(Draft)
Angeles National Forest San Gabriel Mountains National Monument Travel Analysis Report
April, 2018
1
(Draft)
2
(Draft)
Table of Contents
STEP 1: SETTING UP THE ANALYSIS ...... 5
BACKGROUND ...... 5
OBJECTIVES OF SUBPART A ...... 5
Scale of Sub Part A ...... 6
Scope of Sub Part A ...... 6
TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS TEAM MEMBERS ...... 7
PRODUCTS ...... 8
STEP 2: DESCRIBING THE SITUATION ...... 9
INTRODUCTION ...... 9
CURRENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ...... 10
Geographic and Biological Settings...... 11
CURRENT MANAGEMENT DIRECTION ...... 12
2005 Land Management Plan (LMP) and 2005 Roads Analysis Process (RAP) ...... 12
Summary of Important 2005 RAP Findings ...... 16
ROAD MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES ...... 16
OTHER TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS ...... 18
STEP 3: IDENTIFYING ISSUES ...... 24
ROAD SYSTEM MANAGEMENT ...... 24
ROAD SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY ...... 25
Financial Resources ...... 25
Budget Constraints-Current and Projected ...... 27
FUTURE TRANSPORTATION TRENDS ...... 28
STEP 4: ASSESSING BENEFITS, EFFETCTS AND RISKS ...... 30
BENEFITS OF NATIONAL FOREST ROADS ...... 30 3
(Draft)
Administrative Needs for NF Roads ...... 30
Fire and Fuels Management...... 30
Ecological Restoration ...... 30
Recreation ...... 31
Communities and Private Property Access ...... 32
Mineral Access ...... 33
Hydroelectric Power Generation...... 33
EFFECTS AND RISKS FROM ROADS ...... 33
Effects on Wildfire Protection ...... 34
Risks to Terrestrial and Avian Species ...... 34
Risks to Aquatic and Riparian Species ...... 35
Risks to Botanical Resources ...... 35
Heritage and Cultural Conflicts ...... 36
Watershed Effects ...... 36
Effects on Air Quality ...... 38
Social-Economics ...... 38
STEP 5: DESCRIBING OPPORTUNITIES AND SETTING PRIORITIES ...... 39
PROJECTED ACCESS NEEDS ...... 39
Opportunities to Change Existing Road System ...... 39
Resource Specific Recommendations...... 41
Road System Management Recommendations ...... 42
STEP 6: REPORTING ...... 43
LIKELY NEEDED/LIKELY NOT NEEDED SUMMARY ...... 43
4
(Draft)
STEP 1: SETTING UP THE ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND September 2005, the Record of Decision for the Angeles National Forest Land Management Plan was published. In November of 2005, the Forest Service issued the final Travel Management Rule (36 CFR 212). The Travel Management Rule revised Forest Service directions concerning the management, use, and maintenance of the National Forest Transportation System. In order to designate a sustainable transportation system, halt cross country motorized travel and to provide consistent over snow motorized use.
The Travel Management Rule was broken down into three subparts:
Subpart A Identify roads likely not needed for future use
Subpart B Designate the NF Transportation System; roads, motorized trails and areas
Subpart C Designate an over snow vehicle system
The Angeles National Forest completed the analysis portion of Subpart A during the 2005 planning process and this Travel Analysis Report (TAR) documents what have changed since the Land Management Plan was completed and also identifies roads that today are not likely needed in the future. The overall goal is to provide a financially and environmentally sustainable road system, to meet the expectation for utilization for the National Forest Lands and to maintain a safe road system for all users of the Angeles National Forest.
The Angeles NF completed Subpart B in 2011. The Forest plans to review designated routes (Subpart B) in the future and will revisit the capability to complete this project on an annual basis.
Subpart C will not be completed. The Angeles National Forest currently does not have an over snow vehicle system and does not plan on a system in the future.
OBJECTIVES OF SUBPART A The objective of this analysis is to inform future decisions for a sustainable and safe road system. The primary goal is to list roads “likely not needed” for future use and suggest recommendations for a sustainable road system.
5
(Draft)
Scale of Sub Part A The Forest completed a detailed Roads Analysis Process (RAP) in 2005 as part of the Land Management Plan. Over 10,000 road-related comments were received from the public during the 2005 RAP process. The natural resource concerns and risks are similar today to those identified in the RAP and subsequent studies since 2005. The issues identified by the public were economic and natural resource sustainability of the existing road system, the effects of roads in watersheds and on species of animals and plants. Other major issues were too much, or too little public motorized access, and the need for more public rights-of-way.
The Record of Decision was published September 2005 just prior to the issuance of the new Travel Management Rule issued on November 9, 2005. This Travel Analysis utilized the GIS resource analysis that was completed as part of the RAP.
The proposed Minimum Road System was determined using the Forest Service RAP and the Forest Service multidisciplinary teams listed below validated the data as a group and confirmed or changed conclusions accordingly. The Travel Analysis Process does not lead to a management NEPA decision. It is intended to inform and focus future detailed analysis towards making site specific road decisions.
Scope of Sub Part A The scope for this Subpart A Travel Analysis is the Angeles NF road system where the Forest Service has primary jurisdiction. The scope of this analysis utilized the existing spatial and natural resource data available in the current corporate Geographic Information System (GIS).
The scope of this Travel Analysis is to evaluate issues and concerns developed by internal staff and external publics. This Forest-wide analysis does not evaluate or identify site specific conditions.
The 2005 RAP completed as part of the Land Management Plan (LMP) Revision process, which concluded in 2006 with the issuance of the final Record of Decision (ROD).
The San Gabriel Mountains National Monument planning process following the October 14, 2014 proclamation made by President Barrack Obama. The Proclamation required a Monument Management Plan to be developed within 3 years. A Transportation Plan was included in the monument plan. Additional plan components regarding transportation and access are proposed. The draft SGMNM Management Plan Environmental Assessment (2016) received 1144 public comments. 226 comments were specific to transportation. The comments received were similar to the comments received during the FY 2005 RAP process with one major difference. The public expressed a need for leadership, coordination and collaboration to provide alternative transportation to the Forest from regional transportation networks, especially the new Metro Gold Line.
6
(Draft)
TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS TEAM MEMBERS The Core Analysis Team listed below was designated by the Forest Supervisor.
Forest Program Lead:
o Sonja Bergdahl – Forest Engineer (Retired) o Jennifer Hooper – GIS Coordinator o Nader Ghamraoui – Transportation Engineer o Steve Eastwood – Consulting Travel Analyst o Jennifer Dean, Detailed R5 RO Transportation Engineer Los Angeles Gateway Ranger District Team:
o Nicolas Butler, Deputy District Ranger
o Andy Ramsey, Road Crew Foreman o Annitta Keck, Special Uses o Chris Stpierre, Battalion o Dennis Merkel, Recreation Officer o Evy Rimbenieks, Special Uses o Katie VinZant, Botanist o Leslie Welsh, Biologist o Matt Conklin, District Fire Management Officer o Mike Strawhun, District Fire Management Officer o Ray Kidd, OHV Manager o Ron Heinig, Assistant Recreation Officer o Steve Bear, Resource Officer San Gabriel River Ranger District Team
o Matthew Bokach, Monument Manager
o Adrienne Dunfee, Deputy Monument Manager
o Alex Liau, District Fire Management Officer o Jeremy Sugden, Recreation Officer o Ann Berkley, Biologist o Freddie Duncan, Wilderness Manager Forest Staff
o Robert Garcia – Fire Chief o David Peebles – Forest Archeologist o Chinling Chen, NEPA Coordinator
7
(Draft)
PRODUCTS The products of this TAP are:
A report documenting the analysis
A table listing roads likely not needed and roads likely needed (Step 6)
A map of the results (Map 3)
8
(Draft)
STEP 2: DESCRIBING THE SITUATION
INTRODUCTION The area that is now known as the Angeles National Forest was originally set aside for watershed protection in 1892, as the first timber reserve in California. President Harrison recognized the importance of the land encompassing the San Gabriel Mountains, creating the San Gabriel Timberland Reserve through executive order. The order acknowledged that current and future residents of Los Angeles would benefit from forest protection. Today, the forest provides Los Angeles County with 35 percent of their drinking water and 70 percent of their open space. The Angeles National Forest is a land of extremes. The mountains are steep and fractured and raise from the Los Angeles Basin to a height of 10,064 feet.
The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) constructed most of the roads in the 1930's for fire and watershed protection. These roads are narrow, steep, native-surfaced travel ways with few, if any, turnouts and few minimal drainage features. The amount of use these roads currently receive was not anticipated in the 1930's, nor was the size of today's fire engines. As a result of declining road maintenance budgets the condition of many roads on the Forests have fallen below the levels necessary for resource protection and to efficiently support the traffic volumes being carried. About one third of the total Level 2 miles have points of difficulty for the latest generation of wildland fire engines.
In 2007, the Angeles National Forest received a total of $660,000 to maintain 735 miles of NFS Roads and approximately 600 miles are within the newly designated San Gabriel Mountains National Monument (SGMNM). On average, 35 percent of the Forest’s miles received some maintenance and approximately 20 percent of the miles were maintained to standard. The appropriated road maintenance budget has declined each year since to $571,000 in 2017. Very few miles can be maintained with such a severely reduced budget.
The deferred maintenance backlog continues to grow each year that maintenance needs are unable to be fulfilled. Erosion of the drivable surface on many of the 1930's era Level 2 roads have left significant portions with uneven exposed bedrock. These portions are impassable by today's fire equipment. Other problems have contributed to the loss of available drivable width. Other problems include: slides; heavy brush encroachment; eroded and undercut sections; damaged and non-functioning drains, lack of improved water crossings; and tight horizontal radius curves through vertical solid rock cuts.
National Forest System (NFS) roads are not public roads in the same sense as roads that are under the jurisdiction of state and county road agencies The majority of travel on the National Forest Transportation System (NFTS) is linked to resource management and outdoor recreation. These roads provide access for multiple uses. An appropriate level of maintenance is designated for every road depending on the traffic permitted or required by on-going resource programs.
October 2014, President Barrack Obama proclaimed the designation of the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument. The Forest was given 3 years to complete a Monument
9
(Draft)
Management Plan. This plan is due for release to the public early 2018. The Forest implemented a reorganization from the three previous districts (51 Los Angeles River Ranger District, 52 San Gabriel River Ranger District and 53 Santa Clara River Ranger District) in two districts: the SGMNM Monument and the newly created Los Angeles Gateway District. The reorganization was implemented October 1, 2017.
CURRENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM The Angeles National Forest currently manages and maintains a National Forest Transportation System of approximately 735 miles of system roads. A road is defined as a motor vehicle travel- way more than 50 inches wide that is not designated and managed as a trail. The road system is managed and maintained to various road standards depending on management objectives. The roads range from paved roads (ML 4, 5) to roughly graded high clearance roads (ML2), depending on the type of access necessary. In some cases, where no access is currently needed, roads are “stored” for future management use by closing them to all motor vehicle traffic (ML1).
System roads are also categorized by Functional Classification. This classification denotes the relative area served and connectivity to other roads provided by the road. The highest-level roads serving the most area and connecting to other major roads are called arterial roads. Local roads are those serving relatively small areas and often ending in dead ends. Collector roads connect with other roads and access moderately large areas. The miles of system road by Functional Classification are summarized in Table 1, below. The great majority of the roads on the Angeles are native surfaced, maintenance level 2, local and collector roads which receive relatively light traffic volumes.
Table 1: System Road Miles by Functional Classification
Functional Classification Miles Percent of System Arterial 144 14% Collector 667 64% Local 230 22%
Maintenance levels (ML) are defined by the USDA Forest Service Handbook (FSH 7709.59 Chapter 60) as the level of service provided by and maintenance required for a specific road. Maintenance levels must be consistent with road management objectives and maintenance criteria. Roads may be currently maintained at one level and planned to be maintained at a different level at some future date.
The Operational Maintenance Level (OPML) is the maintenance level currently assigned to a road, considering today’s needs, road condition, budget constraints, and environmental concerns. In other words, it defines the level to which the road is currently being maintained.
The Objective Maintenance Level (OBML) is the maintenance level to be assigned at a future date, considering future road management objectives, traffic needs, budget constraints, and environmental concerns. The objective maintenance level may be the same as, or higher or lower 10
(Draft)
than, the operational maintenance level. The transition from operational maintenance level to objective maintenance level may depend on reconstruction or disinvestment (i.e., conversion to trail or decommissioning).
Table 2a: Level of Roads and Description
Road levels Description Level 1 Roads placed in storage between intermittent uses. Level 2 Open for use by high-clearance vehicles. Passenger car traffic, user comfort and user convenience are not considerations. Level 3 Open and maintained for travel by a prudent driver in a standard passenger car. Level 4 Provide a moderate degree of user comfort and convenience at moderate travel speed. Level 5 Provide a high degree of user comfort and convenience.
