Gila National Forest
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Travel Management Rule Implementation Gila National Forest Aquatic Specialist Report Prepared by Jerry A. Monzingo Wildlife, Fish, and Rare Plant Biologist December 10, 2013 Implementation of the Travel Management Rule Implementation – Gila National Forest The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, employees, and applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability, sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, marital status, familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program, or protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.) April 2013 – Gila National Forest Page - 2 - Implementation of the Travel Management Rule Implementation – Gila National Forest Contents Analysis Question ............................................................................................................................... - 5 - Affected Environment ........................................................................................................................ - 5 - Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policy ............................................................................................ - 5 - Methodology and Analysis Process .................................................................................................... - 6 - Analysis Framework ....................................................................................................................... - 6 - Data & Methods ............................................................................................................................. - 6 - Assumptions ................................................................................................................................... - 7 - Effects Analysis .................................................................................................................................. - 7 - Effects of the No Action Alternative .............................................................................................. - 7 - Effects Common to all Action Alternatives ................................................................................... - 8 - General Effects ........................................................................................................................... - 8 - Direct and Indirect Effects ............................................................................................................. - 9 - Routes Within 300 Feet of Streams .......................................................................................... - 10 - Road-stream Crossings ............................................................................................................. - 11 - Impaired Water Quality Streams .............................................................................................. - 12 - Route Density and Use ............................................................................................................. - 16 - Motorized Dispersed Camping ................................................................................................. - 18 - Motorized Big Game Retrieval ................................................................................................. - 19 - Motorized Areas ....................................................................................................................... - 19 - Lower San Francisco River....................................................................................................... - 19 - Aquatic Resources .................................................................................................................... - 20 - Individual Species Analysis ...................................................................................................... - 21 - Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources ............................................................ - 57 - Cumulative Effects ....................................................................................................................... - 57 - Effects of Forest Plan Amendments ............................................................................................. - 58 - Relevant Literature ........................................................................................................................... - 59 - April 2013 – Gila National Forest Page - 3 - Implementation of the Travel Management Rule Implementation – Gila National Forest Analysis Question What effects will changes to the current transportation system, motorized dispersed camping, motorized big game retrieval, and areas have on aquatic habitats and species? Affected Environment The Gila National Forest (GNF) is situated within four river basins, the Gila-San Francisco, Mimbres, Little Colorado, and Rio Grande. Among them, species diversity, richness, and endemism are variable and depend, in part, on geologic history, relative proximity to more mesic and species-rich regions, climatic factors, and relative size and complexity of each drainage (Propst, 1999). The GNF has three manmade lakes completely or partially on National Forest lands and hundreds of miles of streams within one hundred-eighty 6th code watersheds. Aquatic features found on the GNF include both lotic (moving water) and lentic (still water) systems. There are over 1700 miles of perennial and intermittent stream habitat that occur in watersheds of the Gila National Forest within the project area. These streams contain a variety of aquatic species (see table 29 for federally listed species and table 47 for Region 3 sensitive species), most significant of which are those native resident species that are key for aquatic habitat management. These species’ designations as endangered, threatened, sensitive and/or as management indicator species (MIS) emphasize the need for not only conservation, but also recovery efforts as part of interagency management programs throughout the project area. Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policy Forest Service Manual 2670 and Forest Service Handbook 2609.25 provide direction regarding Forest Service sensitive species, which are identified by the Regional Forester. The Forest Service develops and implements management practices to ensure that rare plants and animals do not become threatened or endangered, and ensure their continued viability on National Forests. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC 1531 et seq.) states that each Federal agency shall, in consultation with and with the assistance of the Secretary insure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by such agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat of such species. Section 7 of the ESA, as amended, requires the responsible federal agency to consult the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concerning threatened or endangered fish species under their jurisdiction. There are five fish species that are listed under the Endangered Species Act on the GNF: loach minnow, spikedace, Gila chub, Chihuahua chub, and Gila trout. Gila National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan identified the following relevant management standards and guidelines for fisheries resources across the entire forest: C01, C11: Manage threatened, endangered, and sensitive animal, fish, and plant habitat to achieve delisting in a manner consistent with the goals established with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish in compliance with approved recovery plans. C02: Manage riparian areas to protect the productivity and diversity of riparian dependent resources by requiring actions within or affecting riparian areas to protect and where applicable, April 2013 – Gila National Forest Page - 5 - Implementation of the Travel Management Rule Implementation – Gila National Forest improve dependent resources. Emphasize protection of soil, water, vegetation, and wildlife and fish resources prior to implementing projects. C02: Give preferential consideration to resources dependent on riparian areas over other resources. Other resource activities may occur to the extent that they support or do not adversely affect riparian dependent resources. C02: Wildlife coordination and improvement efforts will include emphasis on riparian and aquatic area management. L04, L05: Road construction will be avoided in riparian areas. LRMP standards and guidelines related to water quality are displayed in the Hydrology section. Methodology and Analysis Process Analysis Framework The project area includes all NFS lands within the administrative boundary of the Gila National Forest. The geographic extent of the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects analysis is generally confined to aquatic features of watersheds within this administrative boundary. The area of analysis was chosen based on the potential for motorized routes on NFS lands to affect aquatic systems. It assumes that motorized routes located in watersheds on the GNF that influence larger riverine systems could have a measurable influence on these systems immediately adjacent to and downstream of the Forest. Therefore, this analysis will focus