Chiricahua Firescape Draft Environmental Assessment

Home , Chiricahua, Huachuca Mountains, Pinus engelmannii

United States Department of Agriculture

Chiricahua FireScape Draft Environmental Assessment

Forest Service Coronado National Forest Douglas Ranger District September 2018

For More Information Contact:

Renee Kuehner Fire Management Officer 1192 West Saddleview Road Douglas, AZ 85607 520-388-8448

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.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Contents

Introduction ...... 1 Background ...... 1 Location of the Proposed Project Area ...... 1 Need for the Proposal ...... 2 Management Direction ...... 3 Agencies and Persons Consulted ...... 3 Public Involvement ...... 4 Proposed Action and Alternatives ...... 4 No Action ...... 4 Proposed Action ...... 5 Description of Proposed Treatments ...... 5 Treatment Units ...... 8 Project Design Features ...... 9 Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives...... 11 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions ...... 11 Cultural Resources ...... 13 Fire and Fuels ...... 14 Range ...... 16 Recreation and Wilderness ...... 21 Scenery ...... 27 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species ...... 29 Vegetation ...... 36 Watershed...... 40 Appendix A – Design Features ...... 47 Appendix B – Maps ...... 58

List of Tables

Table 1. Chiricahua FireScape proposed vegetation treatments ...... 9 Table 2. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions ...... 12 Table 3. Allotment size and current management of the grazing allotments on the project area, Douglas Ranger District. Permitted use is shown in both numbers of livestock and animal unit months (AUMs)...... 16 Table 4. Summary of determinations for threatened and endangered species...... 29 Table 5. Summary of effects to Forest Service sensitive species...... 33 Table 6. Coronado National Forest management indicator species that may occur within the project area ...... 35 Table 7. Design features for the Chiricahua FireScape Project organized by resource ...... 47

List of Figures

Figure 1. Project area vicinity map ...... 2 Figure 2. Acres of Treatment Type by Slope Percent ...... 42

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

List of Maps

Map 1. Treatment units in the Chiricahua FireScape project area ...... 59 Map 2. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Bruno unit ...... 59 Map 3. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Cave Creek unit ...... 59 Map 4. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Cochise Head unit ...... 59 Map 5. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Jackwood unit ...... 59 Map 6. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for John Long unit ...... 59 Map 7. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Limestone unit ...... 59 Map 8. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Onion unit ...... 59 Map 9. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Packsaddle unit ...... 59 Map 10. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Pine Canyon unit ...... 59 Map 11. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Pinery unit ...... 59 Map 12. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Price Canyon unit ...... 59 Map 13. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Rough Mountain unit ...... 59 Map 14. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Rucker unit ...... 59 Map 15. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Rustler Park unit ...... 59 Map 16. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Silver Peak unit ...... 59 Map 17. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Turkey Creek unit ...... 59

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Introduction We are proposing to implement ecosystem restoration treatments, including hand thinning, mechanical treatments, wildland fire (planned and unplanned), and selective herbicide use on National Forest System lands on approximately 140,000 acres of the Douglas Ranger District of the Coronado National Forest.

We prepared this environmental assessment to determine whether effects of the proposed activities may be significant enough to prepare an environmental impact statement. By preparing this environmental assessment, we are fulfilling agency policy and direction to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and regulations. For more details of the proposed action, see the “Proposed Action and Alternatives” section of this document. Background Fire has played an important ecological role in the history of the grassland and woodland ecosystems of southeastern Arizona. Regular intervals of naturally occurring fire restrict the growth of shrubs in grasslands, thin forests of fire-intolerant trees, increase stream flows, and renew wildlife habitat. Since the beginning of the early 20th century, the frequency of natural fire has decreased dramatically through a concerted effort of fire suppression. This decrease corresponded with an increased demand for wildland fire suppression to protect life and property and the reduction of fine fuels by livestock grazing. Past fire suppression greatly altered the disturbance regimes in the Chiricahua Ecosystem Management Area and contributed to the impacts of the more recent large uncharacteristic wildfire (2011 Horseshoe 2 Fire).

In 2011, the Horseshoe 2 Fire occurred during a hot, windy spring, and largely due to fuel loading and climax vegetation conditions, it burned the majority of the mountain range. The Horseshoe 2 Fire burned uncharacteristically in some areas, while benefitting other areas where burn severity was low to moderate. In the years following the Horseshoe 2 Fire, the ecosystem has responded to the re-introduction of fire and is in a position to allow natural fire to perform its role with proactive management activities protecting values at risk. Proposed Chiricahua FireScape treatments will be designed to help maintain favorable conditions created by the Horseshoe 2 Fire, as well as treat heavy fuel loadings that have resulted from regeneration and downed woody debris following the Horseshoe 2 Fire. Location of the Proposed Project Area The project area is located in the Chiricahua Mountains in Cochise County, Arizona, on the Douglas Ranger District of the Coronado National Forest. Considered a “sky island” mountain range, the Chiricahua Mountains rise to over 9,500 feet elevation from grassland valley bottoms (elevation 4,000- 5,000 feet). Vegetation includes Madrean and Rocky Mountain species, including Arizona cypress, Arizona sycamore, Chihuahua pine, Apache pine, Ponderosa pine, Douglas fir, and Engelmann spruce. Spectacular scenery is visible throughout the range. Steep canyons dissect it, radiating in all directions from the mountaintops. Much of the area is densely timbered with steep slopes. Grazing permittees ranch the foothills and valleys surrounding the range. The Chiricahua Wilderness Area encompasses 87,169

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment acres of the range’s high country. The perimeter of the Chiricahuas is sparsely settled, with eastside communities around Portal constituting the largest concentration of people adjacent to public land.

Figure 1. Project area vicinity map

Need for the Proposal The purpose and need for this project is to:

• Reduce fuel accumulations and uncharacteristic vegetation composition and structure in the Chiricahua Ecosystem Management Area that contribute to the risk of large, high intensity wildfire and the associated negative effects.

• Restore and sustain ecological processes in fire-dependent ecosystems, to enhance the overall health and resiliency of desired native plant and tree species to improve habitat for wildlife and forage for range and wildlife.

• Facilitate fire management within the project area to provide for public and firefighter safety and ability to manage natural ignitions to achieve desired Land and Resource Management Plan objectives and create conditions that enable naturally occurring fires to return to their historic role.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

• Provide protection to values at risk within the project area, including, but not limited to, wildland-urban interface (WUI) communities and Forest Service (FS) infrastructure. Management Direction The 2018 Coronado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), provides general guidance on how to manage National Forest System Lands. Proposed activities are designed to be consistent with goals and objectives defined in the Forest Plan. The Chiricahua FireScape project is located on the Douglas Ranger District in the Chiricahua Ecosystem Management Area (EMA).

The Forest Plan objectives for the Chiricahua EMA state “every 10 years treat the vegetation using wildland fire (planned and unplanned ignitions), prescribed cutting, and mastication on at least 20 percent of the Chiricahua Ecosystem Management Area to create resiliency to disturbances. Treatments will be consistent with the objectives for forestwide vegetation communities and resources” (Forest Plan, p. 131). Similarly, the desired condition for the wildland-urban interface (WUI) includes “as a result of vegetation management, most wildfires in the wildland-urban interface are low- to mixed-severity fires that result in limited loss of structures or ecosystem function. Patterns of treatments are effective in modifying fire behavior” (Forest Plan, p. 23). The Forest Plan objective for the WUI states to “treat 5,000 to 10,000 acres in the wildland-urban interface using wildland fire (planned and unplanned ignitions), prescribed cutting, and mastication every year to reduce fire hazard and risk to communities and the forest” (Forest Plan, p. 23). Implementing fuels treatments would help achieve Forest Plan management objectives for both the Chiricahua EMA and the wildland-urban interface.

Agencies and Persons Consulted The Forest Service consulted the following individuals, Federal, State, tribal, and local agencies during the development of this environmental assessment:

Federal, State, and Local Agencies: USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, USDA Forest Service, National Park Service, Arizona State Lands Department, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, Cochise County, Hidalgo County, State Historic Preservation Office.

Tribes: Tribal consultation, as directed by 36 CFR 800 and the Programmatic Agreement, was conducted by the Coronado National Forest. The Coronado National Forest normally consults with 12 Native American tribes who have ancestral ties to lands currently managed by the Coronado National Forest. These tribes include the Ak-Chin Indian Community, Ft. Sill Apache Tribe, Gila River Indian Community, Hopi Tribe, Mescalero Apache Tribe, Pasqua Yaqui Tribe, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, San Carlos Apache Tribe, Tohono O’odham Nation, White Mountain Apache Tribe, Yavapai-Apache Nation, and Pueblo of Zuni. The scoping letter for the Chiricahua FireScape project was sent to 24 representatives from local tribes on January 31, 2018.

Others: The Forest Service provided information on this project to approximately 367 individuals who are identified on the project mailing list, located in the project administrative record. This list includes recreation user groups, outfitters, guides, range permittees, environmental groups, and other interested parties.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Public Involvement This proposal was first listed on the Coronado National Forest’s Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) in January 2018 and updated periodically during the analysis. The project information is available on the Forest website at http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=53185.

On January 31, 2018, a letter announcing the official scoping period for this project was sent to approximately 35 individuals and organizations, including State and local land management agencies, Tribal leaders, range permittees, and other interested parties. On February 7 and 9, 2018, a legal notice announcing the start of the 30-day scoping period was published in the Douglas Dispatch and the Hidalgo County Herald.

The interdisciplinary team reviewed the eight comments letters received during the scoping period to determine if any alternatives were recommended or if any comments constituted issues with the proposed action. No site-specific issues with the proposed action were identified. General comments or concerns about the proposal included: effects to rangeland resources; collaboration with ranchers and tribes; effects to wildlife, recreation users and hunters from the use of herbicide; and treatments in designated and recommended wilderness. These concerns are addressed as appropriate in the “Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives” section. No commenters suggested alternatives to the proposed action.

Proposed Action and Alternatives Two alternatives were analyzed in detail: the Proposed Action and the No Action. The proposed action was developed to maximize attainment of the purpose and need. The no-action alternative was analyzed to provide a baseline of the environmental condition if no agency action is taken. The site- specific maps apply to the proposed action. For the no-action alternative, no activities would occur in the areas shown on the maps. These alternatives are described in more detail below. No Action No action, which is the option of not treating vegetation and fuels in the Chiricahua FireScape project area, is included as an alternative in this analysis to provide an environmental baseline against which the effects of the proposed action may be compared. For the proposed project, taking no action implies that:

1. The status of the ecological components in the proposed treatment areas would remain the same over the timeframe planned for implementation of the proposed action, with the exception of changes resulting from natural phenomena (such as wildfire, earthquakes, landslides, growth, and decay);

2. The implementation of existing restoration projects, such as the Rustler-Barfoot Park Forest Health Project and the Chiricahua Watershed Restoration Project, would continue.

3. If other non-Forest Service fuel and fire management projects or agreements are proposed over the timeframe of the proposed action, their environmental effects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis by each agency.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Proposed Action We are proposing to use a mix of fire and non-fire treatments to improve vegetation conditions in the Chiricahua Ecosystem Management Area (EMA), with the goals of facilitating a decrease in vegetative fuel loading and improving ecosystem health. Attaining these project goals would help us to make progress toward vegetation conditions that support a more historic low to moderate intensity natural fire cycle, which, in turn, would lessen the probability that high intensity fires would occur. For planning purposes, 16 geographic areas were used to define the Chiricahua landscapes. The Chiricahua Wilderness is not a proposed geographic area; however, areas of the wilderness are included within proposed treatment areas. Treatments are also proposed in two areas recommended for wilderness designation in the 2018 Coronado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan: Ku Chish and Chiricahua Addition.

Description of Proposed Treatments The following sections provide brief descriptions of both fire and non-fire vegetation treatments proposed to achieve the wide range of goals specified in the Forest Plan. Treatments would restore ecosystem structure by reducing surface fuels, ladder fuels and the density of trees and shrubs.

Weather factors, limited operating periods, recent fire events, and available funding would dictate the amount and type of activities that might be applied in any given year. Anticipated treatments include wildland fire (planned and unplanned), hand thinning, mechanical treatments, and herbicide application. Projects would be implemented incrementally over a period greater than 20 years. In addition to the actions described below, land managers would also have the choice of managing naturally ignited wildland fires for the protection and enhancement of Forest values.

Wildland Fire Treatments

We propose to use both planned fire ignitions (called prescribed fires or prescribed burns) and unplanned ignitions that originate from natural causes such as lightning.

Forest Service policy and the National Fire Plan provide direction that allows fire managers to manage unplanned ignitions (naturally occurring wildland fire) for multiple, concurrent resource objectives. When managing an unplanned ignition, fire managers use the Wildland Fire Decision Support System to weigh variables such as weather, timing, fuel conditions, values and resources at risk, and available firefighting resources to determine the appropriate course of action. Though it is uncertain exactly where these unplanned ignitions will start, management of the naturally occurring fires could take place where prescribed fire is planned.

Planned ignitions are designed to meet objectives specified in a written, approved burn plan and all regulatory requirements prior to implementation. Prescribed fires may be ignited by hand, mechanical, or aerial-firing methods and are intended to burn at low to moderate intensities. Fire managers use prescribed fire to achieve varying levels of burn severity based on vegetation type and objectives.

Historically, regular intervals of naturally occurring fire played an important role in the development and ecological functioning of the grasslands, woodlands, and forests within the project area. As one intent of Chiricahua FireScape is to restore the natural role of fire across the landscape, prescribed fire treatments would be implemented regularly in some treatment units to mimic the historical fire return intervals. Where unplanned ignitions can be managed for resource objectives, fire treatments would transition to utilize more unplanned fire to allow for a more natural restoration of fire across the landscape.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Pile Burning Pile burning is used to dispose of vegetation remaining after hand thinning and mechanical treatment. Similar to prescribed fires, pile burning is guided by burn plans that specify the parameters of favorable conditions during which the risk of fire spread is low. Trees, shrubs, pruned limbs, and dead and down woody material (generally larger than 1 inch in diameter) are gathered and piled by hand. Piles may range from about 5 feet in diameter and 4 feet high to approximately 15 feet in diameter and 8 feet high. They are carefully located to minimize scorch to the canopies and trunks of trees.

Hand Thinning

This method involves the use of hand tools or chainsaws to create a prescribed spacing among trees and shrubs. Trees would be selected for thinning based upon treatment objectives, tree-hazard rating, snag recruitment, health and vigor, species, size, and age. Species preference, size classes, and residual stocking levels would be determined on a site-specific basis and would be designed to achieve the desired future condition for the treatment unit.

Mechanical Treatment

This type of treatment includes specialized mechanical-harvesting and slash treatment equipment, mastication and grubbing. Mechanical treatment reduces woody biomass across a larger area than is typically treated by hand thinning. Mastication is used to eliminate shrubs and small trees for ecological or fuel reduction purposes. In areas where mastication is ineffective (for example, where vegetation re- sprouts quickly), grubbing would be used as an alternative. Grubbing uses a tracked or rubber-tired machine to uproot shrubs and small trees, removing the rooting zone of the plant and limiting re-sprouting and survival.

Application of Herbicide

Application of herbicides is proposed to reduce re-sprouting of trees and shrubs to prevent regrowth after thinning, mastication, or grubbing treatments and/or a primary treatment to address broad-scale invasion (generally into grasslands) of woody species that are difficult to control with fire or mechanical means. Herbicide treatment would be limited to 35,799 acres or less than 27 percent of the project area. However, it should be noted that herbicide would not be applied indiscriminately nor uniformly across these acres due to the spot treatment methods being proposed and the varying plant densities of target species. Use of herbicide is dependent on site specific needs and objectives. Examples include:

• in forest communities, limited, supplemental use of herbicide on woody shrubs and small trees to create openings and maintain a healthy ecosystem;

• the restoration of shrub and tree invaded grasslands to reduce re-sprouts or remove woody species; and

• the establishment of fuelbreaks.

Target species may include, but are not limited to: mesquite, acacia, oak spp., juniper spp., manzanita, buckbrush, New Mexico locust, and Chihuahua pine.

Herbicide treatment methods would include ground-based application (including cut stump following thinning, mastication and/or grubbing); foliar application; hack-and-squirt; or basal bark injection, using a backpack sprayer or spray boom. Herbicide treatments are a supplemental treatment option in most vegetation communities and would be used to promote historical vegetation structure. When removal is

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment ineffective, herbicide may be used as the primary treatment. Herbicide applications would be scheduled and designed to minimize potential effects on animals, water quality, soil fertility, and non-target plants, while remaining consistent with the objectives of the treatment.

Treatments in Designated and Recommended Wilderness

Fire and fuels treatments are proposed within congressionally designated wilderness and areas recommended for wilderness designation in the 2018 Coronado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. In order to reduce fire hazard, resource damage, and threats to the wildland-urban interface, the public and firefighter safety, corresponding treatments in and out of wilderness are needed.

Designated Wilderness Treatments within the 87,169-acre Chiricahua Wilderness include approximately 108 acres of hand thinning, followed by 189 acres of overlapping wildland (planned and unplanned) fire, in the Cave Creek and John Long units (see maps 3 and 6 in appendix B). Treatment is needed in this portion of the wilderness to allow treatment unit boundaries to follow existing trails and natural control features, such as ridgelines, which best provide for firefighter safety during prescribed burning activities. In the long term, fire would transition from prescribed fire treatments to unplanned ignitions to restore natural fire across the landscape.

Prescribed fire within the Chiricahua Wilderness would be conducted using tools prohibited under Section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act. Therefore, a Forest Service Minimum Requirements Decision Guide would be used to plan treatments on National Forest System lands in wilderness. The guide provides the information for the Regional Forester to determine whether or not action is necessary to meet the minimum requirements for administration of the wilderness area and, if so, which actions are the minimum necessary.

Prohibited tools, including chainsaws and helicopters, would be used to reduce firefighter time and exposure in extremely rugged terrain. Chainsaws would be used for fire control line preparation and as a safety precaution during ignition and holding efforts. Helicopters may be used for aerial ignition in the John Long unit. Chainsaw use for line prep would be limited to improving existing trails and natural control features, totaling about 108 acres, or approximately 0.1% of the Chiricahua Wilderness. A draft Minimum Requirements Decision Guide will accompany the final decision document; the proposed activities in wilderness would not be implemented until approved by the Regional Forester as part of the Minimum Requirements Decision Guide process.

