DOCSLIB.ORG

2016 CONSERVATION INVESTMENTS United States and U.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION 2016 CONSERVATION INVESTMENTS On thecover: Ablackskimmer fishes inFlorida. S ERRITORIE T AND U.S. U.S. AND S UNITED STATE UNITED The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation is dedicated to sustaining, restoring and enhancing the nation’s fish, wildlife, plants and habitats for current and future generations. NFWF will advance its mission through innovative public and private partnerships, and by investing financial resources and intellectual capital into science-based programs designed to address conservation 3 priorities and achieve measurable outcomes. In Fiscal Year 2016, NFWF funded more than 860 conservation projects across the nation, generating an on-the-ground conservation impact of more than $353.8 million. KEY Projects supported by NFWF in fiscal year 2016 Alaska Projects supported by NFWF since founding in 1984 (Not to scale) S ERRITORIE T AND U.S. U.S. AND S UNITED STATE UNITED Hawaii (Not to Scale) NOTE: Projects with multiple locations are represented once and some locations are approximate. NFWF Conservation investments Projects supported by NFWF in fiscal year 2016 The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation funded Projects supported by NFWF since founding in 1984 morE ThaN 860 coNsErvatioN projEcTs across ThE NatioN IN FIscal year 2016. NFWF has supported morE ThaN 16,000 projEcTs sincE its FouNding in 1984. S ERRITORIE T AND U.S. U.S. AND S UNITED STATE UNITED Puerto Rico (Not to scale) 4 coNTENTs united states and u.s. Territories Fiscal Year 2016 conservation Investments alabama 09 montana 45 alaska 10 Nebraska 46 arizona 12 Nevada 46 arkansas 13 New hampshire 47 california 14 New jersey 48 colorado 19 New mexico 49 connecticut 21 New York 50 delaware 22 North carolina 52 district of columbia 23 North dakota 53 Florida 24 ohio 54 georgia 26 oklahoma 55 hawaii 27 oregon 55 Idaho 29 pennsylvania 57 Illinois 30 rhode Island 61 Indiana 31 south carolina 61 7 Iowa 32 south dakota 62 Kansas 33 Tennessee 63 Kentucky 33 Texas 63 louisiana 34 utah 66 maine 35 vermont 67 maryland 36 virginia 67 massachusetts 39 Washington 70 michigan 41 West virginia 72 minnesota 42 Wisconsin 72 mississippi 43 Wyoming 74 missouri 44 u.s. Territories 74 united states and International Fiscal Year 2016 conservation Investments 76 gulf Environmental Benefit Fund Fiscal Year 2016 project commitments 82 Impact-directed Environmental accounts Fiscal Year 2016 project commitments 86 UniteD states AND U.S. Territories FIscal YEar 2016 coNsErvatioN invEsTments S ERRITORIE T AND U.S. U.S. AND S UNITED STATE UNITED ALABAMA Birmingham-Southern College Land Trust for the Mississippi Coastal Plain Long-Eared Bat and Darter Habitat Restoration Best Practices for Effective Land Conservation Alabama Forestry Association and Education at Turkey Creek Nature Preserve in the Gulf of Mexico Region Incentives for Planting Shortleaf Pine (AL) (AL, FL, LA, MS, TX) in the Alabama Cumberlands - II remove invasives and replant natives on 9 promote best practices and efficiencies provide financial assistance to private acres of habitat at Turkey creek to support among various practitioners to achieve landowners for site preparation and habitat of the endangered vermilion darter, land conservation goals of emerging state planting shortleaf pine. project will as well as bat populations including the only and federal conservation plans for the gulf. establish 1,136 acres of shortleaf confirmed alabama colony of threatened project will provide capacity building and pine/upland savanna forest in the northern long-eared bats. project will reduce technical assistance to partner organizations, cumberlands of alabama. stormwater runoff and enhance K-12 outdoor identify best practices and efficiencies for $150,000 classroom opportunities through creation of implementing landscape level conservation, a bioswale/native plant demonstration garden and assist in implementation by enhancing American Forest Foundation at the new Turkey creek classroom pavilion. collaboration among public agencies and Longleaf Restoration on Coosa $34,690 nongovernmental organizations. Wildlife Management Area and $247,500 Surrounding Areas (AL) City of Birmingham restore 700 acres of longleaf pine on the Bertram A. Hudson K-8 School Manomet coosa county Wildlife management area Bio-Retention System (AL) Gulf of Mexico Coastal Waterbird Conservation and engage and educate 2,000 adjacent retrofit Bertram a. hudson K-8 school with Framework (AL, FL, LA, MS, TX) family forest owners on sustainable forest a bio-retention basin and pervious pavers. Work with federal and state agency and management practices and longleaf project will include restoration planning nongovernmental organization experts to restoration. project will provide technical and