DOCSLIB.ORG

Rico-West Dolores Roads and Trails (Travel Management) Project Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rico-West Dolores Roads and Trails (Travel Management) Project Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Rico-West Dolores Roads and Trails (Travel Management) Project Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement Dolores District, San Juan National Forest, Dolores and Montezuma Counties, Colorado November, 2017 For More Information Contact: Derek Padilla, Dolores District Ranger Dolores District 29211 Hwy. 184 Dolores, CO 81323 970-882-7296 [email protected] FAX: 970-882-6841 1 RWD FEIS In accordance with federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, office, 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. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online 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. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected] . USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender. 2 RWD FEIS Note to Reader, The Rico West Dolores Roads and Trails (Travel Management) Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) published May 6, 2016 and the Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) published July 2107 described analysis of the physical, biological, social, and economic effects of the proposed changes to the designated system of roads and trails open to over- ground travel by motor vehicles, and proposed physical changes to the road and trail system (decommissioning, structural developments, maintenance levels, trail class). The preferred Alternative is Alternative B (Modified) which has been added to this FEIS. Appendix A - Maps – Maps in Appendix A include, ‹ Map 1 – Alternatives B, C, D and E Maintenance Levels 2, 2-Admin and 3 Roads ‹ Map 2 – Alternatives B, C, D and E Maintenance Level 1 Roads ‹ Map 3 –OHV and Single-Track Trails Alternative A ‹ Map 4 – OHV and Single-Track Trails Alternative B ‹ Map 5 – OHV and Single-Track Trails Alternative C ‹ Map 6 – OHV and Single-Track Trails Alternative D ‹ Map 7 – OHV and Single-Track Trails Alternative E ‹ Map 8 – Recreation Settings Alternative A ‹ Map9 - Recreation Settings Alternative B (same for Alt B modified) ‹ Map 10 - Recreation Settings Alternative C ‹ Map 11 - Recreation Settings Alternative D ‹ Map 12 - Recreation Settings Alternative E ‹ Map 13 – Roadless Areas (with Proposed Action for Scoping) ‹ Map 14 – Overground Motor Vehicle Travel Suitability Map Alternative A ‹ Map 15 – Overground Motor Vehicle Travel Suitability Map Alternative B-E ‹ Map 16 – Motorcycle Regional Connections ‹ Map 17– OHV and Single Track Trails Alternative B (modified) ‹ Map 18 – Alternative B Modified Maintenance Levels 2, 2-Admin and 3 Roads ‹ Map 19 – Alternative B Modified Maintenance Level 1 Roads ‹ Map 20 – Overground Travel Suitability Map for Alterative B (modified) Appendix B through K – Appendix G has been updated with additional photos, clarifications were added to Appendix D, Appendix K was added with Response to Comments. ‹ Appendix B – Existing Conditions by Sub Area; ‹ Appendix C – Alternative Actions by Subarea; ‹ Appendix D – Comparison of Travel Analysis Report and Alternatives; ‹ Appendix E – Refinements from Proposed Action for Scoping to Alternative B (Proposed Action); ‹ Appendix F - Forest Plan Excerpts; ‹ Appendix G – Trail Diagrams and Photos; ‹ Appendix H - Riparian and Wetlands Maps and Tables, ‹ Appendix I – Decommissioning Implementation Tree; ‹ Appendix J – Other Management Direction ‹ Appendix K – Response to Comments. 