Recommended Wilderness Fire and non-fire treatments are proposed within two recommended wilderness areas. The 26,245-acre Ku Chish Recommended Wilderness Area is located at the north end of the Chiricahua Ecosystem Management Area. The 5,012-acre Chiricahua Addition North Recommended Wilderness Area is located adjacent to the existing Chiricahua Wilderness. Treatments in recommended wilderness are proposed in the Cave Creek, Cochise Head, Rough Mountain, and Turkey Creek units (see maps 3, 4, 13 and 17 in appendix B). Treatments in these units include hand thinning, mechanical treatment and wildland (planned and unplanned) fire. All proposed treatments in recommended wilderness would meet the purpose of Forest Plan guidelines to maintain desired conditions for Recommended Wilderness Areas and Wilderness Study Areas (Forest Plan, pp. 118-120).

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Treatment Units The interdisciplinary team identified 16 treatment units within the project area. These units and their prescriptions are shown in table 1 and depicted on maps 2 through 17 in appendix B.

A long-term goal of the project is to allow natural and prescribed fire to maintain all fire-adapted vegetation types. Currently, much of the landscape has the potential to burn with uncharacteristic fire behavior. In these areas, it may take multiple treatments to reduce extreme behavior and bring ecosystems to the desired condition. For example, the large prescribed fire treatments listed in table 1 may not be burned in a single operation; each of these units may be broken into smaller areas for practical project implementation.

Several factors will determine treatment priority, primarily fuels loading and the existing condition of vegetation in a parcel relative to desired ecological conditions. Areas of treatment prioritization will also include those within or in close proximity to the wildland-urban interface. Other priority areas may include natural features at risk, such as threatened and endangered species habitat, healthy watersheds, wilderness, and sensitive heritage resources.

Table 1 displays the total acres designated for treatment within each treatment unit, as well as acres for each treatment type within each unit. The acres for each treatment type do not collectively represent the total planned acres for treatment within a unit. In many cases, multiple treatment types may be applied in a single area (e.g. initial hand thinning followed by supplemental prescribed fire). It is assumed that the acres to be treated by mechanical treatment may be overlapped by hand thinning treatments, herbicide treatments and/or prescribed fire. Similarly, hand thinning acres may be overlapped with herbicide treatments and/or prescribed fire. Acres for hand thinning and mechanical treatment will, in most cases, be overlapped with prescribed fire treatments, as many of the initially thinned acres may receive supplemental treatment with prescribed fire. Nearly all of the treatment units will be treated with prescribed fire, with the exception of certain areas where prescribed fire is not feasible. Due to the overlap of treatment types in each unit, the acres associated with each treatment type may not add up to the total acres designated for treatment within each unit.

Acreages of treatment units and corresponding treatment options are approximations based on maps and models. Actual on-the-ground acreages may differ. Actual acres treated would depend on objectives, environmental conditions, occurrence of natural fire starts, funding, and availability of personnel. Fire treatment acreage would likely increase over the lifetime of the project as more acres are treated, creating conditions where fire can be safely returned a more natural role.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Table 1. Chiricahua FireScape proposed vegetation treatments

Acres Treatment Type Treatment Designated Primary Supplemental Unit for Treatment Mechanical Hand Wildland Fire Treatments Treatments Within Unit Treatment/ Thinning/ (planned and Herbicide Herbicide unplanned) Hand Thinning, Bruno 19,683 6,138 901 19,683 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment Hand Thinning, Cave Creek 2,821 1,215 732 2,821 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment Hand Thinning, Cochise Head 16,315 703 317 16,315 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment Hand Thinning, Jackwood 8,818 1,709 155 8,818 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment Hand Thinning, John Long 5,903 1,286 346 5,903 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment Hand Thinning, Limestone 14,066 3,409 133 14,066 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment Hand Thinning, Onion 9,751 503 615 9,751 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment Hand Thinning, Packsaddle 19,779 8,099 64 19,779 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment Hand Thinning, Pine Canyon 4,172 1,052 109 4,172 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment Hand Thinning, Pinery 3,991 199 618 3,991 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment Hand Thinning, Price Canyon 9,320 2,364 153 9,320 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment Rough Hand Thinning, 7,267 539 245 7,267 Prescribed Fire Mountain Mechanical Treatment

Rucker 2,396 1,734 0 2,396 Mechanical Treatment Prescribed Fire

Rustler Park 551 0 551 551 Prescribed Fire Hand Thinning

Hand Thinning, Silver Peak 8,383 1,221 386 8,383 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment Hand Thinning, Turkey Creek 401 259 142 401 Prescribed Fire Mechanical Treatment

Project Design Features The project is designed to apply design features and best management practices that would ensure protection of sensitive natural and cultural resources.

Specific design features are included in detail in appendix A. General goals of the design features are: 1. To ensure safe fire operations, a prescribed “burn plan” would be developed and approved prior to the initiation of each burning operation, including burning of piles. A burn plan would include, but would not be limited to, the following: unit description, specific prescribed burn objectives, public notification procedures, coordination with other regulatory agencies (such as air quality regulators), hazard analysis, contingency plan, firing procedures, risk assessment, mitigation

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

measures, estimated fire behavior, acceptable weather variables, and prescribed burn organization. 2. To maintain air quality, fire managers would cooperate with Federal, State, and local regulatory agencies to protect air quality in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act and State and local regulations. 3. To minimize impacts of operations on the landscape, off-road vehicle use would be minimized during project activities. The creation of new access routes, if needed for suppression activities, would be limited. These routes would be created only if other alternatives are not available. Areas of substantial human activity during fire suppression operations, such as fire crew camps, landing strips, and equipment staging areas, would not be located on or next to sensitive resources or habitat of special-status species. Best management practices would be followed to prevent the introduction or spread of invasive exotic species by vehicles, equipment, or workers. 4. To prevent erosion, protect soils, and maintain water quality in steep areas (slopes generally over 40 percent), fire control lines would be constructed in accordance with Forest Service and Arizona Department of Environmental Quality erosion prevention standards. Intense fire would be avoided because this may promote water repellency and erosion of soils. Burned areas would be rested from grazing for specified periods after treatment. Riparian areas would be protected to prevent or minimize impacts to watersheds and the riparian habitat and species that occur there. Fire management treatments within or adjacent to riparian and aquatic habitats would be designed to provide long-term benefits to aquatic and riparian resources by reducing threats associated with dewatering and surface disturbance, or by improving the condition of the watershed and enhancing watershed function. 5. To protect wildlife, fish, plants and their habitats, specific protection measures would be implemented to protect and conserve wildlife, fish, plants, and their habitat. Potential effects have been assessed for federally listed threatened, endangered, or proposed species, as well as Forest Service Southwestern Region sensitive species, Coronado National Forest management indicator species, and species covered under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. This analysis aids in defining specific mitigation measures to minimize or assure avoidance of impacts. 6. To protect range resources, grazing areas to be treated would be sufficiently rested or grazed at light enough levels prior to and following fire treatments to ensure that fine fuels are present to carry a prescribed fire and to ensure plant recovery and soil protection. Project activities would be coordinated with grazing permittees to ensure success of burning operations and minimize adverse impacts. 7. To protect recreation uses, special uses authorized permit areas, and facilities, project activities would be performed during low-use periods when possible. Slash and debris would be removed, impacted sites would be rehabilitated, and informational signs would be posted to alert users of potential conflicts. 8. To protect scenic quality, proposed treatments would be designed to blend with the natural environment as much as is practical. Specific instructions on techniques to reduce visual impacts would be implemented. 9. To protect cultural and historic sites and resources, project areas would be reviewed for the presence of cultural resources and validity of previous surveys. All known historic and cultural sites would be surveyed, protected, and/or avoided.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

During implementation of the proposed project, as fire and fuels managers propose activities, the interdisciplinary team would review treatment parameters to ensure they are within the scope of the proposed action and that they are consistent with the design features. Such prescreening would help assess whether the anticipated effects of treatments fall within acceptable boundaries.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives This section summarizes the potential impacts of the proposed action and alternatives. Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions Cumulative impact is the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes the action (40 CFR 1508.7). To result in cumulative effects, the effects of an activity must overlap in space and time with the effects of the alternative analyzed. The temporal boundary for this cumulative effects analysis is 20 years, although the proposed Chiricahua FireScape treatments may be implemented over a timeframe greater than 20 years. The spatial boundary for the cumulative effects analysis is the Chiricahua Mountains.

The following is a listing of actions considered in the cumulative effects analysis for this project. These actions may contribute effects to some or all affected resources analyzed. General management activities are listed below, and more specific projects are shown in the following table:

• Activities such as vegetation management, fuels management, livestock grazing, recreational activities, and other management activities (e.g. noxious weeds treatments) have occurred in the past, are occurring, and are reasonably foreseeable actions on the district.

• Fuelwood cutting has occurred in the past and would continue in the foreseeable future on the district.

• Management of designated wilderness (Chiricahua Wilderness) would continue.

• Road construction and maintenance and right-of-way brushing can be expected to continue on non-National Forest System land. Road construction, reconstruction, and decommissioning are expected to continue to move towards Forest Plan and Arizona Department of Transportation desired conditions.

• Road realignment, reconstruction, or decommissioning may occur with future vegetation management projects.

• Recreation activities are expected to continue to increase on the Forest. Future recreation projects may be developed.

• Lands and recreation special use permitting are expected to continue to increase on the Forest. Future lands projects may be developed.

• National Forest System lands have been and will continue to be managed to meet the multiple-use goals and objectives as established in the Land and Resource Management Plan.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Table 2. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions Resource Area Proposed/Implemented Year Affected Area Affected Activities Resources/Issues Watershed Tex Canyon and 2015 - 2020 Chiricahua Watershed, range, Barboot Watershed Mountains (Tex vegetation, wildlife, Projects Canyon and cultural resources, Barboot Allotment) special uses Chiricahua Watershed 2017 - Future 197,450 acres Watershed, range, Restoration Project vegetation, wildlife, cultural resources, special uses Fire and Fuels Rustler-Barfoot Forest 2018 - Future 460 acres Watershed, fire and Health Project fuels, vegetation, wildlife, cultural resources, recreation Rustler Park Thinning 2017 - Future 17.5 acres Watershed, fire and Project fuels, vegetation, wildlife, cultural resources, recreation Chiricahua Hazard Tree 2014 - Future 4,320 acres Watershed, fire and Removal fuels, vegetation, wildlife, cultural resources, recreation Horseshoe 2 Fire 2011 192,647 acres Watershed, range, fire and fuels, vegetation, wildlife, cultural resources Saddle Fire 2017 5,128 acres Watershed, range, fire and fuels, vegetation, wildlife, cultural resources Recreation Administrative Ongoing 11 campgrounds Recreation, operations and visitor vegetation, cultural use of developed resources, wildlife campgrounds Administrative Ongoing 217 miles Recreation, maintenance and visitor vegetation, cultural use of National Forest resources, wildlife, System Trails watershed Cabin rental program Ongoing 2 cabins Recreation, cultural resources Special Uses Permitted special use Ongoing Chiricahua Recreation, activities (e.g. recreation Mountains vegetation, cultural residence, equestrian, resources, wildlife, powerlines, waterlines, watershed and recreation events) Outfitter & Guides Ongoing Chiricahua Recreation, Mountains vegetation, cultural resources, wildlife, watershed

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Resource Area Proposed/Implemented Year Affected Area Affected Activities Resources/Issues San Bernardino 2016 - 2017 10,176 acres Recreation, Powerline Replacement vegetation, cultural Project resources, wildlife, watershed, range Minerals Mining and mineral Historic, no Chiricahua Watershed, wildlife, exploration active mining Mountains cultural resources, special uses Roads Homeland security and 2016 - Future Chiricahua Watershed, Border Patrol activities Mountains recreation, vegetation, cultural resources, wildlife, range Jhus Canyon Road 2018 - Future Jhus Canyon Watershed, wildlife, Reroute recreation, range, cultural resources Non-FS Actions Illegal wood cutting Ongoing Chiricahua Vegetation, fire and Mountains fuels, cultural resources, wildlife

Cultural Resources No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no-action alternative would not cause direct effects to cultural resources or traditional cultural properties because no activities likely to affect such resources would be undertaken. Indirect effects may occur under the no-action alternative because there are known sites in the area that could be affected by wildfire.

Cumulative Effects Past wildfires have affected cultural resources by consuming prehistoric and historic structures, features and fabrics. Cultural resources within the project area include features and materials that could be lost from the continued effects of high-intensity wildfire.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Implementation of the proposed action would follow guidelines designed to avoid adverse effects to cultural resources within the area of potential effect. These guidelines, based on the Programmatic Agreement between the Forest Service and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), are presented in appendix A. Design criteria would be applied to all known sites within the project area. Mechanized treatments, including mastication and grubbing, would require complete surveys for cultural resources, and any identified sites would be flagged and avoided. No ground disturbing activities would occur within site boundaries.

Indirect effects of fuel reduction activities could be beneficial, as impacts from wildfires that may affect cultural resources would be reduced. No other indirect effects (e.g., erosion) are likely to occur to known cultural resources as a result of this project. There is potential for unanticipated discoveries of sites that are currently obscured by vegetation. Unanticipated discoveries would be mitigated using the terms of the design criteria.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Tribes interested in gathering traditional materials prior to site-specific activities would be notified in advance. The design features state that prior to project-specific implementation, tribes would be notified of activities that may affect traditionally important plants such as agave, beargrass and yucca, and afforded an opportunity to collect plants that would otherwise likely be destroyed. As such, no direct effects are anticipated to cultural resources or traditional cultural properties.

Cumulative Effects The cumulative effects boundary for cultural resources is limited to the area encompassed by the Chiricahua EMA. All previous projects (within the last 20 years) have been completed with a reasonable and good-faith effort to comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and all future projects would also comply. Avoidance of adverse effects to cultural resources is expected for all present and foreseeable projects. Cumulative effects on cultural resources on the Douglas Ranger District now and into the future may arise as a result of natural disasters and/or accidents, not from project level work.

In the past, historic properties have been damaged by wildfire. Additional properties may be adversely affected by future high-intensity wildfire and by fire suppression efforts. Under the proposed action, fewer sites would potentially be damaged by wildfire and/or suppression activities due to the removal of hazardous fuels and reduced potential for high-intensity wildfire. Known sites would receive protection from project activities, either through avoidance or from thinning activities within site boundaries. Therefore, there would likely be small, beneficial cumulative effects from the proposed project on cultural resources.

Table 2 lists recent and foreseeable projects within the Douglas Ranger District. No adverse effects to historic properties are foreseen for any of these projects. All are subject to Section 106 compliance, and in each case, it is anticipated that projects will be designed to mitigate any potential adverse effects. Fire and Fuels No Action Direct and Indirect Effects There would be no direct effect to fuels under this alternative. The no-action alternative would not alter the fuel profile to reduce fire behavior and would not meet the purpose and need of this project. Potential fire behavior characteristics would be similar and eventually worse than the existing condition. For a more detailed description of the existing condition, please see the Fire and Fuels Report in the project record.

In the absence of human-caused or natural disturbance such as vegetation treatment activities and wildfire, there may be an increased accumulation of surface and ladder fuels due to insect and disease activity, past fire and the progression of forest succession. Increased fuel loading levels would continue to pose a threat to communities, property and ecosystems as fire suppression becomes more difficult. The no-action alternative may indirectly lead to increased surface, ladder and crown fuels that affect flame length, contribute to the torching of trees, and make crown fire more likely (Peterson et al. 2005, Graham 2004). Increases in fuel loading would make overstory trees more susceptible to damage from wildfire.

Wildfires that escape initial attack may impact adjacent private lands and other resource values. It is probable that a large wildfire may threaten adjacent private lands similar to the Horseshoe 2 Fire of 2011. Direct suppression tactics by firefighting forces would not be as effective in the analysis area under the no-action alternative. The no-action alternative would restrict local fire managers from utilizing fire for meeting various land management objectives and would not be consistent with agency direction. It would not contribute to the desired conditions of the Forest Plan or address the purpose and need of the project.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects The proposed treatments would help to restore ecosystem structure by reducing surface, ladder and crown fuels, reducing the density of trees and shrubs, and changing the fuel model profile. The proposed treatments would also help maintain favorable conditions created by past disturbance. It is expected the fire behavior potential would be substantially reduced with the proposed treatment units and the cumulative risk of wildfire impacts to adjacent wildland-urban interface (WUI) and other resource values would be reduced. The prescribed burn treatments (planned ignitions) would reduce fuels and break up contiguous vegetation to create a mosaic fuel profile so that areas with high fire behavior potential are interspersed with areas of mixed and low fire behavior potential, thereby limiting the potential for high- intensity fire to spread towards the WUI. Forest restoration and fuel management activities aid in the reduction of wildfire and also help to reestablish the natural fire regimes.

In low-intensity prescribed burns, mortality would likely occur in many of the smaller diameter understory trees in forested areas including overcrowded regeneration from past wildfires. It is anticipated that this mortality would create areas that are more open and still contain a multi-storied canopy. Mixed- severity prescribed burns are expected to create a mosaic of vegetation with open and closed single-story, multi-story, and early seral grass/forb/shrub openings. The effects of all treatments would last for many decades. Eventually, forested stands would become more closed, and as regeneration occurs the understory would fill in. Treatments would help fire managers introduce more low-intensity prescribed fire in the future. National Forest System land and adjacent private land would be positively affected by the reduction of hazardous fuels and subsequent modification of potential fire behavior. The existing condition has been influenced by fire exclusion, as well as past large scale wildfire occurrence in other areas resulting in favorable conditions that should be maintained. The proposed action combined with other fuels reduction activities would modify fire behavior by contributing to the overall reduction of surface, ladder, and crown fuels, thereby reducing fire intensity and crown fire potential within the analysis area. In addition, breaking up the continuous horizontal and vertical fuels could allow more wildland fire ignitions to be managed for various resource benefits and contribute to safer conditions in and around the WUI for public and firefighter safety.

Cumulative Effects Cumulative impacts may result from a combination of the proposed action with other past, current, and foreseeable activities. The temporal boundary for this cumulative effects analysis is 20 years, although the proposed Chiricahua FireScape treatments may be implemented over a timeframe greater than 20 years. The spatial boundary for the cumulative effects analysis is the Chiricahua Mountains. Current, past and future activities that are occurring, have occurred and would occur are included in table 2.

For analyzing cumulative impacts to fire and fuels management, only those activities including wildfires and fuels reduction activities will be discussed in more detail. Impacts from the other listed activities typically occur in small, localized areas, in relation to the large size of the analysis area, and therefore the impact is relatively small.

