DOCSLIB.ORG

DECISION NOTICE and FINDING of NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DECISION NOTICE and FINDING of NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT DECISION NOTICE and FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Upland Island Wilderness Fire Management Initiative USDA ,Forest Service Angelina National 'Forest Angelina and Jasper Counties, Texas November 2009 Decision and Reasons for Decision Based upon my review of the proposal, the analysis deseribed in the environmental assessment (EA), public comments, and the project record, I have decided to select Alternative 2, the proposed action, and its associated design criteria for the Upland Island Wilderness Fire Management Initiative. Alternative 2 proposes the least amount of impact to Wilderness Character while still meeting the Purpose and Need of the Proposed Aetion. Alternative 2 provides for the following acti vities: 1. Conduct prescribed burns on approximately 11,990 acres in LJpland Island Wilderness to reduce hazardous fuels. Conduct prescribed burns on approximately 990 of adjacent private property, state lands, and national forest lands for an approximate total of 12,980 acres. The proposed action includes approximately 1,260 acres in a No Burn Area in the vicinity of Graham and Cypress Creeks inside UIW (see Appendix AA.l, Alternative 2). 3. Construct approximately 16.4 miles of fire control lines on the exterior of UIW. These lines will be located on private lands adjacent to UIW. These lines will use existing control lines where they exist on adjacent private property, and be established with mechanical tools (e.g., bulldozer) or hand tools on private property with permission from the land owners. 4. In addition, this proposal includes 14.4 miles of interior control lines within UIW. Approximately 6.3 miles of interior control lines would be established using hand tools on abandoned roads that accessed the area prior to the establishment of the wilderness in 1984. No hand line would be constructed on previously undisturbed surfaces inside UIW. However, there are approximately 4.7 miles of creeks or naturally wet fuel breaks that would be used as control lines where the minimum required hand clearing may be necessary to eliminate fuel bridges. In addition, approximately miles of existing roads on non-wilderness lands would be used as fire breaks to separate burn units or burn blocks. Design Criteria Associated with Alternative 2 In addition to the applicable standards from the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the National Forests and Grasslands in Texas (the Plan), the design criteria described below, as well as monitoring detailed on 21-22 of the EA, are part of my decision. 1. Wet sites, such as bogs and seepage zones would be identified and protected (the Plan p. 83 and 152). No equipment would be allowed in these areas and no stream crossings will be designated in these areas. Measures to prevent or reduce siltation problems at stream crossings to protect aquatic habitat for the aquatic species will be used. Stream crossings would be kept to a minimum to prevent disturbances within mesic habitats to sensitive flora and fauna. 3. If previously undiscovered archaeological or historical resources are encountered during the implementation of this project, work in that area would cease immediately until the resources can be assessed and evaluated by a member of the Heritage Management Team, and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has been afforded the opportunity to review the findings. The site area would be excluded from all treatments until this review can be completed. Known archaeological and historical sites which are considered eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and those which have not been fully evaluated in order to determine their eligibility for the NRHP, would be removed from the area of potential effect by adjusting the appropriate boundaries of the proposed actions. 4. If previously undocumented RCW activity is discovered during implementation of this project, the project would be stopped. The district wildlife biologist would evaluate the situation and determine appropriate management actions to take that would be consistent with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service guidelines. 5. Prescribed fire would only be applied under an approved burning plan to meet specific resource objectives, and under the supervision of a qualified burning boss. The burning plan would plot the trajectory of the smoke plume, identify smoke-sensitive areas, predict fire behavior, and set parameters for burning conditions to minimize risk of resource damage or fire escape. Burns would be conducted within weather and fucl moisture parameters established for the NFGT. 6. Notify the Forest Supervisor's Office, Texas Forest Service, County Sheriff's Office, Volunteer Fire Departments, and adjacent landowners prior to ignition of any prescribed burn. 7. A void placement of hand-lines on soils occurring on slopes greater than 15% to decrease long-term soil loss. Reasons for the Decision DNIFONSI 2 Upland Island Wilderness Fire Management Initiative- November 2009 My decision to implement Alternative 2 is based on its effectiveness to reduce hazardous fuels in UIW, to protect human life and adjacent private property, to increase the safety of wildland firefighters who would have to respond to wildfires within UIW, and to protect the ecosystems in UIW from possible wildfire conflagrations or high severity fires. This project will reduce the hazardous