DOCSLIB.ORG

Rock Pit Development on the Coconino and Kaihah National Forests

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rock Pit Development on the Coconino and Kaihah National Forests Rock Pit Development on the Coconino and Kaihah National Forests BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT for Federally Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Wildlife, Fish and Plant Species 1 . Background/History; Introduction Source material for road surfacing is needed across the Coconino and Kaibab National Forests (NFs) for maintaining/improving public safety on current level-3 roads (roads managed and maintained to be suitable for passenger vehicle, which are mostly surfaced with gravel or other aggregate material), for watershed protection (e.g., minimize erosion from roads to nearby streams and meadows and realigning roads to avoid sensitive habitats), increase operational efficiency, and to maintain available materials for future project-specific road needs (e.g. maintenance of hauling roads and temporary road construction to support mechanical treatments). Mineral evaluations in 1979 and 1997 identified about I 00 potential pit locations for accessing additional source material (i.e., basalt, limestone, and cinders) on the Coconino and Kaibab NFs (Smith and Green 1979, Malpais Consulting 1997). Baseline geotechnical studies, including surveys of existing and potential material pits, were completed in 2011. These studies identified appropriate materials and new locations suitable for ongoing road maintenance. A result of these studies was identifying specific rock pit locations that balanced material availabilities, hauling considerations, proximity of new and functioning pits, and access from national forest system roads. Upon completion of consultation, these rock sources would be established over the next 20 years based on funding availability, maintenance needs for existing roads, and road construction/reconfiguration needs. After ten years the Forest Service will review potential reconsultation needs in conformance with Fish and Wildlife Service guidance on biological consultation. Consultation history Federal actions that affect listed species must undergo consultation or conference with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Definitions related to consultation and conferencing are given in the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Consultation Handbook, Procedures for Conducting Section 7 Consultation and Conferences (USDI FWS 1998). None of the proposed activities have been consulted on under the ESA, however, some of the existing pits that are proposed for expansion in this project were included in previous consultations, including: • A "Biological Assessment and Evaluation" for a 5-acre expansion of the Cinch Hook Pit in 2002. The BA&E documents no effects to all Threatened and Endangered species or their habitat. • The USFWS concurred with a determination that the Buck Butte pit may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Mexican spotted owl (MSO; USFWS, April 19, 2005). • A "Biological Evaluation" was prepared for Buck Butte Cinder Pit Expansion Project in 2005, which increased the pit from 3 acres to 5 acres. The Buck Butte Cinder Pit Expansion resulted in a May Effect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect determination to the MSO and its habitat. • A "Biological Assessment and Evaluation" was prepared for the expansion of the Lockwood Pit in 2000. The BA&E documents no effects to Threatened and Endangered species or their habitats. • The Marshall Fuel Reduction and Forest Restoration Project Biological Assessment, dated September 2010, identified the use of the existing Riordan Pit as a material source for road surfacing needs during the project. All the pits in the current consultation that have had previous consultations on pit expansion were concluded as informal ("not likely to adversely affect") under the ESA. There have been several similar consultations for rock pit development outside of those included in this Biological Assessment, including: • A "Biological Assessment and Evaluation" was submitted and received concurrence for the Clint's Well Forest Restoration Project in 2012, which included the expansion of the Park Knoll Pit to up to 25 acres. • A Biological Assessment was submitted for reclamation of Kelly Pit in June 2013. This involved