Fuelwood cutting and utilization has been implemented at a small scale. Past substantial wildfires (within last 10 years) include the 2008 Jackwood Fire (8,606 acres), 2008 Buck Fire (2,020 acres), 2010 Horseshoe Fire (3,404 acres), 2010 Brushy Fire (5,933), 2011 Horseshoe 2 Fire (222, 954), and the 2017 Saddle Fire (5,128). Hand thinning is being proposed as part of the Rustler-Barfoot Forest Health Project as well as ongoing hazard tree removal post-Horseshoe 2 Fire. These projects will improve forest health, wildlife habitat and public and firefighter safety in addition to reducing hazardous fuels.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

These activities combined with the proposed action would reduce surface, ladder and crown fuels throughout the analysis area. Cumulatively, these activities result in reductions in flame length (fire line intensity) and crown fire to a greater degree than the proposed action alone due to the area being treated. Because some areas may be impacted by more than one activity, there would be greater reductions in fire line intensity and potential crown fire in those areas. All of the activities discussed would cumulatively break up fuel continuity on the landscape.

These combined treatments would complement the purpose and need and objectives for fire and fuels management by reducing fuel loading levels. These combined activities would also greatly facilitate restoring and sustaining ecological processes in fire-dependent ecosystems and move vegetation and fuel conditions toward their historic frequent low-to-mixed-severity fire regimes. It would also help fire management to manage naturally occurring fires in fire-dependent ecosystems.

The effects of future wildland fire starts in the analysis area were not analyzed in detail because it is impossible to predict when and where a wildfire may occur in the future, or the subsequent effects of that fire. Range The project area includes 22 grazing allotments (Barboot, Big Bend, Boss, Bruno, Cave Creek, Cochise Head, East Whitetail, Horseshoe, Hunt Canyon, Jackwood, Lower Rock Creek, Lower Rucker, Paradise, Pedregosa, Pine, Pinery, Price Canyon, Rak, Rough Mountain, Tex Canyon, Turkey Creek and Willie Rose) located within the Chiricahua Mountains. Elevations range from approximately 3,000 feet to over 9,000 feet within these allotments. The majority of suitable and capable rangelands are located on the gentler terrain at the base of the mountain ranges. Steep slopes and rough topography render some of the higher elevations in the project area unsuitable for grazing. Vegetation consists of Chihuahuan Desert and mesquite grasslands at the lowest elevations, oak-juniper-pinyon woodlands and Madrean pine-oak woodlands at mid-elevations and Ponderosa pine and Mixed Conifer forest at highest elevations. Current permitted numbers and recent grazing use on the allotments is displayed in table 3.

Table 3. Allotment size and current management of the grazing allotments on the project area, Douglas Ranger District. Permitted use is shown in both numbers of livestock and animal unit months (AUMs). Capable Permitted Allotment Acres Acres Permitted Use Use (AUMs)1 Current Management Barboot 11,002 6,328 400 cow/calf pairs, 2,788 Winter Seasonal, Oct – Apr deferred rotation Big Bend 8,254 6,130 400 cow/calf pairs, 2380 Winter Seasonal, Nov – Apr deferred rotation Boss 873 817 43 yearlings, Oct – Mar 210 Winter Seasonal

Bruno 7,526 5,440 240 cow/calf pairs, 1554 Winter Seasonal, Oct 16 – Apr 30 deferred rotation

1 Animal unit months (AUMs). A measure of range capacity of an animal unit (AU) for the period of an average month throughout the year, or 30.417 days. An animal unit (AU) is considered to be one mature cow of about 1,000 pounds (450 kg), either dry or with calf up to 6 months of age, or their equivalent, consuming about 26 pounds (12 kg) of forage/day on an oven-dry basis. (Society for Range Management. 1998. Glossary of terms used in range management, fourth edition - https://globalrangelands.org/glossary).

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Capable Permitted Allotment Acres Acres Permitted Use Use (AUMs)1 Current Management Cave Creek 26,590 13,242 80 cow/calf pairs, 479 Winter Seasonal, Oct - Mar deferred rotation Cochise Head 6,975 3,198 126 cow/calf pairs, 750 Winter Seasonal Nov - Apr East Whitetail 12,830 11,337 100 cow/calf pairs, 595 Winter Seasonal Nov – Apr Horseshoe 19,744 3,571 200 cow/calf pairs, 1190 Winter Seasonal, Nov – Apr deferred rotation Hunt Canyon 8,311 6,920 154 cow/calf pairs 1848 Deferred rotation yearlong Jackwood 10,832 10,301 406 yearlings, 1990 Winter Seasonal Oct 15 – May 15 Lower Rock 7,890 5,541 75 cow/calf pairs yearlong 900 Deferred rotation Creek Lower Rucker 4,720 3,190 151 cow/calf pairs, 1211 Winter Seasonal Oct 15 – Jun 15 Paradise 9,466 7,770 105 cow/calf pairs, 580 Winter Seasonal, Oct 15 – Mar 31 deferred rotation Pedregosa 10,035 9,966 196 cow/calf pairs 2352 Deferred rotation yearlong Pine 8,507 6,672 16 cow/calf pairs yearlong 192 Deferred rotation

Pinery 12,142 10,573 60 cow/calf pairs, 357 Winter Seasonal, Nov – Apr deferred rotation Price Canyon 14,016 11,596 190 cow/calf pairs, 2280 Deferred rest rotation yearlong Rak 36,355 13,000 332 cow/calf pairs, 2980 Deferred rest rotation Aug - Apr Rough 19,830 10,744 295 cow/calf pairs, 1755 Winter seasonal Mountain Nov – Apr Tex Canyon 18,636 11,802 600 cow/calf pairs, 2367 Winter seasonal Nov – Feb Turkey Creek 13,449 3,380 72 cow/calf pairs yearlong 864 Deferred rotation

Willie Rose 1,572 565 31 cow/calf pairs, 184 Winter seasonal Nov - Apr

No Action Direct and Indirect Effects Under this alternative, there would be no direct effects as proposed activities would not occur. Current conditions and processes would continue. There would be little, if any, substantial change in forage conditions that would benefit the range resources. However, there could be indirect effects if a wildfire were to occur. Because wildfire events are unplanned and unexpected as regards to location, intensity, and extent, and because they often resist control, they present a much greater potential to negatively affect forage resources, threaten livestock, destroy or damage structural range improvements, disrupt allotment management efforts, and have greater negative economic effect on the local ranching economy.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Wildfire may directly result in the injury or death of livestock contained within fenced pastures or open range allotments. Fire may also indirectly harm livestock by affecting the surrounding environment. Forage may be consumed in a fire, limiting its availability and use, and grazing capacity of the pasture. Wildfire may damage structures such as water developments and fences, which are critical to the management of livestock because they either provide necessary resources directly to the animals, or support management of other critical resources such as forage.

Because of an overabundance of fuels, wildfires in the present landscape often burn at high intensities and result in severe, widespread resource damage. A wildfire could be potentially damaging to the soil and ultimately to forage production. Severe high-intensity burns could remove large acres from production and contribute to the spread of weeds across a wide area.

Economically, the no-action alternative would continue to limit our flexibility when balancing permitted grazing with grazing capacity, which could lead to an impact to the permittee by requiring reduced livestock numbers. Opportunities to increase available forage would remain limited and therefore could have a negative economic impact on the ranching operations dependent on national forest grazing. This could have further economic impact on the small local economies that surround the Coronado National Forest.

Cumulative Effects If no treatments occurred, the only cumulative effects that could occur would result if there was a high- intensity, large-scale wildfire. In combination with other actions or events, a wildfire would prevent or defer grazing on allotments, and likely lead to an overall reduction in available forage.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects The proposed action allows for treatments best suited for bringing areas to desired condition with the least negative effects. While fire often presents an immediate danger to livestock and may cause damage to critical livestock resources, the benefits of its prescribed use can exceed its negative effects.

Changes to Distribution and Utilization of Pastures

Fire treatments would result in a temporary loss of forage both before and after burning. In order to have sufficient fuel to carry fire, planned burn areas may need to be rested for a length of time prior to the burn. Typically at least one growing season rest should follow fire to allow for recovery of plants to encourage soil and plant health, and for the adequate growth of sufficient forage. Burned areas would be unavailable for grazing until these needs are met. Therefore, it could be possible that additional growing seasons of rest may be required. In the long term, fire treatments would benefit the forage resource and therefore livestock indirectly. Once recovered, forage quality and quantity would be enhanced.

Generally, non-fire treatments would not require grazing deferment, with the exception of the application of those herbicides that recommend deferment after treatment on their respective labels. In many cases non-fire treatments would benefit livestock in the short term with an immediate availability of additional rangeland acreage. Although some areas would require adequate rest and deferment to allow for increases in forage plant densities once the competing overstory (shrubs and trees) is removed. Once treated and desired herbaceous species have increased in density, many of these areas can be treated with fire to maintain their desired condition. Wildfire intensity would be reduced and have fewer negative effects on the forage resource, livestock, and allotment management.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

All treatments would result in increased acreages of available forage. This would allow for increased flexibility in allotment management, allow range managers to retain permitted numbers, offer possible opportunities for increases in permitted livestock numbers, and therefore have a positive effect on local economies. Wildfire intensity would be reduced, which would have greater beneficial effects of maintaining forage quality and quantity. There may still be some disruption of allotment management. However, the increase in forage-producing acres created by the proposed action would provide alternative grazing options while those areas burned by wildfire recovered.

Effects to Livestock

The removal of older plant growth may create greater accessibility to plants and plant parts. Improved grazing opportunities may result in greater nutrition and performance in the animal. Removal and prescribed cutting of dense stands of shrubs and trees can change livestock use patterns. Generally, this would be beneficial, however, in some cases this may increase access in areas sensitive to livestock grazing.

Restoration of a more natural fire regime through prescribed fire and unplanned ignitions managed for resource objectives can not only improve grazing opportunities for livestock by modifying vegetation, but can help prevent more severe and widespread damage to critical livestock resources. By managing fire only in circumstances where the impact to ongoing permitted activities such as livestock grazing can be mitigated, the negative effects of fire on livestock can be minimized during a single event and over time. Modifying fuel conditions and forest structure through the use of fire in optimum conditions would create landscape conditions that more closely resemble the historic landscape and that are less susceptible to severe, high-intensity wildfires in the future.

Effects on Structural Improvements

Fire has the potential to damage or destroy existing structural improvements (such as fences and waterlines). A design feature for this project has been included to ensure that prior to treatments, a site- specific evaluation would occur to determine the risk of loss, cost effectiveness of the improvement, and the cost of replacement for individual improvements. By managing fire only in circumstances where the impact to ongoing permitted activities can be mitigated, the deleterious effects of fire on range improvements can be minimized during a single event and over time. It is expected that the loss of structural improvements to fire would decrease in the future because implementation of all treatments would ultimately reduce fuel loads, and change vegetation structure and composition to that of more historic levels. As a result, the occurrence of severe, high-intensity wildfire would be minimized and the need for comprehensive and expensive repairs to improvements would be reduced over time.

Non-fire treatments include prescribed cutting, chipping, removal, hand piling and burning, and mastication and/or grubbing and herbicide application. Although these treatments have far less potential to negatively affect livestock than fire and may result in more immediate benefits to livestock, there is still the potential of sustaining damage to infrastructure from non-fire treatments such as mastication and/or grubbing. Mastication and/or grubbing has some potential to damage structural improvements, particularly fences and pipelines that are obscured from view by shrubs or other dense vegetation.

Effects to the Ranching Economy

Ranching is an important part of the economy of southeastern Arizona; therefore, actions that affect the availability of forage, the ability of cattle to utilize that forage, and the number of permitted livestock have an effect on the viability of individual ranching operations and the economy of the area. Therefore,

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment opportunities to sustain or increase available livestock forage have a positive impact on the economy. Current direction is to balance permitted use with capacity. This includes sustaining the viability of existing and planned structural range improvements, maintaining the quality of forage resources and, where possible, increasing the availability of forage. Without treatment, there is the potential that reductions in permitted grazing must occur where necessary or additional forage resources must be found and made available to livestock.

Effects on Forage Production and Spread of Invasive Species

All treatments could have direct and indirect effects on forage resources. These treatments are especially compatible with range management objectives in mesquite woodlands, oak-juniper-pinyon woodlands and other shrub- and tree-dominated habitat types because they help to maintain openings for forage production for livestock and wildlife. Fire generally increases forage production on many grasslands, with some exceptions on semiarid and arid grasslands, and increased livestock gains have been attributed to the increased nutritive quality of forage growing on recently burned areas. Site-specific evaluation would be undertaken to determine the potential effects of fire on the forage base of a particular pasture.

Standing mature forage consumed by fire constitutes a loss for that particular season. To prevent further loss of forage following a fire, grazing must be delayed to allow for the recovery of forage plants and to prevent localized excessive grazing use. Deferred grazing periods and restocking rates after a fire would depend on the severity of the fire as well as other site-specific criteria, and could affect the recovery of the particular plant community. The spread of invasive species into burned areas could also potentially affect the long-term production of forage. Invasive species, if left unchecked, could degrade or reduce livestock foraging areas by occupying habitat or injuring livestock. Once established, it could be difficult to control or eradicate invasive plant species, therefore it is important to track weed occurrences, determine their proximity to a fire, determine the likelihood of their spread, and take the appropriate steps to prevent their proliferation within burned areas.

Prescribed fire and unplanned ignitions managed for resource objectives present some potential negative consequences for forage production primarily through direct consumption by fire and displacement by invasive vegetation after a fire. However, long-term benefits such as improved nutrition and maintenance of foraging areas within woody vegetation communities are expected to exceed the negatives, given appropriate pre- and post-fire management such as grazing deferment, reseeding, and noxious weed prevention and management. Also, the overall risks to a grazing operation that could potentially be associated with catastrophic wildfire would be reduced after the appropriate implementation of fire as a tool on the project area.

It is expected that prescribed fire and unplanned ignitions would not adversely affect long-term production of forage. By managing fire only in circumstances where the impact to ongoing resource objectives such as forage production can be mitigated, the deleterious effects of fire on forage can be minimized during a single event and over time. Modification of fuel conditions and forest structure using fire in optimum situations would create landscape conditions that more closely resemble the historic landscape conditions that are less susceptible to severe, high-intensity wildfires in the future. Non-fire treatments offer the opportunity to reduce fuel loads on areas where fires intensity would be too great to avoid long-term damage to residual herbaceous plants and possibly damage soil.

Cumulative Effects Current, past and future activities that are occurring, have occurred and would occur are included in table 2 of the Environmental Assessment. For analyzing cumulative impacts to range management, only those activities potentially contributing to the effects analyzed for range resources will be discussed in more

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment detail. Impacts from the other listed activities, with the exception of wildfires, typically occur in small, localized areas, in relation to the large size of the analysis area, and therefore the impact is relatively small. The activities and occurrences discussed further have contributed incrementally to changes in ecological conditions in the project area and may continue to influence conditions in the project area over the term of the project.

Livestock grazing has occurred within the analysis area for over 100 years. In the late 1800s, widespread unregulated grazing resulted in erosion, heavy surface runoff, flooding and down-cutting of streams throughout the southwest. Livestock consumption of herbaceous fine fuels, combined with active fire suppression beginning in the early 1900s has likely contributed to a decreased fire frequency and subsequent invasion of many grasslands by woody plants. The effects of these activities and events, especially the increase in woody vegetation, are still evident in some portions of the project area. The proposed action, in part, is designed to correct the effects of historic management, but these effects will likely continue to influence resource conditions, especially soil condition, for the foreseeable future.

The Tex Canyon and Barboot Watershed Projects, as well as the Chiricahua Watershed Restoration Project, are inherently focused on watershed restoration, which in turn are designed to increase overall watershed health which improves range condition. These projects would complement the purpose and need for the proposed action by restoring and sustaining ecological processes in fire-dependent ecosystems.

Some mines are located in or adjacent to the grazing allotments within the project area. Most of the mining activity is historic, with the majority of prospecting and small mine developments that extracted copper, silver, gold, and lead beginning in the late 1800s. Disturbance related to mining continues to affect soil condition in the vicinity of old mines.

The occurrence of wildfire has impacted forage condition, availability and structural range improvements over the recent past. Substantial wildfires within last 10 years include the 2008 Jackwood Fire (8,606 acres), 2008 Buck Fire (2,020 acres), 2010 Horseshoe Fire (3,404 acres), 2010 Brushy Fire (5,933 acres), 2011 Horseshoe 2 Fire (222,954 acres), and the 2017 Saddle Fire (5,128 acres). The immediate impact was a reduction of available forage and the damage to infrastructure. A positive impact of these wildfires has been the aforementioned increase in available forage and the quality of that forage over the longer term. In combination with the long-term effects of past wildfires, the proposed action would further increase available forage for livestock grazing. There were many range improvements that were damaged or destroyed by wildfire (the majority being within the Horseshoe 2 Fire), but most have been repaired or replaced. Recreation and Wilderness No Action Direct and Indirect Effects

Effects to Recreation

Under the no-action alternative, there would be minimal to no change to current visitor recreation experiences and opportunities in the Chiricahua Mountains. However, future catastrophic wildfires may occur in the absence of treatments and may result in the interruption to special use permitted activities, recreation sites, and trail closures. These closures may occur both during wildfire suppression efforts and after wildfire events due to flooding, erosion and tree mortality. This action would have a negative effect on the recreation users’ experience by reducing opportunities for recreation activity.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Effects to Wilderness Character

Although no direct effects to recommended or designated wilderness would occur as a result of no action, indirectly wilderness character may be affected, as follows:

Untrammeled Any action within wilderness that interferes with nature, regardless of the consequences, is considered trammeling. The no-action alternative would help to preserve the untrammeled quality in the short term because it would not introduce any new management actions into the wilderness. In the long term (over 5 years), the accumulation of fuels and dense overgrown vegetation increases the probability of extreme wildfire occurrence that may trigger suppression efforts. In the absence of action, unplanned ignitions would not be allowed to play their natural role in the ecosystem therefore increasing the risk and frequency of more severe trammeling by future suppression efforts.

Undeveloped The no-action alternative would have no negative effects on the undeveloped quality of the wilderness.

Natural The no-action alternative would have a negative effect on the natural quality of the wilderness. This alternative would not provide benefits to the wilderness nor improve conditions of the vegetation communities that occur in these areas. Over time, vegetation would continue to depart from natural vegetation conditions and could become more susceptible to uncharacteristically large wildfires.

Solitude, primitive and unconfined recreation Future catastrophic wildfires may occur in the absence of prescribed fire treatments and may result in trail closures due to flooding, erosion and tree mortality. In the long term, the no-action alternative would have a negative effect on the natural sights of the wilderness as a result of the reduction in natural regeneration following high-intensity wildfires. However, the no-action alternative would avoid the negative effects associated with the sights and sounds of motorized and mechanized equipment in wilderness.