fuels that have developed in UIW as a result of fire suppression during the last 25 years since it was designated as wilderness. It will also result in a wider range of options for responding to unplanned ignitions in the wilderness. I considered the need to take action and the issues identified during scoping in making my decision. I weighed the effects of prescribed burning, constructing firelines, and protecting human life and private property, and the key issues associated with the project, against taking no action. I am not willing to accept the potential effects on human life and private property associated with Alternative 1 - No action or Alternatives 3 and 5 which do not propose the use of a helicopter for lighting interior fire lines. The Proposed Action would have acceptable effects on the environmental components and provide the benefits of reducing hazardous fuels and increasing the safety of wildland firefighters. I have considered the best available science in making this decision. The project record demonstrates a thorough review of relevant scientific information, consideration of responsible opposing views, and the acknowledgment of incomplete or unavailable information, scientific uncertainty, and risk. I considered the need to take action and the issues identified during scoping in making my decision. I weighed the effects of thinning, road improvements, prescribed burning, NNIPS control, and erosion control work on the vegetation, soil and water, air, wildlife, and recreational use of the area, and the key issues associated with the project, against taking no action. I am not willing to accept the potential effects associated with the no action alternative. The Selected Alternative will have acceptable effects on the environmental components and provide the benefits of reducing fuel loadings and SPB hazard. I have considered the effect of this project on climate change, as well as the effect of climate change on this project. Any resulting greenhouse gas emission would not be measurable on a global scale. Other Alternatives Considered The following alternatives were considered in detail. They are fully described on pages 14-19 of the EA and a description summary in table form is also given on pages 19-20 in the EA. Alternative 1- No Action. This alternative was not selected because: 1. It does not meet the purpose and need and is not supported by the analysis contained within the EA. Alternative 2 - Proposed Alternative This alternative will be implemented. See above discussion regarding my decision to implement Alternative 2. DN/FONSI - 3 Upland Island Wilderness Fire Management Initiative- November 2009 Alternative 3 This alternative was not selected because: 1. It would construct over 44 miles of interior firelines. 2. It would not provide the safety of firefighters since it excludes using the helicopter to light interior fire lines. 3. The magnitude and duration of the proposed activities would adversely affect Wilderness Character. Alternative 4 This alternative was not selected because: 1. It does not meet the purpose and need. Hazardous fuel reduction would only occur on 6,610 acres within Cpland Island Wilderness. Alternative 5 This alternative was not selected because: 1. It does not meet the purpose and need. Hazardous fuel reduction would only occur on 6,610 acres within C pI and Island Wilderness. 2. It would construct over 30 miles of interior fireline. 3. It would not provide for the safety of firefighters since it excludes using the helicopter to light interior fire lines. 4. The magnitude and duration of the proposed activities would adversely affect Wilderness Character. Public Involvement This project was developed with input received through several public collaboration efforts including a Limits of Acceptable Change analysis for Cpland Island Wilderness that was completed in 1994, the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan (1996), and a collaborative meeting concerning this proposal held on March 7,2007 at Zavalla City Hall that included a field trip to UIW. Presentations were made to Sierra Club chapters on May 1, 2007 in Beaumont and on August 8, 2007 in Houston. A Minimum Requirements
Load more

Recommended publications
  • VGP) Version 2/5/2009
    Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) VESSEL GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OPERATION OF VESSELS (VGP) AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), any owner or operator of a vessel being operated in a capacity as a means of transportation who: • Is eligible for permit coverage under Part 1.2; • If required by Part 1.5.1, submits a complete and accurate Notice of Intent (NOI) is authorized to discharge in accordance with the requirements of this permit. General effluent limits for all eligible vessels are given in Part 2. Further vessel class or type specific requirements are given in Part 5 for select vessels and apply in addition to any general effluent limits in Part 2. Specific requirements that apply in individual States and Indian Country Lands are found in Part 6. Definitions of permit-specific terms used in this permit are provided in Appendix A. This permit becomes effective on December 19, 2008 for all jurisdictions except Alaska and Hawaii. This permit and the authorization to discharge expire at midnight, December 19, 2013 i Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 William K. Honker, Acting Director Robert W. Varney, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1 6 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, Barbara A.
