DOCSLIB.ORG

Travel Analysis Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Travel Analysis Report Travel Analysis Report United States Department of Cajon Place Off-Highway Vehicle Use Agriculture Forest Service January 2013 Mountaintop and Front Country Ranger Districts, San Bernardino National Forest San Bernardino County, California For More Information Contact: Tom Hall, Environmental Coordinator San Bernardino National Forest [email protected] 909-382-2921 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual‘s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795- 3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 0 San Bernardino National Forest Cajon Place Off-Highway Vehicle Travel Analysis Process TABLE OF CONTENTS Setting up the Analysis .................................................................................................................................................. 2 36 CFR 212 .......................................................................................................................................................... 2 FSM 7712 ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 FSH 7709.55 Chapter 20 ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Objectives and Priorities ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Describing the Situation ................................................................................................................................................ 5 San Bernardino National Forest Land Management Plan ......................................................................................... 5 Social and Economic Environment ........................................................................................................................... 6 Recreation ............................................................................................................................................................ 9 Transportation Atlas ........................................................................................................................................... 11 Heritage Resources ............................................................................................................................................ 13 Physical ................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Soils and Watershed ........................................................................................................................................... 14 Fire and Vegetation Management ...................................................................................................................... 16 Wildlife and Plants ............................................................................................................................................. 17 Forest Management ............................................................................................................................................ 19 Identifying Issues ......................................................................................................................................................... 22 Public Values and Uses ........................................................................................................................................... 22 Heritage .............................................................................................................................................................. 24 Ecosystem Elements and Function ......................................................................................................................... 25 Wildlife and Plants ............................................................................................................................................. 25 Soils and Watershed ........................................................................................................................................... 26 Fire and Vegetation Management ...................................................................................................................... 26 Commodity Uses and Values .................................................................................................................................. 27 Urban Development and Forest Linkages ............................................................................................................... 27 Special Area Designations ...................................................................................................................................... 27 Assessing Benefits, Problems, and Risks .................................................................................................................... 29 Describing Opportunities and Setting Priorities .......................................................................................................... 30 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................................................... 31 Appendix A – TAP Maps ............................................................................................................................................ 33 Appendix B – 2005 Roads Analysis Process ............................................................................................................... 42 Appendix C - FSH 7709.55 Chapter 20 ....................................................................................................................... 69 1 San Bernardino National Forest Cajon Place Off-Highway Vehicle Travel Analysis Process Setting up the Analysis On August 11, 2003, the Pacific Southwest Region of the Forest Service entered into a Memorandum of Intent (MOI) with the California Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Commission and the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division of the California Department of Parks and Recreation. That MOI set in motion a region-wide effort to ―Designate OHV roads, trails and any specifically defined open areas for motorized vehicles on maps of the 19 National Forests in California by 2007.