Cumulative Effects Under the no-action alternative, there would be minimal to no change to current visitor recreation experiences and opportunities in the Chiricahua Mountains. However, future catastrophic wildfires may occur in the absence of treatments and may result in the interruption to special use permitted activities, recreation site and trail closures. These closures may extend post-wildfires due to safety concerns with flooding, erosion and hazard trees present in high-use recreation areas. The no-action alternative would have a negative effect on the recreation users’ experience by reducing long-term opportunities for recreation activity. The no-action alternative would have no short-term impacts on wilderness character. In the long term (over 5 years), the accumulation of fuels and dense overgrown vegetation increases the probability of extreme wildfire. The results of no action in the long term would have a negative effect on the untrammeled, undeveloped, and natural character of the wilderness, as well as the opportunities for solitude and primitive and unconfined recreation. Without the Chiricahua FireScape Project, forest health would continue to decline, and risks of severe wildfire would grow. Additional negative impacts from major wildfires would be expected as these incidents trigger future suppression efforts that further impact wilderness character.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects

Effects to Special Uses

The proposed action may temporarily displace research permit holders, site survey, and Outfitting and Guiding permit holders, although disruptions can be minimized by scheduling trips to avoid the project area during implementation. Pole replacement permits, waterlines, or road maintenance permits can be worked around as needed. Increased sediment levels, smoke and other health concerns may negatively impact recreation residence permit holders, Sulphur Springs power company, and other permit holders (lands and recreation), and private residents in the project area, including Cave Creek Canyon and the Southwest Research Center. Impacts would be mitigated by keeping the public informed on project activity prior to (preferably two weeks) and during implementation (see Design Features, appendix A, RE-1).

Effects to Developed Recreation

The Douglas Ranger District is popular for both motorized and non-motorized recreation. Camping is another popular activity within the project area. The project area includes campgrounds, trailheads, picnic areas and other day-use sites that can accommodate large groups. Activities such as hiking, bird watching, mountain biking, horseback riding and some Off Highway Vehicle (OHV) use are oriented around these developed sites. The proposed action would have a short-term, negative effect on recreation activities as developed recreation sites are temporarily closed for public safety during and immediately after implementation. For the extent of the closures, recreation opportunities would decrease at sites within the project area. Some users may have concerns over smoke due to existing health issues or uncertainty when smoke is visible in the neighboring area, which may result in a reduced quality experience. Impacts to recreation users would be mitigated by notifying the public prior to and during implementation, through posted signage and news releases (see Design Features, appendix A, RE-1, RE-5).

Effects to Dispersed Recreation

Dispersed camping or camping in non-developed or under developed areas is a common recreation activity on the Douglas Ranger District, occurring mostly during the summer and fall hunting seasons. Dispersed camping activities would likely be temporarily displaced to other sites for the short term following project implementation. Visitors who are sensitive to these activities may have a reduced quality experience and may be permanently displaced to other areas that have not previously had extensive use. This may result in impacts to those areas from longer, more continuous periods of occupation by multiple parties. The removal of trees that may have also served as shade and screening for dispersed camping sites may result in a long-term displacement from some dispersed camping sites. Visitors from outside the southwestern region who are recreating near the project area are less likely to be displaced due to project activities. Most visitors are not likely to change plans because of the proposed treatments. However, repeat visitors might be displaced to other areas. Disturbances associated with burning and cutting activity, such as equipment noise and dust from falling and moving timber, may affect recreation use and experiences, depending on the locations of the operations in relation to the recreation users.

Effects to Trails

Temporary or short-term displacement of recreation users from motorized and nonmotorized trails to areas outside the project area may result in increased use on other parts of the Douglas Ranger District.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

General off-highway vehicle use may be dispersed to other parts of the ranger district. This change in use may result in greater impacts caused by more frequent and concentrated use of trails outside the immediate treatment areas. In the long term, dead standing trees may fall over existing trails and roadways, limiting access to certain areas. Nonmotorized recreational activities, such as horseback riding, hiking and photography, would continue for the long term in the project area. These activities may be temporarily displaced and a short-term reduction in use is expected within the project area during the proposed activities. This reduction would be the result of displacement while cutting and burning are occurring. Predicting how much reduction in use or the duration is difficult, as exact current use is not known, nor is the sensitivity of users to the proposed activities. Existing trails may be used as fire control features. In this case, a positive effect would result as crews maintain and brush existing trails.

Effects to Wilderness Character

Under the proposed action, wilderness character in both recommended and designated wilderness may be affected, as follows:

Untrammeled Manipulating conditions inside wilderness would have a negative effect on the untrammeled quality. Cutting treatments in the wilderness would result in visual evidence of landscape modification by humans. However, grass and shrub vegetation would be expected to rapidly increase beginning one year after treatments. Additional negative effects would result from the creation of safety zones and fire control lines during the implementation of prescribed burns. Mitigation measures, such as concentrating handlines on existing trails, have been developed to lessen the impacts of these activities (see Design Features, appendix A, RE-9 and RE-10). During fire treatments, firefighter activity and the use of chainsaws and helicopters would have a negative effect on the untrammeled quality of the wilderness. Although the use of chainsaws and helicopters would result in a negative effect, reintroducing fire to the area would reduce risk of more severe trammeling by future suppression efforts in the case of high- intensity wildfire. Fire effects following project implementation would help to remedy the human manipulation that occurs during project preparation. By using delayed aerial ignition devices and chainsaws, time in wilderness would be reduced when compared to the use of hand tools.

Undeveloped The proposed action would have a short-term negative effect on the undeveloped quality through the use of helicopters, which show evidence of modern human occupation. Similarly, short-term negative effects would result from the use of chainsaws for cutting and line preparation during the implementation of prescribed burns. Design criteria, such as concentrating handlines on existing trails, have been developed to lessen the impacts on the undeveloped quality of wilderness (see Design Features, appendix A, RE-11, RE-14). Cutting treatments in the wilderness would result in a more developed condition through the visual evidence of landscape modification by humans. However, grass and shrub vegetation would be expected to rapidly increase beginning one year after treatments. The undeveloped quality may be temporarily compromised while evidence of staged supplies and equipment exists; however, all staged supplies and equipment would be removed after implementation.

Natural The activities associated with the proposed action would temporarily manipulate the natural condition of the wilderness, contrary to the forces of nature, and would therefore have a short-term negative effect on the natural quality. Cutting treatments, including line preparation prior to burning, would contribute to an unnatural condition in the wilderness.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

The use of chainsaws and helicopters during prescribed fire activities would temporarily interrupt the natural processes within the wilderness and therefore have a negative effect on this quality while these tools are in use. However, the natural quality could be preserved in the long term as prescribed fires can limit the occurrence of uncharacteristic wildfires by: (1) consuming flammable fuels, (2) acting as a fuel break to better control fire progression, and (3) tempering the burn severity of subsequent fires. Helicopters allow for aerial ignitions which would promote beneficial fire behavior and directionality, create mosaic patterns with a mixture of burned and unburned areas, and encourage mixed fire severity. Regeneration of vegetation would likely begin quickly after fire treatments, especially in communities dominated by oak and other resprouting species, thus restoring natural conditions to the wilderness. The conditions resulting from these activities would encourage natural processes (e.g. nutrient recycling, grass and forb production) and promote ecosystem functionality to continue into the future.

Solitude, primitive and unconfined recreation This action would have a short-term, negative effect on the outstanding opportunities for primitive and unconfined recreation because it imposes temporary management restrictions on visitor behavior. Temporary closures would be needed within treatment areas in order to preserve public and firefighter safety during and immediately after prescribed burning activities. During temporary closures, displacement of recreation users may result in increased use in others areas; this increased use may result in increased physical impacts.

The proposed action would also have a short-term, negative effect on the outstanding opportunities for solitude due to the increased presence of Forest Service and cooperating agency personnel and the presence of smoke. Chainsaw operation and helicopter flight would introduce sights and sounds of civilization to the wilderness and would disrupt the opportunities for solitude in these areas. These activities would therefore have a negative effect on this quality of wilderness. However, the negative effects would be temporally limited to project implementation. The use of these tools reduces time spent in wilderness when compared to hand tools, thus lessening visitor exposure to prescribed fire activity.

In the long term, primitive recreation opportunities would be enhanced as improved habitat attracts wildlife for viewing and hunting. Treatments under the proposed action would improve opportunities for natural sights and sounds by restoring the area to a more natural condition. Scenic quality and visibility from trails would be improved by clearing brush and downed fuels during project preparation. The proposed action would further improve the scenic stability of the wilderness by reducing the potential for uncharacteristically large and severe wildfires.

Reintroducing the natural fire regime into the Chiricahua Mountains would aid in the overall conservation of this ecosystem. Introducing fire promotes natural processes and provides for a natural system of selection. Rather than human-chosen vegetation changes which tend to reconstruct areas to appeal to the human eye, these treatments would allow for less-biased changes. Fire movements would determine the changes and variability within these movements would lead to a more mosaic type of treatment, leaving the landscape with a more natural appearance.

Cumulative Effects Various past and present land uses have impacted the wilderness character and recreation resources in the project area. Some activities, such as managed grazing, have little impact on recreational use and wilderness character. Other land uses that affect recreation uses include fuelwood harvesting and vegetation management, and unmanaged recreation activities (such as off-highway vehicle use and dispersed camping). Natural disturbances that affect both recreation and wilderness include wildfires (especially the Horseshoe 2 Fire) and large post-fire debris flows.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

This analysis relies on current environmental conditions as a proxy for the impacts of past actions and events. These past actions are reflected in the existing conditions and the baseline environmental habitat evaluation. While indirect effects resulting from the project may occur to a minor extent and for a short duration, these effects are minor and would not have an incremental effect on special uses or recreation in the project areas.

Surrounding national and state parks and other recreation and tourist opportunities often draw additional visitors to the Chiricahua Mountains. Proximity to Interstate-10, state highways, growing residential areas such as Sunsites and Cave Creek, and transient populations are contributing to increasing visitation in the project area. This visitor increase brings an increased chance of wildfires if no action is taken to reduce the vegetation fuel loads.

The proposed action would result in additional burned areas which, when combined with past wildfires (especially the Horseshoe 2 Fire), would result in short-term cumulative effects due to similar effects such as burned and blackened vegetation. The use of chainsaws and helicopters would have an added negative effect when coupled with other intrusions from emergency wildfire suppression and other prohibited uses authorized with a Minimum Requirements Decision Guide. As more treatments are implemented, the frequency of suppression efforts would likely diminish over time as fire begins to play a more natural role and overall forest health improves. Therefore, no long-term adverse cumulative effects are expected.

Reasonably foreseeable future actions that would affect special uses, recreation, and wilderness resources include: • Watershed – Waterlines, water diversions, wildlife water supply, dams.

• Fire and Fuels – Increase in unmanaged fuel loads presents the potential for catastrophic wildfires to escape wilderness boundaries.

• Recreation – Potential for abandoned recreational campfires to spread into the unmanaged fuel loads in the campground areas and result in catastrophic wildfires.

• Special Uses – Special use permitted activities (e.g. waterlines, water diversions, wildlife water supply drinkers, dams, research studies, site surveys and testing, recreation residence, Outfitters & Guides).

• Minerals –Leasable minerals which require a special uses permit under the Organic Administration Act of June 4, 1897.

• Roads – Special uses easements and permits, which allow shared activities with other agencies, visiting public, and partners.

In addition, there are a number of planned forest health improvement projects that would affect recreation and wilderness resources. These include Rustler-Barfoot Forest Health Project, Rustler Park Thinning Project, and Chiricahua Hazard Tree Removal. These projects have limited extents, mostly short-term impacts, and would provide recreation and wilderness benefits by protecting long-term forest health and reducing the risk of large, high-intensity wildfires.

Because past, present, and future actions, when combined with treatments proposed under Chiricahua FireScape, would not alter recreation and wilderness resources on the Douglas Ranger District in the long term, no long-term cumulative effects from this project are expected.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Scenery No Action Direct and Indirect Effects The no-action alternative would not create any short-term impacts from the treatment of vegetation and fuels, but would not provide long-term benefits to scenery. Without the Chiricahua Firescape Project, scenery would appear to the untrained eye to be in good condition, changing very slowly throughout time until unnaturally large or destructive fires occur. Scenic Integrity Objectives (SIOs) in the Forest Plan would likely be met in the short term. However, dense, overgrown vegetation and heavy accumulations of fuel would remain, forest health would continue to decline, and risks of severe wildfire would grow. Additional scenic impacts from major wildfires would be expected.

Cumulative Effects Because there would be no direct effects from treatments, there would be no cumulative effects.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects The proposed action recommends a variety of treatments across the Chiricahua EMA including wildland (planned and unplanned) fire, mechanical treatments, hand thinning, pile burning, and herbicide application over 20 or more years. The project would reduce the potential for catastrophic fires and improve forest health, therefore providing long-term benefits to scenic quality.

The proposed action would also create short-term impacts during and immediately following treatments. Scenic impacts result from activities that contrast with the line, form, color, and texture of the landscape character. Most of the impacts would be relatively short term, but could easily impact scenic quality for a year or more. Effects to scenery from the Chiricahua Firescape Project from each type of treatment would include:

Wildland Fire: Preparation (line construction) and burning (planned and unplanned) would result in vegetation removal, damage to trees and other vegetation that would remain, bare ground (from fuel breaks, temporary roads, and other work), loss of visual screening, and blackened areas. These effects would contrast with the landscape character by creating linear elements (such as fuelbreaks), changes in forest color (exposed light-colored soil and blackened vegetation), and changes to landscape texture (altered vegetation). Most of these effects would be relatively short term (during and immediately following treatment), but could impact scenic quality for a year or more. Scorched bark on tree trunks might be visible for several years.

Mechanical Treatments: Implementation of treatment (mechanical harvesting and slash treatment, mastication, and grubbing) would result in tree and vegetation removal, damage to trees and shrubs that would remain (highly visible tree scars can be painted black), slash and debris piles, stumps, bare ground (from fuelbreaks, temporary roads, and other work), and loss of visual screening. These effects would contrast with the landscape character by creating linear elements (such as the shapes of treatment areas) and changes in forest form (stumps, slash piles), color (exposed light-colored soil and blackened vegetation), and texture (altered vegetation, mastication). Most of these effects would be relatively short term (during and immediately following treatment), but could impact scenic quality for a year or more.

Hand Thinning: Hand thinning would result in tree and vegetation removal, damage to trees and shrubs that would remain, slash and debris piles, stumps, ground disturbance, and loss of visual screening. These effects would contrast with the landscape character, primarily from stumps and slash. Most of the effects

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment would be short term (during and immediately following treatment), but could impact scenic quality for a year or more.

Pile Burning: Slash pile burning would result in changes that contrast with landscape character, primarily from color changes (blackened areas). Effects would generally be short term.

Herbicide: Herbicide treatment would result in dead vegetation, bare ground (from UTV/ATV use) and loss of visual screening. These effects would contrast with the landscape character by creating different colors and textures (from dead vegetation and light-colored soils). Most of these would be relatively short term, but could impact scenic quality for a year or more.

Benefits from this project to scenery would include a lower risk of large damaging wildfires and a healthier forest with greater diversity. Proposed treatments are expected to result in a mosaic of forest conditions, with some patches of widely-spaced larger trees and a grassier understory. In ponderosa pine forests, more open conditions are referred to as "park-like", and research shows that people prefer these conditions to the dense thickets and heavy debris on the forest floor that typify many parts of the project area. Therefore, in the long-term, this project would have a positive effect on scenic resources.

Design features listed in appendix A would help lessen impacts to scenery during and immediately following treatments.

Cumulative Effects Past and present trends in the project area include continued management activities such as vegetation and fuels treatments, watershed management, special uses, mineral exploration, livestock grazing, road maintenance, management of wilderness, and recreation activities. These activities generally have few impacts to scenery.

Reasonably foreseeable future actions that would affect scenic resources include a continuation of activities such as vegetation and fuels management (including fuelwood cutting, the Rustler-Barfoot Forest Health project, Rustler Park thinning, and Chiricahua Hazard Tree Removal), watershed management (including the Tex Canyon and Barboot project and the Chiricahua Watershed Restoration project), special uses (including recreation events, outfitter-guides, and powerline replacements), livestock grazing, road maintenance (and implementation of Travel Management, Homeland Security and Border Patrol activities, and the Jhus Canyon Road re-route), recreation (including campgrounds, trails, cabin rentals, and dispersed use), and illegal wood cutting.

The proposed action would result in additional burned areas, which when combined with past wildfires (especially the Horseshoe 2 Fire) would result in some short-term cumulative effects due to similar effects (e.g., dead trees and blackened vegetation). Over time, however, these effects would diminish, and no long-term cumulative effects are expected.

Because past, present, and future actions, when combined with Chiricahua Firescape Project treatments, would not substantially alter scenic resources in the Chiricahua EMA (and some would provide benefits), no cumulative effects from this project are expected.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species No Action Direct and Indirect Effects Under the no-action alternative, there would be no direct effects to species or their habitat from treatment activities. In the absence of any kind of human-caused or natural disturbance, indirect effects would occur from the natural progression of vegetative growth and change. Fire risk in the project analysis area would likely increase and contribute to severe wildfires. It is likely that stand-replacing wildfires would continue to occur at recent levels or increase in frequency and severity. In the case of wildfires, the effects are especially difficult to assess because of the many and great uncertainties related to management of such fires. The timing, location, extent, and severity cannot be accurately predicted. However, wildfires could result in a reduction of important habitat features such as travel corridors, nesting or foraging habitat, and hiding cover.

Cumulative Effects The potential impact of severe, uncharacteristic wildfires is the primary cumulative impact on wildlife and plant communities within the project area. Reduction of this impact is also the primary purpose of the project. It is likely that fires with severe impacts will continue to occur although these impacts would be substantially lessened if treatments were implemented. Increasingly drier and warmer conditions will result in more severe fire conditions and also lengthen the fire season. These conditions will likely result in a higher occurrence of severe fire behavior and impacts, creating challenges for managers. Treatments such as those presented in the proposed action would help mitigate these future negative impacts.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects on Threatened and Endangered Species The following table lists the species analyzed in the biological assessment and the effects determination for each species and its habitat. The information following the table summarizes the effects analysis and provides a rationale for the effects determinations for each listed species analyzed. The complete analysis and rationale is available in the biological assessment. These effects determinations are considered preliminary determinations until consultation with FWS is complete.