design, stream/site maintenance and develop a framework to achieve long-term assistance and conduct private landowner monitoring, outdoor learning and community conservation and recovery goals for targeted outreach activities including field days. outreach. project also will reduce pollutant species of coastal waterbirds across the gulf. $100,000 loads into village creek, a priority watershed, project will build on existing business plans to help control the volume runoff exiting the create a set of strategies and associated actions American Forest Foundation site, and create educational opportunities and costs to guide coastal shorebird and Shortleaf Pine Restoration on for Birmingham city school students and the waterbird conservation projects throughout Lauderdale and Freedom Hills community about stormwater management. the gulf over the next decade. Wildlife Management Area (AL) $36,781 $203,746 restore 1,100 acres of shortleaf pine on lauderdale and Freedom hill Wildlife City of Montevallo Marine Environmental Sciences management area, which provides habitat Shoal Creek Stream Enhancement (AL) Consortium - Dauphin Island Sea Lab for endangered and threatened species, restore and protect 3 acres of a heavily eroded Establishing a Mobile Conservation and 9 including the red-cockaded woodpeckers and section of shoal creek in montevallo, alabama. Resiliency Corps (AL) northern long-eared bats. project will promote project will engage students and volunteers provide full-time, on-the-job education and shortleaf restoration and sustainable forest in stabilizing creek banks through dredging, training to a target population of 12 urban, management to family forest owners in the invasive plant removal and native replantings, disadvantaged young adults, ages 18 to 25 in surrounding area on the cumberland plateau. and educate the public on watershed health the mobile area. project will put to work two $194,000 and maintenance. a plant identification team leaders and 10 corps members, restoring booklet produced by university students will 3 miles of stream, riparian buffer and wooded Audubon Nature Institute assist volunteers in restoration and educate on wetlands to benefit red belly turtles, yellow Reduced Impacts to Sea Turtles through the importance of native plantings to erosion crowned night herons, wood ducks, alligators Shrimp Industry Engagement (AL, LA, MS) control. and other species. Increase sea turtle protection by expanding $26,318 $250,000 the “Tow the Time” education campaign for shrimp fishermen and implement community- Forest Landowners Association National Wildlife Federation based workshops for the skimmer fleet of the Fostering Large-Scale Working Forest Alabama Longleaf Pine Restoration northern gulf of mexico in alabama, louisiana Landowner Collaboration (Multiple States) on Private Lands - IV and mississippi. project will host industry Target working-forest landowners, as restore and enhance 5,000 acres of workshops to educate fishermen on current well as companies that manage large longleaf and advance longleaf mapping and upcoming proposed regulations, forestland holdings for family owners, to and measurement in alabama. project will the logistics and benefits of turtle excluder identify opportunities for longleaf pine identify priority areas for longleaf restoration, devices, and the importance of carrying restoration and management. project will provide landowners with technical assistance observers on their vessels. foster communication between the Forest to develop conservation plans, and offer $51,695 landowner association’s member network, educational opportunities including longleaf stakeholders and the u.s. Fish and workshops and field days. Wildlife service to help landowners understand $125,000 and address regulatory barriers or disincentives to planting and maintaining longleaf pine. Operation Migration-USA $100,000 Whooping Crane Reintroduction to Southeastern U.S. - IV (Multiple States) support monitoring and outreach efforts in support of conserving the critically endangered whooping crane and building a self-sustaining population in the southeast. project will support two staff positions during the three- season migration period and provide outreach to increase general awareness. $75,000 Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife The Nature Conservancy University of Central Florida Conservation of Shoal and Redeye Bass Accelerate Longleaf Pine Ecosystem Important Sea Turtle Habitat Identification through Native Black Bass Business Plan Restoration on Private Lands on the Fall Line through Genetic Indicators (AL, FL, LA, MS) (AL, FL, GA, SC) (AL, GA) - II sample, satellite tag and track oceanic stage Evaluate, through a gIs threat assessment, accelerate and demonstrate longleaf
Recommended publications
  • French Broad River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009

