SLACK WEISS ANALYSIS PROJECT

Medicine Bow-Routt National Forests & Thunder Basin National Grassland Parks Ranger District Jackson County, Colorado

Heritage Specialist Report

April 1, 2015

PREPARED BY:

_____ /s/ Price B. Heiner______Price B. Heiner [email protected] (970) 723-2733

REVIEWED BY:

______Charlie Sharp, NEPA Planner

ACCEPTED BY:

______Ric Ondrejka, IDT Leader

PROJECT AND ANALYSIS AREAS The Slack Weiss Project area is located on the Parks Ranger District of the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forests and Thunder Basin National Grassland in Jackson County, approximately 25 miles south of Walden, Colorado, in Townships 4 & 5 North, Ranges 79, 80, & 81 West, 6th PM (Figure 1). Based on watershed boundaries, the Analysis Area encompasses approximately 139,747.7 acres (ac), including 58,804 ac (38.5%) of private land, 46,922 ac (33.6%) on National Forest, 24,015 ac (17.2%) on State lands, 14,926 ac (10.7%) on BLM, and 80.3 ac (0.1%) owned by the Colorado River Water Conservancy District (Figure 1; Table 1). Table 1. Land Ownership in the Slack Weiss Analysis Area. Land Ownership/ Administration Acres % of Total Private 58,804.3 38.5 Routt National Forest 46,922.0 33.6 State 24,014.7 17.2 Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 14,926.4 10.7 CO River Water Conservancy District 80.3 0.1 TOTAL 139,747.70 100.0

The project area encompasses 42,952 acres located primarily in the Arapahoe Creek (27,264 ac) and Chimney Rock (15,612 ac) Geographic Areas (GAs). Both GAs support motorized and non- motorized recreation, and portions of the Continental Divide Trail (CDNST) occur in the northern extent of the Chimney Rock GA. Small portions of the project area occur in the Willow Creek (49 ac) and Troublesome (27 ac) GAs (Figure 1). The 27,310-acre Arapahoe Creek GA is dominated by lodgepole pine (43%), spruce-fir (26%), and aspen (17%). The northeast corner of the GA provides deer and elk winter range. Desired conditions for this area include continued dominance by these land cover types; a variety of tree sizes and seral stages under Management Area prescriptions 5.11 and 5.13 (see Management Areas below); and vegetation diversity for a full spectrum of wildlife (Forest Plan 3-7). In Management Areas 5.13, late successional habitats should be provided and well distributed so that individuals requiring those habitats can interact with others (Forest Plan 3-8). The 15,622-acre Chimney Rock GA is dominated by lodgepole pine (26%), spruce/ fir (35%), aspen (22%), and shrubs (6%). Desired conditions for this area include continued dominance by these land cover types; a variety of tree sizes and seral stages, including late successional; continued shade of kettle lakes to provide amphibian habitat; riparian health that meets forest plan objectives in Indian Creek and other watersheds; and vegetation diversity for a full spectrum of wildlife (Forest Plan 3-12). The 44,897-acre Willow Creek GA is dominated by lodgepole pine (62%), spruce/fir (20%), and aspen (8%). Within the forested portion, 38% is considered late successional. Riparian areas are an important component of the geographic area. The northwest corner provides elk winter range and supports moose. Desired conditions for this area include continued dominance by these land cover types; a variety of tree sizes and seral stages in Management Areas 5.11 and 5.13; vegetation diversity for a full spectrum of wildlife; management of vegetation for big game habitat; and riparian stability and health (Forest Plan 3-41).

Page 2 of 43

Figure 1. Slack Weiss Project and Analysis Areas.

Page 3 of 43

The 57,208-acre Troublesome GA is dominated by lodgepole pine (64%), spruce/fir (12%), grass and forbs, and shrubs (15%). Within the forested area, 39% is considered late successional. Winter range for big game is provided in the southern portion of the area. Considerable riparian habitat occurs in the area that supports moose. Desired conditions for this area include continued dominance by these land cover types; a variety of tree sizes and seral stages in Management Areas 5.11 and 5.13; vegetation diversity for a full spectrum. Five Management Areas (MAs) represent the project area (Table 2). The majority of the project area is in MA 5.13 (Forest Products) and MA 5.11 (General Forest and Rangelands- Forest Vegetation Emphasis).

Table 2: Forest Plan Management Areas in the Slack Weiss Project area. Management Area Acres 1.32 – Backcountry Recreation Non-motorized with Winter Limited Motorized 7,590 5.11 – General Forest and Rangelands – Forest Vegetation Emphasis 20,850 5.12 –General Forest and Rangelands – Range Vegetation Emphasis 5,838 5.13 – Forest Products 7,412 5.41 – Deer and Elk Winter range 1,262 TOTAL 42,952

Desired conditions for MAs in the project area include:

MA 1.32 - Backcountry Recreation Non-Motorized with Winter Limited Motorized- Landscapes with predominantly natural appearance in relatively undisturbed condition. A variety of non-motorized recreation opportunities will be provided in summer, with motorized use allowed in winter.

MA 5.11 - General Forest and Rangelands –Forest Vegetation Emphasis Vegetation composition and structure that provides a range of successional stages to meet wildlife, range, and timber objectives.

MA 5.12 - General Forest and Rangelands – Range Vegetation Emphasis Satisfactory rangeland conditions and desired plant communities with species composition, structure, and pattern plus desired soil characteristics consistent with range site potential.

MA 5.13 - Forest Products Vegetation composition and structure that provides a mosaic of tree ages and heights for a sustained yield of forest products.

MA 5.41 – Deer and Elk Winter Range Vegetation composition and structure that provides the forage, cover, and solitude needs of deer, elk, and other species.

Page 4 of 43

PURPOSE AND NEED The primary purpose of this project is to improve forest health, reduce threats to public safety, and provide commercial forest products while minimizing environmental effects in the project area. A secondary purpose of the project is to address other resource conflicts and needs identified in the project area. The project would advance Forest Service goals, objectives, and desired conditions of the 1997 Routt National Forest Revised Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) including managing for ecosystem function and providing for multiple-uses and sustainability of National Forests in an environmentally acceptable manner (Forest Plan, 1-1 to 1-3).

The mountain pine beetle epidemic has affected large portions of the Slack Weiss project area, resulting in reduced regeneration, diversity, and resiliency of forest cover types; and high hazard fuel conditions due to tree mortality. The project would implement a variety of silvicultural treatments and fuels treatments to:

Encourage establishment and growing conditions for aspen and lodgepole pine regeneration, through natural regeneration and/or artificial reforestation; Manage timber stands to create optimum conditions for timber resiliency, growth, and regeneration; Reduce the development of large, continuous hazardous fuels and associated threats to public safety by removing dead, dying, and susceptible trees; Enhance wildlife habitat; and Provide commercial forest products and/or biomass to industry.

In addition, other resource conflicts and needs have been identified in the project area including fence damage and risk of damage associated with dead and dying trees; and travel-related impacts on recreation, watershed, heritage, and other values. Implementing actions to address these issues would benefit range, hydrology, recreation, heritage, and wildlife resources while minimizing environmental effects in the project area.

ALTERNATIVES

Alternative 1 – No Action Under the No Action Alternative, current management would continue in the project area. No silvicultural treatments would occur to improve or restore forest health. Attempts to expedite the establishment of the next forest would not occur. Standing or down fuel would not be reduced, and fuel treatments would not occur to provide for public safety. No additional forest products would be utilized. Roads would remain unchanged and scheduled maintenance would continue. Identified resource conflicts and needs in the project area would not be addressed. However, valid previously approved management actions would continue to be implemented in the project area, and new independent actions could be analyzed and/or implemented. The EA may document consideration of a no-action alternative through the effects analysis by contrasting the impacts of the proposed action and any alternative(s) with the current condition and expected future condition if the proposed action were not implemented (36 CFR 220.7(b)(2(ii).

Page 5 of 43

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Alternative 2 is the Proposed Action Alternative designed to specifically meet the purpose and need for this project. Under this alternative, areas affected by mountain pine beetle would be managed to improve and restore conditions for the future forest and to provide timber products. Standing or down fuel loading would be reduced. Fuels treatments would occur to provide safe areas around roads, trails, fences or near private lands. Design criteria would be implemented to avoid or minimize impacts on resources. In developing this alternative, environmental constraints including steep and rocky slopes, roadless areas, wetlands, streams and riparian areas, access and road engineering issues, and wildlife concerns were considered. Also, timber treatment units (prescription type, size, and configuration/location) were modified accordingly to minimize potential impacts. Timber management actions that would occur under Alternative 2 are summarized below.

Also under Alternative 2, actions would be implemented to address identified conflicts and needs for other resources including range, hydrology, heritage, and recreation. These actions are summarized below by resource.

Timber Management Under Alternative 2, a combination of silvicultural prescriptions would be implemented across approximately 1,833 acres of forest (Table 3; Figure 2). The majority of treatment units would occur in MA 5.13 (Forest Products), with some units in 5.11 (General Forest/ Rangelands – Forest Vegetation Emphasis) and a few in 5.12 (General Forest/Rangelands – Range Vegetation Emphasis) (Table 4). Proposed treatments are consistent with GA and MA desired conditions as prescribed in the Forest Plan (see Project and Analysis Areas). The project could be implemented via timber sale contracts, stewardship contracting, and service contracting authorities, or by Forest Service crews or other partners. Implementation is scheduled for spring 2016 and may take several years to complete.

Table 3. Alternative 2- Timber Prescriptions. Timber Prescription Estimated Acresa

Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 1,000.09

Commercial Harvest – Clearcut all but aspen 395.58

Commercial Harvest – Clearcut/ Overstory Removal 266.03

Seed Tree 107.69

Commercial Thinning 56.51

Meadow Restoration 7.14

TOTAL 1,833.06b a Estimates are based on the best information currently available. Actual treated acres will likely be less upon implementation due to topographic and other site constraints, and application of project design criteria. b Due to rounding, total acres do not equal the sum of individual treatment acres. See Table 4 for more precise figures by timber prescription unit.

Page 6 of 43

Figure 2. Proposed Action (Alternative 2)- timber, fire/ fuels, and range management.

Page 7 of 43

Table 4. Timber units and associated Management Areas (MA). Unit Prescription MA Acres 1 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.12 34.10 2 Clearcut all but Aspen 5.13 2.10 3 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 18.76 4 Clearcut/ Overstory Removal 5.13 17.87 5 Clearcut/ Overstory Removal 5.13 58.67 6 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 88.27 7 Meadow Restoration 5.13 7.14 8 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 12.64 9 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 71.40 10 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 20.49 11a Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 20.68 11b Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 14.52 12 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.12 47.83 13 Clearcut/ Overstory Removal 5.13 64.88 15 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 28.95 16 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 35.56 17 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 8.49 18 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 35.62 19 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 15.53 20 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 52.34 22 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 34.96 23 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 70.70 24 Clearcut all but Aspen 5.13 118.17 28 Clearcut all but Aspen 5.13 63.99 a 29 Seed Tree 5.13, 5.11 107.69 30 Clearcut all but Aspen 5.13 31.85 31 Clearcut/ Overstory Removal 5.13 11.47 32 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 43.75 a 33 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13, 5.11 118.25 34 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 41.69 35 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 42.51 36 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 62.24 37 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.13 51.29 38 Commercial Thinning 5.13 45.83 39 Clearcut/ Overstory Removal 5.11 34.07 40 Commercial Thinning 5.11 10.68 44 Salvage/ Sanitation Cut 5.11 29.51 45 Clearcut all but Aspen 5.11 179.48 48 Clearcut/ Overstory Removal 5.11 79.06 TOTAL 1,833.06 a Over 90% of the unit occurs in Management Area 5.13.

