Virgin River Management Plan & Environmental Assessment, Utah
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
United States Department of the Interior NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Zion National Park State Route 9 Springdale, UT 84767 ERRATA Virgin River Comprehensive Management Plan/Environmental Assessment July 2013 Chapter 1 – Impact Topics Retained for Further Analysis – Table 4. Impact Topics – Page 43 TEXT CHANGES: Impact Topics Analyzed in Detail: Wildlife ORV (including the threatened Mexican spotted owl) Impact Topics Eliminated from Detailed Analysis: Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Plant and Animal Species Chapter 1 – Impact Topics Dismissed from Further Analysis – Page 46 TEXT CHANGES: Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Plant and Animal Species The Endangered Species Act of 1973 requires examination of impacts on all federally listed threatened, endangered, and candidate species. Section 7 of the ESA requires all federal agencies to consult with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by the agency does not jeopardize the continued existence of the listed species or critical habitats. In addition, The 2006 Management Policies and DO-77: Natural Resource Management requires the NPS to examine the impacts on federal candidate species, as well as stated listed species. In 2010 the USFWS directed the National Park Service to their Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPAC) on the internet to obtain a list of species that may occur in project area. The list included the following species: greater sage grouse, Mexican spotted owl, southwestern willow flycatcher, yellow- billed cuckoo, Virgin River chub, woundfin, Gierisch mallow, Jones cycladenia, Las Vegas buckwheat, Shivwits milk-vetch, Welsh’s milkweed, Utah prairie dog, desert tortoise, and California condor. Zion does not have the habitat components to support most of these species. Or the park has surveyed potential habitat for certain species and have not found them (southwestern willow flycatcher, yellow- billed cuckoo). Those that are known to occur in the park are Mexican spotted owl, Shivwits milk-vetch, desert tortoise, and California condor. Impacts to Mexican spotted owl are addressed under wildlife and are analyzed in detail later in this document. Shivwits milk-vetch and desert tortoise do not occur within any of the designated river segment boundaries. So the preferred alternative would have no affect these species. The preferred alternative would not result in reduction or adverse modification of Shivwits milk-vetch critical habitat. California condor do occupy habitat within wild and scenic river boundaries. There are no actions in this plan that would adversely affect California condor. The plan identifies protective measure to protect water quality and ecological processes, which would benefit California condor. Therefore, the implementation of the preferred alternative may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect this species. Because there would be no measurable effects, this topic is dismissed from further analysis in this document. Summary Virgin River Comprehensive Management Plan / Environmental Assessment Zion National Park and Bureau of Land Management, St. George Field Office Utah July 2013 This Virgin River Comprehensive Management Plan / Environmental Assessment describes three alternatives for managing the Virgin Wild and Scenic River segments within Zion National Park and adjacent Bureau of Land Management lands. Each alternative responds differently to the issues and concerns identified by the public and interested agencies. Alternative A is the “no-action” alternative and would continue current management practices into the future. Its goal would be to retain the existing visitor experience and resource management strategies based on existing agency planning. Alternative A would not fully meet the requirements of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, whereas the action alternatives (alternatives B and C) were designed to meet the requirements of the act. Under alternative B, restoration of the Virgin River and its tributaries would take precedence over recreation activities. The Virgin River and its tributaries would be managed with an emphasis on resource stewardship—restoring and interpreting natural and cultural resources. Visitor use levels would generally remain the same in low use areas and would be reduced in some areas where impacts on the river are being observed. In alternative C, the preferred alternative, the Virgin River and its tributaries would also be managed with an emphasis on resource stewardship. A variety of recreational activities that are appropriate and compatible with resource stewardship would be