reclamation of the 10-acre pit site using clean fill from the Flagstaff Pulliam Airport. • The Hart Prairie Fuels Reduction and Forest Health Project Biological Assessment and Evaluation, dated February 2010, identified Curly Pit as a source of cinders to be developed and used for road maintenance related to project implementation. Objectives The project objective is to make surfacing material available for road maintenance and construction of temporary roads approved through other project decisions. This project identifies development of 37 new and existing pits (Table 1). Pit development includes continued workings in existing pit footprints (n = 6), expanding footprints of existing pits (n = 20), and creation of new pits (n = 11 ). Rock material would be exposed, excavated, crushed (where necessary), piled, and prepared for transportation. This consultation includes hauling of the rock material and road surfacing using this material on the main (level 3) forest roads since the material from rock pits is most likely to be used on Forest transportation routes that receive the most use. While this rock material will likely be hauled to and used on temporary and secondary system roads as well, the impacts associated with these activities on temporary roads and level secondary roads were and will continue to be analyzed through the project-specific NEPA analysis for those projects. Also included in this consultation is the reclamation of 3 existing pits, which means this analysis includes analysis of activities at a total of 40 pits across the Coconino and Kaibab NFs (Figures 1-3). Species Addressed Information on species occurrence in the Rock Pits Project Area and suitable habitat features were collected from Forest Service biologists and engineers, GIS data (Forest Service), the Arizona State Wildlife Action Plan (AZGFD 2012), and other sources to aid in the analysis of this project. Species listed, proposed, or candidates for listing under the ESA and likely to occur on the Coconino and/or Kaibab NFs were identified by accessing http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/ and from input 2 from Forest Service biologists on the Coconino and Kaibab NFs. Only those species known or with potential to occur or be affected by the proposed action are analyzed in this biological assessment (Table 1). Species were excluded if: 1. The species occurs in habitats that are not present; and/or 2. The Project Area is outside the range of the species. Table 1. Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species on the Coconino and Kaibab National Forests. Species Status Analysis Forest Rationate carried Forward? Birds Southwestern Willow E1, CH 1 No CNF, KNF Spec ies uses riparian thickets dominated by Flycatcher ta ma risk (Tamarix spp) or composed of mixed Empidonax trail/ii extimus riparian vegetation such as willow (Salix spp) or cottonwood (Populus deltaides) trees. Neither the species nor its Critical Habitat occurs in or near any of the proposed rock pit sites or potential haul routes. This species will not be analyzed further. Mexican spotted owl and T1, CH Yes CNF,KNF Occupies mixed conifer, ponderosa Critical Habitat pine/gambel oak (Pinus ponderosa/ Quercus Strix occidentalis Jucida gambe/i}, and steep canyon vegetation types. MSOs and their habitat, including restricted/recovery, protected, and Critical Habitats have the potential to occur near individual rock pits or along likely hau l routs .. Western yellow-billed PT1, 51 No CNF Habitat for the species includes undisturbed cuckoo riparian deciduous forests composed of willow, cottonwood, sycamore (Platanus Coccyzus americanus wrightii), (A/nus oblongifolia). occidentalis and/or alder This habitat type is not found in or near any of the proposed rock pit sites, therefore, neither the species nor its habitat occurs in or near any of the proposed rock pit sites or potential haul routes. This species will not be analyzed further. California condor E-XN 1 Yes CNF,KNF Nonessential experimental population Nests on cliffs and forages over a large variety of Gymnogyps californianus habitats, hunt ing by sight (rather than scent). There is no suitable cliff nesting habit at in or near any of the proposed rock pit sites. Condors very rarely fly south of the Grand Canyon. When they have travelled into the southern extent of the designated recovery zone they have headed back north relatively rapidly. There are few reports of condors on the Coconino National Forest or the Williams or Tusayan Ranger Districts (RDs) of the Ka ibab National Forest (Parrish, pers. comm. 2012). 