INYO NATIONAL FOREST ASSESSMENT TOPIC PAPER (NOVEMBER 2013)

Chapter 15: Designated Areas

Introduction This chapter will assess current conditions and trends for both statutorily designated and administratively designated areas on the , including wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, national scenic areas, national trails, research natural areas, scenic byways, and inventoried roadless areas. While the Inyo NF does have designated critical habitat for the federally endangered species, Sierra bighorn sheep (SNBS), this designated habitat for SNBS (as well as proposed critical habitat for other species) will be evaluated in the Chapter 5 topic paper, and the information will not be repeated here in Chapter 15.

In addition, this chapter will evaluate the potential need and opportunity for additional designated areas, such as wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, or research natural areas. This evaluation will be completed using a framework of questions regarding need and opportunity for additional designated areas on the Forest.

This chapter will describe the relative contribution of Inyo NF designated areas within the context of the broader landscape, including geographic connections and coordinated management between designated wilderness national scenic trails, and wild and scenic rivers on adjoining lands managed by other federal agencies.

Process and Methods

Scale of Assessment This assessment will be focused on the area within the boundaries of the Inyo National Forest (Inyo NF or Forest) for existing designated areas because this is the sphere of influence for Inyo NF management of such areas. The current condition and trend will be assessed individually for each type of designated area.

Information Sources The following information sources are used for the assessment of current conditions and trends for designated areas on the Forest: Wild and Scenic River eligibility studies (USDA Forest Service 1993); Inyo NF wilderness permit use numbers (2000 to present); special use permit data for commercial pack stations and other wilderness outfitters and

Page 1 of 86

guides; visitor data from the Mono Basin and Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest Visitor Centers; GIS data for Forest roads and trails; data from the Inyo NF Terrestrial Ecological Unit Inventory; Forest publications on the Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest (ABPF), the ABPF Management Plan, and existing assessments of Great Basin bristlecone pine (Pinus longaeva); Bioregional assessment for Research Natural Areas; Ecological Surveys (Keeler-Wolf 1990; Cheng 2004 ); the Special Use Data System (SUDS) database, and other district records for research permits.

Abbreviated summaries of the distinctive features of each research natural area (RNA) were based primarily upon the General Technical Report “Forest Service Research Natural Areas in ” (Cheng 2004). The Bioregional Assessment Chapter 15 topic paper provides links to more detailed information on each RNA on the Inyo NF and throughout the Region. Additional information was based upon Inyo NF Terrestrial Ecological Unit Inventory (TEUI) and Ecology plots (Chapter 1 – Ecosystems), the latter of which occur in the Harvey Monroe Hall, Indiana Summit, Sentinel Meadow, McAfee, Last Chance Meadow, and White Mt. RNAs. Many published and unpublished reports of research conducted in RNAs are available in the Inyo NF files. This assessment is not a comprehensive review of those documents, and is focused on information that pertains to the management of these designated areas.

Indicators The following indicators will be used for assessing designated areas on the Inyo National Forest.

Characteristic or Indicator Measure or Unit attribute being measured or assessed Wilderness Allocation of Acreage of Recreation Opportunity Recreation Spectrum (ROS) class within wilderness Opportunities Visitor Use Wilderness visitor, Commercial Pack Outfit and Outfitter-Guide permit data Wilderness Character 1. Untrammeled 2. Natural 3. Undeveloped 4. Solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation Wild and Scenic Rivers Outstandingly Assess ORVs identified for each WSR (WSRs) Remarkable Values (ORVs) for already designated and recommended WSRs Allocation of Acreage of ROS class for designated and Recreation recommended WSRs Opportunities

Page 2 of 86

Characteristic or Indicator Measure or Unit attribute being measured or assessed Existing Inventory Evaluation of suitability / eligibility of streams not currently designated or recommended Mono Basin National Scenic Character 1. Scenic Integrity Forest Scenic Area 2. Scenic Stability Visitor use 1. Number of visitors at fee sites and visitor centers; 2. Number of special use permits for research, photography, filming, etc. Ancient Bristlecone Pine Public enjoyment Visitor use – Number of visitors Forest annually

Scientific study Discussion of research projects conducted in the Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest

Fragmentation; Road density - Miles of road within ecosystem condition Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest

Pacific Crest National Allocation of Acreage of ROS class for the PCT Scenic Trail (PCT) Recreation management corridor Opportunities Setting in PCT 1. Permitted events –type and number Management Corridor 2. Legal motorized roads / trails for Visitor Experience crossings and if there are areas with motorized trespass 3. Legal non-motorized trail crossings and if there are areas with mechanized (bike) trespass 4. Connecting & side trails that should be designated (criteria for determination) 5. Private lands and special use developments National Recreation Trails Trail condition Qualitatively discuss existing use (NRT) Research Natural Areas Scientific study Amount of research – Number of (RNAs) research projects conducted

Ecosystem function - Fire return interval departure (FRID) fire

Ecosystem function – Number (count) and extent (acres) invasive species invasive species

Page 3 of 86

Characteristic or Indicator Measure or Unit attribute being measured or assessed Ecosystem function – Extent of invasive species – acres invasive species occupied

Scenic Byways Scenic Character 1. Scenic Integrity 2. Scenic Stability

Highway Use Traffic data (from Transportation Study) Inventoried Roadless Proximity to 1. Proximity to designated wilderness Areas (IRAs) designated wilderness 2. Presence of developed sites / and level of Wildland-Urban Interface within development IRAs 3. Density of higher standard roads within IRAs

Overview of Geographic Connections The Inyo National Forest shares geographic boundaries with lands managed by many different Federal and State agencies. The Inyo also has strong ties with nearby private lands which are under the jurisdiction of local county governments and communities and held by private owners.

The Inyo NF shares geographic boundaries with the following Federal and State- managed public lands which offer recreation opportunities or access to the Forest: Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Park; ; Death Valley National Park; Devils Postpile National Monument; Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest; ; ; Bureau of Land Management Field Offices at Bishop and Ridgecrest, California and Carson City, Nevada; Mono Lake Tufa State Beach; University of California Valentine Reserve and Aquatic Research Lab; State Fish Hatcheries at Hot Creek, Fish Springs, and Mt. Whitney; and others.

The Inyo National Forest covers multiple counties, including Mono County and Inyo County in California, and Esmeralda County and Mineral County in Nevada. The impact and influence of the Inyo National Forest on the socioeconomic well-being of the local counties is of paramount importance. There are also numerous communities with strong socioeconomic ties to the Forest. Some communities also share an immediate geographic boundary with the Inyo National Forest which fosters strong physiographic connections with the Inyo. The communities include, but are not limited to, the following: Mono City; Lee Vining; June Lake; Mammoth Lakes; Long Valley; McGee Creek; Crowley Lake; Aspen Springs; Toms Place; Sunny Slopes; Swall Meadows; Aspendell; Kennedy Meadows; Bishop; Big Pine; Independence; Lone Pine;

Page 4 of 86

Olancha; Cartago; Hawthorne; Dyer; Fish Lake Valley; Chalfant Valley; Hammil Valley; Benton; Rovana; Round Valley; Paradise; and others.

The Forest shares boundaries with other large private land owners which sometimes offer public recreation opportunities or access to adjoining public lands. These include the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Southern California Edison, numerous private ranch lands and others.

These shared geographic boundaries create opportunities for maximizing use of open space across all lands. Maximum use of open space across multiple land ownerships can alleviate recreation pressure by dispersing visitor use. Conversely, a high demand for or constraints on recreation use in one area can create additional pressure on adjoining lands. Thus, the shared boundaries add complexity and need for coordination between the Forest and adjoining lands when managing recreation.

For example, Yosemite and Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Parks are evaluating potential need for new wilderness use limits to alleviate overcrowding in the parks, particularly in association with the John Muir / (s). If these National Parks decide to further limit use in the wildernesses, then there may be an increased demand for wilderness use and increased recreation pressure on adjoining Inyo National Forest lands.

Communities and local counties with ties to the Inyo typically depend upon the Forest for support of livelihoods and life-ways for those who live here. Recent economic studies have shown that “counties with national parks, wilderness, and other forms of protected public lands benefit through increased economic performance”, including stimulating economic growth, enhancing nearby private property values, accelerating employment growth and increasing per capita income compared to other areas (Rasker et al. 2013; Rasker 2006; Phillips 2004). Designated areas with special protections on the Inyo NF are known to have a positive influence on the local economy through tourism and permitted commercial uses. For example, numerous communities serve as “gateways” for the public to secure lodging or purchase food, fuel and other supplies while visiting these designated areas. In addition, designated areas provide outdoor recreation activities which foster health and wellness, and offer connections to a protected scenic landscape which supports a high quality of life in the region.

Wilderness

Overview of Wilderness on the Inyo National Forest Designated wilderness comprises forty-six percent of the Inyo NF, for a total of 964,360 wilderness acres (Figure 1). There are nine designated wilderness areas, either in whole or part, within the administrative boundary the Forest. The geographic area for these wildernesses ranges from 14,725 acres to 325,315 acres (Table 1).

Page 5 of 86

The Hoover, John Muir, and Ansel Adams (originally named the Minarets Wilderness) were the first wilderness areas established on the Forest with passage of the Wilderness Act in 1964 (Public Law 88-577). Subsequent legislation expanded these areas and added new wilderness to the National Wilderness Preservation System with the Endangered American Wilderness Act of 1978, the California Wilderness Act of 1984, the Nevada Wilderness Protection Act of 1989, the California Desert Protection Act of 1994, and the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Table 1). More detailed maps for these wilderness areas and other information can be found at the following website: www.wilderness.net .

Page 6 of 86

Figure 1. Map of Inyo NF wilderness areas, plus national trails and inventoried roadless areas.

Page 7 of 86

Table 1. List of wilderness areas, designating legislation, acreage and miles of trails

Wilderness- Specific Visitor Designating Management Permits Geographic Trail Legislation Plan? Required? Area System Wilderness Area (Public Law/Year) (Yes/No) (Yes/No) (Acres) (Miles) PL 88-577 / 1964; PL 98-425 / 1984; Ansel Adams PL 111-11 / 2009 Yes Yes 78,710 132 PL 101-195 / 1989 No No 10,511 1 Golden Trout PL 95-237 / 1978 Yes Yes 193,630 216 PL 88-577 / 1964; Hoover PL 111-11 / 2009 Yes Yes 28,619 11 PL 103-433 / 1994 No No 74,512 28 PL 88-577 / 1964; John Muir PL 111-11 / 2009 Yes Yes 325,315 287 Owens River Headwaters PL 111-11 / 2009 No No 14,725 4

South Sierra PL 98-425 / 1984 Yes No 31,582 37 White Mountains PL 111-11 / 2009 No No 206,756 43

The description of scenic character for wilderness areas is incorporated into the discussion of Forest Places found in Chapter 9. A list of the designated wilderness areas and the Forest Places in which they are located is displayed below: : Mono –Lee Vining and June Lake Loop-Walker-Parker Forest Places. Boundary Peak Wilderness: White Mountains Forest Place. : Mono –Lee Vining Forest Place. Inyo Mountains Wilderness: Inyo Mountains Forest Place : Reds Meadow-Fish Creek, Mammoth-Mammoth Escarpment, Convict-McGee-Rock Creek-Pine Creek-Bishop Creek-Buttermilk, Escarpment, Escarpment Hubs and the Golden Trout-South Sierra Forest Places. Owens River Headwaters Wilderness: Owens River Headwaters Forest Place. White Mountains Wilderness: White Mountains Forest Place.

Current Management Direction for Wilderness General direction for management for all wilderness area on the Forest is contained in the Inyo NF Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP; USDA Forest Service 1988). General wilderness management direction from the LRMP specifies that the Forest

Page 8 of 86

should “maintain a predominantly natural and natural-appearing environment, facilitate low frequencies of interaction between users, and exercise necessary controls primarily from outside the wilderness boundary” (page 97).

The Boundary Peak, Inyo Mountains, Owens River Headwaters, South Sierra and White Mountains wildernesses rely solely on management direction in the LRMP, and do not currently have more detailed wilderness management plans. While the process for revising the LRMP may not include development of wilderness specific management plans for these 5 wilderness areas, additional management direction in a new LRMP would be of benefit. For example, key monitoring elements could be developed for wilderness which would indicate need for a more detailed management plan or an outfitter/guides needs assessment.

More detailed direction for managing the Ansel Adams, Golden Trout, Hoover, and John Muir wilderness areas is currently provided by wilderness-specific management plans. In addition, there is more detailed management direction for commercial pack stations and pack stock outfitter/guide uses in the Ansel Adams and John Muir wildernesses. The wilderness-specific management direction for each of these areas is detailed and voluminous. For brevity, these wilderness management plans will not be discussed in detail for this assessment chapter. If interested in additional details for wilderness-specific management direction, the reader is referred to the following documents:

Hoover Wilderness Management Plan, Toiyabe National Forest (USDA Forest Service 1976); Hoover Wilderness Management Plan, Supplement for the Inyo National Forest (USDA Forest Service 1977); Management Plan, Inyo and Sequoia National Forests (USDA Forest Service 1982a); Wilderness Management Plan for the Ansel Adams, John Muir and Dinkey Lakes Wildernesses, Inyo and Sierra National Forests (USDA Forest Service 2001a, 2001b and 2001c); Commercial Pack Station and Pack Stock Outfitter/Guide Permit Issuance, Inyo National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2006a, 2006b and 2007).

