DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Revised Forest Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft Revised Forest Plan Draft Revised Forest Plan United States Department of Helena - Lewis and Clark National Forest Agriculture Forest Service June 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 (for example, 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. 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. Draft Revised Forest Plan Helena - Lewis and Clark National Forest Lead Agency: United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service Responsible Official: Bill Avey, Forest Supervisor 2880 Skyway Dr. Helena, MT 59602 406-449-5201 For Information Contact: Deb Entwistle, Forest Plan Revision Team Leader 2880 Skyway Dr. Helena, MT 59602 406-449-5201 Abstract: The Helena - Lewis and Clark National Forest has developed this draft revised forest plan, in accordance with the 2012 National Forest System land management planning rule (planning rule) adopted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Page intentionally left blank. Helena-Lewis and Clark National Forest Draft Revised Forest Plan Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 Helena - Lewis and Clark Consolidation ................................................................................................................ 1 Purpose of this Land and Resource Management Plan ........................................................................................ 2 Plan Structure ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 Plan Content ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Plan Components ......................................................................................................................................... 4 Other Required Plan Content ....................................................................................................................... 6 Project and Activity Consistency with the Plan ................................................................................................... 10 Determining Consistency ........................................................................................................................... 11 Rights and Interests ............................................................................................................................................ 11 Use of Best Available Science ............................................................................................................................. 11 Other Planning Efforts ........................................................................................................................................ 12 Chapter 2. Forestwide Direction ........................................................................................... 13 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 13 Aquatic Ecosystems ............................................................................................................................................ 13 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 13 Watershed (WTR) ....................................................................................................................................... 14 Riparian Management Zones (RMZ) .......................................................................................................... 17 Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat (FAH) .......................................................................................................... 21 Conservation Watershed Network (CWN) ................................................................................................. 23 Soil (SOIL) ............................................................................................................................................................ 24 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 24 Air Quality (AQ) ................................................................................................................................................... 26 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 26 Fire and Fuels Management (FIRE) ..................................................................................................................... 27 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 27 Vegetation........................................................................................................................................................... 29 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 29 All Terrestrial Vegetation (VEGT) ............................................................................................................... 30 Forested Vegetation (VEGF) ....................................................................................................................... 35 Nonforested Vegetation (VEGNF) .............................................................................................................. 44 Plant Species at Risk (PRISK) ...................................................................................................................... 45 Pollinators (POLL) ....................................................................................................................................... 46 Invasive Plants (INV) ................................................................................................................................... 46 Wildlife (WL) ....................................................................................................................................................... 48 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 48 Recreation Opportunities, Settings, Special Uses, Access, and Scenery ............................................................. 52 Recreation Settings (ROS) .......................................................................................................................... 52 Recreation Opportunities (REC) ................................................................................................................. 58 Recreation Special Uses (RSUP) ................................................................................................................. 61 Recreation Access (ACCESS) ....................................................................................................................... 61 Scenic Character (SCENERY) ....................................................................................................................... 62 Designated Areas ................................................................................................................................................ 63 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 63 Designated Wilderness (WILD) ..................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Self-Guiding Geology Tour of Stanley Park