3 Species Status Analysis Forest Rationale ' Carried Forward? Suitable foraging habitat could be present in or nea r Big Ridge pit on the North Kaibab where the species consistently occurs. Yuma clapper rail E No CNF Occupies marsh-like habitat around rivers, ponds, and bogs where emergent vegetation Roi/us langirastris such as cattails (Typha /atifolia), bu lrush yumanensis (Scirpus califonicus), and reed grass (Phragmites cammunis) occur. This habitat type is not found in or near any of the proposed rock pit sites. This species will not be analyzed further. Bald and Golden Eagles Not Yes CNF, KNF Neither bald nor golden eagles are included in listed the ESA consultation. However, they are Haliaetus leucocephalus and under protected under the Ba ld and Golden Eagle H. chrysaetos ESA Protection Act (Eagle Act) and the Flagstaff office of Ecological Services requests
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Barringer Meteorite Crater, Coconino County, Arizona
    BARRINGERI' METEORITE CRATER, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA Eugene Shoemaker CaliforniaInstitute of Technology David Roddy United States Geological Survey Carleton Moore Arizona State University Robert Dietz Arizona State University A one-day field trip will visit Barringer Meteorite Crater. Partici­ pants will depart from Tempe in the evening and spend the night in Flagstaff. The field trip will depart from Flagstaff to the Crater and will return to Flagstaff and Phoenix on the same day. At the Crater participants may choose from a number of guided or self-guided op­ tions to visit this interesting geologic feature. In addition to the road guide included here participants will be provided with a ''Guidebook to the Geology of Meteor Crater, Arizona" prepared for the 37th Annual Meeting of the Meteoritical Society. It has been reprinted and is available from the Center forMeteorite Studies, Arizona State Uni­ versity, Tempe, Arizona 85281. Access to the Crater is by the courtesy of the Barringer Crater Company and Meteor Crater Enterprises, Inc. Visitors must receive permission to enter nonpublic areas of the Crater. SYNOPSIS OF THE The Supai Formation consists of interbedded red and GEOLOGY OF METEOR CRATER yellow fine-grained argillaceous sandstone and subordinate by Eugene M. Shoemaker siltstone. It is more than 300 meters (1,000 feet) thick in REGIONAL SETTING this region (Pierce, 1958, p. 84), but not more than 100 Meteor Crater lies in north-central Arizona in the Can­ meters or so (a few hundred feet) have been penetrated by yon Diablo region of the southern part of the Colorado drill holes at the crater.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona 'Highways
    Sc:~r1ic: VOL. XXXIII NO. 3 MARCH 1957 RAYMOND CARLSON, Editor U. S. Highway 89, Arizona's main artery of north­ GFORGE M. AV EY, Art Editor south trayel, is one of the most scenic of all 0~1r roads. Its JAJ\LCS E. STEVENS, Business Manager some 600 miles through the state offer a Yarietv of eleva­ LEGEND tion, terrain and scenic interest. Each mile unfoldi1we:, be- "89" ENT ERl'-'G HousEROCK VALLEY FRONT COVER fore the traveler is an interesting mile and different from ~ . R .,, y MANLEY'S PHOTOGRAPH SHOWS the one preceding. "89" brings :--·ou into the state at GLORIOUS NORTHERN ARIZONA VISTA. Fredonia. It leaves the state at Nogales. As eYen the most ARIZONA S CRAPBOOK . 2 S:-.:11PSHOTS OF SCEN IC INTEREST casual glance at a map ·will reveal, "89'' cuts right through ALO ~G "89," BORDER TO BORD ER . the heart of Arizona and covers a lot of interesting· coun­ PIPE SPRI NG NATIONAL MoNUJVIENT 4 try between Utah and J\1e.\'ico. The Strip, the cool J(aibab, \VF. PAY A VISIT TO HISTORIC the s,1 ·eeping panorama of Houserock Valley, Vermilion SHR INE GLORIFYING OUR PIONEERS. and Echo Cliffs, the lofty forested reg·ion ~f San Fran­ IO \VE TAKE A TRIP ON A HIGHWAY cisco Peaks, the high pla~eau countr:v ~bet\\·een vVillia1m OF INTE RNAT IONAL GRANDEUR. and Prescott, or by Alternate "89" Oak Creek and the OLD BrLL WrLLTAJVrs' FAVORITE MouNTAIN 34 Verde Va llev, the desert and then the historic Santa Cruz D ESC RIPTIO N OF A MOUNTAIN THAT Vallev- all of these and more, too, make up the travel JS LA NDM ARK IN NORTHERN ARIZONA.