Wilderness visitor permits are one of the primary means for exercising management control from outside the wilderness boundary. Trailhead quotas for general public use and service day allocations for commercial use are another key management tool to govern visitor use numbers and facilitate limits on the frequency of user interactions from outside the wilderness boundary. Trailhead quotas set the maximum number of people permitted to enter the wilderness from a trailhead each day; trailhead quotas apply to both commercial use and non-commercial use, and are in effect May 1 to November 1 each year. With the exception of day use on the Trail, Page 9 of 86

trailhead quotas only apply to overnight visitors. Service day allocations are the number of people a commercial outfitter may provide services for on a daily, seasonal, or annual basis. Mandatory visitor permits and commercial service day allocations are employed in managing use within the Ansel Adams, Golden Trout, Hoover, and John Muir under existing conditions, but not any of the other wilderness areas. Wilderness permits are not required for day use, except on the Mount Whitney Trail in the John Muir Wilderness. Trailhead quotas are applied in managing use within the Ansel Adamsand John Muir wilderness areas, and the Cottonwood Pass Trailhead for the Golden Trout Wilderness.

Currently, the Inyo NF measures the level of accomplishment for wilderness management using national standard performance elements, as follows. The 10-Year Wilderness Stewardship Challenge (Challenge) was developed by the Forest Service in 2004 as a means to quantifiably measure the agency’s success in managing wilderness areas. The goal of the Challenge is to bring each and every wilderness under Forest Service management to a minimum stewardship level by the 50th Anniversary of the Wilderness Act in 2014. To quantify stewardship, 10 comprehensive elements were defined for wilderness management. A “minimum stewardship level” was defined as achieving 6 out of the 10 elements, or a minimum score of 60 points.

The 10 elements include the following:

1. The natural role of fire and the full range of management responses to wildland fire in wilderness are addressed through Fire Management direction within the Forest Land Management Plan and information contained in the Fire Management Plan or the Fire Management References System. The goals of this element are: wilderness is managed to preserve natural conditions through the role of fire, and wilderness character is maintained regardless of the fire management response. 2. Native species are protected through successful identification and treatment of invasive plants which threaten the natural conditions and biological processes within wilderness. The goals of this element are: restore the natural landscape, and protect wilderness from the adverse effects of invasive species. 3. Wilderness air quality values are monitored to determine the baseline condition of at least one sensitive receptor in each wilderness. The goal of this element is: evaluate if air pollution is causing changes to the wilderness character. 4. Wilderness education plans are created and implemented to inform existing and potential wilderness visitors for an understanding of wilderness values beyond recreation, the importance of wilderness and how to protect it. The goals of this element are: reduce wilderness impacts from camping, day use, and stock use. 5. Wilderness management direction, monitoring, and actions are implemented to protect opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation. The goals of this element are: places exist within each wilderness that allow visitors

Page 10 of 86

to experience different levels of isolation, closeness to nature, tranquility and challenge in an environment that is in distinct contrast to their normal lives; wilderness visitors will be free to enjoy pursuits like fishing, hiking and camping without feeling crowded. 6. A recreation site inventory is completed for each wilderness, which provides information about where and how people use each wilderness, and the effects of this use. This information is not static; some percent of site inventories are re- evaluated each year. The goals of this element are: use this information to make decisions to protect wilderness character; for example, limits on use, revegetation of over-used areas, or education strategies. 7. Operating plans for outfitters and guides direct outfitters to serve as ambassadors for wilderness, by modeling appropriate wilderness practices and incorporating awareness for wilderness values in their interaction with clients and others. Needs assessments are completed for new operations or for major changes to existing outfitter programs. The goals of this element are: outfitters will provide a direct benefit to the wilderness they operate in by providing needed opportunities for visitors and education about wilderness; their clients will leave with appreciation and knowledge that they may use in future self- guided trips to wilderness areas. 8. The Forest Land Management Plan provides adequate direction to prevent degradation of the wilderness resource, which includes the combination of biophysical, social, and managerial qualities that make wilderness unique from any other place. The goals of this element are: specific objectives are developed for social conditions (party size, encounter levels), biophysical conditions (fire, air quality, invasive plants) and managerial conditions (signs, trails, outfitter/guides), so wilderness character can be protected and/or restored. 9. Identify what information needs are the most important for long-term, effective wilderness stewardship. The needed priority information is collected in the field, and such data is later analyzed and stored. The goals of this element are: focus the efforts of wilderness rangers and other staff to collect data that will inform management about the most pressing issues for a particular wilderness, enter the data into a database, analyze it to produce information, and use that information in the wilderness management decision making process. 10. The wilderness has a baseline workforce in place. The goals of this element are: each wilderness has the staff necessary to support a viable wilderness program, and at a minimum, to accomplish the 10 Year Wilderness Stewardship Challenge. Nationwide, the Challenge data compiled in 2002 indicated that only 8% of the Forest Service Wildernesses were managed to this “minimum stewardship level.” Data from the 2005 reporting indicated a slight improvement from the original assessment in 2002, with approximately 12% of wildernesses nationwide meeting the minimum level of stewardship. Since then, accomplishment has been in a positive direction, most recently

Page 11 of 86

40.6% of wildernesses reported being managed to this standard as of the fiscal year (FY) 2010 reporting cycle. Perhaps more encouragingly, the average score for all wildernesses has risen steadily from 34.7 in FY 2005 to 53.7 in FY 2010.

On the Inyo National Forest, achievements and trends for meeting the Wilderness Stewardship Challenge are consistent with the nationwide results. For the FY 2012 reporting cycle, scores ranged from a high of 81 for the John Muir Wilderness to 41 for the White Mountains Wilderness (Table 2). Scores have improved over time for the five wilderness areas that have not yet reached the minimum stewardship level (i.e. minimum score of 60 points), and have remained steady for the three wildernesses that currently meet the challenge. Although the forest has been tracking Challenge scores for Upper Owens Headwaters and White Mountains wildernesses, these wilderness areas are not part of the original 10-year Challenge, as they were not designated until 2009.

Table 2. Wilderness Stewardship Challenge scores for Inyo National Forest wilderness areas.

Owens Total Ansel Boundary Golden Inyo John River South White Score Adams Peak Trout Mtns. Muir Headwaters Sierra Mtns. 2009 69 33 49 36 79 NA* 37 NA* 2010 69 37 53 38 77 29 41 31 2011 71 41 63 42 79 43 51 39 2012 69 43 65 50 81 43 57 41 *Wilderness areas newly designated by the 2009 Public Lands Omnibus Act have no scores for 2009. While a portion of the Hoover Wilderness is on the Inyo NF, the lead data steward is the Humboldt Toiyabe NF. Consequently, the Hoover Challenge scores are not tracked by the Inyo NF.

To move forward with the 10-Year Wilderness Stewardship Challenge the Inyo National Forest has identified four elements for focus on improvement, specifically element numbers 4, 5, 9 and 10. Under element number 4, there is a need to develop and implement wilderness education plans for the five wildernesses which do not currently meet the Challenge (e.g. Boundary Peak, Inyo Mountains, Owens River Headwaters, South Sierra and White Mountains Wildernesses). Under element number 5, there is a need to develop and implement a monitoring protocol to measure opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined recreation experience in the Boundary Peak, Inyo Mountains, Owens River Headwaters and White Mountains Wilderness areas. For element number 9, an information needs assessment should be completed for the five wildernesses which do not currently meet the challenge, along with collection of inventory and monitoring data as the needs assessments may identify. For element number 10, there is a need to secure adequate baseline staffing for field management in the wilderness, including wilderness rangers and staff to coordinate with field volunteers.

Page 12 of 86

Current Conditions of Wilderness

Wilderness Character Wilderness character is defined by four attributes: untrammeled; undeveloped; natural; opportunity for solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation (USDA Forest Service 2008). The attributes for wilderness character will be described briefly in this section, with more detail provided in subsequent sections of this assessment chapter, as well as other assessment chapters. An in-depth assessment of every wilderness character attribute for each individual wilderness area has not been completed at this time.

The untrammeled attribute of wilderness character relates to modern human control or manipulation of the biophysical environment. Actions that intentionally manipulate or control ecological systems inside wilderness degrade the untrammeled quality of wilderness character. Biophysical manipulation includes management actions such as fire suppression, the use of herbicides to control non-native invasive plant species, and actions taken to protect threatened, endangered, and sensitive species (i.e. Golden Trout Recovery Plan, Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep Recovery Plan, and protection actions for the Paiute cutthroat trout in the White Mountains) which are discussed in assessment Chapters 1 and 3. The action of suppressing fires has manipulated the ecological systems by altering natural fire cycles, changing the biophysical environment. The use of herbicides in wilderness requires approval by the Regional Forester, and has been limited to only direct application to invasive weeds that have the potential to alter ecosystem processes and displace native species.

The undeveloped attribute of wilderness character relates to the lack of infrastructure, or use of motorized equipment and mechanized transport in wilderness. The undeveloped quality is degraded by the presence of structures, installations, habitations, and by use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment, or mechanical transport that increases people’s ability to occupy or modify the environment. Infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, trails and livestock grazing developments. . The use of motorized or mechanized equipment is limited in wilderness, and requires special authorization. Examples of such special authorizations include the limited use of chainsaws for clearing blowdown trees in the John Muir and Ansel Adams Wilderness areas during summer 2012, or the use of helicopters for translocation of Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep to the in spring 2013.

The natural attribute refers to ecosystem settings and ecological systems that are substantially free from the effects of modern civilization. The natural quality is degraded by intended or unintended effects of modern people on the ecological systems inside the wilderness. Current conditions for ecosystem settings are described below and in more detail in assessment Chapters 1, 2 and 3. Wilderness uses that can affect the natural attribute include visitors, commercial use, and livestock grazing, which are discussed below. Fish stocking is another type of wilderness use which can affect

Page 13 of 86

ecological conditions and the natural attribute of wilderness. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) is responsible for fish stocking in select wilderness lakes within its jurisdiction for management of fish and wildlife populations in the state. CDFW currently conducts fish stocking in the John Muir, Ansel Adams and Hoover Wilderness areas. In the John Muir Wilderness, thirteen lakes are aerially stocked with trout on a biennial basis, and ten annually. In the Ansel Adams Wilderness, seven lakes are aerially stocked with trout on a biennial basis, and two annually. In the Hoover Wilderness, one lake is aerially stocked with trout on a biennial basis, and two annually. Further information regarding CDFW management of fish and wildlife populations in California, including trout and other species such as the Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frogs or mountain yellow-legged frogs, can be found in Chapter 5. Neither the Inyo NF LRMP nor wilderness-specific management plans contain direction for fish stocking in the wilderness. The natural attribute of wilderness character can be affected by atmospheric pollution, climate change, and wildfire. The effect of climate change and atmospheric pollution on Forest ecosystems is discussed in assessment Chapters 1, 2 and 3. Wildfires in wilderness are discussed below.

The opportunity for solitude relates to remoteness from the sights and sounds of people. This quality is degraded by settings that reduce these opportunities, such as visitor encounters. In general, there are good to excellent opportunities for solitude in wilderness areas on the Forest, with limited exceptions. Trailhead quotas for overnight public use and service day allocations for commercial use are a key management tool to govern visitor use numbers and facilitate limits on the frequency of user interactions in wilderness. Although parking capacity at trailheads indirectly limits the number of visitors, there are no management controls for number of day use visitors (with the exception of the Mount Whitney Trail). In addition, Boundary Peak, White Mountains, Inyo Mountains, and South Sierra wildernesses do not have management control on the number of visitors. Current management is described in more detail below. During the peak wilderness use months of July and August, there are specific trails which may have more limited opportunities for solitude. The Mount Whitney Trail and are prime examples of high use trails with more limited opportunity for solitude in July and August. The John Muir Trail is discussed further in a subsequent section of this assessment chapter. Other examples of high use trails include Kearsarge Pass, Bishop Pass, Little Lakes Valley and Mono Pass.

The opportunity for primitive and unconfined recreation relates to visitor self-reliance and freedom in wilderness. Current management restrictions can detract from a visitor’s sense of freedom. Current management restrictions include mandatory visitor permits, trailhead quotas, restrictions on party size, food and refuse storage requirements, prohibitions on camping and campfires in specific locations, constraints on disposal of soap or body waste, closures or limits on pack stock grazing in specific places, and more. Boundary Peak, White Mountains, Inyo Mountains, and South Sierra wilderness areas have few management restrictions, and therefore a higher degree of unconfined recreation than the other wilderness areas on the Forest. Current management is also Page 14 of 86

discussed below.