    [Show full text]
  • Consumer Plannlng Section Comprehensive Plannlng Branch
    Consumer Plannlng Section Comprehensive Plannlng Branch, Parks Division Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Austin, Texas Texans Outdoors: An Analysis of 1985 Participation in Outdoor Recreation Activities By Kathryn N. Nichols and Andrew P. Goldbloom Under the Direction of James A. Deloney November, 1989 Comprehensive Planning Branch, Parks Division Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, Texas 78744 (512) 389-4900 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Conducting a mail survey requires accuracy and timeliness in every single task. Each individualized survey had to be accounted for, both going out and coming back. Each mailing had to meet a strict deadline. The authors are indebted to all the people who worked on this project. The staff of the Comprehensive Planning Branch, Parks Division, deserve special thanks. This dedicated crew signed letters, mailed, remailed, coded, and entered the data of a twenty-page questionnaire that was sent to over twenty-five thousand Texans with over twelve thousand returned completed. Many other Parks Division staff outside the branch volunteered to assist with stuffing and labeling thousands of envelopes as deadlines drew near. We thank the staff of the Information Services Section for their cooperation in providing individualized letters and labels for survey mailings. We also appreciate the dedication of the staff in the mailroom for processing up­ wards of seventy-five thousand pieces of mail. Lastly, we thank the staff in the print shop for their courteous assistance in reproducing the various documents. Although the above are gratefully acknowledged, they are absolved from any responsibility for any errors or omissions that may have occurred. ii TEXANS OUTDOORS: AN ANALYSIS OF 1985 PARTICIPATION IN OUTDOOR RECREATION ACTIVITIES TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Unger, Daniel R
    DANIEL ROBERT UNGER 348 County Road 2054 Nacogdoches, Texas 75965 Office: 936-468-2234 Cell: 936-553-4875 E-mail: [email protected] Education University of Idaho Doctor of Philosophy in Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sciences; Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Systems emphasis. May, 1995. Dissertation titled, “Evaluation of GIS Methods for Mapping Relative Temperature Zones in Forest Ecosystems”. The Pennsylvania State University Master of Science in Forest Resources; Forest Biometrics emphasis. December, 1991. Thesis titled, “A Test of the Mean Distance Method for Forest Regeneration Assessment”. Purdue University Bachelor of Science in Forestry; Forest Management option. May, 1989. Purdue University Bachelor of Science in General Management; Marketing option. May, 1982. Academic Work Experience Assistant Professor/Associate Professor/Professor/Kenneth Nelson Distinguished Professor of Geospatial Science Arthur Temple College of Forestry and Agriculture, Stephen F. Austin State University August 1998 – Present Instruction in the quantitative and qualitative analysis of natural resources via the disciplines of remote sensing and GIS. Research involving practical applications of remote sensing and GIS technology involved with inventorying, mapping, monitoring and managing natural resources. Adjunct Associate Professor of Natural Resources Measurements Department of Forestry, Southern Illinois University August 1998 – July 2000 Direct graduate students, serve on departmental committees, review research proposals and scientific manuscripts involving the spatial analysis of natural resources. Assistant Professor of Natural Resources Measurements Department of Forestry, Southern Illinois University September 1995 – August 1998 Instruction in the quantitative and qualitative analysis of natural resources via the disciplines of mensuration, biometrics and remote sensing. Research involving practical applications of remote sensing and GIS technology involved with inventorying, mapping, monitoring and managing natural resources.
