DOCSLIB.ORG

Sawtooth National Forest – Roads Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sawtooth National Forest – Roads Analysis Table of Contents Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................................... 3 Roads Analysis Objective ............................................................................................................... 3 Project Area and Existing Transportation System .......................................................................... 5 Project Area ................................................................................................................................ 5 Existing Transportation System .................................................................................................. 5 Identifying Issues ............................................................................................................................ 7 Forest-wide Management Road Direction .................................................................................. 7 Management Area Description and Direction of the Road System ............................................ 9 Management Area 06- Upper South Fork Boise River ........................................................... 9 Management Area 07 – Little Smoky Creek ........................................................................ 13 Management Area 08 – Middle South Fork Boise River ..................................................... 16 Management Area 09 – Lime Creek ..................................................................................... 19 Management Area 10 – Soldier Creek/Willow Creek .......................................................... 22 Assessing Benefits, Problems, and Risks ..................................................................................... 26 Road Analysis Process .............................................................................................................. 26 STEP 1 - Road Risk/Cost Indicators ......................................................................................... 27 STEP 2 - Road Value/Benefit Indicators .................................................................................. 28 STEP 3 - Assessing Benefits, Problems, and Risks .................................................................. 29 STEP 4 - Road Risk/Value Matrix composite .......................................................................... 30 STEP 5 - Road Management Strategy ...................................................................................... 30 Budgetary Needs of Maintaining the Minimum Road System ..................................................... 32 Summary of Roads Analysis ......................................................................................................... 33 Appendix A – Ecological, Social, and Economic Considerations ................................................ 35 Appendix B – Composite of Benefits, Problems, and Risks Table .............................................. 40 Appendix C – Recommended Road Management Strategies Table ............................................. 49 Appendix D – Divisional Map Displaying Recommended Road Management Strategies .......... 68 2 | P a g e Purpose and Need In 2005, the Washington Office of the Forest Service directed all National Forests create a motor vehicle use map (MVUM) with the purpose of stopping uncontrolled cross-country motor vehicle use. This map was to adhere to the directions specified in Subpart B of the Forest Service Travel Management Rule (rule), regarding designation of roads, trails, and areas for motor vehicle use. The rule consists of two other Subparts: Subpart A, which covers the administration of the Forest transportation system, and Subpart C, which covers use by over- snow vehicles. By the end of 2010, approximately 93 percent of the National Forest System Lands were covered by an MVUM1. These maps only followed directions specified in Subpart B, but in order to identify opportunities for the forest transportation system to meet current or future management objectives, based on ecological, social, cultural, and economic concerns, the National Forests also needed to adhere to the directions specified in Subpart A. On November 10, 2010, the Washington Office directed the National Forests to complete Subpart A of the rule, which would require each unit to: Identify the minimum road system needed for safe and efficient travel and for the protection, management, and use of NFS lands; and Identify roads that are no longer needed to meet forest resource management objectives and therefore, scheduled for decommissioning or considered for other uses (36 CFR 212.5(b)). With this direction given, the District Ranger for the Fairfield Ranger District has directed an interdisciplinary team to identify the minimum road system and unneeded roads using a travel analysis process that is dynamic, interdisciplinary, and integrated with all resource areas. The travel analysis process (TAP) will follow directives described in Forest Service Manual 7712 and Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 7709.55, Chapter 20, to complete the applicable sections of Subpart A. This analysis includes all National Forest System roads, maintenance levels 1-5, on lands located within the Fairfield district on the Sawtooth NF. The analysis will not evaluate existing motorized trails or non-system roads but will consider their existence when performing the analysis. Roads Analysis Objective The objective of the roads analysis is to provide the line officer with critical information that is used to develop a road system that is safe and responsive to public needs and desires, adheres to the Sawtooth National Forest’s Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), meets 1 Cited in letter sent by Joel D. Holtrop, Deputy Chief, National Forest System, “Travel Management, Implementation of 36 CFR, Part 212, Subpart A (36 CFR 212.5(b)”, November 10, 2010 3 | P a g e current and future resource management objectives, reverses