Ecosystem Settings in Wilderness The ecosystem setting in wilderness is characterized by vegetation assessment types which are derived from the Inyo National Forest Terrestrial Ecological Unit Inventory (USDA Forest Service 2012a). There are ten broad vegetation groups plus lakes used to define these assessment types. These vegetation groups are updated to correspond with the assessment types discussed in Chapter 1 and Chapter 3. The acres of vegetation assessment types are displayed for each wilderness area on the Forest (Table 3).

Table 3. Acres of vegetation assessment types for wilderness areas on Inyo NF.

Vegetation - Owens Ansel Boundary Golden Inyo John South White Assessment Hoover River Adams Peak Trout Mountains Muir Sierra Mountains Types Headwaters Alpine 9,686 1,371 619 5,260 -- 93,285 639 90 12,397

Jeffrey 201 -- 2,763 -- -- 1,090 228 3,223 -- Pine Lake 2,025 -- 91 250 -- 3,525 37 -- --

Mixed 356 -- 13,847 571 -- 9,517 1,047 7,805 -- Conifer

Mt. 1,920 3,052 2,043 2,256 93 27,149 188 1,756 8,673 Mahogany

Pinyon- -- 1,377 16,244 46 50,579 18,368 -- 10,881 86,118 Juniper Red Fir 28,779 -- 40,437 632 -- 13,877 9,277 1,674 -- Sagebrush 1,266 1,079 253 1,582 2,204 35,885 3,292 44,333

Special 1639 -- 8401 97 -- 4552 656 501 748 Types

Subalpine 32,805 3,632 101,726 17,920 9,538 114,365 2,653 2,051 37,348 Forest Xeric Shrublands -- -- 7,165 -- 12098 3,554 -- 310 17141 and Blackbrush Total Acres 78,679 10,511 193,591 28,614 74,513 325,167 14,725 31,583 206,757

The ecosystem setting in the Ansel Adams Wilderness is dominated by the alpine peaks of the Ritter Range, and forests of subalpine conifers and red fir. Bristlecone pines and mountain mahogany cover the majority of area in the Boundary Peak Wilderness. The Golden Trout Wilderness is known for the large, open meadows which are surrounded

Page 15 of 86

by forests of subalpine conifers, red fir, lodgepole pine, and pinyon-juniper. The Hoover Wilderness is dominated by the alpine peaks of the Sierra Crest and forests of subalpine conifers; also notable are the aspens which grace Lundy Canyon with flaming fall color. The dry area within Inyo Mountains Wilderness supports pinyon-juniper woodlands, interspersed with xeric shrublands and blackbrush at the lower elevations. The John Muir Wilderness is defined by the alpine peaks of the Sierra Crest, and forests of subalpine conifers; also notable are the aspens which grace many canyons with stunning fall colors. Red fir forests comprise the majority of the ecosystem setting in the Owens River Headwaters Wilderness. The South Sierra Wilderness supports a more arid ecosystem setting, including pinyon-juniper, Jeffrey pine and sagebrush. Pinyon-juniper, sagebrush and bristlecone pine stand out in the ecosystem setting for the expansive White Mountains Wilderness.

The ecosystem settings in some areas of the wilderness have been affected by past wildfire. Since 1944, there have been forty-four wildfires recorded in wilderness on the Forest. These fires have burned a cumulative total of 5,168 acres in the Ansel Adams, 25,420 acres in the Golden Trout, 27,880 acres in the John Muir, 8,298 acres in the South Sierra, and 581 acres in the White Mountains Wilderness areas. Recent fires in forested settings have burned with high severity which caused a high degree of tree mortality. In these fire areas, mature trees may take decades to recover. Until the forest is reestablished, vegetation in the fire area typically consists of grasses or shrubs. As a result of these high severity fires, the affected areas currently lack trees and are dominated by grasses and shrubs in the burn area. Examples of this can be seen in the Rainbow Fire which burned in the Ansel Adams and John Muir Wilderness areas in 1992 and in the more recent Clover Fire which burned in the South Sierra Wilderness in 2008. Additional information regarding the ecological conditions and trends for these assessment types can be found in Chapters 1, 2 and 3.

Conforming Uses in Wilderness The 1964 Wilderness Act allows for a variety of acceptable activities within designated wilderness areas. These acceptable activities are termed conforming uses, and include recreation visitation using primitive forms of travel, commercial services to support primitive recreation, and livestock grazing, among others. In addition, the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA 1990) supplement the Wilderness Act regarding allowable use for ADA access into designated wilderness. These conforming uses are described further in this section.

ADA Access in Wilderness The American with Disabilities Act (ADA 1990) Title V Section 508c provides clarification to the Wilderness Act of 1964 regarding disabled accessibility and applies to Federally designated Wilderness, as follows:

Page 16 of 86

“Federal Wilderness Areas” ADA Title V Section 508c In general - Congress reaffirms that nothing in the Wilderness Act prohibits wheelchair use in a wilderness area by an individual whose disability requires its use. The Wilderness Act requires no agency to provide any form of special treatment or accommodation or to construct any facilities or modify any conditions of lands within a wilderness area to facilitate such use.

Definition – for the purposes of the paragraph above, the term wheelchair means a device designed solely for use by a mobility impaired person for locomotion, that is suitable for use in an indoor pedestrian area.”

For more information http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/accessibility/

Non-Commercial Visitor Use From the general public visitor permit data, the number of people entering wilderness for overnight use has remained steady or trended toward a slight increase over the past thirteen years (Table 4). From this data, the number of overnight visitors to the two most popular wilderness areas averaged 8,415 and 43,657 people per year for the Ansel Adams and John Muir Wildernesses, respectively.

Table 4. General public visitor permit data for overnight wilderness use, showing total number of visitors per year.

Golden Hoover Ansel Adams John Muir Trout South Sierra Year Wildeness Wilderness Wilderness Wilderness Wilderness 2000 1395 7927 47878 1986 No data available 2001 1798 8441 41895 1790 No data available 2002 1706 9269 31024 2071 No data available 2003 1588 8939 46889 2044 176 2004 1620 8058 45209 2186 109 2005 1060 6963 38701 1777 123 2006 1105 7077 39434 1708 135 2007 1429 8481 43880 1706 108 2008 1628 8803 45397 1874 86 2009 1524 9098 48374 2130 130 2010 1293 8894 46253 2190 131 2011 829 8463 42056 2244 191 2012 1185 8976 50552 2176 65 Annual Average 1397 8415 43657 1991 125 Note: For Golden Trout and South Sierra wildernesses, overnight use is likely higher than the data shows. The Golden Trout Wilderness data does not include Blackrock Trailhead data from Page 17 of 86

the Sequoia NF; and South Sierra Wilderness data only reflects visitors who voluntarily obtained wilderness permits since permits are not required for South Sierra Wilderness.

There are fifty-eight trailheads with daily use quotas, which access areas within the Ansel Adams, Golden Trout and John Muir Wildernesses. These quotas are in effect from May 1st to November 1st each year, with the annual quota period lasting 185 days. Demand for visitor permits sometimes reaches the limits set for the trailhead quotas. However, the trailhead quotas are never filled for all trails on all days. On an annual basis, the total number of occurrences with quotas filled for a specific trailhead and on a given day averaged 247, with a high of 370 in 2010. This represents three percent of the potential instances. This means that ninety-seven percent of the time trailhead quotas are not filled. Thus, there is currently additional capacity to accommodate more wilderness visitors within the established quota system.

For the relatively few instances where trailhead quotas are filled, this is most likely to occur during the month of August. An average forty-six percent of the instances with filled trailhead quotas occurred during that month, while ninety-one percent occurred during July, August and September combined. Further, quotas were most often filled for the following trailheads: 1) North Fork of Lone Pine Creek; 2) North Fork of Big Pine Creek; 3) Lamarck Lakes; 4) Little Lakes Valley; 5) Mt. Whitney (both overnight and day use); 6) Bishop Pass; 7) Mono Pass; 8) Rush Creek; and 9) Shadow Lake. The first seven of these trailheads access the John Muir Wilderness, while the remaining two provide entry into the Ansel Adams Wilderness.

Commercial Wilderness Use Visitors have the opportunity to hire a stock packer or guide for commercial support services during their visit into the wilderness. This commercial use is authorized in wilderness through special use permits issued to the commercial service provider by the Forest. The following types of commercial packer or guide services are authorized in the John Muir and Ansel Adams wildernesses: packstock support, backpacking, mountaineering, winter mountaineering and touring, credited educational services, equestrian day rides, and other incidental temporary uses. Other commercial uses in addition to these may be authorized in other wilderness areas, such as guided hunting, with proper analysis. A summary of the authorized commercial pack stock support and equestrian day rides use is presented in this section. Data has not yet been compiled for commercial backpacking, mountaineering, winter mountaineering and touring, credited education use and other temporary use.

From 2001 to 2012, the number of visitors who used commercial pack stock services for overnight visits or day rides in the wilderness is displayed in Table 5. During this period, there has been an overall trend for decreasing commercial packstock use in wilderness. The authorized commercial packs tock use within the John Muir and Ansel

Page 18 of 86

Adams wildernesses has decreased in the past decade as a consequence of litigation and a court order to reduce the service days allocated for this type of use (US District Court for the Northern District of California 2002 and US District Court for the Northern District of California 2008). In addition, other court ordered resource protections have led to reduced opportunities for stock grazing and use of campfires, limited stock access to more areas, and limitations on the number of pack animals per person. These, and other court requirements, have caused service rates to increase which has had an impact on potential customers during the recent economic recession. Another factor that has led to reduced use is the changing demographics of the clientele, including the demand for this type of service during a narrower season of use caused, in part, by earlier school start dates. Although rarely requested, commercial pack stock use can be authorized on a case-by-case basis for the other wilderness areas which are not listed in Table 5, including the Owens River Headwaters Wilderness, Boundary Peak Wilderness, White Mountains Wilderness, Inyo Mountains Wilderness, and Hoover Wilderness except in the portions which overlap with Research Natural Areas. Currently, the amount of commercial pack stock use in these other wilderness areas is very low.

Table 5. Number of visitors who used commercial packstock services for wilderness day or overnight visits.

Overnight Day Rides Overnight Day Rides Overnight Day Rides Ansel Ansel Adams Adams Golden Golden & John Muir & John Muir Trout Trout South Sierra South Sierra Year Wilderness Wilderness Wilderness Wilderness Wilderness Wilderness no use no use no use no use 2001 3742 3627 report report report report no use no use no use no use 2002 2786 3349 report report report report no use no use no use no use 2003 2545 3368 report report report report no use no use no use no use 2004 2505 3113 report report report report 2005 2872 3446 369 78 21 36 2006 2802 2697 268 53 6 53 2007 3029 3147 216 18 8 12 2008 2813 3068 207 15 14 15 2009 2476 2940 211 5 6 0 2010 2803 2805 220 25 13 12 2011 2479 1561 291 2 18 2 2012 2397 2328 255 4 15 4

Page 19 of 86

Livestock Grazing in Wilderness There are thirty allotments with grazing pastures in designated wilderness (Table 6). Of these, twenty-three allotments are active and currently being grazed, with the permitted numbers of animals and season of use determined for each individual allotment based on capacity of the land to sustain grazing. For the remaining seven allotments, the grazing pastures located within wilderness are vacant, and are not currently being grazed. All permitted allotments have some degree of basic developments, such as fencing or water troughs. Some of these allotments have additional developments, such as the cow camp cabins at Templeton or Mulkey Meadow. Grazing facilities in some areas are in disrepair or may no longer be needed for allotment administration. Rangeland conditions and trends associated with livestock grazing are discussed further in assessment Chapter 8.

Table 6. Grazing allotments in designated wilderness on the Inyo NF.