Table 2b: Miles of ANF Roads by Operational ML and Objective ML
Maintenance Operational ML Objective ML Level Angeles Angeles Total Total Monument Gateway Monument Gateway Miles Miles District District ML 1 29 31 60 18 22 40 ML 2 227 286 513 229 255 484 ML 3 43 35 78 50 62 112 ML 4 49 12 61 31 16 47 ML 5 6 17 23 28 24 52 Total Miles 355 380 735 355 380 735
Geographic and Biological Settings The Angeles National Forest is home to over 300 different animal species. Some of the more commonly seen animals include black bear, mule deer, squirrels, chipmunks, rabbits, and coyotes. More elusive mammals are mountain lions, bobcats, gray foxes, porcupines and ringtails. Fish found in forest lakes and streams include rainbow trout, Santa Ana sucker, Santa Ana speckled dace, arroyo chub, unarmored threespine stickleback, largemouth bass, bluegill, and catfish.
Weather conditions on the Angeles National Forest vary locally with elevation and exposure. Weather changes more rapidly and severely in the Forest’s higher elevations. Summer weather is generally hot and dry, with lower elevation high temperatures ranging from 90 degrees to more than 100 degrees. At higher elevations, temperatures are cooler and afternoon thundershowers are common. The forest receives most of the precipitation in winter. Winter temperatures are
11
(Draft)
relatively moderate, with daytime highs usually ranging from 30 to 60 degrees.
CURRENT MANAGEMENT DIRECTION 2005 Land Management Plan (LMP) and 2005 Roads Analysis Process (RAP)
The Angeles National Forest (ANF) is currently managed under the 2005 Land Management Plan prepared jointly with the other Southern Province Forests (San Bernardino, Cleveland and Los Padres N.F.)
The Regional Forester signed the Records of Decision and Final Environmental Impact Statement on September 20, 2005. “Most of the development (such as roads, developed recreation sites, and administrative structures) that might be expected to occur on the national forest has occurred. The Forest transportation systems (roads) have been built and much expansion should not occur. The decision is based on the concept of gradual change over time, expanding or improving the capacity of existing facilities before building new ones.”
Under 36 CFR 212.5 (b) (1): the National Forests will “…identify the minimum road system needed for safe and efficient travel and for the administration, utilization, and protection of National Forest System lands.” The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) confirmed the need for the existing system, and the RODs specifically mentioned that the NFSR is the minimum system needed.
The RAP Process was conducted simultaneously with the Land Management Plan revision effort, no separate public involvement process was initiated for the roads analysis. Comments received during formal and informal scoping periods and public meetings for the revision, were categorized and entered into a database. Over 10,000 comments were received pertaining specifically to “access”, which were then analyzed and reviewed for issue identification prior to the RAP. Internal comments from specialists on each Forest were also documented and considered during the analysis process.
Four rounds of public meetings and open houses were held in various locations across southern California. In addition, newsletters and information posted on the forest planning website kept the public informed and involved in the planning process. Other than members of the general public, specific stakeholder groups were invited to participate in the process, including: other federal, state, county, and city agencies; nearby private landowners; Native American tribes; numerous local and national interest groups and community associations.
The main road related issues identified during the RAP were the following:
Concern that roads will negatively affect the water flow within the watersheds for various reasons including the shallow, erosive soils, areas of steep terrain and proximity of roads to stream courses and endangered and sensitive species habitat.
Concern that adequate road access is maintained for private landowners, recreation and 12
(Draft)
business users, administrative and vegetation management activities, and for fire protection.
Concern that motorized use roads for 4WD/OHV associated recreation will have to change because many roads are listed for consideration for closure or conversion to trail.
Concern that roads have negative effects by allowing people to access and damage cultural resource sites, create visually offensive scars on the land, or negatively affect wilderness resources.
Concern that roads have negative effects to wildlife or sensitive plants by fragmenting habitat leading to species and suitable habitat declines.
The primary concern for land managers is to provide adequate access for public use; and resource management; including recreation, private land access, and vegetation treatment for fuels reduction, fire protection, and wildlife and aquatic habitat improvement.
The primary legal constraints on roads and roads management are the requirements to protect cultural resources, requirements to allow reasonable access to private in-holdings, the aquatic management strategy, and maintaining wilderness characteristics in designated wilderness and IRAs that have not been released for other uses. The other constraint at this time is the budgeted road maintenance allocation.
All elements required for the Travel Analysis Report (TAR) were included in the 2005 Four Forest RAP prepared in conjunction with the Land Management Plan Revision. These topics include ecosystem functions and processes; aquatic, riparian zones and water quality; terrestrial wildlife; economics; commodity production in terms of timber, minerals and range management, water production, and special forest products; special use permits; general public transportation; administrative uses (e.g., resource management); protection (e.g., fire or cultural resources); road-related and unroaded recreation; social issues; and civil rights and environmental justice. The SoCal Multi - National Forest RAP was conducted at a broad, multi - forest scale to identify overall trends and to identify priorities for potential future projects. RAP 2005 Chapter 4 documents the assessment of problems, risks and benefits.
Management objectives from the 2005 Land Management Plan are applicable in identifying the minimum road system.
The applicable objectives are:
Tribal 1 - Traditional and Contemporary Uses
Allow traditional uses, access to traditionally used areas, as well as contemporary uses and needs by tribal and other Native American interests.
REC 3 - Recreation Participation
13
(Draft)
Offer a wide range of high quality, environmentally sustainable developed and dispersed recreation opportunities to a rapidly growing and culturally diverse visitor population, with minimal visitor conflicts and effects to other resources:
Develop new, environmentally sustainable recreation opportunities, areas and infrastructure to relieve concentrated demand within existing high-use areas and to accommodate future growth and new uses elsewhere.
Improve, remove or replace aging developed recreation infrastructure to better meet current needs and future demand. Replacing opportunities lost to closures will be a high priority.
Inventory and analyze existing and potential dispersed use, including, but not limited to, hiking, motorized recreation, day-use, recreational target shooting, waterplay, snowplay and camping opportunities. Identify areas where that use is consistent with resource protection and public safety, and mitigate or eliminate problems over time.
Law 1 - Enforcement and Investigations
Provide law enforcement (LE) services for safety and resource protection.
Trans 1 - Transportation System
Plan, design, construct and maintain the National Forest System roads and trails to meet plan objectives, to promote sustainable resource conditions and to safely accommodate anticipated levels and types of use. Reduce the number of unnecessary unclassified roads and restore landscapes:
Enhance user safety and provide adequate parking at popular destinations on high traffic passenger car roads, while also minimizing adverse resource effects.
Using priorities identified in the Roads Analysis Process, reduce the road maintenance backlog to provide safe, efficient routes for recreationists and through-traveling public and to safely accommodate fire protection equipment and other high-clearance vehicles.
Implement landscape scale transportation system analysis on a priority basis. Coordinate with state, county, local and regional government entities, municipalities, tribal governments, other agencies and the public.
Add unclassified roads to the National Forest System roads or trails when site-specific road analysis determines there is a public need.
Decommission roads and trails that have been determined to be unnecessary and establish level of restoration during project planning.
Trans 1 – Unnecessary Roads
14
(Draft)
Reduce the number of unnecessary or redundant unclassified roads and restore landscapes:
Decommission roads determined to be unnecessary for conversion to either the road or trail system through site-specific road analysis.
Establish level of restoration through project planning
Trans 4 - Off-Highway Vehicle Opportunities
Improve off-highway vehicle opportunities and facilities for highway licensed and non-highway licensed vehicles.
Lands 2 - Non-Recreation Special Use Authorizations
Optimize utilization of encumbered National Forest System land and efficiently administer special-use authorizations (SUAs).
Fire 1 - Fire Prevention
Reduce the number of human-caused wildland fires and associated human and environmental impacts. Focus fire prevention programs on the urban interface, threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate and sensitive species habitat, vegetative areas threatened with type conversion and areas of major recreation use.
The Roads Analysis process was conducted from 2002 to 2004 using an interdisciplinary, science based process described in FS-643 Roads Analysis: Informing Decisions about Managing the National Forest Transportation System to inform Decisions about Managing the National Forest Transportation System for the four Southern California National Forests. The public was involved during the LMP Revision process, which incorporated the Road Analysis Process. Tens of thousands of comments were received from the public related to travel through five rounds of public involvement. There is need for the National Forest System Roads to provide access to protect resources, permitted activities, fire suppression, and hazardous fuels reduction. Roads are also needed to provide recreation opportunities for the public. The need was evaluated and measured and compared to the economic costs of the system and the effects to the natural and heritage resources affected by the system.
All Forest roads Levels 1 through 5 were evaluated and ranked in order to support the concurrent Land Management Plan Revision Process. The analysis yielded lists for each Forest of High Priority for Mitigation, Low Priority for Mitigation and High Risk Low Importance. It was further mapped to show ML 1 closed roads, ML 2 high clearance vehicle roads and ML 3, 4, 5 passenger car roads. Each Forest verified the RAP lists and maps, and the documents were subject to several rounds of public involvement during the Plan Revision process. This report contains information concerning the transportation system, and does not make road management decisions. Additional TAPs and subsequent environmental analyses at a more site-specific level would need to be conducted to make road management decisions.
15
(Draft)
Summary of Important 2005 RAP Findings National Forest System Roads provide access for fire suppression, community protection, recreation, landowners, and permit holders. Demand is increasing as road conditions deteriorate, while public access is diminishing.
Southern California forest road density is 0.69 miles / square mile; the density throughout the rest of Region 5 (California) is 1.61 miles / square mile.
Since 2005 the population of Los Angeles County has grown by approximately 3.5 percent. The Angeles National Forest is within a half hour’s drive of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area to the South and an hour’s drive to San Bernardino to the East, San Diego to the South. Both of the Forest’s Counties have grown, as have the ones adjacent and nearby. The supply of developed and dispersed recreation opportunities will likely remain level unless a national level program encourages and funds major new and expanded recreation sites, trails, campgrounds, and roads to access them. So, population will grow both outside the Forest and in the communities surrounded by the Forest. Use and competition for the limited supply of popular Forest recreation sites will lead to capacity management. Public use of the open system roads will increase and 1930’s CCC era roads may need widening, turnouts, enhanced signing and possibly surfacing.
The large Special Uses Permit (SUP) program on the Angeles National Forest will continue to grow with more demand for infrastructure to support communications, wind, solar, and transmission of electrical energy, water, and petroleum. Nearby developing communities will apply to install water and waste water systems. Current permit holders will want to expand operations. Most will want to use some Forest system roads, which may have to be upgrade to support the commercial activities.
The annual road budget has declined in the past ten years to $571,000. With an emphasis on watershed protection and restoration, allowing the roads to deteriorate with drastically reduced maintenance may actually increase watershed degradation.
Major fires, major floods, landslides, earthquakes, windstorms, tree mortality, major drought have occurred between 2005 and 2017. The ANF road system has been critical in providing access to accomplish fire suppression, fire restoration, watershed restoration, road system repairs, hazardous fuels reduction and community protection, as well as, providing the portal for a huge recreation program.
ROAD MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES There are several activities associated with the roads system which are necessary to provide economical, safe, ecologically responsible access to the Angeles NF. This includes the original planning, construction, reconstruction, maintenance and management.
Planning for Roads
The roads needed for management of the Angeles National Forest lands are in place. However there may be an unforeseen need for an additional road or portion of a road in the future. For
16
(Draft)
instance, a new road or portion of a road may be needed to replace an existing road in an unacceptable location.
If a new road is contemplated a detailed analysis would be completed evaluating the necessity for the road and what type of road is required. The proposed route would be field located, surveyed, designed and plans, specifications and estimates prepared. A Line Officer (District Ranger or Forest Supervisor) must approve the road before new construction may be proposed to begin. The entire project and its relationship to the environment surrounding the area would be analyzed through the NEPA process.
Maintaining Roads
In the past decade, Forest Service road maintenance funding has declined making it more difficult to maintain the road system as it was originally envisioned. This is caused by declining budgets and increased usage of public roads. As a result of the diminished road maintenance capability, many roads are showing signs of lack of maintenance leading to roads that are narrowing due to overgrown brush and vegetation and many have washouts or slumps that require more than routine maintenance. This results in loss of access and environmental degradation.
The priority for maintenance work has generally been on the roads providing access to recreation and administrative sites such as Forest Service communication sites. In addition priority is given to safety concerns and prevention of resource degradation. Known safety issues that are beyond the capability for the Forest to address result in road closure. The relatively low traffic volume roads receive less maintenance. These roads, primarily maintenance level 2 roads, comprise most of the miles of the road system. Reduced funding inhibits the ability to contract out road maintenance work that is beyond the capability of the 2-3 person Forest Service road crew which jeopardizes the accomplishment of critical fuels reduction projects. In addition, several critical roads have deteriorated thus compromising access for firefighting equipment.
Jurisdiction and Rights-of-Way
Roads on National Forest lands are under the jurisdiction and responsibility of the National Forest unless they have been assigned to another entity. Granting of a right-of-way easement to a public road agency such as, the State or county is the preferred method of documenting jurisdiction. Most County and State roads are under old Special Use Permits (SUP) without expiration clauses. Also, commercial and non-commercial organizations may acquire a SUP or easement for exclusive use roads to their land or facility.
Scenic Byways
The Angeles Crest Scenic Byway was designated a California State Scenic Highway on March 12, 1971 and a National Forest Scenic Byway on October 5, 1990. This 55-mile stretch of California State Route 2 travels through the San Gabriel Mountains and provides access to spectacular scenery, geological features, historic sites, recreational opportunities, important
17
(Draft)
ecological and biological areas, and mountain communities within driving distance of Los Angeles.