or minimizes negative ecological effects on the land, and allows for economical and efficient road management within likely budget levels. To meet these objectives, as stated previously, Forest Service Manual (FSM) 7712 requires an interdisciplinary team conduct a science-based roads analysis process. A process meeting the requirements is described in the report Roads Analysis: Informing Decisions About Managing the National Forest Transportation System (USDA Forest Service, 1999, Misc. Report FS-643). The interdisciplinary team conducting the science-based roads analysis consisted of the following: Team Member Title / Specialty Shawn Robnett Forest’s Assistant Engineer / Engineering Steve Frost Fairfield RD Recreation Manager / Recreation Mark Dallon Fairfield RD Hydrologist / Hydrology Erika Phillips Fairfield RD Aquatics Biologist / Aquatics David Skinner Fairfield RD Wildlife Biologist / Wildlife John Pine Fairfield RD Forester / Timber Management John Shelley Fairfield RD Rangeland Mgmt. Specialist / Range & Weeds Devin Hulme Fairfield RD Fire Management Officer / Fire & Fuels Heidie Torrealday Forest’s Geologist / Minerals Dave Stockdale Forest GIS Specialist / Mapping The science-based roads analysis provides a written document that contains the necessary information for the line officer to: 1. Identify transportation management opportunities and priorities. 2. Assess transportation management needs, long-term funding, and expected ecosystem, social, and economic effects. 3. Establish transportation management objectives and priorities. The final result of the roads analysis is a written document with accompanying maps that document the information and analysis methods used to identify social and environmental opportunities, issues, risks, and priorities for future road management. The report, at a minimum, should contain the following: 1. Identification of needed and unneeded roads. 2. Identification of road-associated environmental and public safety risks. 3. Identification of site-specific priorities and opportunities for road improvements, decommissioning, and conversion to other uses. 4. Identification of areas of special sensitivity, unique resource values, or both. 5. Any other specific information that may be needed to support project-level decisions. 4 | P a g e It should be noted here the information and final recommendations in this TAP represents the best available information at this time. This document is an analysis tool to be used for guiding future planning documents such as Environmental Analysis, Environmental Impact Statements or Categorical Exclusions. It is not intended to be a decision making document by itself. Project Area and Existing Transportation System Project Area The Fairfield Ranger District is located in the southwest portion of the northern half of the Sawtooth National Forest. The District lies mostly within Camas County with a small portion of it in the western section of Elmore County. The District encompasses 420,720 acres of Forest system administered lands and contains 440 miles of inventoried trails, twelve campgrounds, over 680 miles of streams and more than 20 high mountain lakes. Existing Transportation System The existing road system on the Fairfield Ranger District consists of 369.78 miles of forest roads. A “Forest Road” is a road wholly or partly within or adjacent to and serving the National Forest System that the Forest Service determines is necessary for the protection, administration and utilization of the National Forest System and the use and development
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Region Forest Roadless Name GIS Acres 1 Beaverhead-Deerlodge
    These acres were calculated from GIS data Available on the Forest Service Roadless website for the 2001 Roadless EIS. The data was downloaded on 8/24/2011 by Suzanne Johnson WO Minerals & Geology‐ GIS/Database Specialist. It was discovered that the Santa Fe NF in NM has errors. This spreadsheet holds the corrected data from the Santa Fe NF. The GIS data was downloaded from the eGIS data center SDE instance on 8/25/2011 Region Forest Roadless Name GIS Acres 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Anderson Mountain 31,500.98 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Basin Creek 9,499.51 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Bear Creek 8,122.88 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Beaver Lake 11,862.81 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Big Horn Mountain 50,845.85 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Black Butte 39,160.06 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Call Mountain 8,795.54 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Cattle Gulch 19,390.45 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Cherry Lakes 19,945.49 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Dixon Mountain 3,674.46 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge East Pioneer 145,082.05 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Electric Peak 17,997.26 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Emerine 14,282.26 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Fleecer 31,585.50 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Flint Range / Dolus Lakes 59,213.30 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Four Eyes Canyon 7,029.38 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Fred Burr 5,814.01 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Freezeout Mountain 97,304.68 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Garfield Mountain 41,891.22 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Goat Mountain 9,347.87 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Granulated Mountain 14,950.11 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Highlands 20,043.87 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Italian Peak 90,401.31 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Lone Butte 13,725.16 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Mckenzie Canyon 33,350.48 1 Beaverhead‐Deerlodge Middle Mtn.