Wilderness Acres in Allotment Season Allotment Name Area Wilderness Status Permitted Livestock of Use Alabama Hills John Muir 1,176 Active 7 cow/calf pairs 2/1-6/30

Ash Creek Golden Trout 8,221 Active 60 cow/calf pairs 2/1-5/31 Buttermilk John Muir 6,257 Active 90 cow/calf pairs 6/1-9/15 White Cottonwood Mountains 21,750 Vacant White Crooked Creek Mountains 15,358 Active 275 cow/calf pairs 7/1-9/15 Davis Creek Boundary Peak 247 Active 515 cow/calf pairs 7/1-9/15 White Davis Creek Mountains 4,333 Active 154 cow/calf pairs 7/1-9/15 George Creek John Muir 284 Active 35 cow/calf pairs 4/1-6/30 Independence John Muir 6,004 Active 19 cow/calf pairs 2/1-6/30 White Indian Creek Mountains 10,596 Active 120 cow/calf pairs 7/1-9/15

Inyo Mazourka Mountains 6,446 Active 50 cow/calf pairs 5/1-8/30 McMurray Meadows John Muir 4,635 Active 100 cow/calf pairs 5/1-9/15 485 cow/calf pairs + 400 cow/calf pairs Monache Golden Trout 17,615 Active + 7 horses/mules 7/1-9/30

Page 20 of 86

Wilderness Acres in Allotment Season Allotment Name Area Wilderness Status Permitted Livestock of Use 485 cow/calf pairs + 400 cow/calf pairs Monache South Sierra 15,543 Active + 7 horses/mules 7/1-9/30 235 cow/calf pairs 7/10- Mulkey Golden Trout 18,932 Active + 13 horses/mules 10/10 Olancha Golden Trout 3,751 Active 81 cow/calf pairs 4/1-6/30 Olancha South Sierra 1,780 Active 81 cow/calf pairs 4/1-6/30 White Perry Aiken Mountains 26,537 Active 125 cow/calf pairs 7/1-9/15 Queen Valley Boundary Peak 260 Vacant Rock Creek John Muir 717 Vacant Taboose Creek John Muir 1,060 Active 44 cow/calf pairs 3/1-6/15 Templeton Golden Trout 43,628 Vacant Templeton South Sierra 178 Vacant Trail Canyon Boundary Peak 6,284 Active 201 cow/calf pairs 7/1-9/15 White Trail Canyon Mountains 2,230 Active 60 cow/calf pairs 7/1-9/15 White Tres Plumas Mountains 37,536 Vacant Waucoba/Hunter Inyo HMA Mountains 22,951 Active 11 Wild Burros N/A White Mountain HMA Boundary Peak 7,498 Active 70 Wild Horses N/A White White Mountain HMA Mountains 99,955 Active 70 Wild Horses N/A Whitney Golden Trout 45,004 Vacant

Trends Because of current trailhead quotas, it is expected that overall wilderness use will remain steady into the future, at least for overnight use and the Mount Whitney Trail, until such time as the quotas are revised. Day use visitation, however, has increased over time and future trends are uncertain. With the exception of the Mount Whitney Trail, day use permits are not required, and there is limited monitoring information available to assess the trends in number of day users and if indicators are being exceeded. This may be of particular concern where trails are located within popular recreation areas and provide relatively easy access to the wilderness, such as Rock Creek and Little Lakes Valley. Nonetheless, use patterns may shift and concentrated use in wilderness may also be focused more heavily along the Pacific Crest and John Muir Trail corridors as a consequence of the growing popularity for through-hiking. (See the John Muir Trail and Pacific Crest Trail sections of this chapter for more information.)

Page 21 of 86

Concentrated use has the potential to affect wilderness character by lessening opportunity for solitude or increasing crowding in select locations, and by creating ecosystem effects such as vegetation trampling or water quality impairment. There may also be increased future desire for outfitter/guide services in wilderness as part of the overall increasing demand for recreation on public lands and an aging population who want more amenities during their visit.

Wild and Scenic Rivers Congress passed the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System Act in 1968 (Public Law 90-542; 16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq.) for the purpose of preserving rivers with outstanding natural, cultural, and recreational values in a free-flowing condition for the enjoyment of present and future generations. The Act is recognized for safeguarding the special character of these rivers, while also allowing for their appropriate use and development. The Act promotes river management across political boundaries and public participation in developing goals for river protection.

It is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States that certain selected rivers of the Nation which, with their immediate environments, possess outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural or other similar values, shall be preserved in free-flowing condition, and that they and their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Congress declares that the established national policy of dams and other construction at appropriate sections of the rivers of the United States needs to be complemented by a policy that would preserve other selected rivers or sections thereof in their free-flowing condition to protect the water quality of such rivers and to fulfill other vital national conservation purposes. (Wild & Scenic Rivers Act, October 2, 1968)

Four Wild and Scenic Rivers (W&S Rivers) are currently designated for the Inyo National Forest, with all or part of the river located within the administrative boundary of the Forest (Figure 2). These four W&S Rivers are North Fork , South Fork Kern River, Cottonwood Creek in the White Mountains, and Owens River Headwaters. These four W&S Rivers are assessed individually in the following sections. Streams found to be eligible for inclusion in the W&S River system are discussed in the Potential Need and Opportunity section at the end of this chapter.

The North Fork Kern River and South Fork Kern River are currently managed according to general direction in the 1988 LRMP plus specific direction found in a Comprehensive Management Plan (CMP; USDA Forest Service 1994). Cottonwood Creek and Owens River Headwaters are also managed according to general direction in the 1988 LRMP, but do not currently have more specific management direction in a CMP. While the process for revising the LRMP may not include development of river specific management plans for these 2 wild and scenic rivers, additional management direction in a new LRMP may be of benefit. For example, key monitoring elements could be developed for wild and scenic rivers which would indicate need for a more detailed Page 22 of 86

management plan.

The description of scenic character for Wild and Scenic Rivers is incorporated into the discussion of Forest Places found in Chapter 9. A list of the designated Wild and Scenic Rivers (WSRs) and the Forest Places in which they are located is displayed below: North Fork Kern and South Fork Kern WSRs are located within the Golden Trout-South Sierra Forest Place. Cottonwood Creek WSR is located within the White Mountains Forest Place. Owens River Headwaters WSR is located in the Owens River Headwaters Forest Place.

Each river in the National System is administered with the goal of protecting and enhancing the outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs) for which it was designated. Recreation, agricultural practices, transportation development, and other uses may generally continue after designation. For W&S rivers, the designated management boundaries generally average one-quarter mile on either bank in the lower 48 states. The purpose of this one-quarter mile management corridor is to protect river-related values. For management purposes, river segments are classified as wild, scenic, or recreational.

Wild River Areas – Those rivers or sections of rivers that are free of impoundments and generally inaccessible except by trail, with watersheds or shorelines essentially primitive and waters unpolluted. These represent vestiges of primitive America. Scenic River Areas – Those rivers or sections of rivers that are free of impoundments, with shorelines or watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines largely undeveloped, but accessible in places by roads. Recreational River Areas – Those rivers or sections of rivers that are readily accessible by road or railroad, that may have some development along their shorelines, and that may have undergone some impoundment or diversion in the past.

Page 23 of 86

Figure 2. Designated areas on the Inyo NF, including Wild and Scenic Rivers, Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area, Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest Area, Research Natural Areas, and Scenic Byways.

Page 24 of 86

North Fork of the Kern River

Description The upper 78 miles of the North Fork of the Kern River were designated as a Wild and Scenic River in 1987 by Public Law 100-174. The Wild and Scenic section starts at its headwaters west of Mount Whitney in Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, and ends at the county line boundary between Tulare and Kern Counties.

The Inyo NF administers a portion of “Segment 2” of the river, which is designated as “Wild”. The Inyo NF portion is a ¼ mile wide corridor on the east side of the river approximately 11.5 miles in length. The Sequoia NF administers the west side of the river corridor. The portion administered by the Inyo NF is located within the Golden Trout Wilderness.

In compliance with Section 3 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, the Comprehensive Management Plan for the North Fork and South Forks of the Kern Wild and Scenic River (CMP) was completed in September, 1994 (USDA Forest Service 1994). The CMP is a programmatic plan that provides overall management direction for the Wild and Scenic River.

Current Management Three management plans provide the primary direction for administration of the North Fork Kern River. Comprehensive Management Plan for the North Fork and South Forks of the Kern Wild and Scenic River (CMP) (1994): The CMP provides programmatic management direction for the North Fork of the Kern River. The Plan’s elements included: 1) whitewater boating management; 2) a compilation of existing Forest Service programmatic direction on natural resources within the river corridor; 3) references to best management practices to protect natural resources when implementing Plan elements. The Plan is organized around the Recreational Opportunity Spectrum concept, and contains a set of management actions for four opportunity classes. The Inyo NF portion of the North Fork is within the “Wild” opportunity class.

The Forest’s goal is to provide resource, social, and managerial settings on Segment 2 of the North Fork that are consistent with the “Wild” opportunity class. The resource setting is characterized by a primitive recreation opportunity class: some human caused modification of the environment is evident in localized areas; visitor impacts to soils and vegetation in campsites and along trails are minor. The social setting is characterized by limited use, with good opportunities for solitude, and only occasional encounters with other visitors. The managerial setting is characterized by maintaining natural conditions and primitive recreation opportunities.

Page 25 of 86

The Plan adopts a Levels of Acceptable Change approach to managing visitor use to the North Fork. The approach defines several indicators for social conditions (trail encounters per day and density of campsites), and sets standards for those indicators. If standards are exceeded, management actions would be implemented to bring the social impacts or resource conditions to within acceptable levels.

Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (USDA Forest Service 2004) (SNFPA): The SNFPA sets broad goals for the desired conditions on Wild and Scenic Rivers: 1) The ORVs for which wild and scenic river was established are protected and preserved for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations; 2) Free-flowing conditions are preserved; 3) Human influences does not interfere with the natural succession of river ecosystems. The SNFPA aquatic management strategy includes the desired conditions for aquatic and riparian habitats, and a set of riparian conservation objectives with associated standards and guidelines that apply to Riparian Conservation Areas within the Wild and Scenic Corridor. Riparian Conservation Areas are lands within 300 feet of the river or other special aquatic feature.

Inyo National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1988): The 1988 LRMP applied Management Prescription 8 – Wild and Scenic River to rivers designated or recommended as wild and scenic rivers. With the broad goal of protecting the free- flowing condition of rivers with a “Wild” designation, the LRMP contains management prescriptions for each plan element or type of resource. The management prescriptions generally describe what activities are allowed in the river corridor. The LRMP also provides forest-wide standards and guidelines for twenty-four resource categories. Several of the resource categories particularly apply to the Wild and Scenic Corridor: fish, riparian areas, visual resources and watershed.

Coordination needs between Inyo & Sequoia National Forests & SEKI: . Non-native invasive weed inventory and eradication efforts □ velvet grass control in Kern Flat area □ NNIP inventory along river section burned by McNally Fire (cheat grass and perennial Pepperweed now in Nine Mile Creek watershed upstream from NF Kern). . Visitor use monitoring to track whether social conditions meet plan standards.

Currently, there are no known water resource projects being evaluated under Section 7. Also, there are no known water resource proposals or recent Section 7 determinations.

Page 26 of 86

Current Conditions River channel current conditions: . The river corridor is protected by both Wild and Scenic and wilderness designation from its headwaters through Segment 2, so the channel is in a largely natural condition. . Riparian habitat along the corridor is largely limited to a narrow broken band of alder and willow, with occasional cottonwood. Cottonwoods in 1970s burn area did not appear to be regenerating in the mid-1990s (page 81; USDA Forest Service 1994). . No known current assessment of river channel conditions

Upland current conditions: . The natural qualities of the uplands are protected by both Wild and Scenic and wilderness designation from its headwaters through Segment 2. . The river canyon is dominated by transitional mixed coniferous forest. Wildfire in the 1970s “eliminated most of the forest vegetation”. The area currently supports dense stands of scrub oak, bitterbrush, black oak and buck brush. Stands of older pines exist in scattered pockets and on flats along the river (page 81; USDA Forest Service 1994).

Development of lands and facilities: . Golden Trout Creek Trail (Trail Class 3) crosses the river corridor at north end of segment 2. There is a stock bridge across the river at the crossing. . Painter’s Camp Trail extends 1.5 miles on east side of river upstream from Nine Mile Creek area. The remaining 11 miles of river on the Inyo NF side of river does not contain any trails (trails in Segment 2 are on the Sequoia NF side). . There is a private property inholding with structures on an island within the river corridor at the northern end of Segment 2 (location of island places it within Sequoia NF jurisdiction).

User capacity: . There are no trail entry quotas to the trails within the Golden Trout Wilderness that lead to the NF Kern River . The CMP limits non-commercial whitewater boating launches to 15 non-commercial visitors daily on the Wilderness Run (the put-in is at Soda Flat at the north end of Segment 2 and the take-out is at the confluence with Little Kern River). Boaters likely access Soda Flat through trails on the Sequoia NF side of the river. . The CMP indicated commercial use of Segment 2 would be investigated, but there is no existing commercial use on Segment 2.

Page 27 of 86

Recreation impacts: . There is no current data on number of occupied campsites or number of parties encountered daily because most visitors access Segment 2 from the Sequoia NF, which has not compiled visitor use data from recent years. . Few campsites are located on Inyo NF side of river in Segment 2 because the primary access trail is located on the west side of river in the Sequoia NF. There are no known issues with visitor impacts to natural qualities related to campsites located within 100 feet of water.

Water quality conditions: . The 1994 FEIS North Fork and South Fork Kern Rivers characterized water quality conditions as “well oxygenated, cold, generally clear, low in nutrients, and essentially without known water quality problems” (pages 76-77; USDA Forest Service 1994). . Water quality is currently protected by: 1) Forest Service Best Management Practices (2000); 2) standards and guidelines for Riparian Conservation Areas required by the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (USDA Forest Service 2004); 3) CMP management direction requires campsites to be located more than 100 feet from surface water; if terrain prevents camping more than 100 feet from the water, then campsites must be at least 25 feet from water. . There has been no known water quality monitoring on Segment 2 (page 77; USDA Forest Service 1994). Though water quality may be affected by air pollution. The has conducted an assessment of the presence of airborne contaminants that detected pesticides in the Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Park (SEKI) snowpack in the headwaters of the Kaweah River watershed: “Concentrations of many current-use pesticides and historic-use pesticides were high, producing high deposition fluxes”. Snowmelt from lands within SEKI forms the headwaters of the North Fork of the Kern River.