    Page 1 of 30 Self-guiding geology tour of Stanley Park Points of geological interest along the sea-wall between Ferguson Point & Prospect Point, Stanley Park, a distance of approximately 2km. (Terms in bold are defined in the glossary) David L. Cook P.Eng; FGAC. Introduction:- Geomorphologically Stanley Park is a type of hill called a cuesta (Figure 1), one of many in the Fraser Valley which would have formed islands when the sea level was higher e.g. 7000 years ago. The surfaces of the cuestas in the Fraser valley slope up to the north 10° to 15° but approximately 40 Mya (which is the convention for “million years ago” not to be confused with Ma which is the convention for “million years”) were part of a flat, eroded peneplain now raised on its north side because of uplift of the Coast Range due to plate tectonics (Eisbacher 1977) (Figure 2). Cuestas form because they have some feature which resists erosion such as a bastion of resistant rock (e.g. volcanic rock in the case of Stanley Park, Sentinel Hill, Little Mountain at Queen Elizabeth Park, Silverdale Hill and Grant Hill or a bed of conglomerate such as Burnaby Mountain). Figure 1: Stanley Park showing its cuesta form with Burnaby Mountain, also a cuesta, in the background. Page 2 of 30 Figure 2: About 40 million years ago the Coast Mountains began to rise from a flat plain (peneplain). The peneplain is now elevated, although somewhat eroded, to about 900 metres above sea level. The average annual rate of uplift over the 40 million years has therefore been approximately 0.02 mm.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Action - Revised Forest Plan
    Proposed Action - Revised Forest Plan United States Helena - Lewis and Clark National Forest Department of Agriculture Forest Service Nov. 2016 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 (for example, 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. 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Sheet-Like Emplacement of Satellite Laccoliths, Sills, and Bysmaliths Of
    Sheet-like emplacement of satellite laccoliths, sills, and bysmaliths of the Henry Mountains, Southern Utah Michel de Saint Blanquat, Sven Morgan, Eric Horsman, Basil Tikoff, Guillaume Habert To cite this version: Michel de Saint Blanquat, Sven Morgan, Eric Horsman, Basil Tikoff, Guillaume Habert. Sheet-like emplacement of satellite laccoliths, sills, and bysmaliths of the Henry Mountains, Southern Utah. Geological Society of America Field Guide , Geological Society of America, 2005, 10.1130/2005.fl. hal-03025592 HAL Id: hal-03025592 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03025592 Submitted on 26 Nov 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. fl d006-14 page 1 of 28 Geological Society of America Field Guide 6 2005 Sheet-like emplacement of satellite laccoliths, sills, and bysmaliths of the Henry Mountains, Southern Utah Sven Morgan Department of Geology, Central Michigan University, Mt. Pleasant, Michigan 48858, USA Eric Horsman Basil Tikoff Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA Michel de Saint-Blanquat Guillaume Habert LMTG-UMR5563/Observatoire Midi-Pyrénées, CNRS/Université Paul-Sabatier, 14 av. Edouard-Belin, 31400 Toulouse, France ABSTRACT Small intrusions (<3 km2) on the margins of the Henry Mountains intrusive com- plex of southern Utah are exceptionally well exposed in three dimensions and have a variety of shapes.
    [Show full text]
  • Geosphere.Gsapubs.Org on 10 June 2009
    Downloaded from geosphere.gsapubs.org on 10 June 2009 Geosphere Growth and zoning of the Hortavær intrusive complex, a layered alkaline pluton in the Norwegian Caledonides Calvin G. Barnes, Tore Prestvik, Yujia Li, Lindy McCulloch, Aaron S. Yoshinobu and Carol D. Frost Geosphere 2009;5;286-301 doi:10.1130/GES00210.1 E-mail alerting services click www.gsapubs.org/cgi/alerts to receive free e-mail alerts when new articles cite this article Subscribe click www.gsapubs.org/subscriptions/index.ac.dtl to subscribe to Geosphere Permission request click http://www.geosociety.org/pubs/copyrt.htm#gsa to contact GSA Copyright not claimed on content prepared wholly by U.S. government employees within scope of their employment. Individual scientists are hereby granted permission, without fees or further requests to GSA, to use a single figure, a single table, and/or a brief paragraph of text in subsequent works and to make unlimited copies of items in GSA's journals for noncommercial use in classrooms to further education and science. This file may not be posted to any Web site, but authors may post the abstracts only of their articles on their own or their organization's Web site providing the posting includes a reference to the article's full citation. GSA provides this and other forums for the presentation of diverse opinions and positions by scientists worldwide, regardless of their race, citizenship, gender, religion, or political viewpoint. Opinions presented in this publication do not reflect official positions of the Society. Notes © 2009 Geological Society of America Growth and zoning of the Hortavær intrusive complex, a layered alkaline pluton in the Norwegian Caledonides Calvin G.
    [Show full text]
  • Structures Related to the Emplacement of Shallow-Level Intrusions David Westerman, Sergio Rocchi, Christoph Breitkreuz, Carl
    Structures related to the emplacement of shallow-level intrusions David Westerman, Sergio Rocchi, Christoph Breitkreuz, Carl Stevenson, Penelope Wilson 1. Norwich University, VT, USA 2. Università di Pisa, Italy 3. TU Bergakademie, Freiberg, Germany 4. University of Birmigham, UK 5. Kingston University, London, UK Abstract A systematic view of the vast nomenclature used to describe the structures of shallow level intrusions is presented here. Structures are organised in four main groups, according to logical breaks in the timing of magma emplacement, independent of the scales of features: (1) Intrusion-related structures, formed as the magma is making space and then develops into its intrusion shape; (2) Magmatic flow-related structures, developed as magma moves with suspended crystals that are free to rotate; (3) Solid-state, flow-related structures that formed in portions of the intrusions affected by continuing flow of nearby magma, therefore considered to have a syn-magmatic, non-tectonic origin; (4) Thermal and fragmental structures, related to creation of space and impact on host materials. This scheme appears as a rational organisation, helpful in describing and interpreting the large variety of structures observed in shallow-level intrusions. Keywords: Magma intrusion, Magma flow, Syn-magmatic deformation, Fragmentation, Geo-logic. 1. Introduction This overview of the fabrics and structures characterizing shallow-level intrusions is focused on tabular intrusions recognized as dykes, sills and laccoliths, and related types of bodies. At the grossest scale, shallow-level intrusive bodies are classified based on their aspect ratio and relationship to pre-existing structures in their host, and on their coherent versus clastic texture.