    [Show full text]
  • National Forests & Grasslands in Texas
    Cooperative Wildlife Management Areas Designated trails (in miles) (USFS/Texas Parks and Wildlife Department) Multi-use Angelina National Forest Ranger Multi-use Mountain NATIONAL FORESTS & Hiking non- District Motorized Bike Bannister 25,658 acres motorized Davy Crockett National Forest Angelina 2.7 GRASSLANDS IN TEXAS Davy Alabama Creek 14,561 acres Crockett 22 52 Sabine National Forest FINGERTIP FACTS Sabine 1 Moore Plantation 26,455 acres FOREST SUPERVISOR – Eddie Taylor Sam Houston 120 85 20 Caddo National Grassland Caddo/LBJ 0 92 4 Caddo 16,150 acres TOTALS 147.7 144 85 24 Sam Houston National Forest THE ORGANIZATION: Four National Forests and two National Grasslands comprising 675,816 Sam Houston 162,984 acres acres in 15 counties make up the National Minerals Forests & Grasslands in Texas. Forest Supervisor Permitted wells 299 Wilderness Areas Headquarters is in Lufkin. Approximately 140 Reserved/Outstanding Mineral Acres 203,339 Angelina National Forest employees make up the workforce. 2000 Soil Resource Inventory – Order II: 675,832 acres completed. Turkey Hill 5,473 acres This completes the Order II update for the NFGT. Upland Island 13,331acres Angelina National Forest Established in 1934 Davy Crockett National Forest Ranger District Office in Zavalla Designated miles of roads Big Slough 3,639 acres Acres: 153,334 State County USFS Sabine National Forest Acres per county: Angelina, 58,684; Jasper, 21,023; San Augustine, 64,389; Nacogdoches, 9,238 1,836 1,598 2,394 Indian Mounds 12,369acres Davy Crockett National Forest Sam Houston National Forest Established 1934 Ongoing research projects Little Lake Creek 3,855 acres Ranger District Office in Ratcliff Wildlife (8) & Fisheries (2) 10 Botanical 3 Acres: 160,467 Silvicultural 1 Insects 1 Acres per county: Houston, 93,155; Trinity, 67,312 Archeology 2 Chemical 0 Long-term Soil Productivity 1 TOTAL 18 Sabine National Forest Established 1934 Grazing – 5,000 AUMs graze on 17,438 acres.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Small Vessel General Permit
    ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PUBLIC NOTICE The United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois has requested a determination from the Illinois Department of Natural Resources if their Vessel General Permit (VGP) and Small Vessel General Permit (sVGP) are consistent with the enforceable policies of the Illinois Coastal Management Program (ICMP). VGP regulates discharges incidental to the normal operation of commercial vessels and non-recreational vessels greater than or equal to 79 ft. in length. sVGP regulates discharges incidental to the normal operation of commercial vessels and non- recreational vessels less than 79 ft. in length. VGP and sVGP can be viewed in their entirety at the ICMP web site http://www.dnr.illinois.gov/cmp/Pages/CMPFederalConsistencyRegister.aspx Inquiries concerning this request may be directed to Jim Casey of the Department’s Chicago Office at (312) 793-5947 or [email protected]. You are invited to send written comments regarding this consistency request to the Michael A. Bilandic Building, 160 N. LaSalle Street, Suite S-703, Chicago, Illinois 60601. All comments claiming the proposed actions would not meet federal consistency must cite the state law or laws and how they would be violated. All comments must be received by July 19, 2012. Proposed Small Vessel General Permit (sVGP) United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) SMALL VESSEL GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OPERATION OF VESSELS LESS THAN 79 FEET (sVGP) AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act, as amended (33 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • (USDA) Forest Service Working with Partners for Bird Conservation
