USDA Forest Service

New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse Critical Habitat Protection Project

Environmental Assessment

Santa Fe National Forest Jemez Ranger District

January 2016

NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

ATTENTION

Map products are reproduced from geospatial information prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. GIS data and product accuracy may vary. They may be: developed from sources of differing accuracy, accurate only at certain scales, based on modeling or interpretation, incomplete while being created or revised, etc. Using GIS products for purposes other than for which they were created, may yield inaccurate or misleading results. The Forest Service reserves the right to correct, update, modify, or replace, GIS products without notification. For more information, contact: Santa Fe National Forest at (505) 438-5300. Data Projection: UTM Zone 13 NAD83

This information was released on Date: January, 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 (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. 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.

NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ...... i 1. Purpose and Need for Action…………………………………………………………...3 Project Location………………………………………………………………………...3 Purpose and Need for Proposed Action ...... 4 Summary of Proposed Action and Alternative ...... 7 Decision to be Made ...... 7 Issues ...... 8

2. Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action…………………………………………...9 Alternatives Considered, but Eliminated from Further Detail ...... 9 Alternatives Considered ...... 10 Alternative A – No Action Alternative ...... 10 Alternative B – Proposed Action Alternative ...... 10 Mitigations for Alternatives ...... 11 Monitoring ...... 13

3. Environmental Consequences ...... 16 Management Direction...... 16 Range Management ...... 18 Recreation ...... 25 Wildlife ...... 36 Hydrology ...... 68 Soils…………………………………………………………………………………...92 Heritage Resources ...... 95 Social/Economics…………………………………………………………………….101 Environmental Justice ...... 102

Appendix A. Project Design Features and Mitigation Measures………………..….. 104 Appendix B. Forest Plan Consistency……………………………………………….105

i NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

ii NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need for Action

The Forest Service has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant federal and state laws and regulations. This EA discloses direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts that would result from the proposed action and alternatives. This EA analyzes the effects of the New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse on the Santa Fe National Forest, particularly on the Jemez Ranger District.

Project Location

The project area is located within the Cebolla/San Antonio and San Diego grazing allotments. Both allotments are located entirely within Sandoval County, New Mexico. A vicinity map and proposed action map are shown on Figures 1 and 2, respectively.

Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment Proposed Critical Habitat

The New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (NMMJM) identified proposed critical habitat within the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment occurs along San Antonio Creek and the Rio Cebolla (Figure 2). Both perennial waterways intersect the allotment in a generally NE to SW direction. The legal description of the analysis area is:  Township 19N/ Range 02E/ all or part of sections 3, 10, 15, and 16.

 Township 19N/ Range 03E/all or part of sections 6, 7, 8, and 17.

 Township 20N/ Range 02E/all or part of sections 24, 25, 26, 34, and 35.

 Township 20N/ Range 03E/all or part of sections 16, 17, 20, 21, 29, 31, and 32.

The majority of the area is characterized by mountainous terrain, mesa tops, and canyons. Primary tree species include ponderosa pine, aspen, and Douglas fir. The approximate elevation of the identified proposed critical habitat in both streams ranges from 8,200 feet above mean sea level (amsl) at the northern portions of the Rio Cebolla and San Antonio Creek to 8,000 feet amsl at the southern portion of the allotment.

San Diego Allotment Proposed Critical Habitat

The identified NMMJM proposed critical habitat occurs along the Rio Cebolla, a perennial stream that is located in the northwestern area of the allotment (Figure 2). The legal description of the analysis area is:

 Township 18N/ Range 01E/ section 1.

 Township 19N/ Range 01E/ all or part of sections 25 and 36.

 Township 19N/ Range 02E/ all or part of sections 16, 17, 19, 20, and 30.

3 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

The majority of the area is characterized by mountainous terrain, large meadows, mesa tops, and canyons. Primary tree species include ponderosa pine, aspen, oak, and Douglas fir. The approximate elevation of the identified critical habitat ranges from 8,000 feet amsl at the northern reaches of the Rio Cebolla to 7,200 feet amsl at the southern part of the creek.

The Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment includes approximately 26,107 acres and is located north of the community of La Cueva on the Jemez Ranger District of the Santa Fe National Forest.

The San Diego Allotment comprises approximately 102,687 acres and is located west and south of the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment on the Jemez Ranger District of the Santa Fe National Forest. The allotment is within the San Diego Land Grant, dating from Spanish times. The allotment encompasses Cat, Schoolhouse, Stable, Virgin, Guadalupe, Peggy, and Holliday mesas. The communities of Gillman, Jemez Springs, and Ponderosa are located within the allotment.

Purpose and Need for Proposed Action

This proposal is to manage habitat to maintain viable populations of wildlife and improve habitat for selected species as described in the Santa Fe National Forest Plan, specifically: the need for this project is to address the forest plan goals such as “manage threatened and endangered animal, fish, and plant habitats to achieve delisting in a manner consistent with goals established with United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)” (Forest Plan, Forest Wide Prescriptions, Wildlife, page 64), and ”evaluating these lands and identifying opportunities to contribute to threatened and endangered species recovery objectives.”(Forest Plan Management Direction p. 122).

In 2013, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS, issued a proposed rule and preliminary determination to list the New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse (NMMJM) as endangered. Since then, USFWS has finalized the determination that the NMMJM is endangered, and designated occupied habitat, but has yet to finalize critical habitat. According to the listing decision, the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse “has an overall low viability (probability of persistence) in the near term (between now and the next 10 years) and a decreasing viability in the long-term future (beyond 10 years)…. The New Mexico meadow jumping mouse has exceptionally specialized habitat requirements to support these life-history needs and maintain adequate population sizes.… Because the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse requires such specific suitable habitat conditions, populations have a high potential for extirpation when habitat is altered or eliminated... The primary sources of current and future habitat losses include grazing pressure (which removes the needed vegetation)…. Additional sources of habitat loss are likely to occur from …highway reconstruction,… and unregulated recreation. These multiple sources of habitat loss are not acting independently, but produce cumulative impacts that magnify the effects of habitat loss on New Mexico meadow jumping mouse populations (Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse; Endangered Status Jun 10, 201450 CFR Part 17) ”

4 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

In light of the listing of the NMMJM, we intend to protect and improve habitat conditions for the mouse within the San Diego and Cebolla/San Antonio Allotments in order to increase species viability. The purpose of this analysis is to allow for the protection of the NMMJM habitat while continuing grazing.

Background

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USF&WS) determined that the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius luteus) met the definition of an endangered species and published the final rule to list the NMMJM as an endangered species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act (Federal Register /Vol. 79, No. 111 /Tuesday, June 10, 2014). The USF&WS found that the jumping mouse currently faces numerous high magnitude threats and qualifies for listing, based on present, threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat. The listing became effective on July 10, 2014. Occupied NMMJM habitat was identified and designated as part of the final rule. A final rule for the designation of critical habitat is expected sometime during early 2016.

The NMMJM is active only during the warm growing season of the grasses and forbs on which it depends. The NMMJM is a true hibernator, usually entering hibernation in September or October and emerging the following May or June. The jumping mouse hibernates about 8 or 9 months out of the year, longer than most animals. The activity period for a montane population studied at Fenton Lake, New Mexico, was active from early June to first week in October, with adult jumping mice entering into hibernation about 1 month prior to juveniles. The NMMJM requires dense riparian herbaceous vegetation associated with perennial (persistent) flowing water and adjacent uplands that can support the vegetation characteristics needed for foraging, breeding, and hibernating (USFWS 2013 a).

In light of the listing of the NMMJM and designating occupied habitat, and in anticipation of the final rule regarding critical habitat, the Santa Fe National Forest intends to protect NMMJM occupied and proposed critical habitat within the San Diego and Cebolla/San Antonio Allotments. These actions include a combination of administrative actions and infrastructure development.

Administrative actions to protect NMMJM habitat would be done separately from this project would through Annual Operating Instructions (AOIs) for the 2016 grazing season. The AOIs are a set of operating guidelines developed by both the Forest Service and the permittee(s) operating on the San Diego and Cebolla/San Antonio grazing allotments. The Forest Service may approve changes to the grazing rotation in consultation with the permittees to address range condition situations that may occur due to weather related circumstances, water availability, conflicts with other resources, operational needs, or other factors. In this case, it would be for the protection of NMMJM and NMMJM habitat. They would be developed and finalized prior to next grazing season.

5 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 1. Location of Project Area – Santa Fe National Forest – Jemez Ranger District

6 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Summary of Proposed Action and Alternative

The Santa Fe National Forest (SFNF) proposes to construct forest improvements on the Jemez Ranger District to aid in the protection of jumping mouse occupied and proposed critical habitats. The Proposed Action Alternative is to provide long lasting protection to occupied habitat by replacing temporary barbed wire fencing surrounding four discrete occupied habitat areas with long lasting pipe fences located on the same footprint of the current barbed wire fence lines. An additional 5.5 acres between the Lake Fork Corral and the large occupied habitat exclosure would be pipe fenced and enclosed as well. Electric fence will be temporarily used until the pipe fence can be built. A long term public entry closure, 10 years, would be implemented on all exclosures in occupied habitat.

Additional protections to proposed critical habitat included in the Proposed Action Alternative include constructing approximately four miles of new fence on Schoolhouse and Lake Fork Mesas. An additional four miles of fence would be constructed on the east side of the Upper Rio Cebolla (Cebolla Riparian Pasture) and a cross fence across the Rio Cebolla on the northern boundary of proposed critical habitat. A new corral in the Lake Fork Pasture would be constructed at a location agreed upon by all resource specialists in consultation with permittees. Approximately one mile of range fence, from NM State Highway 4 across forest lands to NM State Highway 126, would be constructed, including two new cattle guards along the fence line where it crosses Forest Roads 106 and Winters Road, to close in pastures and restrict cattle from accessing the San Antonio River from the highway.

Initially to protect the NMMJM and proposed critical habitat and not disturb Mexican spotted owl (MSO) and the active season for the Jemez Mountain Salamander (JMS) during the breeding season, in this alternative we propose to install temporary electric fences where permanent fences are proposed. This will allow livestock to enter allotments on scheduled dates and concurrently provide protection for the NMMJM until permanent fences can be constructed. The electric fence would involve a minimally invasive installation method and would occur in late spring (snowmelt dependent) sometime prior to the NMMJM active season (June through September). The electric fences would be built to include signs for the notification and protection of public.

The Forest Service would ensure that employees are dedicated to monitoring infrastructure and compliance on the affected allotments during the active grazing season. This monitoring would include all of the fences and exclosures constructed for the protection of the NMMJM. It would include the entire electric, pipe, and barbed wire fences that would be constructed in 2016 and 2017 to ensure that they exclude livestock from NMMJM proposed critical habitat.

Decision to be Made Given the purpose and need, the responsible official reviews the proposed action and other alternatives. The Jemez District Ranger is Responsible Official for this proposal. For this project, the Jemez District Ranger, will decide if:

The proposed action will be implemented; and if so: o Where would the projects be located; and o What mitigation measures, if any, are necessary.

7 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Issues A number of other issues were identified during the interdisciplinary analysis process. Once analyzed by the Interdisciplinary Team (ID Team), they did not merit detailed analysis but were analyzed in relation to their contribution to environmental effects. These issues will be briefly discussed here and then not addressed further in the EA. More detailed discussions of each of these issues can be found in the Project Record. The issues were grouped into like categories. Grazing The Service (USDI 2013) states that ungulate grazing affects jumping mice when it eliminates or reduces herbaceous plants and litter or alters the composition and structure of herbaceous riparian habitats used by the subspecies. Ungulate grazing within NMMJM habitat affects individual mice by reducing the availability of food resources. Grazing particularly reduces the amount of food available to jumping mice in the late summer just prior to hibernation, which can limit the accumulation of sufficient fat reserves needed to survive. Whitaker (1972 in USFWS 2014) found that individual meadow jumping mice (Zapus hudsonius) that enter hibernation with a low body mass do not survive. Therefore, factors that reduce the availability of grass seeds and other foods can lower overwinter survival and result in reduced population sizes and eventually extirpation of populations when suitable habitat is grazed. The reduction of suitable habitat due to grazing also puts individual mice more at risk of succumbing to predation due to the loss of vegetative cover. Rangeland Monitoring Range inspections would continue to be conducted at random and when the opportunity arises during the grazing season. The purpose of these inspections would be to insure range readiness cattle are authorized in the pasture and at appropriate times, pastures are not being over utilized and improvements are properly maintained, range is ready to be grazed, etc. When inspections are prescheduled, the permittee would be invited and encouraged to attend. Archeological Site Initially the proposal was for the expansion of the Fogon Corral in the Lake Fork Pasture. After the Archeological clearance it was discovered that the corral was a component of an archeological site and the site is recommended as eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. The site had the potential for a finding of an Adverse Effect to the site and it was the recommendation of the Cultural Resource specialist that the proposed action to rebuild Fogon Corral is abandoned and a new corral be constructed at another location in the Lake Fork Pasture.

8 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Chapter 2 - Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

This section describes the two alternatives that were considered for this project. It summarizes how these alternatives would or would not meet the purpose and need, and identifies design elements and mitigation measures.

This chapter describes and compares the alternatives considered for the NMMJM Habitat Protection Project. This section also presents the alternatives in comparative form, defining the differences between each alternative and providing a clear basis for choice among options by the decision maker and the public. Some of the information used to compare the alternatives is based upon the environmental, social, and economic effects of implementing each alternative. The no action alternative of no grazing must be addressed in the analysis as required by the CEQ regulations for implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1502.14). Alternatives Considered, but Eliminated from Further Analysis

Permittee Alternative During applicant status meetings where the San Diego permittees were encouraged to provide alternatives, options, and voluntary measures to continue grazing within their allotment containing both occupied and proposed critical habitat – one was presented.

“Begin/end seasonal flash grazing reflecting historical turnout rates and dates inside of exclosures surrounding critical habitat areas to be built at sufficient height and stability to exclude all ungulates and humans year round. Flash grazing will not occur unless an assessment of PCEs supports that they are being met under previous year’s grazing practices.”

Specifically this alternative would include the following:  Grazing in the spring and fall;  Keep all elk and human activity out of there;  8-foot tall;  Exclude unregulated recreation;  Build an exclosure of the entire critical habitat; o The height and stability would keep out elk and humans; and o During the spring and fall, the gates are open, cows come in and graze it.

This alternative involves the construction of over 30 miles of eight foot fencing to include all proposed critical habitat (including occupied) while excluding all ungulates in addition to human- related recreational activities. Current temporary exclosures would be removed. Gates would be installed on the fencing to provide access for grazing operations at the beginning and end of the season based on Annual Operating Instructions (AOI) as long as the Primary Constituent Elements (PCE’s) are being met.

This alternative was not analyzed in detail as an alternative for the following reasons:

9 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

 Under this alternative, permitted livestock would be authorized to graze occupied and proposed critical habitat within the exclosures, according to the AOIs. This is expected to result in adverse effects to the NMMJM and habitat, and therefore would not meet the purpose and need of this project.

 Additionally, providing exclusive access to critical habitat for the sake of continued grazing operations would be contrary to the multiple-use mandate of the Forest Service. Alternatives Analyzed in Detailed Study

Two alternatives have been developed to protect NMMJM occupied habitat and critical habitat when designated of the NMMJM; the No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action Alternative. They are described below:

Alternative A – No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative current management would continue. The temporary barbed wire fences protecting occupied habitat would be removed, and occupied and critical habitat across both Allotments would continue as is described in the Allotment Management Plans. Occupied habitat would be available for unmanaged dispersed recreation activities.

Alternative B – Proposed Action Alternative

The Proposed Action Alternative expects to protect critical habitat when designated by the following measures:

10 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

 Construct approximately 1 mile of fence from New Mexico State Highway 4 to New Mexico State Highway 126 on the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment;  Install two cattle guards over Forest Road 105 and CFF 199 on the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment;  Construct 4 miles of fence on the east side of the Rio Cebolla on the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment to exclude cattle;  Construct a cross fence across the Rio Cebolla on the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment at the northern end of identified critical habitat;  Convert a temporary closure order to long-term (10 years) closure order in the NMMJM occupied habitat;  Convert the barbed wire fence on the perimeter of the closure order to permanent pipe fences in the four existing enclosures along the Rio Cebolla near FR 376 on the San Diego Allotment. This action includes removal of the barbed wire fence that is currently in place;  Construct an additional pipe fence to enclose 5.5 acres of occupied habitat between the Lake Fork Corral and the third exclosure noted above on the San Diego Allotment. The additional acreage would be included in the long-term closure order;  Construct approximately one mile of barbed wire fence on Schoolhouse Mesa on the San Diego Allotment;  Construct approximately 4 miles of barbed wire fence on Lake Fork Mesas on the San Diego Allotment; and  Build a new corral in the Lake Fork Pasture on the San Diego Allotment at an appropriate location agreed upon by all resource specialists in consultation with the permittees.

These actions include construction and maintenance of associated fences and cattle guards for their intended purpose. Fence construction would involve the removal of trees in various sizes within a 20 feet wide path over an approximate 10 mile total install. The removal of trees is required for installation and ease of maintenance over time.

Mitigations for Alternatives The mitigation measures listed below are practices that the ID Team developed during this analysis to address site-specific environmental concerns that were not sufficiently addressed by existing management requirements. Mitigation is a tool to ameliorate an undesirable environmental effect; it is identified and included as part of each alternative, and the analysis of environmental effects is based upon the application and effectiveness of that mitigation. Mitigation measures were developed to ease some of the potential environmental impacts the various alternatives may cause. The mitigation measures may be applied to any of the action alternatives. Heritage

11 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

 Discovery of any undocumented cultural resources during project implementation will result in immediate cessation of any ground disturbing activities in the locale and notification of the Forest Archaeologist. Wildlife  Complete goshawk surveys according to protocol prior to any construction activity. If found to be present limit human disturbance and activities in or near nest sites and post- fledgling areas during breeding season (March 1 through September 30).  Limit human activity in goshawk nesting areas during breeding season.  As much as possible, avoid equipment use and human activity in prairie dog mounds and main colony use area.  With the exception of the two cattle guards and temporary electric fence, project activity within NMMJM, MSO or JMS habitat will not occur during the below times: o NMMJM Habitat: Active Season: June 1st through October 15th (electric fence will be installed prior to June 1) o MSO Habitat: Breeding Season: March 1st through August 31st o JMS Habitat: Rainy/Active Season: July 1st through September 15 (June 15 through October 30, is the usual, but fencing would be difficult to complete after October 30th)  All permanent fences will be wildlife friendly using New Mexico Game and Fish design recommendations. Further, certain visualization techniques (e.g. PVC place on top fence wire or vinyl tabs placed on wire) will be used to increase visibility and minimize entrapment and will be placed where signs of extensive elk and/or deer crossing or trailing are obvious. (Fence Guides are available and are a part of the projects administrative record).  For the temporary electric fence; the least invasive methods (e.g. handsaws) and route will be taken to greatly limit disturbance for the MSO and JMS.  Rebuilding and/or relocating the Lake Fork and Fogon corrals and associated activities will require site-specific clearance from the District Biologist prior to installation.  No cutting of trees > 9 inch diameter at breast height (dbh) to limit the amount of habitat disturbance for the MSO and JMS, unless they pose a safety issue.

12 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

 Trees that lean away or do not pose an installation, maintenance and/or safety issue will be left alone.  The tops of fallen trees will be lopped, scattered and/or piled around the fence path. Logs and woody debris will be left on-site in MSO and JMS habitat.  During fence installations, crews will limit the amount of ground disturbance of rocks, bark, moss mats, woody debris and decaying stumps and logs to the greatest extent possible in MSO and JMS habitat.  All fence projects and associated activities will require site-specific clearance from the District Biologist prior to installation.  General habitat elements for all species will be monitored throughout project implementations Recreation  Replacing the four temporary fence exclosures surrounding NMMJM occupied habitat with stouter pipe fencing would require one design/mitigation measure. The pipe fencing should be painted brown or left unpainted to oxidize naturally to maintain the scenic integrity of the Jemez National Recreation Area and surrounding wet meadows.

 A gate would be needed at the access road to the on FR 376 to restrict public access into Fogon Canyon. Barrier fence improvements on parallel to FR 376 would be needed to keep the public from driving into Fogon Canyon through wet and dry meadows. Additional signage at Fogon Canyon to keep the public keep public motorized travel on FR 376. In the event that a new corral location close to FR 376 is identified a new gate a barrier fencing improvements may still be needed. Hydrology  A hydrologist or watershed specialist will be consulted prior to constructing fences or corrals within or across the aquatic management zone (AMZ). The hydrologist will approve implementation plans and exact feature locations to ensure water quality will be protected.  A hydrologist or watershed specialist will be consulted prior to using heavy equipment within the AMZ.

Monitoring Monitoring of the project area would be conducted, including both implementation and effectiveness monitoring. The monitoring would also include the participation of the permittee; however, the ultimate responsibility for monitoring the allotment rests with the Forest Service. Although the responsibility for monitoring the allotment is that of the Forest Service, the permittee would have the responsibility for ensuring guidelines are not exceeded.

Implementation Monitoring Periodic inspections will be done to ensure compliance with permit Terms and Conditions. Effectiveness Monitoring This will determine if grazing standards and guidelines, grazing prescription, and Allotment Management Plan practices are effective in accomplishing the planned objects.

13 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Range readiness will be monitored before the grazing season begins, stubble heights (residual vegetation) may be measured during the grazing season and utilization will be monitored at the end of the season. These measurements will occur in key areas. Recreation Ongoing monitoring of dispersed recreation activities in occupied and proposed critical habitats is required. District employees typically monitor developed recreation sites once to multiple times per day. Site hosts are also available five days per week to monitor visitor actions. High use dispersed recreation areas, such as the FR 376 recreation corridor, are monitored at least twice a week during the summer camping season. Monitoring is also augmented on weekends and holidays. Monitoring includes staff from all disciplines and resources, such as recreation, fire, wildlife, range and archeology.

14 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 2. Proposed Action Map

15 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Chapter 3 - Environmental Consequences

This chapter provides the basis for comparing the two alternatives described in Chapter 2. The chapter is arranged by alternative, with the probable effects of each alternative summarized in reference to the issues listed in Chapter 2. The effects are described in more detail in the Specialist Reports in the Project Record. The analysis of effects for the proposed action under each resource is described with the assumption mitigation measures described in chapter 2 would be applied.

Management Direction

The project proposal was designed to conform to Forest Plan direction, goals, and standard and guidelines, which are incorporated by reference. The project area falls within three Forest Management Areas X, R, and N.

X-Jemez National Recreation Area -. Resource values specifically identified in the JNRA include recreational, ecological, cultural, religious and wildlife. R-Cultural Resources -Wildlife/Timber. Emphasis is on cultural resource location, inventory and nominations with wildlife habitat improvement timber management activities. N-Threatened and Endangered Species Habitat. Managed to protect and enhance essential wildlife habitat.

16 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 3. Forest Plan Management Areas Map

17 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Range Management

Background

The San Diego and Cebolla/San Antonio Grazing allotments are located on the western edge of the Jemez Ranger District of the Santa Fe National Forest. Together, their extent is from the western and southern edge of the Jemez Ranger District, north to the Valles Caldera National Park, and west to the San Diego Canyon (Figure 2).

The Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment consists of approximately 22,249 acres. The allotment is managed through four10 year permits. Three hundred forty-seven cow/calf units are permitted to graze the allotment. One hundred ninety eight head of cattle graze this allotment from June 1 to September 30 and 149 from June 1 to October 31 under a deferred-rotation management system. Deferred-rotation is a system of grazing where the grazing on a pasture is rested (or not grazed) to allow for recovery. Under this grazing system, the pasture that gets deferred (rested) is changed yearly, or rotated, so that each pasture eventually gets rest. The graze-able portion of the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment is made up of four main pastures; the Mushroom, Road, Barley, and the Calaveras pastures. There are also two riparian pastures; the Cebolla Riparian and the San Antonio Riparian. The Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment contains one holding pasture named the Horseshoe Pasture. Both of these riparian pastures contain proposed critical habitat for the NMMJM. There are 11 pastures that have proposed critical habitat; however 6 of them are closed to grazing.