    [Show full text]
  • Winter 2013-2014
    The Cactus Wren•ditionNotes & Announcements Volume LXVII, No. 4 Winter 2013-2014 Lincoln’s Sparrow Photo by Matt VanWallene Programs December 3 2013 The Madrean Archipelago Biodiversity Assessment (MABA) program was created by Brazil with David and Diane Reesor the Sky Island Alliance in 2009 to document From the highlands to the wetlands of the the flora and fauna of the Sky Islands between Pantanal, Serra das Araras, Itatiaia, Ubatuba the northern Sierra Madre Occidental in and Iguassu Falls, the Reesors’ adventures Chihuahua and Sonora and the Mogollon Rim and stunning photography are always for conservation, research, and education. We captivating. Combining wildlife and culture, programs will learn about the MABA database, which the Reesors’ programs imbue a true sense is linked to the Southwest Environmental of place. Information Network, and includes information NOTE: This program will be held at on 29,579 herbarium specimens and 134,625 Papago Buttes Church of the Brethren, animal records. The MABA database is the 2450 N 64th St., Scottsdale, AZ 85257 most comprehensive source of biological (northwest corner of 64th St. and records for the Madrean Archipelago and Oak, about a mile north of the Desert Sonora, and continues to grow through new 2010 she quit a very nice fulltime job so Botanical Garden). data acquisitions and targeted biodiversity she could devote extra time to conservation expeditions. activities. Mary is Secretary for Maricopa January 7 2014 Thomas Van Devender, manager of the Audubon Society and President of the Thomas R. Van Devender and MABA project at Sky Island Alliance, has Arizona SeedCrackers Society.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Arizona Ecological Services Office 9828 N
    United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Arizona Ecological Services Office 9828 N. 31st Avenue Ste C3 Phoenix, AZ 85051 Telephone: (602) 242-0210 Fax: (602) 242-2513 AESO/SE 22410-2011-F-0210 September 27, 2016 Ms. Laura Jo West, Forest Supervisor Coconino National Forest 1824 South Thompson Street Flagstaff, Arizona 8600 I RE: Rock Pits Project, Coconino and Kaibab National Forests Dear Ms. West: Thank you for your request for formal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544), as amended (Act). Your request and biological assessment (BA) were dated March 29, 2016, and received by us on April 4, 2016. This consultation concerns the potential effects of activities associated with the development and operation of rock pits on the Coconino and Kaibab National Forests in Coconino and Yavapai Counties, Arizona. The Forest Service has determined that the proposed action may affect, and is likely to adversely affect, the threatened Mexican spotted owl (Strix occidenta/is lucida) and its critical habitat. You have also requested our concurrence that the proposed action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the endangered California condor (Gymnogyps ca/ifornianus) outside of the lOj experimental nonessential population area, and "is not likely to jeopardize" the condor within the 1Oj experimental nonessential population area. We concur with your determinations. The basis for our concurrences is found in Appendix A. You also requested that we provide our technical assistance with respect to compliance with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Sbhc Hike Database 01-01-15 R1
    Hike Database January 1, 2015 January, 1. 2015 Table of Contents General Information ...................................................................................................................................................1 Hike Ratings, Pace and Elevation Change ...................................................................................................................3 Ratings ....................................................................................................................................................................3 Pace ........................................................................................................................................................................3 Elevation Change ....................................................................................................................................................3 Special Conditions ......................................................................................................................................................5 Glossary ......................................................................................................................................................................7 Hike Descriptions ........................................................................................................................................................9 A ......................................................................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Oak Creek Canyon
    ' " United States (. Il). Department of \~~!J'~~':P Agriculture CoconinoNational Forest Service ForestPlan Southwestern Region -""""" IU!S. IIIII.IIIIII... I I i I--- I I II I /"r, Vicinity Map @ , " .. .' , ",', '. ',,' , ". ,.' , ' ' .. .' ':':: ~'::.»>::~: '::. Published August 1987 Coconino N.ational Forest Land and Resource Management Plan This Page Intentionally Left Blank Coconino Foresst Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Plan. 1 Organization of the Forest Plan Documentation. 2 Planning Area Description. 2 2. ISSUES Overview . 5 Issues . 5 Firewood . 6 Timber Harvest Levels. 7 The Availability of Recreation Options . 8 Off-Road Driving . 9 Wildlife Habitat . 9 Riparian Habitat . 11 Geothermal Development . .. 11 Management of the Transportation System . 12 Use of the Public Lands . 13 Law Enforcement . 13 Landownership Adjustment . 14 Opportunities . 14 Public Affairs . 14 Volunteers . 15 3. SUMMARY OF THE ANALYSIS OF THE MANAGEMENT SITUATION Overview . 17 Prior Allocations . 18 4. MANAGEMENT DIRECTION Overview . 21 Mission . 21 Goals . 21 Objectives . 26 Regional Guide/Forest Plan . 26 Outputs & Range of Implementation . 26 Management Prescriptions . 46 Management Area Description . 46 Management Emphasis . 46 Program Components . 46 Activities . .. 47 Standards and Guidelines . 47 How to Apply Prescriptions . .. 47 Coordinating Requirements . .. 47 Coconino National Forest Plan – Partial Cancellation of Amendment No. 15 -3/05 Replacement Page i Coconino Forest Plan Table of Contents continued Standards and Guidelines . 51 Forest-wide . 51 MA 1 Wildernesses . 98 MA 2 Verde Wild and Scenic River . .. 113 MA 3 Ponderosa Pine and Mixed Conifer, Less Than 40 Percent Slopes. .. 116 MA 4 Ponderosa Pine and Mixed Conifer, Greater Than 40 Percent Slopes. 138 MA 5 Aspen . 141 MA 6 Unproductive Timber Land .