Table 4. Summary of determinations for threatened and endangered species Scientific Name Common Name Status1 Critical Habitat2 Determination3 Gila purpurea Yaqui chub E None in AA MANLAA Rana chiricahuensis Chiricahua leopard frog T Critical Habitat in AA MANLAA Strix occidentalis lucida Mexican spotted owl T Critical Habitat in AA MALAA Coccyzus americanus Western yellow-billed cuckoo T None in AA MANLAA Panthera onca Jaguar E None in AA MANLAA Leopardus pardalis Ocelot E No Critical Habitat MANLAA Falco femoralis septentrionalis Northern alpomado falcon EPN No Critical Habitat NLJ Canis lupus baileyi Mexican wolf EPN No Critical Habitat NLJ 1E=federally endangered; T=federally threatened; EPN=Experimental Population, Non-essential 2AA=Action Area 3May affect, is not likely to adversely affect (MANLAA) - the effects on listed species are expected to be discountable, or insignificant, or completely beneficial. Beneficial effects are contemporaneous positive effects without any adverse effects to the species. Insignificant effects relate to the size of the impact and should never reach the scale where take occurs. Discountable effects are those extremely unlikely to occur. Based on best

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment judgment, a person would not: (1) be able to meaningfully measure, detect, or evaluate insignificant effects; or (2) expect discountable effects to occur. May affect, is likely to adversely affect (MALAA) - if any adverse effect to listed species may occur as a direct or indirect result of the proposed action or its interrelated or interdependent actions, and the effect is not: discountable, insignificant, or beneficial (see definition of "is not likely to adversely affect"). In the event the overall effect of the proposed action is beneficial to the listed species, but is also likely to cause some adverse effects, then the proposed action "is likely to adversely affect" the listed species. If incidental take is anticipated to occur because of the proposed action, a determination of "is likely to adversely affect" should be made. A determination of "is likely to adversely affect" requires the initiation of formal Section 7 consultation. Not likely to jeopardize (NLJ) – the action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species.

Yaqui chub Determination of Effects The proposed action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, Yaqui chub for the following reasons: • Treatments would not occur in any occupied habitat for the species. • Numerous Conservation Measures and Best Management Practices (BPMs) would be employed to mitigate any potential effects of the proposed action on aquatic systems. • The IDT would consult an implementation guide to ensure that all potential resource concerns are being addressed and the appropriate design criteria are used. If appropriate, the IDT would coordinate implementation plans with the USFWS to address any additional concerns regarding federally listed species. • The proposed action would result in long-term beneficial effects to Yaqui chub as it would reduce the likelihood of stand-replacing fires.

Chiricahua leopard frog Determination of Effects The proposed action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, Chiricahua leopard frog for the following reasons: • Treatments would not occur in any occupied, or potentially occupied, habitat for CLF. • The implementation window would avoid the active period for CLF and avoid its overwintering habitat. • Treatment activities could produce insignificant amounts of ash deposition and sediment deposition in potential, suitable, or occupied habitat. • Avoiding certain riparian areas, limiting the amount and timing of treatment with the watershed, and developing site-appropriate buffers, would greatly reduce the amount of sediment/ash produced and introduced to frog habitat. Such measures would avoid or greatly minimize the cumulative effects of treating multiple areas within the same watershed. • The spatial distribution and contiguous size of planned burn/treatment areas would be considered in order to reduce the effects of peak flow change on stream channels. • Best management practices identified within the Forest Service Handbook offer a variety of mechanisms that would be used to further control sediment and ash production/movement to minimize more local effects to the species. • The IDT would consult an implementation guide to ensure that all potential resource concerns are being addressed and the appropriate design criteria are used. If appropriate, the IDT would coordinate implementation plans with the USFWS to address any additional concerns regarding federally listed species and their designated critical habitat. • The proposed action would result in long-term beneficial effects to CLF as it would reduce the likelihood of stand-replacing fires.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Mexican Spotted Owl Determination of Effects The proposed action may affect and is likely to adversely affect the Mexican spotted owl and its critical habitat for the following reasons: • Planned treatments would not occur within PACs during the MSO breeding season (March 1 – August 31). • There may be occasions when an unplanned fire with the potential to provide resource benefits occurs during the breeding season. In this instance, resources specialists would work with USFWS to determine the best course of action. • The proposed action may treat up to 2,601 acres (13.0%) of designated and inventory PACs in the action area during the non-breeding season. • Site-specific treatments within occupied, or potentially occupied MSO habitat, would adhere to the guidelines of the MSO Recovery Plan and the ensuing BO from FWS consultation. • Treatments may affect breeding and wintering MSO through auditory or visual disturbance. • Prescribed burning or thinning activities may indirectly affect Mexican spotted owl by altering the vegetation structure. • The main objective of the proposed action is to reduce the likelihood of stand-replacing fire while maintaining suitable owl habitat.

Yellow-billed cuckoo Determination of Effects The proposed action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect yellow-billed cuckoo for the following reasons: • Planned treatments would avoid potential YBCU habitat during the breeding season. • There may be occasions when an unplanned fire with the potential to provide resource benefits occurs within YBCU habitat during the breeding season. The likelihood of this occurrence would be rare given that YBCU’s breeding season coincides with summer monsoons, however, should a fire occur, resources specialists would work with USFWS to determine the best course of action. • Treatments would avoid all riparian areas and high-gradient streams, and would largely avoid all drainages. • Treatments would be designed to reduce the likelihood that a high-intensity wildfire would occur within riparian areas and drainages. • The planning and implementation of the proposed action would take into account the distribution and size of treatments within a watershed. Because the application of the action would occur at multiple scales (planning block, watershed, and the entire action area), effects to marginal YBCU habitat are expected to occur at insignificant levels.

Jaguar Determination of Effects The proposed action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, jaguar for the following reasons: • The proposed action may cause jaguars to shift their home range and travel longer distances, possibly through less suitable habitat. Extra travel would require jaguars to expend additional energy and increase the potential for encounters with humans, vehicles, potential competitors, and other stresses. • The jaguar is a wide-ranging species and although travel corridors may be thinned, treatments are not expected to prevent jaguars from using the travel corridors or entering the United States. • Treatments would benefit the main prey species of jaguars (e.g., deer and javelina). • Treatments would avoid all riparian areas and high-gradient streams, and would largely avoid all drainages.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

• The proposed action is designed to reduce the risk of stand-replacing wildfires that could substantially affect the quality and quantity of jaguar habitat in the action area. • The planning and implementation of the proposed action would take into account the distribution and size of treatments within a watershed.

Ocelot Determination of Effects The proposed action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect ocelot for the following reasons: • The proposed action may cause ocelots to shift their home range and travel longer distances, possibly through less suitable habitat. Extra travel would require ocelots to expend additional energy and increase the potential for encounters with humans, vehicles, potential competitors, and other stresses. • The ocelot is a wide-ranging species and although travel corridors may be thinned, treatments are not expected to prevent ocelots from using the travel corridors or entering the United States. • Treatments would benefit the main prey species of ocelots (e.g., mice and rabbits). • Treatments would avoid all riparian areas and high-gradient streams, and would largely avoid all drainages. • The proposed action is designed to reduce the risk of stand-replacing wildfires that could substantially affect the quality and quantity of ocelot habitat in the action area. • The planning and implementation of the proposed action would take into account the distribution and size of treatments within a watershed.

Northern aplomado falcon Determination of Effects The proposed action is not likely to jeopardize Northern aplomado falcon because currently, there are no nesting or foraging Northern aplomado falcons known to occur on CNF lands. If Northern aplomado falcons are found on CNF lands in the future, surveys would be conducted and protection of nesting and foraging habitats would be implemented.

Mexican wolf Determination of Effects The proposed action is not likely to jeopardize Mexican wolf because currently, there are no Mexican wolves known to occur on CNF lands. If wolves are found on CNF lands in the future, protection measures would be implemented as necessary.

Direct and Indirect Effects on Forest Service Sensitive Species Seventy-two species (table 5) were analyzed for potential effects (see the biological evaluation in the project record). All these species had determinations of “may impact individuals but not likely to cause a trend toward Federal listing or loss of viability”. Reasons for this determination vary between species but generally consist of the following:

• Modification of habitat and forage areas • Direct mortality of individuals • Indirect effects to prey species • Short-term effects to pond, stream and riparian habitats • Short-term effects to nesting and roosting areas • Reduced risk of extreme fire within occupied habitat

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Conservation measures and project design criteria are intended to avoid or minimize such effects. However, some short-term effects are likely therefore a “may impact” determination is necessary. In addition, long-term effects of proposed treatments are expected to be beneficial to most species by reducing the risk of catastrophic fire, and trending ecological processes toward historic levels. Please refer to the biological evaluation in the project record for detailed analyses.

Table 5. Summary of effects to Forest Service sensitive species Species Name Common Name Effects Determination Fish Catostomus insignis Sonora sucker MII Campostoma ornatum Mexican stoneroller MII Reptiles Crotalus pricei Twin-spotted rattlesnake MII Sceloporus slevini Slevin's bunchgrass lizard MII Senticolis triaspis Green ratsnake MII Tantilla yaquia Yaqui black-headed snake MII Birds Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald eagle MII Falco peregrinus anatum American peregrine falcon MII Accipiter gentilis Northern goshawk MII Ammodramus bairdii Baird's sparrow MII Vireo vicinior Gray vireo MII Amazilia violiceps Violet-crowned hummingbird MII Ammodramus savannarum ammolegus Arizona grasshopper sparrow MII Calothorax lucifer Lucifer hummingbird MII Cynanthus latirostris Broad-billed hummingbird MII Empidonax fulvifrons Buff-breasted flycatcher MII Euptilotis neoxenus Eared quetzal MII Megascops trichopsis Whiskered screech-owl MII Meleagris gallopavo mexicana Gould's wild turkey MII Pachyramphus aglaiae Rose-throated becard MII Picoides arizonae Arizona woodpecker MII Trogon elegans Elegant trogon MII Tyrannus crassirostris Thick-billed kingbird MII Junco phaeonotus Yellow-eyed junco MII Camptostoma imberbe Northern beardless-tyrannulet MII Melozone aberti Abert's towhee MII Passerina versicolor Varied bunting MII Myiodynastes luteiventris Sulphur-bellied flycatcher MII Hylocharis leucotis White-eared hummingbird MII Mammals Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens Pale Townsend's big-eared bat MII

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Species Name Common Name Effects Determination Idionycteris phyllotis Allen's lappet-browned bat MII Lasiurus blossevillii Western red bat MII Choeronycteris mexicana Mexican long-tongued bat MII Lasiurus xanthinus Western yellow bat MII Baiomys taylori ater Northern pygmy mouse MII Sciurus nayaritensis chiricahuae Chiricahua squirrel MII Sorex arizonae Arizona shrew MII Mephitis macroura milleri Hooded skunk MII Invertebrates Oreohelix barbata Bearded mountainsnail MII Cymbiodyta arizonica Chiricahua water scavenger beetle MII Plants Graptopetalum bartramii Bartram stonecrop MII Rumex orthoneurus Blumer's dock MII Gentianella wislizeni Wislizeni gentian MII Heuchera glomerulata Arizona alum root MII Desmodium metcalfei Metcalfe's tick-trefoil MII Carex ultra (=C.spissa var. ultra) Cochise sedge MII Erigeron kuschei Chiricahua fleabane MII Perityle cochisensis Chiricahua rockdaisy MII Polemonium pauciflorum ssp. hinckleyi Hinckley's polemonium MII Potentilla rhyolitica var. chiricahuensis Chiricahua cinquefoil MII Castilleja nervata Trans-Pecos indian paintbrush MII Astragalus cobrensis var. maguirei Maguire's (coppermine) milkvetch MII Limosella pubiflora Chiricahua mudwort MII Pediomelum pentaphyllum Chihuahua scurf-pea MII Arabis tricornuta Chiricahua rock cress MII Asclepias lemmonii Lemmon milkweed MII Lupinus lemmonii Lemmon's lupine MII Viola umbraticola Shade violet MII Erigeron arisolius Arid throne fleabane MII Lilium parryi Lemon lily MII Lupinus huachucanus Huachuca mountains lupine MII Samolus vagans Chiricahua mountain brookweed MII Sisyrinchium cernuum Nodding blue-eyed grass MII Senecio multidentatus var. huachucanus Huachuca groundsel MII (=s. huachucanus) Muhlenbergia elongata (=M. xerophila) Sycamore canyon muhly MII Hieracium abscissum (= H. rusbyi) Rusby hawkweed MII Stellaria porsildii Porsild's starwort MII Hexalectris spicata var. arizonica Arizona coralroot MII

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Species Name Common Name Effects Determination Packera neomexicana var. toumeyi Toumey groundsel MII (=Senecio n. var. t.) Carex chihuahuensis Chihuahuan sedge MII MII = May impact individuals but is not likely to cause a trend to Federal listing or loss of viability (effects are expected to be insignificant, or discountable)

Direct and Indirect Effects on Management Indicator Species

Direct and indirect effects of the proposed action to Management Indicator Species (MIS; table 6) include direct and indirect disturbance to species and indirect effects due to habitat impacts from factors such as alteration of plant height, canopy cover and ground cover, and a temporary increase in ash and sedimentation of riparian areas. The degree of these effects would be influenced by treatment implementation, which is subject to financial constraints and personnel time, as well as design features and best management practices, which protect sensitive habitats and limit the number of acres that can be treated within a watershed in a given year.

Table 6. Coronado National Forest management indicator species that may occur within the project area Habitat1 Species Name Indicator Occupied Potential Acorn Woodpecker Melanerpes formicivorus Madrean Pine-Oak Woodland Y Y Sonoran Mud Turtle Kinosternon sonoriense Natural and Constructed Waters Y Y Mexican Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis lucida Mixed Conifer Y Y 1 Habitat refers to presence of known occupied habitat (occupied) or potentially occupied habitat (potential) within the project area.

The Mexican Spotted Owl (MSO) is the MIS for mixed conifer vegetation type. It is a federally listed species, thus, treatments under the proposed action are subject to consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The proposed action does contain MSO and designated Critical Habitat, and MSO and their habitat are likely to be affected by the proposed action, however the proposed action is designed to reduce the risk of stand-replacing wildfire. Stand-replacing wildfire is expected to have considerably greater impacts to the species than the proposed action.

The Sonoran mud turtle is the MIS for natural and constructed water sources. It is a moderate-sized aquatic turtle that inhabits rivers, streams, cienegas, and constructed stock tanks or other impoundments. It can be found in a variety of habitat settings where permanent water is found, including Sonoran and Chihuahan desertscrub, semi-desert and plains grassland, oak woodland, and pine-oak woodland in elevations from sea level to about 6,700 feet. Their diet consists of aquatic insects, snails, crayfish, fish, frogs, lizards, and snakes. Some plants are consumed as well. Threats to the species include predation by non-native species such as bullfrogs, largemouth bass, and crayfishes. In many areas its aquatic habitats have disappeared due to water diversions and groundwater pumping. The proposed action has the potential to indirectly affect water quality through temporary increases in ash and sedimentation, however design features would be implemented to reduce possible effects. Furthermore, the proposed action is designed to reduce the risk of stand-replacing wildfire. Stand-replacing wildfire is expected to have considerably greater impacts to the species than the proposed action.

The acorn woodpecker is the MIS for Madrean Pine-Oak vegetation communities. The species is omnivorous with tree sap, insects, and green and mature acorns comprising most of their diet. Other foods consumed include pinyon pine seeds, oak buds and catkins, grass seeds, and occasionally lizards, bird eggs, and bats. Possible concerns related to the proposed action include reduction in shrub, forb, and

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment grass cover. Under the proposed action, treatment implementation would be guided by design features that would limit the acreage treated within a watershed in a given year. The proposed action is designed to reduce the risk of stand-replacing wildfire. Stand-replacing wildfire is expected to have considerably greater impacts to the species than the proposed action.

Given the design features that are incorporated to manage the implementation of the proposed action, no long-term impacts to MIS are expected. Species are expected to benefit from returning habitats to their desired conditions and helping create a landscape that is resilient to stand-replacing fire.

Cumulative Effects ESA cumulative effects are those of future state or private activities, not involving federal activities, that are reasonably certain to occur within the action area of the federal action subject to consultation [50 CFR §402.02]. Federal agencies manage the majority of lands that are important wildlife habitat within the action area. Activities on federal land that could affect wildlife are not considered in this section because they require separate consultation pursuant to Section 7 of the Act. Examples of these kinds of actions include: management of Forest Service grazing permits, travel management and mineral activities.

Activities in the vicinity of the action area that are reasonably certain to occur in important wildlife habitat but are not subject to Section 7 analysis include illegal activities and action on private lands. Examples of illegal activities that may affect wildlife include: inappropriate use of off-highway vehicles, illegal woodcutting, the distribution of restricted live wildlife (especially aquatic invasives), and poaching. Illegal activities are difficult to predict and are assumed to occur indefinitely and uniformly throughout the vicinity of the action area and are not expected to significantly contribute to the adverse impacts from the proposed action.

Activities occurring on private lands may include residential development, farming/ranching, road construction and maintenance, and mineral exploration. These activities could potentially affect wildlife through habitat destruction or degradation and harassment of individuals. Many of the private lands near or within the action area have already been developed, and no new major developments of private lands are expected to occur; therefore, future activities on private lands are not expected to significantly contribute to adverse impacts to wildlife from the proposed action. Vegetation No Action It is anticipated that the no-action alternative would promote a continuation of current vegetation trends with respect to vegetation composition and structure, deviation from fire resilient characteristics, and values and associated risks. Forests and woodlands would continue the current trend of densification as stands become more overstocked and canopy layers, both vertical and horizontal, become more contiguous. Species composition would continue to become more late-seral or more skewed to dominance of fire intolerant species. Fuel loadings, both live and dead, would continue to build in and around values at risk, such as infrastructure and WUI communities.

Direct and Indirect Effects Existing conditions are expected to be maintained and will likely worsen over time. The lack of frequent low severity fire would continue to promote current trends away from the historic range of natural variability. Species compositions would continue to shift. Within the Madrean pine-oak system, oaks would continue to become more dominant over pines (Barton 2008) and off-site species, such as Douglas- fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and border piñon (Pinus discolor), would continue to invade (Barton 1993). Areas which have recently burned under severe fire behavior will continue to convert to an even-aged oak

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment dominant woodland type as opposed to a pine-oak woodland typical of a Madrean pine-oak woodland (Barton 2005). The juniper grasslands of the Madrean encinal woodlands, common to the project area, will continue to become more dominated by tree species such as oneseed juniper (Juniperus monosperma) and border piñon, compared to the condition before the era of fire exclusion and cattle grazing (Brockway et al 2001). Conditions of the dry mixed-conifer forests would continue to shift from a more open horizontal structure with fire tolerant and shade intolerant species composition to a forest dominated by closed canopies and late-seral, shade tolerant, and fire-intolerant tree species (Reynolds et al 2013). Effects common throughout these vegetation types include the continual buildup of fuels: dead, live, horizontal and vertical. These increased fuel loadings increase the risk of non-characteristic fire behavior in terms of behavior, severity, and scale. Cumulative Effects The potential impact of severe, uncharacteristic wildfires is the primary cumulative impact on the vegetation communities within the project area. Reduction of this impact is also the primary purpose of the project. Current trends are expected to continue. Previously treated/thinned stands will continue to develop along trajectories similar to those of that last century.