Table 1. Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment Pastures

Cebolla/San Management Days of Pasture NMMJM NMMJM NMMJM Antonio Use Acres Occupied Proposed Potentially Pastures Critical Suitable Habitat Road Deferred Up to 75 4577 0 17 0 Rotation days Barley Deferred Up to 75 5916 2 22 0 Rotation days Mushroom Deferred Up to 45 3862 0 0 0 Rotation days Calaveras Season-long w/ Up to 130 4155 0 0 0 40 head days Cebolla Riparian Up to 14 1289 0 99 75 Riparian Pasture days San Antonio Riparian Up to 21 2467 1 502 146 Riparian Pasture days Horseshoe Holding Pasture Up to 14 163 3 2 0 days

18 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

The San Diego Allotment consists of roughly 103,000 acres, of which 77,165 acres are grazed by livestock. There are 16 grazed pastures (Table 2) on the allotment managed under a deferred rotation system, and the allotment is managed under one year-round ten year permit which is currently held by the San Diego Grazing Association. The association is permitted to graze 252 cow/calf pairs from May 1 to November 30, and 117 cow/calf units from December 1 to April 30. The allotment is managed under an adaptive management principle. Adaptive management is a system of grazing management that allows for flexibility and change in livestock numbers, livestock class, and timing of grazing in order to meet desired conditions. Decisions are made based on conditions on the ground (such as weather, residual forage, and water availability). Consequently numbers vary from year to year from what is permitted by 65% to 120% of permitted numbers (151 - 302).

Table 2. San Diego Allotment Pastures

San Diego Management Days of Pasture NMMJM NMMJM NMMJM Pastures Use Acres Occupied Proposed Potentially (in acres) Critical Suitable Habitat (in acres) (in acres) Deferred Cebollita/ Up to 30 Rotation 2685 0 0 0 Virgin days Summer Deferred Lake Fork Up to 30 Rotation 1550 0 0 0 Mesa days Summer Deferred Up to 30 Schoolhouse Rotation 2330 0 0 0 days Summer Deferred Up to 60 Porter Rotation 5859 0 0 0 days Summer Deferred Up to 30 Upper Virgin Rotation 1226 0 0 0 Days Summer Deferred Up to 45 Holiday Rotation 3935 0 0 0 days Summer Deferred Up to 30 Lower Virgin Rotation 3915 0 0 0 days Summer Deferred Lake Fork Up to 15 Rotation 2110 0 0 32 Canyon days Summer Fogon Holding Up to 5 223 0 0 0 Holding Pasture days Cebolla Riparian Up to 45 2672 178 102 26 Riparian Pasture days Riparian Up to 30 Guadalupe Pasture 5017 0 46 9 days Winter

19 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

San Diego Management Days of Pasture NMMJM NMMJM NMMJM Pastures Use Acres Occupied Proposed Potentially (in acres) Critical Suitable Habitat (in acres) (in acres) Winter Up to 3 Joaquin 6738 0 0 0 Pasture months Winter Up to 4.5 Palomares 10241 0 0 0 Pasture months Winter Up to 3 Pajarito 25131 0 0 0 Pasture months Winter Bull Up to 4.5 Lobo 1528 0 0 0 Pasture months Fenton Rest/Option to Up to 15 2004 16 84 34 Pasture use - Riparian days

Annual Operating Instructions (AOIs) are a set of operating guidelines developed by both the Forest Service and the permittee(s) operating on an allotment. The AOI is typically developed in an AOI meeting prior to the grazing season giving the permittee time to make any adjustments that may be necessary for the coming season. Livestock stocking numbers, grazing rotation schedules timing, forage utilization standards, upcoming/ongoing projects, monitoring, and any other known issues are discussed during these meetings. The AOI is a schedule; it is a rough schedule that allows for a great deal of flexibility due to changing environmental factors. The Forest Service may approve changes to the grazing rotation in consultation with the permittees to address range condition situations that may occur due to weather related circumstances, water availability, conflicts with other resources, operational needs, or other factors.

Existing conditions

In the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment, the Cebolla Riparian Pasture is comprised of approximately 1,289 acres. Ninety nine of these acres are proposed critical habitat for the NMMJM is the Cebolla Riparian Pasture grazed in both the spring (cattle are put on the allotment on June 1), and the fall for a short duration (the last two weeks of September). Keeping livestock out of the Cebolla Riparian Pasture during times when they’re not authorized to graze has proven to be a challenge due to ineffective fence locations.

Fencing has been ineffective in preventing unauthorized grazing the Cebolla Riparian Pasture of the Cebolla San Antonio Allotment. One fence constructed in the Cebolla Riparian Pasture at the bottom of the canyon has been ineffective at preventing cattle from entering the Rio Cebolla Riparian Pasture from the east in the Barley and Road Pastures. This fence is ineffective due to the fence’s close proximity to riparian vegetation and water. Once cattle make it down the steep canyon walls of the Rio Cebolla to within feet of the stream they find a way over or through the fence instead of turning around and climbing back up the canyon.

The San Antonio Riparian Pasture (approx. 2,500 acres) is used use in both the spring and the fall as well, but typically is used in the fall. One permittee uses the San Antonio River Pasture in the fall to take cattle off the allotment from the Mushroom Pasture. The San Antonio River Pasture

20 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

has approximately 502 acres of proposed NMMJM critical habitat, and one acre of NMMJM occupied habitat. The final pasture containing NMMJM habitat in the Cebolla San Antonio Allotment is the Horseshoe Pasture (163 acres). It is a holding pasture and contains three acres of occupied habitat and two acres of proposed critical habitat. However, due to the terrain; these areas generally get light use by livestock.

To the east of the Cebolla Riparian Pasture lies the San Antonio Riparian Pasture (Figure 2). Although unauthorized cattle have been less of an issue in the San Antonio Riparian than in the Rio Cebolla. Cattle sometimes find their way down into the San Antonio Riparian Pasture from the Mushroom Pasture to the east through a fence at the north-western boundary of the pasture. .

Another concern in managing the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment is that to the east of the San Antonio Riparian Pasture there is no fencing at the bottom end of the Mushroom Pasture near State Highway 4. Due to lack of fencing, only the top portion of the pasture is available to grazing by livestock. This result is added pressure placed on the fences at the northern half of the pasture and cattle entering the San Antonio Riparian Pasture.

The San Diego Allotment, the Cebolla Riparian Pasture in the San Diego Allotment (both the San Diego and the Cebolla Riparian allotments have a Cebolla Riparian Pasture) and the Fenton Pasture are both grazed pastures that contain proposed NMMJM critical as well as occupied habitat. The Cebolla Riparian pasture in the San Diego Allotment consists of about 2,672 acres. Of that, 178 acres are designated as NMMJM Occupied Habitat and 102 acres are proposed critical habitat. This pasture is used in both the spring for the movement of cattle from winter pastures to upland summer pastures, and in the fall for the movement of cattle going the opposite direction. Cattle are authorized to graze the Cebolla Riparian Pasture for three weeks in the spring (May) and a month in the fall (October/November), though the allotment is managed under adaptive management and times vary from 65% - 120% of permitted numbers. Again, variation in numbers allows for adaptive management based on climate and other environmental factors.

In October of 2014, for the protection of the NMMJM, barbed wire fences were constructed and a temporary closure order issued to exclude grazing and recreational activity of approximately 83 acres designated as occupied NMMJM habitat in the Cebolla Riparian Pasture of the San Diego Allotment. The exclosures did reduce the forage available to livestock, but were negligible; the acreage they encompassed made up less than 3% of the pasture and less than .01% of the entire allotment. The largest impact was probably that it was placed so close to the Lake Fork Corral, changing the way that livestock entered the handling facilities. Operators, however seemed to have adapted to the fences and their locations. The exclosures and the closure order were originally meant to be in place for one year but were extended for one additional year in 2015. The fences and the exclosure order are currently in effect until October 2, 2016. The exclosures were mostly effective at excluding cattle from the occupied habitat areas, However cattle were able to enter through parts of the fence that were damaged by elk or areas where they were able to make it over because of a nearby snowdrift. The temporary exclosures were usually monitored twice a week by district personal and there was increased presence in other critical habitat areas of the NMMJM habitat.

21 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Adjoining the Cebolla Riparian Pasture in the San Diego Allotment is the 2,004acre Fenton Pasture. It is typically rested. It can be grazed, and was grazed for the 2015 grazing season. The Fenton Pasture contains 16 acres of designated NMMJM Occupied Habitat and 83 acres of Proposed NMMJM Critical Habitat. The Fenton Pasture will not be grazed in the future to protect designated critical habitat. The Guadalupe Pasture to the south of the Cebolla Riparian Pasture also contains 46 acres of Proposed NMMJM Critical Habitat; the area of the pasture where NMMJM habitat is found is mostly transitory by livestock and typically receives light use. Livestock occasionally make their way from the mesas to the east onto the Cebolla Riparian. This is possible because natural barriers are not adequate to stop the movement of cattle.

Desired Conditions

The Santa Fe National Forest would like to continue to allow for grazing, through the issuance of ten-year permits, allowing the same numbers and class of livestock and keeping the same timing while concurrently providing protection of the NMMJM.

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 -No Action Alternative

The Alternative 1 - No Action Alternative would consist of continuing current management including grazing. The closure order for occupied habitat would be allowed to expire and the exclosure fences protecting that habitat would be removed as early as October 2, 2016. Once the fences are removed, there will be no measures to prevent cattle from grazing in occupied habitat. The Forest Service would not have the means to physically or administratively to exclude livestock from these areas.

Without any fences cattle would continue to enter pastures containing proposed critical habitat when not authorized. In the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment without the fence and cattle guards in the Mushroom Pasture, cattle would continue to congregate at the northern part of the pasture and to make their way across the fence and into the San Antonio Riparian Pasture, which contains proposed critical habitat. As for the fence in near the bottom of the valley in the Cebolla Riparian Pasture, cattle would continue to enter mouse habit in the Cebolla Riparian Pasture, because of its ineffective location. Similarly, if the Lake Fork and Schoolhouse fences aren’t built then cattle would enter into the Cebolla Riparian of the San Diego during times when not authorized to graze there.

A new corral in the Lake Fork Pasture would increase the flexibility needed for management of the allotment under the new conditions brought on by the NMMJM listing.

In summary, continued management of these allotments as is currently performed would not be protective of the NMMJM’s critical and occupied habitat. Cattle will be able to graze occupied and proposed critical habitat.

Alternative 2 - Proposed Action Alternative

22 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

The conversion of the current barbed wire fence exclosures to pipe fence exclosures and the addition of another 5.5 to the north of the third exclosure near the Lake Fork corral would allow for protection of occupied habitat and would not measurably alter the availability of forage to livestock since they would exclude an insignificant amount of land proportional to the entire pasture. Cattle would still have access to water, as they do now, in the areas between exclosures. The conversion of barbed wire to pipe fence would not result in having to change the current management on the San Diego Allotment as it would be grazed as it was during the 2016 grazing season. The area is already excluded from livestock grazing. Its exclusion has not altered management. The conversion of the barbed wire fences to pipe fence would require less maintenance because pipe fence is more durable, requires less maintenance, and is more effective at excluding livestock than four-strand barbed wire fences. A short-term immediate measure would be to install an electric fence around an additional 5.5 acres of occupied habitat. This would exclude livestock until the permanent pipe fence can be constructed outside of active breeding seasons for the NMMJM, MSO and JMS.

The new one mile of fence on Schoolhouse Mesa would also make it possible to keep the cows from drifting into the proposed critical habitat. These fences would not alter management of the allotment. Permittees would be more likely to keep cattle out of the Cebolla Riparian Pasture, especially in the fall when temperatures begin to fall and cattle tend to migrate to the lower elevations where they typically winter.

Construction of the four mile Lake Fork fence would make more forage available for utilization by livestock by opening the Lake Fork Mesa Pasture. The pasture cannot currently be used because cattle cannot be kept in the area and make their way into the Fenton and Cebolla Riparian pastures. The fence would help keep cattle from drifting into the Cebolla riparian and allow permittees to be more effective at keeping cattle out of Fenton Pasture and the Cebolla Riparian Pasture.

The construction of the one mile fence and installation of two cattle guards at the south end of the Mushroom Pasture would increase the amount of forage available to livestock by providing fence to keep cattle out of the riparian area enabling the permittees to graze the southern half of the pasture. Currently they are only able to use the northern half of the pasture because there is no fence to keep cattle from drifting into the San Antonio riparian area. The fence would not change the management of the allotment and would relieve pressure from the fence at the northern portion of the pasture, preventing cows from getting on the San Antonio Riparian Pasture.

The fences on the Rio Cebolla wouldn’t affect the management of the allotment or the availability of forage to livestock. The four mile long fence along the ridgeline to the east of the pasture would make it possible to exclude cattle from the riparian pasture by placing a fence in a more effective location in the uplands. An electric fence will also be constructed here to prevent cattle from entering the Rio Cebolla Riparian Pasture until a more permanent fence can be constructed. The quarter mile cross fence in the Rio Cebolla would result in a loss of forage if cattle are excluded from the NMMJM mouse proposed habitat, but it wouldn’t be enough to reduce the number of permitted head, and will be offset by opening the southern half of the Mushroom

23 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Pasture. The fence would allow for greater flexibility in the protection of the NMMJM due to its location at the northern extant of proposed critical habitat along the Rio Cebolla.

A new corral in the Lake Fork pasture would increase the flexibility of livestock operators and of the Forest Service in managing the San Diego Allotment. At this time the nearest functional corral is in the Cebolla Riparian Pasture.

The administrative closure of Rio Cebolla Riparian Pasture in the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment to allow for resource recovery would make livestock management more difficult for livestock operators since the pasture is used for gathering and moving out of the allotment in the fall. The closure would allow the vegetation to recover from overutilization that has occurred in recent years.

The Fenton Pasture would remain closed administratively. The pasture is seldom used so there would not be a reduction of available forage and the pasture is not used as a holding pasture or a corridor for livestock movement.

Maintenance of the proposed rangeland improvements would be the responsibility of both the Forest Service and the Permittees of the allotment on which they were constructed. The Forest Service would likely to be responsible for the exclosure fences in the occupied habitat as well as the cattle guards placed along the Mushroom fence. Permittees would be responsible for all other range improvements constructed.

In summary, under this alternative, cattle grazing operations will be able to continue with some modifications, and NMMJM habitat would be protected under proposed measures.

Cumulative effects

The cumulative effects of past and present activities such as grazing use, vegetation treatments, wildfires, mining, opening and closing of roads through Travel Management, restoration projects, and use by wildlife are reflected in the following discussion of range management.

The Southwest Jemez Collaborative Restoration Project is the largest project within this project area. This project is to help vegetation treatments and allow fire to play a more natural role on a landscape scale. However, this, along with the thinning of many areas in the allotment will result in an increase of forage available to livestock. Specific projects under the Southwest Jemez Collaborative Restoration in the immediate area of the Cebolla San Antonio and San Diego Allotments are the decommissioning of the road that leads to San Antonio Well and a meadow restoration project along the San Antonio Creek. Permittees would still have access to the well through another road that comes down into the canyon off of FR144 to the north. The meadow restoration is also not likely to have any major effects; it will likely cause a slight increase in forage production but will have no impacts on management.

Fire is a past disturbance that has influenced the project area. The Lakes Fire, which burned the area to the south and the east of Fenton Lake in the San Diego Allotment in 2007. The Lake Fork Fire burned much of the heavy timber in the Lake Fork Mesa Pasture that, prior to the fire, served as natural barrier and prevented cattle from trailing down into the Fenton and Rio Cebolla Pastures at times when not authorized to graze there. The fire greatly reduced the canopy cover

24 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

causing an increase of forage available to livestock if the pasture were to be fenced and operators able to use it.

Both allotments get heavy use by recreationalists, throughout most of the year and recreation poses many challenges to both the Forest Service and the livestock operators on the allotments. Many user-created trails can be found along both the Rio Cebolla and the San Antonio Creek, and motorists and OHV users make their way on to riparian areas with their vehicles.

Exclosures were built in 2014 and 2015 for water quality improvement along the San Antonio Creek near the border of the Valles Caldera. The acreage for both exclosures totals about 8 acres, and has not made a significant impact on the forage available for cattle.

In summary, the Southwest Jemez Collaborative Restoration (SJCR) is a large scale action affecting the proposed project area. The SJCR is likely to provide more forage for livestock but have no impacts on management. Fire has had and will have an effect on our project area, as well as recreation. Fire may have positive effects on forage may also have negative effects on infrastructure such as corrals and fences. Recreation is very heavy in the project area, and OHV use can impact forage in areas where OHV operators go off road.

It is during this AOI process it could be determined that certain pastures be rested or the timing changed due to conflicts with other resources or for recovery of certain resources. Because utilization standards this year were not met, the Cebolla Riparian Pasture (Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment), which contains proposed critical habitat for the NMMJM, will be rested for the 2016 grazing season and the 2017 grazing season. The use of San Antonio Riparian Pasture duration will be scaled back to 2 days, rather than 15, to protect NMMJM habitat. The Fenton Pasture will also be closed, again for the protection of NMMJM habitat. The AOIs are not analyzed in this project. They are a separate administrative process that the Jemez/Cuba Range Staff and District Ranger will be working on with permittees in early 2016 prior to the next grazing season.

Recreation

Affected Environment

During FY 2009, approximately 1,496,000 people visited the SFNF (USDA Forest Service 2012b). General information on a forest level indicates that approximately 77 percent of public visitation was for recreational purposes. Using National Visitors Use Monitoring data for forest- wide vehicle occupancy averages, the number of dispersed recreation users along the FR 376 recreation corridor is estimated between 97,000 to 111,200 visitors annually. Forest Road 376 South (from New Mexico Highway 126 to the Gilman Tunnels) is closed to public use from January 1st to April 15th to protect natural resources, reduce erosion and protect road surfaces from motor vehicle damage.

Existing Condition

The existing condition is described for Rio Cebolla and San Antonio River reaches where occupied and proposed critical habitat is proposed. Travel Management is an important existing administrative tool and would be discussed as an existing condition.

25 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Desired Condition

The desired condition is to protect and enhance NMMJM occupied and proposed critical habitats and contribute toward species recovery while providing a level and range of recreational opportunities and scenic values that meet visitor demands and expectations. This is difficult since the FR 376 recreation corridor contains most of the occupied habitat areas and also is the most heavily used dispersed recreation area on the forest. It is expected that dispersed recreation opportunities in occupied habitat, where no developed recreation sites exist, would continue to be limited and/or prohibited in order to protect existing populations of the NMMJM. Replacing the temporary fencing surrounding occupied habitat with long lasting pipe fences coupled with a long term closure to public access would provide long term habitat protection and resource benefits such as enhanced scenery and increased fisheries. The pipe fences should blend into the natural background.

The FR 376 corridor has suffered resource damage in the proposed critical habitat along the lower Rio Cebolla, between Porter’s Landing and Lake Fork Corral due to overuse and vandalism. Managing unregulated dispersed recreation is challenging, and the vast majority of dispersed recreation visitors prefer to recreate in conjunction with surface water. It is not feasible to prohibit public pedestrian access and unmanaged dispersed recreation activities in areas with streams and riparian environments. Continue current management of motor vehicle travel, which causes heavy resource damage that is restricted to 35 feet off designated forest roads and 150 feet off forest roads in dispersed camping corridors pursuant to Travel Management regulations.

Long term desired conditions would continue the practice of restricting motor vehicle use to forest roads designated open to public travel. Other forms of compatible dispersed recreation would continue to be available to the public within proposed critical habitat along the rivers and waterways.

Rio Cebolla – There are 854 acres of occupied and/or proposed critical habitats along the Upper and lower Rio Cebolla (SFNF GIS 2015). Beginning at McKinney Lake, the terminus of proposed critical habitat, the Upper Rio Cebolla falls towards Seven Springs Picnic Area. The Twin Cabins Trail follows the stream from a trailhead for approximately three miles. The trail is considered a low use trail and the picnic areas is a low use site. Forest Road 314 follows the stream from the Seven Springs Fish Hatchery through the picnic area, ending at the trailhead. Recreational activities are limited to picnicking, hiking, fishing and other day use activities. There is occupied habitat located at Seven Spring State Fish Hatchery but does not intrude into SFNF lands. From the fish hatchery to Fenton lake State Park the stream flows through a mix of private and forest land holdings; the dominant recreational activity is fishing off FR 378 and New Mexico Highway 126. There is occupied habitat located at Fenton Lake State Park.

Camp Gallagher, an environmental education center operated by the Albuquerque Public School District under a Special Use Permit, is located a quarter mile below Fenton Lake State Park. This education facility has seen low use over the last five years, but is scheduled for improvements over the short term. The school district has indicated that day use educational activities will increase over the next several years. Although not directly on the river, the facility is within proposed critical habitat.

The high use dispersed recreation corridor begins where the Rio Cebolla passes underneath FR 376 at the Lake Fork Corral. Occupied habitat is located in proximity to this area, including four

26 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

temporary occupied habitat exclosures (Figure 4). The closure order protecting occupied habitat prohibits public entry, including camping, hiking and fishing activities.

Figure 4. New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse Occupied Habitat Exclosures

27 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

From the Lake Fork Corral to the confluence with the Rio de las Vacas, FR 376 runs parallel to the stream for approximately four miles. High use dispersed recreation occurs in this area. This road segment has 28 dedicated dispersed camp sites where motor vehicles can park off the road in pullouts or on road spurs. These dispersed sites include major camping compounds for large group camping as well as single sites for families and smaller groups. In addition to camping, dispersed recreation includes fishing, all-terrain vehicle use, and day use picnicking. Many visitors drive FR 376 just for pleasure.

Over time, dispersed tent campsites have become permanently established, primarily in conjunction with the convenience of being close to parked vehicles. Approximately two acres of proposed critical habitat have been degraded, including soil compaction and vegetation damage due to vandalism, motor vehicle camping and trailer use. A dispersed campsite typically includes a compacted tent pad cleared of rocks and debris, reinforced rock fire rings and user created foot paths leading to the stream, fire ring and vehicle. Vehicle pull outs are considered part of the motor vehicle transportation system and are not included in the two acres of the degraded area.

Forest Road 376 is the most heavily used road on the forest, providing access for 97,000 to 111,200 visitors annually. Motor vehicle caused resource damage in the wet meadow environment(s) along FR 376 has been minimized due to on-going barrier efforts associated with Respect the Rio and Travel Management, although an occasional off-highway vehicle or 4-wheel drive vehicle will attempt to use the wet meadow for mud bogging. Buck and pole fencing and bollards between the road and wet meadows, coupled with active monitoring and patrolling, have effectively curtailed most motor vehicle damage to wet meadows and riparian areas.

San Antonio River – There are 426 acres of occupied and/or proposed critical habitats along the San Antonio River (SFNF GIS 2015). From the common boundary with the Valles Caldera, the San Antonio River flows in a southern direction. San Antonio Hot Springs is located along the river, approximately three miles below the boundary with the Caldera. The hot springs is very popular and considered a high use site. Visitors typically access the hot springs via FR 376 north July through December), approximately five miles from New Mexico Highway 126 and park in a parking area. From the parking area it is a ¾ mile hike to the hot springs which includes a footbridge across the river bisecting proposed critical habitat. An alternative hike of five miles from San Antonio Campground along the river also provides access to the hot springs. Forest Road 376 North (from New Mexico Highway 125 to the San Antonio Hot Springs parking area) is closed from January 1 through June 30th to protect sensitive wildlife species. Visitors use the road to hike the road to access the hot springs during winter months.

The San Antonio Campground is situated along the river inside occupied habitat. The campground was constructed in the mid-1970s and is hardscaped, and although it lies within occupied habitat it is not included in the public access closure.

Travel Management

Forest roads are primary access routes to get to most dispersed recreation destinations. Travel Management establishes requirements for administration of the forest motorized transportation system (i.e., roads, motor vehicle dispersed recreation corridors and motorized trails). The SFNF Travel Management Record of Decision (ROD) provides a forest-wide system of roads, trails, and areas designated for motor vehicle use, and time of year operation. The ROD clarifies vehicle

28 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

use patterns on the forest, prohibiting cross country motor vehicle use off designated roads (more than 30 feet off the road shoulder), unless in recreation corridors designated for motorized dispersed recreation and motorized big game retrieval. Along with the ROD the forest published the SFNF Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM), re-issued April 2015, that shows the road and motorized trail network currently open to public use.

Travel Management offers NMMJM habitat protection from motor vehicle use and damage. There are three miles of roads designated open to the public in occupied and/or proposed critical habitat along the San Antonio River. Travel Management provides a 94 percent protection from motor vehicle travel in NMMJM occupied and proposed critical habitats (SFNF GIS, 2015). An additional three miles of roads designated open to public use along the Rio Cebolla are located in occupied and proposed critical habitats, offering a 92 percent protection from motor vehicle travel (SFNF GIS, 2015). Roads open to public use into occupied and/or proposed critical habitats are shown in Figure 5.

29 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 5. Motor Vehicle Use Map in NMMJM Habitat Protections Map

Environmental Consequences

Environmental impacts and consequences for each alternative action are discussed separately for occupied and proposed critical NMMJM habitats.

30 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Alternative 1 – No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, current management would continue. The temporary fences protecting occupied habitat along the Rio Cebolla would be removed, and management in occupied and proposed critical habitats across both Allotments would continue as is described in the Allotment Management Plans. Forest visitors would still be required to adhere to Travel Management regulations. With respect to forest recreation this alternative would have both beneficial and detrimental effects because the closure prohibiting public access would expire.