    [Show full text]
  • Coconino National Forest This Report Contains the Best Available Information at the Time of Publication
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 10/01/2020 to 12/31/2020 Coconino National Forest This report contains the best available information at the time of publication. Questions may be directed to the Project Contact. Expected Project Name Project Purpose Planning Status Decision Implementation Project Contact Projects Occurring Nationwide Locatable Mining Rule - 36 CFR - Regulations, Directives, In Progress: Expected:12/2021 12/2021 Nancy Rusho 228, subpart A. Orders DEIS NOA in Federal Register 202-731-9196 EIS 09/13/2018 [email protected] Est. FEIS NOA in Federal Register 11/2021 Description: The U.S. Department of Agriculture proposes revisions to its regulations at 36 CFR 228, Subpart A governing locatable minerals operations on National Forest System lands.A draft EIS & proposed rule should be available for review/comment in late 2020 Web Link: http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=57214 Location: UNIT - All Districts-level Units. STATE - All States. COUNTY - All Counties. LEGAL - Not Applicable. These regulations apply to all NFS lands open to mineral entry under the US mining laws. More Information is available at: https://www.fs.usda.gov/science-technology/geology/minerals/locatable-minerals/current-revisions. R3 - Southwestern Region, Occurring in more than one Forest (excluding Regionwide) 4FRI Rim Country Project - Wildlife, Fish, Rare plants In Progress: Expected:07/2021 08/2021 Mike Dechter EIS - Forest products DEIS NOA in Federal Register 928-527-3416 [email protected] *UPDATED* - Vegetation management 10/18/2019 (other than forest products) Est. FEIS NOA in Federal - Fuels management Register 03/2021 - Watershed management - Road management Description: Landscape-scale restoration on the Coconino, Apache-Sitgreaves, and Tonto National Forests of ponderosa pine ecosystems, designed to maintain, improve, and restore ecosystem structure, pattern, function, and resiliency.
    [Show full text]
  • Mt. Elden Dry Lake Hills Recreation Planning
    United States Department of Agriculture Mt. Elden / Dry Lakes Hills Recreation Planning Project Scoping Proposed Action Forest Service Coconino National Forest August 2020 Mt. Elden / Dry Lake Hills Recreation Planning Project Scoping Proposed Action For More Information Contact: Christine Handler Team Leader Phone: 559-920-2188 Email: [email protected] 1 Mt. Elden / Dry Lake Hills Recreation Planning Project Scoping Proposed Action Project Background The Mt. Elden/Dry Lake Hills (MEDL) area is located directly north of Flagstaff, Arizona (figure 1). Largely because of its proximity to Flagstaff and the appealing diversity of forest topography and vegetation, it is the most popular and heavily used recreation area on the Flagstaff Ranger District of the Coconino National Forest. The area provides thousands of forest visitors opportunities to enjoy the great outdoors, including hiking, mountain biking, riding horse, snowshoeing, cross-country skiing or rock climbing. Adjacent property owners walk this area daily and the project area borders the City of Flagstaff’s ‘Buffalo Park,’ which serves as one of the primary gateways into the Coconino National Forest from Flagstaff. The original MEDL trail system was dedicated in 1987. There are eight trailheads providing access to 14 designated National Forest System trails, including portions of the Arizona National Scenic Trail, Flagstaff Loop Trail, and the historic Beale Wagon Trail. The Little Elden Springs Horse Camp is adjacent to Forest Service Road 556 providing access to the trail system for equestrians staying at the campground. There are numerous organized recreation events which utilize trails and trailheads, some of which have been issued annual special-use permits for over a decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Traditional Resource Use of the Flagstaff Area Monuments
    Traditional Resource Use of the Flagstaff Area Monuments Item Type Report Authors Toupal, Rebecca; Stoffle, Richard W. Publisher Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology, University of Arizona Download date 06/10/2021 09:55:19 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/272100 TRADITIONAL RESOURCE USE OF THE FLAGSTAFF AREA MONUMENTS FINAL REPORT Prepared by Rebecca S. Toupal Richard W. Stoffle Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology University of Arizona Tucson, AZ 86721 July 19, 2004 TRADITIONAL RESOURCE USE OF THE FLAGSTAFF AREA MONUMENTS FINAL REPORT Prepared by Rebecca S. Toupal Richard W. Stoffle Shawn Kelly Jill Dumbauld with contributions by Nathan O’Meara Kathleen Van Vlack Fletcher Chmara-Huff Christopher Basaldu Prepared for The National Park Service Cooperative Agreement Number 1443CA1250-96-006 R.W. Stoffle and R.S. Toupal, Principal Investigators Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology University of Arizona Tucson, AZ 86721 July 19, 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................iv CHAPTER ONE: STUDY OVERVIEW ..................................................................................1 Project History and Purpose...........................................................................................1 Research Tasks...............................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Mexican Spotted Owl Habitat Monitoring Flagstaff Watershed Protection Project Dry Lake Hills Area