Proposed Action The proposed action alternative would include the thinning of overstocked forest and woodland stands as well as the application of fire as a management tool. The desired outcome is the restoration of desired vegetation composition and structure, the re-establishment of fire-dependent systems, and landscapes that would pose a substantially diminished threat to lives and values such as infrastructure, resources, and property.

Direct and Indirect Effects Management activities are expected to either modify existing conditions to align with the desired conditions established as part of the 2018 Coronado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) or to move existing conditions along a trajectory to align with these desired conditions.

Treatments within the dry mixed-conifer would transition existing structure and vigor towards the desired conditions for that vegetation community. Structure within the dry mixed-conifer vegetation community would become generally uneven-aged, on a mid-scale or landscape scale. Stocking levels would transition towards being vigorous, healthy, and the risk of mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) and western pine beetle (Dendroctonus brevicomis) would be substantially decreased. Horizontal structure consists of trees grouped in more clumps and less contiguous canopy layers. Regeneration, such as seedlings and saplings, are present but not spatially arranged as fuel ladders (forest fuels which provide pathways for ground fires to transfer to crown fires). Species composition is dominated by more early seral and fire tolerant species, such as ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), Douglas-fir, and southwestern white pine (Pinus strobiformis) and white fir is a minor component more generally found in cool and wet areas (USDA 2018 and Reynolds et al 2013).

Treatments within the Madrean pine-oak woodland would create conditions which are less dense in terms of stems per acre and canopy cover. Trees, shrubs, and snags are generally grouped in clusters. The lower elevations of this vegetation type are dominated by silverleaf oak (Quercus hypoleucoides) with moderate to closed canopies. Grasses and forbs are relatively minor and shrubs are common to well-represented. At higher elevations, the tree layer is more dominated by pines such as Arizona pine (Pinus arizonica), Apache pine (Pinus engelmannii), Chihuahua pine (Pinus leiophylla v. chihuahuana), and Arizona white oak (Quercus arizonica) and Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii). Grasses are better represented at this range and shrubs are less represented. Tree canopy cover is generally low to moderate. The re-introduction of fire as a management tool keeps canopy cover relatively lower and more in line with pre-settlement

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment conditions (USDA 2018). Pines are generally more highly represented given that these species are more tolerant of fire (better survivability) while oaks are more resistant to fire (post fire sprouting) (Barton 2005). Off-site invading trees, pinyon and Douglas-fir, are absent (Barton 1993).

Treatments within the Madrean encinal woodland create conditions where woodland structure is composed of more open areas with more dense area on north facing slopes and drainages. Species composition is dominated by oaks; including Emory (Quercus emoryi), Mexican blue (Quercus oblongifolia), Arizona white, gray oak (Quercus grisea); along with alligator (Juniperus deppeana) and one-seed juniper and border pinyon. Trees are generally single large individuals or part of small clumps. Tree crowns are generally wide. Grass cover is generally high, ranging up to 50% cover (USDA 2018). Given these conditions, fuel loadings and the risk of high severity wildfire would be diminished. Prescribed fire and mechanical treatments would be utilized to create and/or maintain these conditions.

All treatments within the numerous vegetation communities would work to transition the current conditions towards desired conditions as described above. Reintroducing fire, as well as thinning, would allow for vegetative communities to shift towards desired conditions faster and in a more controlled setting than if left to progress without assistance or intervention.

Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects from the combination of the proposed alternative and other past, current, and foreseeable activates may exist. The proposed action is anticipated to continue for 20 years, and possibly longer, and would be confined to the analysis area of the Chiricahua EMA. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable activities are detailed as part of table 2.

For the purpose of analyzing the cumulative effects of vegetation management, only projects related to the harvest or thinning of trees and other woody vegetation are analyzed in further detail.

Tex Canyon, Barboot Watershed, Chiricahua Watershed Restoration Projects – These projects are focused on restoring the watershed, which are designed to increase overall watershed health. The results from these projects will also improve vegetation health and resilience.

Rustler-Barfoot Forest Health Project – The objective of this project is to reforest areas impacted by high severity fire during the Horseshoe 2 Fire and to thin remaining stands to improve health, vigor, and resistance to fire within the area immediately adjacent to Rustler Park campground and Barfoot Park campground. Rustler Park Thinning Project occurs within the same area around Rustler Park campground. The proposed action does not propose to treat this area, but would complement these treatments by helping to achieve desired conditions in forested communities affected by the Horseshoe 2 Fire.

Rustler Park Thinning Project – After the Horseshoe 2 Fire, hazard tree removal and sanitation thinning was needed within the area immediately adjacent to the Rustler Park campground. The objective of this project is to remove hazard trees and to suppress mountain pine beetle and western pine beetle activity. The proposed action does not propose to treat this area, but would complement these treatments by helping to achieve desired conditions in forested communities affected by the Horseshoe 2 Fire.

Chiricahua Hazard Tree Removal – Hazard tree removal within the project area became re-emphasized in 2009 in order to mitigate risk to the public in recreation sites on National Forest System lands such as parking lots, campgrounds, and trailheads. Hazard tree removal increased substantially after the Horseshoe 2 Fire as crews removed hazard trees along affected roadways. The proposed action is anticipated to create more hazard trees as prescribed fire is utilized across portions of the landscape.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Mechanical treatment and hand thinning projects are expected to mitigate hazard trees within these treatment blocks.

Chiricahua Fuelwood Collection – Fuelwood harvest is a continual and ongoing activity within the project area. Spatial scale is relatively small and is generally confined to accessible areas, such as roadsides. The product collected by the public consists of dead and downed wood and small (<9” diameter) snags. Total volume removed from the project area is generally less than 300 ccf (hundred cubic feet) per year. Removal of fuelwood would likely increase over the lifetime of this project given that products would become more readily available for public consumption as thinning activities progress through the various locations of the project area.

Horseshoe 2 Fire – The Horseshoe 2 Fire altered a considerable portion of the project area. Burn severity was moderate to high on large portions of the forested and woodland areas. Effects of the fire included tree mortality, diminished tree vigor which led to increased bark beetle activity, and the promotion of root-sprouting oak trees in areas with high severity fire effects. Treatments of the proposed action are intended to mitigate some of the effects of the moderate and high severity fire, such as closed canopy stands of oak sprouts, hazard trees, and insect agents.

Saddle Fire – The Saddle Fire altered a small portion of the project area. Proposed action treatments are intended to mitigate some of the effects of varied fire severity, such as closed canopy oak stand sprouts, insect agents, and hazard trees.

Administrative operation and visitor use of developed campgrounds – Minimal damage may occur from visitor use and vegetation (e.g. trees and shrubs) may be removed due to public and structure safety precautions (i.e. hazard trees). The proposed action would help reduce the amount of hazardous vegetation and improve intrinsic values for the public.

Administrative maintenance and visitor use of National Forest System Trails – Some minimal damage may occur from visitor use (mainly trampling); vegetation, such as trees and shrubs, may be removed to maintain trail system safety and accessibility. The proposed action would help reduce the amount of hazardous vegetation and improve intrinsic values for the public.

Permitted special use activities (e.g. equestrian and bike events) – Some minimal vegetation damage can occur (e.g. horse browse, trampling) as part of these special use activities. The proposed action would improve habitat and reduce hazards while improving the intrinsic values and scenery for the public.

Outfitter Guides – Outfitters conducting rock-climbing tours, birding tours, hiking tours, and hunting excursions pose minimal damage to the existing vegetation. The proposed action would improve habitat, vegetative structure and composition for these outfitter excursions.

San Bernardino Powerline Replacement Project – This project involves Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Cooperative (SSVEC) implementing a pole-to-pole replacement of the existing powerline structure and framework of the San Bernardino Line which occurs within some of the southernmost treatment units. Some extremely localized vegetation removal and trampling may occur while poles are replaced with minimal vegetation damage during existing access road development. Trees and shrubs may be removed or trimmed in some areas to safely and effectively access pole sites. However, the powerline exists in areas with relatively little vegetation and few shrubs and trees. The proposed action would reduce the risk of impingement on the powerline and would improve the vegetation around the San Bernardino Line.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Mining and mineral exploration – Some mines are located within the project area. Most of the mining activity is historic with the majority of prospecting and small mine development (which extracted silver, gold, copper, and lead) beginning in the 1800s. Soil condition in the vicinity of old mines continues to be affected by mining-related disturbances which limits optimal vegetative conditions.

Homeland Security and Border Patrol activities – These activities have minimal interaction and impacts on the native vegetation or within the proposed treatment units. Watershed No Action Direct and Indirect Effects As a result of the no-action alternative, the existing vegetation would remain in its current condition and would continue with the trend of increasing tree/shrub encroachment and density, if other management actions are not taken to prevent it. In the short term, it can be expected that water quality would not be impacted beyond existing impacts. However, as tree/shrub density and encroachment increases, it can be expected that herbaceous cover would continue to decrease with time. As a result, there will be less herbaceous ground cover over the soil, increasing the opportunity for soil erosion and sediment introduction into streams.

The existing risk of high intensity wildfire would remain, and possibly worsen over time as tree/shrub density increases with time. High intensity fires can have detrimental effects on soil. Most organisms living in the soil die when soil temperature is raised to near 212 degrees Fahrenheit, at least temporarily reducing nutrient availability and consequently woodland and range production. Water repellency (hydrophobicity) is increased if soil containing organic matter or covered with organic matter is heated between 349 and 400 degrees Fahrenheit. This occurs as organic substances are vaporized and then condensed as they leach downward into cooler layers of mineral soil, generally within about 2 inches of the surface. The result is at least temporary changes in the hydrologic soil group, and increases in erosion. Soils with moderate or severe erosion hazard would lose productivity (DeBano et al. 1998). Soil erosion potential also increases when the vegetation and organic matter protecting the soil is burned off. An increased potential for high intensity fire within the project area, as would be expected for the no- action alternative, would cause an increased risk for accelerated soil erosion in the wake of such a fire. Vegetation re-establishment would also be slowed. Some soil types, slopes, and recently burned areas support less vegetation, so it would be expected that a wildfire would burn less hotly in these areas, and damage to soils would therefore be less extensive than would be expected in areas with denser vegetation coverage.

High intensity wildfire would also expose more soil to erosion in the short term. Eventually, vegetation may establish and proliferate over time. However, this would be substantially delayed due to damage to the soil condition and water repellency, as discussed in the previous paragraph. Also, species that establish may be different than expected due, at least in part, to species tolerance to the changed conditions. However, when vegetation does become established, it would result in more ground cover, reducing soil erosion over time, and therefore decreasing sediment transport to streams in the long term.

After a high intensity wildfire, a substantial rainfall event would move sediment and ash into downslope drainages, possibly overwhelming the capacity of the drainages to hold the flow. Due to the increased erosion potential as a result of the high intensity wildfire, more sediment would wash into drainages than would normally occur with the same storm event on an area that burned at low or moderate intensity. That, combined with ash, would make it more likely that these drainages would overflow onto surrounding property, possibly causing damage to homes, businesses, infrastructure such as bridges and

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment roads, and property. The magnitude of these flows would be expected to decrease over time as soil condition improves, vegetation re-establishes to hold the soil in place, and the watershed in general begins to heal. However, this can be delayed as opposed to a prescribed burn due to increased soil resource damage.

Air quality may be impacted from the no-action alternative. Although air quality may not be impacted by existing vegetation condition, it can be impacted, at least temporarily, by a wildfire. During a wildfire, air quality may be temporarily impacted by smoke in certain areas, depending on fire location, wind direction, and other such parameters. Air quality effects from smoke are expected to be temporary, and clear up after the fire is controlled. However, the size, magnitude, and longevity of a catastrophic wildfire may be greater and may therefore generate more smoke than if thinning and prescribed burning had been done to reduce fuel loads through the proposed action.

The amount of wind erosion and whether air quality is impacted would depend on the amount of area burned, rock fragments, vegetation remaining, and other site characteristics. Catastrophic, high intensity wildfires result in increased damage to soil and vegetation resources, so wind erosion may be expected to be greater (all else being equal) than for prescribed fire, which is managed to result in less intense fire activity.

Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Project planning involves the consideration of resource needs and site conditions, and planning treatments accordingly. The use of design features, mitigating measures, and best management practices specified for the project would further help minimize effects to soil, water, and air resources.

Slope was considered in planning the location and extent of treatment measures (see figure 2). Mechanical treatment, along with associated practices of pile burning and potential herbicide use, is planned for implementation most commonly on shallower slopes. Moderate slopes of 15%-40% are planned to receive a mix of treatment types, depending on site conditions. Prescribed burning and the strategic use of unplanned ignitions accounts for the vast majority of treatments on land area with slopes greater than 40%. Hand thinning occurs evenly across all slope types since it is primarily used along firelines, roads and trails, other treatment edges, for wildland-urban interface areas, and in other areas with logistical constraints.

Areas with high slopes are not readily accessible for mechanical treatment or hand thinning and tend to be more erosive, so prescribed fire would be utilized in these areas. Areas with high slopes would not be impacted by ground disturbance from mechanical treatment that would result in increased soil erosion potential. These areas are instead planned for light to moderate burning intensity that would help ensure rapid regeneration of plants and limited effects to soil condition, thereby ensuring more limited soil erosion potential. Areas with higher slopes and less vegetation production potential would also naturally burn less intensely.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Prescribed Fire Hand Thinning Herbicide Treatment Mechanical Treatment Pile Burning

Figure 2. Acres of Treatment Type by Slope Percent

Thinning and prescribed burning would expose more soil to erosion in the short term. However, thinning and prescribed burning would allow more herbaceous vegetation to establish and proliferate over time in areas that are currently dominated by shrubs. Increases in herbaceous vegetation would result in more ground cover, reducing soil erosion over time, therefore decreasing sediment transport to streams in the long term. Some delays in vegetation establishment may be expected in areas with increased fire severity, but these areas are expected to be much more limited in extent than with a high-intensity wildfire due to planning and management for less damaging fire conditions.

Some limited areas of soil damage may occur with prescribed burns, but they would be expected to occur over a smaller area and be of a lesser magnitude than a high-intensity wildfire. Since prescribed fires typically have reduced negative effects to soils, watersheds and vegetation can recover more quickly.

Soil disturbance would occur on firelines. These firelines would be used to facilitate prescribed burning and handpile burning operations. Fireline construction may consist of removing herbaceous vegetation, pruning, or cutting breaks in the fuel by hand and clearing all vegetation from a strip about 3 feet in width down to mineral soil. Firelines would be rehabilitated, which may include pulling removed material back into the lines, hand constructing water diversion channels, or laying shrubs or woody debris in the lines following burning. Fire control lines would also consist of existing natural barriers, roads, and trails. This would minimize the need to create temporary firelines. With these planning and implementation considerations in place, and through the use of best management practices, design features, and mitigating measures, it can be expected that soil and water resource effects from firelines would be minimal.

After a fire, a substantial rainfall event can move sediment and ash into downslope drainages, possibly overwhelming the capacity of the drainages to hold the flow. These effects would be expected to be less with a prescribed burn or managed unplanned ignitions than with a high-intensity wildfire. Prescribed burns and managed unplanned ignitions would be tactically executed to hold fire spread within the identified project area. Also, prescribed burning would be managed to occur when burning intensity would be minimized due to factors such as weather, wind, and vegetation moisture. Unplanned ignitions are managed for project objectives if site conditions and location are conducive for meeting project objectives. Lastly, thinning and other management practices are completed as needed prior to prescribed burns to ensure that the vegetation structure available for the burn does not result in more damaging and intense fires. As such, it is expected that prescribed burning and managed unplanned ignitions would result in fewer areas where burning intensity results in severe impacts to soil resources. Although increases in erosion and flood flows can be expected for prescribed burn areas and managed unplanned

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment ignitions in the short term until vegetation establishes and the watershed recovers, it would be projected to be much less and for shorter duration than if a high intensity, catastrophic wildfire were to occur.

There are about 35,900 acres (27% of the total project area) proposed for treatment by hand thinning and mechanical treatment. Mechanical treatment is planned for areas with slight to moderate slope. Minor amounts of soil compaction may occur in areas accessed for mechanized treatment, but this would be projected to be minor since it would not occur during moist soil conditions or within areas with moist soils. Soil erosion can occur from areas disturbed through mechanized treatment. However, mechanized treatment is planned on areas with less slope, so erosion potential would be minimized due to that planning consideration. Also, the type of mechanized treatment performed, whether it be mastication or grubbing, would be expected to result in different levels of erosion potential. Mastication is commonly selected for its ease of implementation, and it results in less ground disturbance than grubbing. Since grubbing involves removing plant roots, it is a more ground disturbing practice, and therefore results in a higher potential for soil erosion than mastication. Any soil erosion resulting from mechanical treatment may reach drainages in the short term resulting in short term effects to localized water quality, though it is not projected that it would have substantial effects to larger streams with larger drainage areas farther downslope. Soil erosion reaching these drainages is expected to be relatively minor due to planning considerations, design features, mitigating measures, and best management practices implemented. No adverse effects to soil would be expected from hand thinning, since no ground disturbance is involved, and there would be no compaction from mechanized equipment. Burn piles would be constructed to avoid intense fire, and pile burning would be done with a prescription that avoids intense fire in order to minimize soil resource damage.

There may be short term negative effects to air quality through the implementation of the proposed action due to smoke and wind erosion. However, these effects would be minimized through planning the prescribed burns for good to excellent smoke dispersal days and for good site conditions. Also, unplanned ignitions are only managed for project objectives if location and site conditions such as weather, timing, and fuel conditions would be conducive for meeting project objectives. Therefore, they would result in less potential for air quality concerns as opposed to catastrophic, high intensity wildfires.

Consideration of need and on-site soil and water conditions such as soil type, proximity to surface water and groundwater, and slope must be carefully considered along with herbicide attributes prior to the selection of herbicide and method of application. In general, different herbicides have different persistence durations in the soil, runoff potential, and leaching potential. They also have labeling requirements that specify where they may be used, under what conditions, and on what plant species they may be used. As long as label and other requirements are followed, and design features, mitigating measures, and best management practices are implemented, soil and water effects from herbicide use can be expected to be minimal.

Cumulative Effects for All Alternatives Cumulative effects for this project will be considered for the Chiricahua Mountains. It can reasonably be expected that activities or management decisions occurring within the Chiricahua Mountains may have impacts on the project area. Similarly, the proposed action or no-action alternatives may have impacts to management or activities occurring within this mountain range. The cumulative effects analysis will consider activities or management decisions that occur within the next 20 years. However, it is possible that the Chiricahua Firescape proposed action may be implemented over a timeframe greater than 20 years. Projects, activities, and circumstances occurring in the past will not be analyzed in this cumulative effects analysis since they can reasonably be expected to affect the current environment, which has

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment already been assessed through the Affected Environment and No Action Alternative sections of the Watershed Resource Report.