    French Broad River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009

    French Broad River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009 French Broad River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 What is a River Basin Restoration Priority? 1 Criteria for Selecting a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) 2 French Broad River Basin Overview 3 French Broad River Basin Restoration Goals 5 River Basin and TLW Map 7 Targeted Local Watershed Summary Table 8 Discussion of TLWs in the French Broad River Basin 10 2005 Targeted Local Watersheds Delisted in 2009 40 References 41 For More Information 42 Definitions 43 This document was updated by Andrea Leslie, western watershed planner. Cover Photo: French Broad River, Henderson County during 2004 flood after Hurricanes Frances and Ivan French Broad River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009 1 Introduction This document, prepared by the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), presents a description of Targeted Local Watersheds within the French Broad River Basin. This is an update of a document developed in 2005, the French Broad River Basin Watershed Restoration Plan. The 2005 plan selected twenty-nine watersheds to be targeted for stream, wetland and riparian buffer restoration and protection and watershed planning efforts. This plan retains twenty-seven of these original watersheds, plus presents an additional two Targeted Local Watersheds (TLWs) for the French Broad River Basin. Two 2005 TLWs (East Fork North Toe River and French Broad River and North Toe River/Bear Creek/Grassy Creek) were gardens, Mitchell County not re-targeted in this document due to a re-evaluation of local priorities. This document draws information from the detailed document, French Broad River Basinwide Water Quality Plan—April 2005, which was written by the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ).
  • Caddo Lake News

    Caddo Lake News

    CADDO LAKE NEWS NEWSLETTER OF THE GREATER CADDO LAKE ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS February, 2017 On the web: www.glcaoftx.com Greater Caddo Lake Association of Texas Donna McCann, Editor Giant Salvinia Control Status Boat Road Marker Maintenance By Darren Horton Donna McCann & Stella Barrow The Morley Hudson Greenhouse project, overseen by the Caddo For long-time Caddo Lake residents and Biocontrol Alliance (CBA) with the support of many local volun- frequent visitors, navigating the labyrinth teers, finished its second complete year of operation in 2016. of passageways through our extensive Since the project began 273,675 adult weevils have been grown bald cypress swamp becomes easier with and released into Caddo Lake in our efforts to develop a manage- time, as the best ways to get from ment program for the reduction of the invasive Giant Salvinia “here” to “there” are either discovered plants infesting many areas of the lake, often to the point that by trial and error or are learned from navigation and water sports activities are impossible. some old-timer who knows the lake like the back of his hand. But for the less The Giant Salvinia weevil was first used to control Giant Salvinia in frequent visitor, and particularly for first- Australia in 1980, after it was brought there from its native envi- timers, the complexity of the boat-road ronment in the tropical regions of Brazil. Since then, Giant Salvinia system can be overwhelming. After all, on most lakes in the has become a tremendously invasive weed in regions of Africa, region, getting lost is unlikely since one can see the shoreline all Asia, North America and South America, as humans either acci- around.
  • Aquatic Ecosystems

    Aquatic Ecosystems

    February 19, 2014 Nantahala and Pisgah NFs Assessment Aquatic Ecosystems The overall richness of North Carolina’s aquatic fauna is directly related to the geomorphology of the state, which defines the major drainage divisions and the diversity of habitats found within. There are seventeen major river basins in North Carolina. Five western basins are part of the Interior Basin (IB) and drain to the Mississippi River and the Gulf of Mexico (Hiwassee, Little Tennessee, French Broad, Watauga, and New). Parts of these five river basins are within the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests (NFs). Twelve central and eastern basins are part of the Atlantic Slope (AS) and flow to the Atlantic Ocean. Of these twelve central and eastern basins, parts of the Savannah, Broad, Catawba, and Yadkin-Pee Dee basins are within the Nantahala and Pisgah NFs. As described later in this report, the Nantahala and Pisgah NFs, for the most part, support higher elevation coldwater streams, and relatively little cool- and warmwater resources. To gain perspective on the importance of aquatic ecosystems on the Nantahala and Pisgah NFs, it is first necessary to understand their value at regional and national scales. The southeastern United States has the highest aquatic species diversity in the entire United States (Burr and Mayden 1992; Williams et al. 1993; Taylor et al. 1996; Warren et al. 2000,), with southeastern fishes comprising 62% of the United States fauna, and nearly 50% of the North American fish fauna (Burr and Mayden 1992). Freshwater mollusk diversity in the southeast is ‘globally unparalleled’, representing 91% of all United States mussel species (Neves et al.
  • AN INTRODUCTION to Texas Turtles