Table 3: List of Federal Lands Transportation Program (FLTP) Roads on the Angeles National Forest
Road ID Name Length (Miles) 5N30 Dry gulch rd 0.82 5N04.1 Little rock canyon rd 2.07 5N30 Dry gulch rd 0.31 5N30 Dry gulch rd 0.06 7N33 Kings cyn rd 0.50 5N30 Dry gulch rd 0.15 5N13.2 Rush cyn. Rd. 2.27 4N11.2 Big rock creek rd 2.10 5N30 Dry gulch rd 0.41 7N32 Los alamos 3.15 3N06.1 E. Blue ridge/wright mt 2.36 3N17.1 Santa clara divide 3.88 3N17.8 Santa clara divide 3.63 3N24.1 Colby ranch road 1.50 5N04C0 Rocky point parking 0.30 4N11A0 South fork cg 1.32 5N30 Dry gulch rd 0.25 OTHER TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS In addition to the National Forest Service roads, other roads also provide access to the Angeles National Forest. State and county roads are the backbone of the Forest Transportation system. They are not under the jurisdiction of the National Forest but are critical to getting to and thru the Forest. State and county roads provide access to all of the administrative and fire facilities and most major recreation sites.
State Highways
The Angeles NF works predominately with Caltrans District 7 in Los Angeles. There is a small portion of Highway 2 that is within Caltrans District 8 in San Bernardino. The Angeles National Forest regional transportation network includes 39 state highways (I-5, State Route 2 and 39). State Route 2 bisects the Forest from the west starting in La Canada and ending on the east in Wrightwood. State Highway 3 starts to the South in Azusa and travels north beyond Crystal Lake where it connects to State Route 2. There is a 4 mile portion of Hwy 39 that has been closed to the public since 1976 due to a massive slide at Snow Springs Summit. There has been recent renewed interest by congressional representatives, some cities and other interested parties in reconstruction of this closed section with an estimated cost in excess of $70,000,000.
Table 4: State Highways passing through ANF
18
(Draft)
Route ID Miles CA-2 125 CA-39 20 Interstate 5 7
County Roads
The Angeles NF is situated almost exclusively within Los Angeles County. The Angeles NF works closely with Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LADPW) personnel at the operational field level and the strategic organizational level. Most of the county road alignments do not have secured rights of ways and are under very old Special Use authorizations.
The Angeles NF and LADPW have had very preliminary discussions regarding exchanging approximately 2 miles of the Dry Gulch Road 5N30 to provide a link between Lake Huge Road and San Francisquito Road to better serve County residents and National Forest users.
Table 5: County Roads on ANF
Route id Name Miles 1n04 Palmer-evey cyn 2.5 1n04a Potato mtn spur 0.8 1n14.2 Big dalton 2.35 1n15.1 Sycamore flat mtorway 1.7 1n15.3 Sycamore flat mtorway 1.5 2n07.3 Sunset peak 0.4 2n19 Bear cyn 0.4 2n25.1 West fork rd. 7.4 2n35 Mt baldy village 0.2 2n41.1 Chantry/santa anita 1.6 2n45.3 Mt. Wilson/henninger flats rd 2.6 2n45a0 Henniger flat spur 0.4 2n45b0 Henniger flat helipor 1.1 2n68.2 Millard ridge rd 1.1 2n70.2 Arroyo seco rd 1 2n74 Clear creek schoolcmp 1.416 2n81.1 Earl cyn motorway 1.53 2n81.2 Earl cyn motorway 2.021 2n86 Graveyard rd 3.64 2n94 North dody rd 2.06
19
(Draft)
Route id Name Miles 2n96 Dunsmore cyn rd 0.2 3n09.2 Crystal lake system 2.36 3n41 Paradise ranch rd 2.17 3n42 Marek cyn rd 1.5 3n45.1 Kagel ridge rd 3.876 3n48 Upper marek motorway 2.1 3n57 Big tujunga dam 0.8 4n45 Iron canyon county road 0.8 5n16 Powerhouse cutoff 1.1 5n17 San fran motorway 5.42 5n62 Soledad sta 0.1 7n03 Portal ridge rd 4.1 7n07a0 Broad cyn rd 0.5 7n07b0 Troedel spring rd 0.5 7n09 Lake hughes rd 20.27 7n16 Fairmont reservoir lp 3.6 Lac-aliso canyon road Aliso canyon road 5.23 Lac-angeles forest highway Angeles forest highway 21.5 Lac-big pines highway Big pines highway 8.9 Lac-big tujunga canyon road Big tujunga canyon road 9.63 Lac-bouquet canyon road Bouquest canyon road 13 Lac-east fork road East fork road 5.23 Lac-little tujunga canyon road Little tujunga canyon road 9.97 Lac-mount baldy road Mount baldy road 10.03 Lac-mount emma road Mount emma road 4.74 Lac-mount wilson road Mount wilson road 4.51 Lac-san francisquito canyon rd San francisquito canyon road 15.58 Lac-sand canyon road Sand canyon road 2.36
Private Property Access
In addition to the National Forest System Roads needed for forest management activities and public recreation, there are roads authorized for special uses such as recreation cabins, organization camps, or for access to private in- holdings and private properties along the edges of the Forest boundary.
These roads are for the benefit of the private or commercial entity and are under the jurisdiction
20
(Draft)
of private individuals either thru actual land ownership or under exclusive private use permits. These roads are inventoried as part of the forest road system but control of their use is through Special Use road permits. The maintenance responsibility and control of the traffic lay with the permittee or licensee.
21
(Draft)
Map 1: Current Transportation System on the ANF
22
(Draft)
State & County & State Roads Forest
Trails
23
(Draft)
STEP 3: IDENTIFYING ISSUES
This step provides a description of the issues and concerns being evaluated.
ROAD SYSTEM MANAGEMENT Transportation system management must balance public expectations, legal requirements, resource constraints, and budget limitations. The capacity to perpetuate the Forest Service road infrastructure has become problematic since there are few funds available to continue to maintain the road system as it was originally intended. However, the general public expects a higher level of travel convenience than years past and less adverse effects on the natural environment.
The amount of money available for road maintenance activities on Forest Service roads has declined overall. Road maintenance funding comes from the regular appropriated budget from Congress. A small portion of the road maintenance work is accomplished by permittees under a road use permit.
The amount of funding needed to maintain the Angeles National Forest roads to their operational maintenance levels is considerably higher than current budgets. The total road maintenance expenditure from appropriated roads funds was approximately $571,000 in 2017. The amount of future road appropriations is unknown, but is not expected to increase in the foreseeable future. Many roads, which have provided relatively good access to National Forest activities in the past, are now rough on the surface and slows traffic down. Likewise, roads previously used by high clearance vehicles, such as pickups, are becoming overgrown with brush.
The Forest Service transportation system needs to be adequately connected to the rest of the public’s travel system in order to provide access to National Forest lands. There is an increased expectation that portions of the Forest are accessible through public and/or alternative transportation. This is the single biggest change in public comment since the 2005 RAP process. In general the transportation network and highways of other public road agencies are available to provide access to the Forest; however, the desire by the public is to ride the new Metro light rail system and have alternative transportation options, such as buses and shuttles to connect from the public transits lines to various recreational opportunities.
Occasionally, Forest Service roads are found to not have adequate rights-of-way to accommodate the public’s access to national forest lands. When these situations are identified, it is incumbent on the Forest to secure a proper easement or relocate the access to clear up the jurisdiction for the responsibility party. The Forest can pursue an exchange of roads to more properly reflect the jurisdictional responsibilities, however such activities are complex and time consuming. Dry Gulch Road 5N30 is an example of a road where LA County has expressed an interest in assuming ownership and improving the road to meet highway standards. The two end sections of the Old Ridge Route 8N04 are also a priority for the Forest. The desire is for the County to extend their jurisdiction through as easement up to the Forest boundary.
State of California’s “Green Sticker” program allows grants opportunities for maintaining roads 24
(Draft)
providing OHV access. The majority of designated OHV routes are located on ML 2 roads. Currently, the Angeles N.F. receives little OHV grant funding for road maintenance; however, the Forest staff is actively working on completing resource reports required to apply for these grants.
ROAD SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY Financial Resources National Forest System roads require administration and maintenance to safely accommodate their intended use, and to avoid problems that can arise when routes fall into disrepair. Included are costs of maintenance that should be performed routinely to maintain the system to its current standard (annual maintenance), and costs of needed maintenance that has not been completed for various reasons (deferred maintenance). Additional costs may be operations, management, enforcement, mitigation of safety or resource issues, decommissioning, and improvements associated with proposed changes to the roads. Implementation costs may be for constructing new routes that could be added to the system, for safety improvements, or for increasing maintenance levels. Maintenance costs may differ based on the designated road maintenance level.
Estimates of the annual maintenance costs for the existing road system are included in the following tables. Average costs per-mile to maintain each maintenance level were developed and applied to the road system to calculate the estimated total cost. The average unit costs per mile were developed at the regional level (Pacific Southwest Region is the State of California) but adjusted for the higher costs in urban Southern California. Some maintenance activities need to be performed annually; others are performed on a less frequent cycle. The costs shown reflect the annualized costs of performing all needed maintenance activities on their required cycle.
Each year, the Angeles National Forest prepares a road maintenance plan, which identifies the road operation and maintenance priorities for the year, as well as maintenance that needs to be done prior to opening for traffic after seasonal closures. Resource protection and public safety are maintenance priorities. Needed maintenance that is not completed are added to the deferred maintenance backlog. Maintenance is completed by Forest Service, contractors, volunteers, user groups, cooperators, and other forest resources, as appropriate.
Road funding includes both routine maintenance and other related maintenance activities. Additional maintenance may be accomplished using other funding sources, agreements, partnerships, and other methods. Actual maintenance will vary from year to year depending on how much work is accomplished by Forest employees, contracts, partners and cooperators. In the following table, miles maintained means at least one maintenance activity was performed, not that every mile reported was fully maintained to standard.
25
(Draft)
Table 6: Road System Appropriated Funding and Maintenance
High Passenger Car Percent of 735 Road Clearance Total Miles Miles Miles Maintenance Miles Receiving Year Receiving Receiving Funds Receiving Some Some Some (CMRD) Some Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance 2006 $691,000 553 100 653 89% 2007 $789,000 111 100 211 29% 2008 $789,000 27 63 90 12% 2009 $708,000 224 206 430 59% 2010 $749,000 231 237 468 64% 2011 $640,000 76 69 145 20% 2012 $597,000 69 76 145 20% 2013 $568,000 23 89 112 15% 2014 $554,000 42 67 109 15% 2015 $553,000 35 81 116 16% 2016 $553,000 113 81 194 26% 2017 $571,000 113 81 194 26%
Lower budgets, higher costs, and more complexity increase the difficulty of maintaining ANF roads. Road maintenance budgets have declined over the past decade. Annual road maintenance budgets have not been sufficient to accomplish all needed maintenance activities. In addition, Best Management Practices (BMP) for the protection of the resources and threatened and endangered species from erosion and sedimentation, and the introduction of non-native species require more planning and coordination and implementation of protective measures during road maintenance activities.
While maintenance budgets decrease and the maintenance backlog grows larger, safety standards have become more stringent. For example, existing warning and regulatory signs placed on ML 3-5 are now required to meet new standards for retro-reflectivity set by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The resources needed to maintain the entire National Forest Transportation System are substantial.
Deferred maintenance is broken up in the following categories:
Health and Safety (clearing along roadsides, repairing potholes, replacing signs, etc.)
Resource Protection (installing water bars, rolling dips, and over-side drains to prevent or reduce sediment from entering streams; installing larger culverts or bridges for aquatic organism passage; closing roads to protect sensitive plant and animal species and to 26
(Draft)
encourage animal migration)
Forest Service Mission (providing safe access on roads for fire protection, and vegetation management).
In terms of resource protection, most drainage structures (culverts) in the system roads were designed for a 25-year storm event. Culverts in the arterial and collector roads were often designed for a 50-year storm event. Current management direction is to upgrade all culverts to pass a 100-year storm event, as they are replaced. Also, the larger size culverts should improve unimpeded passage of aquatic organisms (USDA 2001, USDA 2012). This culvert replacement direction is part of the deferred maintenance cost estimate.
In recent years, the Forest Service has actively assessed the condition of its road network. The network is in a deteriorating condition due to increased use and the continued deferral of maintenance and capital improvement needs. Roads are becoming unusable through lack of maintenance, are causing resource damage, or are no longer needed, or desired, for administrative or public access. These increasingly unusable roads are candidates for decommissioning after conducting the appropriate site-specific environmental analysis.
Budget Constraints-Current and Projected The current and predicted road maintenance budgets do not adequately fund maintenance of the existing road system (See tables below), or reduce the deferred maintenance deficit. The limiting factor in road management for the past decade, and into the foreseeable future is funding. If the ANF used the current road maintenance budget to maintain roads to standard, only some roads (i,e ML 4-5) would be maintained; none of the native surfaced roads (ML 1-3) would receive maintenance. This has the potential to adversely affect the ecosystems and access if the road system continues to deteriorate at the current rate. Though there are social factors that could benefit from more roads, or roads at higher maintenance levels (ML 3-5), than currently exist, the economic feasibility does not exist.