Ranching occurs within the Chiricahua Mountains as site conditions allow. Prescribed burning on a grazing allotment may impact soil condition depending on the burn severity, which could affect the rate and diversity of rangeland vegetation recovery. The more severely burned an area, the greater the soil resource damage that may be expected. High intensity wildfires have the potential to have an even greater impact on the rate and diversity of rangeland vegetation recovery since there is a greater potential for increased burn severities associated with high intensity wildfires.

Rangeland improvements such as pipelines, watering facilities, and fence may be constructed within the next 20 years to support livestock management objectives. The installation of these improvements after a managed unplanned ignition or prescribed fire may help to reduce livestock impacts to damaged watershed resources, which may be more important after potentially greater damages over a larger extent occur from catastrophic wildfire. However, where this range infrastructure existed prior to a fire occurring, it may be damaged from the fire and from watershed activity such as erosion or increased flows in drainages. In general, this damage would be expected to be more extensive with high intensity wildfire than with prescribed burns.

Planned fuel and thinning projects within the Chiricahua Mountains will also help to reduce fuel loads that can lead to high intensity, catastrophic wildfires that can damage the natural resource base, including soil condition. These other planned fuel reduction projects would be expected to complement the beneficial effects of the proposed action by reducing fuel loads elsewhere in the Chiricahua Mountains. The sum total of the treatments would result in a larger area where the potential for high intensity, resource damaging wildfire would be reduced.

Permitted wood cutting may occur in areas near to and accessible by road and of reasonable terrain. Permitted wood cutting can result in compaction and disturbance to soil resources, particularly where vehicles are driven off road for loading purposes. However, if vehicles are kept on roads, compaction and disturbance to soil resources from vehicular travel would be minimal. Erosion effects from fire can add to and be worsened by erosion from vehicles driven off of roads. The more intense the fire in an area, the greater the potential for erosion, so high intensity wildfires would tend to cause the greater potential for erosion that can be worsened by vehicles driven off road.

Mineral exploration may reasonably be expected to occur within the project area. Surface and underground mining is a ground disturbing activity by definition and causes many effects, some irreversible, to the environment. Mining activity can have adverse effects to soil and water quality caused by excess sediment and pollutants from areas of waste rock dumps or processed ore. Water quantity may also be impacted since large volumes of water are generally necessary for present day commercial mining activities. If mining does occur in the project area, it is not projected that watershed impacts from the proposed action or no-action alternative would substantially impact mineral exploration. However, watershed effects from mining, including increased erosion, would add to those that result from the no- action alternative or proposed action.

Developed recreation in the form of campsites and any related infrastructure (e.g. restrooms, trash cans, picnic tables) that occurs within the Chiricahua Mountains may be impacted by flood flows after fires. This is also true of cabins that can be rented through the cabin rental program. These developed recreation sites and rental cabins are often located along or close to stream channels and as such, may be impacted by large-scale storm flows. Temporary increases in soil erosion and decreases in water infiltration into the soil can result in increased storm flows over what would have normally occurred

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment down these stream channels. If a developed recreation site or rental cabin is located along a stream within a burned watershed, there would be an increased potential for damage to the site from storm flows. These increased flows are expected to be temporary and diminish with time as the watershed recovers vegetation and stability. The time to recovery is often longer and the severity of watershed damage is often more pronounced following a catastrophic, high intensity wildfire as compared to a prescribed burn or managed unplanned ignition. As a result, the storm flow effects could be expected to last longer and be of greater magnitude with a catastrophic wildfire than a prescribed burn or managed unplanned ignition.

Trail systems, including those used by equestrians, bicycles, pedestrians, and for special use permits, may also be impacted by storm flows. There may always be a risk of damage to sections of trail that cross even small drainages, particularly in the wake of larger storm events. However, this risk would increase in burned watersheds due to increased erosion and reduced water infiltration. It would be expected that there would be a greater increased risk in the wake of a catastrophic, high intensity wildfire as compared to a prescribed burn or managed unplanned ignition due to a higher probability of more severe watershed damage after a catastrophic, high intensity wildfire. These effects would be expected to be temporary until vegetation re-establishes and watersheds stabilize. Trails may also be subject to erosion in places, or they can channelize erosion coming onto them from upslope, and therefore make this erosion worse. Erosion coming off of trails would be expected to have the greatest impact to damaged watershed conditions. Areas with a lack of vegetation and a damaged soil condition from a high-intensity wildfire would erode more readily than areas where light to moderate fire intensity resulted in less damages to vegetation and soil resources.

Dispersed recreation and outfitter tours can occur throughout the Coronado National Forest, including in the Chiricahua Mountains. It is not projected that these types of recreation would substantially affect the watershed impacts of the no-action alternative and the proposed action. However, the storm flows and erosion occurring after a fire can affect areas visited by these recreationists. So, just like for other types of recreation uses, these visited areas can be impacted due to storm flows and erosion from damaged watersheds. Again, this is projected to more likely occur after a catastrophic, high intensity wildfire as compared to a prescribed burn or a managed unplanned ignition.

Road construction, realignment, decommissioning, and maintenance may occur within or adjacent to the project area within the next few years. Since increased flood flows may occur, there may be an increased need for maintenance of existing roads at stream crossings. Again, it would be expected that there would be a greater need for maintenance and for a longer duration after a catastrophic, high intensity wildfire as opposed to a prescribed burn or managed unplanned ignition. Also, just like for trails, erosion coming off of roads would be expected to be more damaging for areas that burned with high intensity as compared to light or moderate intensity.

Off highway vehicle use within the project area on existing roads/trails designated for this purpose would have limited additional impacts to watershed resources in regards to the project. However, off highway vehicle use off of designated roads and trails increases the potential for soil erosion from disturbed and compacted soil. In areas that are burned, off highway vehicle use off of designated roads can add soil compaction and disturbance effects to an already fragile soil resource, increasing the potential for erosion. As previously discussed, these effects would be expected to be worse on areas that burned with high intensity as compared to areas that burned with light to moderate intensity.

Border Patrol use of existing roads in the course of their work would have limited additional watershed impacts after a wildfire or prescribed burn. However, Border Patrol access to areas of interest across country, and not using an existing road, would be damaging to watersheds due to compaction and soil disturbance. These damages from driving across burned ground would be worse in the aftermath of a

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment high intensity fire since soil condition is already damaged and therefore not as resilient. Additional damage to soil resources increases the amount of time that it takes the impacted area to recover, and increases the potential for erosion to occur in or from the tire tracks of the vehicle. The more severely burned the watershed, the greater the amount of time it takes to recover vegetation and watershed stability, and the more damaged soil and vegetation would be. Therefore, Border Patrol access across country would tend to be more damaging in the aftermath of a catastrophic, high intensity wildfire.

The San Bernardino Powerline Replacement Project involves the use of existing roads for access and may cause soil disturbance along the powerline itself during the course of the replacement project. It would be expected that there would be no impacts to the project area from the use of existing roads. However, any areas of soil disturbance may result in soil erosion, depending on characteristics of soil, slope, rock content, and vegetation. Any erosion from the project may connect to and worsen erosion on fire damaged slopes. Again, it would be expected that this would be more severe in areas that burned with high intensity due to the extent of soil and vegetation resource damage.

Illegal wood cutting can be expected to occur, limited mostly to areas near to and accessible by road and of reasonable terrain. Illegal wood cutting can be expected to result in compaction and disturbance to soil resources, primarily where vehicles are driven off road for loading purposes. Erosion effects from fire can add to and be worsened by erosion from vehicles driven off of roads. The more intense the fire in an area, the greater the potential for erosion, so high intensity wildfires would tend to cause the greater potential for erosion that can be worsened by vehicle access.

Invasive plant control treatments have occurred and will continue to occur throughout the Chiricahua Mountains. Some of these invasive plants increase the potential for uncharacteristic wildfires. Removal or reduction of invasive species will work in tandem with the proposed action to reduce fuel loads, which would reduce the potential for a high intensity wildfire.

Management of designated wilderness would continue. It is not projected that it would have substantial additional effects to watershed resources in consideration of the proposed action or no-action alternative over what has already been assessed. Effects from fire burning through wilderness in consideration of soil, water, and air resources is not expected to substantially change or add to that which has already been assessed for the proposed action or no-action alternative.

Planned watershed projects involve the use of rock and brush erosion control structures in small drainages. These structures can reduce channel downcutting, promote sediment deposition, encourage plant establishment, and stabilize stream channels. As such, they can help damaged watersheds to recover from the effects of fire. Therefore, these projects are complementary to the proposed action and no-action alternatives in that they will help reduce negative effects from fire, including increased erosion. However, due to the volume of sediment, ash, and debris moving down drainages after a high intensity wildfire, they may fill with sediment more quickly, need maintenance more often, and have a higher failure rate than would be projected for a light to moderate intensity wildfire.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Appendix A – Design Features Specific design features were developed to eliminate or reduce adverse effects of the actions on sensitive resources. These design features are part of the proposed action and are intended to achieve fuels objectives in concert with resource objectives. Managers will consult an implementation guide, which will include a checklist of potential resource concerns and associated design features, prior to carrying out site-specific actions. Resource concerns identified as being relevant to each proposed treatment area, combined with individual agency management objectives, will determine which design features to apply at each site. While this may result in some variation in application of the design features, the overall effects of all actions must remain within maximum effects predicted in the environmental assessment.

In addition to these design features, best management practices (BMPs) from the Soil and Water Conservation Handbook, Southwest Region Directive (2509.22) would be followed to ensure protection of soil and water resources. For more information on the BMPs that would apply, refer to the Watershed Resource Report.

Table 7. Design features for the Chiricahua FireScape Project organized by resource Resource Design Feature Number Prescribed Fire Design Features to Protect All Resources A-1 A prescribed burn plan would be developed according to agency standards and approved prior to initiating any burning operation. A-2 Off-road vehicle activity during treatment activities would be kept to a minimum. Vehicles would be parked as close to roads as possible, and vehicles would use wide spots in roads or disturbed areas to turn around. A-3 No permanent or temporary road construction would be allowed. Any skid trails and off highway vehicle trails resulting from proposed activities would be obliterated and restored. A-4 Areas of increased human activity during treatment implementation, such as equipment staging areas, would not be located on or adjacent to sensitive sites such as habitat of protected species or archaeological sites. Such activities should also be kept to the minimum area possible and should be located in previously disturbed sites whenever possible. A-5 Prescribed fire control actions along tails and in sensitive areas (such as riparian areas) should apply minimum impact suppression tactics to minimize damage to stands of native animals, vegetation and soils from prescribed fire or wildfire use operations. A-6 Spray trucks, all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), and other equipment used for project implementation will not be used in such a way that would increase erosion. Steep or highly erodible slopes will be avoided, and soil disturbance will be minimized. Number Air Quality AQ-1 Fire managers would cooperate with other Federal, State and local regulatory agencies to protect air quality as required by the Clean Air Act and State and local regulations.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Resource Design Feature AQ-2 Fire Treatments a) To reduce smoke emissions or minimize smoke impacts, land managers are required to implement as many Best Management Practices (BMPs) as are feasible for their burn projects (ADEQ Instruction Guide for Completing the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality ADEQ Burn Plan Form). b) Basic smoke management practices (BSMPs) applied on prescribed fire can mitigate the impacts of smoke to public health, public safety and nuisance, and visibility. The USDA Forest Service and Natural Resources Conservation Service have created a Technical Note that outlines a suite of basic smoke management practice options that a fire manager can use to reduce the impacts of smoke from prescribed fires (USDA Forest Service and Natural Resource Conservation Service 2011). c) The publication “Smoke Management Guide for Prescribed and Wildland Fire” (PMS 420-2) provides more information on managing smoke and is available on the NWCG Web site at http://www.nwcg.gov/publications. d) Notify potentially affected communities, other agencies, fire departments, etc., in advance of and during the burn activities. Number Caves and Mines CM-1 Design criteria for caves and mines will be determined on a site-by-site basis. Efforts will be made to preserve vegetation around cave entrances. Fuel reduction buffer areas may be desirable to protect such vegetation. Number Cultural Resources CR-1 Any areas of intensive ground disturbance will receive 100% survey, including but not limited to: - intensive mechanical treatments (including mastication and grubbing) - hand and mechanical fire line construction - staging areas, constructed safety zones - water bars and other constructed erosion control features - other actions such as constructing fuelbreaks CR-2 Prescribed burns - At a minimum, surveys for prescribed burn areas would include survey of locations likely to contain additional fire-sensitive sites, based on pre-field research, expected fire behavior, and other relevant data. Additional survey may be conducted at the Forest Archaeologist’s discretion. The survey strategy shall identify the types of sites that are considered fire-sensitive for each fuels reduction project, using the guidelines below. This should include both known fire-sensitive sites and other sites considered fire-sensitive for the specific area, based on fuel loading, site characteristics, and expected fire behavior. If existing inventories and reconnaissance of the project area do not indicate the presence or likelihood of fire-sensitive properties, survey strategy may be determined by the Forest Archaeologist without prior consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). CR-3 Hand thinning units - Areas where any activity using mechanized equipment is planned would be 100% surveyed. Units where only hand thinning is planned, with no use of mechanized equipment and no follow-up prescribed burning, may or may not be surveyed at the discretion of the Forest Archaeologist without prior State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) consultation.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Resource Design Feature CR-4 Fuelwood sales - Projects that affect 640 acres or less will be surveyed 100%. Projects that exceed 640 acres in size will be surveyed using a two-stage process. The initial survey stage will consist of surveying linear transects at ¼ mile intervals and all roadways that will be improved. Based upon a review of the data gathered in the initial survey stage, the Forest Archeologist may require a second stage of survey consisting of block survey of areas with a high probability of sites. CR-5 Identifying fire-sensitive sites: Archaeologists would use site assessment and monitoring data, and would consult with fire management staff, to identify known and other project-specific fire-sensitive sites for individual project areas, and to ensure that fire personnel are appropriately qualified and briefed on cultural resource fire management guidelines, or are supervised by a qualified cultural resource advisor. Fire-sensitive sites include sites with organic (combustible) elements and rock-art sites. Other sites may be fire-sensitive depending on the severity of the fire (e.g. buried cultural deposits). Fire-sensitive sites officially determined ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places (in consultation with the SHPO) do not require protection under Section 106. Of the known fire-sensitive site types, only historic sites with wooden elements and rock art sites have been identified within the project area. CR-6 Treatment actions within or adjacent to site boundaries: Various combinations of the following protection measures may be approved by the Forest Archaeologist to protect sites within wildland-urban interface and other large-scale hazardous fuels reduction projects without additional SHPO consultation. The Forest Archaeologist may approve additional measures to further protect sites; however, if a lesser level of protection is recommended, or if it is likely that adverse effects cannot be avoided, the agency shall consult with the SHPO on a case-by-case basis. CR-7 Prescribed Burning • To protect fire-sensitive sites, the following mitigation measures will be used to remove or buffer sites from the fire: Hand line, Black line, Wet line, Foam retardant, Structural fire shelter • Remove heavy fuels from site by hand • Prevent ignition of in-situ heavy fuels that cannot be removed (e.g., flush-cut & bury stumps) • Implement same protective measures for future maintenance burns Prescribed burning may be allowed on non-sensitive sites. CR-8 Protect selected other sites (option) • Allow burning over sites without fire sensitive features or materials: • No slash piles within site boundaries • No ignition points within site boundaries • No staging of equipment within site boundaries • Allow construction of safety zones and additional lines in 100% surveyed areas, with archaeological monitoring to assure recorded sites are avoided Conduct post-fire monitoring (in accordance with inventory report). CR-9 Hand thinning and Mechanical Treatments - No hand thinning within site boundaries or allow hand thinning within site boundaries, provided: • Cutting is accomplished using hand tools only • Large-diameter trees are felled away from all features • Thinned material is hand carried outside site boundary • No use of mechanized equipment within site boundaries • No staging of equipment within site boundaries No slash piles within site boundaries.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Resource Design Feature CR-10 Fuelwood Sales - No fuelwood cutting or vehicles within site boundaries, or: • Allow fuelwood cutting within sites, but do not allow vehicles within site boundaries • No dragging of logs, trees, or cut material across or within site boundaries Allow fuelwood cutting in areas of continuous, low-density scatters, with the post-project monitoring and the following recommendations: all features and artifact concentrations are recorded and avoided; use of vehicles are prohibited during wet ground conditions; and periodic monitoring is used to assess impacts and if impacts are noted, fuelwood cutting will be prohibited in the area. CR-11 Newly Discovered Sites - When previously unidentified cultural resources are discovered, or unanticipated detrimental impacts occur, all work would cease in the immediate vicinity and the appropriate cultural resource specialist would be notified to evaluate the find, and the procedures in Section VI of the Programmatic Agreement will be followed, including additional SHPO and Tribal consultation as necessary. CR-12 Chipping – a chipper should not be placed within or immediately adjacent to a historic property or archaeologically sensitive sites. Spreading chips back across the site cannot cause ground disturbance. CR-13 Lop and Scatter – Lop and scatter using hand techniques is not considered ground disturbing provided no piling of downed material occurs. If mechanized equipment is used, the project area will require 100% survey CR-14 Mastication/Grubbing – Sites would be avoided during any mastication activities. CR-15 Pile burning – Pile burning would not be allowed within an historic property or archaeologically sensitive site boundaries. CR-16 Prune and Hand-removal, thin by hand – These methods would be allowable within site boundaries, as long as materials are not piled (i.e. scattered across the landscape). Tribal Notification - Prior to project-specific implementation, all applicable NEPA and 36 CFR Consultation 800 regulations regarding scoping and tribal consultation would be followed. In addition, Tribes would be notified of activities that may affect traditional practices, such as the gathering of agave, beargrass or yucca. Number Herbicide H-1 Special precautions will be taken to minimize impacts to special status species, including a site evaluation of each project site for listed, proposed and sensitive species prior to vegetation treatment activities. H-2 Heavy equipment will not be used within 30 feet of any live stream bank. Handheld equipment will be used within this zone. H-3 All applicable state and federal laws, including herbicide label requirements will be followed. H-4 Projects will be supervised by a Forest Service Certified applicator who will be responsible for insuring safe handling, application and disposal of herbicides. H-5 Herbicides will be applied only by ground-based equipment, including hand painting or daubing, backpack sprayers, and spray units on ATV’s or trucks. In areas with sensitive vegetation, spot application will be used to treat individual plants while protecting desired vegetation. Spot application may require that the site be revisited many times to treat plants that were missed or have grown since the previous application, making this method less effective than broadcast treatments. Spot application is not a good choice for all sites and situations, but can be useful when sensitive vegetation is present. H-6 Picloram will not be used where the water table is within 40 inches of the surface; where soil permeability would be conducive to water contamination. H-7 Only herbicides labeled for aquatic use (i.e. Rodeo (glyphosate) Renovate (triclopyr) and Weedar 64 (2,4-D amine) will be used within 30 feet of streams and other bodies of water. H-8 Persons involved in mixing, loading and applying herbicides will be required to wear appropriate personal protective equipment as required on the label.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Resource Design Feature H-9 Areas used for mixing herbicides and cleaning equipment shall be located where spillage will not run into surface waters or result in ground water contamination. H-10 All requirements in a Safety and Spill Plan will be followed. H-11 Treatment areas will be signed to alert the public of the herbicide application. Number Nonnative Invasive Plants NIP-1 Fire Planning a) Increase invasive species awareness and invasive species prevention during project planning. Note that fires can increase soil nitrogen, decrease shade, and decrease competition from desirable plants – all conditions that favor invasive species invasion. b) Provide invasive species identification aids. c) For prescribed burns, inventory the project area and evaluate potential invasive species spread with regard to the fire prescription. Areas with moderate to high invasive species cover should be managed for at least two years prior to the prescribed burn to reduce the number of invasive species seeds in the soil. Vigilant invasive species management will be necessary after the burn. d) Ensure that an invasive species specialist is consulted during project planning in or near an infested area. e) Use operational practices to reduce invasive species spread. Avoid invasive species infestations when locating base camps, helibases, and staging areas and maintain them in an invasive species-free condition. NIP-2 Fire Implementation a) Ensure that all equipment has been thoroughly cleaned and is free of invasive species seed and propagules. b) Designate equipment-cleaning sites. Inspect and treat invasive species that establish at equipment-cleaning sites after fires. c) When possible, use tactics that reduce disturbances to soil and vegetation. d) Avoid moving water buckets from aquatic-invasive species-infested waters to waters that are not infested. There is no hazard in using water infested with aquatic invasive species on terrestrial sites. e) Given a choice of tactics, avoid ignition and burning in areas at high risk for invasive species establishment or spread. NIP-3 Fire Rehabilitation a) To prevent invasive species spread, treat invasive species in burned areas. Invasive species can recover as quickly as two weeks following a fire. b) Invasive species-free or relatively invasive species-free burned areas should be monitored for invasive species the following growing season. c) Determine soon after a fire whether revegetation is needed to speed recovery of a competitive plant community, or whether desirable plants in the burned area will recover naturally. Consider the severity of the burn and the proportion of invasive species to desirable plants on the land before it burned. In general, more severe burns and higher pre-burn invasive species cover increase the necessity of revegetation. Consider revegetating an area if the desired plant cover is only 20 to 30%. Use certified invasive species-free seed mixes. d) Monitor, document, and treat invasive species at fire access roads, cleaning sites, fire lines, staging areas, and within burned areas.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Resource Design Feature Number Range RA-1 Coordination with Grazing Permittees - To ensure success of burning operations, it is imperative to coordinate plans with the affected grazing permittees. Areas to be burned must either receive sufficient growing season rest prior to the burning period or be grazed at a conservative enough level to ensure fine fuels are present to carry the fire. Prior to re-stocking, burned areas must receive sufficient growing season rest to ensure plant recovery and soil protection. To determine if the range is ready to be stocked, an inspection will be done collaboratively between the grazing permittee and range management personnel. RA-2 Infrastructure Compensation - Management burns must provide for protection or replacement of range infrastructure (e.g., fences, pipelines, water storage, etc.). Costs of replacement must be considered and planned for up front. RA-3 Prior to treatments; a site-specific evaluation is undertaken to determine the risk of loss, cost effectiveness of the improvement, and the cost of replacement for individual improvements. Number Riparian, Aquatic, and Wetland Areas RAW-1 Important aquatic habitat, including all seeps, springs, streams, ponds, stock tanks, washes, and drainages will be evaluated by resource specialists (i.e., Biologists and Hydrologists), to determine the best way(s) to mitigate the effects of the treatment and preserve the functionality and integrity of the aquatic system. RAW-2 To the extent possible, large, downed woody materials and snags that are not a hazard to firefighters would be retained. Large logs (12 inches diameter and greater and 8 feet or more long) should not be cut into sections. RAW-3 Retain all age classes of riparian species (defined in FSM 2526, Riparian Watershed Management) and madrone. RAW-4 In riparian areas, only use existing features and natural barriers to manage prescribed fire. RAW-5 Site-specific implementation plans (e.g., Coronado National Forest Fire Management Plan) that include management areas with federally listed aquatic or riparian-obligate species would specify fire management objectives and prescribed burning guidance, taking into account the special concerns related to these species. RAW-6 In riparian areas, natural barriers, openings in riparian vegetation, or topographic features would be used where possible as the easiest, safest method to manage prescribed fire. RAW-7 Avoid use of heavy mechanical equipment in wet riparian drainages or on wet upland soils if rutting greater than 3 inches (8 cm) is occurring. RAW-8 The use of fire retardants or chemical foams in riparian habitats or within 300 feet of aquatic habitats would be avoided; particularly sites occupied by federally listed species. Retardant Avoidance Zones will be followed. RAW-9 Placement of prescribed fire support sites (e.g., staging areas and refueling sites) would be outside riparian areas or river/stream corridors and will utilize spill containment systems to minimize impacts. RAW-10 If water is drafted from a stock tank or other body of water for prescribed fire activities, it shall not be refilled with water from another tank, lake, or other water source that may support non-native fishes, bullfrogs, crayfish, or salamanders. Only water drawn from a municipal water supply or well water shall be used to refill stock tanks. Use of containment systems for portable pumps to avoid fuel spills in riparian or aquatic systems would be required. Number Recreation