Page 8 of 43

Activity fuels would be reduced by integrating follow-up treatments across the project area. Fuels treatments would be considered at the time of project implementation and may include one or more of the following: whole tree skidding, lop and scatter, broadcast burning, pile and burn, or removal as biomass material. Following piling and burning of activity fuels, affected sites will be evaluated for rehabilitation through scarifying and seeding.

Following timber treatments, site monitoring would occur to determine if further work is needed to promote forest regeneration. If additional treatments are needed, mechanical site preparation may occur to encourage establishment of seedlings. Also, active planting or seeding with local tree species may occur within the harvest units. Invasive plant species would be treated and monitored in disturbed areas.

Approximately 2.5 mi of new temporary roads and 1.4 mi of new specified, system roads would be needed to implement the silvicultural treatments. These roads would be used by harvesting and hauling equipment to remove forest products from the project area. Temporary roads are used only to access treatment areas and are then decommissioned/ closed (see Travel Management for decommissioning guidelines). They are not part of the Forest travel management system and are not available for public or administrative use. New specified roads would be included in the Forest travel management system but would be closed to public use. Maintenance (20.3 mi) and potential reconstruction (17.5 mi) of existing Forest system roads would also occur to provide safe access to work sites (Figure 2). Locations and miles of road work needed are approximate. The final location of maintenance, reconstruction, and new construction would be determined in the field. If road conditions worsen before project implementation, due to storm events or other factors, additional road work may be necessary.

Timber prescription types and objectives that would be implemented under Alternative 2 are described below. The condition of beetle killed trees continues changing forest stand structure over time, requiring that a range of silvicultural prescriptions and tools be available for effective management. Subject to project design criteria, slight variations of proposed timber prescriptions may be used to meet site-specific needs related to wildlife habitat, hydrologic concerns, silviculture, fuels or other resource objectives.

Salvage/ Sanitation Cut Approximately 1,000 ac of forest would be treated by salvage and sanitation cutting under Alternative 2. This treatment is designed to improve forest health as well as reduce the buildup of forest fuels. In stands of mixed conifer with a manageable fully stocked understory, most dead and dying lodgepole pine (including dwarf mistletoe infected pine) and spruce would be removed. All dead or dying trees would be salvaged and any remaining live lodgepole trees may be sanitized if risk of wind-throw is evident. All advanced regeneration would be protected, and live fir and spruce would be retained in support of Canada lynx habitat objectives. Slash would typically be lopped and scattered to 24 inches. Some site preparation by scarification, piling and burning or pile removal may occur. Some salvage/ sanitation units would require temporary road construction for access.

Clearcut/ Overstory Removal Approximately 266 ac of forest would be commercially harvested by clearcutting and overstory

Page 9 of 43 removal under Alternative 2. This treatment is designed to reduce the buildup of forest fuels and regenerate pine and understory growth. In stands of primarily lodgepole pine without a manageable, fully stocked understory, most trees 5” dbh (diameter at breast height) and greater would be removed. Slash would typically be machine piled for future disposal (either burning or biomass removal). Whole tree skidding would be avoided. If a stand prescribed for clearcut is found to be regenerating at the time of layout, and has a manageable fully stocked understory, overstory removal would include most trees 7” dbh and greater. All advanced regeneration would be protected. Slash would typically be lopped and scattered to 24”. Piling and burning or pile removal may occur. Post-harvest site preparation by scarification and/or slash treatment may be required when regeneration is not present. Some clear cut units would require temporary road construction for access.

Clearcut all but Aspen Treatment methods would be the same as those described above for Clearcut/ Overstory Removal but would retain aspen.

Seed Tree Approximately 107 ac will be treated using seed tree treatment methods under Alternative 2. In stands of mixed conifer without a manageable fully stocked understory, most dead and dying trees would be removed (60-80% of the merchantable trees). Scattered trees and small groups of healthy pine and spruce would be retained as a seed source for future development of the stand. This treatment is designed to reduce the buildup of forest fuels and regenerate the stand. All advanced regeneration would be protected. Slash would typically be lopped and scattered to 24”. Some units will require temporary road construction for access. Winter logging is not recommended and some site preparation may be necessary to create a suitable seedbed.

Commercial Thinning Approximately 57 ac will be treated using commercial thinning under Alternative 2. This treatment would remove merchantable timber (equal to or greater than 7” dbh) from a stand down to a designated basal area (to be determined for each stand) to reduce stocking. The intent is to decrease the susceptibility to insect and disease, as well as reduce the buildup of forest fuels. All advanced regeneration would be protected. Slash would typically be lopped and scattered to 24”. Some units will require temporary road construction for access.

Meadow Restoration This treatment would remove all conifer (most trees are under 7”dbh) from the unit to reduce conifer encroachment. Slash would typically be piled for future disposal, either by burning or biomass removal.

Fire/ Fuels Management Under Alternative 2, prescribed fire and mechanical treatments would be implemented to reduce hazardous fuels and promote fire resistant plant communities with the intent of reducing wildland fire risk near the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) and the forest boundary. Private lands in the area near the forest boundary consist of both ranch land as well as small groups of both primary and secondary residences. Treatments would occur entirely within MA 5.41 (Deer and Elk Winter Range), in the northwestern corner of the Slack-Weiss Analysis Area where it

Page 10 of 43 borders private land and BLM-administered land. Treatments would be designed to benefit wildlife values including deer and elk winter range, consistent with GA and MA desired conditions (see Project and Analysis Areas).

Prescribed Fire Prescribed fire would be used to treat approximately 1,025 ac to reduce the quantity and continuity of hazardous fuels with the intent of reducing the intensity of future wildland fire in the area, while benefiting wildlife (Figure 2). Treatment units in the project area consist of high elevation mountain shrub communities, mid to late seral aspen communities, grassy meadows, and mixed conifer stands with varying degrees of mortality due to disease and insects. Generally, a mosaic of burn patterns would be the desired result, affecting 40-75% of the areas dominated by mountain shrub or aspen. Prescribed burn units would be slightly larger than the extent of target vegetation to create a ‘maximum management area’ and allow for flexibility in implementing prescribed fire. Burning could occur during any season allowing for flexibility and wider prescribed burning windows. Existing roads, natural vegetation breaks, topographic breaks, black-lining, and constructed line (hand or heavy equipment) would be used for fire control. Snowline may also be utilized extensively during spring burning, which is the typical prescribed burn season. Constructed line would be rehabilitated once burning operations are complete.

Mechanical Treatment/Aspen Maintenance Mechanical treatment would occur on approximately 55 acres adjacent to existing roads east of Slack-Weiss Reservoir (Figure 2). The treatment area is a mix of aspen, lodgepole pine, Engelmann spruce, and subalpine fir. Mechanized equipment would be used to reduce the amount of dead and live conifer to allow for regeneration of aspen. Aspen is a desired species due to its resistance to fire and is considered a natural fire break. Treatment would include cutting and removing, piling and burning, or lopping and scattering conifers in the area. Specific methods used to accomplish work may range from mechanical timber harvesting equipment to hand crews with chainsaws.

Range Management Under Alternative 2, within proposed timber and fuels units, treatments would occur along fence lines where practical to remove dead or dying trees and reduce damage and risk of damage to fences. Approximately 1.6 mi of fence and 19.9 ac of forest would be treated for this purpose (Figure 2).

Recreation and Travel Management Under Alternative 2, multiple actions would occur to enhance recreation opportunities, the Forest Service travel system, and other resources.

Finger Lake Motorized Trail Under Alternative 2, approximately 0.37 mi of existing, unauthorized trail would be designated to connect National Forest System Roads (NFSR) 700.2F and 704.1 (Figure 3). The designation would authorize motorized trail use by OHVs less than 50” wide. NFSR 700.2F and 704.1 would remain in the open road system as a Level 2 designation. This action would enhance motorized recreation opportunities in the Finger Lake area.

Page 11 of 43

Travel Management Under Alternative 2, four routes, or portions thereof, would be decommissioned or closed (Figure 3). In total, 10.9 mi of road would be decommissioned, benefiting hydrology, riparian, heritage, and wildlife resources. Specific routes that would be decommissioned include:

NFSR 104.1 and spur roads (10.1 mi total): A 7.1-mile segment of the 104.1 would be decommissioned beginning at the Rabbit Ears Divide Telecommunications Site, but would leave and designate a non-motorized trail within the road footprint. Roads accessed by the 104.1 including the 711.1 (2.2 mi) and 711.1A (0.8 mi) would also be decommissioned, but would leave and designate a non-motorized trail within the road footprint for access to the CDNST. These closures would benefit recreation, heritage, wildlife, and other resources.

NFSR 708.1: Unauthorized routes (.8 mi total) beyond the system road would be closed and rehabilitated to reduce impacts on wetlands, streams, and riparian in the area. This closure would benefit watershed, wildlife, and other values.

Decommissioning of routes would require rehabilitation by either natural recovery of vegetation, if appropriate, or by using active techniques such as scarification, ripping, recontouring, water bar installation, culvert removal, chipping and mulching, slash placement. The following guidelines would apply to route decommissioning.

Scarification would be done to a depth of 4 to 6 inches. The ripper teeth should be lifted every 150 feet on slopes less than 15 percent, every 100 feet on slopes 15 to 30 percent, and every 50 feet on slopes greater than 30 percent to prevent concentration of water and development of rills and gullies. An approved seed mixture would be used for reseeding. Water bars would be installed using an appropriate spacing for slope and soil type. Slash would include both fine and coarse woody debris. Chips and mulch would not exceed more than 3 inches in depth and would not cover more than 40 percent of the treatment area. When mastication or chipping is used distribution will be a discontinuous, patch mosaic and avoid contact with residual trees. If desired coverage or depth are exceeded that site will be evaluated to determine if redistribution or disposal is required. Ground cover would be 65 percent over the affected area. Road obliteration would be rehabilitated by restoring and re-contouring to a hydrologically self-maintaining and natural state roads and skid trails that have a 3-foot or greater cut slope, roads that cross slopes exceeding 25%, and other areas as determined necessary by Forest Service personnel. Where recontouring is not needed, outsloping of roads may occur to maintain the hillslope hydrology and prevent concentrated flows. Once re-contouring or outsloping is complete, work equipment would remain on the existing roadway or skid trail to minimize new disturbance. Scattering slash may also occur in re-contoured areas to prevent erosion, add organic material, and improve water retention.