    U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service Appendix A Working with Partners for Bird Conservation Bird Conservation Accomplishments Published 2004 This appendix lists the bird conservation accomplishment projects by USDA Forest Service Deputy Areas: National Forest Systems, Research and Development, State and Private and International Programs. This is not a complete set of the many bird conservation actions that have been or are currently being implemented across Forest Service Deputy Areas. It represents bird conservation accomplishment projects from the administrative units that replied at the time of the request. Projects started before fiscal year 2000 that are ongoing or conducted annually (beyond 2002) are reported as “ongoing” or “annually”, with the date of inception included (when known). I. National Forest Systems Region 1 (R-1): Northern Region Regionwide Accomplishments Partnership Enhancement • Partners in Flight (PIF) and Bird Conservation Region (BCR) Plans. Forest Service biologists throughout the Northern Region participated in the development of PIF and BCR plans for Montana, Idaho, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Active participation is ongoing with PIF working groups, BCR coordinators, joint venture meetings, and other activities that promote bird conservation. Partners in these efforts include the American Bird Conservancy (ABC), Montana Fish, Wildlife, & Parks (MFWP), Idaho Department of Fish and Game 1 (Idaho Fish & Game), U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Potlatch Corp., Plum Creek Timber Co., local Audubon Society Chapters, and the Universities of Montana and Idaho. Ongoing since FY1993. • Montana Sage Grouse and Sagebrush Conservation Strategy. The Northern Region participated in the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks-led effort to develop a statewide sage grouse and sagebrush conservation strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • Illustrated Flora of East Texas Illustrated Flora of East Texas
    ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS IS PUBLISHED WITH THE SUPPORT OF: MAJOR BENEFACTORS: DAVID GIBSON AND WILL CRENSHAW DISCOVERY FUND U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION (NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, USDA FOREST SERVICE) TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT SCOTT AND STUART GENTLING BENEFACTORS: NEW DOROTHEA L. LEONHARDT FOUNDATION (ANDREA C. HARKINS) TEMPLE-INLAND FOUNDATION SUMMERLEE FOUNDATION AMON G. CARTER FOUNDATION ROBERT J. O’KENNON PEG & BEN KEITH DORA & GORDON SYLVESTER DAVID & SUE NIVENS NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY OF TEXAS DAVID & MARGARET BAMBERGER GORDON MAY & KAREN WILLIAMSON JACOB & TERESE HERSHEY FOUNDATION INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT: AUSTIN COLLEGE BOTANICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF TEXAS SID RICHARDSON CAREER DEVELOPMENT FUND OF AUSTIN COLLEGE II OTHER CONTRIBUTORS: ALLDREDGE, LINDA & JACK HOLLEMAN, W.B. PETRUS, ELAINE J. BATTERBAE, SUSAN ROBERTS HOLT, JEAN & DUNCAN PRITCHETT, MARY H. BECK, NELL HUBER, MARY MAUD PRICE, DIANE BECKELMAN, SARA HUDSON, JIM & YONIE PRUESS, WARREN W. BENDER, LYNNE HULTMARK, GORDON & SARAH ROACH, ELIZABETH M. & ALLEN BIBB, NATHAN & BETTIE HUSTON, MELIA ROEBUCK, RICK & VICKI BOSWORTH, TONY JACOBS, BONNIE & LOUIS ROGNLIE, GLORIA & ERIC BOTTONE, LAURA BURKS JAMES, ROI & DEANNA ROUSH, LUCY BROWN, LARRY E. JEFFORDS, RUSSELL M. ROWE, BRIAN BRUSER, III, MR. & MRS. HENRY JOHN, SUE & PHIL ROZELL, JIMMY BURT, HELEN W. JONES, MARY LOU SANDLIN, MIKE CAMPBELL, KATHERINE & CHARLES KAHLE, GAIL SANDLIN, MR. & MRS. WILLIAM CARR, WILLIAM R. KARGES, JOANN SATTERWHITE, BEN CLARY, KAREN KEITH, ELIZABETH & ERIC SCHOENFELD, CARL COCHRAN, JOYCE LANEY, ELEANOR W. SCHULTZE, BETTY DAHLBERG, WALTER G. LAUGHLIN, DR. JAMES E. SCHULZE, PETER & HELEN DALLAS CHAPTER-NPSOT LECHE, BEVERLY SENNHAUSER, KELLY S. DAMEWOOD, LOGAN & ELEANOR LEWIS, PATRICIA SERLING, STEVEN DAMUTH, STEVEN LIGGIO, JOE SHANNON, LEILA HOUSEMAN DAVIS, ELLEN D.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Public Comment, Appendix B