3 RWD FEIS Executive Summary The analysis area is comprised of 256,256 acres total of FS and non FS lands. Non FS acres total 11,702 and FS acres total 244,544. Within the 256,256 total acres there are 129, 865 acres of Colorado Roadless area (51 percent) and 20,682 acres that make up a portion of the Lizard Head Wilderness (8 percent). Five alternatives are analyzed in detail. The preferred alternative is Alternative B (Modified) and modifications are described. The alternatives are briefly described below followed by tables with mileages and dates. Refer to the maps in Appendix A for a visual representation of the alternatives. Alternative A – The no action alternative proposes to continue the current situation and would have no timing restrictions. Alternative B (Proposed Action) – This alternative is the December, 2014, proposed action for scoping, with refinements. It would make minor changes to the road system, and remove motorcycles from some trails to address resource impacts, livestock distribution concerns and balance requests for nonmotorized areas. This alternative includes seasonal restrictions on motor vehicle use of trails. New trails for vehicles 62-inches or less (ATV/UTV/Motorcycle) are also included. Alternative B (Modified) – This alternative is the same as Alternative B with four modifications regarding seasonal timing restrictions on motor vehicle use of trails, one forest road, 62-inch trails in the Black Mesa area and changing single track motorized designations between two trails. Alternative C – This alternative would reestablish motorcycle use on some, but not all, of the trails that would be closed to motorcycle use under alternative B. It proposes new motorcycle trails in order to create connections and adds more 62-inch trails than alternative B. Timing restrictions of motor vehicle use on trails would be less restrictive under this alternative than they would be under alternative B. Alternative D – This alternative focuses on changes to trail designations in the Bear Creek drainage where semiprimitive nonmotorized recreation settings would be emphasized. Alternative D would continue to provide a motorcycle riding trail system throughout the rest of the analysis area that would be similar to alternative C’s system. Timing restrictions of motor vehicle use of trails would be the same as those proposed under alternative C. Alternative E – Like alternative D, this alternative would provide a semiprimitive nonmotorized setting throughout the entire Bear Creek drainage and similarly, it would create nonmotorized settings on North Calico Trail and connecting trails, as well as in the East Fork Trail area. Motorcycle riding in this alternative would be focused on areas from Eagle Peak Trail south to Taylor Mesa. Timing restrictions would be the same as those under alternative C. Other Alternatives were considered but eliminated from detailed study as explained in Chapter 2 of this FEIS. This section of the FEIS was updated as a result of public comment. The tables below display mileages and timing restriction dates for each alternative, Executive Summary Table 1 – Road Miles Alternative A B B (Mod) C D E 4 RWD FEIS Alternative A B B (Mod) C D E Miles Designated Open to All Wheeled 205.5 198.42 199.25 198.42 198.42 198.42 Motor Vehicles Miles of Closed/Stored Roads Not Open 169.16 125.5 124.67 125.5 125.5 125.5 to Motor Vehicles Total Minimum Road System Miles 374.66 323.92 323.92 323.92 323.92 323.92 Executive Summary Table 2 – Trail Miles Alternative A B B (Mod) C D E Miles Designated Open to Motorcycles 114 84 83 100 88 65 (and All Other Nonmotorized Uses) Miles Open to Wheeled Motor Vehicles 7 * * * * 50-Inches or Less (ATVs, Motorcycles) Miles with a Special Designation Open * 15 20 20 15 15 to Wheeled Motor Vehicles 62-Inches or Less (ATVs, UTVs, and Motorcycles) Trails open to motor vehicles are also open to nonmotorized uses. In addition, the following nonmotorized trails would result; Alternative A = 142 miles, Alternative B = 180 miles, Alternative C = 167 miles, Alternative D = 179 miles, and Alternative E = 203 miles. Executive Summary Table 3 – Timing Restrictions Alternative Motorcycle Timing Restrictions for ATV/UTV Timing Restrictions for Trails Trails A None None B Closed from 9/9 to 6/30 Closed from 12/1 to 6/30 Open from 7/1 to 9/8 Open from 7/1 to 11/30 B Mod Closed from 11/1 to 5/31 Closed from 11/1 to 5/31 Open from 6/1 to 10/31 Open from 6/1 to 10/31 C, D, and E Closed from 11/1 to 5/31 Closed from 11/1 to 5/31 Open from 6/1 to 10/31 Open from 6/1 to 11/31 Black Mesa OHV Trails Only: Closed from 9/8 to 5/31 Open from 6/1 to 9/7 5 RWD FEIS TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Purpose and Need ............................................................................................................................. 7 1.1 Background .................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wilderness Visitors and Recreation Impacts: Baseline Data Available for Twentieth Century Conditions