Page 12 of 43

Figure 3. Proposed Action (Alternative 2)- recreation, travel, and watershed Management.

Page 13 of 43

Where re-contouring or outsloping is not necessary, such as on flat areas of ground, then obliteration may occur by installing water bars, scarification, scattering of slash, and seeding where necessary. Culverts would be removed, and streambanks would be reshaped to reflect the original or natural hydrology of the stream. Stabilization of newly constructed streambanks using slash, logs, or rocks would occur as specified by Forest Service personnel.

Watershed Management Under Alternative 2, an exclosure would be installed and revegetation (reseeding, willow planting) would occur along an ephemeral drainage and floodplain above Indian Creek and near NFSR 103.1 (Figure 3), affecting approximately 5 ac. The objective is to restore hydrologic function and mitigate impacts associated with livestock grazing.

DESIGN CRITERIA, MONITORING, & MITIGATION The following design criteria, mitigation measures, and monitoring criteria have been identified for this project.

Resource Design Criteria

Significant cultural and/or paleontological resources in the project area should be avoided or the effects of project implementation otherwise mitigated based on decisions identified during analysis of the undertaking under the National Heritage Historic Preservation Act and other relevant cultural resource protection laws and regulations, and consideration of the undertaking’s effects to historic properties. If in connection with operations under this authorization any of the above resources are encountered, or previously unidentified resources are encountered, work shall be immediately suspended, and all activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery that might further disturb such materials Heritage will be suspended. The Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest authorized officer will be informed of the findings, and the discovery must be protected until notified in writing to proceed by the authorized officer (36 CFR 800.110 & 112, 43 CFR 10.4). If affected properties are discovered after project activities are completed, the Heritage District would document any damage and consult with SHPO and the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation pursuant to 800.13(b). All roads planned for decommissioning that have not been adequately surveyed for cultural resources will be identified for the archaeologist to Heritage review, and subject to National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) compliance prior to any implementing activities. With regard to the development of roads under this project, all proposed road Heritage corridors either outside units or within units that have not been adequately surveyed for cultural resources will be identified during sale preparation and

Page 14 of 43

approximate locations provided to the archaeologist for review, which will be completed prior to sale implementation. If necessary, additional survey will be conducted and supplemental consultation completed with the CO SHPO. During implementation no fire suppression or timber felling activities, and no vehicles of any kind may enter NRHP-eligible site boundaries. These NRHP- eligible sites include 5JA.712, 5JA.2497, 5JA.2511, 5JA.2512, and 5JA.2521. Heritage All of the NRHP-eligible sites listed above are on the project GIS layer and have exclusion polygons around them. The exclusion polygons are going to be considered the site boundary for the purposes of this proposed action.

Affected Mitigation Criteria Resources

Affected Monitoring Criteria Resources

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

As no action would occur for Alternative 1, there will be no affected environment. As such, no avoidance or mitigation measures would need to be taken regarding Heritage resources.

For Alternative 2, The Slack Weiss Analysis survey area of potential effect (APE) consists of approximately 1,080 acres of proposed prescribed burn area, and approximately 4,444 acres of proposed timber harvest for a total of approximately 5,524 acres. The approximate 1,080 acres of proposed prescribed burn is contained within four separate survey units, and the approximate 4,444 acres of timber harvest is contained within 98 separate survey units. All of the approximate 1,080 acres of proposed prescribed burn were intensively surveyed to Class III cultural resource inventory standards; whereas, the approximate 4,444 acres of proposed timber harvest were surveyed using a Class II cultural resource inventory sample strategy. The Class II sample survey of the proposed timber harvest units resulted in the intensive survey of approximately 3,225 of the 4,444 proposed acres (or 73% of the proposed acres). The 3,225 acres selected for survey were selected based upon an archaeological probability model that considered slope, vegetation, and proximity to water. In all, approximately 1,080 acres of

Page 15 of 43 proposed prescribed burn, and approximately 3,225 acres of proposed timber harvest (for a total of ~4,305 acres) were intensively surveyed during the project, but all 5,524 acres comprising the APE are considered to be surveyed and in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).

As the project planning progressed and became finalized the proposed prescribed burn acres were reduced from ~1,080 to ~1,025 and the proposed timber harvest acres were reduced from ~4,444 to ~1,833. However, both of the final proposed prescribed burn (~1,025 ac) and timber harvest (~1,833 ac) acres are completely contained within the original proposed prescribed burn (~1,080 ac) and timber harvest (~4,444 ac) acres.

All previously surveyed acres within the current project APE were included in the current survey because they were areas considered to be too small to attempt to avoid and/or they did not comply with current cultural resource standards at the start of the project.

Survey Methodology From June 4th through August 15th, 2014 Forest Service archaeologist Price Heiner along with archaeological technicians Michael Stites, Brian Flynn, and Marlis Muschal of the Parks Ranger District conducted a Class II and III intensive pedestrian survey of the Slack Weiss Analysis Project area.

A Class II survey is a sample survey where high probability areas for cultural resources are inventoried and low probability areas are not inventoried. This allows for more acreage to be analyzed by inventorying a portion of the project area. In theory, significant sites are expected to be encountered at the expense of some cultural resources deemed to be insignificant (e.g., isolated finds). The sample areas that are surveyed are intensively surveyed using Class III cultural resources inventory standards.

A Class III survey is where the entirety of a proposed project area is inventoried for cultural resources regardless of probability. The goal is to locate all cultural resources in a specified project area.

The areas surveyed for both Class II and III cultural resource inventories are conducted using parallel pedestrian transects spaced no greater than 30 meters apart. The sample areas for Class II and all areas for Class III were surveyed in this fashion.

Cultural manifestations were sought in the form of prehistoric and/or historic period artifacts, features, structures, and unusual ground disturbances. For the purposes of this survey a "site" has been defined as 15 or more prehistoric artifacts, or 50 or more historic period artifacts within 30 meters of each other, or any historic period or prehistoric feature or structure regardless of the number of artifacts. An "isolated find" (IF) has been defined as 14 or fewer prehistoric and 49 or fewer historic period artifacts unassociated with a cultural feature. Also, “isolated find” describes isolated historic period features with no or few associated artifacts and little to no research potential such as portable saw mill sites, logging-related loading or skidding platforms, isolated aspen art, and/or mineral prospect pits. Lastly, prehistoric surface cultural manifestations

Page 16 of 43 that contain less than 15 artifacts but are thought to represent a surface expression of a larger buried site or buried component(s) are also considered a “site” for the purposes of this survey.

Some cultural resources are subsurface tested in order to gain a better understanding of the cultural resource and assist with making a National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) determination. For those cultural resources that are tested for subsurface cultural deposits, the methodology is as follows:

Shovel tests are cylindrical in form and typically measure 35-40 cm in diameter by 30-50 cm below surface (cmbs). The matrix removed from shovel test is sifted through a 1/4-inch wire mesh dry screen. An initial shovel test is excavated at roughly the center of the cultural resource. Two tests are then excavated at 5 m intervals in each cardinal direction from the initial shovel test. Testing ceases when two consecutive tests return a negative result for buried cultural material in each cardinal direction. If, however, cultural material is encountered, shovel tests are continued in that same cardinal direction until two consecutive tests return negative results for buried cultural material. If, while following this methodology, a modern surface feature such as a road is located at the next 5 m interval, the location of the next test is adjusted along its testing axis until a suitable test location is encountered. The final testing pattern resembles a cross-like grid pattern across the cultural resource. Any subsurface cultural materials recovered during testing are collected.

Upon completion of the fieldwork, a finalized report is prepared and the original, along with all original photographs and field notes, is kept in repository with the Parks Ranger District Archaeologist at the Walden, Colorado District office. Additionally, a copy is filed with the Colorado State Historic Preservation Office in Denver, Colorado.

Existing Data and Previous Surveys On May 19th -23rd 2014, Price Heiner, Forest Service Zone Archaeologist, conducted a Class I literature search for the Slack Weiss Analysis Project, which utilized the records of the State Historic Preservation office, the cultural resource atlas of the Routt National Forest, all relevant CRM reports, and GLO plat maps. This literature search indicated that there have been 19 previous cultural resource surveys conducted within one mile of the current project APE (Table 5). In addition, 41 previously recorded cultural resources are situated within one mile of the current project APE (Table 6).

Table 5. Previous surveys conducted within one mile of the current project APE. Survey Number Description Year Covers a Portion of APE

GA.FS.NR5 Class III Fence 1980 Yes Project GA.FS.NR13 Class III Fence 1982 No Project GA.FS.NR91 Class II Grazing 1996 No Allotment JA.FS.NR5 Class III Timber 1986 Yes

Page 17 of 43

Sale JA.FS.NR11 Class III Timber sale 1989 No JA.FS.NR20 Class III Fence 1992 Yes Project JA.FS.NR24 Class III Dam 1993 No Repair Project JA.FS.NR31 Trail Head 1994 Yes Improvement Project JA.FS.NR61 Class III Fence 2003 No Project JA.FS.R4 Class III Timber 1988 Yes Sale JA.FS.R7 Class III Timber 1990 Yes Sale JA.FS.R17 Class III Timber 1991 Yes Sale JA.FS.R20 Class III Fence 1991 No Project JA.FS.R37 Class II Grazing 1998 Yes Allotment MC.FS.NR8 Class III Fence and 1990 Yes Cattle Guard Project MC.FS.R72 Class III Timber 1993 Yes Sale and Grazing Allotment MC.FS.R216 Class III Snotel Site 2002 No Project MC.FS.R262 Class II Grazing 2003 No Allotment MC.FS.R486 Class III Hazard 2011 Yes Tree Removal

Table 6. Previously recorded cultural resources within one mile of the current APE. Smithsonian No. Description Type Determination In APE

5JA.652 Prehistoric – Isolated Flake IF Not Eligible No 5JA.653 Historic Period – Corral IF Not Eligible Yes 5JA.711 Prehistoric – Open Camp Site Eligible No 5JA.712 Prehistoric – Kill Site Site Eligible Yes 5JA.713 Historic Period – Bear Trap? Site Unevaluated Yes 5JA.780 Historic Period – Corral IF Not Eligible Yes 5JA.793 Prehistoric – Isolated Flake IF Not Eligible No