    Summary of Public Comment on Roadless Area Conservation Appendix B Requests for Inclusion or Exemption of Specific Areas Table B-1. Requested Inclusions Under the Proposed Rulemaking. Region 1 Northern NATIONAL FOREST OR AREA STATE GRASSLAND The state of Idaho Multiple ID (Individual, Boise, ID - #6033.10200) Roadless areas in Idaho Multiple ID (Individual, Olga, WA - #16638.10110) Inventoried and uninventoried roadless areas (including those Multiple ID, MT encompassed in the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act) (Individual, Bemidji, MN - #7964.64351) Roadless areas in Montana Multiple MT (Individual, Olga, WA - #16638.10110) Pioneer Scenic Byway in southwest Montana Beaverhead MT (Individual, Butte, MT - #50515.64351) West Big Hole area Beaverhead MT (Individual, Minneapolis, MN - #2892.83000) Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness, along the Selway River, and the Beaverhead-Deerlodge, MT Anaconda-Pintler Wilderness, at Johnson lake, the Pioneer Bitterroot Mountains in the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest and the Great Bear Wilderness (Individual, Missoula, MT - #16940.90200) CLEARWATER NATIONAL FOREST: NORTH FORK Bighorn, Clearwater, Idaho ID, MT, COUNTRY- Panhandle, Lolo WY MALLARD-LARKINS--1300 (also on the Idaho Panhandle National Forest)….encompasses most of the high country between the St. Joe and North Fork Clearwater Rivers….a low elevation section of the North Fork Clearwater….Logging sales (Lower Salmon and Dworshak Blowdown) …a potential wild and scenic river section of the North Fork... THE GREAT BURN--1301 (or Hoodoo also on the Lolo National Forest) … harbors the incomparable Kelly Creek and includes its confluence with Cayuse Creek. This area forms a major headwaters for the North Fork of the Clearwater. …Fish Lake… the Jap, Siam, Goose and Shell Creek drainages WEITAS CREEK--1306 (Bighorn-Weitas)…Weitas Creek…North Fork Clearwater.
    [Show full text]
  • State No. Description Size in Cm Date Location
    Maps State No. Description Size in cm Date Location National Forests in Alabama. Washington: ALABAMA AL-1 49x28 1989 Map Case US Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service. Bankhead National Forest (Bankhead and Alabama AL-2 66x59 1981 Map Case Blackwater Districts). Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Side A : Coronado National Forest (Nogales A: 67x72 ARIZONA AZ-1 1984 Map Case Ranger District). Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. B: 67x63 Side B : Coronado National Forest (Sierra Vista Ranger District). Side A : Coconino National Forest (North A:69x88 Arizona AZ-2 1976 Map Case Half). Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. B:69x92 Side B : Coconino National Forest (South Half). Side A : Coronado National Forest (Sierra A:67x72 Arizona AZ-3 1976 Map Case Vista Ranger District. Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. B:67x72 Side B : Coronado National Forest (Nogales Ranger District). Prescott National Forest. Washington: US Arizona AZ-4 28x28 1992 Map Case Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Kaibab National Forest (North Unit). Arizona AZ-5 68x97 1967 Map Case Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Prescott National Forest- Granite Mountain Arizona AZ-6 67x48.5 1993 Map Case Wilderness. Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Side A : Prescott National Forest (East Half). A:111x75 Arizona AZ-7 1993 Map Case Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. B:111x75 Side B : Prescott National Forest (West Half). Arizona AZ-8 Superstition Wilderness: Tonto National 55.5x78.5 1994 Map Case Forest. Washington: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Arizona AZ-9 Kaibab National Forest, Gila and Salt River 80x96 1994 Map Case Meridian.