Table 7: Existing Average Annual Maintenance Needs by Objective ML
Objective Maintenance ANF Annual Cost/Mile Forest Miles Level Maintenance ML 1 $400 40 $16,000 ML 2 $1,000 484 $484,000 ML 3 $6,500 112 $728,000 ML 4 $20,000 47 $940,000 ML 5 $30,000 52 $1,560,000 Total Needed $3,728,000 Total appropriated funds 2017 Available $571,000 (CMRD) Shortfall* $3,157,000 27
(Draft)
*The shortfall amount shown is the difference between the total needed and the 2017 CRMD available funds.
Table 8: Existing Average Annual Maintenance Needs by Operating ML
Operating Maintenance ANF Annual Cost/Mile Forest Miles Level Maintenance ML 1 $400 60 $24,000 ML 2 $1,000 513 $513,000 ML 3 $6,500 78 $507,000 ML 4 $20,000 61 $1,220,000 ML 5 $30,000 23 $690,000 Total Needed $2,954,000 Total appropriated 2017 $571,000 funds (CMRD) Available Shortfall* $2,383,000 * The shortfall amount shown is the difference between the total needed and the 2017 CRMD available funds.
FUTURE TRANSPORTATION TRENDS The lack of maintenance due to limited available funding, particularly on the lower priority roads (ML 1 and 2), is causing deterioration of the roadways and damage to sensitive natural resources. Some roads and trails have become overgrown with brush and trees, and are impassible to vehicular traffic. Other roads are causing resource damage in the form of sedimentation, as culverts and other drainage structures no longer function properly. The highest priority for road maintenance is expected to be on maintenance levels 3 to 5 roads for public and administrative access, and reasonable access to private property. Other roads that provide access to private lands, important fire protection features, administrative sites, special use permitted areas, and recreation areas are also expected to be priorities to maintain. This means that the ML 1 and 2 roads may receive no annual maintenance.
Road maintenance in the Angeles National Forest is essential for managing recreation opportunities. While recreation demand in the future is expected to increase, appropriated dollars have been decreasing over the past several years. Appropriated dollars alone (CMRD) will not be enough to fully fund the operation and maintenance of roads. Partnerships, including volunteers, are expected to be essential for providing high quality recreation opportunities. Consequently, the forest relies more and more heavily on outside funding, partners, and volunteers to maintain the road system. As the population grows and urban development expands, the continuous use of NFS roads is expected to increase, as is the demand for a variety of recreation uses in both motorized and non-motorized settings. Maintenance Level 3 to 5 roads that connect to recreation areas will experience the most increases in day use traffic, particularly on weekends. This traffic 28
(Draft)
adds to the maintenance work required, but no additional funding is available to accomplish the work.
29
(Draft)
STEP 4: ASSESSING BENEFITS, EFFETCTS AND RISKS
This section provides the description of the analysis of the benefits, effects and risks in more depth. The Forest Service Interdisciplinary Team evaluated the NF Road System for its relationship to the identified issues and concerns.
BENEFITS OF NATIONAL FOREST ROADS Administrative Needs for NF Roads The general administration of the Angeles National Forest requires access to do basic monitoring, planning and protection of the National Forest Lands. These administrative responsibilities are essential regardless of how the forest is to be utilized or what types of project are implemented. A minimum number of roads are necessary in order for the Angeles NF to meet its administrative responsibilities.
Fire and Fuels Management Fire suppression strategy and access needs are critical considerations in road management decisions. However, not every road is needed for fire suppression access. Wildfire suppression requires rapid initial attack, and suppression access roads must be in good drivable condition to reach the fire while it is still small. Maintaining good access to known water sources and needed evacuation routes is also critical.
Roads are often used as fuelbreaks to stop or slow down a fire. Roads on or near ridge tops and roads in wider open canopy areas with gentle or flat slopes are often used for backfiring. Main roads accessing relatively large areas are important for fire suppression equipment and personnel. However, many short dead end roads that are not located in positions strategic for firefighting are not utilized during fire suppression due to firefighter safety concerns. Closed roads, and even decommissioned roads, can be used for extended attack, since fire suppression bulldozers can easily reopen them during emergencies.
Fuel reduction projects also depend on roads for equipment access. Reducing hazardous fuel accumulations is a major objective of the Angeles National Forest. Often, mastication equipment must be transported by lowbed, and at other times logging equipment and log trucks, or chip vans are needed. The Angeles National Forest rarely constructs roads for fuel reduction and prescribed fire projects. However, if temporary roads were analyzed, approved and constructed they would be closed after the project is fully implemented. In some cases, roads may be left open temporarily for fuelwood gathering and prescribed burn access, then closed after completion of the burn. Completion of prescribed burns may be delayed for a few years due to weather, fuel moisture and air quality conditions, so the road closure timing needs to remain flexible in such cases.
Ecological Restoration Ecological restoration is the major objective for the Angeles NF in the coming decades. Restoring the forest environment to replicate pre-fire suppression era condition is expected to 30
(Draft)
reduce the occurrence of major wildfire, recreate habitat for a variety of species and improve the water quality coming off the forest.
These activities include thinning the forest to encourage larger tree growth, remove ground vegetation to provide a more naturally open forest floor, reconstructing stream crossing to provide for better aquatic organism passage, and upgrading drainage patterns of roads and motorized trails to improve water quality. All of these activities require inventorying, analysis, surveying, designing, implementation and monitoring. Roads provide the access to all of these activities.
Much of this restoration work is accomplished by manipulation of vegetation through vegetation removal and the sale of timber or fuelwood. Good roads and bridges provide the critical access to accomplish this work. However, if the road system deteriorates the extra expense of reconstructing to bring it back to a useful standard may make the restoration goals financially unattainable.
Recreation Recreation is a major use of the Angeles National Forest.
Destination Recreation Access
Destination recreation needs a road system providing access to recreation activities; as opposed to using the roads as the experience in dispersed recreation. These destination recreation opportunities are advertised, signed and managed for recreationists.
Most of these destinations are accessible from State and county roads. Some sites are accessed by National Forest System Roads maintained for passenger car access however, due to remoteness, a few sites are only accessible by ML2, high clearance roads.
Developed Recreation
Developed recreation sites include campgrounds, trailheads, vista points, picnic areas and day use areas. Most of these opportunities have developed services such as potable water, and restroom facilities. Many of these sites are located directly off State highways or county roads such as the Chilao, Big Pines and Crystal Lake Recreation Areas. These developed sites are typically fee sites or managed by a concessionaire. Day use areas usually have picnic tables, water and restroom facilities. Often scenic vistas and overlooks have day use facilities in addition to interpretive information.
Trail Access
Trail access is mostly from State and county roads some Forest Service roads also provide access to trailheads.
Water Recreation
31
(Draft)
The Angeles National Forest has few recreational water sports opportunities. Pyramid and Castaic Lake located in the northern part of the Forest adjacent to I-5 are the only lakes which offers motorized water sport and are operated by the State. Jackson Lake and Crystal Lake are small lakes located off of county roads that provide fishing opportunities.
Dispersed Recreational Uses of NF Roads
This road network provides general forest access for hunting, fishing, camping, picnicking, hiking, biking, woodcutting, forest product gathering, sightseeing, bird watching, kayaking, swimming, target shooting and other activities along forest roads. It also incorporates the recreational use of the roads with SUVs, motorcycles, OHV, ATV and UTV. All of these activities require access from roads.
Off Highway Vehicles
The growing popularity of Sport Utility Vehicles and the growth of the population create a growing demand for mountain driving on primitive roads. Street legal trail motorcycles, all- terrain vehicles (ATV) and Utility Terrain Vehicle side-by-sides (UTV) are also experiencing record sales and use on the Angeles NF. The Forest has two designated OHV areas, San Gabriel Canyon Off-Highway area accessible from Hwy 39 on the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument and Rowher Flats Off-Highway area accessible from 6N07 from Bouquet Canyon Road and 5N13 from Sierra Highway. In addition the Forest has 200 miles of maintenance level 2 roads designated for off-highway use.
State Scenic Highway
Touring, or driving for pleasure, is a popular activity on the Forest. The Angeles Crest Scenic Highway traverses the Forest from La Canada on the west and Wrightwood on the east. It crosses the high country of the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument through some of the most scenic and rustic portions of the Forest. It includes several recreational stops including Clear Creek, Three Points, Jarvi Vista, Inspiration Point, Islip Saddle and Big Pines. A Corridor Management Plan was completed as part of an effort to have the highway designated as a National Scenic Byway.
Recreation Residences
Several clusters of summer homes (recreation residences) exist on Forest regulated under a Special Use Permit program. Most of the cabin tracts are accessible by state highway or county roads but a few depend on Forest Service roads.
Communities and Private Property Access The forest road network is generally seamless with state, county and other roads. The general public is probably not aware of the jurisdictional status.
The Forest Service allows access across National Forest lands to private property as long as it is compatible with the surrounding or adjacent lands. Typically, private access can be 32
(Draft)
accommodated on multiple use forest roads; however, if the road is not necessary for general utilization of the National Forest the road is permitted as an exclusive use road. Forest roads provided benefit for the wellbeing of the community in terms of social economics and safety.
Table 9: Miles of Roads with other Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction Approximate Miles State 2 County 94 State Highways 11 Local Municipalities 24 Private 11 Other Forest Service* 2 *ANF maintains 2 miles of roads for the San Bernardino National Forest.
Mineral Access Forest Service roads provide access to locatable, leasable and saleable minerals. Locatable minerals are minerals which can have a claim made to a site for exclusive use and possible future ownership, or patent. Minerals in this category are gold, silver and gypsum. The Forest Service allows access to locatable mineral through an approved operating plan. The Forest does manage several claims for locatable minerals.
Leasable minerals include oil and gas for which the right to extract may be leased from the Federal government. The Angeles National Forest has no known oil or gas resources. Saleable materials are common materials such as sand, rock or cinders. There is currently no market for salable materials on the Forest at this time.
Hydroelectric Power Generation The Angeles National Forest has two lakes, Pyramid and Castaic that are part of the State Water Project which are under Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licenses. In addition, multiple powerline corridors passes through the Forest. The two main transmission lines under construction are the Southern California Edison (SCE) Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project and City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) Barren Ridge Transmission line. Most of the primary access to the transmission lines are on Forest Service owned roads; however, some roads and spur roads are operated and maintained by the power utility. These exclusive use roads are maintained solely for and by the permitted power company. Roads where the use is mixed have a shared maintenance responsibility between the Forest Service, and LADWP or SCE.
EFFECTS AND RISKS FROM ROADS In the 2005 Four Forest RAP prepared in conjunction with the Land Management Plan Revision, topics related to risks include ecosystem functions and processes; aquatic, riparian zones and water quality; terrestrial wildlife; economics; commodity production in terms of timber, minerals and range management, water production, and special forest products; special use permits; general public transportation; administrative uses, protection (e.g., fire or cultural resources); 33
(Draft)
road-related and unroaded recreation; social issues; and civil rights and environmental justice.
Effects on Wildfire Protection One of the major hazards on National Forest lands is the ignition or starts of wildfires. There is little to be done to reduce ignition of naturally occurring wildfire such as lightening. However, the majority of fires on the Angeles are human caused.
The map below shows fire start data from 1970-2015 which highlights that roads dramatically contribute to fire starts. However, roads are also essential for effective fire suppression activities.
Map 2: Angeles Fires Starts 1970-2015
Risks to Terrestrial and Avian Species 34
(Draft)
The Angeles NF manages the habitat for a variety of animals and birds. Each of these species has unique ecosystems they thrive in. However, the presence of a road or the occurrence of traffic on a road may disrupt them. There is potential for existing road to negatively impact wildlife in general, species at risk, and special habitats. Many species are put at risk when they are in the vicinity of a road, either by the existence of a roadbed or by the presence of vehicle traffic. The most commonly at risk species are evaluated as to their proximity to roads.
Habitat loss has broader effects than just the conversion of a small area of land to road surfaces. Roads fragment habitat by changing landscape structure and by directly and indirectly affecting species. Road-associated factors that have a direct negative effect on habitat are:
Snag/hazard reduction Fragmentation Habitat loss and loss to fire Collecting Harassing or disturbing wildlife Barrier to wildlife movement Species displacement Risks to Aquatic and Riparian Species The risks of roads to aquatic and riparian species are typically from direct contact or dust and sediment degrading their habitat. The road system directly affects riparian communities where it impinges on riparian areas. Roads can indirectly affect riparian communities by intercepting surface and subsurface flows and routing these flows so that riparian areas dry up and the riparian vegetation is replaced. Riparian communities play a vital role in providing shade. Removal or degradation of these communities can affect stream stability and water temperatures, which in turn, affects aquatic habitat.
The road system contributes to direct habitat loss when sediment is delivered directly to the stream channel through connected disturbed areas, at road-stream crossings, and where the road system is restricting channel migration and isolating floodplains.
Migration and movement of aquatic organisms are primarily restricted at road/stream crossings by culverts. Generally, the restriction is on upstream migration, although downstream migration can also be affected. This is a result of hanging (or shotgun) culverts, high flow velocities in culverts, and inadequate depths for fish migration. In some locations, migration barriers are desirable to protect native species. While culverts can affect the migration of amphibian species, the greatest concern is the effect on fish species.
Risks to Botanical Resources Construction and maintenance of forest roads contribute to the possible spread of non- native plant species that have detrimental effects on ecosystem function. Roadwork may also affect protected natural plant species.