Page 18 of 43

5JA.840 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter Site Not Eligible No 5JA.841 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter Site Not Eligible No 5JA.842 Prehistoric – Projectile Point IF Not Eligible No 5JA.843 Prehistoric – Isolated Flake IF Not Eligible Yes 5JA.844.1 Historic Period – Road Site Not Eligible Yes 5JA.845.1 Historic Period – Road Site Not Eligible Yes 5JA.1086 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible Yes 5JA.1474 Historic Period – Site Unevaluated No Outhouse/Toilet 5JA.1733 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No 5JA.1738.1 Historic Period – Road Site Not Eligible Yes 5JA.1759 Prehistoric – Isolated Flake IF Not Eligible No 5JA.1944.1 Historic Period – Ditch Site Not Eligible Yes 5JA.2094 Prehistoric – Isolated Biface IF Not Eligible Yes 5JA.2096 Historic Period – Refuse Scatter IF Not Eligible No 5JA.2097 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter Site Not Eligible Yes 5JA.2098 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter Site Eligible No 5JA.2099.1 Historic Period – Ditch Site Eligible No 5JA.2100.1 Historic Period – Ditch Site Not Eligible No 5JA.2101.1 Historic Period – Ditch Site Not Eligible Yes 5JA.2102.1 Historic Period – Ditch Site Eligible No 5GA.1732 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter Site Not Eligible No 5GA.1734 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter Site Not Eligible No 5GA.1735 Prehistoric – Open Camp and Site Eligible No Quarry 5GA.1833 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter Site Not Eligible No 5GA.2625 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter Site Not Eligible No 5GA.2626 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter Site Not Eligible No 5GA.2627 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter Site Not Eligible No 5GA.2628 Prehistoric – Isolated Flake IF Not Eligible No 5GA.2629 Prehistoric – Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No 5GA.2630 Prehistoric – Isolated Flake IF Not Eligible No 5GA.2631 Historic Period – Aspen Art IF Not Eligible No 5GA.4196 Historic Period – Prospect Pit IF Not Eligible No 5GA.4197 Historic Period – Aspen Art IF Not Eligible No 5GA.4198 Prehistoric – Isolated Flake IF Not Eligible No

Although 11 previous surveys cover a portion of the current project APE, these surveys were either too small to attempt to avoid during the current survey or no longer comply with current standards (see Table 5 above). As such, all 5,524 acres of the current project APE were surveyed to Class II and III cultural resource inventory standards during the current project.

Also, 13 of the 41 previously recorded cultural resources within one mile of the current project APE are situated within the current project APE (see Table 6 above). Of the 13 previously recorded cultural resources situated within the current project APE, 12 are officially not eligible

Page 19 of 43

for the NRHP with SHPO concurrence (see Table 6 above). The remaining site (5JA.713) was unevaluated for the NRHP at the start of the current project; and therefore, was revisited and updated during the current project. After the revisit and update of 5JA.713 it has been determined to be not eligible for the NRHP.

Furthermore, one of the previously recorded sites (5JA.712) situated within the current project APE that was officially not eligible for the NRHP at the start of the project was revisited and updated during the current project. 5JA.712 was revisited because it was considered to be a relatively rare and unique site type and it was determined it should be revisited to ensure no previously unobserved cultural or faunal material was present. During the revisit previously unobserved/unrecorded faunal and cultural material was observed, which prompted an update and re-evaluation of the site. The NRHP eligibility of 5JA.712 was changed from not eligible to eligible.

Newly Recorded Cultural Resources (Survey Results) During the Class II and III cultural resource inventory 37 new cultural resources were recorded and two previously recorded cultural resources were revisited and updated (Table 7). Eleven of the 37 newly recorded cultural resources are sites and the other 26 are IFs. Four of the 11 newly recorded sites (5JA.2497, 5JA.2511, 5JA.2512, and 5JA.2521) have been determined to be eligible for the NRHP and will be avoided by the proposed project undertaking (Table 7). Furthermore, five of the 11 newly recorded cultural resources are linear resource segments that were left unevaluated for the NRHP. It was determined that the avoidance of these five linear resource segments is unnecessary because it is highly unlikely the proposed project undertaking will adversely affect these resources. Therefore, the five newly recorded linear resource sites will not be avoided by the proposed project undertaking (Table 7). The remaining two newly recorded sites, as well as all of the 26 newly recorded IFs have been determined to be not eligible for the NRHP and require no further work or avoidance (Table 7).

Lastly, one of the two previously recorded sites revisited and updated during the current project (5JA.712) has been determined to be eligible for the NRHP, and will be avoided by the proposed project undertaking. The other previously recorded site revisited and updated (5JA.713) has been determined to be not eligible for the NRHP with no further work or avoidance necessary (Table 7).

Provided NRHP-eligible sites 5JA.712, 5JA.2497, 5JA.2511, 5JA.2512, and 5JA.2521 are avoided by the proposed project undertaking, the Forest Service has a finding of no adverse effect for the proposed project undertaking.

Table 7. Summary of cultural resources and associated management determinations for the Slack Weiss Analysis Project. Newly Recorded Description Site/IF NRHP Management Cultural Resources Eligibility Determinations 5JA.2493 Historic Period— Site Not Eligible No further work or Habitation avoidance 5JA.2494 Prehistoric—Flake IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance

Page 20 of 43

5JA.2495 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2496 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2497 Prehistoric—Wickiup Site Eligible Avoid 5JA.2498 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2499 Historic Period—Bottle IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2500 Prehistoric—Biface IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2501 Historic Period—Cabin Site Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2502 Historic Period—Bottle IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2504 Historic Period—Bottle IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2505 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2506 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2507 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2508 Prehistoric—Flake IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2509 Historic Period—Corral IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2510 Prehistoric—Flake IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2511 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter Site Eligible Avoid 5JA.2512 Prehistoric—Cairn and Site Eligible Avoid Lithic Scatter 5JA.2514 Prehistoric—Flake IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2515 Prehistoric—Core IF Not Eligible No further work or Fragment avoidance 5JA.2516 Prehistoric—Flake IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2517 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2518 Prehistoric—Flake IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2519 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2520 Prehistoric—Flake IF Not Eligible No further work or

Page 21 of 43

avoidance 5JA.2521 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter Site Eligible Avoid 5JA.2522 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2523 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2524 Historic Period—Bottle IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2526 Prehistoric—Flake IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5GA.4419 Prehistoric—Lithic Scatter IF Not Eligible No further work or avoidance 5JA.2527.1 Historic Period—Trail Site Unevaluated No avoidance by current Segment project 5JA.2528.1 Historic Period—Road Site Unevaluated No avoidance by current Segment project 5JA.2529.1 Historic Period—Road Site Unevaluated No avoidance by current Segment project 5JA.2530.1 Historic Period—Road Site Unevaluated No avoidance by current Segment project 5JA.2101.2 Historic Period—Ditch Site Unevaluated No avoidance by current Segment project Previously Recorded Description Site/IF NRHP Management Cultural Resources Eligibility Determinations 5JA.712 Prehistoric—Bison Bone Site Eligible Avoid and Cultural Material Scatter 5JA.713 Historic Period—Hunting Site Not Eligible No further work or Blind avoidance

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Direct Effects For Alternative 1 there will be no direct effects as no action will occur.

For Alternative 2 activities associated with tree felling and/or removal, as well as prescribed burns can be considered ground disturbing activity. Impacts to cultural resources from tree felling and/or removal, as well as prescribed burns include the potential alteration or destruction of artifacts or cultural features on the surface, as well as damage to site soil matrices and depositional strata. There is a potential for ground disturbance in the form of vehicles, personnel, and other equipment used to remove or fell trees, as well as to control, contain and/or monitor prescribed burns. Disturbance and/or destruction of surface cultural material is the greatest threat of the proposed undertaking; however, shallow subsurface deposits (i.e., 1 to 20 cm below the ground surface) are also in danger of disturbance and/or destruction.

Page 22 of 43

Direct effects to sites determined to be eligible for the NRHP that are situated within the current project APE are not expected to occur as Design Criteria are in place to ensure these are either avoided or negligible.

Indirect Effects For Alternative 1 indirect effects for this project consist of destruction or alteration of Heritage sites or archaeological contexts due to lack of hazard tree removal. Standing dead trees may fall or collapse damaging surface archaeological contexts. Subsurface contexts may also be damaged by the root system becoming dislodged or uprooted when a dead tree falls or collapses.

For Alternative 2 potential indirect effects from the proposed action may include the destruction of archaeological contexts due to ground disturbance and any resultant erosion, vandalism, or artifact collection. To mitigate the effects of these potential threats to archaeological contexts, Forest Service personnel will inform archaeologists of any areas subject to these threats during project implementation.

Potential indirect impacts from the proposed action, such as artifact collection, vandalism, and erosion on the surveyed portion of the project area are not expected to increase. The discovery and education stipulation requires all persons associated with operations under the authorization to be informed that cultural resources cannot be collected, damaged, or moved. When placed in contracts and permits, the stipulation may help reduce potential indirect effects and may help protect unidentified buried deposits during project implementation.

Cumulative Effects The cumulative effects related to this project are the same for Alternatives 1 and 2. The loss of archaeological resources has happened in the past and will happen in the future. As time progresses, this loss results in fewer archaeological resources available to future generations to learn about past human lifeways, to study changes in human behavior through time, and to interpret the past for the public. During this project, the loss is limited to cultural resources not meeting qualifying criteria as sites (i.e., isolated finds), or the effect is considered to not affect those characteristics of a site that make it important, or the potential for effect is considered very low. In surveyed areas, recording and archiving basic information about each cultural resource for future reference serves to partially mitigate potential effects to cultural resources. Also, the Design Criteria, Mitigation, and Monitoring measures related to Heritage resources serves to protect cultural resources and avoid potential negative effects to cultural resources deemed to be significant.

A list of past projects conducted within the Analysis Area is provided below (Tables on pages 24-27). All of these projects have contributed to the cumulative effects to archaeological resources as described above.

Page 23 of 43

Report on this code for Cumulative Activity Effects? YES or Code Activity Description NO 1112 Jackpot Burning - Scattered concentrations YES 1130 Burning of Piled Material YES 1150 Rearrangement of Fuels YES 1153 Piling of Fuels, Hand or Machine YES Range Control Vegetation (No because only 4 acres in a 69 2360 acre unit were treated) NO 4111 Patch Clearcut (EA/RH/FH) YES 4113 Stand Clearcut (EA/RH/FH) YES 4121 Shelterwood Preparatory Cut (EA/NRH/NFH) YES Overstory Removal Cut (from advanced regeneration) 4143 (EA/RH/FH) YES 4151 Single-tree Selection Cut (UA/RH/FH) YES 4152 Group Selection Cut (UA/RH/FH) YES 4220 Commercial Thin YES 4232 Sanitation Cut YES 4310 Silvicultural Stand Examination NO 4320 Stand Diagnosis Prepared NO 4341 Stocking Survey NO 4342 Plantation Survival Survey NO 4346 Post Treatment Vegetation Monitoring NO 4381 Certification of Natural Regeneration with Site Prep NO 4382 Certification of Natural Regeneration without Site Prep NO 4383 Certification-Planted NO 4384 Certification-Seeded NO 4392 TSI Certification - Thinning NO 4401 Reforestation Need Created by Harvest NO 4404 Reforestation Need created by Regeneration Failure NO 4406 Reforestation Need Change due to Stocking Changes NO 4409 Reforestation Need Change due to Other (windthrow, etc) NO 4411 Seed (Trees) YES 4431 Plant Trees YES 4432 Fill-in or Replant Trees YES 4473 Site Preparation for Planting - Other NO 4474 Site Preparation for Planting - Mechanical NO 4483 Site Preparation for Seeding - Other NO 4484 Site Preparation for Seeding - Mechanical NO 4493 Site Preparation for Natural Regeneration - Other NO