    [Show full text]
  • East Texas Ecosystem Plan 2004
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 2 EAST TEXAS ECOSYSTEM PLAN FY 2004 AND BEYOND Prepared by the EAST TEXAS ECOSYSTEM TEAM LAST REVISED October 2003 Table of Contents ECOSYSTEM DESCRIPTION.......................................................................................................3 STATEMENT OF GOALS .............................................................................................................4 MAP OF THE EAST TEXAS ECOSYSTEM ................................................................................5 GOALS OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES.................................................................................6 PARTNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES.............................................................................................13 PUBLIC REVIEW OF EAST TEXAS ECOSYSTEM PLAN......................................................14 TEAM MEMBERS........................................................................................................................15 Appendix A. Federally listed, proposed, and candidate endangered and threatened species; species of concern; and select game species in the East Texas Ecosystem 2 ECOSYSTEM DESCRIPTION The East Texas Ecosystem encompasses the drainages of the Brazos, Trinity, Neches, and Sabine Rivers, with the exception of their coastal sections and the upper Brazos. The area's rivers run roughly parallel northwest to southeast, where they drain into the Gulf of Mexico. While the majority of this ecosystem is in east Texas, it also includes a portion of the Sabine
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    CURRICULUM VITAE BRIAN P. OSWALD, Ph.D. CF Joe C. Denman Distinguished Professor of Fire Ecology, Silviculture, and Agroforestry Regents Professor 2012-2013 Arthur Temple College of Forestry and Agriculture, Stephen F. Austin State University Box 6109, SFA Station Nacogdoches, Texas 75962 C:(936) 645-7990 W:(936) 468-2275 H:(936) 569-1363 [email protected] EDUCATION May, 1992 Ph.D. in Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sciences. University of Idaho. May, 1981 M.S. in Forestry. Northern Arizona University. June, 1979 B.S. in Forestry. Michigan State University. ACADEMIC EXPERIENCE December 1995 – Present Arthur Temple College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University. June 2004-Present Professor of Fire Ecology, Silviculture, and Agroforestry. Joe C. Denman Distinguished Professor of Forestry September 2012 Lacy H. Hunt Disguished Professor of Forestry September 2007-August 2012 June 1999: Associate Professor. December 1995: Assistant Professor. August 1992 - December 1995 Department of Plant and Soil Science, Alabama A&M University. Assistant Professor of Forest Ecology. June 1991 Teton Science School, Kelly, Wyoming. Instructor of fire ecology course. 1986 – 1992 College of Forestry, Wildlife, and Range Sciences, University of Idaho. August 1986 - May 1988: Teaching Assistant. August 1987 - May 1989: International Student Co-Coordinator. May 1989 - August 1992: Research Assistant. January - May 1990: Instructor of lab section of Aerial Photo Interpretation. April 1990/August 1991: Aerial Photo Interpretation Instructor for Bolivian and Honduran students involved in Forestry short courses. 1981 – 1986 The College of Ganado, Ganado, Arizona. August 1981 - May 1983: Instructor of Forestry and Range Management. May 1983 - July 1986: Assistant Professor and Chairman of Forestry, Range and Parks Department.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Law 98-574 98Th Congress an Act
    PUBLIC LAW 98-574-OCT. 30, 1984 98 STAT. 3051 Public Law 98-574 98th Congress An Act To designate various areas as components of the National Wilderness Preservation Oct. 30, 1984 System in the national forests in the State of Texas. [H.R. 3788] Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may Texas be cited as the "Texas Wilderness Act of 1984". Wilderness Act of 1984. National DESIGNATION OF WILDERNESS AREAS Wilderness Preservation SEC. 2. In furtherance of the purposes of the Wilderness Act (16 System. U.S.C. 1131-1136), the following lands in the State of Texas are National Forest hereby designated as wilderness and, therefore, as components of System. the National Wilderness Preservation System: (1) certain lands in the Angelina National Forest, Texas, 16 use 1132 which comprise approximately five thousand four hundred note. acres, as generally depicted on a map entitled "Turkey Hill Wilderness—Proposed", dated March 1984, and which shall be known as the Turkey Hill Wilderness; (2) certain lands in the Angelina National Forest, Texas, 16 use 1132 which comprise approximately twelve thousand acres, as gener­ note. ally depicted on a map entitled "Upland Island Wilderness— Proposed"; dated March 1984, and which shall be known as the Upland Island Wilderness; (3) certain lands in the Davy Crockett National Forest, Texas, 16 use 1132 which comprise approximately three thousand acres, as note. generally depicted on a map entitled "Big Slough Wilderness— Proposed", dated March 1984, and which shall be known as the Big Slough Wilderness; (4) certain lands in the Sabine National Forest, Texas, which 16 use 1132 comprise approximately nine thousand nine hundred and forty- note.
    [Show full text]