    United States Department of Agriculture Wilderness Visitors and Forest Service Recreation Impacts: Baseline Rocky Mountain Research Station Data Available for Twentieth General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-117 Century Conditions September 2003 David N. Cole Vita Wright Abstract __________________________________________ Cole, David N.; Wright, Vita. 2003. Wilderness visitors and recreation impacts: baseline data available for twentieth century conditions. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-117. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 52 p. This report provides an assessment and compilation of recreation-related monitoring data sources across the National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS). Telephone interviews with managers of all units of the NWPS and a literature search were conducted to locate studies that provide campsite impact data, trail impact data, and information about visitor characteristics. Of the 628 wildernesses that comprised the NWPS in January 2000, 51 percent had baseline campsite data, 9 percent had trail condition data and 24 percent had data on visitor characteristics. Wildernesses managed by the Forest Service and National Park Service were much more likely to have data than wildernesses managed by the Bureau of Land Management and Fish and Wildlife Service. Both unpublished data collected by the management agencies and data published in reports are included. Extensive appendices provide detailed information about available data for every study that we located. These have been organized by wilderness so that it is easy to locate all the information available for each wilderness in the NWPS. Keywords: campsite condition, monitoring, National Wilderness Preservation System, trail condition, visitor characteristics The Authors _______________________________________ David N.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Dan Gibbs Executive Director Colorado Department Of
    Statement of Dan Gibbs Executive Director Colorado Department of Natural Resources Before The Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands of The House Natural Resources Committee April 2, 2019 Chairwoman Haaland, Ranking Member Young, and Members of the Subcommittee: On behalf of Governor Polis and the State of Colorado, we appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony on the Colorado Outdoor Recreation and Economy Act (H.R. 823). We strongly support the CORE Act and hope Congress will move swiftly to enact it. Governor Polis would have liked to be here today with his former colleagues to express his strong support for this legislation. As you know, as a member of Congress, Governor Polis had sponsored the Continental Divide Recreation, Wilderness and Camp Hale Legacy Act, which has now been incorporated into the broader CORE Act. Introduction This legislation—the product of years of collaboration among elected officials, businesses, community members, and a myriad of other interested and affected stakeholders across Colorado—would protect some of the most beloved public lands in Colorado for their unsurpassed recreation, scenery, wildlife, watersheds, historic, and other unique values. As the Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, I support this bill because it will benefit our wildlife by protecting critical habitat and migration corridors; it will protect the outstanding recreational experiences that bring people from across Colorado—and the world—to these special places; it will help safeguard Colorado’s water resources by protecting key watersheds and all water rights; it strikes the right balance by protecting key public lands from development, while protecting all existing mineral rights and leaving other appropriate lands available for mining, oil, and gas development; and because it complements the values and opportunities associated with our state lands.