    [Show full text]
  • 470 Part 294—Special Areas
    § 293.17 36 CFR Ch. II (7–1–20 Edition) (iii) The portage from Back Bay to under appropriate conditions deter- Pipestone Bay of Basswood Lake. mined by the Chief, Forest Service. (iv) The portages from Fall Lake to (b) Grazing of domestic livestock, de- Newton Lake to Pipestone Bay of Bass- velopment of water storage projects wood Lake. which do not involve road construc- (v) The portage from Vermilion Lake tion, and improvements necessary for to Trout Lake. the protection of the National Forests (2) The Forest Service may authorize, may be permitted, subject to such re- by special use permit, the use of motor strictions as the Chief, Forest Service, vehicles to transport watercraft over deems desirable. Within Primitive the following portages: Areas, when the use is for other than (i) Four Mile Portage From Fall administrative needs of the Forest Lake to Hoist Bay of Basswood Lake. Service, use by other Federal agencies (ii) Vermilion Lake to Trout Lake. when authorized by the Chief, and in (iii) Prairie Portage from Sucker emergencies, the landing of aircraft Lake to Basswood Lake and the use of motorboats are prohib- (iv) Loon River to Loon Lake and ited on National Forest land or water from Loon Lake to Lac La Croix. unless such use by aircraft or motor- (c) Snowmobile use. (1) A snowmobile boats has already become well estab- is defined as a self-propelled, motorized lished, the use of motor vehicles is pro- vehicle not exceeding forty inches in hibited, and the use of other motorized width designed to operate on ice and equipment is prohibited except as au- snow, having a ski or skiis in contact thorized by the Chief.
    [Show full text]
  • Fsm9 002705.Pdf
    Travel Management Alternative 4 Fairfield District Sawtooth National Forest # 7 F 4 7 709 H 9 4 2 6 4 # 5 4 # 7 # Galena Peak 7 7113 71 Nahneke Mountain Mattingly Peak 0 2 9 9 4 7 0 # 8 Blizzard Mountain 3 0 0 9 9 5 # 0 1 3 7 4 0 7 7 7 Easley Peak 1 6 East Warrior Peak 8 4 4 7 # 3 # 9 0 16 7 4 6 7 Silver Peak # 2 2 # 9 7 6 # 7 4 Greylock Mountain Boulder Peak 1 7 9 8 Bromaghin Peak 71 7 3 25 1 3 78 8 6 7 1 08 0 7 6 7 6 7 3 4 4 0 1 1 8 2 7 4 7 FH26 8 7 2 4 164 412 1 4 3 6 1 0 3 7 3 7 9 1 6 48 1 6 7 1 0 7 3 7 Norton Peak 5 # 7 0 2 6 2 8 1 1 Marshall Peak 7 3 7 1 7 0 2 # 0 7 7 2 7 5 0 2 6 7 2 7 9 4 8 0 2 7 6 7 1 1 2 3 1 7 5 7 6 7 1 1 9 8 4 A 6 4 # 1 # # 70 7189 Bald Mountain Paradise Peak 78 # Two Point Mountain 35 Ross Peak 7142 Fox Peak # 5 7 7139 7228 7 1 0 7 0 4 3 8 7 1 7 8 0 7 9 9 0 0 7 7 1 7 6 0 0 3 7 7 #7 0 4 5 03 2 7212 28 70 07 70 # 70 7 8 8 68 6 1 Bear Peak 1 1 ! # ! 3 0 6 Gunsight Peak 7 70 7 # 8 6 5 ! 7 7 0 ! # 9 Skillern Peak 0 4 7 3 ! Smoky Mountains Boyle Mountain 7 6 0 2 # 0 5 0 2 3 # ! 1 0 2 7 0 7 2 7 7 A 2 7 5 1 7 ! 1 0 # 1 4 7 ! 9 0 7 Baker Peak 7 ! 4 A ! Big Peak ! 0 D 0 0 ! 1 0 0 0 7 7 7 1 3 0 1 70 8 0 2 2 ! 7 ! 1 9 1 6 ! 4 7 4 8 7 A 1 ! ! 2 6 C ! 1 0 7 0 4 0 ! ! B ! ! 4 7 7 7 0 ! 2 ! 7 B 06 0 ! 4 ! 6 1 7 0 7 7 ! 0 4 2 ! 1 ! 7! 0 7 ! 7 0 ! 5 7 ! 7 1 0 3 7 ! ! ! 4 ! 1 ! ! 0 2 8 ! 0 ! 1 ! 7 ! 7 ! 0 2 1 065 0 ! 7 ! ! ! 3 7 ! 7076 ! 8 ! 7 ! ! ! ! ! 0 0 2 ! ! ! !!!! ! 2 7 ! ! ! ! 1 ! 6 0 ! ! 7 ! ! 9 ! 3 ! 0 ! ! ! 7 ! ! ! 0 ! A 8 ! ! ! ! ! ! 7 7 1 ! 6 4 7 ! ! 81 ! ! ! 2 0 ! ! 7 1 7 ! 0 7 ! 2 ! 4 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! 0 1 ! 3 0
    [Show full text]
  • High Resolution Adobe PDF