Reopening occupied habitat to public access and use would result in positive effects to dispersed campers and stream based recreation by allowing greater access facilitating fishing and other dispersed recreation activities. Dispersed camping opportunities would become available within occupied habitat, although campers would necessarily need to carry camp tents, cooking utensils, food, and other supplies from the road to the camp site. There are eight camp sites, defined by fire rings and soil compaction, in the occupied habitat area exclosures, that are presently fenced off and closed to camping that would be reopened.

Negative recreation related environmental consequences in occupied habitat include continued resource degradation. The resumption of unregulated dispersed camping would result in a continuation of accelerated soil compaction and loss of vegetative cover. Four of the eight dispersed camp sites are relatively newer and show less soil compaction and vegetation trampling, while the other four are more established with more severe soil compaction and no ground vegetation in the immediate camp site area. Repeated use would accelerate trampling of camp sites and trails leading to camping and fishing sites. Vegetation adjacent to non-System fishing access trails would continue to be trampled. There is a greater chance that human waste and trash would accumulate in occupied habitat.

Motor vehicle access to a mile of dispersed camping area on the east side of the 73 acre occupied habitat exclosure area below the FR376/Rio Cebolla crossing was gated and barricaded in 2012. The mile long camping area accommodated 40 to 50 established dispersed camping sites, The closed gate has effectively eliminated dispersed camping on the east side of Lower Rio Cebolla wet meadow(s) and will remain closed regardless of either alternative selected. Figure 6 shows resource damage to wet meadows where the project five acre expansion of the Lake Fork Corral occupied habitat exclosure is proposed.

31 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 6. Resource Damage to Wet Meadows at Lake Fork Corral

The Fogon Corral would stay unchanged and no access road would be needed. The existing barrier fencing would act as a deterrent to motor vehicle access into Fogon Canyon.

The “no action” alternative would have little effect on NMMJM occupied and proposed critical habitats along the San Antonio River. Terminating the public access closure would allow the public to cross the river to access fishing spots on the riverbank opposite the San Antonio Campground. Day use soakers at the San Antonio Hot Springs would continue in the same capacity that is already occurring. Fishing and hiking would continue as well. Other than the campground there are very limited dispersed camping opportunities along the river and much of the canyon is restricted to day use only.

Developed and dispersed recreation activities would continue to function uninterrupted as before the temporary fences surrounding the occupied habitat.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Alternative

This alternative would have no negative impacts or environmental consequences related to developed or dispersed recreation caused by building new range fences where proposed. These new range fences represent a small fraction of the total allotment fences on the district and are not in locations of developed recreation sites or preferred dispersed recreation use areas.

A new corral which would replace Fogon Corral may have a negative impact to natural resources because the road to the corral would allow addition motor vehicle access into Fogon Canyon, which does not exist at the present. Should the location for a new corral be identified adjacent to

32 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

FR 376 the issue and resource impacts caused by motor vehicles and related dispersed camping and day use activities would be minimized or not materialize.

Replacing the temporary fences surrounding the four occupied habitat areas with long lasting pipe fences would have no environmental consequence related to forest recreation because the fence exclosures currently exist in place and trading out temporary fences for long lasting pipe fences would not affect dispersed recreation activities or behaviors. Stouter pipe fence may be beneficial in discouraging vandalism and illegal entry onto occupied habitat and would act as a deterrent to motor vehicle trespass and driving through wet meadows. Very temporary electric fences would not have an impact.

Positive resource related environmental consequences in occupied habitat can be expected by extending the closure prohibiting public entry to a 10 or 20 year period. This would be a continuation of existing measures; measures that the public have largely accepted and modified recreational behaviors to acknowledge and respect the exclosure(s). Positive effects to resource degradation include: no additional unregulated dispersed camping or access which would result in an opportunity for vegetative cover in compacted or trampled areas to recover. Wet meadow and streambank vegetation would also have an opportunity to recover and provide stream shading, which would benefit water quality and fish production. There would be less chance for human waste and trash accumulation in occupied habitat. The stouter pipe fence would act as a deterrent to motor vehicle trespass and driving through wet meadows and riparian areas. Figure 7 illustrates illegal motor vehicle entry over wet meadows where the 5.5 acre fence expansion and long term closure are proposed.

33 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 7. Motor Vehicle Caused Damage in NMMJM Habitat

There would be no environmental consequences to dispersed recreation in proposed critical habitat because there isn’t any measure proposed which impacts current developed or dispersed recreation patterns or activities. The two developed recreation sites, San Antonio Campground and Seven Springs Picnic Area are unaffected by proposed alternative measures.

There would be no effect to the motorized public use. Travel Management regulations would remain unaffected and in place. There are no proposed project elements that would close roads, even in and through NMMJM occupied habitat. The Travel Management Decision which prohibits cross country motor vehicle travel is unaffected and would remain in place.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Proposed Action Alternative

With respect to Recreation, there would be only minor direct and indirect effects. The new range fencing projects would have no effect on existing developed and dispersed recreational activities because the proposed locations are not near developed or dispersed recreation areas. There is a vast network of range management fences on the district and the additional miles of fencing would be a nominal inconvenience to forest visitors.

A new corral replacing Fogon Corral and access road may have a negative effect by opening the area to motor vehicles. At the present time, motor vehicle access to the corral is fenced off as part of the barrier buck and pole fence. Providing a road to the corral will entice illegal motor vehicle travel into the canyon. An alternative corral located adjacent to FR 376 would minimize the possibility of vehicles traveling into Fogon Canyon; however a new gate and fencing improvements may still be needed. Day-use hiking occurs in Fogon Canyon but is considered a low use activity and area and would not be affected.

34 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Replacing temporary occupied habitat exclosure fences with long lasting pipe fences would have no direct effect on forest recreation because occupied habitat areas are already fenced off and closed to public entry.

There would be small positive indirect effects to developed recreation (i.e. San Antonio Campground or Seven Springs Picnic Area. The campground is excluded from the public access closure, although it is located within occupied habitat. Cattle have wandered into the campground from time to time and the new range fencing and cattle guard improvements on FR 106 would discourage this from happening again. There would be fewer cattle vehicle conflicts on the highway since cattle would be further fenced from the Rights-of-Ways. The Seven Springs Picnic Area is within proposed critical habitat; the proposed alternative measures do not impact the picnic area.

Dispersed recreation and camping on the FR 376 recreation corridor within occupied or proposed critical habitats would remain unchanged.

Forest roads are managed with the Travel Management Decision and MVUM restrictions and prohibitions. No changes to Travel Management or the MVUM are proposed and would occur. All roads currently designated open to public travel on the MVUM would remain open and subject to travel restrictions.

Cumulative Effects – Proposed Action Alternative

There would be few cumulative effects to forest recreation caused by the implementation of the proposed action alternative. The continued public access closure on occupied habitat areas would have an on-going minor displacement of dispersed campers. These campers have had two years to adjust camp site preferences and have mostly relocated to sites outside of the fenced exclosures. New visitors desiring a dispersed camping site along FR 376 may be impacted. On weekends and holidays the FR 376 corridor is saturated with visitors and many are displaced to other locations on the forest. Long term closure of the eight camp sites in NMMJM occupied habitat would have an insignificant incremental effect during weekends and holidays on displaced dispersed campers.

The new range fencing projects would not affect dispersed recreation users because these locations are not near desired dispersed recreation areas. The range fencing connecting New Mexico Highways 4 and 126 would be beneficial in keeping cattle off the highway, an added safety measure. Very little dispersed recreation occurs in proximity of the new range fences.

Without a gate restricting public access to the relocated corral, the public will attempt to drive into Fogon Canyon to camp or engage in other forms of dispersed recreation. Relocating the corral to a site close to FR 376 may minimize impacts to forest recreation.

Travel Management offers NMMJM habitat protection from motor vehicle use and damage. There are three miles of roads designated open to the public in occupied and/or proposed critical habitat along the San Antonio River. Travel Management provides a 94 percent protection from motor vehicle travel in NMMJM occupied and proposed critical habitats (SFNF GIS, 2015). An additional three miles of roads designated open to public use along the Rio Cebolla are located in occupied and proposed critical habitats, offering a 92 percent protection from motor vehicle travel (SFNF GIS, 2015).

35 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Summary

The proposed action alternative would aid in the protection of NMMJM occupied and proposed critical habitats. The project measures proposed would have no or minor negative effects related to forest recreation in occupied NMMJM habitat and net beneficial impacts for wetlands and riparian environments within occupied and proposed critical NMMJM habitats.

Conversely, the “no action alternative” would have net negative impacts to resources. Removing the temporary exclosure fences surrounding occupied habitat, and not renewing the public access closure, would promote dispersed camping and other recreation activities which would further trample vegetation and compact soils. Motor vehicles would be more apt to drive into wetlands and riparian areas protected with occupied NMMJM habitat exclosures. Other dispersed recreation would remain unchanged.

Wildlife

Threatened and Endangered Species

This analysis discusses the effects to Threatened and Endangered Wildlife Species within the project areas and their associated Proposed and/or Designated Critical Habitats (Figures 2 & 8). The San Diego and Cebolla/San Antonio Allotments will serve as the analysis boundaries for this proposed project. Species with habitat within the analysis area include:

 New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse (NMMJM)  Mexican Spotted Owl (MSO)  Jemez Mountain Salamander (JMS)

36 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 8. Proposed Action and Proximity to MSO and JMS Critical Habitat

37 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

This section summarizes a more detailed analysis contained in wildlife Biological Assessment (BA), which is part of this project’s administrative record.

Past Actions that have affected the Existing Condition

The past actions presented only define the general activities and their potential influence to the habitat and species over time, if any. To date, the existing condition of the analysis area has been influenced by historic and ongoing activities including; timber, road maintenance and construction, prescribed fire, regulated (developed) and unregulated (dispersed) recreation, livestock grazing, and wild ungulate grazing (specifically Rocky Mountain Elk) to a lesser extent, when compared to domestic. Other contributing factors to the existing condition include drought, wildfire and overall climate change.

For this analysis the existing condition is focused in riparian habitat for the NMMJM and MSO, and forested habitat (mixed conifer and ponderosa) for the MSO and JMS. Currently, permitted livestock grazing, dispersed (unregulated) recreation and road construction along State Highway 126 are the primary factors that have contributed to the composition and structure of habitat, compounded by natural events such as drought. Fire has also contributed to the existing condition to a small degree in forested areas potentially used by the JMS. There is no timber activity in riparian areas and no activity has occurred within forested areas of the proposed projects in the last 10 years.

Existing Condition

Currently the MSO, JMS and NMMJM are known to occur within the San Diego and Cebolla/San Antonio allotments. The San Diego Allotment contains critical habitat for the MSO predominantly covering the mid to west side of the allotment (Figure 8) and high quality foraging habitat within the Cebolla Riparian Pasture. In addition, it has 6 Protected Activity Centers (PACs), 3 of them positive for occurrence in 2015. The nearest PAC to the project areas is Lake Fork and it’s between .5 to 2.5 miles away. In addition, the 83 acres of fenced and protected NMMJM occupied habitat within the Cebolla Riparian Pasture also resides within MSO critical habitat.

The Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment also contains critical habitat for the MSO, 10 PACs and high quality foraging habitat is expected to exist within the Cebolla Riparian Pasture. Although critical habitat is not designated in the San Antonio Riparian Pasture area, it does have high quality foraging habitat and it is adjacent to established MSO PACs.

At the scale of this analysis, critical habitat for the JMS predominantly covers the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment (Figure 8). This allotment also has 17,351 acres of occupied habitat and 275 acres of high probability occupancy. The San Diego Allotment has only 28 acres of critical habitat, but it has 1,196 acres of occupied habitat and 8,530 acres of high probability occupancy.

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects

The analysis below is a summary from a BA for Threatened and Endangered (T&E) Species specifically for this project. This BA and all associated wildlife documents will be part of the administrative record. Table 3 is a summary of the findings for Threatened, Endangered wildlife species and designated or proposed critical habitats.

38 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Table 3. Listed Species and Critical Habitats Designated in Sandoval County, New Mexico

Species Status Critical Determination Determination Habitat Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Proposed Action Canada Lynx Threatened Designated Species: NE Species: NE (Lynx canadensis) Critical Habitat: Critical Habitat: NE NE Jemez Mountains Endangered Designated Species: NE Species: salamander Critical Habitat: MANLAA (Plethodon NE Critical Habitat: neomexicanus) LAA Least tern (Sterna Endangered No Species: NE Species: NE antillarum) Mexican spotted Threatened Designated Species: Species: owl (Strix MANLAA MANLAA occidentalis lucida) Critical Habitat : Critical Habitat: MANLAA MANLAA New Mexico Endangered Proposed Species: LAA Species: meadow jumping MANLAA mouse (Zapus Proposed Critical Proposed Critical hudsonius luteus) Habitat: LAA Habitat : MANLAA Rio Grande Endangered Designated Species: NE Species: NE Silvery Minnow Critical Habitat: Critical Habitat: (Hybognathus NE NE amarus) Southwestern Endangered Designated Species: NE Species: NE willow flycatcher Critical Habitat: Critical Habitat: (Empidonax traillii NE NE extimus) Yellow-billed Threatened Proposed Species: NE Species: NE cuckoo, Western Critical Habitat: Critical Habitat: U.S. DPS NE NE (Coccyzus americanus) NE = No Effect MANLAA = May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect LAA = Likely to Adversely Affect

Neither the yellow-billed cuckoo, least tern, Southwestern willow flycatcher, Rio Grande silvery minnow, Canada lynx nor their designated critical habitats occur within the project area and are excluded from further analysis. The No Action and the Proposed Action alternatives will not affect these species or their critical habitats. Therefore, these alternatives will have “No Effect” on these species or their critical habitats and consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is not required.

Environmental Consequences

39 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Alternative 1 - No Action Alternative

Under this alternative, no action to protect the NMMJM occupied habitat or proposed critical habitat will occur. The current closure order on 228 acres will expire and the temporary exclosures protecting 83 acres of occupied habitat will be removed in October 2016. Additional fences and cattle guards would not be installed on either allotment.

Alternative 2 - Proposed Action Alternative

On the San Diego Allotment, this alternative would continue to protect occupied habitat. The existing barbed wire exclosure would be removed and replaced with a permanent pipe fence, plus an additional 5.5 acres of occupied habitat will be pipe-fenced between the Lake Fork Corral and the large 3rd exclosure. Additional protections to proposed critical habitat include construction of approximately 5 miles of fence on both Schoolhouse and Lake Fork Mesas and a new corral in the Lake Fork Pasture would be constructed. The location for the new Corral has not yet been determined, but it will occur in the Lake Fork pasture at an agreed upon location that greatly limits the disturbance of listed species. Therefore effects from the corral are expected to be minor for all species.

On the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment, this alternative would predominantly protect proposed critical habitat, by constructing approximately one mile of fence off of New Mexico State Highway 4 and across to NM State Highway 126, and put in two cattle guards along this fence where it crosses Forest Roads 105 and CFF 199. In addition, this alternative proposes to construct 4 miles of fence within the Road and Barley pastures on the east side of the Cebolla Riparian Pasture and a cross-fence just north of proposed critical habitat in the Cebolla Riparian Pasture. On both allotments, the current closure order on 228 acres will be made permanent and will exclude all activity from the area. Further, on all proposed fence locations where current fencing is not present, a temporary electric fence will be initially installed to protect the NMMJM and proposed critical habitat until the permanent fences can be constructed.

New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse

Alternative 1 -No Action Alternative

The actual removal of the fence is not expected to impact the NMMJM to any large extent as this would occur prior to the mouse active season or late October and/or early November when lingering juveniles are in hibernation. The removal of the fence during these times is only expected to have minor and temporary indirect effects such as trampling of residual vegetation.

The removal of the fence and closure order is expected to have direct and indirect effects on the mouse considering occupied habitat will be exposed to unregulated recreation. Forest Road 376 runs parallel to the Rio Cebolla and is mostly inside the proposed critical habitat. This road is the most heavily used road and corridor with the highest concentration of dispersed camping during the summer months on the Santa Fe National Forest. Therefore the potential for effects to the mouse and habitat would occur primarily throughout the active season when recreational activity is at its highest level. The potential for direct effects from unregulated recreation can include disturbance and displacement from riparian habitat and nesting areas. In addition, individual adult mice, juveniles and/or newborns may be trampled or crushed within their day nests during high recreational activity and thus mice could potentially suffer mortality. Indirectly, unregulated disbursed recreation such as fishing, hiking, and camping can cause trampling of habitat, soil

40 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

compaction and loss of dense vertical cover that does not equate to providing the biological or ecological requirements of the species.

This alternative will also allow current livestock grazing management to continue (See Range Section) throughout open pastures without protections for the NMMJM. Without the closure order, exclosures, proposed fences, and cattle guards, permitted livestock will have open access to NMMJM habitat. Direct and indirect effects are expected to occur within open pastures located in occupied and proposed critical habitat including upland habitat. Cattle will have access to proposed critical habitat in the San Antonio Riparian Pasture of the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment and the Cebolla Riparian Pasture of the San Diego Allotment.

Permitted livestock will be able to graze occupied habitat in the Cebolla Riparian Pasture of the San Diego Allotment where the species was captured in 2005 and 2006. Effects to the NMMJM in occupied habitat such as trampling of adults and juveniles prior to hibernation may occur. In addition, since livestock grazing will continue to be managed at 40% utilization using 8-12 inch stubble height standards in riparian areas. This will not provide the biological or ecological requirements of the species, including habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering of the NMMJM. That does not say all aspects of current utilization standards throughout the allotment would impact the species and habitat.

Although, where habitat requirements such as the 24 inch minimum grass height, abundance of seed heads and insects, perennial flowing water and moist soils and intact upland areas are not being met within occupied, proposed critical habitat and habitat that may be suitable elsewhere – indirect effects on the mouse would be expected in these pastures. However, the Guadalupe Pasture where winter grazing occurs in proposed critical habitat, grazing pressure is light. This pasture is considered non-capable range, that exhibit slopes of >60%, canopy cover of > 80% and forage production of <100lbs/acre. Therefore these combined attributes deter livestock use and results in very light grazing pressure. Therefore, any potential effects on the NMMJM such as a reduction of residual vegetation would be expected to be minor, where habitat should still support the species biological requirements.

Overall, implementation of Alternative 1- No Action Alternative would be expected to have a negative effect on the NMMJM and its associated habitat. Considering a relative concentration of unregulated recreation and grazing within occupied habitat during the NMMJM active season, the potential for direct effects primarily from recreational activity compounded with indirect effects from recreation and livestock grazing; this alternative is expected to adversely affect the species and proposed critical habitat.

Alternative 2 -Proposed Action Alternative

The Proposed Action Alternative is expected to have the least amount of direct and/or indirect effects on the NMMJM and proposed critical habitat. Project activities would protect occupied habitat and most of the proposed critical habitat within the two allotments. In addition, the closure order on 228 acres will exclude all activity including but not limited to livestock grazing and unregulated recreation. This will allow the continual protection of the species and maintenance and enhancement of habitat. However, some proposed critical habitat that’s adjacent to occupied habitat and within the San Antonio Riparian Pasture will still be grazed by livestock to some authorized level (See Range Section), and will experience other multiple use such as unregulated recreation.

41 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Initially to protect the NMMJM and proposed critical habitat, this alternative proposes to install an electric fence where permanent fences are proposed to allow livestock to enter on to the allotments and concurrently provide protection until permanent fences can be constructed. The electric fence will involve using thin composite or fiberglass posts, electric tape or smooth wire, solar operated power source and a very minimally invasive installation method. Installation will occur in late spring (snowmelt dependent) and sometime prior to the NMMJM active season (June through September). Therefore, no direct effects are expected. In addition, indirectly the installation of this fence could cause very minor residual vegetation trampling, but not at any notable levels that would adversely affect the species or proposed critical habitat. Beneficial effects are expected from the immediate and pre-active season protection of the 5.5 acre occupied site that’s adjacent to the current exclosure. Therefore, overall effects from the installation are expected to be very minimal to non-existent.

Direct effects to the NMMJM from the removal of existing barbed wire fences are not expected. Project activities will occur sometime during mouse hibernation and removal will predominantly not occur in upland habitat where the species is known to hibernate. Indirectly, there is a minor potential expected for trampling of residual vegetation around the perimeter of the exclosures from removal activities and movement of authorized personnel. This minor effect is expected to be short-term as vegetation should recover.

The construction of the pipe fence will also occur sometime during the mouse hibernation season but will be much more involved in time and equipment. Constructing the pipe fence will require the use of a skid steer, mobile welding truck and hand tools. The skid steer is considered small heavy equipment and will cause some level of soil compaction and residual vegetation damage from equipment movement. This impact is expected to some extent around the perimeter of occupied habitat, depending on where this equipment is used. The level of soil compaction and impact to vegetation will depend on the amount of time the equipment stays, its movement and the existing level of soil moisture and amount of vegetation already present.

Impacting soil and vegetation may result in impacts to the NMMJM, which consequently may at some minor level affect the species biological requirements. Any direct impacts to residual vegetation can lead to a decrease in invertebrates and loss of protective cover for emergence out of hibernation. In addition, compaction of soils anywhere within habitat that may be suitable for the species may result in a modification of plant communities. However, these effects would only be expected in isolated areas of heavier equipment use. These effects are however only expected in the short-term and in isolated areas depending on the factors above. Over time, habitat around the perimeter of the pipe-exclosure would recover and in the long-term the pipe-fence is expected to protect occupied habitat from recreational and livestock impacts.

The construction of approximately 10 miles of fence will be wildlife friendly post and wire fence, it will predominantly not occur in NMMJM habitat and is not expected to negatively impact the species. A small section of fence that’s part of the Lake Fork Mesa fence, is intended to tie into the east and west sides of the 2nd exclosure. Technically, this fence work will occur in very small sections of proposed critical habitat, but not in occupied habitat and it’s not expected to impact the species. In addition, work will occur during the hibernation season. Fence construction in both allotments is proposed to prevent livestock grazing for the protection of habitat.

Overall, Alternative 2- Proposed Action Alternative is expected to have short-term minor effects on the NMMJM and proposed critical habitat with removal of the barbed wire fence, construction of pipe fence and additional fencing. However, these effects on the NMMJM and proposed critical habitat are expected to be insignificant and discountable. Fence construction will occur

42 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

outside of the NMMJM active season, thus direct effects are not expected. The effects from protecting an additional 5.5 acres of occupied habitat through electric fencing are expected to be immediately beneficial by promoting and enhancing occupied habitat. In the long term, the protection of habitat by implementing the Proposed Action Alternative is expected to benefit and assist in the recovery of the species and to promote the development and maintenance of suitable habitat.

Mexican Spotted Owl

Alternative 1 -No Action Alternative

Although the exclosures were built primarily for the protection of NMMJM occupied habitat, they are serving another purpose inadvertently allowing for protection and enhancement of high quality riparian foraging habitat for the MSO. However, under Alternative 1- No Action Alternative, the closure order will expire and the exclosures would be removed in October 2016. Direct effects are expected to be minor with potential foraging disturbance to the MSO, resulting from unregulated recreation and any livestock activity at night. Indirectly this alternative could result in minor impacts to MSO habitat over time where vegetation may not be able to grow to its full potential in isolated areas. This is expected to have some impact on plant species richness and residual plant cover within the riparian corridor. Consequently this can impact small mammal habitat and reduce the availability and distribution of prey species for the MSO within the exclosure area.

Under Alternative 1, No Action Alternative would result in the benefits of the closure order and exclosure no longer existing, for MSO and critical habitat. However, removing the existing occupied habitat barbed wire exclosure, and not installing the additional livestock fencing on the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment is expected to benefit the MSO by eliminating potential flight obstruction and snagging hazards during nighttime foraging.

Under Alternative 1, no addition fencing and/or no cattle guards will be installed. Livestock grazing will continue under current management (See Range Section). Additional fencing would provide an added measure of protection and ability for enhancement of MSO riparian foraging habitat located in the canyon bottoms of the above two pastures. Without the additional fencing this will not occur.

Overall, implementation of Alternative 1 would be expected to have an effect on the MSO and its associated habitat. Considering unregulated recreation within high quality foraging habitat would be allowed again, compounded by livestock grazing, there is a potential for direct and indirect effects. However, these effects would not be expected to result in an adverse effect to the species or critical habitat and would be insignificant and discountable. Direct effects are expected to be minor with limited species disturbance and although the quality of foraging habitat may be reduced in isolated areas, it should still function and meet the biological requirement of the species. In addition, beneficial effects from removing the exclosures and thus flight obstructions are expected.

Alternative 2 -Proposed Action Alternative

Implementation of Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Alternative is expected to have effects on the MSO and critical habitat to some degree, but very limited during the breeding season. Project activities will occur in fall as the MSO breeding season runs from March through August.