Roadside habitats can be invaded by a suite of exotic (non-native) plant species, which may be
35
(Draft)
dispersed by “natural” agents such as wind and water as well as by vehicles and other agents related to human activity. Roads may be the first point of entry for exotic species into a new landscape, and the road can serve as a corridor along which the plants move farther into the landscape. Some exotic plants may then be able to move away from the roadside into adjacent patches of suitable habitat. Invasion by exotic plants may have significant biological and ecological effects if the species are able to disrupt the structure or function of an ecosystem. Protected native plants may be destroyed by the maintenance of roads.
Great efforts are made to protect these species by simple avoidance, or changing the method or timing of work in sensitive population areas. Botanical populations do not have well developed GIS data at this time. Currently, road activities are accommodated by avoidance and the most significant issue is invasive plants in the berms created on the out slopes of the roads. Equipment washing is done when moving from an area heavily infested with invasive plant species. Monitoring and eradication will continue. Forest Specialist work with road crew employee on methods for clean equipment as well as areas to avoid.
Heritage and Cultural Conflicts Roads often affect heritage and cultural resources during ground disturbing activities such as maintenance and repair. These valued resources have been covered by mineral soil for hundreds of years by natural processes, but careful archaeological reconnaissance is conducted to identify these hidden items to the greatest extent possible.
Often roads create access to sites which contain heritage or cultural resources. This increases the opportunity for discovery, research and interpretation; however, it also increases the threat of unauthorized destruction and scavenging. Road access near heritage sites may result in the loss of valuable public property and increased need for law enforcement.
In the similar way roads provide access to cultural sites valued by Native American groups. Typically, these sites go without any general recognition since unwelcome activities may bring destruction of the sites. Roads do provide access to the National Forest in general for the Native Americans.
Roads conflict with historic and prehistoric sites by directly damaging them from ground disturbing activities such as maintenance and repair or by providing easy access allowing scavengers to destroy or remove historical artifacts. The Forest archaeology staff maintains spatial records of known sites in three forms: polygons, lines and points. By buffering each of these GIS layers a composite area can be delineated which would represent historic and prehistoric properties potentially being put at risk with their proximity to roads.
Watershed Effects Roads have an extremely large effect on the condition of the watersheds. Road templates disrupt ground water movement. Ditches and grades divert water from one drainage to another. Unstable road surfaces often contribute directly to sediment being introduced into streams and aquatic habitat areas.
36
(Draft)
Most often roads are initially designed and constructed to alleviate conflicts with water resources. Fords are armored, or bridged over. Culverts are sufficiently sized to handle large storm flows. Road surfaces are rocked to reduce soil movement from incident rain. Outlets are rip-rapped. And the road is in sloped and water transported to a rolling dip and into an appropriate sized overside drain. Though roads may be properly designed and constructed; however, inadequate maintenance often negates good initial intent.
Chronic stream sedimentation occurs from erosion of unsurfaced roads and unstabilized cuts and fills. Road sediment enters streams in addition to normal rates of erosion in watersheds and is often caused by hydrologically connected segments (HCS) on roads. These segments are locations along roads that provide a direct pathway for water to reach streams (i.e., inside- ditched road segments, stream crossings and streamside roads.)
Roads expand the channel network, convert subsurface flow to surface flow, and reduce infiltration on the road surface. All of these factors affect the overall hydrology in a watershed, particularly the quantity and timing of flow. Increasing peak flows through the extended channel network increases the energy available for in-channel erosion, which affects stream stability and increases sedimentation.
Reduced infiltration contributes to additional surface flow since water does not infiltrate for storage in the soil profile, but rather runs off as overland or surface flow. Storage and movement of water through the soil profile as subsurface flow regulates and sustains base flows. When roads disrupt these processes, more water becomes available during peak flows, and less water is available to sustain base flows, thus altering the natural riparian regime.
Surface erosion is highly dependent on soils, road surfacing, road grade, cross slope, age of the road, traffic volumes, and the effectiveness and spacing of drainage structures. The greatest surface erosion problems occur in highly erosive terrain, particularly landscapes underlain by granitic or highly fractured rocks.
Road maintenance is important to protect the roads’ cross slope and drainage features. Without sufficient maintenance, road surfaces may develop ruts that drain runoff down the road instead of off to the side. Lack of maintenance also leads to plugging of culverts with sediment or vegetative debris, leading to washouts. When culverts plug and are over-topped, the water may run across the road or may run down the road for some distance leaving the road into another drainage. Where water is diverted into other drainages, it adds to the flow volume in that drainage and can cause long term gully erosion.
Road-stream crossings have the potential to directly and indirectly affect local stream channels and water quality. Poorly designed crossings directly affect hydrologic function when they constrict the channel, when they are misaligned relative to the natural stream channel, or when improperly sized culverts are installed.
Roads can affect wetlands directly by encroachment, and indirectly by altering hydrologic surface and subsurface flow paths. Encroachment results in a loss of wetland area directly
37
(Draft)
proportional to the area disturbed by the road. Alteration of the hydrologic flow paths can affect wetland function with the effects extending beyond the area directly affected by the road.
While individual landslides are a localized concern to roads on the Angeles National Forest, the potential for a landslide is a widespread phenomenon. A number of roads cross existing landslides and periodically suffer distress and movement episodes. Landslides more often occur as cut-slope failures. Debris flows, which are a common landslide type on the Angeles National Forest, affect roads by either undermining fill slopes or by moving down drainages and blocking drainage structures where the road crosses the drainage.
Effects on Air Quality The majority of the ANF is within the South Coast Air Basin with several air quality concerns. Many issues contribute to the air pollution in the basin such as prevailing wind patterns, dense population, and industrial sources. Some areas in the air basin do not meet standards set forth by the Clean Air Act, and are the designated as in nonattainment for pollutants including ozone, PM2.5, and PM10. Traffic related emissions and fugitive road dust are two primary factors that affect air quality. The ANF adheres to all applicable Federal, State, and Local air quality laws.
Social-Economics Some of the respondents were concerned they may be excluded from their public lands for protection of resources. These respondents expressed a general concern that certain special interest groups will close off the Monument and forest to the people who have lived in and around it for generations. This same concern has been raised during site-specific projects.
There is also a concern from several respondents about reduced vehicle access for people who have disabilities that limit their ability to walk to sites. Some of the elderly respondents also mentioned concerns about their road access needs due to physical limitations as they’ve aged. They want to keep roads accessible by automobile because they now need to drive to areas they could have hiked to in the past.
38
(Draft)
STEP 5: DESCRIBING OPPORTUNITIES AND SETTING PRIORITIES This step identifies opportunities and priorities for the road system related to the current issues and concerns. Current laws and regulations are expected to be followed continuously. However, these recommendations may result in rethinking current Forest protocols and procedures in addition to stimulating innovation related to new technologies, partnerships and alternative funding sources.
These recommendations are not ordered or prioritized. Some changes could be made administratively to improve road management; while other decisions would require an integrated planning process under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and documenting official decision for implementation.
PROJECTED ACCESS NEEDS Some existing roads have been rated low in importance for access both by the public and for administrative purposes. Some of these same roads have moderate to high resource risk factors, which make them likely candidates to consider for decommissioning (Likely Not Needed). This may result in some of the roads becoming available to consider for decommissioning in the next decades.
Opportunities to Change Existing Road System A variety of opportunities exist to change the road system to reduce problems and risks. A matrix is developed to capture the importance of a road in term of access need or benefit and resource risk.
The 2005 RAP categorized roads into four categories:
1. High Resources Risk is High Priority for Mitigation (HPM) equivalent to the HH rating used in the Roads in IRA’s analysis.
2. Low Priority for Mitigation (LPM) a list of roads with moderate importance and moderate to high resource risk. These roads need help to remedy resource issues and are needed on the system, but obtaining adequate funding for a project is a challenge.
3. The High Risk Low Importance (HRLI) roads would be “Likely Not Needed” for future use.
4. All the other roads on the Forest that are Low to Moderate Resource Risk and Low to Moderate Importance.
39
(Draft)
Table 10: Angeles RAP Opportunity Categories Matrix (Listed by Resource Risk/Access Benefit)
Importance
Low High
High High/Low: HRLI High/High: HPM
Consider for closure or Consider for road maintenance decommissioning (high priority). priority, storm proofing, reconstruction, or reroute (high priority).
Resource Risk Resource Low Low -Moderate/Low:-Moderate All Moderate/High: LPM other ANF Roads Consider for road maintenance Consider for road maintenance priority, storm proofing, or priority, storm proofing, or reconstruction (medium reconstruction (medium priority). priority).
Screening of individual ratings could be done to further refine opportunities and priorities. As shown in Table below, one factor is the mileage in each category, and the associated costs depending on maintenance levels.
Table 11: Opportunity Category Mileage per Current Rating (Listed by Risk/Benefit)
Importance
Low High
High High/Low: HRLI High/High: HPM
151 miles 139 miles
(70 roads) (43 roads)
Low Low -Moderate/Low:- Moderate/High: LPM Moderate All other ANF
Resource Risk Resource Roads
438 miles 7 miles
(264 roads) (26 roads)
40
(Draft)
All ANF current ML1 - ML5 National Forest System Roads (NFSR) (735 miles, 384 roads) were reviewed during the collection and update of the GIS and Infra Travel Routes data. The Angeles NF has not changed Road Management Objective (RMO) maintenance levels for any road since at least 2005. But after 2005, it did implement pre-2005 decisions to change road maintenance levels, by physically and actively obliterating roads and restoring natural conditions, or by passively allowing roads to deteriorate and reverse to their natural conditions.
Roads to consider changes include:
Roads rarely used by the public or Forest Service (i.e., low need equivalent), and are high risk equivalent could be considered for decommissioning.
Roads rarely used by the public or Forest Service (i.e., low need equivalent), and are low resource risk equivalent could be considered for decommissioning or reduced maintenance level.
Roads primarily provide access to another jurisdiction (such as county administered lands or a property owners association) with limited benefit to the Forest Service could be considered for transfer to the benefiting jurisdiction.
Roads provide access to a private property inholding or special use permit holder (such as an organization camp) where general public access is not needed or desirable could be considered for transfer of maintenance responsibility to the permit holder.
Roads accessing vegetation that has reached desired condition may be evaluated for decommissioning or reduced maintenance level, unless there is a fire/fuels access need.
Roads frequently used by the public or Forest Service (i.e., moderate to high need equivalent) with moderate to high resource risk equivalent could be evaluated to for storm-proofing, to relocate portions of the roads away from resource risks, or create alternate access routes with fewer resource risks.
Two or more roads accessing the same area, where traffic could be directed onto the more stable road and decommission the less stable road(s).
Create a loop road to eliminate several spurs accessing the same area.
Resource Specific Recommendations Improve and enhance resource GIS coverage for geospatial analysis on the Forest. Use the linear heritage event GIS information when doing smaller area Travel Analysis. Consider doing smaller area Travel Analysis on burn areas or priority watersheds. Make watershed/road condition surveys available to the Engineering Roads Group as
41
(Draft)
soon as possible in order to affect corrections. When doing small area Travel Analysis ground truth conflicts with roads. Continue to use seasonal road closures to avoid conflicts with wildlife. Inventory road/water course intersections for possible aquatic passage obstructions. Prioritize and fund aquatic organism passage fixes.
Road System Management Recommendations Update and correct INFRA/SDE roads data to reconcile identified road discrepancies. Pursue doing second level TAP at smaller areas when opportunities arise. Re-initiate coordination with Los Angeles County to pursue proposed exchange of Dry Gulch road Initiate discussion with Los Angeles County on extending their jurisdiction of the Old Ridge Route 8N04 to the Forest Boundary. Continue the Transportation Working Group concept to advance coordination with regional transportation agencies (FHWA, State, County, Metro, and Local) to pursue alternative transportation opportunities to connect communities with the Forest.
42
(Draft)
STEP 6: REPORTING
LIKELY NEEDED/LIKELY NOT NEEDED SUMMARY The forest program lead core team members of the Angeles National Forest have met with the district staff to conduct several meetings to come up with the following recommendation of whether each road is “Likely Needed or Likely Not Needed”. Team members of each district had a substantial amount of knowledge and information regarding roads. The recommendation was done by using GIS (Geographic Information System) and the database for our National Forest System Roads (NFSR). The Development of More Site-Specific Evaluation Criteria table listed below was also used for each road to evaluate and come up with a recommendation.
The table below represents the summary of recommendations for all the roads on the Angeles National Forest being “Likely Needed or Likely Not Needed”, highlighted in green and red fonts respectively along with their objective and operational maintenance levels.