    114°20'0"W 114°0'0"W Saturday Mountain " THOMPSON CREEK CLAYTON BALD MOUNTAIN LONE PINE PEAK ANTELOPE FLAT GROUSE CREEK MOUNTAIN DOUBLESPRING d R n yo Stat an ¤£93 75 e H 5 C RQ wy 7 r a Sp d R 6 1 Dickey Peak 1 d Potaman Peak " a o Sullivan Lake " R U p o S l e H v Anderson Peak w e y D 9 t " 3 s e r LIVINGSTON CREEK o POTAMAN PEAK ZIEGLER BASIN THE PAINT POT HORSE BASIN DICKEY PEAK F BORAH PEAK l t a N d Jimmy Smith Lake R R s o d s H ad C a r R e eek R d P r g d k in e r C p e s r r e le Borah Peak e C b k u " e o d R D R d g gs a prin S S ch d r d Bi R R t k r a l o e H rd F F La n t k e A s o n R s a W r d E d e e a d lk r s er n Rd A o n Lart e R r Sheep Mountain C d L o n ates Rd " Jerry Peak BOULDER CHAIN LAKES BOWERY CREEK BOWERY PEAK HERD LAKE " JERRY PEAK CHILLY BUTTES ELKHORN CREEK Bowery Peak WHIT"EM eCrrLiaOmU PDeSak WILDERNESS Swensen Butte " Castle Peak " O " ld t Rd C in h o i P lly tt R le d JIM MCCLURE-JERRY PEAK WILDERNESS rt a B N " n 0 ' L t 0 t i ° v 4 Herd Peak a 4 " R e id L atl Forest D ge N eve lop R Zolli o ng a Lehman Butte e r d Rd 0 " 6 3 R Meridian Peak d " GALENA PEAK RYAN PEAK MERIDIAN PEAK HERD PEAK HARRY CANYON PORPPHorYphRyYry PeEaAk K LEHMAN BUTTE " Glassford Peak " Ryan Peak " Kent Peak st Develo Galena HPeEaMk INGWAY-BOULDERS WILDERNESS " N tl Fore p Ro a ad 135 " Rd d R ek d Easley Peak re R Cabin Mountain C k l i e " " Silver Peak a r e T r E " " C a s e t Boulder Peak n F S A L M O N - C H A L L I S N F o " a r K k R d Phi Kappa Mountain " EASLEY HOT SPRINGS AMBER LAKES ROCK ROLL CANYON PHI KAPPA
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Agriculture Forest Service
    Thursday, October 16, 2008 Part II Department of Agriculture Forest Service 36 CFR Part 294 Special Areas; Roadless Area Conservation; Applicability to the National Forests in Idaho; Final Rule VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:40 Oct 15, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\16OCR2.SGM 16OCR2 rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES_2 61456 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 201 / Thursday, October 16, 2008 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Gilbert at (208) 765–7438. Individuals November 29 and 30, 2006, in using telecommunication devices for the Washington, DC. The committee issued Forest Service deaf (TDD) may call the Federal a unanimous, consensus-based Information Relay Service (FIRS) at recommendation on December 19, 2006, 36 CFR Part 294 1–800–877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 that the Secretary direct the Forest RIN 0596–AC62 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, Monday Service, with the State of Idaho as a through Friday. cooperating agency, to proceed with Special Areas; Roadless Area SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rulemaking. The Committee’s report Conservation; Applicability to the document serves as both notice of final provided specific advice and suggested National Forests in Idaho rule and record of decision. clarifications regarding particular issues. After considering the advisory AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. Decision committee’s review and report, the ACTION: Final rule and record of For the reasons set out below, the Secretary accepted the petition and decision. Department hereby promulgates a directed the Forest Service to initiate regulation establishing IRAs as rulemaking on December 22, 2006. SUMMARY: The U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior Geological