43 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Considering the fence removal and construction of the pipe fence, disturbance is expected to be minor as this will not occur in any designated core area or PAC. However, activities will occur in critical habitat and quality riparian foraging habitat but are not expected to notably impact the Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) related to maintaining adequate prey habitat.

Initially, this alternative proposes to install an electric fence where permanent fences are proposed to allow livestock to enter on to the allotments and concurrently provide protection until permanent fences can be constructed. Installation will occur in late spring (snowmelt dependent), but will occur during the MSO breeding season. However, because of the minimally invasive installation materials and techniques; direct and indirect effects from this are expected to be minimal. Directly, the installation will cause minor disturbance, but not expected at a level that disrupts breeding. Also electric fencing should cause minimal flight obstruction and relatively no potential for snagging. Indirectly the installation is not expected to result in habitat modification or impacts to any PCEs. The least invasive route will be taken to greatly limit species and habitat disturbance. A minimal amount of small trees may be removed; however a hand-saw will be used as much as possible. Chainsaws will only be used incidentally on an absolute as needed basis to reduce installation duration and increase efficiency.

The removal of the occupied habitat fence may cause trampling of residual vegetation around the perimeter of the exclosures from de-construction activities and movement of authorized personnel. However, this minor effect is expected to be short-term as vegetation should recover during the next growing season. An immediate benefit of removing the barbed wire fence would be the elimination of a snagging hazard.

The construction of the pipe fence will require more involvement and equipment. Constructing the pipe fence will require the use of a skid steer, mobile welding truck and hand tools. The skid steer is considered small heavy equipment and will cause some level of soil compaction and residual vegetation damage from equipment movement. This impact is expected to some extent around the perimeter of NMMJM occupied habitat, depending on where this equipment is used. The level of soil compaction and impact to vegetation will depend on the amount of time the equipment stays, its movement and the existing level of soil moisture and amount of vegetation already present.

Impacting soil and vegetation may result in minor impacts to the MSO that affect foraging habitat, any direct impacts to vegetation can lead to a potential decrease small mammal habitat and thus potentially impact foraging opportunities for the MSO. However, these effects would only be expected in isolated areas of heavier impact and be short-term and minor. Over time habitat around the perimeter of the pipe-exclosure would recover and in the long-term the pipe- fence is expected to benefit the MSO, critical habitat by protecting riparian vegetation from the impacts of recreation and livestock grazing and improve habitat for prey species.

Installation of the cattle guards is not expected to affect the MSO and will not occur in critical habitat. The location for the new corral has not yet been determined, but it will occur in the Lake Fork pasture at an agreed upon location that greatly limits the disturbance of the MSO and habitat. Therefore effects from the corral rebuild would be very minor. However the construction of 10 miles of additional livestock fence can have an effect on the MSO and critical habitat in certain locations. The construction of the fence will be wildlife friendly. Although any fence can create a new barrier for wildlife, building them to wildlife specifications poses less of a hazard. Additional fences may create a new hazard for owls and may have the potential for short-term harm related to obstructing flight, however over time they should be able to acclimate.

44 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

The MSO critical habitat is located in all fence locations except for the one mile of fence off of NM State Highway 4 and across to NM State Highway 126. The construction of all fences with the exception of the one mile highway fence is expected to occur outside of the MSO breeding season. Therefore breeding disturbance would not be expected. Construction will involve the removal of trees in various sizes within a 20 ft wide path over an approximate 10 mile total install. The removal of trees is required for installation and ease of maintenance over time.

Tree removal within critical habitat and PACs is expected to relatively impact the MSO in the short–term and also some of the PCEs of critical habitat related to forest structure. However, a restriction will be placed on the removal of trees larger than 9 inch dbh to limit the amount of habitat disturbance. Further, any tree that leans away or does not pose an installation or maintenance issue to the fence, will be left alone. Fallen trees will be lopped and scattered within and around the fence path. At least along the fence line this should increase the number a fallen trees and ground woody debris, which in turn should promote some level of small mammal habitat and likely improve the prey-base within the fence line.

Long-term beneficial effects should occur primarily in the Cebolla Riparian Pasture of the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment and to a lesser extent the San Antonio Riparian Pasture. With the implementation of the fences and cattle guards, livestock will no longer have access to the Cebolla Riparian Pasture and MSO critical habitat within the boundary of Seven Spring Day Use Area to just north of proposed critical habitat (Figure 8). Livestock will also be better managed in the San Antonio Riparian Pasture with new fences and installation of the cattle guards. These additional features will provide an added measure of protection and future enhancement of MSO riparian foraging habitat located in the canyon bottoms of the above two pastures.

The implementation of Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Alternative is not expected to have any notable short or long-term effects on the MSO and critical habitat. Considering the timing and tree restrictions in place and considering the owls biological needs; the direct and indirect effects should be minor, short-term and be insignificant and discountable overall on MSO and critical habitat.

Jemez Mountain Salamander

Alternative 1 -No Action Alternative

Under Alternative 1 – No Action Alternative the expiration of the closure order and removal the 83 acre exclosure fence are not expected to affect the JMS or critical habitat. In addition, this alternative will not implement additional fencing or cattle guards and therefore no species or habitat disturbance will occur from those actions. However, this alternative will allow permitted livestock grazing to resume under current management which will be analyzed in a separate biological assessment.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Alternative

Implementation of Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Alternative is expected to have effects on the JMS and critical habitat, but mostly critical habitat. Project activities would not occur during the salamander active season that runs essentially from July through mid-September. Considering the temporary electric fence, no direct and or indirect effect would be expected. However directly, there may be a small potential for harm of individual burrowing salamanders when composite

45 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment fence posts are driven into the ground. However, these fence posts are narrow and do not pose as much ground disturbance.

Indirectly, because of the minimally invasive installation materials and techniques, the installation is not expected to result in habitat modification or impacts to any PCEs. This least invasive route will be taken to limit species and habitat disturbance. A minimal amount of small trees may be removed; however a hand-saw will be used as much as possible. Chainsaws will only be used incidentally on an absolute as needed basis to reduce installation duration and increase efficiency.

No effect to JMS is expected from fence removal and construction of the pipe fence in the San Diego Allotment. This area is riparian and contains no critical or occupied habitat for the JMS. cIn addition, the location of the new corral has not yet been determined, but it will not be rebuilt in JMS habitat. The schoolhouse fences are also not located in critical or occupied habitat, but are proposed in potentially suitable habitat for the JMS. Therefore the JMS may potentially experience some minor effects such as disturbance and/or habitat alterations related to construction of the fence, but they are expected to be insignificant and discountable in this area.

The construction of the other 9 miles of fence within the allotments will presumably have an effect on the JMS and critical habitat; potentially the PCEs related to canopy cover, ground surface or underground habitat. However, direct effects should be minimized because installation will occur outside of the salamander active season. The Lake Fork Mesa fence is not proposed in critical habitat however it is proposed in some occupied and high probability occupied habitat. The 4 mile fence on the east side of the Cebolla Riparian Pasture is proposed in occupied critical habitat. Although the cross-fence just north of critical habitat in the Cebolla Riparian Pasture is located in proposed critical habitat, its installation will predominantly be within a meadow area, although end portions will anchor in suitable habitat.

Although direct effects from the existence of the fences are not expected, the installation may have a potential for harm of individual salamanders in burrows when fence t-posts are driven into the ground and holes are dug for braces. Fence installation will involve the removal of some trees over the span of the fence and removal or alteration of debris. However, a restriction will be placed on the removal of trees larger than 9 inch dbh to limit the amount of overall habitat disturbance and reduction of canopy cover in the immediate area. Further, any tree that leans away or does not pose an installation or maintenance issue to the fence, will be left alone. Fallen trees will be lopped and scattered within and around the fence path. At least along the fence line this should increase the number a fallen trees and ground woody debris. Also, ground debris removal and alteration will be limited to necessity and any large trees that need to be removed due to unmanageable reasons, will also be left for future salamander habitat.

Considering the timing and tree restrictions in place and proper implementation of the project considering the salamander’s biological needs; the direct and indirect effects presumably should be less and only short-term. However, the effects on the PCEs relating to canopy cover, ground surface and underground habitat may initially adversely affect salamander critical habitat, but would not be expected to result in any long-term effects.

Cumulative Effects Summary

Alternative 1 would be expected to have no notable cumulative effects on the NMMJM, MSO or JMS, or their critical and/or proposed critical habitat.

46 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

The cumulative effects analysis for this project is based on future State and private land, tribal or non-Federal activities that are reasonably certain to occur within the analysis area. Federal actions are not addressed under ESA requirements. The US Fish and Wildlife Service will address federal actions separately through their own Section 7 Consultation. No tribal land occurs within the San Diego or Cebolla/San Antonio allotments. However, for these allotments, private and state lands are known. Current and future activities within these allotments that are known for any activity are presented as such.

New Mexico State Activities:

Fenton Lake State Park (including the day use area): This locality is owned by the NMDGF and is managed by New Mexico State Parks. Fenton State Park is a popular year-round retreat found along the Rio Cebolla, within critical habitat, north of occupied habitat and the Fenton pasture. The park attracts campers, hikers, fishermen, swimming and boating at the lake and cross-country skiers. Species and habitat within the State Park area include:

 NMMJM: proposed critical and occupied habitat  MSO: Critical habitat but no occurrences or PACs  JMS: Occupied and high probability occupied habitat

Seven Springs New Mexico Department of Game and Fish Hatchery, Sandoval County: Responsible for production and distribution of native Rio Grande cutthroat trout, New Mexico’s State Fish. Species and habitat within the State hatchery area include:

• NMMJM: proposed critical habitat • MSO: Critical habitat and several adjacent PACs • JMS: Critical and Occupied habitat throughout surrounding canyons

Both of these state operated facilities experience a broad level of recreation. However, for both the State Park areas and Seven Springs Hatchery NMMJM occupied locations; habitat was noted recently in 2013 as remaining suitable, suggesting that currently, habitat loss and/or fragmentation may not be occurring. Therefore, effects may more likely be direct and may be relatively similar to those of livestock grazing and unregulated recreation. Riparian foraging habitat for the MSO, would also be expected to be stable and functioning since it resides in the same area as the NMMJM. However, considering the surrounding forested areas especially camping sites within the state park, MSO disturbance during the breeding season would be expected, especially during peak recreational activity (Memorial Day through Labor Day). Although PACs do exist around the State Hatchery, human activity and disturbance is far less in that location. In addition, despite MSO critical habitat being present within the State Park and Hatchery, these locations have been well established and the level of effects upon the MSO and habitat are expected to have remained stable over time and ultimately manageable by the species.

The JMS may have been negatively impacted by the state park over time due to disturbance and potential trampling, habitat fragmentation and alteration, reductions in down woody debris, loss of cover and soil compaction from recreationists. However, occupied and high probability occupied habitat exist, so this suggest salamanders can co-exist on some level around the state ark activities within the state hatchery stay concentrated within the bounds of the property, thus

47 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment direct and/or indirect effects on the salamander and habitat would not be expected, or at most very minimal.

Cumulatively, these activities would be expected to have a level of effect upon the NMMJM, MSO and JMS and its associated habitat when combined with the effects of the Proposed Action Alternative analyzed. In addition, there are no other projects or activities known or planned on private and/or state land within the analysis area in the foreseeable future, which might impact the above species.

Forest Service Sensitive Species

The following table represents the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List for the Santa Fe NF September 2013; species with potential habitat or present in the project area with potential effects to those species and determination in the allotments under analysis. Table 4. Forest Service Sensitive Species

Common Name Scientific Name San Diego Cebolla/ Analysis/deter Allotment San Antonio mination of Allotment effect AMPHIBIANS (1) Northern Rana pipiens Potential habitat Potential habitat See discussion leopard frog within riparian within riparian below corridor: MI* corridor: MI* BIRDS (6) Bald eagle Haliaetus Potential Potential Any eagle leucocephalus transient transient present would roosting habitat; roosting habitat; be adult that no no would avoid nesting/breeding nesting/breeding project activity habitat. habitat. No impact Northern Accipiter No PFA’s in PFA in stream See discussion goshawk gentilis action area; corridor below potential habitat potential habitat in adjacent in adjacent forest forest; MI* American Falco No protective Two protective See discussion peregrine falcon peregrinus Zones within zones located in below (anatum) project area project area MI* Burrowing owl Athene None None No impact (Western) cunicularia hypugaea Boreal owl Aegolius None None No impact funereus Gray vireo Vireo vicinior None None No impact

48 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Common Name Scientific Name San Diego Cebolla/ Analysis/deter Allotment San Antonio mination of Allotment effect CLAMS (1) Lilljeborg's pea- Disidium None None No impact clam lilljeborg MAMMALS (11) Cinereus Sorex cinereus None None No impact (masked) shrew (cinereus) Water shrew Sorex palustris Potential all Potential all See discussion (navigator) along riparian along riparian below corridor; MI* corridor; MI* Preble’s shrew Sorex preblei None None No impact Spotted bat Euderma Potential for Potential for No impact maculatum transient transient foraging at foraging at night; no project night; no project activity at night; activity at night; no habitat no habitat removal; no removal; no adverse impact; adverse impact; benefit species benefit species by restoring by restoring vegetation and vegetation and prey (insect) prey (insect) habitat habitat Pale Corynorhinus Potential for Potential for No impact Townsend’s big- townsendii transient transient eared bat pallescens foraging at foraging at night; no project night; no project activity at night; activity at night; no habitat no habitat removal; no removal; no adverse impact; adverse impact; benefit species benefit species by restoring by restoring vegetation and vegetation and prey (insect) prey (insect) habitat habitat Pika Ochotona None None No impact princeps Goat Peak pika Ochotona None None No impact princeps nigrescens

49 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Common Name Scientific Name San Diego Cebolla/ Analysis/deter Allotment San Antonio mination of Allotment effect Gunnison’s Cynomys None None No impact prairie dog gunnisoni (prairie population) Gunnison’s Cynomys Present on None See discussion prairie dog gunnisonia project site below (montane population) American Martes None None No impact marten americana origenes Canada Lynx Lynx None None No impact Canadensis Plants (11) Tufted sand Abronia None None No impact verbena bigelovii Greene Asclepias Not known in None No impact milkweed uncialis project area ssp.uncialis Chaco milkvetch Astragalus Not known in None No impact micromerius project area Pecos mariposa Calochortus Not known in None No impact lily gunnisonii var. project area perpulcher Yellow lady’s Cypripedium Not known in None No impact slipper parviflorum var. project area pubescens Robust larkspur Delphinium Not known in None No impact robustum project area Pecos fleabane Erigeron Not known in None No impact subglaber project area Wood lily Lilium Not known in None No impact philadelphicum project area Chama blazing Mentzelia Not known in None No impact star conspicua project area Springer’s Mentzelia Not known in None No impact blazing star springeri project area Arizona willow Salix arizonica Not known in None No impact project area MI* - may impact some individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability.

50 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Northern leopard frog – The northern leopard frog is typically associated with streams and rivers, although lakes, marshes and irrigation ditches are also occupied. In New Mexico, they occur at elevations of about 3,500 to 11,000’ and they breed in ponds or lake edges with fairly, dense aquatic emergent vegetation from April-July and September-October (Degenhardt et al 1996). Juveniles and adults live in aquatic vegetation in ponds, and in adjacent grass, sedge, weeds or brush (Corkran and Thomas 1996).

Affected Habitat – Their habitats include cattail marshes, beaver ponds and other water sources with aquatic vegetation. This type of habitat exists thought the Rio Cebolla drainage particularly within the temporary exclosures within the Cebolla riparian pasture of the San Diego Allotment. Breeding can occur at any time of year following heavy rainfall; eggs are deposited on emergent vegetation. Threats to local populations include alterations in wet areas, stocking of predatory fish; local extinctions as water dries up during years of low precipitation, and predation and competition by bullfrogs.

No Action Alternative - This alternative may impact individuals but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability. Impacts from grazing could include effects on water quality from waste products and sedimentation from streambank trampling. These effects are not expected to be excessive as long as all grazing monitoring measures and utilization standards identified in annual operating plans are met.

Proposed Action Alternative – Excluding all activities and installation of a permanent exclosures would be a beneficial impact because of reduced disturbance in riparian area and potential for improved aquatic habitat. Restoring vegetation along riparian corridor will be beneficial to the species this species. Proposed fence and cattle guard installation in the Mushroom pasture of the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment would not have an effect on Northern leopard frog habitat.

Determination of Effects – Installation of permanent exclosures in occupied NMMJM habitat may impact some individuals if present, but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability. Proposed fence construction would have no effect to this species.

Northern goshawk - The goshawk is a forest habitat generalist, utilizing a variety of forest types, forest ages, structural conditions and successional stages. The principal forest types occupied by the goshawk are ponderosa pine, mixed-species and spruce fir (Reynolds et al. 1992). Nesting habitat consists of older age forests with variable tree species. The most consistent vegetation characteristic of goshawk nest sites is a high percent of canopy closure. The goshawk is a predator of small birds and mammals. Snags, downed logs, woody debris, openings, large trees, herbaceous and shrubby understories and interspersion of vegetation structure are important features contributing to the presence of prey populations (NMDG&F BISON-M 2014). The goshawk is a predator of small birds and mammals. Snags, downed logs, woody debris, openings, large trees, herbaceous and shrubby understories and interspersion of vegetation structure are important features contributing to the presence of prey populations (NMDG&F BISON-M 2014). Goshawk populations are threatened by human disturbances.

51 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Affected Habitat –The dominant vegetation types adjacent to the river corridor in the project area include mixed conifer and ponderosa pine. The mature and over-mature forests in the action area provide suitable/potential nesting and post-fledgling areas (PFA). There is one goshawk PFA within the Hatchery Pasture of the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment.

No Action Alternative – may impact some individuals if present, but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability. Goshawk typically nest high in larger trees there would be no change in current use or conditions to create disturbance to nest sights.

Proposed Action Alternative – The proposed action with mitigation measures may impact some individuals if present, but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability. Proposed fence and cattle guard installation in the Mushroom pasture of the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment would not have an effect on Northern goshawk . Equipment noise and other project activity would contribute to direct effects of disturbance to nesting goshawks, depending on distance from nest sites. The proposed action would not be implemented during breading , nesting, or fledgling seasons thus there would be no expected increase of human activity. Removal of large trees to construct 4 miles of fence on the east side of the Rio Cebolla (Cebolla Riparian Pasture) and a cross fence across the Rio Cebolla, would have a negligible impact on nesting /roosting habitat.

Any goshawk inhabiting the area could be deterred from foraging or cause nesting birds to be agitated and leave their nest for short periods of time. Overall improved riparian habitat may benefit foraging by improving prey habitat for goshawk.

Determination of Effects - may impact some individuals if present, but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability.

Mitigation: Apply forest plan standards and guidelines for goshawk:

- Complete survey according to protocol prior to any construction activity. If found to be present limit human disturbance and activities in or near nest sites and post- fledgling areas during breeding season (March 1 through September 30). - Limit human activity in nesting areas during breeding season.

American peregrine falcon - The peregrine falcon was listed as an endangered species in 1970 after numbers of falcons had been reduced to a few hundred pairs at most in western U.S. and Mexico. Following a ban on the use of DDT (pesticide) and other chlorinated hydrocarbons, and successful captive breeding and release of over 6,000 falcons, there were over 2,000 pairs breeding each year across the U.S. The peregrine falcon was removed from the Federal Endangered Species List in August 1999. In NM, the peregrine breeds locally in mountain and river canyons statewide. Data from NMDGF show that although productivity in the state had recovered from historic lows by the 1980s, it began trending lower after 1984 and has yet to stabilize; through 2003, productivity remains 19% below the 1984 average (Johnson and Williams, 2003, in NMDGF 2004). Habitat occurs in open country and cliff areas characterized by steep, inaccessible sheer faces, generally exceeding 200 feet in height and adjacent to water. Falcons feed on song birds and catch their prey in mid-air.

52 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Affected Habitat - Management areas which include sensitive areas are made up of a series of zones in which different activities may be permitted at different times of the year. There are two nest sites located in the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment Project Area. The proposed fence lies within sensitive habitat zones A, B, C and D zones which limit the planning and administration of human activities in peregrine habitat.

No Action alternative - may impact some individuals if present, but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability. There would be no change in current use or conditions to create disturbance to falcon nest sights.

Proposed Action Alternative - The proposed action with mitigation measures may impact some individuals if present, but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability. Proposed fence and cattle guard installation in the Mushroom pasture of the Cebolla/San Antonio allotment would not have an effect on peregrine falcon.

Disturbance by activity type would need to be kept within the limits of tolerance by possible nesting falcons and outside of sensitive zones and seasons. Disturbance intolerance by peregrine falcon is mitigated by following this table. It describes acceptable levels of noise disturbance and opening dates for people, machinery or aircraft activities in each sensitivity zone. A typical low magnitude activity is described for each activity class. Exceeding the limit of either intensity or duration constitutes medium magnitude. Exceeding both limits constitute high magnitude. For example, public wood collection would be people/low magnitude. Crews using several chainsaws, but moving around from day to day within along the proposed fence route, would be machinery/medium magnitude. Operation of more than one piece of heavy logging equipment for more than one day would be a machinery/high magnitude. One helicopter flying to and from the landing sites for more than one day would be aircraft/high. The closing date for all categories is March 1, so that activities are restricted from March 1 until the date given.

Table 5. Opening Dates for Human Activities After March 1

ACTIVITY ZONE

Class Magnitude A B C D

People Low Aug 16 All year All year All year

Medium Aug 16 May 16 All year All year

High Oct 16 Aug 16 May 16 All year

Includes use of any ordinary highway vehicle.

Low = 3 or less persons and vehicles, 1 day or less.

Machinery Low Aug 16 May 16 All year All year

Medium Oct 16 Aug 16 May 16 All year

53 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

ACTIVITY ZONE

Class Magnitude A B C D

High Oct 16 Oct 16 Aug 16 May 16

Chainsaws, heavy trucks, logging or construction equipment.

Low = 2 or less machines, 1 day or less

Aircraft Low Oct 16 Aug 16 May 16 All year

Medium Oct 16 Oct 16 Aug 16 May 16

High Oct 16 Oct 16 Oct 16 Aug 16

Helicopters and airplanes below 2000 feet altitude.

Low = 1 single engine propeller plane, 1 day or less. Any helicopter operation is medium or high.

Determination of Effects - may impact some individuals if present, but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability.

Water shrew - In New Mexico, water shrews are confined, so far as known at present, to the Sangre de Cristo, San Juan, and Jemez mountains where they occur in the vicinity of permanent streams, seldom descending below 8,000 feet in altitude. They are widespread in the Jemez Mountains, although not common (Frey 2006). Known capture sites on the Jemez District include near Fenton Lake, Rio Cebolla, and San Antonio Creek.

Affected Habitat – Potential habitat occurs all along riparian corridor within the Rio Cebolla and San Antonio creek and tributaries.

No Action alternative - This alternative may impact individuals but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability. Some burrows could be damaged by livestock and human activity but this probability is minimal and limited along riparian corridor. These effects are not expected to be excessive as long as all grazing monitoring measures and utilization standards identified in annual operating plans are met.

Proposed Action Alternative – Beneficial impact because of reduced disturbance in riparian area, increased vegetation, and potential for improved habitat along streambank.

Determination of Effects - may impact some individuals if present, but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability. Proposed fence building would have no effect to

54 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

this species. Proposed fence and cattle guard installation in the Mushroom pasture of the Cebolla/San Antonio allotment would not have an effect on water shrew.

Gunnison’s prairie dog - The Gunnison’s prairie dog inhabits shortgrass and mid grass prairies and grass/shrub habitats. The mixed shrub habitat type occurs at lower elevations below the mesas at less than 6,700 feet. The juniper habitat type is dominated by one-seed juniper with an occasional pinon pine and alligator jumpier. This prairie dog occurs in northern and western NM where the black-tailed prairie dogs do not occur. They occur in low valley but are also common in parks and meadows in the montane forests up to at least 10,000ft. They form small; loosely organized towns-often colonies consist of only 2-3 animals. Home range is about two acres. Threats include predation, man and habitat loss, as well as sylvatic plague. (NMDG&F BISON-M 2014)

Affected Habitat: The area where current temporary exclosures are located and between the Lake Fork Corral and the large exclosure where Forest Road 376 crosses the Rio Cebolla. This area contains an active colony of Gunnison’s prairie dog. There are mounds throughout this area, even in the middle of the road to the corral.

No Action Alternative – Effects to all species analyzed above would be similar as in the proposed action alternative with the exception that there would be effects from grazing in riparian habitat that would be grazed once the temporary exclosures are removed. Additional fences would not be constructed not impacting any identified species.

Proposed Action Alternative - placement of permanent pipe fence around the existing temporary barbed wire fences and the additional 5.5 acres, in the Lake Fork Pasture will created some activity disturbance. Use of equipment and human activity in this area could impact borrows and travel corridors below ground.