Instream flow requirements: . Not applicable – The North Fork Kern is a free flowing river with no diversions from headwaters through Segment 2. . Currently, there are no known water resource projects being evaluated under Section 7. Also, there are no known water resource proposals or recent Section 7 determinations.

Water rights decree (only if a federal reserved water right has been secured) . There is currently no information compiled regarding federally reserved water rights.

Page 28 of 86

Outstandingly Remarkable Values The Outstandingly Remarkable Values identified for Segment 2 of the North Fork Kern River include scenic, recreation, fisheries, vegetation, cultural/historical and geologic values (USDA Forest Service 1982b and USDA Forest Service 1994).

Scenic values: . The North Fork Kern River canyon’s visual-recreational experience, the postpile formations, lakes, pools, and waterfalls. . Current conditions: Scenic values and undeveloped qualities continue to be protected by wilderness designation of lands within the river corridor and CMP Visual Quality Objective of preservation.

Recreation values: . The W&S river is entirely located within designated wilderness. The recreational characteristics include excellent hiking, pack stock trips, camping, fishing, solitude, and the outstanding visual experience. The CMP noted the existing (1994) opportunities for solitude & a river corridor with only minor visitor impacts. . Current conditions: The river corridor continues to provide outstanding recreation opportunities, likely including the opportunity for solitude. Visitor impacts to the river corridor remain minor due to the absence of trails on the most on the Inyo NF side of the river corridor.

Fisheries values: . The hybrid trout fishery in Segment 2 was recognized for outstandingly remarkable population values (USDA Forest Service 1982b and 1994). Populations of pure Kern River rainbow trout and Little Kern golden trout are found within Segment 2 (page 83; USDA Forest Service 1994). . Current conditions: Fishery habitat is protected by both the wilderness designation and Wild and Scenic designation of lands in the river corridor. The current conditions for aquatic special status species, including Kern River rainbow trout and Little Kern golden trout can be found in assessment Chapter 5. . The US Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife are partners with the Inyo and Sequoia NF in implementing the Conservation Assessment and Strategy for the California Golden Trout.

Vegetation values: . The North Fork Kern River corridor includes regionally uncommon wetland habitat at Kern Lakes and the alkaline seep at the Forks of the Kern. The wetland habitat contains several uncommon aquatic and marsh species; the alkaline seep also supports several uncommon plants (page 73; USDA Forest Service 1994). . Current conditions: The vegetation values are located on the Sequoia NF, and outside the areal scope of this assessment.

Page 29 of 86

Cultural values: . Prehistoric Tubatulabal sites occur intermittently along the river, and include large multi-occupation areas characterized by bedrock mortars, dense lithic scatter, and middens (page 49: USDA Forest Service 1994). Cultural resources in the corridor, most of which are on the Sequoia NF portion of the W&S river, were described as numerous and still largely undisturbed in 1989. . Current conditions: There is no data currently available to characterize existing conditions.

Geologic values: . The North Fork Kern River canyon within Segment 2 is part of what may be the longest, linear glacially-sculpted valley in the world. It contains regionally unique features referred to as Kernbuts and Kerncols. These rounded to elongated (parallel to the axis of the canyon) granitic knobs (Kernbuts) and the depressions between them (Kerncols) were first identified and named in the Kern Canyon (page 46; USDA Forest Service 1982b). . Current conditions: The geologic values continue to be protected by both wilderness designation and W&S River designation of lands in the river corridor.

South Fork Kern River

Description The upper 72.5 miles of the South Fork Kern River were designated as a Wild and Scenic River in 1987 by Public Law 100-174. The Wild and Scenic section is a ¼ mile wide corridor that starts at its headwaters near Cirque Peak in the Golden Trout Wilderness, and ends at the southern boundary of the Domeland Wilderness in Sequoia NF. The Inyo NF administers the upper 28 miles of the river corridor, which is divided into four segments, starting at the headwaters and continuing downstream: . Segment 6 is designated “Wild” and is located entirely within the Golden Trout Wilderness. The segment is 20 miles in length, beginning at the headwaters and ending at the southern boundary of the Golden Trout Wilderness. . Segment 5a is designated “Wild” and is located on non-wilderness lands. The segment is 1.2 miles in length, beginning at the Golden Trout Wilderness barrier and ending at the Schaeffer fish barrier in Monache Meadows. . Segment 5 is designated “Scenic” and is located within non-wilderness lands in the Monache Meadows area. The segment is 7 miles in length, beginning at the Schaeffer fish barrier and ending where the boundary of the South Sierra Wilderness crosses the river. . Segment 4 is designated “Wild”, and is located within the South Sierra Wilderness. The segment is 14.3 miles in length, beginning at the South Sierra Wilderness

Page 30 of 86

boundary in Monache Meadows and ending at the southern boundary of the South Sierra Wilderness.

Current Management The Comprehensive Management Plan for the North Fork and South Forks of the Kern Wild and Scenic River (CMP) (1994) provides management direction for the Wild and Scenic section of the South Fork Kern River. The four segments of the river within the Inyo NF are within the “Wild”, “Wild1”, or “Scenic” opportunity class. The “Wild1” opportunity class has the same resource and managerial settings as the “Wild” opportunity class, but with lowers standards for opportunities for solitude. The “Scenic” Segment 5 is a 7 mile long stretch of the river located in Monache Meadows. The resource setting is characterized by a primitive recreation opportunity class: some human caused modification of the environment is evident in localized areas; visitor impacts to soils and vegetation in campsites and along trails are minor. The social setting is characterized by limited use, with good opportunities for solitude, and only occasional encounters with other visitors. The managerial setting is characterized by maintaining natural conditions and primitive recreation opportunities.

Coordination needs between Inyo & Sequoia National Forests: . Non-native invasive weed inventory and eradication efforts. . Visitor use monitoring. . Provide visitors to the river corridor information on leave no trace camping practices.

Stewardship partners: The US Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife are partners with the Inyo and Sequoia NF in the Conservation Assessment and Strategy for the California Golden Trout.

Currently, there are no known water resource projects being evaluated under Section 7. Also, there are no known water resource proposals or recent Section 7 determinations.

Current Conditions River channel and upland current conditions: The South Fork Kern River flows through three livestock grazing allotments. Segment 6 flows through two allotments, Whitney and Templeton, which have been rested since 2001. Segment 5a, 5, and the northern portion of Segment 4 flow through the Monache Allotment, which is currently being grazed.

The Forest Service has conducted two types of long-term condition and trend monitoring on portions of the South Fork Kern River in connection with the management of grazing allotments on the Kern Plateau.

Page 31 of 86

1. Amendment #6 to the Inyo National Forest land and Resource Management Plan establishes a methodology for assessing watershed condition in meadow and upland areas for vegetation and watershed conditions. Amendment 6 rates watershed condition for wet meadows based on six factors: thickness of sod or surface organic layer, soil compaction, presence and extent of hummocks, presence and extent of rills and gullies, amount of bare ground due to disturbance, presence and extent of head cuts or nickpoints. 2. Proper Functioning Condition is a methodology for measuring the health of riparian and aquatic systems by evaluating the vegetative, geomorphic, and hydrologic development and structural integrity of an area or reach of stream. Stream Condition Inventories have also been conducted on portions of the South Fork Kern River in 2010-2011. This methodology measures stream features to classify stream channels, evaluate the condition of stream morphology and aquatic habitat, and make inferences about water quality. Another monitoring effort was initiated in 1999 and continued through 2010 that examined channel morphology through major meadows along the South Fork Kern River (Ettema et al. 2010).

Condition and Trend Monitoring for Segment 6:

PFC assessments were conducted in the South Fork Meadow area near the headwaters of the river in 2010. Most of the river channel within the meadow key area is rated as “Functional At Risk” without an apparent trend. A “functioning at risk” system has some features that make it more susceptible to degradation during a high flow event. A reach that is functional at risk is negatively affecting beneficial uses of the water in the river. The rating was attributed to inadequate riparian cover and degraded channel geomorphic conditions as a result of head cuts (USDA Forest Service 2010a).

PFC and Amendment 6 assessments found that rest from livestock grazing since 2001 has resulted in a strong upward trend in meadow condition and stream bank stability within in Templeton Meadows (USDA Forest Service 2012b). There is a “strong upward trend in the hydrological function of the river throughout the Ramshaw and Templeton meadows…. The river is in a dynamic state at this time, and will continue the process of widening the floodplain until a functional balance is reached where the channel shape, sinuosity and gradient is in balance with the sediment load” (USDA Forest Service 2010b).

Stream Condition Inventories were conducted in Ramshaw and Templeton Meadows. All measurements, including particle size, width to depth ratio, number of pools, bank stability and shading, were either stable or showed an upward trend (USDA Forest Service 2011a).

Channel morphology monitoring reported by Ettema (2010) showed that all stream reaches through South Fork, Tunnel, Ramshaw and Templeton Page 32 of 86

meadows were within the expected range for the width of the stream and the width to depth ratio, meaning that the channels are not wider or shallower than needed for proper hydrologic function.

Condition and Trend Monitoring for Segment 5a: There has been no known assessment of river channel or upland conditions on this section of the river.

Condition and Trend Monitoring for Segment 5:

The Monache Meadows area in Segment 5 generally has the lowest proportion of sites meeting desired condition and the lowest proportion of sites trending upward (USDA Forest Service 2012b). This is due to slow recovery from a recent stream-incision event in 1983 coupled with high sediment loads, most likely from the high and unstable banks along this stretch of river.

Amendment 6 ratings for three meadows that are partially within the river corridor indicate two meadows (Bake oven and upper Soda) are “fully functional”, while Monache Meadow is “at risk”.

Channel morphology monitoring reported by Ettema (2010) showed that the stream channel through Monache Meadow did not meet the expected width or width to depth ratio for this section of stream, indicating that stream channels were wider and shallower than needed for proper hydrologic function, and is related to the same stream incision event as mentioned above. However, Soda Creek did fall within the expected width and width to depth ration for hydrologic function.

. Condition and Trend for Segment 4: There has been no known assessment of river channel or upland conditions on this section of the river. The river corridor continues to be protected by both Wild and Scenic and Wilderness designation.

Development of lands and facilities: There are five types of developments within the four segments of the river corridor: forest system trails; administrative cabins and pasture fences; livestock grazing exclosures; four wheel drive routes; and fish barriers. 1. There are 8.5 miles of system trails within Segment 6, which is within the Golden Trout Wilderness; there are 7.5 miles of system trail, including a 2 mile section of the Pacific Crest Trail, within Segment 4, which is within the South Sierra Wilderness. 2. Forest Service administrative cabins and pasture fences are located at Tunnel Meadow in Segment 6. 3. There are livestock grazing exclosures in Segments 6 at Ramshaw and Templeton Meadows, and in Segment 5 in Monache meadows. Several livestock grazing exclosures in Ramshaw Meadow protect abronia alpina populations

Page 33 of 86

4. Four-wheel drive routes, several crossing the river, are located in river corridor in Section 5. 5. The Templeton barrier is located in Section 6 and the Schaeffer barrier is located in Section 5a. User capacity: . There are no trail entry quotas for trailheads entering either the Golden Trout Wilderness or South Sierra Wilderness that provide access to the South Fork Kern River. . The CMP prohibits commercial whitewater boating on all four segments, and nearly all non-commercial whitewater boating takes places on river sections downstream of the Inyo NF.

Recreation impacts: . Visitation in the Golden Trout Wilderness is well within zone capacities established by the 1982 Golden Trout Wilderness Interim Management Plan. Although the Forest has not monitored either campsite occupancy or trail encounters, there are outstanding opportunities for solitude along the river within the Golden Trout Wilderness. . The Pacific Crest Trail is within Section 4 for a 3 mile long stretch and also crosses the river further upstream in Section 4, within the South Sierra Wilderness. The number of Pacific Crest Trail through-hikers in early June each year is large enough that South Sierra Wilderness occupied campsite standards are occasionally exceeded. . There are thirty-five campsites within 100 feet of the river in Segment 6 and twenty campsites within 100 feet of the river in Segment 4.

Water quality conditions: . The 1994 FEIS discussed the implementation of best management practices (BMPs) as the performance standard for meeting water quality standards for the South Fork Kern River. . Water quality is currently protected by: 1) Forest Service BMPs; 2) standards and guidelines for Riparian Conservation Areas required by the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (USDA Forest Service 2004); 3) CMP management direction which requires campsites to be located more than 100 feet from surface water. . There has been no known water quality monitoring program conducted on the South Fork Kern River. From the PFC, Amendment 6, and SCI monitoring results, it is inferred that the protecting the beneficial uses of the water in the South Fork through Forest implementation of BMPs.

Instream flow requirements . Not applicable – free flowing river with no diversions from headwaters through Segment 4.

Page 34 of 86

Water rights decree (only if a federal reserved water right has been secured) . There is currently no information compiled regarding federally reserved water rights.

Outstandingly Remarkable Values Outstandingly Remarkable Values (ORV) have been identified for each of the four segments of the South Fork Kern River in the Inyo NF (USDA Forest Service 1982b and USDA Forest Service 1994). The ORVs include scenic, recreation, fisheries, vegetation, cultural, and geologic values.