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Geology and mineral deposits of the Hailey and western Idaho Falls I°x2° quadrangles, Idaho Abstracts and short papers selected from the symposium and poster sessions presented to the Annual Convention of the Northwest Mining Association, Spokane, Washington, December 7, 1989 edited by Gary R. Winkler1 , Sandra J. Soulliere1 , Ronald G. Worl2 , and Kathleen M. Johnson2 Open-File Report 89-639 December 1989 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards and stratigraphic nomenclature. 1U.S. Geological Survey ^.S. Geological Survey Denver, Colorado Spokane, Washington CONTENTS Page Introduction ............................ 1 Worl, R.G., and Johnson, K.M., Geologic terranes and mineral deposit types in the Hailey and western Idaho Falls I°x2° quadrangles, Idaho .................... 3 Johnson, K.M., and Worl, R.G., Preliminary assessment of mineral resources of the Hailey and western Idaho Falls I°x2° quadrangles, Idaho ....................... 17 Smith, C.L., Geochemical characterization of some mineralized terranes in the Hailey I°x2° quadrangle, Idaho ......... 23 Kleinkopf, M.D., Bankey, Viki, and McCafferty, A.E., Gravity and magnetic anomaly patterns applied to mineral resource exploration, Hailey I°x2° quadrangle, Idaho .......... 26 Lewis, R.S., Plutonic rocks in the southeastern part of the Idaho batholith and their relationship to mineralization .... 33 Kiilsgaard, T.H., Regional geology of the northwestern part of the Hailey I°x2° quadrangle and ore deposits of the Atlanta district, Idaho .................... 35 Snee, L.W. , and Kunk, M.J., ^Ar/^Ar thermochronology of mineral deposits in the southern part of the Idaho batholith .
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C Roadless Area Re-Evaluation
    Appendix C Roadless Area Re-evaluation SAWTOOTH NATIONAL FOREST INVENTORIED ROADLESS AREAS Blackhorse Creek Roadless Area No. 0414039 7,709 acres DESCRIPTION This area includes the small northwestern portion of what was the Buttercup Mountain IRA (Roadless Area No. 14018) in the 1987 Sawtooth National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan). During the Forest Plan Revision roadless area inventory update, the Buttercup IRA was divided into three separate areas because the existing roads that separate them were considered to be too highly developed to meet wilderness standards. The Blackhorse Creek IRA is located in Camas County, within the Fairfield Ranger District, about 13 miles north of Fairfield, Idaho. It is bordered on the north and west by the Ketchum-Featherville Road (Forest Road 227), and on the southwest and southeast by the Little Smoky Creek Road (Forest Road 015). The topography is very steep over much of the area. Precipitation averages from 16 to 20 inches. The elevations range from around 6,200 feet to over 8,400 feet. The slopes are generally vegetated up to the ridgelines with Douglas-fir, subalpine fir, and some lodgepole pine on the northern and eastern slopes. The southern and western slopes are vegetated with mountain shrub-sagebrush-grass communities. The brush communities include snowberry, bitterbrush, and sagebrush. Aspen is present but it is in decline due to fire exclusion and conifer encroachment. CAPABILITY Natural Integrity and Appearance: Natural integrity and apparent naturalness are rated low because of mining activities, improved and unimproved roads along the borders, interior exclusions, and range management activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Fsm9 002702.Pdf