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Resource Design Feature RE-1 Notification – Keep the public informed on project activity prior to (preferably 2 weeks) and during implementation. This should generally include posting warning signs and project information in developed sites and along trails, putting announcements on the CNF website, Coronado Outdoors website, and writing a news release for media publication. RE-2 Rehabilitation of recreation infrastructure - Trail treads, roads, or facilities would be rehabilitated to pre-existing condition or better if damaged during project operations. RE-3 Treatments within Developed Sites - Vegetation treatments within developed sites would be coordinated with local recreation/facility staff and managers to protect developments and lessen impacts to visitors’ ability to use sites. Developed sites will be temporarily closed for visitor protection. RE-4 Slash Disposal - All slash and materials resulting from treatments within 300 feet of recreation facilities and trails, should be treated as soon as conditions permit. RE-5 Timing of Activities - Project activities that occur within or adjacent to developed sites, dispersed sites, or trails would be conducted outside the major use season whenever possible, with the understanding that most facilities are open year round. Portions of sites and trails may be temporarily closed for visitor protection. RE-6 Trails should not be used for skid trails. Skid trails crossings should be signed, designated and coordinated with district recreation staff. When using trails for handlines or control features treatment should be feathered on both sides of trail. RE-7 Remove all staged supplies and equipment after implementation; avoid leaving any evidence of human activity in wilderness. RE-8 Clear brush around anodized aluminum plate trail signs, wooden trail signs, colored kiosk signs, wilderness boundary carsonite and wooden signs, developed recreation structures (e.g. restrooms, fee tubes) and communication sites. RE-9 Rehabilitate all constructed handlines and safety zones to pre-implementation condition at the completion of the burn. RE-10 Where possible, while implementing proposed treatments, make improvements within recreation sites and along trails. Examples include cleaning up logs and debris from past projects, removing hazards trees surrounding developed sites, and cutting existing stumps to less than six inches. RE-11 Hand thinning and burning treatments should avoid removing visual screening for developed and dispersed recreation sites. RE-12 When possible, in the immediate vicinity of developed campgrounds, cut downed trees into fuelwood lengths for on-site use. RE-13 Use Basic Smoke Management Practices to mitigate the impacts of smoke to public health, public safety and nuisance, and visibility. RE-14 When implementing fire treatments in wilderness, use Minimum Impact Suppression Tactics to preserve wilderness values to the greatest extent feasible. RE-15 When possible, minimize project activity on weekends and holidays and during seasons of high use, especially near high-use trails and recreation sites.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Resource Design Feature Number Scenery S-1 Vegetation management projects should mimic natural vegetation patterns, design treatment boundaries to blend with surrounding landscape, avoid even spacing of retained trees, leave a diversity of tree species and sizes, avoid damage to vegetation that will remain, avoid removing or burning vegetation that screens unsightly facilities, and naturalize disturbed areas. S-2 Prescribed slash treatment in the immediate foreground (up to 300 feet) of concern level 1 and 2 travelways should be completed as soon as conditions permit. S-3 Healthy large trees should be favored as a larger proportion of the immediate foreground along concern level 1 and 2 travelways, unless doing so would not achieve project goals. S-4 In the immediate foreground along concern level 1 and 2 travelways, trees should be marked in a manner that minimizes long-term visual effects and stumps should be treated to reduce their visibility by methods such as cutting as low as possible (no more than 6 inches above ground on uphill side) and angling large stump faces away from viewing locations unless doing so would pose a safety hazard. S-5 Log decks should be removed, and actions should be taken to naturalize disturbed areas such as skid trails landings, and temporary roads as soon as conditions permit. If trails are used as skid trails or haul roads, trail should be cleaned up and rehabilitated. S-6 Effects from prescribed fire should be considered during project planning and implementation. Blackened and scorched vegetation may be visible in project areas in the short term following treatments, but scenic integrity objectives should be met in the long term, though blackened trunks may remain visible. S-7 Consider the use of interpretive signs at the site of vegetation treatments and natural disturbances to inform the public about the nature and consequences of such projects or events. Number Soil and Water SW-1 Herbicide applications will be scheduled and designed to minimize potential effects on water quality, soil fertility, and non-target plants, while remaining consistent with the objectives of the treatment. SW-2 Utilize methods to minimize ground disturbance during mechanized treatments, including planning mechanical equipment travel paths and planning grubbing methods to keep ground disturbance to the minimum needed to accomplish treatment objectives. SW-3 Do not conduct treatments involving heavy mechanical equipment in wet areas including riparian areas and springs or during wet conditions such as after a rain event, to prevent soil and hydrologic resource damage. SW-4 Locate and construct fireline in a manner that minimizes erosion and runoff from directly entering waterbodies by considering site slope and soil conditions, and using and maintaining suitable water and erosion control measures. Rehabilitate or otherwise stabilize fireline in areas that pose a risk to water quality SW-5 Locate slash piles in areas where the potential for soil effects is lessened and that do not interfere with natural drainage patterns. SW-6 Alter prescribed fire prescriptions and control actions in drainages as needed to maintain ecosystem structure, function, and processes and onsite and downstream water quality. Pretreat drainages as needed to reduce fuel loading. SW-7 Sufficient groundcover would be retained to prevent erosion of the burned site. SW-8 Evaluate the completed burn to identify sites that may need stabilization treatments or monitoring to minimize soil and site productivity loss and deterioration of water quality both on and off the site.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Resource Design Feature SW-9 For herbicide use near waterbodies, determine the width of a buffer zone based on a review of the project area, characteristics of the chemical to be used, and application method. Flag or otherwise mark or identify buffer zones as needed. Clearly communicate to those applying herbicides what areas are to be avoided or where alternative treatments are to be used. SW-10 Consider soil type, herbicide mobility, distance to surface water, and depth to groundwater to avoid or minimize surface water and groundwater contamination. SW-11 Use a suitable pressure, nozzle size, and nozzle type combination to minimize off-target herbicide drift or droplet splatter. SW-12 Evaluate weather conditions before beginning herbicide application and monitor throughout each day to avoid or minimize chemical drift. Apply herbicides only under favorable weather conditions as identified in the label instructions. Avoid applying herbicides before forecasted storm events to limit runoff and ensure the chemical reaches intended targets. SW-13 Apply soil protective cover on areas disturbed through mechanical vegetation treatments where natural vegetation is inadequate to prevent accelerated erosion before the next growing season. SW-14 Avoid ground equipment on unstable, wet, or easily compacted soils and on steep slopes. SW-15 Conduct piling of slash in such a manner to leave topsoil in place and to avoid displacing soil into piles. SW-16 Prior to implementation on limestone soils, the forest soil staff should be consulted to ensure that treatment does not cause erosion, inhibit vegetation establishment, or degrade unique communities associated with limestone soils. Number Vegetation and Fuels VF-1 Fuelwood Harvest – To provide for the public, reduce fuel loading, and improve forest health, those areas thinned within 300 feet from the centerline of roads would be analyzed for fuelwood cutting and collection. Additional areas would be analyzed for fuelwood cutting and collection, pending suitability and assessment from other specialist areas. VF-2 Hand Thinning/Mechanical Treatments – Hand thinning activities in forest and woodlands will be conducted under a detailed silvicultural prescription following the general silvicultural prescriptions in the vegetation specialist report. The detailed prescription will be tailored to adjust current conditions toward the Desired Conditions over time. VF-3 Prescribed Burning – For burns designed to reduce encroachment of woody species into grassy areas, plans and prescriptions would also address maintenance of native, perennial grasses and reducing the spread of invasive exotics. VF-4 Pile Burning – Piles generated from thinning will be constructed in locations without an overstory canopy to mitigate damage to larger trees’ crowns. VF-5 Slash Treatment – Where necessary, in hand thinning/mechanical treatment units proposed for prescribed burning, activity slash would be pulled out from around leave trees to minimize damage. Number Wildlife, Fish and Plants WFP-1 Activities occurring within federally listed species habitat will apply habitat management objectives and species protection measures from approved recovery plans. WFP-2 Where the Forest Service has entered into signed conservation agreements that provide guidance on activities or actions to be carried out by Forest Service staff, those activities or actions should be consistent with the guidance found within those conservation agreements.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Resource Design Feature WFP-3 Resource specialists would be consulted regarding all treatment activities. They would also be responsible for coordination with the agencies on federally listed and other sensitive species. They would monitor fire and vegetation management activities to ensure the protective measures are implemented. WFP-4 Resource specialists should coordinate site-specific burn and treatment implementation plans with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Arizona Game and Fish Department to identify site-specific measures to protect federally listed and sensitive species, and species of concern. WFP-5 Implementation activities in habitats of threatened, endangered, sensitive species, and/or species of concern will include oversight or coordination with wildlife staff. Coordination may include training of crews in: the identification of sensitive species; avoidance of impacts to sensitive species (e.g., identification and avoidance of wildlife use/habitat elements, such as nests, cavities, and woodpecker foraging holes); notification of the appropriate agencies (i.e., AGFD or USFWS) if a sensitive, threatened, or endangered species is encountered; and that individuals must not be picked up or removed without a permit. WFP-6 Retention of cavity bearing live trees, snags and or decedent trees will be part of the burn prescription based on input from the resource specialists. WFP-7 Retention areas will emphasize hiding, escape, bedding and thermal cover around feeding and watering areas, in drainages, and along roads. WFP-8 Minimize mechanical disturbance of soils to reduce the impact of habitat manipulation on small mammal and reptile communities. WFP-9 Within a calendar year, consider the spatial scale of treatments relative to distribution of individual species of concern (e.g., the proportion of habitat treated) in the planning area when implementing project(s). WFP-10 The spatial distribution and contiguous size of planned burn/treatment areas will be considered in order to reduce the effects of peak flow change on stream channels. WFP-11 Treatment activities should avoid agave and any known sensitive plant populations. WFP-12 Areas of increased human activity during prescribed fire activities, such as equipment staging areas, shall not be located on or adjacent to sites known to be occupied by threatened or endangered species. WFP-13 Where possible, islands of vegetation in various shapes and sizes would be left in random distribution patterns, providing a natural characteristic vegetative appearance, while meeting project objectives. Mexican Spotted Owl WFP-14 Survey PACs for occupancy and determine location of nest tree/delineate core area prior to implementing treatments within areas potentially occupied by MSO. WFP-15 For treatments within PACs and/or MSO Critical Habitat, follow guidelines detailed in the current MSO Recovery Plan. WFP-16 Prescribed fire (preferably low to moderate-intensity) would be used to maintain and enhance MSO habitat inside and outside of PACs by varying the management prescriptions to: a) Reproduce natural disturbance patterns. b) Maintain native vegetation in the landscape, including early seral species. c) Allow natural gap processes to occur, thus producing horizontal variation in stand structure. d) Promote the growth of additional large oaks and pines by thinning out understory vegetation through the use of moderate-intensity burning and by pretreating large trees (ringing, foam, limbing). e) Reduce fuels to promote future low to moderate-intensity fire in PACs and adjacent areas.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Resource Design Feature Yellow-billed Cuckoo WFP-17 Planned treatments will not occur within ½ mile of potential habitat (cottonwood mixed vegetation type) during the breeding season (June 15 – September 30). WFP-18 Prescribed burning would only be allowed within ½ mile of potential habitat when weather conditions allow smoke to disperse away from potential habitat during the breeding season (June 15 – September 30). Jaguar and Ocelot WFP-19 All treatments planned within pine-oak woodland and oak savanna habitat types will be coordinated with USFWS prior to implementation to determine if configuration and intensity of treatments will impact known jaguar or ocelot behavior. If most recent data suggests that planned treatments may impact jaguar or ocelot behavior, alternate treatment blocks may be selected. Bats WFP-20 Identified bat roosts should be protected from disturbance during periods of bat occupancy. During non-occupancy periods, activities should not modify biophysical features that contribute to roost habitat quality or contribute to the spread of diseases harmful to bats unless unavoidable in order to meet statutory requirements, such as mining law or laws to protect public health and safety.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Appendix B – Maps Please note that the maps provided in this publication have been generated for the use in displaying project information only. The USDA Forest Service uses the most current and complete data available. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data and product accuracy may vary. Using GIS products for purposes other than those for which they were intended may yield inaccurate or misleading results. The USDA Forest Service reserves the right to correct, update, modify, or replace GIS products without notification. Maps in this document are not a legal land line or ownership document. Public lands are subject to change and leasing, and may have access restrictions; check with local offices. Obtain permission before entering private land.

Treatment units displayed are described in table 1.

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

59 Map 1. Treatment units in the Chiricahua FireScape project area

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

60 Map 2. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Bruno unit

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

61 Map 3. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Cave Creek unit

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 4. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Cochise Head unit 62

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 5. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Jackwood unit 63

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 6. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for John Long unit 64

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 7. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Limestone unit 65

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 8. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Onion unit 66

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 9. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Packsaddle unit 67

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 10. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Pine Canyon unit 68

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 11. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Pinery unit 69

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 12. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Price Canyon unit 70

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 13. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Rough Mountain unit 71

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 14. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Rucker unit 72

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 15. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Rustler Park unit 73

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 16. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Silver Peak unit 74

Chiricahua FireScape DRAFT Environmental Assessment

Map 17. Chiricahua FireScape treatments for Turkey Creek unit 75