‖ On November 9, 2005, the Forest Service published final travel management regulations in the Federal Register (FR Vol. 70, No. 216-Nov. 9, 2005, pp. 68264-68291). This final Travel Management Rule requires designation of those roads, trails and areas that are open to motor vehicle use on National Forests. Only roads that are part of a National Forest Transportation System (NFTS) may be designated for motorized use. Designations are made by class of vehicle and, if appropriate, by time of year. The final rule prohibits the use of motor vehicles off designated National Forest System (NFS) roads, NFS trails and areas, as well as use of motor vehicles on roads and trails that are not specifically designated for public use. Prior to 1989 when the San Bernardino National Forest (Forest) first designated a system of Off- Highway Vehicle (OHV) routes, National Forest System (NFS) lands were managed as open to cross-country motor vehicle travel, resulting in unplanned, unauthorized, roads and trails. Unauthorized routes generally are developed without environmental analysis or public involvement and do not have the same status as NFS roads and NFS trails included in the NFTS. Nevertheless, some unauthorized routes are well-sited, provide excellent opportunities for outdoor recreation by motorized and non-motorized users and would enhance the NFTS. Other unauthorized routes are poorly located and cause unacceptable impacts. Only NFS roads and NFS trails can be designated for motorized vehicle use. In order for an unauthorized route to be designated, it must first be added to the forest transportation system. On the Forest, there is a designated system for motor vehicle use and travel off of designated routes is prohibited and enforced by Forest Order. The existing system designated for motorized vehicle use was reconfirmed, with public input, through the land management process and Record of Decision of April 2006. The 2006 San Bernardino National Forest Land Management Plan (Forest Plan) prohibits motor vehicle travel off designated NFS roads and trails and limited areas that are designated for vehicle use (Forest Plan, Part 3, S35, pp. 8-9). In 2005, the Forest completed an inventory of unauthorized routes on NFS lands as described in the MOI and identified approximately 457 miles of unauthorized routes. Beginning in 2006, the Forest
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Environmental Assessment
    Environmental Assessment United States Department of Miller Canyon OHV Staging Area Project Agriculture Forest Service September 2013 Mountaintop Ranger District, San Bernardino National Forest San Bernardino County, California For More Information Contact: David Kotlarski, District Recreation Officer [email protected] 909-382-2815 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250- 9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Environmental Assessment Miller Canyon OHV Staging Area Project Table of Contents Document Structure .................................................................................................................................. ii Chapter 1 – Need for the Proposal ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B Evaluation of Potential Impacts Of
    Appendix B Evaluation of Potential Impacts of Cedar Springs Dam (Silverwood Lake) and Mojave River Dam on Downstream Mojave River Flows and Groundwater Recharge Table of Contents Page 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 1 B 1.2 Purpose and Objectives .................................................................................................................................. 1B 1.3 Headwaters of the Mojave River .................................................................................................................... B3 1.4 Review of Previous Studies ............................................................................................................................. B5 1.5 Evaluation of Streamflow Data related to Cedar Springs Dam ..................................................................... B12 1.6 Evaluation of Streamflow Data related to Mojave River Dam ...................................................................... B20 1.7 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................... B28 1.8 References .................................................................................................................................................... B29 List of Tables Table B1 Annual Measured Inflow above Cedar Springs Dam vs. Annual Flow at West Fork Mojave River near Hesperia
    [Show full text]
  • Final Designation of Critical Habitat for the Arroyo Toad (Bufo Californicus); Final Rule
    Wednesday, April 13, 2005 Part II Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation of Critical Habitat for the Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus); Final Rule VerDate jul<14>2003 16:23 Apr 12, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\13APR2.SGM 13APR2 19562 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 13, 2005 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR most listed species, while consuming Procedural and Resource Difficulties in significant amounts of available Designating Critical Habitat Fish and Wildlife Service conservation resources. The Service’s We have been inundated with present system for designating critical lawsuits for our failure to designate 50 CFR Part 17 habitat has evolved since its original critical habitat, and we face a growing RIN 1018–AT42 statutory prescription into a process that number of lawsuits challenging critical provides little real conservation benefit, habitat determinations once they are Endangered and Threatened Wildlife is driven by litigation and the courts made. These lawsuits have subjected the and Plants; Final Designation of rather than biology, limits our ability to Service to an ever-increasing series of Critical Habitat for the Arroyo Toad fully evaluate the science involved, court orders and court-approved (Bufo californicus) consumes enormous agency resources, settlement agreements, compliance with and imposes huge social and economic AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, which now consumes nearly the entire costs. The Service believes that Interior. listing program budget. This leaves the additional agency discretion would ACTION: Final rule.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrologic Analysis of the Mojave River, California
    HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS OF THE MOJAVE RIVER, CALIFORNIA USING A MATHEMATICAL MODEL By Timothy J. Durbin and William F. Hardt U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations 17-74 Prepared in cooperation with the Mojave Water Agency rn CO N November 1974 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Rogers C. B. Morton, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director For additional information write to: District Chief Water Resources Division U.S. Geological Survey 345 Middlefield Road Menlo Park, Calif. 94025 CONTENTS Page Abstract 1 Introduction - 2 Location and general features of the study reach 4 Scope and methods 7 Acknowledgments 8 Flow characteristics of the Mojave River 8 Extreme discharges 9 Velocity of the flood wave 10 Flow duration 10 Streamflow depletion by infiltration 14 Effects of the river system on a controlled release 18 Simulation of flow in the Mojave River using a mathematical model 20 Limitations of the model 20 Calibration of the model 21 Conveyance of imported water to Barstow in the Mojave River channel 24 Effects of The Forks Dam on streamf low 28 Predicted aquifer response to recharge using electric analog model 32 Conclusions 36 Selected references 36 APPENDIX Page Derivation of a mathematical model of flow in the Mojave River 39 The governing equations 40 Channel equations 40 Infiltration equation 43 Solution of the governing equations by the method of characteristics 44 Determination of the characteristic equation 45 Determination of the invariant equation 46 Construction of the solution 47 References cited 50 III IV 0 CONTENTS ILLUSTRATIONS Page Figure 1. Index map 3 2. Map showing Mojave River features 5 3-6.