    # #Ryan Peak 8 0 1 # 7 Legend # 7128 Kent Peak Travel Management Project Area Proposed System Road Full Size Galena Peak 7 Removal of Road or Trail from System 711 1 3 71 1 2 5 Trails Open to Vehicles 50" or Less in Width 9 6 2 4 Proposed Trails Open to Vehicles 50" or Less in Width 1 0 0 0 5 59 7 9 7 1 5 5 2 Change in Trail Use to Trails Open to Vehicles 50" or Less in Width 7 7 8 0 Easley Peak 1 1 7 4 8 7 Change in Road Use to Trails Open to Vehicles 50" or Less in Width 7 4 4 # " " " " 1 Trails Open to Horse and Foot Traffic 2 7 0 8 1 6 " " " " # 5 4 0 Proposed Trails Open to Horse and Foot Traffic 6 0 7 1 4 4 4 " " " " Change in Trail Use to Trails Open to Horse and Foot Traffic 7 Silver Peak 4 57 # 2 " " " " # 0 4 Change in Road Use to Trails Open to Horse and Foot Traffic 1 3 4 7 5 0 ((((( 0 4 Big Black Dome Trails Open to Bike, Horse, and Foot Traffic # 6 5 Boulder Peak 4 0 6 1 ((((( Proposed Trails Open to Bike, Horse, and Foot Traffic 7 # 0 2 1 7 4 ((((( Change in Trail Use to Trails Open to Bike, Horse, and Foot Traffic 7 3 1 0 Phi Kappa Mountain ((((( 33 # Change in Road Use to Trails Open to Bike, Horse, and Foot Traffic ! ! ! Trails Open to Motorcycle, Bike, Horse, and Foot Traffic 7 ! ! ! 1 4 Pyramid Peak Proposed Trails Open to Motorcycle, Bike, Horse, and Foot Traffic 3 7 18 # 0 6 7 ! ! ! # 6 Change in Trail Use to Trails Open to Motorcycle, Bike, Horse, and Foot Traffic 2 1 41 Pioneer Mountains ! ! ! Change in Road Use to Trails Open to Motorcycle, Bike, Horse, and Foot Traffic FH2 7 83 Standhope Peak 6 71 7 llll Trails
    [Show full text]
  • ID Roadless Area Conservation FEIS
    Roadless Area Conservation; National Forest System Lands in Idaho FEIS Appendix K APPENDIX K—BOTANICAL SPECIES Table K-1. Global and state status, distribution, national forest distribution, and habitat group for TPCS plant species known to occur within Idaho Roadless Areas in the Intermountain Region (Boise, Sawtooth, Payette, Salmon-Challis, and Caribou-Targhee National Forests) Species name Common name Global1 State2 Distribution3 Idaho Roadless Areas Habitat group Spiranthes diluvialis Ute Ladies’ Threatened S1 sd Caribou City, Garns Mountain Riparian–wet tresses orchid G2 meadows Castilleja christii Christ's Indian Candidate S1 le Mount Harrison Subalpine grassland paintbrush G1 Agoseris lackschewitzii Pink Agoseris G4 S2 re Lemhi Range, Lionhead, Mt. Jefferson Wet meadows Allium madidum Swamp onion G3 S3 re Council Mountain Riparian -vernally wet Allium tolmiei var. Tolmie's onion G4/T3 S3 le Cuddy Mountain Grassland, low persimile elevation Allotropa virgata Candystick G4 S3 d Cottontail Point/ Pilot Peak, Secesh Forest-understory Astragalus amnis-amissi Lost River G3 S3 re Borah Peak, Diamond Peak Cracks and ledges on milkvetch vertical cliffs Astragalus aquilonius Lemhi milkvetch G3 S3 le Diamond Peak, Red Hill Rock-unstable slopes Astragalus vexilliflexus White Cloud G4/T2 S2 le Boulder - White Clouds, Railroad Ridge Subalpine/alpine Sheld. var. nubilus milkvetch Calamagrostis tweedii Cascade G3 S2 re Cottontail Point/ Pilot Peak Forest-open gap reedgrass Chrysothamnus parryi Centennial G5T1 S1 re Garfield Mountain Talus slopes
    [Show full text]
  • Idaho Roadless Conservation FEIS
    United States Department of Roadless Area Conservation Agriculture National Forest System Lands in Idaho Forest Service Idaho Final Environmental Impact Statement National Forests August 2008 Appendix C—Idaho Roadless Areas Volume 4: Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National Forests The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (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 TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Roadless Area Conservation; National Forest System Lands in Idaho FEIS Idaho Roadless Areas Table of Contents APPENDIX C. IDAHO ROADLESS AREAS............ C4-1 Whitehawk Mountain #021........................ C4-129 Wilson Peak #040......................................... C4-133 Boise National Forest Bald Mountain #019 ........................................ C4-3 Payette National Forest Bear Wallow #125............................................ C4-7 Big Creek Fringe #009 ................................
