals Policy, Research and Development Act (1980).
    [Show full text]
  • Lincoln National Forest
    Chapter 1: Introduction In Ecological and Biological Diversity of National Forests in Region 3 Bruce Vander Lee, Ruth Smith, and Joanna Bate The Nature Conservancy EXECUTIVE SUMMARY We summarized existing regional-scale biological and ecological assessment information from Arizona and New Mexico for use in the development of Forest Plans for the eleven National Forests in USDA Forest Service Region 3 (Region 3). Under the current Planning Rule, Forest Plans are to be strategic documents focusing on ecological, economic, and social sustainability. In addition, Region 3 has identified restoration of the functionality of fire-adapted systems as a central priority to address forest health issues. Assessments were selected for inclusion in this report based on (1) relevance to Forest Planning needs with emphasis on the need to address ecosystem diversity and ecological sustainability, (2) suitability to address restoration of Region 3’s major vegetation systems, and (3) suitability to address ecological conditions at regional scales. We identified five assessments that addressed the distribution and current condition of ecological and biological diversity within Region 3. We summarized each of these assessments to highlight important ecological resources that exist on National Forests in Arizona and New Mexico: • Extent and distribution of potential natural vegetation types in Arizona and New Mexico • Distribution and condition of low-elevation grasslands in Arizona • Distribution of stream reaches with native fish occurrences in Arizona • Species richness and conservation status attributes for all species on National Forests in Arizona and New Mexico • Identification of priority areas for biodiversity conservation from Ecoregional Assessments from Arizona and New Mexico Analyses of available assessments were completed across all management jurisdictions for Arizona and New Mexico, providing a regional context to illustrate the biological and ecological importance of National Forests in Region 3.
    [Show full text]
  • 236 Pinaleño Mountains in the Twentieth Century Atalanta Hoyt
    Pinaleño Mountains in the Twentieth Century Atalanta Hoyt Throughout the twentieth century, a few major events dominated the history of the Forest Service. First, the founding of the National Forest Service in 1905 replaced the Bureau of Forestry and led to the creation of modern National Forests. The new service was created under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture with the purpose of securing a long term supply of timber for the American people.1 Second, the great depression of the 1930s, Franklin Roosevelt’s creation of the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) and the expansion of the Forest Service changed the shape of National Forests.2 This time period featured a major transition from timber management to hands on putting resources into the forest. The Forest Service and CCC planted trees, carved trails, built roads, and conducted research; actively molding forests and applying the latest forestry techniques instead of letting the forest take its course.3 A third period of great change came in the 1970s during the environmental era.4 The emphasis changed from conceptualizing the forests as resources to be converted into marketable goods to seeing them as wilderness in need of preservation. While conservation has always been an important part of the Forest Service - advocated by both those who saw an intrinsic value in wilderness and by those who used the wilderness for recreational purposes - increased urbanization highlighted the uniqueness of forests. Efforts to catalog and protect the environments of forests became a main priority while ecologists and conservationists gained status.5 These three main shifts defined the Forest Service in the twentieth century.
    [Show full text]