The objective and operational maintenance levels are numbered from 1 to 5, according to the Forest Service Handbook (FSH 7709.59, sec 62.32):
Table 12: List of Roads Likely Needed and Likely Not Needed
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 1N00A S.G.R.R.D. OFFICE PARKING 0.07 5 5
x 1N00B S.G.R.R.D. OFFICE PARKING 0.01 5 5
x 1N00C S.G.R.R.D. OFFICE PARKING 0.02 5 5
x 1N01 ARROYO SECO DIST. 1 5 5 RANGER STA. x 1N02 SIERRA MADRE RESIDENCE 0.15 1 1
x 1N03A ARCADIA SO PARKING 0.34 5 5
x 1N03B ARCADIA SO PARKING 0.12 5 5
x 1N03C ARCADIA SO PARKING 0.13 5 5
x 1N03D ARCADIA SO PARKING 0.04 5 5
x 1N03E ARCADIA SO PARKING 0.13 5 5
x 1N03F ARCADIA SO PARKING 0.03 5 5
x 1N03G ARCADIA SO PARKING 0.02 5 5
x 1N03H ARCADIA SO PARKING 0.06 5 5
x 1N03I ARCADIA SO PARKING 0.04 5 5
x 1N03J ARCADIA SO PARKING 0.05 5 5
x 1N03K ARCADIA SO PARKING 0.02 5 5
x 1N03L ARCADIA SO PARKING 0.13 5 5
x 1N04 PALMER-EVEY CYN 2.5 2 2
x 1N04A POTATO MTN SPUR 0.8 2 2
x 1N05 FERN CYN 0.8 1 1 43
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 1N06 SAN GABRIAL CYN. ENTR. 0.1 5 5 STA. x 1N07 WOLFSKILL 1.7 2 2
x 1N08.1 BROWNS FLAT 0.3 2 1
x 1N08.2 BROWNS FLAT 1.15 1 1
x 1N09 SAN DIMAS STATION 0.1 5 5
x 1N10.1 TANBARK STA/SPOT B RD 1.1 4 4
x 1N10.2 TANBARK STA/SPOT B RD 3.47 2 2
x 1N10A LYCIMETER RD 0.35 4 4
x 1N11.1 WEST FORK SAN DIMAS 2 2 2
x 1N11.2 WEST FORK SAN DIMAS 1.4 2 2
x 1N14.1 BIG DALTON 4.6 2 2
x 1N14.2 BIG DALTON 2.35 5 5
x 1N14A BELL CYN SPUR 0.8 2 2
x 1N15.1 SYCAMORE FLAT 1.7 3 2 MTORWAY x 1N15.2 SYCAMORE FLAT 0.7 3 2 MTORWAY x 1N15.3 SYCAMORE FLAT 1.5 3 2 MTORWAY x 1N15A SYCAMORE PLANTATION 0.2 1 1
x 1N17 JOHNSTONE PEAK 2.88 2 2
x 1N17A LODI SPUR 1.3 2 2
x 1N17B JOHNSTONE PEAK SPUR 0.5 2 2
x 1N23 LOWER SAN ANTONIO STA 0.15 5 5
x 1N25 GARCIA CYN RD 1.5 1 1
x 1N26 AZUSA-GLENDORA RIDGE 5.4 2 2 MOTORWAY x 1N27 FRANKISH PEAK 1.8 2 2
x 1N29 STONE CABIN ROAD 3 2 2
x 1N36 VAN TASSEL 5.6 2 2
x 1N36A VAN TASSEL RIDGE SPUR 1.3 2 2
x 2N01A VALLEY OF THE MOON 0.2 1 1
x 2N01B VALLEYOFTHEMOON SPUR 0.5 2 2
x 2N02 COLDBROOK CG 0.54 5 4
x 2N03 TECOLATE RD 0.25 1 1
x 2N04.1 BARRETT STODDARD 0.4 2 2
x 2N04.2 BARRETT STODDARD 4.6 2 2
x 2N05 GLENDORA RIDGE CO RD 12 5 5
x 2N07.1 SUNSET PEAK 2 2 2
x 2N07.2 SUNSET PEAK 9.56 2 2
x 2N07.3 SUNSET PEAK 0.4 2 2 44
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 2N07A SUNSET PEAK 3.72 2 1
x 2N08 GLENDORA MTN CO RD 14.58 5 5
x 2N09 RINCON O.H.V. AREA 0.4 5 5 PARKING x 2N09.1 CATTLE CANYON 3.1 1 2
x 2N09.2 CATTLE CANYON 3 1 2
x 2N10 EAST FORK PARKING AREA 0.37 5 5
x 2N11 SHOEMAKER CYN 3.57 2 2
x 2N12 BICHOTA 0.7 2 2
x 2N13 COTTONTAIL 0.75 1 2
x 2N14 NORTH FORK CABINS 0.2 2 2
x 2N15 PIGEON RIDGE 4.8 2 2
x 2N16.1 UPPER MONROE 8 2 2
x 2N16.2 LOWER MONROE 7.01 2 2
x 2N17 BURRO CYN 1.1 4 3
x 2N18 WEST FORK PARKING LOT 0.16 5 5
x 2N19 BEAR CYN 0.4 2 2
x 2N20 AREA 1 WORK CENTER 0.41 4 4
x 2N21 EAST FORK RD 0.7 5 5
x 2N22 RINCON STATION 0.13 4 3
x 2N23 SHORTCUT EDISON RD. 9.2 2 2
x 2N24.1 RINCON/RED BOX 5.52 3 2
x 2N24.2 RINCON/RED BOX 9.84 2 2
x 2N24.3 RINCON/RED BOX 11.04 2 2
x 2N24A PINE MTN 0.76 2 2
x 2N24B VALLY FORGE 0.15 2 2 CAMPGROUND x 2N24C WEST FORK CAMPGROUND 0.1 2 2
x 2N25.1 WEST FORK RD. 7.4 4 3
x 2N25.2 WEST FORK/COGSWELL RD 5.8 2 2
x 2N26 EAST FORK STATION 0.19 5 4
x 2N27 COYOTE FLATS CG 0.2 2 2
x 2N28 SILVERFISH 3.3 1 1
x 2N29 ELDORADOVILLE CG 0.2 2 2
x 2N30.1 SAWPIT 2.9 2 2
x 2N30.2 SAWPIT RD 3.3 3 3
x 2N30.3 SAWPIT ROAD 1 5 5
x 2N31 UPPER CLAMSHELL RD 6.25 2 2
x 2N31A SPRING CAMP CG 0.2 3 3
45
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 2N32A DALTON STATION 0.12 5 5
x 2N32B DALTON STATION 0.04 5 5
x 2N32C DALTON STATION 0.09 5 5
x 2N32D DALTON STATION 0.06 5 5
x 2N33 MANKER FLAT CG 0.21 5 4
x 2N34 GLACIER PG SERVICE RD 0.1 2 2
x 2N35 MT BALDY VILLAGE 0.2 4 4
x 2N36 MT BALDY STATION 0.2 4 2
x 2N37 SAN GABRIEL ADMIN SITE 0.3 2 2
x 2N38 HONEYBEE RD 0.1 2 2
x 2N39 OAKS PICNIC GROUND 0.11 5 5
x 2N40 BIG SANTA ANITA 0.9 3 4
x 2N41 MT. BALDY REST AREA 0.09 5 5 PARKING x 2N41.1 CHANTRY/SANTA ANITA 1.6 5 5
x 2N41.2 CHANTRY/SANTA ANITA 3 2 2
x 2N41.3 CHANTRY/SANTA ANITA 0.9 4 2
x 2N41A CHANTRY PARKING/ADMIN 0.4 5 5
x 2N41B CHANTRY PARKING/ADMIN 0.4 5 5
x 2N43 MT WILSON REC AREA 0.9 4 4
x 2N43A MT. WILSON H2O WELL 0.45 2 2 ROAD x 2N45.1 MT. WILSON TOLL RD. 2.1 2 2
x 2N45.2 MT WILSON TOLL RD 3.4 2 2
x 2N45.3 MT. WILSON/HENNINGER 2.6 2 2 FLATS RD x 2N45A0 HENNIGER FLAT SPUR 0.4 2 2
x 2N45B0 HENNIGER FLAT HELIPOR 1.1 2 2
x 2N46.1 BARLEY FLATS RD 2.6 5 4
x 2N46.2 BARLEY FUEL BANK 1 2 1
x 2N50.1 MT LOWE 6.13 2 2
x 2N50.2 MT LOWE RD 2.45 4 2
x 2N50A0 INSPIRATION PT SPUR 1.16 2 2
x 2N50B0 SIERRA CAMP PG 0.2 4 4
x 2N51 ICEHOUSE DAY USE 0.57 5 5 PARKING AREA x 2N52 DISAPPOINTMENT RIDGE 3.2 4 3
x 2N53 REDBOX STATION 0.39 5 4
x 2N55 LADY BUG PG 0.1 1 1
x 2N57 SWITZER PG 0.51 5 4
x 2N57A0 UPPER SWITZER PG 0.1 4 4
46
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 2N57B0 LOWER SWITZER PG 0.2 4 4
x 2N64 JOSEPHINE PEAK 4.03 2 2
x 2N64A0 JOSEPHONE SADDLE SPUR 0.3 2 2
x 2N65 MILLARD PARKING AREA 0.14 5 5
x 2N65.1 MILLARD CYN RD 2.12 2 2
x 2N65.2 CHANNEY TRUCK TRAIL 1.34 5 4
x 2N66 BROWN MTN 5.46 2 2
x 2N66A0 ARROYO RESIDENCE SPUR 0.1 2 4
x 2N68.1 MILLARD RIDGE RD 0.5 2 2
x 2N68.2 MILLARD RIDGE RD 1.1 4 4
x 2N69 GOULD MESA 0.62 4 4
x 2N70.1 ARROYO SECO ROAD 0.75 2 2
x 2N70.2 ARROYO SECO RD 1 3 4
x 2N71 PINES PG 0.1 5 2
x 2N72 CLEAR CREEK ARRIVAL 0.14 5 5 STATION x 2N73 CLEAR CREEK STATION 0.4 5 5
x 2N74 CLEAR CREEK SCHOOLCMP 1.42 3 4
x 2N75 CCC RIDGE ROAD 0.8 2 2
x 2N76.1 MT LUKENS RD 7.17 3 2
x 2N76.2 MT LUKENS RD 2.96 2 2
x 2N76.3 MT LUKENS RD 2.65 2 2
x 2N76A0 ANGELES CREST STATION 0.38 5 4
x 2N76B0 HAINES CYN WATER TANK 0.7 2 2 RD x 2N79.1 GRIZZLY FLAT 2.84 2 2
x 2N79.2 GRIZZLY FLAT 1.1 2 2
x 2N80 GRIZZLY FLAT CUT-OFF 1.8 2 2
x 2N80A0 PLANTATION RD 0.38 2 2
x 2N81.1 EARL CYN MOTORWAY 1.53 2 2
x 2N81.2 EARL CYN MOTORWAY 2.02 2 2
x 2N82 VOGEL FLAT P.G. 0.38 5 4
x 2N83 BIG TUJUNGA STATION 0.34 5 5
x 2N84 LA PALOMA RD 0.17 4 4
x 2N86 GRAVEYARD RD 3.64 2 1
x 2N87 WILDWOOD 0.84 5 5
x 2N88 STONEYVALE PG & DAYUSE 0.3 5 5
x 2N94 NORTH DODY RD 2.06 2 2
x 2N95 DODY RD 2.5 2 2
47
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 2N96 DUNSMORE CYN RD 0.2 4 4
x 3N01 MT BALDY NOTCH / FALLS 3.6 2 2 RD x 3N02 COOPER CYN RD 1.4 1 1
x 3N03 WATERMAN MTN RD 1.5 2 2
x 3N04 LITTLE JIMMY RD 1.73 2 2
x 3N05A0 VINCENT GAP PARKING 0.1 5 5
x 3N06.1 E. BLUE RIDGE/WRIGHT MT 2.36 4 3
x 3N06.2 E. BLUE RIDGE/WRIGHT MT 2.69 3 3
x 3N06.3 E. BLUE RIDGE/WRIGHT MT 2.76 2 2
x 3N06A0 BLUE RIDGE CG 0.16 4 3
x 3N06B0 GUFFY CG 0.43 3 3
x 3N06C0 GUFFY TANK RD 0.59 1 1
x 3N06D0 INSPIRATION PT VISTA 0.26 5 5
x 3N07.1 HAWKINS LOOKOUT 1.5 4 4
x 3N07.2 HAWKINS LOOKOUT 4.3 2 2
x 3N07A1 DEER FLATS CG 0.6 5 5
x 3N08 PINE MTN RD 2.7 2 2
x 3N09.1 CRYSTAL LAKE SYSTEM 1.39 5 4
x 3N09.1A CRYSTAL LAKE CG LOOP A 0.19 5 4
x 3N09.1B CRYSTAL LAKE CG LOOP B 0.33 5 4
x 3N09.1C CRYSTAL LAKE CG LOOP C 0.12 5 4
x 3N09.1D CRYSTAL LAKE CG LOOP D 0.23 5 4
x 3N09.1E CRYSTAL LAKE CG LOOP E 0.55 5 4
x 3N09.1E1 CRYSTAL LAKE CG SUB 0.1 5 4 LOOP E x 3N09.1E2 CRYSTAL LAKE CG SUB 0.14 5 4 LOOP E x 3N09.1F CRYSTAL LAKE CG LOOP F 0.5 5 4
x 3N09.1G CRYSTAL LAKE CG LOOP G 0.39 5 4
x 3N09.1G1 CRYSTAL LAKE CG SUB 0.15 5 4 LOOP G x 3N09.1H CRYSTAL LAKE CG LOOP H 0.56 5 4
x 3N09.1H1 CRYSTAL LAKE CG SUB 0.12 5 4 LOOP H x 3N09.1I CRYSTAL LAKE CG LOOP I 0.43 5 4
x 3N09.2 CRYSTAL LAKE SYSTEM 2.36 1 4
x 3N09A1 CRYSTAL LAKE ADMIN 0.1 5 4 UPPER x 3N09A2 CRYSTAL LAKE ADMIN 0.12 5 4 LOWER x 3N09B0 CRYSTAL LAKE SERVICE 0.5 2 2 ROAD x 3N10 BIG PINE RES 0.1 2 2