Page 24 of 43

Report on this code for Cumulative Activity Effects? YES or Code Activity Description NO 4501 TSI Need Created- Release or Weeding NO 4502 TSI Need Created- Precommercial Thin NO 4511 Tree Release and Weed YES 4521 Precommercial Thin YES Watershed Resource Non-Structural Improvements Erosion 5510 Cont NO 6010 Wildlife habitat inventory NO 6421 Sensitive Species Species survey NO 8010 Insect and Disease Surveys NO 8100 Disease Control YES

Analysis Area Completed Activities by Activity Type and Decade FACTS Activity Decade Acres Code Activity Description Completed Completed 1112 Jackpot Burning - Scattered concentrations 1990 - 1999 36 1112 Total 36 1130 Burning of Piled Material 1980 - 1989 71 1130 Burning of Piled Material 1990 - 1999 428 1130 Burning of Piled Material 2000 - 2009 7 1130 Total 506 1150 Rearrangement of Fuels 1990 - 1999 486 1150 Total 486 1153 Piling of Fuels, Hand or Machine 1980 - 1989 44 1153 Piling of Fuels, Hand or Machine 1990 - 1999 215 1153 Total 259 4111 Patch Clearcut (EA/RH/FH) 1960 - 1969 260 4111 Patch Clearcut (EA/RH/FH) 1970 - 1979 399 4111 Patch Clearcut (EA/RH/FH) 1980 - 1989 29 4111 Patch Clearcut (EA/RH/FH) 1990 - 1999 81 4111 Patch Clearcut (EA/RH/FH) 2000 - 2009 69 4111 Total 838 4113 Stand Clearcut (EA/RH/FH) 1960 - 1969 950 4113 Stand Clearcut (EA/RH/FH) 1970 - 1979 753 4113 Stand Clearcut (EA/RH/FH) 1980 - 1989 44

Page 25 of 43

FACTS Activity Decade Acres Code Activity Description Completed Completed 4113 Stand Clearcut (EA/RH/FH) 1990 - 1999 415 4113 Stand Clearcut (EA/RH/FH) 2000 - 2009 14 4113 Total 2,176 Shelterwood Preparatory Cut 4121 (EA/NRH/NFH) 1960 - 1969 386 Shelterwood Preparatory Cut 4121 (EA/NRH/NFH) 1990 - 1999 134 4121 Total 520 4143 Overstory Removal Cut (EA/RH/FH) 1990 - 1999 79 4143 Total 79 4151 Single-tree Selection Cut (UA/RH/FH) 1960 - 1969 48 4151 Single-tree Selection Cut (UA/RH/FH) 1990 - 1999 194 4151 Single-tree Selection Cut (UA/RH/FH) 2000 - 2009 39 4151 Total 281 4152 Group Selection Cut (UA/RH/FH) 1960 - 1969 115 4152 Group Selection Cut (UA/RH/FH) 1990 - 1999 18 4152 Group Selection Cut (UA/RH/FH) 2000 - 2009 75 4152 Total 208 4220 Commercial Thin 1990 - 1999 8 4220 Total 8 4232 Sanitation Cut 1970 - 1979 164 4232 Sanitation Cut 1980 - 1989 274 4232 Sanitation Cut 1990 - 1999 130 4232 Total 568 4411 Seed (Trees) 1970 - 1979 282 4411 Seed (Trees) 1990 - 1999 102 4411 Total 384 4431 Plant Trees 1970 - 1979 678 4431 Plant Trees 1990 - 1999 59 4431 Plant Trees 2000 - 2009 127 4431 Total 864 4432 Fill-in or Replant Trees 1970 - 1979 19 4432 Fill-in or Replant Trees 1980 - 1989 409 4432 Total 428 4511 Tree Release and Weed 1980 - 1989 174 4511 Tree Release and Weed 1990 - 1999 201 4511 Tree Release and Weed 2000 - 2009 59

Page 26 of 43

FACTS Activity Decade Acres Code Activity Description Completed Completed 4511 Total 434 4521 Precommercial Thin 1990 - 1999 553 4521 Precommercial Thin 2000 - 2009 86 4521 Total 639 8100 Disease Control 1980 - 1989 57 8100 Disease Control 1990 - 1999 56 8100 Total 113 Remember this value contains many overlapping activities. The area of actual Grand ground disturbance will be equal to or LESS Total THAN this number. 8,827

Although all treatment areas associated with the proposed action were analyzed for the project, undiscovered cultural resources may be encountered during implementation. In the event that undiscovered cultural resources are encountered during implementation the Discovery and Education Stipulation will apply. A description of the Discovery and Education Stipulation is provided below.

Discovery and Education Stipulation All persons associated with operations under this authorization must be informed that any objects or sites of cultural, paleontological, or scientific value such as historic or prehistoric resources, graves or grave markers, human remains, ruins, cabins, rock art, fossils, or artifacts shall not be damaged, destroyed, removed, moved, or disturbed. If in connection with operations under this authorization any of the above resources are encountered, the proponent shall immediately suspend all activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery that might further disturb such materials and notify the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forests authorized officer of the findings. The discovery must be protected until notified in writing to proceed by the authorized officer (36 CFR 800.110 & 112, 43 CFR 10.4).

Geographic scope The Slack Weiss Analysis Project area is located on the Parks Ranger District of the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forests and Thunder Basin National Grassland in Jackson County, approximately 25 miles south of Walden, Colorado, in Townships 4 & 5 North, Ranges 79, 80, & 81 West, 6th PM. Based on watershed boundaries, the Analysis Area encompasses approximately 139,747.7 acres (ac), including 58,804 ac (38.5%) of private land, 46,922 ac (33.6%) on National Forest, 24,015 ac (17.2%) on State lands, 14,926 ac (10.7%) on BLM, and 80.3 ac (0.1%) owned by the Colorado River Water Conservancy District. Access is provided by Colorado State Highway 14, Jackson County Road 53, and Jackson County Road 11.

Timeframe All impacts to Heritage and/or cultural resources are irreversible as they are considered to be non-renewable resources. Once a cultural resource has been disturbed, moved, or modified in

Page 27 of 43 any way, these disturbances are permanent and irreversible. However, disturbance of cultural resources can be avoided, and if already disturbed, further disturbance or modification can be reduced or avoided through Design Criteria, Mitigation and/or Monitoring measures. As stated in the cumulative effects portion of this report, during this project, the loss is limited to cultural resources not meeting qualifying criteria as sites (i.e., isolated finds), or the effect is considered to not affect those characteristics of a site that make it important, or the potential for effect is considered very low. In surveyed areas, recording and archiving basic information about each cultural resource for future reference serves to partially mitigate potential effects to cultural resources. Also, the Design Criteria, Mitigation, and Monitoring measures related to Heritage resources serves to protect cultural resources and avoid potential negative effects to cultural resources deemed to be significant.

All projects that have been conducted in the past and will be conducted in the future in which ground disturbing activities are proposed have the potential to disturb or modify cultural resources.

Possible short term impacts include direct destruction and/or modification of cultural resources by vehicles, equipment, or personnel during project implementation. Long term impacts include any resultant erosion, change in vegetation cover, and/or subsequent artifact collecting as a result of the implementation activities.

Background The research design for this project has been facilitated by the Resource Protection Planning Process (RP3) initiated by the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation during the early 1980s and updated in the late 1990s. The reports, or "contexts," produced by this effort summarize and evaluate the history and prehistory of Colorado. While the reports are in some respects dated, they provide a key framework in which archaeological manifestations can be understood, evaluated, and interpreted. Historic and prehistoric contexts also provide guidance on the formulation of regional research objectives.

Regional contexts applicable to the lands administered by the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forests include the Colorado Prehistory: A Context for the Northern Colorado River Basin (Reed and Metcalf 1999), the Colorado Prehistory: A Context for the Platte River Basin (Gilmore 1999), the Colorado Mountains Prehistoric Context (Guthrie et al. 1984), the Colorado Mountains Historic Context (Mehls 1984a), Colorado Plains Historic Context (Mehls 1984b), the Colorado Historical Archaeology Context (Buckles and Buckles 1984), and the Colorado Engineering Context (King 1984).

A basic overview of the history and prehistory of northern Colorado is provided in Appendix A of this document.

FOREST PLAN CONSISTENCY The two proposed alternatives will meet all Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines, as well as all applicable laws and regulations. This includes 36 CFR 800, FSM 2361.03, National Environmental Policy Act, Archaeological Resource Protection Act, and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

Page 28 of 43

The District Ranger has been informed of these determinations. If the undertaking would likely alter the characteristics of these cultural resources as defined in 36 CFR parts 800.2(0) and 800.9 or if additional prehistoric or historic materials are found during the course of this project, work in that area will cease until the District Ranger has been notified. Work in the area of the cultural resource may not resume until the cultural materials and the potential effects have been evaluated by a professional archaeologist. Final notification to proceed will be given by the District Ranger.

REFERENCES

Andrews, J.T., P.E. Carrara, F. B. King and R. Stuckenrath. 1975. Holocene Environmental Changes in the Alpine Zone, Northern San Juan Mountains Colorado. Evidence from a Bog Stratigraphy and Palynology. Quaternary Research 5:173-197.

Athearn, Frederic J. 1982. An Isolated Empire: A History of Northwest Colorado. Bureau of Land Management-Colorado. Cultural Resource Series No. 2, Second Edition. Denver.

Branton, Nicole. 2007. Tie Hacking 101: A Historical Context and Field Guide to Tie Hacking Site Types. Unpublished manuscript on file at the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, Ft. Collins, Co.

Buckles, William G., and Nancy B. Buckles. 1984. Colorado Historical Archaeology Context. Colorado Historical Society, Denver, Colorado.

Cook, H. J. 1931. More Evidence of Mammoths in the High Mountains of Colorado. Science 73(1106 Roadside):283-284.

Eggan, F. R. 1955. Cheyenne and Arapaho Kinship Systems. In Social Anthropology of North American Tribes, Fred Eggan ed. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Francis, Julie E. 1991. An Overview of Wyoming Rock Art. In, Prehistoric Hunters of the High Plains, 2nd edition, by George C. Frison, pp. 397-430. Academic Press, San Diego, California.

Fremont, J. C. 1850. The Exploring Expedition to the Rocky Mountains, Oregon and California. Geo. H. Derby & Co., Buffalo.

Frison, George C. 1991. Prehistoric Hunters of the High Plains, 2nd edition. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.

Frison, George C., and Robert C. Mainfort. 1996. Archeological and Bioarcheological Resources of the Northern Plains. Arkansas Archeological Survey Research Series No. 47.

Gilmore, Kevin P. 1999. Colorado Prehistory: A Context for the Platte River Basin. Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists, Denver, Colorado.