Additional fences to be constructed on approximately 5 miles of fence on both Schoolhouse and Lake Fork Mesas will not impact any prairie dog colonies.

Determination of Effects: The proposed fence building activities may impact some individuals but not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability.

Mitigation: To minimize disturbance to prairie dog colony:

 As much as possible, avoid equipment use and human activity in prairie dog mounds and main colony use area.

Cumulative Effects

Direct and indirect effects of implementing any of the proposed actions are expected to be very short term; as such they are not expected to result in significant cumulative effects to any wildlife species. Over the long term, improvements in the grazing systems on the two allotments would result in better distribution of cattle combined with improving riparian conditions within the Rio Cebolla and San Antonio Creek.

55 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Because of the temporary nature of potential impacts, this project does not contribute to any negative cumulative effects.

Management Indicator Species

Existing Condition

Table 6 shows the habitat association for each MIS based on information in the Forest Plan EIS (USFS 1987). The table also shows the total acres of each habitat association forest wide and population and habitat trends, based on the Forest’s MIS Assessment (USFS 2012). Acres of habitat available for each species were calculated using the dominant vegetation identified in the Forest’s Terrestrial Ecological Unit Inventory (TEUI) database.

Table 6. MIS Habitat Association and Potential for Occurrence within Project Area

Species Habitat Forestwide Project Population Habitat Species Association Acres/ Area Trend on Trend on or Stream Acres SFNF SFNF Habitat Miles in project area

Rocky Mid- 1,287,640 83,540 Increasing Stable Yes Mountain elk elevation Cervis elaphus (generally nelsoni less than 9000’) grasslands, meadows and forest

Merriam’s Mature 603,235 51,515 Stable Stable Yes turkey ponderosa Meleagris pine forest gallopavo

Mourning dove Mid and 581,419 83,540 Stable Stable to Yes Zenaida low increasing macroura elevation grasslands, woodlands and ponderosa pine

Hairy Mature 80,174 12,662 Stable to Increasing Yes woodpecker forest and increasing Picoides woodland villosus

56 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Species Habitat Forestwide Project Population Habitat Species Association Acres/ Area Trend on Trend on or Stream Acres SFNF SFNF Habitat Miles in project area

Pinyon jay Piñon- 232,204 42,593 Stable Declining Yes Gymnorhinus juniper cyanocephalus woodlands

Mexican Late seral 630,191 63,704 Stable Slightly Yes spotted owl stage mixed declining Strix conifer occidentalis lucida

Rio Grande Riparian 128.7 27.2 Precariously Declining Yes Cutthroat and stream stream stream upward Trout habitat; miles miles Oncorhynchus good water clarki virginalis quality

Rocky Mt. Alpine 7,810 0 Declining Stable No bighorn sheep meadow Ovis canadensis canadensis

General habitat information for each of the MIS species which could occur within the project area is included below. The Santa Fe National Forest Management Indicator Species Assessment (USFS 2012) contains more detailed habitat information and population trends for each species. Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep is not considered in this analysis because there is no habitat for the species in the analysis area.

Elk: Populations of this game species are regulated by the state through hunting regulations and licensing. Although elk in New Mexico were extirpated by 1909, the elk population throughout its range is secure and common, widespread, and abundant (NatureServe 1997). Elk are commonly seen in all forest types in the project area on slopes less than 40%. They use higher elevations on the Valles Caldera National Park during warmer months, breed in the fall, move to lower elevations in deep winter snows, and calve in the spring. The lack of openings, water and forage vegetation limit elk habitat in the area, but hiding and thermal cover is plentiful. Livestock compete for forage. Cover-to-forage ratio is estimated at 90:10, compared to a desired 40:60 (Skovlin 1982). The excess road density in the area further reduces elk habitat quality. Natural predators in the area include coyotes, mountain lions, and bears.

Merriam’s turkey: Populations of this game species are regulated by the State through hunting regulations and licenses. Turkeys use a wide variety of habitat types, preferring mature and old growth ponderosa pine forests. Important habitat components are water, roost trees, ground nest sites, and summer brood area (Kamees 2002). Trees are used for roosting and provide food,

57 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment escape, and resting cover. Turkeys breed in the spring. Nests are built on the ground, and often in branches at the base of large trees and in proximity to water. Turkeys forage in open forest interspersed with shrubs, tall grasses, and forbs. They range widely, often moving 5-20 miles between summer and winter habitats. The project area provides adequate nesting and roosting habitat but foraging and water are limited. The lack of vegetative diversity limits the food supply.

Pinyon jay: This species nests in piñon or juniper trees that supply seeds and nuts. Pinyon jays prefer younger forests with an abundance of nut-producing plants. The declining habitat trend is due to the beetle-caused piñon tree mortality in the early 2000s.

Mourning dove: Mourning dove serves as a management indicator of healthy, mid and low elevation grasslands, woodlands and ponderosa pine habitats; however, abundant food and water must be available nearby. Habitat for this species in the project area is limited by the lack of water and foraging habitat. They can be found in higher elevation communities but are typically regarded as casual above 7,000 feet. They nest in a variety of habitats including shrublands and forests. Project activities that improve food availability and distribution have a positive influence on mourning doves.

Hairy woodpecker: This forest generalist and cavity nesting species prefer large mature snags and large aspen trees for nesting. It forages in large tree trunks and down logs that provide insects. Hairy woodpecker was selected as an indicator for snags in ponderosa pine, mixed conifer, and spruce-fir forest types. This species is common in ponderosa pine forests as well as other forest and woodland types.

The hairy woodpecker is widely distributed wherever there are mature forests with substantial snags. The species is also strongly associated with burned areas, an important historical component of forests resulting from a frequent fire interval. As a primary cavity nester, this woodpecker is dependent on dead and dying portions of live trees and snags for nesting.

Mexican spotted owl: Mexican spotted owls (MSO) serve as a management indicator for late seral stage mixed conifer habitat. Changes in MSO habitat capability result primarily from changing the seral stage of mixed conifer habitat. Mexican spotted owls may be found in other vegetative communities, but on the Santa Fe National Forest (SFNF), they are closely linked to the mixed conifer and riparian vegetative types. In addition to the forested areas, MSO within the Jemez Mountains also occupy canyon habitats and are cliff nesters. These canyon habitats range from those with a high degree of forest structure on at least one of the slopes above the canyon wall, to little or no tree cover present; although, typically mixed conifer habitat is in very close proximity.

The rate of occupancy of surveyed PACs has fluctuated, but it does not necessarily indicate a change in MSO population on the SFNF. Our ability to detect owls from year to year can vary depending on survey routes, local conditions, and whether owls are responsive at the time of survey. The current loss of habitat through catastrophic fire could affect population on the forest, though a more intense annual survey effort would be needed to make that determination. There is still ample habitat that appears unoccupied that fire-displaced owls could occupy. For now, the population trend for the MSO is rated as stable on the SFNF (USFS 2012).

Rio Grande Cutthroat trout (RGCT): In New Mexico, RGCT exist in mountain streams primarily within the Sangre de Cristo and Jemez Mountain ranges within the Carson and Santa Fe National Forests. Isolated populations persist in southern New Mexico on the Gila National Forest in the Black Range (Sublette et al. 1990) and on the Mescalero Apache Indian Reservation

58 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

in the Tularosa Basin. Conservation populations of RGCT occupy approximately 10 percent of their historical habitat (Alves et al. 2008). Within the project area, the Rio Cebolla north of the Seven Springs Fish Hatchery is habitat for a native population of RGCT. Additionally, four streams are stocked with surplus RGCT fingerlings from NM Department of Game and Fish Seven Springs Hatchery. These streams include the East Fork Jemez River, San Antonio Creek, Rio Cebolla, and Rio Guadalupe. This experimental stocking began in 2009 to see if recreational populations of RGCT can establish in these streams, which also have brown and rainbow trout. Environmental Consequences Alternative 1 – No Action Alternative

The No Action Alternative would maintain the current livestock management without the exclosures in the Cebolla riparian pasture. Since these exclosures were intended to provide short term protection to the NMMJM until a permanent solution could be developed, under the No Action Alternative. The temporary fencing would be removed in October of 2016 when the current decision expires. There will be no reduction in number of acres of available habitat for any MIS and no potential for population decline under current management. All effects, both direct and indirect, would be the same as what was analyzed for the renewal of the term grazing permit for each allotment. Direct and Indirect Effects – Alternative 1

This alternative would result in no project effects on MIS population or habitat trends because the proposed activities would not be implemented. This alternative avoids the potential for proposed activities to cause temporary noise or visual disturbance to MIS species. However, riparian habitat conditions would not improve overall for elk, MSO, and RGCT due to continued livestock use. Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Alternative

On the San Diego Allotment, occupied habitat would be excluded from any activity, by a closure order, and converting to a more permanent pipe fence around the perimeter of designated occupied habitat (located where the current temporary barbed wire fences are protecting occupied habitat), with an additional 5.5 acres excluded between the Lake Fork Corral and the large exclosure the Rio Cebolla. As additional protections to critical habitat, we will build approximately eight miles of fence on both Schoolhouse and Lake Fork Mesas, and build a new corral at an appropriate location agreed upon by all resources, in the Lake Fork Pasture.

To protect critical habitat in the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment, approximately one mile of fence off of NM State Highway 4 and across to NM State Highway 126, and put in two cattle guards along this fence where it crosses Forest Roads 105 and CFF 199. In order to protect the Rio Cebolla Riparian, an additional 4 miles of fence would be built on the east side of the Rio Cebolla (Cebolla Riparian Pasture) and a cross fence across the Rio Cebolla on the northern boundary of proposed critical habitat. Direct and Indirect Effects - Alternative 2

There will be no reduction in number of acres of available habitat for any MIS and therefore no potential for population decline. Long-term benefits are anticipated through improved riparian vegetation that may improve foraging habitat for elk and improve aquatic habitat quality for RGCT. Preventing livestock grazing will reduce streambank trampling, likely resulting in

59 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment improved bank conditions for RGCT. Additionally, improved riparian vegetation condition will likely improve habitat for prey species used by MSO. The proposed fencing may result in adverse effects to elk moving through these allotments. Elk can be entrained in wire fencing and suffer injury or death as a result of entangling in the fence strands while crossing the fence. Certain visualization techniques (e.g. PVC place on top fence wire or vinyl tabs placed on wire) can be used to increase visibility and minimize entrainment and can be placed where signs of extensive crossing or trailing are obvious.

Cumulative Effects – Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Alternative

No significant cumulative impacts to population or acres of available habitat would be expected to result from the proposed action in combination with other projects or activities (list of projects considered for cumulative effects can be found in the project record). Future Southwest Jemez Mountains Restoration (SWJR) project activities will likely improve the quality of riparian habitat through aquatic restoration actions that would be fenced from livestock grazing to promote stream stabilization and riparian restoration and would add to the beneficial effects for MIS as a result of the proposed project. Other proposed projects (e.g. 319 Grant) will also limit livestock grazing of riparian areas and likely improve vegetation condition for elk and MSO. This project would also improve habitat quality for RGCT by reducing bank trampling and restoring riparian vegetation that will stabilize stream banks.

Long-term analysis for livestock management in these two allotments will likely take place in the next three years and may include other measure to improve riparian quality, though it is unknown at this time what those actions might be. Other reasonably foreseeable future actions include road decommissioning as part of the SWJR project that is within the analysis area. This will likely improve riparian habitat quality in the San Antonio watershed where the road along the west side of the creek is proposed for decommissioning. Riparian habitat conditions are anticipated to become increasingly more structurally complex and biologically diverse. Improvements in MSO prey base and riparian foraging habitat would be better distributed across the landscape. The proposed action may improve riparian and aquatic resiliency and sustainability and this may help increase resiliency to fluctuating weather conditions and climate change.

Migratory Birds

On January 17, 2001, President Clinton signed Executive Order (EO) 13186 placing emphasis on conservation of migratory birds.

The Forest Service, Southwestern Region, currently analyzes effects (impacts) in the following manner:  effects to Highest Priority species listed by NM Avian Conservation Partners;  effects to Important Bird Areas (IBAs) identified by Audubon, New Mexico; and  effects to important overwintering areas (Intermountain West Joint Venture 2005).

Migratory birds and their habitats are protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. Under EO 13186, unintentional take means take that results from, but is not the purpose of, the activity in question” and that each federal agency shall “identify where unintentional take reasonably attributable to agency actions is having, or is likely to have, a measurable negative

60 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

effect on migratory bird populations, focusing first on species of concern, priority habitats, and key risk factors. With respect to those actions so identified, the agency shall develop and use principles, standards, and practices that will lessen the amount of unintentional take.”

NM Avian Conservation Partners considers eight risk factors in identifying conservation priority species: Global Abundance, NM Breeding Abundance, Global Breeding Distribution, NM Breeding Distribution, Threats to Breeding in NM, Importance of NM to Breeding, Global Winter Distribution, and Threats on Wintering Grounds. Species with the highest risk factors are classified as “highest priority” for conservation action. This evaluation addresses general effects to migratory birds, and effects to Highest Priority species for the main habitat types found in the project area (New Mexico Partners in Flight, 2013).

New Mexico Partners in Flight Bird Conservation Plan lists priority species of concern by vegetation type. All highest priority species were reviewed for vegetation types found in the project area for mixed conifer, ponderosa pine, piñon-juniper, montane riparian, wet meadows/montane grasslands, middle-elevation riparian, and cliff/caves (New Mexico Partners in Flight, 2013). These include:

Mixed conifer: Blue grouse, band-tailed pigeon, flammulated owl, Mexican chickadee*, northern pygmy-owl, Mexican spotted owl, whip-poor-will*, Magnificent hummingbird*, broad- tailed hummingbird, red-naped sapsucker, Williamson’s sapsucker, olive-sided flycatcher, greater pewee*, Cordilleran flycatcher, plumbeous vireo, warbling vireo, olive warbler*, Virginia’s warbler, Grace’s warbler, painted redstart*, red-faced warbler*, yellow-eyed junco*.

Ponderosa pine: Blue grouse, Montezuma quail*, band-tailed pigeon, flammulated owl, plumbeous vireo, warbling vireo, pinyon jay, Mexican chickadee*, northern pygmy-owl, Mexican spotted owl, whip-poor-will*, Magnificent hummingbird*, broad-tailed hummingbird, Lewis’s woodpecker, red-naped sapsucker, Williamson’s sapsucker, olive-sided flycatcher, greater pewee*, Cordilleran flycatcher, Cassin’s kingbird, western bluebird, olive warbler*, Virginia’s warbler, Grace’s warbler, red-faced warbler*, yellow-eyed junco*.

Piñon-juniper: Ferruginous hawk, Montezuma quail*, bridled titmouse*, juniper titmouse, western bluebird, mountain bluebird, broad-tailed hummingbird, Cassin’s kingbird, loggerhead shrike, gray vireo, plumbeous vireo, western scrub-jay, pinyon jay, Bendire’s thrasher, Crissal thrasher*, Virginia’s warbler, black-throated gray warbler, vesper sparrow, black-chinned sparrow*.

Montane riparian: Whiskered screech-owl*, Mexican spotted owl, black swift, broad-tailed hummingbird, elegant trogon*, belted kingfisher, Lewis’ woodpecker, red-naped sapsucker, willow flycatcher*, western bluebird, mountain bluebird, veery*, Wilson’s warbler, red-faced warbler*, Cordilleran flycatcher, plumbeous vireo, warbling vireo, painted redstart*.

Wet meadows/Montane grasslands: Broad-tailed hummingbird, mountain bluebird, vesper sparrow, bobolink*.

Middle Elevation Riparian: Neotropic cormorant*, snowy egret, Mississippi kite, bald eagle, common black-hawk*, Bell’s vireo*, warbling vireo, bank swallow, yellow-billed cuckoo, black- chinned hummingbird, Lewis’ woodpecker, red-headed woodpecker, willow flycatcher*, Cassin’s kingbird, Crissal thrasher*, Lucy’s warbler*, summer tanager*, lazuli bunting, painted bunting*, hooded oriole*, Bullock’s oriole.

61 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Cliff/Cave: Golden eagle, prairie falcon, peregrine falcon, Mexican spotted owl, white-throated swift, black swift.

*Not considered because habitat does not occur in the project area, or species range does not include northern New Mexico.

Important Bird Areas

There is no designated Important Bird Area (IBA) affected by the project. The IBAs on or adjacent to the Santa Fe National Forest are the Chama River Gorge/Golondrino Mesa (SFNF and BLM) >20 mi., Caja del Rio (FS and BLM) >20 mi., Valles Caldera National Preserve (VCNP) <1 mi., Bandelier National Monument (NPS) ~15 mi., Randall Davey Center (NAS) >25 mi., and Santa Fe Canyon Preserve (TNC) >25 mi (Audubon NM 2013). There is no association or important link between the bird communities in this project area and these IBAs.

Overwintering Areas

Many important overwintering areas are large wetlands. Important overwintering areas recognized on the Forest include: Rio Chama, Rio Grande corridor and Pecos Canyon. The project area is not recognized as an important overwintering area because significant concentrations of birds do not occur here nor do unique or a high diversity of birds winter here.

Affected habitat: Water is not abundant in the project area. Small, narrow patches of riparian plants occur in a few drainage bottoms. Changes in riparian management have attempted to improve vegetation and aquatic conditions and have been successful in some areas, though areas where management has lacked enforcement along with many years of drought conditions has led to degraded riparian and aquatic conditions. Alternative 1 – No Action Alternative

This alternative would result in no project effects on birds because the proposed activities would not be implemented. This alternative avoids the potential for proposed activities to cause noise or visual disturbance. However, riparian habitat conditions would not improve overall due to continued livestock use. Riparian woody species and riparian grasses would likely continue in poor condition or experience further decline in habitat quality for riparian bird species. Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Alternative

There could be unintentional take of some individuals if activities would take place during the breeding season (e.g. falling of nesting trees to clear fence line). However, seasonal restrictions for protected species (e.g., Jemez Mountains salamander and Mexican spotted owl) will prevent most of the take of migratory birds by restricting clearing of trees and brush until after the breeding season.

Migratory birds will benefit from improved riparian conditions. Improved riparian woody vegetation (e.g. willows and alders) will likely increase nesting and foraging habitat along streams and rivers for riparian species.

There would be no impacts to cliff or cave dwelling birds except for some possible noise disturbance depending on distance from project activities. Summary of Environmental Effects

62 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Adverse impacts to MIS will be relatively minor and there will be no reduction in habitat quantity or quality of habitat as a result of the proposed action. Fences may interrupt movement of elk that could lead to an individual being entrained in the fence wire. Although this can and has happened on the Forest, the effects of this on elk habitat quality is negligible while improvements in riparian vegetation resulting from better control of livestock grazing will likely improve habitat quality for foraging elk. Likewise, improvement in riparian areas will improve habitat quality for RGCT and likely improve conditions for MSO prey species.

There could be unintentional take of some individuals of migratory bird if activities would take place during the breeding season (e.g. falling of nesting trees to clear fence line). However, seasonal restrictions for protected species (e.g., Jemez Mountains salamander and Mexican spotted owl) will prevent most of the take of migratory birds by restricting clearing of trees and brush until after the breeding season.

Migratory birds will benefit from improved riparian conditions. Improved riparian woody vegetation (e.g. willows and alders) will likely increase nesting and foraging habitat along streams and rivers for riparian species. Fisheries

Existing Condition

The area affected by the proposed action contains three fish species on the USDA R3 Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List: Rio Grande cutthroat trout (Oncoryhnchus clarki virginalis), Rio Grande sucker (Catostomus plebeius) and Rio Grande chub (Gila pandora, Figure 9). The Rio Grande cutthroat trout (RGCT) was petitioned for listing under the Endangered Species Act in 1998, however in November 2014 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service determined that listing under the Endangered Species Act was not warranted at that time. Both the Rio Grande chub and sucker have been petitioned for listing under the Endangered Species Act in 2013 and 2014, respectively, however there has been no determination by the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service as to whether a listing is warranted.

63 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 9. Distribution of Sensitive Fish Species

64 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Rio Grande Cutthroat Trout (RGCT)

Across its range, much effort has been made to conserve the species by restoring its habitat, and managing non-native populations within conservation RGCT streams.

Rio Grande cutthroat trout are found primarily in clear, cold mountain lakes and streams at elevations of 6,000 feet (1,829 meters) and above in Colorado and New Mexico within the Rio Grande Basin (Sublette et al. 1990). In New Mexico, RGCT exist in mountain streams primarily within the Sangre de Cristo and Jemez Mountain ranges within the Carson and Santa Fe National Forests. Rio Grande cutthroat trout spawn in riffles on the descending limb of the snowmelt hydrograph, which is typically from the middle of May to the middle of June in New Mexico (New Mexico Game & Fish 2002). Juveniles need shallow calm water that is protected from the elements. Side channels, undercut banks and overhanging vegetation or exposed roots along margins provide this type of habitat. Adult RGCT need pools with residual depth greater than one foot in order to survive harsh winter conditions (Harig and Fausch 2000). RGCT feed opportunistically on aquatic and terrestrial invertebrates that are found mainly in stream drift.

There are no RGCT designated as conservation populations within the area of the proposed action, however, there is a Conservation population of RGCT upstream of McKinney Pond in Rio Cebolla. Both Rio Cebolla and Rio San Antonio are stocked with surplus Rio Grande cutthroat trout fingerlings from NMDGF’s Seven Springs Hatchery. Experimental stocking began in 2009 to determine whether recreational populations of Rio Grande cutthroat trout can be established in these streams, which also have brown and rainbow trout. As of 2012, RGCT were collected in very low numbers in population surveys at Rio Guadalupe and San Antonio Creek. One fish was collected in each survey.

Rio Grande Sucker

Rio Grande suckers typically occur in middle elevation streams (6,600-8,600 feet) of small to large size (Sublette et al. 1990). On the Santa Fe National Forest, Rio Grande sucker are found in low gradient (<3.2%) stream reaches at elevations from 5,600 – 9,600 feet. Juveniles and adults both preferred glides and pools with mean water column velocities < 20cm/s. They favor low to moderate gradient riffles and pools below riffles in low velocity stream reaches, and are usually found over gravel and/or cobble, but can also be in backwater habitats. (Calamusso 2005). Rio Grande suckers prefer clear-water streams where periphyton is common and are rarely found in waters with heavy loads of silt and organic detritus (Sublette et al. 1990). In the project area, Rio Grande suckers are found in the Rio Cebolla and Rio San Antonio.

Rio Grande Chub

The Rio Grande chub is native to the Rio Grande and Pecos River drainages of Colorado and New Mexico where it inhabits pools associated with undercut banks and aquatic vegetation (Sublette et al. 1990, Rees et al. 2005). Historically, Rio Grande Chub were widespread throughout their range but the population has since been reduced by 75% (Rees et al. 2005). Threats to this species include habitat loss or degradation, streambank trampling, changes in stream temperature, dams, and invasive species among others (Rees et al. 2005). Rio Grande chub spawn in riffle habitat in the spring and early summer, with peak spawning occurring on the descending limb of the spring hydrograph. Rio Grande chubs are mid-water feeders that feed on insects, zooplankton, and small fish. They are generally found in streams less than 2% gradient in low velocity habitats such as pools, runs, and glides, and are often associated with instream woody debris or aquatic vegetation (Calamusso et al 2002). In the area of the proposed action, Rio Grande chubs are found in the Rio Cebolla and Rio San Antonio.

65 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Stream Habitat

Stream habitat surveys were conducted on the Rio Cebolla and San Antonio Creek by Forest Service biologists in 2001 and 2002 (USFS 2003 a,b), respectively. Survey results from both systems documented degraded riparian and stream habitat conditions that were attributed to dispersed camping and riparian zone grazing. Stream habitat degradation included bank instability, loss of undercut banks, and high sediment loads resulting in loss of pool habitat as well as marginal pool habitat quality. This loss of pool quantity and quality limit population productivity and overwinter survival. Lack of undercut banks and riparian vegetation also contributed to the frequent exceedance of stream temperature standards that were documented (USFS 2003 a,b). More recent (July/August 2015) limited observations of riparian and stream channel condition summarized in the Hydrology Report describes degraded conditions similar to those reported in the aforementioned fish habitat surveys. However, sections of the Rio Cebolla and San Antonio Creek where riparian exclosures were installed in late 2014 are showing signs of the initial stages of recovery to past grazing and recreational disturbance with dense growth of riparian vegetation covering the evidence of past cattle impacts on stream banks.