    Mexican Spotted Owl Habitat Monitoring Flagstaff Watershed Protection Project Dry Lake Hills Area Progress Report Prepared by: David W Huffman Joseph. E. Crouse Michael T. Stoddard W. Walker Chancellor John Paul Roccaforte Ecological Restoration Institute Northern Arizona University Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5017 June 2015 Introduction The Flagstaff Watershed Protection Project (FWPP) represents a unique partnership between the City of Flagstaff, the State of Arizona, and Coconino National Forest to help reduce hazardous forest fuels and potential for uncontrollable wildfire and flooding on approximately 10,544 acres of Coconino National Forest land. Two general areas of the Forest were identified for fuels reduction treatment -- Dry Lake Hills and Mormon Mountain. Much of this land is important habitat for the Mexican spotted owl (MSO), a federally threatened wildlife species. Habitat characteristics that are preferred by MSO for nesting and roosting include complex, multi-layered, mixed conifer and pine-oak forests on steep slopes. High quality habitat tends to have higher large tree densities and canopy cover, an abundance of large live trees and standing dead snags, and an abundance of large logs (Ganey and Balda 1994, Ganey et al. 1999, May et al. 2004). Although Mexican spotted owls are often found in forests with higher tree density and canopy cover, two primary threats to MSO populations are timber harvest (i.e., logging of larger trees) and stand-replacing wildfire. The recently revised MSO Recovery Plan (USFWS 2012) describes how hazardous fuels treatments may be conducted within Protected Activity Centers (PACs), i.e., designated protected sites where owls have been observed (US Fish and Wildlife Service 2012).
    [Show full text]
  • Flagstaff Regional Trail Strategy
    Flagstaff Regional Trail Strategy Draft - November 2019 Trails are part of what make Flagstaff what it is – a place that embraces its extraordinary setting on the Colorado Plateau. Trail providers, users, conservation advocates and other stakeholders have come together to prepare the draft Flagstaff Regional Trail Strategy, a plan for the region’s recreational trail system and a set of actions to get there. The Flagstaff Trails Initiative (FTI) represents the most sustained, broad-based attempt to bring together everyone who cares about trails to answer the question: how can we elevate our trails from good to extraordinary? More than ever, we think people need places to pedal, ride, run and walk. The work of FTI comes amidst a backdrop of growth in Northern Arizona – growth in residents, visitors, interest in outdoor recreation and concern for the environment. The greater Flagstaff area is expected to surpass 100,000 residents by 2030 and already welcomes millions of overnight visitors each and every year. We think this growth requires a matching level of foresight, care and stewardship. The landscape has a deep history that we strive to respect. For generations of native people, the canyons and parks surrounding Flagstaff were more than just a place for recreation. They remain home, places of tremendous significance. Plants and animals that reside here face their own pressures, many of them of our making. As people who play in the outdoors, we must play an active and constructive role in limiting our impact and restoring areas that need it. So here is our first attempt, crafted together, to balance these important considerations.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. 85 Tuesday, No. 116 June 16, 2020 Pages 36307–36466
    Vol. 85 Tuesday, No. 116 June 16, 2020 Pages 36307–36466 OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:27 Jun 15, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\16JNWS.LOC 16JNWS lotter on DSK30NT082PROD with FRONT MATTER WS II Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 116 / Tuesday, June 16, 2020 The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) Subscriptions: and the regulations of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Government Publishing Office, is the exclusive distributor of the official edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general (Toll-Free) applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published FEDERAL AGENCIES by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public Subscriptions: interest. Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions: Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the Email [email protected] issuing agency requests earlier filing.
    [Show full text]