    [Show full text]
  • High Resolution Adobe PDF
    114°40'0"W 114°20'0"W WHITE CLOUDS WILDERNESS Herd Peak d " Rid R ge 0 2 1 d a Horton Peak o JIM MCCLURE-JERRY PEAK WILDERNESS R " p lo e v e D st re o F tl Meridian Peak a N " d R er iv ALTURAS LAKE R HORTON PEAK GALENA PEAK RYAN PEAK MERIDIAN PEAK t HERD PEAK Los Big N Fork Glassford Peak " Ryan Peak " atl Fo Kent Peak S A L M O N - C H A L L I S N F N rest De v " e lo p HE"GMaIlNenGaW PeAaYk-BOULDERS WILDERNESS R oa d 1 82 R S d t a t e N H FD w 1 P y 82 d h 7 Easley Peak R i 5 k K e " e a Silver Peak r p il C p " ra a T Rd C 81 r 1 e elop Road Bromaghin Peak ev Boulder Peak e t D k es " " or R tl F d a R d N k e e r Rd C N 79 Phi Kappa Mountain atl ad 1 r Fore o e st Develop R d " GALENA EASLEY HOT SPRINGS l u AMBER LAKES ROCK ROLL CANYON PHI KAPPA MOUNTAIN FRENCHMAN CREEK o B Rd 4 4 1 d a o d R R p 2 lo 4 e v 1 e d D a t s o e R or Norton Peak wma d F p e n reek R tl lo N C a e " N v e D t 75 s RQ e r S Ao W T O O T H N F F tl d a R N 1 d d 5 d 137 R R d lop Roa 2 a t Deve 1 6 Griffin Butte o Natl Fores ad R o Fox Peak " p R H elo p u lo " ev e l v e e t D D n s Johnstone Peak t e s W or e " r F a o tl F y a tl N Ruud Mountain a N " Proctor Mountain " M a Sun ValPlreoyspect Mountain i !( n d S " R PARADISE PEAK e t SUN VALLEY BAKER PEAK BOYLE MOUNTAIN ag " GRIFFIN BUTTE S Penny Mountain HYNDMAN PEAK Boyle Mountain d KetchuDmollar Mountain Bear Peak R B !( i " 7 r " 2 d N " Baker Peak 2 " Big Peak In D de d W pendenc 0 e a r e Cre ' e " " o y k Rd 0 R y p a 4 o k J ° l FD 1 35 in u e N ni 3 p v e 4 e Bald Mountain r D t S s " t e
    [Show full text]
  • Results of Spirit Leveling in Idaho
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DIRECTOR BULLETIN 567 RESULTS OF SPIRIT LEVELING IN IDAHO 1896 TO 1914, INCLUSIVE R. B. MARSHALL, CHIEF GEOGRAPHER WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1915 CONTENTS. Page. Introduction........................................... -fc£«(- -v,-,-------.-. 5 Previous publication................................... J*. .f ^-/r/- -ip-«.- 5 Personnel..................................................... *...-&& 5 Classification.......................................................... 5 Bench marks......................................................... 6 Datum.....:.......................................................... 6 Topographic maps.................................................... 7 Precise ^leveling............................................................ 7 Birch Creek and Weiser quadrangles (Canyon and Washington counties). 7 Primary leveling........................................................... 8 Cambridge, Meadows, Squaw Creek, and Weiser quadrangles (Boise and Washington counties)............................................... 8 St. Anthony and Victor quadrangles (Fremont County).................. 15 Crow Creek, Freedom, Henry, Lanes Creek, Montpelier, Pocatello, Slug Creek, Soda Springs, and Sterrett quadrangles (Bannock and Bear. Lake counties)............................................................ 17 Hailey, Picabo, Sawtooth, and Soldier quadrangles (Blaine County)....... 26 Arco, Bay Horse, Dickey, Mackay, May, Babbit Foot, Salmon,
    [Show full text]