48
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 3N11 BUCKHORN CG 0.88 4 4
x 3N11A BUCKHORN CG 0.11 4 4
x 3N11B BUCKHORN CG 0.48 4 4
x 3N11C BUCKHORN CG 0.19 4 4
x 3N11D BUCKHORN CG 0.08 4 4
x 3N11E BUCKHORN CG 0.09 4 4
x 3N12 HORSE CYN RD 3.97 1 1
x 3N14.1 MT HILLYER RD 2.46 2 2
x 3N14.2 MT HILLYER RD 1.02 4 4
x 3N14A1 CHILAO HELIPORT 0.18 4 4
x 3N14A2 CHILAO HELIPORT 0.09 4 4
x 3N14B0 CHILAO RESIDENCE 0.35 4 4
x 3N14C1 CHILAO MEADOWS 0.23 4 4
x 3N14C2 CHILAO MEADOWS 0.19 4 4
x 3N15 MT MOONEY TRUCK TRAIL 2.2 2 2
x 3N15A0 DOE FLATS RD 0.75 2 2
x 3N16 CHARLTON PG LOOP ROAD 2.3 5 3
x 3N16.1 CHARLTON PG ENTRANCE 1.3 5 3
x 3N16A CHARLTON RESERVOIR RD 0.9 4 3
x 3N16B VETTER LOOKOUT 0.5 2 2
x 3N17.1 SANTA CLARA DIVIDE 3.88 4 4
x 3N17.2 SANTA CLARA DIVIDE 4.49 2 2
x 3N17.3 SANTA CLARA DIVIDE 3.04 3 2
x 3N17.4 SANTA CLARA DIVIDE 6.09 2 4
x 3N17.5 SANTA CLARA DIVIDE 3.1 2 4
x 3N17.6 SANTA CLARA DIVIDE RD 8.25 2 2
x 3N17.7 SANTA CLARA DIVIDE 13.72 2 2
x 3N17.8 SANTA CLARA DIVIDE 3.63 4 4
x 3N17.9 SANTA CLARA DIVIDE 6.99 2 2
x 3N17A CUMORAH CREST CAMP RD 0.4 2 2
x 3N17B CAMP SINGING PINES RD 1 2 2
x 3N17C WATER TANK SPUR 0.2 2 2
x 3N17D CHRISTIAN CAMP 0.4 2 2
x 3N17E BANDITO CG SPUR 0.74 4 4
x 3N17F HIDDEN VALLEY CAMP 0.3 2 2
x 3N17G HORSE FLATS 1.51 4 4
x 3N17H UPPER PACIFICO RD SYS 1.5 2 2
x 3N17J MT GLEASON SIDE RD #2 0.3 1 1
49
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 3N17K MT GLEASON SIDE RD #1 0.5 2 2
x 3N17L MT GLEASON TOWER RD 0.5 2 2
x 3N17M MESSENGER CG ROAD 0.2 5 3
x 3N17N MESSENGER ELECTRONIC 0.4 2 1 SITE x 3N17P NORTH FORK STATION 0.15 5 5
x 3N17Q BEAR DIVIDE VISTA 0.06 4 4
x 3N17R1 BEAR DIVIDE STATION 0.37 5 5
x 3N17R2 BEAR DIVIDE STATION 0.19 5 5
x 3N18 LOOMIS RANCH RD 2.4 2 2
x 3N19.1 COLBY RANCH RD. 1.04 5 5
x 3N19.2 UPPER BIG TUJUNGA 7.86 5 5
x 3N19A0 SHORTCUT STATION 0.6 4 5
x 3N19B0 UPPER WILDCAT GULCH 0.7 2 1
x 3N19C0 LOWER WILDCAT GULCH 0.5 2 1
x 3N20 POWERLINE ROAD 2.7 2 2
x 3N21 CHILAO CG SYSTEM 2.01 4 4
x 3N21A0 CHILAO VIS SPUR 0.4 5 5
x 3N21B0 LITTLE PINES LOOP 0.92 4 4
x 3N21B1 LITTLE PINES H20 0.18 4 4
x 3N21C0 MANZANITA LOOP 1.1 4 4
x 3N21D0 CHILAO PICNIC AREA 0.27 4 4
x 3N21E COULTER GROUP 0.17 5 4 CAMPGROUND x 3N22 FALCON RD 0.5 2 2
x 3N23 MONTE CRISTO MINE RD 1.7 2 1
x 3N23A0 MONTE CRISTO CG 0.26 5 5
x 3N24.1 COLBY RANCH ROAD 1.5 3 3
x 3N24.2 COLBY RANCH RD 1.2 3 3
x 3N25 HIDDEN SPRINGS PG 0.1 5 5
x 3N26.1 WEST BLUE RIDGE RD 1.39 5 4
x 3N26.2 W. BLUE RIDGE RD 2.59 2 2
x 3N26A0 N. SPUR OF W. BLUE RIDGE 2 1 1
x 3N26B0 JACKSON FLAT CG 0.55 5 5
x 3N26C0 GRASSY HOLLOW CG 0.3 4 3
x 3N27 EDISON/FALL CREEK RD 13.16 2 2
x 3N27A0 FALL CREEK CG 0.2 2 1
x 3N28 ICE RINK RD 0.1 2 2
x 3N29.1 GOLD CREEK RD 8.8 2 2
50
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 3N29.2 GOLD CREEK RD 0.49 2 2
x 3N30.1 YERBA BUENA/GOLD CYN 5.94 2 2 SADDLE RD x 3N30.2 AKENS SPUR 0.72 2 2
x 3N30A0 YERBA BUENA 2 1 2 2
x 3N31 BUCK CYN RD 5.1 2 1
x 3N32.1 MENDENHALL RIDGE RD. 15.73 2 2
x 3N32.2 KAGEL TRUCK TRAIL 4.1 2 2
x 3N32A0 DEER SPRINGS SPUR 0.2 2 2
x 3N32B0 LIGHTNING POINT CG RD 0.46 5 4
x 3N32B1 LIGHTNING POINT CG LOOP 0.13 5 4
x 3N32B2 LIGHTNING POINT CG 0.18 5 4 CORRAL LOOP x 3N32C0 CONDOR PEAK WATER 0.5 1 1 TANK SPUR x 3N32D0 HONEYBEE SPUR 0.7 2 1
x 3N33 KAGEL RIDGE 1.5 2 2
x 3N33-A KAGEL RIDGE 1 2 2
x 3N34 TRAIL CANYON RD 0.4 2 2
x 3N35 WATTS RANCH RD 1.1 2 2
x 3N36 BPL NO 1 (OLIVER RD) 3.06 2 2
x 3N37.1 BPL NO2 (BURMA RD) 2.74 2 2
x 3N37.2 BPL NO 2 (BURMA RD) 2.42 2 2
x 3N38.1 DOANE EBEY RD 0.75 2 2
x 3N38.2 DOANE EBEY RD 1.06 2 2
x 3N39 PRAIRIE FK RD 2.89 3 2
x 3N39 PRAIRIE FK RD 2.4 3 1
x 3N39A0 LUPIN CG SPUR 0.1 2 2
x 3N39B0 CABIN FLAT CG 0.25 2 1
x 3N40 GOLDEN CUP 0.53 1 1
x 3N41 PARADISE RANCH RD 2.17 1 5
x 3N42 MAREK CYN RD 1.5 3 3
x 3N43 DOANE CYN RD 1.3 2 2
x 3N44 LOS PINETOS CONTRACT PT 0.3 2 2
x 3N45.1 KAGEL RIDGE RD 3.88 2 2
x 3N45.2 LITTLE "T" ADMIN RD 0.72 5 5
x 3N45A0 LITTLE "T" RESIDENCE 0.19 5 3
x 3N45B0 LITTLE "T" BARRACKS-- 0.4 5 5 TRAIN CTR x 3N46 LAUNCHER RD 0.25 2 2
x 3N47 SCHOENING SPRINGS 0.01 5 3
51
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 3N48 UPPER MAREK MOTORWAY 2.1 2 2
x 3N49 LIVE OAK CG 0.23 5 1
x 3N49A LIVE OAK PG 0.1 5 1
x 3N50 SIMI JARVI VISTA 0.19 5 4
x 3N51 BIG TUJUNGA VISTA 0.1 5 4
x 3N52 BEAR CYN OVERLOOK 0.27 4 4
x 3N53 SMITH RIDGE 1 1 1
x 3N54 MAY CYN RD 4.9 4 3
x 3N55 MONTE CRISTO STATION 0.29 5 5
x 3N56 WILSON CYN RD 4.31 2 2
x 3N57 BIG TUJUNGA DAM 0.8 4 4
x 3N58 MIDDLE FORK 1.6 1 1
x 3N59 ELSMERE GRAPEVINE RD 5.2 2 2
x 3N60 DELTA FLAT OVERLOOK 0.1 5 3
x 3N61 DELTA FLAT DAY USE 0.5 5 2
x 3N62 EAGLES ROOST PARKING 0.18 5 4 AREA x 3N63 ISLIP SADDLE PARKING 0.31 5 5 AREA x 3N64 UPPER SOMBRERO 1.46 2 2
x 3N64A0 SOMBRERO SPUR 0.35 2 2
x 3N65 VISTA PICNIC GROUND 0.1 4 3
x 3N70 BIG PINES RES 0.45 4 3
x 3N72 LITTLE GLEASON LOOP 1.21 2 2
x 3N73 LOWER LITTLE GLEASON 1.33 2 2
x 3N76 LOS PINETOS SPRINGS RD 0.54 2 2
x 3N86 CIENEGA WELL RD 1 2 2
x 3N90 ROUND TOP ROAD 2.73 2 3
x 3N91 PINE HOLLOW PICNIC AREA 0.1 1 3
x 4N03 TABLE MTN RD 1.4 5 5
x 4N03A0 TABLE MTN CG TWIS LOOP 0.21 5 4
x 4N03A1 TABLE MTN CG BROK LOOP 0.2 5 4
x 4N03A2 TABLE MTN CG LOOP 0.14 5 4
x 4N03A3 TABLE MTN MOHAVE CG 0.4 5 4 LOOP x 4N03A4 TABLE MTN OSAGE CG 0.13 5 4 LOOP x 4N03A5 TABLE MTN PIMA CG LOOP 0.23 5 4
x 4N03A6 TABLE MTN CHEROKEE CG 0.22 5 4 LOOP x 4N03A7 TABLE MTN APACHE CG 0.23 5 4 LOOP
52
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 4N03A8 TABLE MTN ZUNI CG LOOP 0.14 5 4
x 4N03B0 TABLE MTN AMPTHR PKNG 0.06 5 3
x 4N04 NORTH TABLE MTN 2.8 2 2
x 4N05 MESCAL PARKING 0.2 5 5
x 4N06 MESCAL CYN RD 3.09 2 2
x 4N07 BIG JOHN FLAT RD 4.05 2 2
x 4N08 MTN OAK CG 0.56 5 4
x 4N09 BOOSTER PUMP RD 0.2 2 2
x 4N10 LAKE CG 0.29 5 5
x 4N11.1 CO SEC BIG ROCK CREEK 5.6 5 4
x 4N11.2 BIG ROCK CREEK RD 2.1 3 3
x 4N11A0 SOUTH FORK CG 1.32 3 3
x 4N11B0 BIG ROCK CG 0.27 3 2
x 4N11C0 SYCAMORE CG 0.22 4 3
x 4N11D0 SOUTH FORK CG/RESERVE 0.11 3 3
x 4N12 FENNER SADDLE RD 4.5 3 3
x 4N13 JACKSON LAKE RESIDNCE 0.1 3 3
x 4N15 ALIMONY TRUCK TRAIL 3.13 3 2
x 4N16 BALL FLAT RD 1.07 2 2
x 4N18.1 LYNX GULCH RD 6.66 2 2
x 4N18.2 LYNX GULCH RD 3.3 2 2
x 4N18A0 FALCON MINE RD 0.5 2 1
x 4N19 MILL CREEK STATION 0.21 5 5
x 4N19A MILL CREEK PCT PARKING 0.25 5 5 AREA x 4N19B MILL CREEK SUMMIT 0.13 5 3 PG/ARR x 4N20.1 KENTUCKY SPRINGS CYN 2.99 3 2
x 4N20.2 SANTIAGO CYN, NORTH 3.2 1 1
x 4N20A0 DESERT MARKSMEN 0.5 3 3
x 4N20B0 SANTIAGO CYN, SOUTH 2.19 2 2
x 4N20C0 0.5 3 1
x 4N21 TABLE MTN RD EAST 2.09 4 4
x 4N21A0 EAST TABLE MTN RD 0.9 2 2
x 4N21B0 EAST TABLE MTN SPUR 1.4 2 2
x 4N22 TABLE MTN OBSERVATORY 0.8 5 5
x 4N23 NATIONAL GUARD RD 1.69 2 1
x 4N24.1 EDISON RD 6.94 2 2
x 4N24.2 EDISON RD 3.64 2 2
53
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 4N25 POWERLINE RD 3.9 2 2
x 4N26 MILL CYN 0.9 2 2
x 4N27 ALISO PG 0.36 5 4
x 4N32 BONNIVILLE POWER & 10.15 2 2 LIGHT x 4N33 MOODY CYN 6.53 2 2
x 4N35.1 PACOMIA 2 2 2 CYN/N.FORK/S.FORK x 4N35.2 PACOMIA CYN/N FORK/S 3.5 1 1 FORK x 4N37 INDIAN CYN 5.47 2 2
x 4N39 TIE CYN CG 0.5 2 1
x 4N42 OAK SPRINGS CYN 2.2 2 1
x 4N42A0 OAK SPRINGS 1.1 2 2
x 4N45 IRON CANYON COUNTY 0.8 1 5 ROAD x 4N46 MAGIC MTN RD 0.82 4 3
x 4N47 APPLE TREE TANK RD 0.2 2 2
x 4N48 VALYERMO DIST ENG STA 0.11 5 4
x 4N49 JACKSON LAKE RD/PRKNG 0.33 5 5
x 4N49A0 JACKSONLAKE TANK SPUR 0.2 2 2
x 4N49B0 JACKSON LAKE PARKING 0.25 5 5
x 4N51 ARCH PG 0.14 5 3
x 4N55 FENNER CYN RD 0.4 4 4
x 4N56 PINYON RIDGE RD 3.98 2 2
x 4N57 WEST TABLE MTN 2 2 2
x 4N58 VALYERMO TRAILER RD 0.14 5 4
x 4N59 VALYERMO WORK CENTER 0.18 5 4
x 5N01 HUNT CYN SHOOTNG AREA 0.3 3 1