    AN INTRODUCTION to Texas Turtles

    TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE AN INTRODUCTION TO Texas Turtles Mark Klym An Introduction to Texas Turtles Turtle, tortoise or terrapin? Many people get confused by these terms, often using them interchangeably. Texas has a single species of tortoise, the Texas tortoise (Gopherus berlanderi) and a single species of terrapin, the diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin). All of the remaining 28 species of the order Testudines found in Texas are called “turtles,” although some like the box turtles (Terrapene spp.) are highly terrestrial others are found only in marine (saltwater) settings. In some countries such as Great Britain or Australia, these terms are very specific and relate to the habit or habitat of the animal; in North America they are denoted using these definitions. Turtle: an aquatic or semi-aquatic animal with webbed feet. Tortoise: a terrestrial animal with clubbed feet, domed shell and generally inhabiting warmer regions. Whatever we call them, these animals are a unique tie to a period of earth’s history all but lost in the living world. Turtles are some of the oldest reptilian species on the earth, virtually unchanged in 200 million years or more! These slow-moving, tooth­ less, egg-laying creatures date back to the dinosaurs and still retain traits they used An Introduction to Texas Turtles | 1 to survive then. Although many turtles spend most of their lives in water, they are air-breathing animals and must come to the surface to breathe. If they spend all this time in water, why do we see them on logs, rocks and the shoreline so often? Unlike birds and mammals, turtles are ectothermic, or cold- blooded, meaning they rely on the temperature around them to regulate their body temperature.
  • Status and Ecology of Mexican Spotted Owls in the Upper Gila Mountains Recovery Unit, Arizona and New Mexico

    Status and Ecology of Mexican Spotted Owls in the Upper Gila Mountains Recovery Unit, Arizona and New Mexico

    Status and Ecology of Mexican Spotted Owls in the Upper Gila Mountains Recovery Unit, Arizona and New Mexico Joseph L. Ganey James P. Ward, Jr. David W. Willey United States Forest Rocky Mountain General Technical Report Department Service Research Station RMRS-GTR-256WWW of Agriculture May 2011 Ganey, Joseph L.; Ward, James P. Jr.; Willey, David W. 2011. Status and ecology of Mexican spotted owls in the Upper Gila Mountains recovery unit, Arizona and New Mexico. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-256WWW. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 94 p. Abstract This report summarizes current knowledge on the status and ecology of the Mexican spot- ted owl within the Upper Gila Mountains Recovery Unit (UGM RU). It was written at the request of U.S. Forest Service personnel involved in the Four Forests Restoration Initia- tive (4FRI), a collaborative, landscape-scale restoration effort covering approximately 2.4 million ac (1 million ha) across all or part of four National Forests (Apache-Sitgreaves, Coconino, Kaibab, and Tonto National Forests) located within the UGM RU. The UGM RU supports >50% of the known population of Mexican spotted owls, and the central location of the UGM RU within the overall range of the owl appears to facilitate gene flow throughout that range. Consequently, the UGM population is viewed as important to stability within the overall range of the owl, and management that impacts owls within the UGM RU could affect owl populations beyond that RU. Keywords: abundance, demography, habitat selection, diet composition, movements Authors Joseph L.
  • Iran & Caddo Lake

    Iran & Caddo Lake

    Iran and the Caddo Lake Connection Have you ever heard of the connection between Caddo Lake and Iran? The country of Iran is featured quite often in present day news stories but its relation to Caddo Lake is seldom, if ever, mentioned. Caddo Lake is a fine place for humans to visit who seek solitude and an almost primeval exposure to nature. After Caddo Lake you will recognize the area Henry Wadsworth Longfellow was describing in Evangeline -- Caddo Lake IS “the forest primeval”. Caddo Lake supports awe inspiring stands of bald cypress trees and lush aquatic vegetation. The Spanish moss hangs on the trees like the grey beards of ancient old men giving further testimony to the lengthy pedigree of this Caddo Lake real estate. There are numerous winding sloughs and watery fingers, a landscape reminisce of Georgia’s Okefenoffe and the Florida Everglades. The water in Caddo Lake is the color of tea. A condition caused by the tannic acid leached from the leaves and other vegetation that fall into the lake. Beneath the waters surface lives what might be considered an aquatic dinosaur. It is a fish whose genealogy extends back to those times. It is known by a variety of common names; grindle, dogfish and lawyer. The first coming from an ichthyologist with a creative mind, the second from what the fish is like to eat and the last from the way it behaves when hauled in at the end of a fishing line. When landed they come at you snapping their jaws as voraciously as a trial lawyer making closing remarks to a jury about a client who he knows is as guilty as sin! This fish has been able to survive in this backwater area of East Texas because of the remoteness and inaccessibility of the area.
  • Obviously Real Wrecks Because-They Were Identified in the Process of Removal