    [Show full text]
  • Growth and Zoning of the Hortavær Intrusive Complex, a Layered Alkaline Pluton in the Norwegian Caledonides
    Growth and zoning of the Hortavær intrusive complex, a layered alkaline pluton in the Norwegian Caledonides Calvin G. Barnes Department of Geosciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas 79409, USA Tore Prestvik Department of Geology and Mineral Resources Engineering, Norwegian Institute of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway Yujia Li Lindy McCulloch Aaron S. Yoshinobu Department of Geosciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas 79409, USA Carol D. Frost Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming 82071, USA ABSTRACT resulted in the alkaline nature of the evolved Waning stages of magma evolution were magmas. Assimilative reaction between dio- less infl uenced by assimilation of carbonate- The Hortavær intrusive complex, Nor- ritic magmas and calc-silicate rocks resulted rich rocks. Thus, late-stage magmas dis- way, is a layered igneous complex that was in partial melting of the calc-silicates and mix- played silica enrichment and the presence of assembled by multiple injections of magmas ing of the Ca-rich melt into the host magma. quartz in the uppermost syenites and mon- that ranged from gabbroic through granitic Addition of Ca stabilized clinopyroxene zonites. Ultimately, evolved magmas reached in composition. Layering is defi ned by intru- (+ plagioclase) at the expense of olivine, which granitic compositions and accumulated in sive sheets that range from 10 cm to 2 m in led to precipitation of clinopyroxene-rich the highest level of the complex. Some gra- thickness. Geopetal structures associated cumulates and formation of syenitic residual nitic (feeder?) dikes extend into the center of with these sheets indicate that the complex magmas.
    [Show full text]
  • A Geological Field Guide to Cooley, Gullion, Mourne & Slieve Croob
    A Geological Field Guide to Cooley, Gullion, Mourne & Slieve Croob Sadhbh Baxter A Geological Field Guide to Cooley, Gullion, Mourne & Slieve Croob Sadhbh Baxter Acknowledgement This fi eld guide was commissioned by Louth County Council, under the Louth Heritage Plan 2007-2011, with guidance from the Louth Heritage Forum, and with generous funding support from the Heritage Council. Printing and distribution of the fi eld guide were generously supported by the Geological Survey of Ireland during 2008, the International Year of Planet Earth. A Geological Field Guide to Cooley, Gullion, Mourne & Slieve Croob Sadhbh Baxter A Geological Field Guide to Cooley, Gullion, Mourne & Slieve Croob Page i 0076957695 llouth.inddouth.indd i 331/8/091/8/09 15:09:0415:09:04 Page ii 0076957695 llouth.inddouth.indd iiii 331/8/091/8/09 15:09:0615:09:06 Contents Page No. List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgements ..........................................................................................................................................vii Using this guide ..................................................................................................................................................x Maps .............................................................................................................................................................viii Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Emplacement History of the Nuevo Rosarito Plutonic Suite in the Southern Peninsular Ranges Batholith, Baja California, México
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Repositorio Academico Digital UANL Revista Mexicana deGeology Ciencias and Geológicas, emplacement v. 29, history núm. of 1, the 2012, Nuevo p. 1-23 Rosarito plutonic suite, Baja California, México 1 Geology and emplacement history of the Nuevo Rosarito plutonic suite in the southern Peninsular Ranges batholith, Baja California, México Tomás Alejandro Peña-Alonso1,*, Luis Alberto Delgado-Argote1, Bodo Weber1, Fernando Velasco-Tapia2, and Víctor Valencia3,4 1 Departamento de Geología, CICESE, 22800 Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico. 2 Facultad de Ciencias de la Tierra, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, 67700 Linares, Nuevo León, Mexico. 3 Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson AZ, 85721, United States of America. 