Scenic values: . Segment 6: The scenic quality afforded by large, open meadows and steep-sided canyons. . Segment 4: The combination of picturesque patterns of rock, vegetation, and canyon walls. The meadow landscapes and the rugged canyons add to the uniqueness of the scenery. . Segment 5 and 5a: The meadow complex is surrounded on the north, east, and west by wilderness. The area offers outstanding panoramas. . Current conditions in Segment 6 and 4: Scenic values and undeveloped qualities continue to be protected by wilderness designation of lands within the river corridor and CMP Visual Quality Objective of preservation . Current conditions in Segments 5 and 5a: Scenic values continue to be protected within the river corridor by the CMP Visual Quality Objective of preservation.

Recreation values: . Segment 6 and 4: Backpacking, fishing, hunting, horseback riding, and camping in a wilderness setting. . Segment 5a: Backpacking, fishing, hunting, and primitive camping, all within an essentially primitive setting. . Segment 5: Camping, picnicking, four-wheel drive and motorbike use, fishing, hiking, and hunting. . Current conditions in Segment 6 and 4: The river corridor continues to provide outstanding recreation opportunities, and with the exception of the 2 mile section of the PCT in Segment 4, there are outstanding opportunities for solitude. . Current conditions in Segments 5 and 5a: The river corridor continues to provide the same suite of recreation opportunities.

Fisheries values:

. Segment 6 and 5a values: The two sections are an outstandingly remarkable fishery for the California golden trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss aguabonita).

Page 35 of 86

. Current conditions: The California golden trout is a Pacific Southwest Region 5 Sensitive Species. In October 2011, the US Fish and Wildlife Service issued a “Notice of 12-month petition finding” that the California golden trout is not warranted to be listed as a Threatened and Endangered Species. The primary potential threats to the subspecies include livestock grazing, competition and predation from introduced brown trout, and hybridization with nonnative trout. The US Fish and Wildlife Service found that the potential threats are all addressed by the Conservation Assessment and Strategy for the California Golden Trout (USDA Forest Service and US Fish and Wildlife Service 2004) and Memorandum of Agreement that the Forest Service, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife are implementing (US Fish and Wildlife Service 2011). The purposes of the Conservation Strategy are to: 1) protect and restore California golden trout genetic integrity and distribution within its native range; 2) improve riparian and instream habitat for the restoration of California golden trout populations; 3) expand educational efforts regarding California golden trout restoration and protection.

Vegetation values: . Segment 6: The populations of abronia alpine in Ramshaw Meadow. . Segment 5a: The area provides a Great Basin vegetation type not normally found in the Sierra Nevada, making it floristically unique. . Segment 5: The potential habitat for abronia alpina along the river corridor. . Current conditions in Segment 6 and 5: The Forest has implemented a conservation strategy to protect populations from recreation-related and livestock grazing impacts. Monitoring indicates the protection measures have substantially reduced trampling of abronia alpina populations. . Current conditions of Segment 5a:

Cultural values: . Segment 5: Eight prehistoric sites in the Monache Meadows area are identified as having an outstandingly remarkable value. . Segment 4: One prehistoric site along the river corridor is identified as having an outstandingly remarkable value. . Current conditions: Surveys of several historic and prehistoric cultural resources in Segments 4 and 5 were conducted in 2012. Some sites in Segment 5 could be considered for eligibility for the National Register. Segment 4 is still largely unsurveyed.

Geologic values: . Segment 6: Templeton Mountain (a large Tertiary volcanic cone), a small outcrop of Pliocene pyroclastic volcanic rock in Ramshaw Meadow, and glacial deposits in the meadow alluvium. . Segment 5a: The river channel cuts through massive exposures of granitic rock outcrop, forming a narrow channel with steep canyon walls.

Page 36 of 86

. Segment 5: Monache Mountain, a large volcanic cone adjacent to Monache Meadows, and glacial deposits in the meadow alluvium. . Current conditions: The values in Segment 6 continue to be protected by wilderness designation, and the values in Segments 5 and 5a continue to be protected by the Wild and Scenic River designation of lands in the river corridor.

Cottonwood Creek in the White Mountains

Description In the White Mountains of California, 21.5 miles of Cottonwood Creek were designated as a Wild and Scenic River in 2009 by the Omnibus Public Land Management Act (Public Law 111-1). This Act specifies that the 17.4 mile section of Cottonwood Creek, from the headwaters downstream to the Inyo National Forest boundary, will be managed as a Wild segment of Wild and Scenic River (W&S River) by the Forest. The Inyo NF manages a ¼ mile wide corridor on the both sides of the Cottonwood Creek, all of which is located within the White Mountain Wilderness. Another 4.1 miles of Cottonwood Creek, downstream from the INF boundary, will be managed as a Recreation section of W&S River by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The portion of Cottonwood Creek W&S River managed by BLM will not be discussed in this assessment.

Section 3 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act directs the managing agencies to complete a Comprehensive Management Plan (CMP) for the all designated Wild and Scenic Rivers. The CMP is a programmatic plan that provides overall management direction for the Wild and Scenic River. A CMP has not yet been completed, and is needed for the Cottonwood Creek Wild and Scenic River.

Current Management Currently, the Inyo NF Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP; USDA Forest Service 1988) provides the primary direction for administration of Cottonwood Creek, because there is no specific CMP for this W&S River.

The Recreational Opportunity Spectrum classification provides direction for the type of management activities which are consistent with the recreation settings in these classes. The upper one-third of Cottonwood Creek is within the “Primitive Non-Motorized” opportunity class, while the lower two-thirds are within the “Semi-Primitive Non- Motorized” class. In both of these classes, recreation management emphasizes non- motorized access, and recreation opportunities which do not rely on developments or infrastructure.

The LRMP provides direction for management of the White Mountains Wilderness, which also applies to the Cottonwood Creek W&S River corridor which is located within the wilderness. Wilderness areas are managed to maintain a natural or natural- Page 37 of 86

appearing landscape and facilitate low frequencies of interaction between users.

Current Conditions River channel current conditions: The river corridor is currently protected by both Wild and Scenic and wilderness designation in 2009, from its headwaters to the Forest boundary. Riparian habitat along the corridor is largely limited to a narrow band of willow and other riparian shrubs, with occasional cottonwood in the lower reaches. An assessment of current river channel conditions shows that streambanks are well vegetated and stable, while the robust riparian vegetation provides adequate cover for fish (Ettema and Sims 2012).

Upland current conditions: The natural qualities of the uplands are currently protected by both Wild and Scenic and wilderness designation in 2009, from its headwaters to the Forest boundary. Cottonwood Creek WSR corridor is dominated by pinyon-juniper woodlands and sagebrush shrublands, with limited areas of bristlecone pine forest, mountain mahogany and dry forbs at the upper elevations. While there is no current formal assessment of upland conditions, anecdotal information suggests there may be impacts in the Cottonwood Creek watershed from recent illegal marijuana garden activities.

Development of lands and facilities: The Cottonwood Creek Stock Trail runs along the entire length of Cottonwood Creek. Two connector trails, Station Peak Stock Trail and Indian Garden Stock Trail, also enter the Wild and Scenic River Corridor on the Forest. Though these trails are on the Forest’s trail system, they are not evident on the ground. There is a non- system trail along the North Fork, down to the junction of South Fork and along the South Fork upstream to McCloud Camp which receives relatively light use. Grazing has previously occurred within the Cottonwood Creek river corridor, though the Cottonwood allotment is currently vacant and no grazing is authorized for the area at this time. There are range developments such as fencing remaining in the area, most of which are in disrepair. However, there is no inventory available.

User capacity: There are no trail entry quotas to the trails within the White Mountain Wilderness that lead to Cottonwood Creek.

Recreation impacts: There is no current data on campsite occupation or number of parties encountered daily, though use is likely low and impacts few. A few dispersed campsites were

Page 38 of 86

noted through public comment along the upper reaches, upstream from Granite Basin. Notable impacts from dispersed campsites were not observed. There are no known issues with visitor impacts to natural qualities related to campsites located within 100 feet of water.

Water quality conditions: Water quality is currently protected by: 1) Forest Service Best Management Practices, and; 2) standards and guidelines for livestock grazing, though no livestock grazing is currently authorized. There has been no known water quality monitoring on Cottonwood Creek, though anecdotal information suggests there may be impacts from recent illegal marijuana garden activities in the Cottonwood Creek watershed. Extensive damage by vegetation removal, terracing, and irrigation system placement for illegal marijuana cultivation was noted in public comments.

Instream flow requirements: Not applicable – Cottonwood Creek is a free flowing river with no diversions from headwaters to the Forest boundary.

Water rights decree (only if a federal reserved water right has been secured) There is no known federally reserved water right on Cottonwood Creek.

Outstandingly Remarkable Values The Outstandingly Remarkable Values identified for Cottonwood Creek include fisheries and other values (USDA Forest Service 1993).

Fisheries Values: Cottonwood Creek supports a population of Paiute Cutthroat Trout (PCT). While this population of PCT was likely planted in Cottonwood and is not endemic to this stream, PCT is an aquatic special status species. Refer to Chapter 5 for more information.

Other values: The headwaters area of Cottonwood Creek contains isolated stands of Bristlecone pine forest. The Bristlecone pine forests in the White Mountains contain some of the oldest living trees in the world. Cottonwood Creek is the only waterway in the Great Basin protected from its headwaters to its terminus as a W&S River. Current conditions: The Bristlecone pines in Cottonwood Creek are protected by both wilderness designation and W&S River designation of lands in the river corridor.

Page 39 of 86

Owens River Headwaters

Description The upper 19.1 miles of the Upper Owens River and tributaries were designated as a Wild and Scenic River in 2009 by Public Law 111-11. The Owens River Headwaters Wild and Scenic River corridor encompasses a ¼ mile wide area along the two headwaters streams, Deadman Creek and Glass Creek, and extends downstream along the Upper Owens River to the Inyo National Forest Boundary with private lands. The Inyo NF administers the entire river corridor, which is divided into eight segments classified as a Wild, Scenic or Recreation river (Table 7).

Current Management Currently, the Inyo NF Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP; USDA Forest Service 1988) provides the primary direction for administration of Owens River Headwaters, because there is no specific CMP for this W&S River.

Current Conditions River channel current conditions: Within the Deadman Creek and Glass Creek headwaters (i.e., the two segments classified as Wild), the river corridor is currently protected by both Wild and Scenic River, and the Owens Headwaters Wilderness designation in 2009. Within the Scenic and Recreation segments, there are existing roads, developed recreation facilities (e.g. campgrounds, trailheads, etc.) and recreational use, including fishing, camping, hiking and off-highway vehicle use. Riparian habitat along the corridor is largely limited to a narrow band of willow and other riparian shrubs, with occasional aspens in the upper reaches and cottonwood in the lower reaches. There is one large, wet meadow located in the river corridor in the Wild segment of Glass Creek at Glass Creek Meadow. River channel conditions are currently being improved with restoration measures being implemented as part of the Upper Owens/Bishop Creek OHV Restoration Project for the Scenic and Recreation river segments.

Page 40 of 86

Table 7. Wild and Scenic River segments and river classification for the Owens River Headwaters.

Segment Segment Length Owens River Headwaters W&S River – Segment Number (miles) Segment Location Description Classification Deadman Creek from the two-forked source to confluence 1 2.3 with un-named tributary in Sec. 12, T3S, R26E Wild Deadman Creek from the un-named tributary to Road 3S22 2 2.3 crossing Scenic Deadman Creek from Road 3S22 crossing to 1/4 mile 3 4.1 downstream of Hwy. 395 Recreation Deadman Creek from 1/4 mile downstream of Hwy. 395 to 4 3.0 100 feet upstream from Big Springs Scenic Upper Owens River from 100 feet upstream of Big Springs 5 1.0 to the boundary with Private Lands Recreation Glass Creek from the two-forked source to 100 feet 6 4.0 upstream of the Glass Creek Meadows Trailhead parking Wild Glass Creek from 100 feet upstream of the Trailhead 7 1.3 parking to the end of Glass Creek Road Scenic Glass Creek from the end of Glass Creek Road to the 8 1.1 confluence with Deadman Creek Recreation

Upland current conditions: The natural qualities of the uplands are currently protected by both Wild and Scenic and wilderness designation in 2009, from the Glass Creek and Deadman Creek headwaters to the Owens River Headwaters boundary. Owens River Headwaters W&S River corridor is dominated by Jeffrey pine forest in the lower reaches, with red fir forest, subalpine forest, aspen and wet meadows at the upper elevations. There is no current formal assessment of upland ecosystem conditions.

Development of lands and facilities: There are numerous types of developments within the W&S River corridor, primarily located in the Scenic and Recreation segments of the Owens River Headwaters. The list of developments is as follows: In the Wild river segments, which are located within the Owens Headwaters Wilderness, there are 2 miles of system trail which is only open to non-motorized use by foot, horseback, skis or snowshoes. In the Scenic and Recreation segments, there are 33 miles of forest roads and less than 1 mile of motorized trail in the river corridor. There is also a two-thirds mile stretch of four-lane State Highway 395 and the CalTrans Highway Maintenance Station which covers about 3 acres of land in the corridor.