    Obviously Real Wrecks Because-They Were Identified in the Process of Removal

    Historic Watercraft, Shreveport to Daingerfield obviously real wrecks because-they were identified in the process of removal. The Albany and Lessie are reliable because the information was derived from the U. S. Customs Service for the Port of New Orleans. However, it is surprising that the Lessie B, which caught fire 15 miles below Jefferson, is not mentioned in the Corps' annual reports concerning improvements to Cypress Bayou. Since project work was suspended in 1880 and did not resume until 1884, it appears that the wreck was quickly removed by its owners. If it had been in place in 1884, it would have been cited as a navigation hazard and removed as part of the ongoing work effort. Of the listed wrecks, it is probable that most were not part of the Jefferson trade, but rather were on the western route around the raft, which duplicated the Jefferson route through Soda Lake. This was definitely the case with the Cotton Plant, which was an upriver packet. The only vessels that definitely were going towards or away from Jefferson were the Albany (which was moving from Shreveport to Albany), the Lessie B. (which was moving from Jefferson to Shreveport), and the Mittie Stephens (which was moving from Shreveport to Jefferson). Whatever their destination, the distribution of these wrecks along the route west of Shreveport shows the relative difficulty in navigating various portions of the route to Jefferson. Contrary to popular conceptions, the portion of the route from the foot of Caddo Lake to Jefferson seems to have been extremely safe. Only two steamboats (Mittie Stephens and Lessie B.) were wrecked along this portion of the route, and both were by fire rather than by snags or other navigation hazards.
  • Lincoln National Forest

    Lincoln National Forest

    Chapter 1: Introduction In Ecological and Biological Diversity of National Forests in Region 3 Bruce Vander Lee, Ruth Smith, and Joanna Bate The Nature Conservancy EXECUTIVE SUMMARY We summarized existing regional-scale biological and ecological assessment information from Arizona and New Mexico for use in the development of Forest Plans for the eleven National Forests in USDA Forest Service Region 3 (Region 3). Under the current Planning Rule, Forest Plans are to be strategic documents focusing on ecological, economic, and social sustainability. In addition, Region 3 has identified restoration of the functionality of fire-adapted systems as a central priority to address forest health issues. Assessments were selected for inclusion in this report based on (1) relevance to Forest Planning needs with emphasis on the need to address ecosystem diversity and ecological sustainability, (2) suitability to address restoration of Region 3’s major vegetation systems, and (3) suitability to address ecological conditions at regional scales. We identified five assessments that addressed the distribution and current condition of ecological and biological diversity within Region 3. We summarized each of these assessments to highlight important ecological resources that exist on National Forests in Arizona and New Mexico: • Extent and distribution of potential natural vegetation types in Arizona and New Mexico • Distribution and condition of low-elevation grasslands in Arizona • Distribution of stream reaches with native fish occurrences in Arizona • Species richness and conservation status attributes for all species on National Forests in Arizona and New Mexico • Identification of priority areas for biodiversity conservation from Ecoregional Assessments from Arizona and New Mexico Analyses of available assessments were completed across all management jurisdictions for Arizona and New Mexico, providing a regional context to illustrate the biological and ecological importance of National Forests in Region 3.
  • Basin 5 French Broad

    Basin 5 French Broad

    BASIN 5 FRENCH BROAD Basin Description The French Broad Basin is one of six basins in North Carolina that drain the western slope of the Eastern Continental Divide and flow into the Mississippi River System emptying into the Gulf of Mexico. The basin is divided into the French Broad River, the Nolichucky River, and the Pigeon River sub-basins, none of which merge in North Carolina. The French Broad River begins in the mountains of Transylvania County and flows north entering Tennessee north of Hot Springs, NC. The Pigeon River drains Hayward County LWSPs were submitted by 23 public water systems paralleling Interstate 40 north of Canton, NC, and flows into having service area in this basin or using water from this basin. Tennessee. The Nolichucky River is formed by the These systems supplied 38.2 mgd of water to 202,596 persons. convergence of the North Toe River and Cane River north of DWR estimated that 200,084 of the 202,596 persons served by Burnsville, NC. This sub-basin drains the western slope of the these 23 LWSP systems received water from this basin. Of the Blue Ridge north from Mount Mitchell to the Tennessee state 38.2 mgd supplied by these 23 LWSP systems, 38.1 mgd line. The Nolichucky and Pigeon rivers merge with the French comes from water sources in the French Broad Basin, the rest Broad in Douglas Lake, east of Knoxville, Tennessee. These coming from wells in adjoining basins. three sub-basins drain 2816 square miles in North Carolina and about 1500 square miles in Tennessee upstream of Douglas 1992 LWSP SystemWater Use from Basin (mgd) Lake.
  • Assessment Report of Ecological / Social / Economic Conditions, Trends, and Risks to Sustainability, Cibola National Forest Mountain Ranger Districts