    [Show full text]
  • Subgrid Variability of Snow Water Equivalent at Operational Snow Stations in the Western USA
    HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES Hydrol. Process. 27, 2383–2400 (2013) Published online 24 May 2012 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/hyp.9355 Subgrid variability of snow water equivalent at operational snow stations in the western USA Leah Meromy,1* Noah P. Molotch,1,2 Timothy E. Link,3 Steven R. Fassnacht4 and Robert Rice5 1 Department of Geography, Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA 2 Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA 3 Department of Forest Ecology and Biogeosciences, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, USA 4 ESS – Watershed Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA 5 Sierra Nevada Research Institute, University of California at Merced, Merced, CA, USA Abstract: The spatial distribution of snow water equivalent (SWE) is a key variable in many regional-scale land surface models. Currently, the assimilation of point-scale snow sensor data into these models is commonly performed without consideration of the spatial representativeness of the point data with respect to the model grid-scale SWE. To improve the understanding of the relationship between point-scale snow measurements and surrounding areas, we characterized the spatial distribution of snow depth and SWE within 1-, 4- and 16-km2 grids surrounding 15 snow stations (snowpack telemetry and California snow sensors) in California, Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho and Oregon during the 2008 and 2009 snow seasons. More than 30 000 field observations of snowpack properties were used with binary regression tree models to relate SWE at the sensor site to the surrounding area SWE to evaluate the sensor representativeness of larger-scale conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • LIZARD HEAD WILDERNESS Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forests San Juan National Forest
    LIZARD HEAD WILDERNESS Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forests San Juan National Forest The following acts are prohibited on National Forest System lands within the Lizard Head Wilderness on the Norwood Ranger District of the Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests and on the Mancos - Dolores Ranger District of the San Juan National Forest 1. Entering or being in the restricted area with more than 15 people per group, with a maximum combination of people and stock not to exceed 25 per group. 36 CFR 261.58(f) 2. Building, maintaining or using a fire, campfire, or wood-burning stove fire: a) Within one hundred (100) feet of any lake, stream or National Forest System Trail. b) Above tree line. c) Within Navajo Basin of the restricted area (as depicted on Exhibit A; and at T.41N.,R.10W NMPM, portions of Sections 4,5,6; T.41N,R.11W NMPM, a portion of Section 1; and T42N R10W NMPM, portions of Section 31, 32, 33.). 36 CFR 261.52(a) 3. Storing equipment, personal property, or supplies for longer than three (3) days. 36 CFR 261.57 (f) 4. Hitching, tethering, hobbling or otherwise confining a horse or other saddle or pack animal: 1) in violation of posted instructions, or 2) within 100 feet of all lakes, streams, and National Forest System Trails. Pursuant to 36 CFR 261.51, this Order shall also constitute posted instructions. 36 CFR 261.58 (aa). 5. Possessing a dog that is a) not under control, or that is disturbing or damaging wildlife, people or property.
    [Show full text]
  • Grand County Master Trails Plan
    GRAND COUNTY MASTER TRAILS PLAN PREPARED FOR: Headwaters Trails Alliance July, 2015 CONTACT INFORMATION: Headwaters Trails Alliance Meara Michel, Executive Director Phone: 970.726.1013 Email: [email protected] Web: www.headwaterstrails.org HEADWATERS TRAILS ALLIANCE Master Trails Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS GRAND COUNTY MASTER TRAILS PLAN OVERVIEW...............................................................................................................................1 EXISTING PLANS AND DATA..............................................................................................5 HTA MISSION AND GOALS................................................................................................14 OPPORTUNITIES & CONSTRAINTS................................................................................16 SUBAREA PLANS PLANNING SUBAREAS.......................................................................................................19 WINTER PARK/FRASER AREA.........................................................................................20 OVERVIEW.....................................................................................................................20 EXISTING TRAIL CONDITIONS...............................................................................22 STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH SUMMARY..............................................................23 OPPORTUNITIES & CONSTRAINTS........................................................................24 GOALS, OBJECTIVES, & BENCHMARKS..............................................................27
    [Show full text]
  • COLORADO CONTINENTAL DIVIDE TRAIL COALITION VISIT COLORADO! Day & Overnight Hikes on the Continental Divide Trail
    CONTINENTAL DIVIDE NATIONAL SCENIC TRAIL DAY & OVERNIGHT HIKES: COLORADO CONTINENTAL DIVIDE TRAIL COALITION VISIT COLORADO! Day & Overnight Hikes on the Continental Divide Trail THE CENTENNIAL STATE The Colorado Rockies are the quintessential CDT experience! The CDT traverses 800 miles of these majestic and challenging peaks dotted with abandoned homesteads and ghost towns, and crosses the ancestral lands of the Ute, Eastern Shoshone, and Cheyenne peoples. The CDT winds through some of Colorado’s most incredible landscapes: the spectacular alpine tundra of the South San Juan, Weminuche, and La Garita Wildernesses where the CDT remains at or above 11,000 feet for nearly 70 miles; remnants of the late 1800’s ghost town of Hancock that served the Alpine Tunnel; the awe-inspiring Collegiate Peaks near Leadville, the highest incorporated city in America; geologic oddities like The Window, Knife Edge, and Devil’s Thumb; the towering 14,270 foot Grays Peak – the highest point on the CDT; Rocky Mountain National Park with its rugged snow-capped skyline; the remote Never Summer Wilderness; and the broad valleys and numerous glacial lakes and cirques of the Mount Zirkel Wilderness. You might also encounter moose, mountain goats, bighorn sheep, marmots, and pika on the CDT in Colorado. In this guide, you’ll find Colorado’s best day and overnight hikes on the CDT, organized south to north. ELEVATION: The average elevation of the CDT in Colorado is 10,978 ft, and all of the hikes listed in this guide begin at elevations above 8,000 ft. Remember to bring plenty of water, sun protection, and extra food, and know that a hike at elevation will likely be more challenging than the same distance hike at sea level.