Page 41 of 86

In the Scenic and Recreation segments, there are several developed campgrounds, including Upper and Lower Deadman, Glass Creek and Big Springs. In the Scenic segments adjacent to the Owens Headwaters Wilderness boundary, there are two trailhead parking areas, Deadman and Glass Creek. In the Recreation segment along Glass Creek, there is a tract of recreation residences with twelve permitted cabins located within the river corridor. In the Scenic and Recreation segments, there are dispersed area campsites. However, there is no inventory of such and the number of sites is not currently known. User capacity: There are no trail entry quotas for trailheads entering the Owens Headwaters Wilderness that provide access to the tributary headwaters on Glass Creek and Deadman Creek.

Recreation: Visitation in the Owens Headwaters Wilderness is primarily for day use. Although the Forest has not monitored either campsite occupancy or trail encounters, there are outstanding opportunities for solitude along the W&S River within the wilderness.

Water quality conditions: Water quality is currently protected by: 1) Forest Service BMPs, and 2) standards and guidelines for Riparian Conservation Areas required by the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (USDA Forest Service 2004). No water quality monitoring data has been compiled for the Owens River Headwaters W&S River.

Instream flow requirements Not applicable – the Owens River Headwaters is a free flowing river with no diversions from the headwaters to the Forest boundary.

Water rights decree (only if a federal reserved water right has been secured) . There is no known federally reserved water right for the Owens River Headwaters W&S River.

Outstandingly Remarkable Values The Outstandingly Remarkable Values (ORV) were identified for some but not all of the Owens River Headwaters W&S River, as follows (USDA Forest Service 1993). There are no ORV identified for the upper reaches of Deadman Creek in segments 1 and 2 (Table 7). Recreation is the ORV identified for the other reaches of Deadman Creek in segments 3 and 4. Recreation and other values are identified for the Upper Owens River in segment 5. For the headwaters of Glass Creek in segment 6, the ORV includes scenic, Page 42 of 86

geologic, fish and wildlife, and other values. For the other reaches of Glass Creek in segments 7 and 8, recreation is identified as the ORV.

Scenic values: Segment 6: The scenic quality is afforded by the large, open meadow in the headwaters of Glass Creek.

Recreation values: Segment 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8: Camping, picnicking, fishing, hunting, four-wheel drive and motorbike use, scenic driving, hiking, and more in a natural setting.

Fish and Wildlife values: Segment 6: A population of Yosemite toads resides in Glass Creek Meadow. Yosemite toads are a Forest Service sensitive species, and a candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act. Glass Creek Meadow is protected as a “Critical Aquatic Refuge” (CAR) for this population of Yosemite toads, per direction in the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (USDA Forest Service 2004). Other species of interest reside in this area, including Northern goshawk and American marten, which are both Forest Service sensitive species.

Geologic values: Segment 6: The visual quality of the Glass Creek headwaters is dominated by the unique geologic feature called White Wing. The volcanic ridge of White Wing is composed of light colored pumice and volcanic rock. With only sparse vegetation, this ridge with light colored rock stands out like a “white wing”. Current conditions: The geologic values in Segment 6 are protected by designation of the Owens Headwaters Wilderness in 2009, as well as the Wild and Scenic River designation of lands in the river corridor.

Trends Related to Wild and Scenic Rivers As discussed in assessment Chapter 9, the predicted trend for recreation is an overall increase in visitors and a greater demand for access and opportunities. Given the uncertainty with regard to specific types of uses and the magnitude of increase in visitor numbers, it is not possible to forecast a specific future need for special use permits or quotas to limit use, types of activities, party size, etc. on the designated Wild and Scenic Rivers.

Future trends for Wild and Scenic Rivers and other rivers as related to ecological conditions are discussed in assessment Chapters 1, 2 and 3.

Page 43 of 86

Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area

Current Condition The Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area was statutorily designated with the California Wilderness Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-425). This enabling legislation called for management of the area to protect geologic, ecologic and cultural resources within the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area (hereafter referred to as Scenic Area or MBNFSA). Public Law 98-425 also specified that management would provide for recreation use and interpretive facilities, such as trails and campgrounds, and permit full use for scientific study or research on the 116,274 acres within the Scenic Area administrative boundary (Figure 2). Additional provisions in the 1984 Act prohibit commercial timber harvest except where needed to control wildfire or forest insects and disease, allows for cutting of firewood or Christmas trees, and provides for hunting or fishing.

A comprehensive management plan for the MBNFSA was completed in 1989. In this plan, action items direct development of recreation opportunities and interpretive facilities including a visitor center, while standards and guidelines are specified for management activities to protect resources and the scenic character of the MBNFSA. Recreation opportunities and interpretive facilities will be discussed first in this section, with resource protection, management activities and scenic character assessed after the recreation discussion.

The Mono Basin Visitor Center (VC), which opened in 1992, provides visitors with interpretive exhibits and films, which introduce the natural and human history of Mono Basin, as well as art galleries and a bookstore. From records kept at the Mono Basin Visitor Center, an average of more than 130,500 visitors frequent the VC per year.

Other interpretive exhibits are found at the South Tufa developed recreation site, where trails access the shoreline of Mono Lake and the unique geologic formations called tufa. Day use fees are charged at the South Tufa site under authority of the congressionally- legislated Recreation Enhancement Act (REA; Public Law 108-447, 2005). Under REA, a portion of the fees collected for day use at this site are used for resource protection, education and recreational services at this location. Currently, a $3 per adult (i.e. 16 or older) fee is charged for day use at the South Tufa exhibit and trail. The America the Beautiful-the National Parks and Federal Recreational Lands Pass (Annual, Senior, Access, Military, and Volunteer) cover the fee for day use at South Tufa.

A network of roads and trails currently provide recreational access to the Scenic Area. Of the 196 miles of road within the MBNFSA, 76 miles are suitable for use by passenger cars and are open to highway legal vehicles. The remaining 120 miles of roads are suitable for use by high clearance vehicles and are open to all vehicles. Five miles of motorized trails are open for use by all-terrain vehicles or motorcycles. Three miles of

Page 44 of 86

trails are open for non-motorized travel, notably for hiker access to the shore of Mono Lake at South Tufa and from the Visitor Center. Visitors also have opportunity for primitive forms of cross-country travel into designated wilderness, such as hiking or equestrian use, in the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area. The Hoover Wilderness partially overlaps with the northwest part of the MBNFSA, with 3,835 acres of wilderness in the Scenic Area.

A wide range of recreation activities are available in the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area, including canoeing and kayaking, hiking and equestrian riding, mountain biking, off-highway vehicle driving, wildlife and bird viewing, picnicking, and more. Commercial enterprises and organized events are also popular in the Scenic Area, especially landscape photography, filming and the annual Bird Chautauqua (discussed in more detail below), as authorized by special use permit from the Inyo NF.

The Mono Lake County Park and the Mono Lake Tufa State Natural Reserve are located within the MBNFSA administrative boundary on the north and west shores of Mono Lake. The County Park and State Reserve provide visitors with additional recreation opportunities, facilities, and interpretive services.

There are historic structures and properties located within the MBNFSA, including the DeChambeau Ranch and the Log Cabin Mine. These historic facilities represent important cultural resources, and many partners, including the Mono Basin Historical Society and Friends of the Inyo have invested in the maintenance and enhancement of these historic properties.

The communities of Lee Vining and Mono City are located just outside of the MBNFSA administrative boundary, while there are parcels of private land located within the Scenic Area. The communities have strong ties to the Scenic Area. Businesses in Lee Vining and nearby locations provide important services and amenities for visitors to the SA, and in turn, the patronization from visitors supports the local economy. An assessment of the Inyo NF contributions towards economic support for the local economy can be found in the assessment Chapter 6, Socioeconomics.

The Mono Lake Committee, with its home base in Lee Vining, is a non-profit group with a focus on advocacy for the protection of Mono Lake. The Mono Lake Committee operates an Information Center and Bookstore in Lee Vining, and provides public programs with an emphasis on science, education and interpretation concerning the Mono Lake ecosystem. The annual Bird Chautauqua is one of the more popular events organized by the Mono Lake Committee. This event, which is authorized by a Forest Service special use permit, draws a large number of bird watching enthusiasts and visitors to the Scenic Area each year in June. Additional information regarding visitor participation in activities related to viewing wildlife and birds can be found in assessment Chapter 8, Renewable Resources, and Chapter 9, Recreation Settings, Opportunities and Access.

Page 45 of 86

Ecosystems within the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area are dominated by sagebrush shrublands and the aquatic system of Mono Lake, which comprise thirty-nine and thirty-seven percent of the MBNFSA, respectively. The remaining area is comprised of riparian areas, Jeffrey pine forest, mountain mahogany shrubs, pinyon-juniper woodlands, and subalpine forest. DeChambeau Ponds, historically a wetlands mitigation project, possesses high quality wildlife habitat and recreational value within the MBNFSA. Information regarding the current conditions and trends for ecosystem assessment types can be found in assessment Chapters 1, 2 and 3.

Within the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area boundary, ecosystems have been affected by past wildfire disturbance. Over the past fifty years, eighteen wildfires have occurred within the MBNFSA, affecting a total of 4,496 acres. In the more recent burns, such as the Mono Fire (2010), the land remains sparsely vegetated because of sagebrush mortality during burning, and there has not been sufficient time for re-growth of sagebrush. In the older burns, such as the Lousy Fire (1985), re-growth of sagebrush provides for quality wildlife habitat, notably for sage grouse. Some fires in the Mono Basin have been invaded, at least partially, by cheatgrass within 2-3 years of the fire. The likelihood of invasion appears to be dependent on the occurrence of at least some cheatgrass at or near the site prior to the fire. In some cases like the June fire, the perennial grasses recovered quickly, but did not seem to prevent cheatgrass invasion entirely (Table 8). Additional effects of wildfire are described in relation to scenic quality later in this assessment section.

No commercial timber harvest has occurred in the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area, in compliance with the enabling legislation. Firewood gathering has been permitted in wildfire areas where fire-killed Jeffrey pines were made available to the public, such as in the areas burned in the Crater Fire (2003) and June Fire (2007). Within the MBNFSA boundary, no tree planting occurred in these burn areas after the wildfire, so that ecological recovery processes could play out without management intervention.

Page 46 of 86

Table 8. Cheatgrass observations in wildfire areas.

Fire name Year Cheatgrass observations (Near Mono Lake) 1972 2005 road survey found no weeds within fire boundary (Mono Craters) 1978 No information N of Aeolian 1985 2005 road survey found no weeds within fire boundary Buttes Tioga 1996 No information Dechambeau 1997 No weeds found in 1999 survey Dechambeau 1999 Russian thistle documented, but not cheatgrass Azusa 2000 Cheatgrass present in patches in 2001, had increase cover in area above Horse Meadow (s facing slope) by 2003 Crater 2001 Casual observations – apparently no cheatgrass Lundy 2003 No information Crater Mountain 2004 2005 road survey found no weeds within fire boundary Dechambeau 2004 No cheatgrass recorded, Russian thistle at edge of burned area Beach 2005 No information June 2007 Immediately after fire, lots of perennial grasses, very little cheatgrass. Cheatgrass invaded 395 roadcut on east side after about 2 years. Tioga 2008 Cheatgrass mapped along road Mono 2010 No cheatgrass observed yet, annual species – Eriogonum and Phacelia displays.

Livestock grazing is permitted on three rangeland allotments, which occur in part within the MBNFSA boundary (Table 9). Grazing within the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area is subject to standards and guidelines which manage livestock use for the protection of resources in the Scenic Area (USDA Forest Service 2011c). A fourth allotment, which is located partly within the MBNFSA, is currently closed and no grazing is permitted.

Page 47 of 86

Table 9. Livestock grazing allotments within the Mono Basin Scenic Area.

Allotment Acres in Status Permitted Season of Notes Name MBSA Numbers Use June Lake 10,389 Active 1,500 7/1—8/31 Permitted numbers are 1,500 S&G sheep, but in actual use, only 1,200 ewes are grazed. Mono Mills 2,836 Active 4,000 7/1—9/15 Permitted numbers are 4,000 S&G sheep, but in actual use, approximately 2,100 ewes are grazed there. Mono Sand 8,324 Active 26 12/1— This allotment has been rested Flat C&H 5/31 for the past several years due to drought conditions and will continue to be rested for the foreseeable future.

As provided in the enabling legislation, extensive research is conducted in the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area. One recent study, conducted by NASA-supported researchers, lead to the ground-breaking discovery in Mono Lake of “the first known microorganism on Earth able to thrive and reproduce using the toxic chemical arsenic” (NASA Science News 2010). With far too many studies to fully list here, the reader may wish to consult the Mono Basin Clearinghouse website if interested in learning more about research in the MBNFSA and surrounding areas (www.monobasinresearch.org).