Page 29 of 43

Guthrie, Mark R. Powys Gadd, Renee Johnson and Joseph J. Lischka. 1984. Colorado Mountains Prehistoric Context. State Historical Society of Colorado, Denver, Colorado.

Harris, Arthur H. 1985. Late Pleistocene Vertebrate Paleoecology of the West. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Hilger, M. Inez. 1952. Arapaho Child Life and Its Cultural Background. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 148. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Hughes, J. Donald. 1977. American Indians of Colorado. Pruett Publishing Company, Boulder, Colorado (2nd Edition, 1987).

Hurst, C. T. 1943. A Folsom Site in a Mountain Valley of Colorado. American Antiquity 8(3):250-253.

Jackson, Donald and Mary Lee Spence. 1970. The Expeditions of John Charles Fremont, Vol. 1: Travels From 1838-1844. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

King, Joseph E. 1984. Colorado Engineering Context. Colorado Historical Society, Denver, Colorado.

Kornfeld, Marcel, and George C. Frison. 2000. Paleoindian Occupation of the High Country: The Case of Middle Park, Colorado. Plains Anthropologist Vol. 45 (172):129-153.

Kornfeld, Marcel, George C. Frison, and Mary Lou Larson. 2010. Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers of the High Plains and Rockies, 3rd edition. Left Coast Press, Inc., Walnut Creek, CA.

Mehls, Steven F. 1984a. Colorado Mountains Historic Context. Colorado Historical Society, Denver, Colorado.

Mehls, Steven F. 1984b. Colorado Plains Historic Context. Colorado Historical Society, Denver, Colorado.

Murphey, R. F. and Yolanda Murphey. 1960. Shoshone-Bannock Subsistence and Society. University of California Anthropological Records 16(7):293-338. University of California, Berkeley and Los Angeles.

National Resource Conservation Service. 2014. Available SNOTEL Data for the the Roach (718) Monitoring Station, http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/nwcc/site?sitenum=718&state=co. Accessed October 2014.

O'Brien Printing Company. 1938. History of the Civilian Conservation Corps, Colorado and Wyoming District. O'Brien Printing Company, Pueblo, Colorado.

Page 30 of 43

Reed, Alan D. and Michael D. Metcalf. 1999. Colorado Prehistory: A Context for the Northern Colorado River Basin. Colorado Council of Professional Archaeologists, Denver, Colorado.

Shimkin, D. B. 1947. Wind River Shoshone Ethnogeography. University of California Anthropological Records 5(4):245-288. University of California, Berkeley.

Toll, Oliver. 1913. Indian Trip in Estes Park. Unpublished manuscript on microfilm, University of Colorado Library, Boulder.

Toulouse, Julian H. 1979. Bottle Makers and Their Marks. Thomas Nelson Inc., New York, NY.

USDA Forest Service. 1965 . History of the Routt National Forest, 1905-1975. USDA Forest Service.

Webster, Sean. 2004. A Re-Evaluation of the McKean Series on the Northern Plains. PhD Dissertation, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada. On file, Parks Ranger District, Medicine Bow-Routt NFs, Walden, CO.

Page 31 of 43

Appendix A: Historic and Prehistoric Overview of northern Colorado

Page 32 of 43

Prehistoric Overview Prehistoric research themes generally include questions about local chronology, individual cultural resource function, settlement patterns and cultural resource location variables, lithic procurement strategies, lithic technological organization, and resource exploitation patterns (Guthrie et al. 1984).

Based primarily on projectile point typologies, radio carbon dates, and stratigraphy the prehistoric occupation of the forest appears to have been fairly continuous if not intensive from at least 13,000 years B.P. until historic contact with the Ute, Shoshone, and Arapaho. The earliest evidence of human activity in north-central Colorado comes from the Paleoindian period, commonly defined as lasting from approximately 12,500 to 8,000 years B.P. (Kornfeld and Frison 2000). The Paleoindian period is commonly characterized as a period where highly mobile hunter-gatherers focused primarily on big game hunting roamed the North American landscape, but were also exploiting a number of other floral and faunal resources (Kornfeld et al. 2010). The environment was much more cool and moist and supported Pleistocene mega fauna such as mammoth, extinct varieties of bison, horse, and camel (Andrews et al. 1975; Cook 1931; Harris 1985; Hurst 1943; Kornfeld et al. 2010). Artifacts were very well made compared to subsequent periods and tool caches were fairly common (Frison 1991). Archaeological cultures or complexes assigned to the Paleoindian period consist of Clovis, Goshen, Folsom, Agate Basin, Hell Gap, Cody Complex (e.g., Alberta and Scottsbluff), and a number of Late Paleoindian cultural complexes such as Jimmy Allen, Frederick Allen, Lusk, Angostura, Lovell Constricted, and Pryor Stemmed (Kornfeld et al. 2010; Frison 1991). In North Park, evidence diagnostic of all of these Paleoindian cultural complexes have been found except for the earliest period (Clovis).

The subsequent Archaic period is thought to represent a major cultural shift from the Paleoindian period and is commonly divided into Early, Middle, and Late subdivisions (Frison 1991; Kornfeld et al. 2010). The Archaic period spans the time period from approximately 8,000 to 2,000 or 1500 B.P. and supposedly represents groups that had established more defined territorial zones with patterned seasonal settlement rounds within those zones (Frison 1991). The divisions between the Archaic periods are based primarily on projectile point style changes; however, there are a number of material culture changes that are thought to represent adaptive changes in subsistence, landscape-use, and settlement patterns between these periods (Kornfeld et al. 2010). For example, pit houses begin to appear in the archaeological record beginning in the Early Archaic, as well as a marked increase in the use of ground stone tools (Frison 1991). Furthermore, mass bison kills begin to appear in more frequency during the Early Archaic and become ubiquitous during the Middle Archaic (Frison 1991). Other major changes in material cultural that occurred during the transition from Early to Middle Archaic periods include the regular use of boiling pits, an increase in the frequency of mass deer and antelope kills, and what appears to be an increase in territorial range. Middle Archaic sites are found in just about every possible environmental setting throughout the Plains and Rocky Mountains, whereas Early Archaic sites are much more limited in their range and distribution (Frison 1991; Webster 2004). Stone circles first appear (although somewhat limited) during the Middle/Late Archaic possibly indicating the earliest use of tipis or some other type of conical shaped lodge and use of pithouses all but disappear by Late Archaic times (Frison 1991; Frison and Mainfort 1996). Also,

Page 33 of 43 communal bison hunting seems to have dramatically increased during the Late Archaic and reached its peak during the subsequent Late Prehistoric period (Frison 1991).

The following period, known as the Late Prehistoric (2,000-1,500 B.P. to about 500 to 400 B.P.), witnessed the introduction of the bow and arrow into hunting tool kits, as well as the limited use of ceramic vessels, into the mountains of northern Colorado (Frison 1991; Frison and Mainfort 1996). Also, the use of stone circles (for whatever purpose) dramatically increases during this period (Frison and Mainfort 1996). Pithouses are largely absent during this period and it appears communal bison hunting was at its peak (Frison 1991). Furthermore, some of the earliest rock art dates to the beginning of the Late Prehistoric (Francis 1991).

Horses, guns, and other Euroamerican trade items such as trade beads were introduced to Plains cultural groups beginning in the late 1600’s, becoming an integral part of their cultural systems and lifeways from that point on (Frison 1991). Protohistorically, the Ute occupied the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forests for at least 500 to 600 years. The Arapaho, Shoshone, Cheyenne, and possibly Kiowa, utilized the mountains of this area to a lesser extent until the 1700s. After 1810, the Ute and Arapaho were the primary groups in the area and competed over hunting territory (Hughes 1977:36).

Historic Overview Historic research themes of north-central Colorado generally include early exploration, the fur trade, Euroamerican-Native American contact and conflict, precious metal mining, early transportation, high country agriculture, commercial timber operations, high country stock raising, and recreation and tourism (Mehls 1984a). For the mountains of north-central Colorado, the historic period begins in the early to mid-1800s, when Euroamerican explorers first began to venture into the area. Unfortunately, most of the earliest Euroamericans in the area were explorers and trappers, and left little trace of their visits. The most visible historic activities on the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forests relate to the early mining and timber industries.

American Indian Historic Period Information from various sources indicates that areas of the Routt National Forest were occupied or visited by several historic tribes including the Ute, Arapaho, Cheyenne, Shoshone, Lakota, and Crow (Mehls 1984a). The latter two groups apparently visited the area only infrequently, and then only in the company of the Arapaho and Cheyenne (Jackson and Spence 1970:451,714). Themes include early exploration and the fur trade, as well as Euro-American-Native American.

The majority of the Routt National Forest is considered to be traditional Ute territory. While other tribes came and went during the historic period, the Utes remained until they were forcibly removed to Utah in 1879. Even after their removal, the Ute often returned to visit and hunt.

The Shoshone, close linguistic and cultural relatives of the Ute, ventured into northern Colorado on occasion during historic times, just as they did during the Late Prehistoric. Murphey and Murphey (1960) argue that the Shoshone visited northern Colorado (specifically the North Park area) only periodically, for the purpose of hunting. An account by an Indian agent at Ft. Bridger, in western Wyoming, places the Shoshone in northern Colorado in 1849 (Murphey and Murphey 1960:304):

Page 34 of 43

. . . their claim of boundary is to the east from the Red Buttes [near Casper, Wyoming], on the North Park of the Platte, to its head in the Park, De-cay-a-que or Buffalo Bull Pen, in the Rocky Mountains; to the south across the mountains, over to the Yampa-pa, till it enters the Green or Colorado River. . .

However, because their normal range was further north in Wyoming, it is not likely that the Shoshone used the Routt for any long-term occupation (Murphey and Murphey 1960:311). Shimkin claims that the Shoshone only used the North Park area during their annual bison hunt (Shimkin 1947:247).

The Arapaho and Cheyenne migrated from the area of present-day Minnesota during historic times, and settled in eastern Wyoming and Colorado (Eggan 1955:35). Culturally, the two groups were quite similar, and generally maintained friendly relations. The Ute, however, did not appreciate the arrival of the newcomers on their traditional lands and skirmishes between the Ute and the Cheyenne/Arapaho were common.

The Cheyenne and Arapaho ranged throughout the mountains of northern and central Colorado, as well as on the eastern plains. According to Farnham, an explorer during the middle 1800s, their range included much of north-central Colorado (Hilger 1952:2-3):

[The Arapahos] wander in the winter season over the country about the Kenyon of the Colorado of the West, and to a considerable distance down that river; and in the summer hunt the buffalo in the New Park [North Park] or 'Bull Pen', in the Old Park [Middle Park] on the Grand River [Colorado River], and in the 'Bayou Salade' [South Park] on the south fork of the Platte.

An expedition led by Fremont in 1844 makes mention of the Arapaho people in North Park, called "New Park" at that time, and in Middle Park, then known as "Old Park." In this expedition journal excerpt, Fremont had just left New Park and was entering Old Park via Muddy Pass (Fremont 1850:414):

Descending from the pass we found ourselves again on the western water; and halted at noon on the edge of another mountain valley, called the Old Park. . . we were now moving with some caution, as, from the trail, we found the Arapaho villages had also passed this way; as we were coming out of their enemy's country, and this was a war-ground, we were desirous to avoid them.