x 5N04.1 LITTLE ROCK CANYON RD 2.07 5 4
x 5N04.1 LITTLE ROCK CANYON RD 1.26 5 4
x 5N04.2 LITTLE ROCK CYN RD 8.77 3 3
x 5N04.3 LITTLE ROCK CYN RD 3.02 3 3
x 5N04A0 LAKESIDE CG LOOP 0.2 5 3
x 5N04B0 JUNIPER GROVES CG 0.1 5 3
x 5N04C0 ROCKY POINT PARKING 0.3 5 3
x 5N04D0 JOSHUA TREE 0.2 5 3
x 5N04E0 BASIN CG 0.55 4 4
x 5N04F0 LITTLE SYCAMORE CG 0.2 1 1
x 5N04G0 LITTLE CEDARS 0.23 1 1 CAMPGROUND
54
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 5N04H0 SULPHUR SPRINGS 0.8 4 3 CAMPGROUND x 5N04I0 LITTLE ROCK STATION 0.2 5 3
x 5N04J LITTLEROCK BOAT LAUNCH 0.26 5 5 PARKING x 5N04K FISHERMANS PARKING 0.35 5 5 AREA x 5N04L SAGE CAMPGROUND 0.1 5 5 PARKING x 5N11 SPADE-LETTEAU 6.3 1 1
x 5N12 SPRING CYN RD 3.3 1 1
x 5N13.1 RUSH CYN RD. 0.57 5 4
x 5N13.2 RUSH CYN. RD. 2.27 4 3
x 5N14.1 TEXAS CYN RD. 3.72 3 2
x 5N14.2 TEXAS CYN. RD. (ROWHER 3.95 3 2 FLATS) x 5N15.1 VASQUEZ CYN RD 3.5 2 2
x 5N15.2 VASQUEZ CYN RD 5.5 5 5
x 5N16 POWERHOUSE CUTOFF 1.1 2 2
x 5N17 SAN FRAN MOTORWAY 5.42 2 2
x 5N18 FALL CYN RD 3.5 2 2
x 5N24 COARSE GOLD RD 2.17 2 2
x 5N25 TAYLOR CYN RD 0.4 1 1
x 5N27 DRINKWATER CYN RD 5.41 2 4
x 5N28 PETTINGER CYN RD 5.2 2 2
x 5N29 DRY CYN RD 1.75 3 2
x 5N30 DRY GULCH RD 0.25 3 3
x 5N30 DRY GULCH RD 0.31 3 3
x 5N30 DRY GULCH RD 0.82 3 3
x 5N30 DRY GULCH RD 0.15 3 3
x 5N30 DRY GULCH RD 0.06 3 3
x 5N30 DRY GULCH RD 0.41 3 3
x 5N39 CANTILLES PG 0.53 5 4
x 5N40 CHAPPARAL CG 0.1 1 3
x 5N41 HOLLOW TREE CG 0.2 1 3
x 5N42 STREAMSIDE CG 0.2 5 5
x 5N44 BIG OAK CG 0.06 1 2
x 5N45 BOUQUET CG 0.06 5 1
x 5N46 TEXAS CYN STATION 0.5 4 5
x 5N47 ZUNI CG 0.2 5 5
x 5N49 SAUGUS WORK CENTER 0.5 4 5
x 5N61 SOLEDAD CG 0.41 5 3 55
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 5N62 SOLEDAD STA 0.1 2 1
x 6N02 LOST VALLEY RD 1 2 2
x 6N04 LEONA DIVIDE 10.62 2 2
x 6N04.2 LEONA DIVIDE 2.61 2 2
x 6N05 GRASS MTN RD 0.9 2 2
x 6N06 MARTINDALE RIDGE RD 1.9 1 1
x 6N07 SIERRA PELONA RD. 13 2 2
x 6N07A0 SIERRA-PELONA LOOKOUT 0.4 1 2
x 6N08 ARTESIAN SPRINGS RD 4.7 2 2
x 6N08A0 ARTESIAN SP CG 0.2 1 2
x 6N09 SPUNKY EDISON RD 2.36 2 2
x 6N10 DOWD CYN RD 0.7 1 1
x 6N11 SPUNKY CG 0.3 3 3
x 6N13 CASTAIC LAKE RD 7.2 2 2
x 6N14 BOUQUET RESERVOIR RD 1.18 3 3
x 6N14 BOUQUET RESERVOIR RD 2.02 3 3
x 6N16 CHERRY CYN PIPELINE R 0.13 2 2
x 6N16 CHERRY CYN PIPELINE R 4.38 2 2
x 6N16 CHERRY CYN PIPELINE R 0.41 2 2
x 6N18 DEL SUR RIDGE RD 10.21 2 2
x 6N19 QUARRY RD 2.33 2 2
x 6N20 FRENCHMAN FLAT RD 0.1 2 2
x 6N21 CITY HIGHLINE RD 13.58 2 2
x 6N22 SURGE TANK RD 0.8 2 2
x 6N23 OAK FLAT CG 0.5 5 3
x 6N24 RUBY CLEARWATER RD 7.93 2 2
x 6N30 CHERRY CYN RD 2 1 1
x 6N32.1 WRMSPRNGS/FSHCYN/TM 8.63 2 2 PL x 6N32A0 CIENAGA CG 0.5 4 2
x 6N32B0 WARM SPRINGS CG 0.29 1 1
x 6N38.1 CANTON DEVIL RD 3.3 2 2
x 6N38.2 CANTON DEVIL RD 3.6 2 2
x 6N42 FALLS CG 0.5 1 1
x 6N43 FOREST INN RD 2.8 2 2
x 6N45 FISHER SPRING RD 0.8 2 2
x 6N46 OAK FLAT STATION 0.5 5 5
x 6N51 GREEN VALLEY STATION 0.42 5 5
x 6N52 CRAIG SPR RD S.U. 0.2 2 2
56
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 6N53 WHITAKER PEAK RD 4.4 3 3
x 6N53A0 CANTON SPUR 0.83 1 1
x 6N53B0 RUBY SPUR 1.6 2 1
x 6N54 GREEN VALLEY 0.2 5 4 RECREATION YARD x 6N56 SAN FRAN CG 0.3 1 1
x 6N60 COTTONWOOD CG 0.64 5 4
x 6N64 PROSPECT CG 0.5 5 4
x 6N66 RED MTN STA 1.04 2 2
x 6N68 OSITO CG 0.1 1 1
x 7N01 TULE DIVIDE - BURNS CYN 11.44 2 2 RD x 7N02 SOUTH PORTAL RD 0.01 2 2
x 7N02 SOUTH PORTAL RD 3.89 2 2
x 7N02A0 SOUTH PORTAL CG 0.2 1 1
x 7N02B SOUTH PORTAL RD (NORTH 1.96 2 2 SECTION x 7N03 PORTAL RIDGE RD 4.1 2 2
x 7N04 PINE CYN CG 0.1 2 2
x 7N05 LAKE HUGHES TRUCK TRL 3.33 2 2
x 7N05.1 LAKE HUGHES LOOP ROAD 1.19 2 2
x 7N07 JUDAY RD 6.88 2 2
x 7N07A0 BROAD CYN RD 0.5 2 2
x 7N07B0 TROEDEL SPRING RD 0.5 2 2
x 7N08 MAXWELL RD 9.79 2 2
x 7N09 LAKE HUGHES RD 20.27 5 5
x 7N13.1 SAWTOOTH/WARM SP 4.29 1 1 MTN x 7N13.2 SAWTOOTH/WARM SPR 3.35 2 2 MTN x 7N13.3 SAWTOOTH/WARM SPR 4.4 2 2 MTN x 7N13A0 WARM SPRINGS LO SPUR 0.5 2 2
x 7N14 THREE POINTS MOTORWAY 0.87 2 2
x 7N16 FAIRMONT RESERVOIR LP 3.6 2 2
x 7N19 ATMORE MDW RD 2.47 2 2
x 7N22.1 CASTAIC CYN RD 4.71 2 2
x 7N22.2 CASTAIC CYN RD 0.97 2 2
x 7N23 LIEBRE SAWMILL RD 17.46 3 2
x 7N23A0 BURNT PEAK SPUR 2.5 2 2
x 7N23B0 UPPER SHAKE CG RD 1.1 3 2
x 7N23C0 SAWMILL PRIMITIVE CG 0.68 3 2
57
(Draft)
Likely Likely Not Road (Likely Needed/Likely Name Miles Objective Operational Needed Needed Not Needed) Maint. Level Maint. Level x 7N23D0 UPPER SHAKE PLANTATON 0.7 2 2
x 7N23E0 BEAR CAMPGROUND 0.2 3 2
x 7N26.1 RESERVOIR SUMMIT RD 3.09 2 2
x 7N26.2 RESERVOIR SUMMIT RD 0.5 3 2
x 7N26A0 RESERVOIR HILL PG 0.1 2 2
x 7N26B0 SPANISH PT RD 0.4 1 1
x 7N27 PYRAMID LAKE 0.75 5 5 ENTRANCE/PARKING x 7N32 LOS ALAMOS 3.15 4 4
x 7N32A LOS ALAMOS C.G. SYSTEM 0.77 5 5
x 7N32A1 LOS ALAMOS C.G. SYSTEM 0.38 5 5 LOOP x 7N32A2 LOS ALAMOS C.G. SYSTEM 0.35 5 5 LOOP x 7N32B LOS ALAMOS WORK 0.15 5 5 CENTER x 7N33 KINGS CYN RD 0.5 3 3
x 7N34 LOWER SHAKE CG 0.3 3 1
x 7N35 FOX FIELD ATB 2.15 5 5
x 7N36 HARDLUCK SHORTCUT 1.47 3 2
x 7N71 LAKE ELIZABETH RARKING 0.5 5 5 AREA x 8N01 LIEBRE GULCH (DAVIS 7.35 2 2 RANCH) x 8N04 OLD RIDGE ROUTE 18.85 3 3
x 8N05 TUMBLE INN RD 3.35 2 2
58
(Draft)
Map 3: Map of Roads Likely Needed And Likely Not Needed
59
(Draft)
Appendix A. Questions for Development of More Site-Specific Evaluation Criteria*
Administrative Use: How does the road system affect investigative or enforcement activities? Ecosystem Functions and Processes: To what degree do the presence, type, and location of roads contribute to the control of insects, diseases, and parasites? What are the adverse effects of noise caused by developing, using, and maintaining roads? What roads are necessary to maintain in giant sequoia groves for resource management, and public access? Aquatic, Riparian Zone, and Water Quality: What downstream beneficial uses of water exist in the area? What changes in uses and demand are expected over time? How are they affected or put at risk by road-derived pollutants? How does the road system alter physical channel dynamics, including isolation of floodplains; constraints on channel migration; and the movement of large wood, fine organic matter, and sediment? How does the road system affect shading, litterfall, and riparian plant communities? How and where does the road system facilitate the introduction of non-native aquatic species? To what extent does the road system overlap with areas of exceptionally high aquatic diversity or productivity, or areas containing rare or unique aquatic species or species of interest? (CARs, RCAs, etc.) Terrestrial Wildlife: How does the road system directly affect unique communities or special features in the area? Water Production: How does road development and use affect water quality in municipal watersheds? Public Health and Protection: How does the road system contribute to airborne dust emissions resulting in reduced visibility and human health concerns? Unroaded Recreation: What are the adverse effects of noise and other disturbances caused by developing, using, and maintaining roads, on the quantity, quality, and type of unroaded recreation opportunities? (e.g., wilderness, inventoried roadless areas, and the Pacific Crest Trail) Road-Related Recreation: What are the adverse effects of noise and other disturbances caused by constructing, using, and maintaining roads on the quantity, quality, or type of roaded recreation opportunities? * These questions and background information came from the FS-643 report and the public involvement efforts for RAP and Motorized Travel Management and the Roads in IRAs Collaborative effort.
60