    [Show full text]
  • 2011, Winter – Bikepacking the CT
    News from the Colorado Trail Foundation WINTER 2011 Bikepacking (and Hike-A-Biking) the Colorado Trail By Judd Rohwer (Rohwer, of Sandia Park, New Mexico, is a member of that’s NUTS. Back of the Pack Racing, a team of riders that describes But then the wheels started turning. And I’m not itself as “a fundamental movement that supports the talking about the 29 inchers on my Black Sheep single- theory of ‘me against mainstream.’ Our team attempts speed. I started thinking about the adventure, the to do everything the ‘right way,’ but not your way. We glory ... and the risks. I started thinking about the are a group of engineers, pilots, dreamers and UFO mental preparation, the physical training, the gear ... chasers. One thing is certain. If the race is long enough, and the danger. we will catch you – maybe.” What follows is his The challenge of The Colorado Trail seemed so description of his bikepacking adventures last summer massive compared to the usual 24-hour mountain on The Colorado Trail.) bike races that we train and live for at Back of the Pack Racing. But I wanted to face the challenge head on, so I made a commitment to myself and started planning for a 2011 attempt at the CTR. Then reality hit: the reality of a 500-mile self- supported race hit me straight in the face. Racing myself to the edge of exhaustion and beyond didn’t sound like much fun. So, I quickly convinced myself that the best way to experience the CT was to approach the adventure as a self-supported tour, not a race.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 OHV Grant Recommended Funding Approval
    State Trails Program 13787 US Hwy. 85 N., Littleton, Colorado 80125 P 303.791.1957 | F 303.470-0782 May 6-7, 2020 2020-2021 OHV Trail Grant funding awards as recommended by the State Recreational Trails Committee. This letter is a summary and explanation of the enclosed Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) 2020-2021 OHV Trail Grant funding recommendations for Parks and Wildlife Commission (PWC) approval during the May 2020 meeting. We are requesting approval for 60 grants for a total award amount of $4,273,860. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Division’s (CPW) Trails Program, a statewide program within CPW, administers grants for trail-related projects on an annual basis. Local, county, and state governments, federal agencies, special recreation districts, and non-profit organizations with management responsibilities over public lands may apply for and are eligible to receive non- motorized and motorized trail grants. Colorado’s Off-highway Vehicle Trail Program CPW’s OHV Program is statutorily created in sections 33-14.5-101 through 33-14.5-113, Colorado Revised Statutes. The program is funded through the sale of OHV registrations and use permits. It is estimated that almost 200,000 OHVs were registered or permitted for use in Colorado during the 2019-2020 season. The price of an annual OHV registration or use- permit is $25.25. Funds are used to support the statewide OHV Program, the OHV Registration Program and OHV Trail Grant Program, including OHV law enforcement. The OHV Program seeks to improve and enhance motorized recreation opportunities in Colorado while promoting safe, responsible use of OHVs.