Environmental Consequences Alternative 1 - No Action Alternative

The No Action Alternative would maintain the current management including livestock grazing. This would result in indirect effects to sensitive fish species due to disturbance to riparian and stream habitats with the removal of the temporary exclosure fencing and re-opening of 84 acres currently closed to grazing. The stream channel and riparian vegetation recovery that has been observed to occur over the first year of the closure to grazing and activities associated with dispersed camping would likely be reversed. This would result in fish habitat degradation due to the loss of riparian vegetation, increased sedimentation, and loss of undercut banks and resulting impacts to pool quality and quantity (Platts 1981, Rees et al. 2005). Direct effects of cows stepping on fish spawning nests or possibly stepping on fish would be greater with this alternative due to greater access of cows to the stream channel (Peterson 2010).

Alternative 2 - Proposed Action Alternative

Because the effects of the Proposed Action Alternative differ between areas open to riparian and stream channel disturbance versus areas closed to disturbance, direct and indirect impacts will be assessed separately. Direct effects of the Proposed Action on sensitive fish species (Rio Grande cutthroat trout, chub and sucker) where the riparian area and stream channel is closed to disturbance include reducing the possible occurrence of cows stepping on fish spawning locations (direct mortality of eggs or larval fish) or stepping on fish (Peterson 2010). In areas that are still open to grazing, direct impacts may be greater than in the No Action Alternative due to the concentration of cattle use in a smaller riparian and stream channel area. This includes areas between the exclosure fencing on the Rio Cebolla. However, the overall adverse direct impact of cattle in the Proposed Action is expected to be less compared to the No Action Alternative because the amount of stream channel open to cattle access is less.

The effects of the Proposed Action on sensitive fish species will mainly be through indirect effects on habitat that in turn affect the species. Activities associated with building the range infrastructure improvements are expected to be negligible on the riparian zone and stream channel because best management practices would be applied during construction activities. In areas closed to riparian and channel disturbance, indirect effects are expected to lead to short and

66 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

long-term benefits from riparian vegetation recovery which is expected to improve habitat conditions for the three species of fish that require cool water by decreasing water temperature increasing terrestrial inputs of food for the three fish species. Preventing riparian grazing and cattle access to streams will also improve physical habitat quality over time by reducing streambank compaction and shearing resulting in improved bank conditions, narrowing and deepening of channels, development of undercut banks and pools, and reduced sedimentation and pool filling (Platts 1981). In areas open to grazing, impacts to riparian areas and stream channels will continue, although in comparison to the No Action Alternative these impacts are expected to be outweighed by the benefits of reduced disturbance by grazing and camping activities.

Cumulative Effects

Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activities

Road density in the general area of the project area is high, averaging 3 to 6 miles of road per square mile in some areas (USDA 2015). This is well above the forest plan standard of 2 to 3 miles of road per square mile. Some of these are user-created roads, made when people drive a vehicle off the main road to get to a campsite, hunting spot, or other place. These user-created roads are not maintained and are in poor condition. Most of the forest system roads are in fair to poor condition especially at stream crossings and some have severe impacts on riparian areas and water quality. The high density of roads in the project area is expected to contribute to impacts to water quality and the quality of fish habitats due to contributions of sediment.

Southwest Jemez Mountains Cooperative Forest Landscape Restoration Project activities could contribute to impacts on aquatic habitats and sensitive fish species in the project area. Activities include riparian area restoration and instream treatments would improve habitat conditions for sensitive fish species in the project area. Instream work would restore or enhance key habitat components. Short-term, localized impacts could include an increase in sediment and turbidity in streams due to mechanical equipment working in or near the stream. The effects would be minimized through the design features and mitigation measures.

In 2013 and 2015 two riparian exclosures (Riparian exclosure fencing on San Antonio Creek) were added to prevent grazing impacts to approximately 0.44 miles of stream channel. These exclosures would contribute to the measures in the Proposed Action to prevent cattle access to San Antonio Creek riparian area and thus would be expected to have a limited but positive impact on sensitive fish species and their habitats in the vicinity of the exclosures by preventing impacts on riparian and stream channels.

Recreation activities such as camping and fishing along and within stream channels and riparian areas can cause impacts to riparian vegetation and stream channels including increased stream bank instability, vegetation removal, and reduced channel and riparian function. Undercut banks, which provide important habitat for fish can slough off due to the streamside activities. Vehicles, RVs and tents trample and kill vegetation, cause erosion, and sediment delivery when frequently placed in the same location.

Dispersed camping and fishing occurs along every major stream channel within the project area. Recreation related trails, bank disturbance and failure, surface erosion and sediment delivery were all observed in the field along the Rio Cebolla and San Antonio Creek channels.

67 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Effects Determination

Overall, the effects of the Proposed Action on sensitive fish species are expected to be beneficial relative to the No Action alternative. Therefore, the Proposed Action Alternative may impact individuals but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or a loss of species viability.

Hydrology

Desired Condition

The watershed resources potentially affected by this project are stream channels, riparian ecosystems, and water quality. Stream channels should be managed to be resilient and dynamic features. Sediment, flow regimes and channel dimensions should remain within their natural range of variability. The stream channel should be well connected with its floodplain so as to support a thriving riparian ecosystem. Riparian vegetation should cover streambanks so that their stems, leaves and root systems resist erosive floods by covering and binding soil. Riparian vegetation should be multi-generational, where seedlings colonize freshly deposited bars. Water quality should remain below published standards (i.e., remain off of the 303(d) list) and support the full potential of the naturally occurring ecosystem. The FSH 2509.22 Soil and Water Conservation Handbook provides the direction which supports the characteristics described above.

Existing Condition

Table 7 summarizes the standards and guides, 2011 RSRA variables, and scores for each reach where data were collected. While RSRA data do not translate directly to standards and guides measures, the RSRA data is used as a reasonable proxy. This 2011 data represent the “existing condition” by the No Action alternative, in which the exclosure fencing would be removed. The 2011 RSRA data for the Rio Cebolla indicate all reaches within the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed are “functional, at risk,” meaning standards and guides may not be met and the general trend of the stream and riparian condition is downward. In particular, variables for the stream reaches within the temporary fence exclosures (reaches 4, 5 and 6) scored below average (of all reaches) for all variables but one.

Other RSRA variable data are discussed separately within sections below. An explanation of RSRA data and scoring is given in the Methodology section of this report.

68 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Table 7. 2011 RSRA Data for Reaches Along the Rio Cebolla and LRMP Standards and Guidelines.

RSRA Scores by Reach Stream (Downstream = 1, Upstream = 8) Average LRMP Standard RSRA variable (Average and Guide per 1 2 3 4* 5* 6* 7 8 Variable) The LRMP water quality standard and guide is unclear; the #1 Algal Growth 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 4.3 RSRA variable is an appropriate proxy measure #2 Channel Shade: ≥80% of Shading/Solar 5 4 4 3 3 2 4 5 3.8 natural Exposure Sedimentation: ≤20% of natural #10 Cobble 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3.0 levels of silt, sand Embeddedness and clay Average ground # 14 Riparian cover: ≥80% of Zone Plant 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3.1 natural Structure and Cover*Ground, mid-canopy and Bank cover: ≥ upper-canopy are 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3.1 80% of natural measured separately. It’s not clear if ground cover is specifically measured on the Crown cover: banks. This 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3.1 ≥80% of natural report assumes at least some of the measurements reflect bank cover. Plant Composition: #15 Shrub ≥60% of woody Demography and 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 4 4.6 species must be of Recruitment 3+ species Plant Structure: #16 Tree 10% of all woody Demography and 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1.5 plants should be Recruitment in at least 3 ages

69 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment classes

Average per Reach 3.5 3.8 3.4 3.1 3.1 3.0 3.0 3.6

*These reaches are currently surrounded by temporary exclosure fencing. This data represents the "existing condition" under the No Action alternative.

Watershed Information

Proposed activities are spread across the Cebolla San Antonio, San Diego and Recreation Allotments. These allotments span five 5th field watersheds and sixteen 6th field watersheds. The major perennial streams in the project area are the Rio Cebolla, San Antonio Creek, Jemez River, and Rio Guadalupe. Activities are proposed along the Rio Cebolla, San Antonio Creek, Sulphur Creek (a tributary to San Antonio Creek), and an unnamed intermittent tributary within Lake Fork Canyon, however, the only proposed activities with the potential to affect watershed resources are located along the Rio Cebolla within the Outlet Rio Cebolla 6th field watershed. This is therefore the only stream channel which will be described in further detail. Table 8 describes acres per watershed and allotment. Bold type indicates watersheds in which actions are proposed. Figure 10 displays the project area, 6th field watersheds, and major streams.

The vast majority of the project area watersheds are underlain by Quaternary Rhyolitic tuff (Tshirege and Otowi members of the Bandolier Tuff). Lesser geologic components are Pennsylvanian limestone, Proterozoic plutonic rocks, Permian sandstone, sandstone shale, and carbonate rocks. Soils in the project area are moderate to severely erodible.

Precipitation and Streamflow

Annual precipitation in the project area ranges from 12.7” to 26.6” (based on 30 year average, PRISM 2015). The period of record in Jemez Springs, NM shows on average, the majority of snow falls during the months of December, January, and February while July and August receive the most rain. The only gaged streams near the project area are the Jemez River (just below the confluence of the Rio Guadalupe and the Jemez River, gage USGS #08324000) and San Antonio Creek (gaged by the Park Service on the Valles Caldera National Preserve). Historically, the largest peak streamflow has occurred during the monsoon months of July, September, and especially August. April and May snowmelt runoff has also produced large floods, but not nearly as frequently as the monsoon storms (Jemez River stream gage annual peak streamflow data, period of record 1936-2014). The project area however, has been experiencing a period of drought; ten of the past 20 years of annual peak flow records show the Jemez River never exceeded bankfull stage (~960 cfs, and the approx. 1.5 year recurrence interval flood; calculated by the Jemez River gage peak flow records).

Affected Stream Channel: Rio Cebolla

The Rio Cebolla (perennial) flows 22.6 miles from its headwaters to the confluence with the Rio de las Vacas. Its maximum elevation is 9,780 ft. above sea level; it ends at 7,240 ft. The average stream slope is 2%. For the majority of its length, the Rio Cebolla is contained within a moderately broad valley bottom (approx. 300 ft.), into which frequent, ephemeral and intermittent

70 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

drainages empty. The wide valley width allows the Rio Cebolla significant room in which to meander; the stream is very sinuous with values between 1.5 and 1.7, meaning some reaches are as much as 70% longer than the valley length. The channel is predominately composed of sand, silt and small to medium gravel. Banks are silt and clay alluvium. Bankfull channel width was measured at several reaches; on average it was found to be 7 ft. wide. The average cross sectional area is 15 ft2. The average width to depth ratio is 9 (ranges widely from 4.6 to 16.9).

The Rio Cebolla is impounded at three places within the project area: Fenton Lake (state recreation area), Seven Springs Fish hatchery ponds, and 1 unnamed pond (there is one more dam upstream but outside of the project area). They are all upstream of the analysis pastures within the Outlet Rio Cebolla 6th field watershed.

71 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 10. Map of Project Area 6th Field Watersheds and Major Streams

72 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Table 8: Watershed and Allotment Acres

Allotment Acres 5th Field 6th Field Watershed CEBOLLA RECREATION Watersheds Watersheds Acres SAN SAN (Battleship DIEGO ANTONIO Pasture Only) Rio Guadalupe 171,231 Headwaters Rio 22,739 12,174 Cebolla Outlet Rio 19,632 6,447 10,984 Cebolla Rio Guadalupe 39,314 38,179 Virgin Canyon 11,449 11,447 Outlet Rio de Las 37,480 43 299 Vacas Rito Peñas Negras 10,883 0.2 Upper Jemez 128,620 River Church Canyon- 23,315 17,164 Jemez River Outlet San 14,805 6,711 1,243 1889 Antonio Creek Sulphur Creek 16,084 796 5 939 Middle Jemez 83,721 River Canon de La 14,481 7,420 Canada Vallecita Creek- 23,214 10,721 Jemez River Vallecita Creek 32,341 2,787 Rio Salado 158,064 Middle Rio Salado 28,530 1,570 Arroyo Lopez 12,525 875 Upper Rio Salado 25,775 18 La Cañada de La 112,110 Lena-Rio Puerco Rincón de Los 33,496 29 Viejos-Rio Puerco Grand Total 26,171 102,739

73 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Affected Riparian: Rio Cebolla Riparian

There are 855 acres of mapped (RMAP) riparian vegetation within the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed. In general GIS data shows riparian vegetation within the affected portion of the project area (Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed) is predominantly herbaceous. Alder and willow make up a lesser, but important part.

Within the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed, RSRA data were collected in 2011 at 8 reaches along the Rio Cebolla (grazing and recreation temporary exclosures were not present in 2011). Overall data scores for the riparian vegetation characteristic along the Outlet Rio Cebolla channel range between 2.1 and 4.29 (on a scale from 1-5; average 3.09, meaning functional, but at risk). At the pasture areas now within temporary exclosures (but absent in 2011), riparian vegetation scores were 3.42 (lower Cebolla exclosure), 2.6 (Cebolla corral exclosure), and 2.1 (Fenton exclosure). For these reaches (4, 5 and 6), the variables which received scores less than 3 (meaning not fully functional) are listed in Table 9; data sheets are included in Appendix B of this report.

Table 9: RSRA Riparian variables which scored less than fully functional (3) within the project analysis pastures (temporary exclosures)

Reach 4,5 and 6 Low Scores Awarded (<3 only) RSRA Variable and their Definitions 1=>50% of plants are impacted by grazing Grazing impacts on ground cover 2 = 26-50% of plants are impacted *data sheet note indicates 75% impacted Tree demography and recruitment 1=no native trees present in the study reach Non-native herbaceous plant species 2=26-50% herbaceous species are non-native

Browsing impacts on shrubs and small 1=>50% of plants are impacted; trees *data note indicates 100% were impacted Riparian plant community structure and 2=5-25% average plant cover cover Shrub demography and recruitment 2=one age class present

Photos taken for the RSRA effort are displayed in Plate 1.

2015 field observations found the riparian vegetation surrounding the Rio Cebolla to be predominately grasses and sedges with few forbs; and, at three out of the four sites visited in the lower watershed, woody species are sparse. Within grazing exclosures, grasses and sedges are tall (>24’’) and densely cover the channel banks. The few mature woody trees at these reaches showed evidence of historic over-grazing where the lower branches are repeatedly browsed giving the tree a club-like shape. A few woody seedlings and saplings were also observed growing on the banks slightly above the water line. Plate 2 displays 2015 photos.

At, and just upstream of the confluence with the Rio de las Vacas, is the only place on the Rio Cebolla where signs of beaver were observed. There, beaver have constructed a four ft. tall dam which effectively ponds and spreads upstream water across the riparian area causing the channel

74 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

to become multi-thread. In response, willows grow densely along the banks and between channels. Evidence of browsing on the willows was seen; no other woody species were noted.

Plate 1: 2011 (pre-exclosure) photos of channel and riparian conditions within the Cebolla Riparian and Fenton pastures

Past bank erosion has revegetated Bank slumping (now within the lower Rio Cebolla exclosure) (now within the Cebolla corral exclosure)

Bank erosion and browse line on distant mature Woody riparian species are largely dead woody species (now within the Cebolla corral exclosure) (now within the Fenton pasture)

Vegetated point bar has been grazed Bank at the outside meander bend is disturbed

75 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

(now in Fenton exclosure) (now in Fenton exclosure)

Water Quality

Several of the streams within the project area are on the state of New Mexico’s 303(d) list of impaired waterbodies. Table 10 displays the waterbodies within the project area (San Diego, Cebolla San Antonio and Recreation (Battleship pasture) Allotments), which have TMDLs (NMED, 2014). Prescribed BMPs are appropriate mitigations for the non-point source pollution (primarily sediment) associated with proposed construction activities (See Appendix A). Given that these activities would occur within the TMDL listed reach of San Antonio Creek, the effective implementation of BMPs will be critical to complying with the CWA. Note the Rio Cebolla reach from Rio de las Vacas to Fenton Lake was delisted in 2008 for sedimentation/siltation and is currently not listed for any pollutants. All proposed activities along the Rio Cebolla are located (downstream of Fenton Lake) within this delisted reach. The RSRA water quality characteristic averaged high across all reaches within the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed (3.9; meaning nearly fully functioning). Only two variables however were evaluated as part of the protocol; filamentous algal growth and channel shading/solar exposure. These variables are proxy measurements for nutrient loading and temperature pollution. For the reaches located within the present day temporary exclosures, filamentous algae scored well (4; 1- 10% of bottom is covered with filamentous algae) and solar shading scored poor to fair (2 and 3; slight shading = 1-15%, and moderate shading = 16-30%).

Table 10. TMDL Listed Waterbodies Within Project Area.

TMDL Pollutants

Tempera

Aluminum

Turbidity

Nutrients

Deposits

Arsenic

Bottom

Stream

Boron

Waterbody pH

ture

Rio Cebolla X X X (Fenton lake to the headwaters) Jemez River

(Rio Guadalupe to Soda Dam X X X X X X X and Soda Dam to East Fork Jemez River) Rio Guadalupe (Jemez river to confluence with X X the Rio Cebolla) San Antonio Creek (East fork Jemez to VCNP X X X X boundary) The state of NM notes the following as some of the possible sources of non-point source

76 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

pollution within the above waterbodies: Site Clearance (New Development or Infill), On-site Treatment Systems (Septic), Recreational Pollution Sources, Loss of Riparian Habitat, Road/Bridge Runoff, Natural Sources, Rangeland Grazing, and Streambank Modifications/destabilization

Channel and Riparian Disturbance

Stream channels and riparian areas are dynamic in that they are always responding to changes in their watersheds. How these changes affect a stream channel or riparian area depends on the magnitude of the disturbance and how resilient to disturbance they are. Resiliency is affected by vegetation, sediment loads and channel materials. For this project, vegetation on channel banks and within riparian areas will have the greatest effect on resiliency to disturbance. Those disturbances currently present and directly related to analysis alternatives are discussed below.

Recreation

Recreation activities (e.g., camping and fishing) adjacent to and within stream channels and riparian areas can be detrimental to stream bank stability, vegetation, channel and riparian resiliency. Trails and erosion develop because humans seek the path of least resistance when moving across the landscape. Trails into and along stream channels erode banks through vegetation removal and shearing, leaving them less resilient to flood flows. Undercut banks, which are valuable habitat features, can collapse under the weight and disturbance of animals above. Vehicles, RVs and tents trample and kill vegetation, compact soil, decrease infiltration, increase runoff, cause erosion and sediment delivery to stream channels when frequently placed in the same location.

The project area is a favorite recreation destination by local population centers. Dispersed camping and fishing occurs along nearly every major stream channel within the project area. Recreation related trails, bank disturbance and failure, surface erosion and sediment delivery were observed in the field along the Rio Cebolla (and other channels) in 2015. For the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed, the number of dispersed campsites is listed by allotment and pasture (Table 11). In particular, note that of the 133 dispersed campsites within the watershed, 46 are located within the Cebolla Riparian pasture (0 in the Fenton pasture).

Table 11: Number of Dispersed Riparian Campsites per Watershed, Allotment and Pasture

6th Field Watersheds, Allotments, and Pastures Number of Campsites

OUTLET RIO CEBOLLA WATERSHED 133 Cebolla San Antonio 16 BARLEY 16 San Diego 117 CEBOLLA RIPARIAN 46 CEBOLLITA/VIRGIN 4 GUADALUPE 2 LAKE FORK EAST 50

77 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

6th Field Watersheds, Allotments, and Pastures Number of Campsites

LAKE FORK MESA 14 SOUTH 126 1 *pastures not listed do not contain dispersed campsites

Grazing

Similar to recreation impacts, grazing threatens streambank resiliency and riparian vigor through both erosion and vegetation alteration on channel banks and within the riparian zone. Animals follow one another adjacent and into stream channels. Their trails are bare of vegetation, can channelize water, and are therefore very vulnerable to erosion. Combined with flood flows, trails are places where channel widening is likely to begin. Bank erosion by hoof shear also removes soil and vegetation, further decreasing channel resiliency to disturbance. Where vegetation on the banks and within the floodplain (riparian) is trampled, grazed, or removed, the protective covering of the streambanks and floodplain is hindered. With intensive grazing, riparian species composition may also be altered. Changes in species may affect the root structure within the banks, thereby also affecting bank stability.

Where banks have failed, large soil clumps are deposited into the channel. With drought, these sediments have begun to revegetate. Where grazing has been eliminated or decreased, willow and alder seedlings and saplings are beginning to colonize the fine grained instream bars and stream banks. If allowed to flourish, these young woody species will protect the banks from erosion while also trapping sediment during flood events.

The 2011 RSRA protocol measured variables associated with channel form and stability. On average, all reaches measured within the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed had fairly high morphology scores (3.9 out of 5). Across all reaches however, low scores (<3) were given for nearly all variables (except for vertical bank stability). For the RSRA reaches (4, 5, and 6) located within the present-day temporary exclosures, most channel form and stability variables scored low (Table 12). The fact that vertical bank stability scored high is likely indicative that channels are not incising but, where banks are disturbed, are widening. See Appendix B for the field data sheets for these reaches.

Table 12. RSRA Channel Form and Stability Variables Which Scored Less Than Fully Functional (3) Within the Project Analysis Pastures (Temporary Exclosures)

Reach 4, 5 and 6 Low Scores Awarded (<3 RSRA Variable only) and their Definitions 1=>1.7 width/depth ratio Floodplain connection and inundation 2=>1.5 w/d ratio 1=no diversity Hydraulic habitat diversity 2=low diversity 1=more than 25% of soil surfaces disturbed Soil integrity 2=16-25% disturbed

78 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Reach 4, 5 and 6 Low Scores Awarded (<3 RSRA Variable only) and their Definitions 1=beavers not present now, but were historically Beaver activity 2= beaver dams and few signs, but none in last year 1=no riffle pool habitat Riffle pool distribution 2=one to several riffle-pool systems 1=no underbank cover Underbank cover 2=<10% of 200 m transect has underbank cover 1=average of >50% rock volume embedded Cobble embeddedness 2=41-50% rocks embedded 1=no large wood in transect Large woody debris 2=<3 pieces of large wood

Exclosure fencing along the Rio Cebolla (Plate 2) was observed in the field (July and August, 2015) to be effective at protecting stream banks and riparian vegetation from the impacts of cattle (and probably most elk). On average, vegetation was thigh high (~24’’). Banks were densely obscured, as was evidence of past hoof impacts such as trails and shear (although scarps were detectable with one’s feet). Further colonization and recovery of vegetation will be required in order to improve bank stability where hoof shear has occurred. The exclosure within the Fenton pasture was not observed in the field, but given the site similarity it is reasonable to assume the channel and riparian condition are similar to the exclosures within the Cebolla Riparian pasture. Photos of the Rio Cebolla (Plate 2) prior to constructing the temporary exclosure fencing reveal the “existing condition,” or the condition the riparian is expected to return to, should the No Action alternative be implemented. Banks are clearly failing, woody species are absent from banks, a clear browse line is visible on all mature woody species, and the height of riparian vegetation is mere inches. Plate 2: The Rio Cebolla before and after temporary exclosures were erected

Before Temporary Exclosure After Temporary Exclosure

79 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Lake Fork Exclosure Lake Fork Exclosure Disturbed banks show slumping Looking upstream at dense riparian vegetation

Lake For Exclosure Lake Fork Exclosure Looking upstream towards exclosure fence Channel is widening Dense riparian vegetation

No photo available for comparison

Cebolla Corral Exclosure, taken January 2014 Mature woody species show a clear browse line.

Looking downstream from the bridge over Cebolla Corral Exclosure the Rio Cebolla, taken January 2014 Looking downstream from the bridge over the Few woody species on stream banks. Rio Cebolla taken August, 2015

80 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Cebolla Corral Exclosure Cebolla Corral Exclosure Bank erosion is beginning to revegetate; Bank erosion and woody species browse taken August, 2015

Cebolla Corral Exclosure Cebolla Corral Exclosure Looking upstream, woody species are Young woody species are beginning to heavily browsed, banks are severely colonize the banks disturbed and failing Photo August 2015

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 – No Action

If the Proposed Action is not implemented, stream channels, riparian areas and water quality within the Fenton and Cebolla Riparian pastures (San Diego Allotment) would be disturbed by grazing and recreation, to a greater extent than presently exists today, because temporary exclosure fencing would be removed and areas not currently open to disturbance would be re- opened. As banks and floodplains are disturbed by cattle and humans under the No Action alternative, some of the following direct effects may occur: vegetation removal, bank erosion, and water contamination (temperature, sediment and E. coli. bacteria), etc.

Expected indirect effects include decreased channel stability and decreased riparian vigor. Where stream channels are recovering from past disturbances (because cattle and recreation impacts have been absent for at least one growing season), improvement in condition is likely to become static, or begin to decline.

The No Action alternative is analyzed by the number of acres open to recreation and grazing. Fencing, corrals and cattle guards would not occur. The No Action alternative and indicator analysis results are shown in Table 13.