    Assessment Report of Ecological / Social / Economic Conditions, Trends, and Risks to Sustainability, Cibola National Forest Mountain Ranger Districts

    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southwestern Region April 2014 Assessment Report of Ecological / Social / Economic Conditions, Trends, and Risks to Sustainability, Cibola National Forest Mountain Ranger Districts Cibola National Forest Mountain Ranger Districts Assessment Literature Cited Prepared by: The Cibola National Forest and Grasslands 2113 Osuna Rd., NE Albuquerque, NM 87113 For further information, contact: Elaine Kohrman Forest Supervisor Cibola National Forest and Grasslands 505-346-3900 ABSTRACT: The Assessment presents and evaluates existing information about relevant ecological, economic, and social conditions, trends, and risks to sustainability and their relationship to the 1985 Cibola Forest Plan, within the context of the broader landscape. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, status as a parent (in education and training programs and activities), because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program, or retaliation. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs or activities.) If you require this information in alternative format (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.), contact the USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (Voice or TDD). If you require information about this program, activity, or facility in a language other than English, contact the agency office responsible for the program or activity, or any USDA office. To file a complaint alleging discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call toll free, (866) 632-9992 (Voice).
  • Cibola National Forest Land Management Plan Revision Draft Environmental Impact Statement

    Cibola National Forest Land Management Plan Revision Draft Environmental Impact Statement

    United States Department of Agriculture Cibola National Forest Land Management Plan Revision Draft Environmental Impact Statement Forest Service Cibola National Forest and National Grasslands Mountain Ranger Districts MB-R3-03-29 August 2018 In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD- 3027, found online at Filing a USDA Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992.

  • SMPDC Region

    Southern Maine Regional Planning Commission Region Shelburne Batchelders Grant Twp Woodstock Sumner Hartford Mason Twp Beans Purchase Greenwood West Paris Miles Knob !! Miles Notch Number Eight Pond ! Albany Twp Shirley Brook ! Speckled Mountain ! Red Rock Brook Pine Mountain ! ! Lombard Pond ! Isaiah Mountain 3 ! 1 1 Hannah Brook E ! ! Ha T Stoneham ! y R R Sugarloaf Mountain d Willard Brook ! Goodwin Brook T Sugarloaf Mountain S ! B W Virginia Lake in Basin Brook ir Buckfield Brickett Place ! c B ! ! H h ! ro u Cecil Mountain w t A n R ! v R Bickford Brook d Co d d ld ! ! R Bro ok T rl B k Bartlett Brook o d a o R ! n r llen u C G B Beaver Brook ! d r r Mason Hill o Palmer Mountain M d o ! v f o d ! e u R k R r S n r c d i to t n a R e H A ld e R B o in u d k se Rattlesnake Mountain e d r i r Rd ! R Little Pond a f e a t d d m W e ! tl is R B l d t d s i d l n S L R A R l Rattlesnake Brook R n R il M A c ! I t ! a ! o B H in s ! d rs l e n e n r ! e l M S i a t e t d t Adams Mountain id e d u Shell Pond u l B n o l d h e Harding Hill o S o ! a y R R P G m d W d Stiles Mountain d d Great B!rook o Pine Hill R ! n n R ! R d ! y o n ! lle P Pine Hill d R a ee Cold B!rook d Pike's Peak V ll K n e c ! Foster Hill Little Deer HillDeer Hill ee h M Birch Island ! ! ! ! r S ! rg oe Mud Pond Upper Bay ve J Bradley Pond E ! Sheep Islan!d A ! ! nd Amos Mountain C Allen Mountain Paris re ! us ! n w Flat Hill h Rattlesnake Island L s m L ! Deer Hill Spring Harndon Hill Horseshoe Pond r n a Trout Pond ! ! ! e n W d P ! lm o ! Weymouth HillWeymouth