    [Show full text]
  • Profiles of Colorado Roadless Areas
    PROFILES OF COLORADO ROADLESS AREAS Prepared by the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region July 23, 2008 INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 2 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS ARAPAHO-ROOSEVELT NATIONAL FOREST ......................................................................................................10 Bard Creek (23,000 acres) .......................................................................................................................................10 Byers Peak (10,200 acres)........................................................................................................................................12 Cache la Poudre Adjacent Area (3,200 acres)..........................................................................................................13 Cherokee Park (7,600 acres) ....................................................................................................................................14 Comanche Peak Adjacent Areas A - H (45,200 acres).............................................................................................15 Copper Mountain (13,500 acres) .............................................................................................................................19 Crosier Mountain (7,200 acres) ...............................................................................................................................20 Gold Run (6,600 acres) ............................................................................................................................................21
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests DRAFT Wilderness Evaluation Report August 2018
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests DRAFT Wilderness Evaluation Report August 2018 Designated in the original Wilderness Act of 1964, the Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness covers more than 183,000 acres spanning the Gunnison and White River National Forests. 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 http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Plant Survey of San Juan Public Lands, Colorado
    Rare Plant Survey of San Juan Public Lands, Colorado 2005 Prepared by Colorado Natural Heritage Program 254 General Services Building Colorado State University Fort Collins CO 80523 Rare Plant Survey of San Juan Public Lands, Colorado 2005 Prepared by Peggy Lyon and Julia Hanson Colorado Natural Heritage Program 254 General Services Building Colorado State University Fort Collins CO 80523 December 2005 Cover: Imperiled (G1 and G2) plants of the San Juan Public Lands, top left to bottom right: Lesquerella pruinosa, Draba graminea, Cryptantha gypsophila, Machaeranthera coloradoensis, Astragalus naturitensis, Physaria pulvinata, Ipomopsis polyantha, Townsendia glabella, Townsendia rothrockii. Executive Summary This survey was a continuation of several years of rare plant survey on San Juan Public Lands. Funding for the project was provided by San Juan National Forest and the San Juan Resource Area of the Bureau of Land Management. Previous rare plant surveys on San Juan Public Lands by CNHP were conducted in conjunction with county wide surveys of La Plata, Archuleta, San Juan and San Miguel counties, with partial funding from Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO); and in 2004, public lands only in Dolores and Montezuma counties, funded entirely by the San Juan Public Lands. Funding for 2005 was again provided by San Juan Public Lands. The primary emphases for field work in 2005 were: 1. revisit and update information on rare plant occurrences of agency sensitive species in the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) database that were last observed prior to 2000, in order to have the most current information available for informing the revision of the Resource Management Plan for the San Juan Public Lands (BLM and San Juan National Forest); 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Recreation & Leisure
    Recreation & Leisure According to a 2008 survey of Garfield County residents, up to 60 percent said they live in the county for its recreational opportunities. As such, tourism is a high priority for the county, which benefits from both significant summer and winter visitations. Over 15 percent of countywide respondents resided or relocated to Garfield County due to its proximity to ski resorts. While many of the signature recreational amenities of the area have been provided in this section, it is impossible to list them all. For more recreational opportunities, visit the town’s chambers, visitor centers or recreation centers. Rio Grande, Glenwood Canyon, and White River National Forest Crystal River Bike Trails Nestled in the heart of the Rocky Mountains, the For biking enthusiasts, pedaling from Aspen to 2.3 million acre White River National Forest is the Glenwood Springs is one of the best things to do while top recreation Forest in the nation. Home to world- visiting Garfield County. The 44 miles of continuous renowned ski resorts and the birthplace of designated multi-use trail features many access points, so one wilderness, the White River has something to offer can pick the ride that is the right length for either a every outdoor enthusiast. Accessible from every town weekend or lunch-hour ride. The trail is a Rails-to-Trails in Garfield County, the White River National Forest is project and was developed along the old Rio Grande available for one to enjoy such pleasures as camping, railway corridor. It has an easy grade up and down the ATV riding, fishing, skiing, rock climbing, or a quiet valley.
    [Show full text]