    [Show full text]
  • October 11, 2016 (Regular Meeting)
    PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA Regular Meetings 2nd Tuesday January, April, July, and October Date: October 11, 2016 (Regular Meeting) Time: 6:00 P.M. COMMITTEE MEMBERS Chair Sam Thatte Vice Chair Richard Amos Member John Holland City of Hesperia Member James Roberts Council Chambers Member Don Webb 9700 Seventh Avenue Hesperia, CA 92345 - - - - - - - Council Member Mike Leonard, Agendas and Staff Reports are Council Liaison available on the City Website www.cityofhesperia.us Documents produced by the City, and distributed less than 72 hours prior to the meeting, regarding any item on the agendas, will be made available in the City Clerk’s Office located at 9700 Seventh Avenue during normal business hours. NOTE: In compliance with the Americans with Disability Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (760) 947-1007 or (760) 947-1056. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. City of Hesperia STAFF REPORT DATE: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 TO: Chair and Committee Members, Public Safety Advisory Committee FROM: Nils Bentsen, City Manager BY: Rachel Molina, Assistant to the City Manager SUBJECT: Hazard Mitigation Plan Revision RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the Public Safety Advisory Committee receive the attached Hazard Mitigation Plan last updated and adopted in April of 2012 in order to review and provide input on Mitigation Programs, Strategies, Preparedness Goals and Priorities found in sections 5.4 through 6.5 and comments at a future Committee Meeting. ATTACHMENT(S) 1.
    [Show full text]
  • ARROYO TOAD (Anaxyrus Californicus)
    ARROYO TOAD (Anaxyrus californicus) SPECIES REPORT Arroyo Toad (Anaxyrus californicus) (Photo by permission of Will Flaxington) Male Arroyo Toad (Photo by USFWS) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, Ventura, California March 24, 2014 - Final EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The arroyo toad is a small, stocky, warty toad that is found in coastal and desert drainages in central and southern California, and Baja California, México. The arroyo toad has evolved in an ecosystem that is inherently quite dynamic, with marked seasonal and annual fluctuations in climatic regimes, particularly rainfall. Natural climatic variations as well as other random events such as fires and drought, coupled with the species’ specialized habitat requirements are likely to lead to annual fluctuations in arroyo toad population sizes. The distribution of the arroyo toad also appears to be restricted naturally as a result of specific habitat requirements for breeding and development. These natural restrictions, coupled with the small sizes of many arroyo toad populations, make them particularly vulnerable to the negative effects of human-induced changes to their habitats. There are several human-related activities that affect the hydrology of arroyo toad stream habitats and can destroy or severely modify the dynamic nature of the riparian systems upon which arroyo toads depend for reproduction, development, and survival. Human activities that affect water quality, the amount and timing of non-flood flows, or the frequency and intensity of floods; affect riparian plant communities; or alter sedimentation dynamics can reduce or eliminate the suitability of stream channels for arroyo toad breeding habitat. Degradation or loss of surrounding uplands reduces and eliminates foraging and overwintering habitat.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Conservation Investment Strategy
    DRAFT San Bernardino County Regional Conservation Investment Strategy December 2018 PREPARED BY Draft San Bernardino County Regional Conservation Investment Strategy Prepared for: Prepared by: 605 3rd Street Encinitas, California 92024 Contact: Mike Howard DECEMBER 2018 Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material. Draft San Bernardino County Regional Conservation Investment Strategy TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................v 1 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................ 1-3 1.3 Intended Uses ....................................................................................................... 1-3 1.4 RCIS Area ............................................................................................................ 1-4 1.5 Conservation Elements ........................................................................................ 1-8 1.6 Planning Process .................................................................................................. 1-8 1.7 Relationship to Other Planning .......................................................................... 1-10 1.8 Document Content and Organization................................................................
    [Show full text]