Fremont refers to North Park as Ute territory (the country of the Arapaho's enemies), but the Arapaho villages he mentions above preceded his party through North Park. Fremont's party finally encountered the Arapahos in Middle Park near Kremmling, without incident.

In 1913, Oliver Toll interviewed several Arapaho informants concerning the North Park area. According to the Arapaho, the pass from North Park to the Laramie Plains was called "Buffalo Pass," and they once had a battle with the Utes there (Toll 1913:42). They also described a place called "The Door," apparently a narrow canyon on the North Platte located near the towns of Saratoga and Encampment (just north of Northgate?). The informants also described a bison hunt

Page 35 of 43 there: "On the east side of the mountain they used to drive game up through it, where some of the hunters would be stationed to kill the game" (Toll 1913:43). There is, in fact, a large bison kill site recorded at Northgate (5JA.7, The Coffin Site). Both Arapahoe and Shoshone use of the site is postulated.

Trapping and Early Exploration Trappers conducted some of the earliest Euro-American exploration in northwestern Colorado. Because of the demand for pelts in the early 1800s, several men explored the country around the Green and Yampa River valleys for beaver and game. In 1824 William H. Ashley on his way to Brown's Hole on the Green River opened the area for trapping (USDA Forest Service 1965). He noted Steamboat Springs on his trip westward. In the early 1830s some men working with Antoine Roubidoux, a famed trapper, were the first Europeans to work the area from Trappers Lake to the White River and the Flat Top Mountains. Alexander Sinclair and Robert Kralick opened North Park for trapping in 1825 (USDA Forest Service 1965). Others followed Sinclair and Brown into North Park, Middle Park and Brown's Park where there was an abundance of beaver and game. Until the late 1830s Thomas "Peg-leg" Smith, John Gantt, Christopher (Kit) Carson, Alexander Sinclair and Calvin Jones all frequented the parks (USDA Forest Service 1965). Furs trapped in these areas were usually brought to Fort Davy Crockett in Brown's Park for trading. Another trapper, William S. Williams, worked in the Williams Fork Valley of Middle Park and the Bear (Yampa) River from 1825 to the early 1830s (Athearn 1982).

By the mid-1800s the beaver and big game population had been severely impacted by the trapping industry. The paucity of resources, in addition to a decreased European demand for imported fur, caused the fur trade to decline, and in 1844 Fort Crockett was abandoned. A few trappers, however, clung to their way of life in northwestern Colorado as late as 1878.

Other men entered the region with different objectives. Exploration and mapping for the U.S. government, in connection with the Louisiana Purchase, or simply for adventure, brought a wider range of people to the west. Although the region was opened for exploration after the Louisiana Purchase of 1803, many of the earliest explorers in northwestern Colorado did not arrive until the early 1830s. In 1838 Thomas Jefferson Farnham led a party of men over the Santa Fe Trail to Bent's Fort. From there they traveled northwest along the Blue River, and over the Continental Divide into Middle Park, and into the Yampa (Bear) Valley where they noted the Steamboat Springs area, then inhabited by the Utes. In 1844 an army expedition led by John Fremont was sent to map, survey and blaze trails in the region. This expedition took him through North Park, and the Yampa Valley to the Green River. Along the Yampa River, they stopped at a series of mineral hot springs that they named the "Steamboat Springs" (Athearn 1982).

The discovery of gold in 1859 near Denver brought flocks of Easterners to the state. This, in turn, brought more intense exploration of the parks and valleys surrounding what are now the Routt and Arapaho National Forests (USDA Forest Service 1965). John Wesley Powell surveyed the White River country in northwestern Colorado and the Green River in 1868. In 1871 Dr. Ferdinand V. Hayden was hired by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) to provide detailed descriptions of the geology, topography, flora and fauna of Middle Park. Some of Hayden's maps provide important information about place names in the area circa 1877. Hayden's party concluded that North Park, the Yampa Valley, Egeria Park and the Little Snake

Page 36 of 43

River Valley all had agricultural potential. The Grand River (Colorado River) valley was explored by A. C. Peale in 1872. By 1876 the results of the northwestern Colorado surveys were published. C. A. White described the geology, A. D. Wilson described the topography, F. M. Endlich described the geology of the White River section, and George Chittenden detailed the geology of the White River. Gustavus Beckler discussed the topography of the Yampa Valley, North Park, and the lands along the Utah-Colorado border.

Mining Just as the word "gold" brought hoards of men westward to Colorado, the same word brought men to northwestern Colorado. The most significant gold ores in the area were located around Hahn's Peak and on the western slope of the Continental Divide (USDA Forest Service 1965). Joseph Hahn, along with William Doyle and George Way, discovered placer gold in the Elk River area in the early 1860s. They established placer mining operations in 1866 but the party did not survive the winter. In 1867 or 1868, the mining operations around Hahn's Peak were "rediscovered" by John Brockmeyer and by 1872 Hahn's Peak was a booming mining town. Places such as Columbine, Farwell (National City), Whiskey Park, Slavonia, Poverty Bar, and Bugtown were associated smaller camps (USDA Forest Service 1965). Hahn's Peak was the primary population center in the area until 1875, and was the county seat for Routt County (USDS Forest Service 1965). New hydraulic mining technology replaced the placer methods around Hahn's Peak and, subsequently, about fifty miles of ditches were built to carry water for the hydraulics (USDA Forest Service 1965).

Other areas, such as North Park, also witnessed early mining activities. Independence Mountain was under production by the early 1870s with placer claims. Placer sites were worked all along the Rabbit Ears Range north into Wyoming. Gold was the primary ore, but silver, lead, copper and zinc were also extracted. In 1879 Lewis Gaskill discovered silver near Teller City, and a minor silver boom occurred which resulted in the construction of Teller City, Lulu City, Burnett and Park City. Teller City became a large boom town, where as many as 1300 people lived and worked. By 1885 the rush was over and the town had been largely abandoned. Middle Park was also producing silver ore along the Blue River, and copper was discovered near Conger Mesa, but there was never a boom in those places (USDA Forest Service 1965).

Later mining enterprises focused primarily on coal, copper and oil. Mining in North Park was revitalized in the late 1890s when copper was discovered near what was soon to become the town of Pearl (this lasted until 1915) and coal was discovered near Coalmont by the Riach Brothers. The coal, however, could not be easily transported without a railroad line, and this did not enter the Park until 1911 (USDA Forest Service 1965).

The Yampa coal beds located between Steamboat Springs, Hayden and Oak Creek were discovered in the 1880s and to this day they are mined for high-quality coal. In the late 1880s, very small coal mining operations along Oak Creek (e.g. Mount Harris) supplied coal to residents of the area. Coal first sold for one dollar a ton. Lack of railroads prevented larger scale mining until the train finally reached Oak Creek in 1909 and Mount Harris in 1914. Four companies currently mine the Yampa coal beds in Routt County alone, and they produce more than 50% of the state's coal.

Page 37 of 43

Settlement Europeans settled what is now the Routt, Arapaho, and Roosevelt National Forests in the 1870s and 1880s (USDA Forest Service 1965). Middle Park witnessed a number of land filings in the mid-1870s. Hilery Harris filed for a ranch in 1874, and Tracy C. Tyler filed for land at the site of Kremmling as early as 1865. In the early 1860s, William Byers made his first attempt to develop Hot Sulphur Springs into a resort, but the lack of a good wagon roads from the east side of the Divide prevented that. Finally, John Q. A. Rollins constructed a toll road for wagons over Rollins Pass in 1873. Between 1873 and 1874 an estimated 200 to 300 visitors were in the area between Grand Lake and Hot Sulphur Springs. In the same year, the Berthoud Pass road (originally constructed in 1861) was rebuilt and became the preferred route for tourists and settlers (USDA Forest Service 1965).

North Park was first permanently settled when J. O. Pinkham arrived with cattle in 1874 or 1875 (USDA Forest Service 1965). The road from Laramie was the easiest way to access North Park with cattle. The discovery of silver at Teller City increased the population of the Park, but only temporarily. When the population grew around the turn of the century, Jackson County (encompassing all of North Park) was carved out of Grand County, and in 1912 a courthouse was built in Walden.

Roads and Transportation Lack of easy access across the Front Range was the primary "roadblock" to development and increased settlement of North and Middle Parks. When the first trappers and explorers arrived trails were established, some of which followed previously established Native American routes. The improved wagon roads over Berthoud, Rollins and Byers Passes encouraged settlers and visitors to enter Middle Park in the 1870s and 1880s.

In Routt County several wagon and freight roads were established in the 1880s. Between 1885 and 1888, the road between Hahn's Peak and Steamboat Springs was constructed. After the railroad reached Wolcott in 1888, stage and freight lines were built from Steamboat Springs to Yampa, Toponas and on to Wolcott. In 1890 the bridge was built across the Colorado River at the town of State Bridge. This southern route was the primary access to Routt County until the railroad reached the Yampa Valley twenty years later. There was also a mail wagon route from Dunckley to Yampa called the Dunckley Pass Stage Route. The stage made biweekly runs over the pass in the late 1890s and early 1900s, and the road simplified the route from Yampa to Hayden (USDA Forest Service 1965).

Several major freight roads linked different parts of the valleys and parks. The Laramie Trail went from Hahns Peak through Columbine and Whiskey Park, then on to Laramie in the early 1870s. The Ellis Trail, built in 1888 by John (Jack) Ellis, supplied tie hackers in the Hog Park and Encampment areas with beef and other supplies. The heyday of the use of the Ellis Trail was in 1905. The second major freight road was built in 1895 over Buffalo Pass, south of a Ute trail that also went over the Continental Divide. The route was used primarily to transport grain from the Yampa Valley to Walden. The Rabbit Ears Pass road was opened in 1914, although it was only available for summer travel until it was upgraded (Athearn 1982).

Page 38 of 43

Railroads reached North and Middle Parks relatively late, and their arrival was much anticipated. The residents of the towns finally reached by rail would come out in droves to celebrate the fact that their town was connected to the Front Range and other areas. The arrival of the railroads brought a wave of small "booms" to some economically suffering towns including Walden, Steamboat Springs, Hayden and Oak Creek (Athearn 1982).

By 1868, the Union Pacific Railroad had reached as far west as Fort Bridger in Wyoming. At this time shipments of hay and coal still had to be transported by wagon up to Wyoming from North Park and the Yampa Valley. Even by the 1890s, the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad was pushing its way west along the Colorado River, but there were as yet no proposed spurs from the Union Pacific or the Denver and Rio Grande lines (Athearn 1982).