81 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Table 13. No Action Alternative and Indicator Results

Indicator: 6th Level Action Allotment Pasture Action Acres OPEN to Watershed Measures Disturbance Remove temporary exclosure fence and continue grazing the area according to the current AOI: 252 head 3.1 miles Cebolla 52 days, 3 weeks and 77 +2664 acres Riparian during spring and 4 acres weeks during fall 40% max utilization Outlet Rio San Diego Also allow recreation Cebolla activities such as

camping and fishing Do not construct Schoolhouse 0.86 miles NA fence Remove temporary 0.52 miles exclosure fence and Fenton and 11 +2004 acres open area to grazing acres and recreation Fenton to Do not construct 3.8 miles NA South 126 fence Lake Fork Do not re-construct 1 <1 acre NA Mesa corral

Barley, Road Headwaters Do not construct and Cebolla 4.1 miles NA Rio Cebolla fence Cebolla Riparian San Outlet San Antonio Do not construct Antonio Mushroom 0.91 miles NA fence Creek

Do not construct fence 0.24 miles NA Sulphur Recreation Battleship Creek Do not construct cattleguards 2 NA

Total Acres Open to Disturbance 4,668

82 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Cumulative Effects – Alternative 1

If the No Action alternative is selected, the stream channel and riparian condition would likely return to pre-exclosure conditions. Because there are direct and indirect effects associated with the No Action alternative, there are also Cumulative Effects. As a result of taking No Action, grazing and recreation activities would continue throughout the Outlet Rio Cebolla 6th field watershed. Cumulative effects are therefore analyzed within its boundary.

Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis

Past Actions

The following tables display acres of disturbance within the watershed which have occurred as long ago as 25 years ago. This time frame is appropriate because it takes into account both the slow processes which build stream channels and riparian areas, considers the stresses of large floods and watershed disturbances, and reflects the recovery period after large disturbances. Twenty-five years is the assumed time it takes to return erosion, infiltration and runoff rates to pre-disturbance levels after wildfire or vegetation management. This assumption is consistent with the ERA model run for the SW Jemez project (see the No Action Cumulative Watershed Effects section below) and is within the range of recovery periods shown by published studies.

Vegetation Management

Vegetation management can be detrimental to watershed processes when vegetation is removed, soil is compacted or burned, slope stability is compromised, and infrastructure (e.g., roads and landings) are built. These activities change how water travels over and through the landscape. Where infiltration is decreased or flow is intercepted, the flow regime of the accepting stream channels is altered. Typically channels must accommodate more flow, in a shorter amount of time. These changes can be detrimental to stream stability and riparian vigor. Table 14 describes the various vegetation management projects (and associated acreage) which have occurred within the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed in the past 25 years.

Table 14. Acres of Vegetation Management Activities within the Outlet Rio Cebolla Watershed

ACRES

Activity Type by Gra

1990 1991 1992 1994 1995 1997 1998 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2008 2009 2010 2011 2013 2015 6th Field nd

Watershed Tota l

Outlet Rio 33 25 17 39 15 51 86 41 13 90 552 7 83 12 53 Cebolla 7 7 8 4 4 5 5 7 45 3 0 Broadcast 13 135 12 Burning 45 7 51 73 52 640 Commercial Thin 5 Fill-in or Replant 0 Trees 0 Improvement Cut

83 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Overstory 11 117 Removal Cut 7 40 22 425 Plant Trees 3 Precommercial 21 17 18 44 619 Thin 4 8 3 19 190 Salvage Cut 0 Shelterwood 12 12 Establishment Cut Shelterwood 69 69 Removal Cut (EA/NRH/FH) Stand Clearcut 37 37 (EA/RH/FH) Thinning for 37 376 Hazardous Fuels 6 Reduction Precommercial 35 15 24 54 7 18 61 14 905 Thin 0 4 7 Underburn - Low 72 720 Intensity 0 (Majority of Unit) Yarding - Removal of Fuels by 53 53 Carrying or Dragging 67 51 16 35 78 30 10 17 83 26 18 10 110 Grand Total 13 0 0 24 0 0 0 5 3 6 6 9 8 29 30 5 90 05 6 40

Roads

Roads disturb watershed hydrology by intercepting and re-routing overland and subsurface flow. Discharge to some channels is increased while it is decreased for others. Where water flows over the road surface it erodes and delivers soil to stream channels, in some places dramatically increasing their fine sediment load (Luce et al., 2001).

There are 122 miles of road (both FS and non FS) within the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed. The high road miles within the watershed suggest roads are likely a significant disturbance to stream channel processes and habitats.

Trails

Trails affect stream channels similarly to roads; they intercept overland flow, erode, and deliver water and sediment to streams. Because they are typically narrower than roads, trails are expected to be much less impactful. There are 9 miles of trail within the Outlet Rio Cebolla Watershed.

Fire

Wildfires quickly remove groundcover from large areas of a watershed. Bare ground is much more susceptible to erosion than that which is vegetated. Consequently, sediment loads within stream channels can dramatically increase following wildfire. Sediment delivery can continue until the exposed ground is sufficiently revegetated, and depending on many factors such as soil type, aspect, and fire intensity, this process varies in time (Ice et al., 2004).

84 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Within the last 25 years, 34% of the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed has burned (Table 15). The largest fire within the watershed occurred in 2002 (Lakes fire, 4,026 acres). Also noteworthy, the Rio fire burned 1,350 acres immediately downstream of the Lakes fire in 2010. Sediment loads within the Rio Cebolla and its receiving waterbodies may still be elevated as a result of these recent fires, even if sediment is no longer being delivered from the hillslopes.

Table 15: Fires within the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed within the last 25 years

Fire Year Outlet Rio Cebolla Grand Total 1993 1999 2002 2010 2011 2013 Acres 39 1281 4096 1242 43 35 6736

Development/Recreation

In general, land development increases erosion by removing vegetation and reducing infiltration. Where development and recreation are located within or adjacent to the riparian, contaminants are also likely to be introduced to stream channels.

There are 809 acres of private land within the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed. These inholdings are variably developed, but are all rural in nature; no major population centers exist. Erosion by rural development within the project area and surrounding watersheds is not considered to be a significant disturbance because developed areas are small compared with undeveloped areas. Table 6 displays acres of development within the watershed (FS and Non-FS) as visible from satellite imagery. Rural development acres also include some logging on private land.

Dispersed campsites are generally located within the riparian zone of the Rio Cebolla. People have created trails along the streambanks; built small rock dams across the channel, removed vegetation by trampling, and compacted the soil at each site. Recreation data are used to estimate the small but very impactful areas of dispersed camping. This analysis assumes each dispersed campsite is 50x50 ft., or 0.05 acres.

Table 16: Development and Recreation Impacts by 6th Field Watershed

Number of Dispersed Total Acres Rural 6th Field Watershed Dispersed Camping Acres Development Campground Sites Acres Developed Outlet Rio Cebolla 768 133 7 775

Grazing

As previously discussed, grazing can be detrimental to channel stability, riparian vigor, and water quality through bank erosion, vegetation removal, and feces deposition. Past grazing has occurred throughout the watershed for many years (more than 100) and is ongoing today. The Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed overlaps with 4 allotments (Table 7). Including the two analysis pastures (Fenton and Cebolla Riparian), there are 25 pastures within the watershed, of which 15 are currently open to grazing (15,475 acres, or 79% of the watershed). If we assume private land is also currently being grazed (a reasonable assumption), 83% of the watershed is grazed. The number of head, season and duration of use vary by pasture and allotment, but in general

85 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

hundreds of head (200+) are authorized for yearlong grazing by the 2015 Santa Fe NF Annual Operating Instructions (AOIs). For the two analysis pastures (Cebolla Riparian and Fenton), the 2015 AOIs allowed a total of 130 cow/calf pairs plus 10 bulls (270 animals) to graze a total of 24 days between May 1 and May 24. Allowed vegetation utilization (by weight, as compared to a non-grazed area) was 40%. The AOI describes utilization from 31-40% as “conservative…choice forage plants (key species) have abundant seed stalks; areas more than a mile from water show little use; about 1/3 to 1/2 primary forage plants show grazing on key areas.”

Table 17: Grazing within the Outlet Rio Cebolla Watershed

Acres Percent of Allotment/Pasture Grand Total Watershed Active 2015 Closed 2015 PVT Area SAN DIEGO 6158 4389 437 10984 55.9% CEBOLLA RIPARIAN 2661 2661 13.6% CEBOLLITA/VIRGIN 238 238 1.2% FENTON 2004 2004 10.2% FOGON HOLDING 222 222 1.1% GUADALUPE 55 55 0.3% LA CUEVA 0 0 0.0% LAKE FORK EAST 2005 2005 10.2% LAKE FORK MESA 1609 1609 8.2%

PORTER 8 8 0.0% PVT 437 437 2.2% SCHOOLHOUSE 968 968 4.9% SOUTH 126 775 775 3.9% CEBOLLA SAN ANTONIO 5116 957 375 6447 32.8% SAN MIGUEL 483 0 0 483 2.5% SOUTH OJITOS 1715 0 0 1715 8.7% Grand Total 13471 5346 812 19629 100.0%

Future Actions Grazing management within the San Diego and Cebolla San Antonio Allotments (88% of the watershed area, 17,431 acres) will be analyzed by grazing NEPA in the near future. Potential impacts of this upcoming project should be less than, and in place of, existing impacts (because the same project area is currently being grazed and the future grazing NEPA is expected to improve range conditions). Adverse impacts by this reasonably foreseeable project are therefore not included in this CWE analysis.

Approximately (depending on the Alternative considered), 4,623 acres of activities by the Southwest Jemez Landscape Restoration Project are located within the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed (except by the No Action Alt. 2, which does not include activities within the watershed). Activities within the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed include: mechanical thinning and harvesting of mixed conifer forest, prescribed fire, aspen treatment, meadow treatment, invasive plant treatment, in-stream restoration, riparian/spring protection, recreation site rehabilitation, and

86 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

road decommissioning/storm-proofing. Many of the potential effects of these activities have already been discussed under past actions. In general, all of these activities have the potential to reduce stream stability and riparian vigor, as well as negatively impact water quality. However, if implemented carefully, some of the actions have the potential to positively impact stream stability, riparian vigor and water quality.

Cumulative watershed effects by this project were previously analyzed by the Equivalent Roaded Acres (ERA) model (model studied and explained within McGurk and Fong, 1995). Upon implementation of the SW Jemez project (Alternative 1), the ERA for the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed in 2015 was calculated to be 25%; the current condition is 10% more than the threshold of concern (TOC) for the watershed. The ERA model and the analysis results are discussed below under summary of cumulative effects.

Present Actions

Under the No Action alternative, no new areas will be closed to grazing within the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed and the temporary exclosure fencing (currently in place) will be removed. The impacts by this action to stream channels and riparian areas are covered under Past Actions because grazing would continue as it has in the past under the current AOI; 83% of the watershed, or 16,287acres would remain open to grazing. No additional adverse impacts to watershed resources, above those already accounted for are expected.

Cumulative Effects Summary for the No Action Alternative

The Southwest Jemez Restoration Project is a large scale restoration project which overlaps with the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed. It was recently analyzed for cumulative watershed effects. Cumulative effects by this project and new reasonably foreseeable projects can therefore be added to the results of the Southwest Jemez analysis. Doing so will help to put the activities proposed by the No Action alternative into context.

By the Equivalent Roaded Acres model (ERA) (as calculated for the Southwest Jemez Project), the existing condition (in 2015, after implementation of the selected Alternative (1)) within the Outlet Rio Cebolla 6th field watershed is 25% ERA. This can be interpreted as 25% (4,878 acres) of the acreage within the watershed is as disturbed (in terms of effects to infiltration, runoff, and erosion processes) as a gravel road (Reid, 1993). A Forest ID team determined the threshold of concern for the Outlet Rio Cebolla watershed to be 15% ERA. This means any additional ground disturbing activities within the watershed could contribute to an already significantly impacted area.

The ERA model uses coefficients to turn impact acres into roaded acres. Table 8 displays the ERA impacts by this project’s No Action alternative. Should the No Action alternative be implemented, the model suggests 37% of the watershed will be as erodible as a gravel road in 2015. These CWE effects however are exaggerated for two reasons: 1) most of the forage is actually in the riparian area of the pastures which is where cattle spend most of their time. This means the upland acres won’t actually be as disturbed by grazing as this model suggests. And 2) while grazing impacts are assumed to be constant, the impacts by vegetation management projects and prescribed fire will decline over time as vegetation re-grows.

87 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Table 18: CWE by the No Action Alternative

2015 ERA Activity Acres coefficient %ERA (acres) Existing 2015 Condition1 25% upland grazing2 15,432 0.15 2,315 12% Subtotal 37% Cumulative ERA by the No Action Alternative 37% 1This number was calculated as part of the SW Jemez project. It includes 855 acres of grazing and recreation (3% ERA) in the riparian area. These impacts are therefore not added to the ERA subtotal but are displayed here for clarity. Other past actions described within this report were also included in the SW Jemez analysis and are not re-analyzed for ERA within this report. Refer to the Watershed specialist report for the SW Jemez project for specifics (available from the Santa Fe NF Supervisors Office). 2This activity was not analyzed by the SW Jemez project. The effects are therefore added to the current condition to represent the No Action alternative associated with this project.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action

The Proposed Action would close some areas of riparian pastures to recreation and grazing within the Cebolla Riparian and Fenton pastures as well as build new fences, re-construct 1 corral, and install 2 cattleguards (Figure 11). These range improvements (fencing, cattleguards, etc.) would be constructed to facilitate the management of cattle distribution. As previously discussed within the Methodology section of this report, range improvement activities are not analyzed here; they are addressed with BMPs and project design features later in this report. For all pastures except the Cebolla Riparian and Fenton pastures within the San Diego Allotments, there would be no change in range or recreation management, when compared with the No Action alternative; those pastures are therefore not analyzed. Only areas associated with Proposed Actions are analyzed here.

88 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Figure 11: Map of 6th Field Watersheds and Proposed Actions

89 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Direct and Indirect Effects - Alternative 2 Areas closed to disturbance by the Proposed Action (exclosure areas within the Cebolla Riparian and Fenton pastures; see Plate 3) would have the beneficial direct effects of decreased channel and riparian disturbance. Within the exclosures, vegetation would continue to grow in height and density. Previously barren areas would continue to re-vegetate. Woody species would likely increase in height and spread in extent. Unstable banks would continue to stabilize as the roots of riparian vegetation spread. Many of these effects have already occurred, and upon implementation of the Proposed Action, they would continue into the short and long terms. Effects however are limited to the areas closed to grazing and recreation. The indirect effects associated with areas closed by the Proposed Action to grazing and recreation are improved stream resiliency and riparian vigor. The channel should be dynamic but stable over time; neither widen nor incise. During flood events, banks should be largely covered by dense, thriving vegetation which should slow stream flow, reduce stream power, deposit and build banks. As a result, the stream channel should narrow and meander across the floodplain. Stable and resilient stream channels maintain NMMJM habitat by ensuring the water table remains within reach of riparian roots as well as ensures flood flows spread onto the floodplain to deposit nutrients and seeds. These indirect effects are expected within the areas closed to grazing and recreation; these processes are currently occurring and would be expected to continue into the long term should the Proposed Action be implemented. The Proposed Action alternative is analyzed by acres open to disturbance. As previously discussed (See “Information Used and Assumptions Made” and Appendix A), fence and cattleguard construction activities are not analyzed here because minimal impacts to watershed resources are expected from these activities. Instead they are addressed with BMPs and project design features. The elements and indicator analysis of the Proposed Action are displayed in Table 19 by allotment, pasture, and 6th level watershed. Plate 3: Satellite image of Proposed Actions (Fenton and Cebolla Riparian pastures) which may affect stream channels and riparian areas along the Rio Cebolla

The stream channel is shown in blue; exclosure fencing is shown in red.

90 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Table 19: Proposed Action and Indicator Analysis

Indicator: 6th Level Action Acres Allotment Pasture Action Watershed Measure OPEN to Disturbance Replace temporary exclosure fence with 3.3 miles permanent pipe fence Acres and 77 (and expand by 5 closed acres acres). Close area to Cebolla grazing and recreation Riparian Continue grazing in open areas according to the current AOI +2587 acres +2587 acres Allow recreation activities such as Outlet Rio San Diego camping and fishing Cebolla Schoolhouse Construct fence 0.86 miles NA Replace temporary exclosure fence with 0.52 miles Fenton permanent pipe fence and 11 +1993 acres and close area grazing acres and recreation Fenton to Construct fence 3.8 miles NA South 126 Lake Fork Construct Corral <1acre NA Mesa Barley, Road, Headwaters and Cebolla Construct Fence 4.1 miles NA Rio Cebolla Cebolla San Riparian Outlet San Antonio Antonio Mushroom Construct fence 0.91 miles NA Creek Sulphur Construct fence 0.24 miles NA Recreation Battleship Creek Construct cattleguards 2 NA Total Acres Open to Disturbance 4,580

Cumulative Effects – Alternative 2 Because the direct and indirect effects by the Proposed Action are less than those associated with the No Action alternative, the CWE by the Proposed Action can be analyzed by simply adjusting the calculated No Action ERA value by the reduced number of acres open to grazing and recreation under the Proposed Action. The past and reasonably foreseeable actions are the same as those analyzed by the No Action alternative. Please refer to the CWE analysis under the No Action alternative for details about cumulative effects, the ERA model, and the SW Jemez project. Table 20 displays the ERA impacts by the Proposed Action. Should the Proposed Action be implemented, the model suggests 36.7% of the watershed will be as disturbed (in terms of effects

91 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

to infiltration, runoff, and erosion processes) as a gravel road (Reid, 1993) in 2015. This is a 0.3% reduction from the cumulative watershed effects by the No Action alternative. These CWE effects however are exaggerated for two reasons: 1) most of the forage is located in the riparian area of the pastures which is where cattle spend most of their time. This means the upland acres won’t actually be as disturbed by grazing as this model suggests. And 2) while grazing impacts are assumed to be constant, the impacts by vegetation management projects and prescribed fire will decline over time as vegetation re-grows. As part of the SW Jemez project, an ID team determined the threshold of concern (TOC) for this watershed to be 15% ERA; therefore, even with the positive benefits to the riparian by the Proposed Action, the watershed is 21.7% over the TOC. This implies that activities within the watershed should be focused on watershed restoration and protection; not resource extraction. Since the actions proposed by this project are not explicitly resource extractive, but are instead aimed at wildlife habitat protection, they should have a positive effect on watershed processes. Table 20: CWE by the Proposed Action

2015 ERA Activity Acres coefficient %ERA (acres) Existing 2015 Condition1 25% upland grazing2 15,432 0.15 2315 12% Subtotal 37% riparian grazing 88 0.6 53 -0.3% and recreation3 Cumulative ERA by the Proposed Action 36.7%

1This number includes past grazing and recreation activities within 855 acres of the riparian (pre-temporary exclosures). Other past actions described within this report were also included in the SW Jemez analysis and are not re-analyzed for ERA within this report. Refer to the Watershed specialist report for the SW Jemez project for specifics (available from the Santa Fe NF Supervisors Office). .

2This number was not included in the SW Jemez analysis as an ongoing activity. It is therefore added to this analysis as part of the existing condition within the watershed.

3This row represents changes by the Proposed Action which will close 88 acres to grazing and recreation within the riparian area of the Cebolla Riparian and Fenton pastures. The coefficient used assumes humans recreating in the stream channel are as detrimental to channel stability and riparian vigor as are cattle.

Soils Existing Condition The major known disturbances affecting soils in NMMJM occupied and critical habitat are grazing, wildfires, timber harvest, recreation and road construction/maintenance. These disturbances occur within the stream corridor and adjoining watershed. A result of these disturbances are a reduction in vegetative cover, an increase in non-native plant species, increased soil compaction, a loss of soil productivity, increased runoff and channelization of runoff flows. Stream flows and sediment delivery to stream channels are altered. Bank instability and stream down cutting have occurred.

Occupied and Critical Habitat Areas within occupied and critical habitat in these allotments appear to be fairly stable. Trails along stream channels and camp sites in occupied and critical habitat are common. There is evidence of past stream down cutting but banks are mostly stabilized with vegetative cover.

92 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Rutting, rill and small gully erosion occur on road corridors. Road ditches are down cut in places. This contributes sediment and increased flows to stream channels. The presence of Kentucky bluegrass and timothy in the occupied and critical habitat indicate a departure from natural conditions. They are however, a component of the diverse vegetative cover contributing to the overall stability of the habitat.

Soil data for the proposed fence locations was obtained from the Santa Fe Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey (TES). The TES provides a description of existing conditions of soil resources, including limitations associated with their management and land use activities (Miller, et. al. 1993). The TES does not contain detailed soil descriptions. A terrestrial ecosystem survey consists of the systematic examination, description, classification, and mapping of terrestrial ecosystems. TES delineates ecosystems into components and larger map units according to their climate, geology, soils, and potential natural vegetation. Components with similar appearance and attributes are grouped into map units. Map units with a single component are called consociations and those with two or more components are referred to as complexes, if the associated components are too intermingled or small to be shown at the TES map scale, or associations if the components can be shown separately but use and management does not justify separation. Components may also include up to two major inclusions with differing properties that can comprise up to 15% each of the map unit.

Soil limitations to the proposed fence building are shown in Table 21 below. Limitations were determined using the Santa Fe Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey Report, Interpretations Section. There are no specific interpretations for fence building but the interpretations for trails were used as this most closely resembles limitations that may be encountered during fence construction. In addition, rock fragment content was factored into the limitations to fence construction.

Table 21. Soil Limitations to Fence Construction Map Limitation 1 Limitation 2 Limitation 3 Limitation 4 Unit 5 Severe: High water Severe: Corrosion Severe: High Severe: Frost table (Pipe Fence) shrink/swell heave 8 Severe: High water Severe: Corrosion Severe: Frost heave table (Pipe Fence) 156 Moderate: Steep slopes 604 Slight 608 Severe: Shallow soils Severe: Rock content 615 Severe: Shallow soils Severe: Rock content 623 Severe: Steep slopes Severe: Rock content Severe: Rock outcrop 626 Severe: Rock content 657 Slight 658 Severe: Rock content 659 Severe: Steep slopes Severe: Rock content 660 Severe: Steep slopes Severe: Rock content

Slight limitations to fence construction impose no major difficulties. Moderate limitations to fence construction cause difficulties that can reasonably be overcome. Severe limitations are more difficult to overcome and can result in increased costs in

93 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment construction as well as an increase in the amount of time to construct the fence. Limitation ratings are not meant to prohibit fence construction. Limitations identify potential impacts to fence building which may result in revised design specifications, altered fence routes or altered installation procedures to overcome the limitation. Limitations can also indicate expected maintenance frequency and cost after construction.

Limitations affecting fence construction and maintenance are high water table, high shrink/swell potential, corrosion, shallow soils, steep slopes, rock content and rock outcrop. Saturated soils are difficult to compact and do not provide a stable base for fence posts. Saturated soils cannot support heavy loads or vehicle weight. Vehicles may become stuck and rutting can occur. High water tables can result in more frequent maintenance due to corrosion of pipe fence posts. Frost heave and high shrink-swell potential can cause fence posts to shift position and work their way out of the soil. Shallow soils, rock outcrop and soil rock content make fence posts difficult to put into place. Steep slopes make access to fence locations and fence construction difficult.

Alternative 1-No Action If fences are not constructed, there will be no additional impact to the soil resource. Soil compaction and reduced vegetative cover in riparian areas accessible to livestock would continue at current levels. This occurs mainly on trails created and used by livestock. Grazing reduces plant stubble height or roughness and can have a negative effect on streambank stability during flood flows. If streambanks erode and down cutting occurs, water tables drop. A lowering of water tables results in a reduction in wetland and riparian vegetation.

If the proposed fences are not constructed, soil disturbance would not increase. Stream flows, sediment delivery to streams and soil productivity would remain at existing levels. Areas in critical and occupied habitat accessible to livestock with limited livestock management may result in further soil compaction and streambank instability. Stream down cutting and a lowering of the water table can occur.

Alternative 2-Proposed Action Table 22 lists limitations and hazards by TES map unit that affect the soil resource. Effects of the proposed fence building to the soil resource are low soil bearing strength, soil compaction and erosion hazard. Map units with no limitations or hazards have no or very limited effects on the soil resource. Moderate limitations or hazards have an effect on the soil resource but can be reasonably mitigated. Severe limitations require more extreme measures to reduce the effect on the soil resource. This can result in higher costs and more time to mitigate the effects. Ruts from vehicular traffic on soils with a low bearing strength, cause channels in which runoff concentrates. Gully erosion can result. Soil compaction can occur from vehicular traffic on all soils when moist. Livestock trailing along fence lines can also result in soil compaction, channelization of overland flow in trails and a reduction in vegetative cover. Compaction reduces water infiltration, increases surface water runoff and restricts plant root growth. Reduced infiltration increases sheet erosion which removes the nutrient rich soil surface layer and reduces soil productivity. A reduction in soil productivity results in a decrease in vegetative cover. Removal of vegetation can also occur during fence construction. Vegetative cover protects the soil from raindrop impact and provides roughness which slows runoff and reduces erosion. Accelerated erosion from sheet and gully erosion result in higher sediment yields to stream

94 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

channels. An increase in surface water runoff can result in increased flows in the stream channel. An increase in sediment delivery to and flows in the stream channel can affect natural stream dynamics. Stream banks may become more erodible and stream channels can shift or down cut.