available throughout the river segments. In alternative C, the National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management would actively manage visitor areas to maintain current use levels or allow a small increase while protecting river values. Additional emphasis would be placed on education and interpretation. In this comprehensive management plan / environmental assessment, the preferred alternative is presented as the alternative that best responds to the issues and protects and enhances river values. Comments received during scoping were used to develop the alternatives. U.S. Department of the Interior • National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management i HOW TO COMMENT ON THIS PLAN If you wish to comment on this Virgin River Mail: Comprehensive Management Plan / Environmental Assessment, your comments Kezia Nielsen will be most useful to us if received by Virgin River Comprehensive September 9, 2013. You may comment using Management Plan / Environmental one of the following methods: Assessment Zion National Park Springdale, UT 84767 Internet Website: Comments can be posted online The Zion River Comprehensive Management using the National Park Service Plan / Environmental Assessment will be on Planning, Environment, and Public public review for 30 days. Before including Comment (PEPC) website your address, telephone number, e-mail http://parkplanning.nps.gov/zion. address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, could be made publicly available at any time. Although you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. ii CONTENTS Chapter 1: Background 1 Introduction 5 Purpose and Need 8 Purpose of the Virgin River Plan 8 Need for the Virgin River Plan 8 Requirements of a Wild and Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan 8 Goals and Objectives 9 Designation of the Virgin River and Its Tributaries 10 Outstandingly Remarkable Values 19 Cultural Values 19 Geologic Values 21 Recreational Values 21 Scenic Values 22 Ecological Processes Values 22 Wildlife Values 23 Fish Values 23 Section 7 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act: Determination Process for Water Resources Projects 25 Section 7 Evaluation Guidelines for Water Resource Projects 27 Relationship to Other Plans 31 Zion National Park General Management Plan 31 Zion National Park, Backcountry Management Plan, 2007 31 Bureau of Land Management, St. George Field Office, Resource Management Plan 31 Zion Soundscape Management Plan and Environmental Assessment (2010) 32 Washington County General Plan (2010), as amended 33 Planning Context 33 Legal Framework 33 Management Planning Process 35 Next Steps 36 Implementation of the Plan 37 Future Planning Needs 37 Issues and Opportunities 38 Kinds and Amounts of Recreational Use 38 Types and Levels of Development 38 Free-flowing Condition 39 Water Quality 39 Ecological Process 39 Issues Beyond the Scope of the Plan: Climate Change 39 iii CONTENTS Free-flowing Conditions and Floodplains 44 Water Quality 44 Ecological Processes ORV 44 Fish ORV 44 Wildlife ORV (including Threatened and Endangered Species) 44 Recreational ORV / River-related Visitor Use and Experience 44 Scenic ORV / Visual Resources / Viewsheds 44 Park Operations 45 Bureau of Land Management Operations 45 Socioeconomic Environment 45 Impact Topics Dismissed from Further Analysis 46 Wetlands 46 Soils 46 Energy Requirements and Conservation Potential 47 Air Quality 47 Night Skies 47 Natural Sounds 47 Geologic Resources (and Geologic ORV) 48 Museum Collections 48 Archeological Resources 48 Historic Structures 49 Cultural Landscapes 49 Ethnographic Resources 49 Indian Trust Resources 50 Environmental Justice 50 Prime and Unique Farmlands 51 Chapter 2: The Alternatives 53 Introduction 55 Overview 55 Boundary Delineation 55 Criteria Used for Developing Boundaries for the Virgin River 56 Development of the Alternatives 71 The Alternatives 72 Alternative Management Concepts 72 Alternative A Concept (No-action Alternative) 72 Alternative B Concept 72 Alternative C Concept (Preferred Alternative) 72 Alternative Management Strategies and Alternative Planning Process 74 Broad-based Management Strategies 76 Alternative A: Continuation of Current Management (No-action Alternative) 76 Free-flowing Condition and Water Quality 76 iv Contents Ecological Processes ORV (Vegetation) 76 Fish and Wildlife ORVs (including Threatened and Endangered Species) 77 Scenic ORV / Visual Resources / Viewsheds 77 Recreational ORV / River-related Visitor Use and Experience 77 Park Operations 78 Bureau of Land Management Operations 78 Existing Types and Levels of Development 80 North Fork Virgin River above the Temple of Sinawava and Tributaries (Wild Segment) 81 North Fork Virgin River below the Temple of Sinawava and Tributaries