4 Valencia Geoservices, 3389 N River Rapids Dr, Tucson AZ, 85712, United States of America. * [email protected], [email protected] ABSTRACT The Cretaceous Nuevo Rosarito plutonic suite is located in the southern part of the Peninsular Ranges batholith (~28.7 °N). It is hosted by a suite of Jurassic granitoid rocks dated at 151.6 Ma (U-Pb single zircon ages) and by Late Jurassic - Early Cretaceous volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks. Host rocks display solid-state fabrics related to a deformational event that occurred before the emplacement of the Nuevo Rosarito plutonic suite. The composition of the suite ranges from gabbro to granite. The suite is sub-alkaline and it is divided into three mafic and four felsic units. The geochemical composition of the felsic units varies from metaluminous to peraluminous, and shows arc-related geochemical signatures.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Study of the Badger Pass Igneous Intrusion and The
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Geosciences Theses Department of Geosciences 4-24-2008 A Comparative Study of the Badger Pass Igneous Intrusion and the Foreland Volcanic Rocks of the McDowell Springs Area, Beaverhead County, Montana: Implications for the Local Late Cretaceous Sequence of Events Brookie Jean Gallagher Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/geosciences_theses Part of the Geography Commons, and the Geology Commons Recommended Citation Gallagher, Brookie Jean, "A Comparative Study of the Badger Pass Igneous Intrusion and the Foreland Volcanic Rocks of the McDowell Springs Area, Beaverhead County, Montana: Implications for the Local Late Cretaceous Sequence of Events." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2008. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/geosciences_theses/11 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Geosciences at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Geosciences Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE BADGER PASS IGNEOUS INTRUSION AND THE FORELAND VOLCANIC ROCKS OF THE MCDOWELL SPRINGS AREA, BEAVERHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE LOCAL LATE CRETACEOUS SEQUENCE OF EVENTS by Brookie Gallagher Under the Direction of Dr. Timothy E. LaTour ABSTRACT Intermediate igneous rocks exposed in the Badger Pass area and 3.5 km away in the McDowell Springs area of Beaverhead County, Montana, previously mapped as Cretaceous intrusive (Ki), and Cretaceous undifferentiated volcanics (Kvu) respectively, exhibit little geochemical variation. Trace element, and lead isotope analyses provide strong evidence allowing for a single source. REE patterns, obtained through ID-ICP-MS, are essentially identical.
    [Show full text]
  • Emplacement and Assembly of Shallow Intrusions, Henry Mountains, Southern Utah
    EMPLACEMENT AND ASSEMBLY OF SHALLOW INTRUSIONS, HENRY MOUNTAINS, SOUTHERN UTAH Field guide for the 2010 LASI IV conference, Utah, U.S.A. from Gilbert (1877) Eric Horsman Dept. of Geological Sciences, East Carolina University, U.S.A. email: [email protected] Sven Morgan Dept. of Geology, Central Michigan University, U.S.A. email: [email protected] Michel de Saint-Blanquat LMTG-UMR5563 / Observatoire Midi-Pyrénées, CNRS / Université Paul-Sabatier, France email: [email protected] Basil Tikoff Dept. of Geology and Geophysics, University of Wisconsin, U.S.A. email: [email protected] LASI 4 field trip – Henry Mountains, Utah, USA ABSTRACT Exceptional exposures of igneous intrusions of the Henry Mountains of southern Utah allow for the detailed study of three-dimensional pluton geometries as well as igneous emplacement and assembly processes. Examination of the geometry, fabric, and wallrock structures of relatively small intrusions (<3 km map-view diameter) suggests that several plutons in the region (Maiden Creek sill, Trachyte Mesa laccolith, Black Mesa bysmalith) represent snapshots of a continuum of pluton geometry recording volume increase through emplacement of successive magma pulses. Intrusions begin as thin sills and inflate into laccoliths through incremental injection of magma sheets. Space is made through wallrock strain and upward rotation. Further sheet emplacement leads to the formation of a subvertical fault at the margin of the inflating intrusion. This fault accommodates piston-like uplift of the intrusion roof and results in the formation of an intrusion geometry referred to as a bysmalith. Margins of laterally propagating igneous sheets are commonly comprised of numerous finger-like magma lobes that coalesce into contiguous sheets with further lateral growth.
    [Show full text]