Table 22. Factors Affecting the Soil Resource TES Map Unit # Limitation Hazard 5 Severe: Low strength None 8 Severe: Low Strength None 156 Severe: Low Strength Severe: Erosion hazard 604 None None 608 None Moderate: Erosion hazard 615 None Severe: Eosion hazard 621 None Severe: Erosion hazard 623 None Severe: Erosion hazard 626 None Moderate: Erosion hazard 657 None None 658 None None 659 None Severe: Erosion hazard 660 None Severe: Erosion hazard

Fence construction results in soil disturbance. Trailing of livestock along fences adds to soil disturbance. Soil compaction, gullying and a reduction in vegetative cover may result in an increase in runoff and erosion which increases stream flow and sediment delivery to stream channels. The above can affect stream dynamics, causing instability of stream banks and channels. Soil productivity can be reduced as a result of accelerated soil erosion of the nutrient rich soil surface layer in areas of disturbance. The use of recommended best management practices can mitigate these impacts.

Heritage Resources

Background

The Santa Fe National Forest (SFNF) proposes to prepare an EA to protect proposed critical habitat for the NMMJM within the Cebolla/San Antonio and the San Diego Grazing Allotments. This Cultural Resources report examines the existing and desired conditions of the allotment from the cultural resource perspective as well as evaluates effects from the proposed action.

Cultural resources may be directly affected by construction activities associated with grazing improvements, trampling by livestock, and implementation of ecosystem restoration projects or other habitat maintenance activities. Cultural resources may also be indirectly affected by natural processes, especially sheet and gully erosion accelerated by the reduction of vegetative cover. Since ungulate trampling and long-term geologic cycles of degradation have been ongoing for over four centuries of grazing, the proposed treatment and construction projects are of primary concern from a cultural resource standpoint. Fortunately, potential impacts to cultural resources may be easily avoided through simple project modifications once cultural inventories have been completed.

95 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

The primary legislation governing cultural resource management by the Heritage Program is the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (amended in 1976, 1980, and 1992). Section 106 of NHPA requires that federal agencies take into consideration the effect of their undertakings on properties listed in or eligible to be nominated to the National Register of Historic Places (NHRP) (this includes both historic and prehistoric properties). In addition, Forest Service Manual 2360 and Forest Service Handbook 2309 provide the basis for specific Forest Service Cultural resources management practices. Appendix H of The First Amended Programmatic Agreement Regarding Historic Property Protection and Responsibilities between the State Historic Preservation Officers of Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas, and Region 3 of the U.S. Forest Service provides a framework for standard consultation protocol for Range Management projects.

Many activities associated with grazing may affect cultural resources and are considered to be undertakings requiring compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. Also, these undertakings are subject to standard consultation and inventory procedures, as agreed upon in 2003 by Region 3 of the USDA Forest Service, the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Officer, and other parties in the First Programmatic Agreement Regarding Historic Property Protection and Responsibilities.

Existing Conditions

This section outlines the previous Cultural Resource investigations and the previously recorded cultural resource sites within the identified critical habitat for the NMMJM located within both the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment and the San Diego Allotment.

The locations of cultural resources, including those that date to pre-contact as well as historic times, are influenced by many different characteristics of the landscape. Slope, aspect, elevation, and access to water and arable land have all proven to be influential characteristics throughout the region. In the case of the Cebolla/San Antonio and San Diego allotments, proximity to the perennial water in the form of the Rio Cebolla and San Antonio Creek appear to be one of the most important factors. The waterways likely served as important source of subsistence opportunities, travel corridors, and communication throughout the pre-contact and historic periods. In the historic period, the analysis areas were primarily used for ranching, logging, and recreation activities.

Previous Surveys

A review of records on file at the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor’s Office, New Mexico Cultural Resource Information System (NMCRIS), and the Santa Fe National Forest’s Geographic Information Systems (GIS) coverage of previous cultural resources inventory projects revealed that 124 Cultural resource investigations have occurred within or adjacent to the areas identified as NMMJM critical habitat within the Cebolla/San Antonio and San Diego Allotments. Of these, 67 are considered valid surveys that meet current SHPO and Forest Service standards. The remaining 57 surveys do not meet the current standards for cultural resource surveys and will not be considered in this analysis.

96 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Cultural Resources and Previously Recorded Cultural Resource Sites

Previous cultural resource investigations have identified 37 cultural resource sites within or adjacent to the critical habitat corridors along San Antonio Creek and the Rio Cebolla included within the Cebolla/San Antonio and the San Diego Allotments. All but two of the sites occur on the Jemez Ranger District. The remaining two sites are on the Cuba Ranger District. The number of cultural resource sites cited above does not include five sites within the holdings of Fenton Lake State Park. These five sites will not be considered as part of this analysis.

Desired Conditions

The desired future conditions for cultural resources include the inventory, documentation, evaluation, and protection of all sites to Santa Fe National Forest and the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office standards. Management activities within the allotments under the Forest Plan standards and guidelines should promote the protection and preservation of cultural resources. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations, as well as the stipulations set forth in the First Amended Programmatic Agreement Regarding Historic Property Protection and Responsibilities, as agreed upon by Region 3 of the U.S. Forest Service, the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Officer, and other parties, requires that appropriate inventories must be conducted in advance of the implementation of any ground-disturbing activities. Projects should be managed in such a manner that ensures a determination of either “No Historic Properties Affected” or “No Adverse Effect” to cultural resources. Discovery of any undocumented cultural resources during project implementation will result in immediate cessation of any ground disturbing activities in the locale and notification of the Forest Archaeologist.

No New Survey Required

Five of the proposed improvement under the Proposed Action Alternative will require no new cultural resource survey prior to project implementation.

 Construct 4 miles of fence on the east side of the Rio Cebolla on the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment to exclude cattle.

The proposed construction of 4 miles of fence on the east side of the Rio Cebolla in the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment will not require a cultural resource survey because it meets the criteria of a fence exempt from (SHPO) consultation, per Appendix G.2.B, of the 2003 Programmatic Agreement. Appendix G, 2. B states “When the Forest Archaeologist or archaeologist with delegated responsibilities determines that a fence construction or reconstruction proposal has little or no potential to affect historic properties no further consultation with SHPO is required”. The proposed fence is located at high elevation (over 8,500 feet amsl), and on slopes exceeding 40%. Therefore, the likelihood of encountering cultural resources is low.

 Construct a cross fence across the Rio Cebolla on the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment at the northern end of identified critical habitat.

97 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

The majority of the proposed cross fence across the Rio Cebolla on the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment has been previously surveyed, in 1989 as part of the Calaveras Timber Sale (R1989- 10-122A) and in 2004 for the Rio Cebolla Willow Planting and Restoration Project (R2004-10- 031). The unsurveyed portions of the fence, which are located on slopes exceeding 40% are exempt from SHPO consultation per Appendix G, 2.B (see above).

 Replace and remove the existing barbed wire fences and install permanent pipe fences in the four existing enclosures along the Rio Cebolla near FR 376 on the San Diego Allotment.

The area surrounding the temporary barbed wire fence was surveyed prior to construction of the fence in 2014 as described in the Rio Cebolla Exclosure Report (R2014-10-002). Cultural Resource sites located in the area were avoided, with the exception of site AR-03-10-03-1475, a historic railroad grade. The temporary fence intersects the railroad grade. Consultation with the NM SHPO will be required prior to installing a pipe fence through the site. Other measures might prove to be effective, such as the use of fencing that will not be ground disturbing.

 Construct an additional pipe fence to enclose 5.5 acres of critical habitat between the Lake Fork Corral and the largest exclosure on the San Diego Allotment.

The area was surveyed in 2014 in the Rio Cebolla Exclosure Report (R2014-10-002B).

 Construct approximately one mile of barbed wire fence on Schoolhouse Mesa on the San Diego Allotment.

The area when the proposed fence will be constructed was surveyed in 2010 for the Lakes Northern and Southern Fuels Treatment report. One cultural resource site, AR-03-10-03-1452, is adjacent to or within the proposed fence route and should be avoided.

Cultural Resource Surveys Required within the Analysis Area

Cultural Resource Surveys will be required for up to four of the proposed improvements listed in the Proposed Action Alternative in the Cebolla/San Antonio and the San Diego Allotments.

In order to comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, the following proposed actions will require a cultural resource investigation and clearance prior to implementation:

 Approximately 850 feet of proposed fence from FR 103 to CFF 199 that crosses Sulphur Creek in the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment.  The cattleguard that will be installed on CFF 199 on the Cebolla/San Antonio Allotment.  Approximately 2 miles of the proposed 4 miles of barbed wire fence on Lake Fork Mesa on the San Diego Allotment.  Construct a corral in the Lake Fork Pasture on the San Diego Allotment at an appropriate location

98 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

These are most likely the only locations that will require cultural resource surveys and consultation on traditional uses and locations that will be required for the activities under the Proposed Action Alternative. The SFNF Cultural GIS layer indicates that portions of the four exclosures and the 5.5 acre proposed exclosure have not been surveyed to standard. However, a survey was conducted prior to the construction of the exclosures in October of 2014 and the data has not yet been entered into the GIS layer nor has the associated cultural resources clearance report been completed at this time. It is expected that the report (Report 2014-10-002B) will be completed by the time the EA is submitted for decision. If any additional survey is required, it will be completed prior to the completion of that report. Consultation with Tribes on Traditional Uses and Traditional Cultural Properties is occurring concurrently with this report and prior to the implementation of any of the proposed alternative actions being analyzed.

Previously Recorded Sites Located Within Proposed Action Alternative

There are seven cultural resource sites located near or within some of the proposed action locations. One site, AR-03-10-03-055 has been renumbered to AR-03-10-03-1452.

There are five previously recorded sites within the proposed Rio Cebolla pipe fence exclosure (AR-03-10-03-1390, AR-03-10-03-1475, AR-03-10-03-2443, AR-03-10-03-2445,and AR-03-10- 03-4378). All sites, with the exception of AR-03-10-03-1475, the logging railroad, were avoided when the existing temporary fence was constructed. It is not anticipated that construction of a pipe fence within the same location as the barbed wire fence will have any significant additional impacts on these five sites. However, the New Mexico SHPO might recommend that the proposed pipe fence avoid site AR-03-10-03-1475, the logging railroad. This could be easily accomplished by either avoiding the logging railroad outright or by constructing non-ground disturbing elements to the fence such as rock jacks or rock cairns to secure the fence posts.

Tribal Consultation

As part of this analysis, the Forest Service will initiate consultation with the surrounding federally recognized tribes to gather information on Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs), sacred sites, and traditional use areas in the project area. The Tribal consultation is occurring concurrently with the NEPA analysis of identified critical habitat for the NMMJM. At this time, there is no specific identification of traditional cultural properties from tribal consultation. Previous consultation with the Tribes for the Southwest Jemez Mountains Landscape Restoration Project indicated that there were no TCP’s within the identified critical habitat. The locations and sensitivity of TCPs, sacred sites, and traditional use areas is information held only by Native American groups or other traditional communities, and cannot be identified, managed, or protected without collaboration with them.

Treatments on and around known Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs), sacred sites, and traditional use areas will be developed and implemented through on-going consultation with Native American groups and other traditional communities throughout the life of this project. Information obtained through consultation regarding the location and current use of these sensitive areas will be considered when prioritizing treatment areas during the implementation phase of the project. In some instances, these areas may receive higher priority for appropriate

99 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment treatments to ensure that traditional practices are sustainable into the future. Additionally, information gained from on-going tribal consultation will be used to implement project-specific mitigation measures to protect TCPs and sacred sites, when necessary.

Review of the existing cultural resource information was conducted to identify heritage resources within the analysis area. As noted, 66 valid cultural resource investigations have occurred within or adjacent to the identified critical habitat and proposed action alternatives. Thirty-seven cultural resource sites have been identified in the analysis area. The expected effects of the proposed action will have a finding of either “no effect” or “no adverse effect” provided that project managers comply with applicable cultural resource laws and regulations.

The no action alternative means that the temporary fences currently in place along the Rio Cebolla will be removed and livestock will continue to graze along the river. Previous consultation with the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Officer has determined that continued grazing will have no adverse effect on cultural resources. It is recognized that cultural resources on the analysis area have been subject to grazing for hundreds of years, and that some degree of impact may have already occurred.

The installation of exclusion fences will reduce the impacts of livestock upon cultural resources within the excluded areas. Ground cover should increase, minimizing the effects of wind and water erosion to cultural resources, provided that wildlife numbers do not increase significantly. The continuation of grazing at or below current levels is not expected to result in significant negative impacts to cultural resources.

The proposed action alternative includes fence construction and maintenance, and the construction of a corral. These activities may be considered undertakings, especially the installation of a pipe fence. Areas that have been previously surveyed for cultural resources will not require additional survey. However, any new ground-disturbing activity associated with the proposed action alternative will require a cultural resource survey prior to project implementation and an archeologist shall be consulted to ensure that the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act are met. All historic properties will be avoided during the implementation of these projects, ensuring that there is “no adverse effect” upon cultural resources.

Cumulative Effects

A majority of the analysis area, from Forest Road 376 south, is located within the boundary of the Southwest Jemez Mountains Landscape Restoration Project, a multiple purpose project that will treat over 110,000 acres on the Jemez Ranger District. Treatments will include mechanical thinning, hand thinning, prescribed burning, managing natural ignition fires, treatment of head- cuts, rehabilitation of dispersed recreation sites, enhancement of native riparian vegetation, in- stream habitat restoration, treatment of non-native invasive plants, screening of water sources, increasing water sources for wildlife, creating snags, cultural site protection, road maintenance, and the creation of gravel pits.

100 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Social/Economics

Background The Jemez Ranger District encompasses or is adjacent to several small predominantly Hispanic and Native American Villages/Pueblos. Spanish settlement of the area occurred during the 1600’s through the 1700’s and into the 1800’s. Long-term residents of northern New Mexico view public lands from the perspective of their ancestors, that of possessing free access to its products and resources, including the ability to graze livestock. This view is not surprising, since 22 percent of the nearly 3 million acres making up the Santa Fe and Carson National Forests were recognized as former Spanish/Mexican land grants.

Today residents depend on the National Forest for water to irrigate their fields, fuelwood to heat their homes, forage to feed their livestock, Christmas trees for traditional celebrations, and pinon nut, herbs, and berries to use in family cooking and healing practices. People of the Jemez Valley view the forest as their backyard and everything the Forest Service does affects someone in the community.

In Northern New Mexico sparse populations dominate the landscape and a rural lifestyle exists. Most residents have a direct and/or indirect tie to the natural resources for their livelihood and believe resource utilization would be less disruptive to their local communities than most other forms of economic development. Recreational activities generally include hunting, camping, and fishing. Rural residents tend to be willing to live at a lower income if the only means of acquiring higher incomes is to live in highly urbanized areas. Community and family are essential to their quality of life. Human use of forest also has important cultural and recreational values. Through many generations of interactions by these communities with the natural resources in the area a cultural value of “stewardship” has been established. Quite often it is imperative for these residents to have a “hands-on” relationship with the forests that has sustained them for generations, as a part of their cultural identity. These communities maintain a certain degree of self-sufficiency by meeting many of their own needs through self, family, and friends.

Economic Environment In 2014, the unemployment rate for New Mexico was 6.8 percent while Sandoval County had a 6.9 percent unemployment rate (US Department of Labor, 2015). There is a strong sense of ownership to land, livestock, and community, with land often viewed as part of family, not as something to sell. Keeping land in the family and upholding traditional values are regarded more highly than material possessions or monetary gain (Raish & McSweeney 2003).

101 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Table 23. Per capita income and unemployment rates

Political division Per capita % of state Unemployment in % of state income average (where percent (2015) average (where (2013) located) located) (rounded) New Mexico $23,763 100 6.8 100 Sandoval County $26,924 113 6.9 101 Bureau of Labor Statistics

This project was developed in consideration of the best available science and is consistent with the Santa Fe National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics was used as a basis for this report.

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 – No Action Alternative

Under the No Action, domestic livestock grazing and recreation activities would still be allowed within the Rio Cebolla and San Antonio Riparian areas. Forest users would continue to use dispersed campsites and user created trails located along the Rio Cebolla. No additional measures would be taken to protect NMMJM critical habitat. No new fences would be constructed and temporary exclosures would be removed. Grazing would continue within the Rio Cebolla and San Antonio Riparian areas. The existing closure order would expire and the riparian areas would once again be open to grazing and recreation.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action Alternative

This alternative provides an opportunity to continue grazing management and improve resource conditions while protecting proposed NMMJM critical habitat. The permittees would continue graze their respective allotments. Permitted livestock numbers would not change with this alternative.

Recreation related activities, while being excluded within the riparian areas, would still be allowed in other developed and dispersed camping areas. The social and economic impact to recreationists would be minimal.

Environmental Justice

Executive Order 12898 (1994) requires federal agencies to address environmental justice of their actions on minority and low-income populations. This analysis considers demographic, economic, and human health risk factors. A specific consideration of equity and fairness in resource decision-making is encompassed in the issue of environmental justice and civil rights. As required by law and Executive Order, all federal actions should consider potentially disproportionate effects on minority or low-income communities. Potential impact or change to low-income or minority communities within the study area due to the proposed action should be considered. Where possible, measures should be taken to avoid negative impacts to these communities or mitigate the adverse effects.

102 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Native Americans have been present in the area for at least the past 1,000 years and Spanish settlers arrived in the area about 400 years ago. Many families in the study area trace their ancestry back to these original inhabitants. As such, there are strong ties to the land and a reliance on the natural resources of the forest. All the communities (San Ysidro, Jemez Springs, Canon, and portions of the Jemez and Zia Pueblos) within the Jemez Valley area would fall under the minority and/or low-income populations identified in the Environmental Justice Executive Order 12898. Generally, environmental justice is concerned with identifying these communities and ensuring that they are involved in and understand the potential effects of the proposed action. The people in the study area communities are interested in maintaining their historic and subsistence lifestyle, using the surrounding area to gather resources needed. Alternatives 1 and 2 Neither alternative would result in adverse or disproportionate effects on low income and minority populations. The opportunity to improve livestock grazing and wildlife habitat across the Jemez Ranger District would not affect the permittees and their family by changing traditional use of the land or causing economic hardship to those individuals who rely in part on the income generated from their long-term livestock operations. There would be no displacement of minorities, changes of land use, or increases in taxes that would constitute an economic hardship.

103 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Appendix A

Project Design Features and Mitigation Measures

All applicable BMPs (see Appendix A) should be implemented. In addition, the following project design features will be followed in order to protect watershed resources: The AMZ is defined as:  Fish-bearing streams – The AMZ consists of the stream and the area on each side of the stream extending from the edges of the active stream channel to the top of the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, or to the outer edges of riparian vegetation, or 300 feet slope distance (600 feet total, including both sides of the stream channel), whichever is greatest.

 Permanently flowing non-fish-bearing streams – The AMZ consists of the stream and the area on each side of the stream extending from the edges of the active stream channel to the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, or to the outer edges of riparian vegetation, or 150 feet slope distance (300 feet total, including both sides of the stream channel), whichever is greatest.

 Seasonally flowing or intermittent streams and wetlands less than 1 acre- This category applies to features with high variability in size and site-specific characteristics. At a minimum, the AMZ must include: the stream channel or wetland and the area from the edges of the stream channel or wetland to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, or extend 100 feet slope distance from the stream channel or wetland, whichever is greatest.

o Intermittent streams are defined as any nonpermanent flowing drainage feature having a definable channel and evidence of annual scour or deposition. This includes what are sometimes referred to as ephemeral streams if they meet these two physical criteria.

 Lakes and natural ponds – The AMZ consists of the body of water and the area to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, or to the extent of seasonally saturated soil, or to the extent of unstable and potentially unstable areas, or 300 feet slope distance, whichever is greatest.

 Constructed ponds and reservoirs, and wetlands greater than 1 acre – The AMZ consists of the body of water or wetland and: the area to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, or to the extent of seasonally saturated soil, or the extent of unstable and potentially unstable areas, or 150 feet slope distance from the edge of the wetland greater than 1 acre, or the maximum pool elevation of constructed ponds and reservoirs, whichever is greatest.

The AMZ definition above is borrowed from the Northwest Forest Plan FEIS (LRMP document for R5 and R6; USDA and DOI, 1994) standards and guidelines for Riparian Reserves. It has been slightly altered to better pertain to the project area.

104 NMMJM Critical Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Appendix B

Forest Plan Consistency

Both alternatives would meet the standards and guidelines for affected resources in the Forest Plan, as amended (USDA Forest Service 1990b). See the “Forest Plan Consistency” section of each Specialist Report for specific information: Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policy

This report considers recreation resource related direction contained in two resource management plans; the JNRA Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 2002a) and the SFNF Land and Resource Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 1987). Both management plans provide standards and guidelines for proposed NMMJM habitat protection as it applies to forest recreation. The JNRA Management Plan has been summarized and incorporated into Appendix H of the SFNF Land and Resource Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 2002b). All of the occupied habitat locations are located within the JNRA.

The Jemez National Recreation Area Act (JNRA) (Public Law 103-104, Stat. 1025) requires the SFNF to protect, conserve and restore natural resource values within the JNRA. Resource values specifically identified in the JNRA include recreational, ecological, cultural, religious and wildlife (Table 1). This specialist report takes into consideration forest recreation elements contained in the management plan.

Table 1. SFNF Land and Resource Plan Section Plan Direction Page Forest Goal Manage the recreation resource to increase opportunities for a wide Rec variety of developed and dispersed experiences. Provide for developed 18 sites and dispersed visitor use, including handicap access. Appendix H In providing for recreational facilities, place particular emphasis on 2003-2 JNRA the preservation, stabilization, and protection of cultural resources and the conservation and protection of wildlife resources. Manage the rivers in the JNRA (Rio Cebolla, San Antonio Creek, East Fork Jemez, Jemez River, and Rio Guadalupe) as key fishing opportunities Appendix H When rehabilitating existing recreation facilities, consider the 2003-2 JNRA dispersed area that the recreation facility serves and consider resource capacities associated with the dispersal area. Manage the Lake Fork and Guadalupe for dispersed recreation. 2003-2 Appendix H Manage the areas surrounding La Cueva and between La Cueva and 2003-2 JNRA Cañon for day uses, with overnight use limited to designated campgrounds. Appendix H Control vehicle and pedestrian traffic and public use as needed to 2003-2 JNRA protect visitor safety and resource values. Appendix H Provide pedestrian trails to connect dispersed sites and parking areas 2003-2 JNRA to the river.

Other than hiking or backpacking, dispersed recreational activities are largely a function of the capability and accessibility of driving to a desired location. The SFNF Travel

105 NMMJM Habitat Protection Project Environmental Assessment

Management Decision (USDA, Forest Service 2012a) provided regulatory direction to manage motor vehicles on the forest. There are no designated recreation/camping corridors (motor vehicle travel is permitted a distance of 150 feet off the road shoulder) on FR 376; however motor vehicles are permitted 35 feet off the road shoulder on forest roads designated open for public travel. Cross-country motorized travel is prohibited. There are no restrictions for pedestrian accessed dispersed camping away from vehicles, however most dispersed camping occurs associated with motor vehicles, and RV’s and trailers. Specific SFNF Land and Resource Management Plan guidance for the JNRA is provided in Table 2.

Table 2. Travel Management Guidance

Section Plan Direction Page Appendix H Provide road access for traditional uses, dispersed recreation, 2003-3 JNRA permittee and administrative uses. Appendix H Manage roads within the JNRA to conserve, protect, and restore the 2003-3 JNRA recreational, ecological, cultural, religious, and wildlife resource values, with particular emphasis on cultural and wildlife resources. Appendix H Restricts motorized travel to designated Forest system roads and 2003-3 JNRA trails, and vehicles may not drive beyond the roadway. Appendix H Prohibits all motorized travel. These areas may contain a few roads 2003-3 JNRA or trails for administrative use but are not open to public use. These are typically areas where natural resources may be seriously damaged or threatened by continued motorized use, or where a non- motorized recreation opportunity is desired. Appendix H Designate areas for motorized and non-motorized use within 2003-3 JNRA corridor. Appendix H Designate dispersed recreation sites and small parking areas along 2003-3 JNRA FR 376 to access the river.

106