With the encouragement of northwestern Colorado landowners, David H. Moffat began collecting money for the construction of what was to become a frustrating undertaking: the construction of the Denver Northwestern and Pacific Railroad (also called the Moffat Road). Moffat was forced to build the track over Rollins Pass because he could not raise enough money to build a tunnel through the Front Range. Rollins Pass presented problems in the winter and many cattle died from the harsh conditions during their rail shipment to Denver. In 1905 the tracks reached Middle Park, in 1907 Hot Sulphur Springs, and in 1908 they reached Yampa and Steamboat Springs. Moffat died in 1911 after losing all his money in what seemed a futile effort because the railroad was not making profits from coal and cattle shipments. In 1913 the Moffat Road project was picked up by Newman Erb and renamed the Denver and Salt Lake Railroad. Erb extended tracks to Hayden and then finally Craig. Not even the extension to Craig could save the line, however, and it was never completed to Salt Lake City (Athearn 1982; USDA Forest Service 1965).

In 1923 construction started on the Moffat Tunnel through the Front Range. The tunnel would house the rerouted tracks and as well as waterlines for water-hungry Denver. The Denver and Salt Lake Railroad was eventually absorbed by the Denver and Rio Grande line which continues to operate it today.

Railroad tracks did not reach North Park until very late. In 1911 a spur off of the Union Pacific in Laramie reached Walden. The line was called the Laramie, Hahn's Peak, and Pacific Railroad because it was intended to go over the Park Range, down the Elk River Valley, through Steamboat Springs, Craig, Meeker, to the White River and ultimately Salt Lake City. The line only made it as far as Coalmont (located south of Walden) but its construction enabled the coal and oil resources in North Park to be shipped by rail. The Union Pacific bought the line in 1951 (Athearn 1982).

Grazing Livestock ranching proved to be the most important long-term economic activity in the north central portion of Colorado (Athearn 1982; USDA Forest Service 1965). Although the imminent failure of the mines prompted many early settlers to begin raising livestock, it was some time before crops and methods suitable to the basins and high alpine meadows of northern Colorado were developed (Mehls 1984a). The short growing season and variable precipitation patterns of

Page 39 of 43 the region dictated that the most successful agricultural product was hay--not only for cattle, but also for the horses and mules utilized in the region's mining camps.

Once the Union Pacific opened lines in southern Wyoming, cattlemen were able to ship cattle westward to untouched grazing lands. As early as 1868, Texas Longhorns were shipped to Fort Bridger, Wyoming. In 1871, the first cattle were driven into northwestern Colorado to Brown's Hole. Soon after, ranchers moved herds to the Little Snake, Yampa, and White River valleys, as well as into North Park. During the heyday of ranching in the 1880s, 1890s, and early 1900s the ranges were open and ranchers followed a pattern of seasonal land use, letting their herds roam free in the high mountain valleys and meadows during the summer and bringing them back to lower elevations during the winter (Athearn 1982).

The initial success of beef producers in north-central Colorado was tempered by several important factors. Cattle ranchers feared the introduction of sheep in the early 1900s, because of the inevitable competition for grazing lands. Sheep were already in southern Colorado and the San Luis Valley in the 1860s, but it was not until 1890 or 1891 that the first sheep came into northwestern Colorado, driven by sheep rancher Johnny Wilkes from Wyoming. Additional pressure was put on both the sheep and the cattle industries after the establishment of the national forests. The Forest Service realized that its lands were inundated with livestock and in the 1920s began to seriously monitor the effects of grazing on the land. Much of the land that previously had been grazed was withdrawn as timber reserve land and, in addition, herders and ranchers were required to apply for grazing permits (Athearn 1982; USDA Forest Service 1965).

Range wars broke out in the late 1890s in Routt County and later in Rio Blanco County. There were conflicts between small cattle outfits and the larger cattle companies, as well as between the sheep and cattle industry. One of the most tragic incidents occurred in 1911 with the George Woolley sheep massacre, when several hundred sheep were forced off the edge of a cliff in Routt County. In 1920, the sheep wars culminated at the Battle of Yellowjacket Pass (between Craig and Meeker). At that time the Colorado state militia was called in to restore order. Harry Ratliff, one of the first Routt National Forest rangers, was involved in the resolution of several tense stand-offs between stockmen and sheepherders (Athearn 1982; USDA Forest Service 1965).

Additional pressure was put on the sheep and cattle industries after the establishment of the national forests. Much of the land that previously had been grazed was withdrawn as timber reserve land and, in addition, herders and ranchers were required to apply for grazing permits. In 1907 Wyoming sheep were allowed to graze on the Routt National Forest. They had already been allowed into North Park because of an agreement between the Carbon County Woolgrowers Association (Wyoming) and the Snake River Stockgrowers Association (Colorado). Up until 1925, eighty percent of the sheep on the Routt were from Wyoming because there were no resident sheepherders in northwestern Colorado. There were two primary sheep driveways utilized by the Wyoming herds: the "High Trail" which followed the present Fireline Trail/Wyoming Trail along the Continental Divide to Rabbit Ears, and the "Lamb Trail" which went from Hinman Park to Elk Park (near Steamboat Springs) and was the division between sheep and cattle range. The Elkhorn Stock Driveway was another major trail south of the Wyoming border. Ultimately the Forest Service realized that its lands were inundated with

Page 40 of 43 livestock and in the 1920s began to seriously monitor the effects of grazing on the land (Athearn 1982; USDA Forest Service 1965).

The production of the winter forage required for cattle was facilitated by the construction of simple irrigation works to transfer spring run-off water from mountain streams to pastures. The first large irrigation ditches were constructed during the 1870s; by the turn of the century a large number of ditches had been built to draw water from most of the major streams and rivers in the area. Although ranching continues to be an important sector of the high-country economy, farming and ranching activity reached a peak about 1910 (Athearn 1982; USDA Forest Service 1965).

Tie Hack Industry A large tie hacking industry in northern Jackson County (Colorado) and southern Carbon County (Wyoming) dominated the commercial use of the Sierra Madre Range during the late 1800s and early 1900s (Branton 2007). The Carbon Timber Company was established in order to provide ties to the Union Pacific Railroad during the latter's rapid westward expansion. Timber from this area was also used to supply the area's mines (Branton 2007).

The remains of tie cutting camps can be seen along several drainages in the area, including the East Fork of the Encampment River, Coon Creek, Camp Creek, and Damfino Creek (Branton 2007). It is estimated that several thousand men could have occupied the area during the heyday of the tie cutting industry between 1902 and 1940. The first tie hackers were Civil War veterans and French Canadians. Later, Swedes, Norwegians, Finns, Austrians, and Italians constituted the primary labor force (Branton 2007). These men were proficient with the use of the broadaxe (a 10-12 inch blade, blunt on the opposite end), guide pole, spud peeler, and pickaroon (Branton 2007). A good tie hack could produce up to 50 ties a day. The ties were floated down the Encampment River during the spring thaw, and eventually driven to the North Platte River and north to Fort Steele, where they were loaded on the railroad (Branton 2007). With the introduction of the portable saw mill in about 1920, the skilled woodsman (e.g., classic tie hackers) needed for logging operations prior to the portable sawmill were not as necessary. The introduction of the portable saw mill allowed for many types of people with various skill levels to work timber.

The Carbon Timber Company was the primary supplier of ties to the Union Pacific (Branton 2007). The Company would acquire public land through the Timber and Stone Act of 1878, and through misuse of the Act, they could illegally remove timber from the public land. The timber company brought wagon loads of men to Steamboat Springs and Walden to file for timber claims (meant for private use) in 1901 and 1902 (USDA Forest Service 1965). These timber claims were then fraudulently used by the Timber Company to make ties. In 1906 the Company attempted to purchase Routt National Forest timber, but news of illegalities prevented them from receiving a permit. As it turned out, 1200 acres of Forest Land had been cut in trespass. The Carbon Timber Company was fined and the company offered to clear a "fire line" in lieu of cleaning up brush on the trespass lands. The fire line was built approximately on top of the Continental Divide, 18 miles long and 100 feet wide. This settled the first trespass on the Routt National Forest and built what became the famous Fireline Driveway over which millions of Wyoming sheep were brought into Colorado.

Page 41 of 43

In 1915, the Carbon Timber Company lost their monopoly with the Union Pacific and were eventually bought out by P.T. Queley who formed the Wyoming Timber Company. The focus of the industry shifted to the east side of the Medicine Bow Mountains after 1915. In 1933 the Wyoming Timber Company sold their holdings to Wyoming Timber Lands and these were sold to the U. S. Government in 1935.

Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) was established in 1933. The purpose of the CCC was to create jobs which would alleviate unemployment and benefit the public. The activities of the CCC were critical to the Forest Service's conservation and recreation goals. CCC projects included the construction of administrative facilities, campgrounds, and trails. CCC companies were also involved in conservation projects which included tree planting, weed removal, dam construction, and fire break construction.

Company 2136 from Jericho, Vermont, arrived in Walden on July 9, 1938 (O'Brien Printing Company 1938). They constructed some of the buildings on Forest Service land, as well as ditches and roads in the area around North Park. Company 847 was organized in Camp Bullis, Texas, and they moved to Grand Lake in 1938 (O'Brien Printing Company 1938).

Establishment of the National Forests Under the act of March 3, 1891, Congress gave the President authority to "set apart and reserve in any State or Territory having public land bearing forests, in any part of the public lands wholly or in part covered with timber or undergrowth, whether of commercial value or not, as public reservations..." The White River Forest Reserve was established that same year (USDA Forest Service 1965). These public lands received increased public notice when Vice President Theodore Roosevelt hunted in the Flat Tops Mountains in 1901. Roosevelt brought attention to the fact that public hunting lands and reserves were needed, and in 1905 he established the Park Range Forest Preserve and changed the name of the White River Reserve to the White River National Forest. In 1905, Theodore Roosevelt created the Routt National Forest. National Forest boundaries were constantly shifting in their early days. Pressure from livestock herders, timber companies, and homesteaders sometimes caused tensions about which drainages and parks should be included in or excluded from public ownership. Major land acquisitions also took place in conjunction with Depression-era Civilian Conservation Corps activities (USDA Forest Service 1965).

Timber harvesting on National Forest land began as soon as the reserves were set aside. When news that the Moffat Road (the Denver and Salt Lake Railroad) was proposed to be built near forest lands, for example, rangers predicted that the demand for timber (to make ties) would increase rapidly. The job of the early Rangers was to prevent trespassing, monitor timber cutting, and promote conservation. According to ex-supervisor Harry Ratliff, the first timber sale on the Routt National Forest was to the Colorado Telephone Company for telephone poles in 1905 (timber was already being cut on the Wyoming/Colorado border by the Carbon Timber Company, however, that land was not under Routt National Forest jurisdiction when they began cutting).

Page 42 of 43

In the 1940s and early 1950s, the Engelmann spruce-bark beetle attacked timber on the Routt National Forest. When the epidemic was over, it was conservatively estimated that one and one- fourth billion board feet of Engelmann spruce and Lodgepole pine had been lost. This dramatic loss of greenery created a historic landscape most noticeable in the Bear River Corridor and the Flat Tops. The dead timber has slowly been salvaged for use as house logs and other commercial products.

Page 43 of 43