The scenic character of the Scenic Area is described in assessment Chapter 9 as part of the Mono Basin and Lee Vining Place. Highlights of the SA scenic character will be described here, as follows. Scenic integrity and scenic stability will also be evaluated for the Scenic Area.

Under existing conditions for scenic integrity, nearly 30% of the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area contains naturally evolving to naturally appearing landscapes with 98% of the area inventoried as retention VQO. The majority of the landscape surrounding Mono Lake has relatively high scenic integrity with only a few developments altering scenic integrity. The most prominent visual disturbance that dominates the surrounding landscape is the Black Point Mine. This mine is located on the north shore visible from Scenic Byway 395 and the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area Visitor Center. This disturbance is noticeable but does not dominate the valued scenery. Other developments that also alter scenic integrity within the Scenic Area include roads, cabins, private developments, and recreation facilities. The Scenic Area is considered an iconic place on this Forest and has very high scenic integrity with many valued scenic attributes.

Under existing conditions, scenic stability is affected by ecological disturbance processes such as wildfire, as described above. Additional information about ecological

Page 48 of 86

disturbance processes, including climate change and risk of future wildfire, can be found in assessment Chapter 3.

Trends Trends for visitor use in the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area are expected to follow the broader recreation trends detailed in assessment Chapter 9. Namely, overall visitor numbers will increase as the U.S. population grows. Visitors will likely desire a greater suite of recreation opportunities, along with increased access and amenities. Commercial enterprises, organized events and research work, authorized by special use permit, are also expected to increase in the Scenic Area.

Because of the mandates in the enabling legislation (Public Law 98-425), it is expected that future management of the area will protect geologic, ecologic and cultural resources within the Mono Basin Scenic Area. Trends for ecosystem conditions are detailed in assessment Chapters 1, 2, and 3.

Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest

Current Condition The Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest Botanical Special Interest Area was administratively established in 1958 to protect the bristlecone pines for public enjoyment and scientific study (USDA Forest Service 2011b). The Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest Botanical Special Interest Area (hereafter referred to as the Bristlecone Forest or ABPF) was statutorily designated in 2009 with the Omnibus Public Land Management Act (Public Law 111-11). It is 11,732 hectares (28,978 acres) (see Figure 2, map of designated areas).

The ABPF is located entirely within the White Mountains subsection in the Mono Section of the Forest Service National Hierarchical Framework for ecoregions. It includes not only the subalpine conifer forest assessment type, which includes bristlecone pine forest, but also the sagebrush shrub, mountain mahogany, and pinyon- juniper assessment types as well. See the Terrestrial Ecosystems section of Chapter 1 for a discussion of Ecological Subsections and assessment types, as well as the condition of subalpine forests across the Inyo NF.

Visitors come from around the world to see the oldest living trees on the planet. Some of the bristlecone pines found here are more than 4,000 years old, and as such have attracted world-wide attention.

There is a long and rich research history in the Schulman Grove and surrounding area. Tree ring chronologies dating back to 6700 B.C. are used in a variety of research programs, including the reconstruction of climatic history, measurement of past isotope concentrations in the atmosphere, and calibration of the radio-carbon time scale. The complete list of permits for research studies in the Bristlecone Forest has not compiled Page 49 of 86

for a couple of reasons. First, the Forest Service permit database is relatively new and does not contain historic records of early research activities which began in the 1950’s. Second, the permit database contains only written data and does not have maps to make tracking the location of research easy. Third, the Inyo National Forest has limited staffing and capacity to process and track research permits. The difficulty in tracking all research activities in the Bristlecone Forest is of management concern because extensive coring of individual trees for research has potential to introduce tree disease or cause cumulative stress for trees when combined with effects of climate change.

The Schulman Grove Visitor Center (VC) provides information on natural and cultural history through displays, interpretive trails and talks. Records from the VC suggest that approximately 32,500 people visit the Bristlecone Forest each year (USDA Forest Service 2013b). Photography is popular here, with the wide vistas and colorful weathered bristlecone trunks providing ample subject matter. Two National Recreation Trails (NRTs) provide hiker access for viewing the ancient bristlecone pines: Methuselah and Discovery NRTs. The NRTs are discussed in a separate section of this chapter.

As described in the Terrestrial Ecosystems section of Chapter 1, subalpine forests have relatively long mean fire return intervals. With the possible exception of north facing slopes with higher vegetation cover and fuel loads, fire suppression has likely had minimal if any effect on the bristlecone pine forest. Due to the low productivity and widely spaced vegetation in these stands, there are usually not enough fuels to carry fire in this high elevation site.

Minor levels of insect and/or disease-related mortality can be seen within the ABPF; however, this appears to be within the natural range of variability at this time.

Currently there is one reported non-native plant species within the ABPF – Russian thistle (Salsola tragus). It is located below 9,000 feet elevation, along the Wyman Creek road. Additional unreported occurrences of non-native species may exist, particularly cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum). The generally high elevation of the ABPF provides some measure of resistance to invasion by non-native species.

Management emphasis in the current Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP), Management Prescription 7, is on maintaining near-natural conditions. All activities are subordinate to the needs of protecting and preserving bristlecone pines and wood remnants. Roads and trails are limited to existing routes except for interpretive roads and trails. Under current direction, pests are managed only when necessary to preserve the values for with the area was established; in addition, the LRMP prescribes that all wildfires will be controlled, and natural fuels will be allowed to accumulate; however, vegetation management practices are allowed which do not threaten the vegetation condition for which the area was established.

The description of scenic character for the Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest is incorporated into the discussion of Forest Places found in Chapter 9. The Ancient Page 50 of 86

Bristlecone Pine Forest is located within the White Mountains Forest Place.

Trends Changes in climate have the potential to significantly affect the ABPF. Though it is difficult to predict the complex interactions of potential changes in temperature, precipitation, and shifting insect and disease ranges, existing habitat, expansion of young bristlecone pines into both higher and lower sites (Millar in Nash, 2010) and older dead trees above current tree line indicate the potential for upslope shifts in distribution to accommodate a warming climate. Shifting patterns of various insects and diseases in response to long term changes in climate could affect existing bristlecone pine stands within the ABPF, particularly at the lower tree limit. Chapter 3, Drivers and Stressors, provides additional context for climate change and insects and disease.

Invasive species could potentially become more of a problem in the ABPF with time, and with changes in climate, as non-native species adapt to higher elevations and/or respond to a more favorable environment resulting from changes in climate.

Interest in conducting research in the ABPF is likely to continue, and possibly increase due to the significance of the area for climate related research.

Visitor use will likely continue as is or increase due to expected increases in population, as described in assessment Chapter 9. Increased visitor use could potentially impact botanical resources in the ABPF and/or create a need for additional infrastructure.

Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail The Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail (PCT) was designated in 1968 by Congress as one of the original national scenic trails. The primary purpose of the PCT is to provide for enjoyment of high quality scenic resources, primitive hiking and horseback riding opportunities, and to conserve natural, historic and cultural resources along the trail. The Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail Comprehensive Plan (USDA Forest Service 1982c) provides direction for management of the trail, as well as a ½ mile corridor of land on each side of the trail.

The Inyo National Forest manages 80 miles of the PCT, including a portion of the trail located in an area of the Sierra National Forest which is administered by INF (Figure 1). Ninety-six percent of this PCT mileage on the Inyo is located within designated wilderness, including the South Sierra, Golden Trout, John Muir and Ansel Adams Wilderness Areas. Of the remaining four percent, there is a short section of the PCT near Kennedy Meadows and a short section of the trail near Reds Meadow, both of which are located outside of wilderness. All lands within the PCT corridor administered by INF are federally owned, and there are no privately owned lands.

Page 51 of 86

Current Condition

Scenery The PCT offers outstanding scenic vistas along the entire 80 miles managed by INF. In the South Sierra and Golden Trout Wildernesses, travelers on the PCT enjoy views of the South Fork Kern River drainage and vast meadows located on the Kern Plateau. In the John Muir and Ansel Adams Wildernesses, PCT visitors experience stunning vistas of glaciated landscapes, including sparkling blue lakes with a backdrop of high, rocky peaks on the Sierra Crest. The Inyo National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP; 1988) provides direction that ninety-four percent of the PCT corridor will be managed for preservation of the visual quality, while the remaining six percent of the corridor will be managed to retain visual quality. The scenic integrity of the PCT corridor generally remains high in areas managed by INF because of protection afforded by designated wilderness and the 1988 LRMP.

Additional description of scenic character for the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail is incorporated into the discussion of Forest Places found in Chapter 9. The Pacific Crest Trail is located within the Golden Trout-South Sierra, Convict-McGee-Rock Creek-Pine Creek-Bishop Creek-Buttermilk, Reds Meadow-Fish Creek, and the Owens River Headwaters Forest Places.

Vegetation Within the ½ mile management corridor established by the PCT Comprehensive Plan, approximately 93% of the area supports forest or woodland vegetation (Table 10, Vegetation Assessment Types), including Jeffrey pine, lodgepole pine, red fir, pinyon pine, aspen, mixed conifer and other tree species found in the subalpine environment. Six percent of the PCT corridor contains grass, forb or shrub vegetation, including meadows, sagebrush, mountain mahogany, and other species found in an alpine environment. A detailed evaluation of current vegetation conditions for these assessment types can be found in Chapter 1.

`

Page 52 of 86

Table 10. Vegetation Assessment Types within the PCT corridor managed by INF.

Total Vegetation - Assessment Types Acres Alpine 504 Jeffrey Pine 146 Lake 346 Mixed conifer 2,185 Mt. Mahogany 60 Pinyon-Juniper 1,196 Red fire 11,372 Sagebrush 634 Special Types 1,759 Subalpine Forest 24,202 Grand Total 42,404

Vegetation within the PCT corridor has been affected by disturbances associated with past wildfire and a severe wind event in the area managed by INF. Vegetation within the PCT corridor has also been affected by less frequent wildfire disturbance resulting from fire suppression. Vegetation impacts from these disturbances, or lack thereof, are summarized here. A more detailed evaluation of environmental drivers and stressors, such as climate change and wildfire hazard, can be found in Chapter 3.

Three wildfires occurred during the past 10 to 50 years, including the Summit Fire which burned 2,069 acres of the PCT corridor in the South Sierra Wilderness (2003), the Fork Fire which burned 92 acres of PCT corridor in the Golden Trout Wilderness (1996), and the Rainbow Fire which burned 1,446 acres of the PCT corridor in the Ansel Adams wilderness and adjoining non-wilderness lands near Reds Meadow (1992). For all of these wildfires, portions of the fire area burned with high severity. In particular, large acreages of red fir forest suffered complete mortality in the Rainbow Fire, leaving an area still scarred with blackened snags and few trees.

In November 2011, a severe wind event toppled thousands of trees within the PCT corridor in areas managed by INF. The most severe wind damage occurred in the vicinity of Reds Meadow, within the Middle Fork San Joaquin River watershed. During the 2012 field season, INF cut and removed over 4,700 down trees from trails, including the PCT. At this time, there are no temporary re-routes on the PCT, since all of the trees blown down by the 2011 wind event were cleared from the trail during summer 2012. The legacy of this wind damage will be high fuel loading and increased wildfire hazard in areas with blowdown.

Research documents that more than a century ago wildfires burned frequently, on average every fourteen to eighteen years, and with low severity in the Reds Meadow Page 53 of 86

area along the PCT managed by INF (Caprio et al. 2006). Fire suppression during the past century has resulted in the absence of such regular fire disturbance. The absence of regular fire has two consequences: first, increased density of smaller trees in the understory of mature forests, and second, encroachment of conifers into meadows. The increased density of trees creates high fuel loading and elevated hazard for high severity wildfire in forested areas, such as seen in the Rainbow Fire of 1992. Conifer growth in meadows poses potential for loss of grassland sites in the future. The meadow encroachment is most notable in the smaller grassland sites along the PCT near Deer Creek, south of Reds Meadow: these meadows may become forested sites in the next few decades without future fire disturbance.

Visitor Experience The PCT offers outstanding opportunities for physical and mental challenge, primitive and unconfined recreation, and solitude. In 96% percent of the PCT corridor managed by INF, the 1988 LRMP specifies that only non-motorized use will occur in a primitive or semi-primitive recreation opportunity setting. The areas allocated to the primitive or semi-primitive settings are entirely located within designated wilderness. The remaining four percent of the PCT corridor occurs in areas where motorized use is permitted, except on the PCT trail itself, in a natural or modified recreation opportunity setting. These natural or modified settings occur outside of wilderness in two locations: one near Kennedy Meadows and another in the Reds Meadow Valley. In these areas, the PCT crosses Kennedy Meadows Road (paved), traverses Kennedy Meadows campground (a developed recreation site), and passes through the Agnew Meadows Trailhead which is accessed by a native surface road. There are no known problems with motorized use occurring on the PCT in these areas.

There are no authorizations for non-recreation special uses in these areas, such as wind turbines, utility transmission lines, or pipelines. Recreation special uses are authorized within the PCT corridor in the Reds Meadow Valley, including Reds Meadow Resort and Pack Station, and Agnew Meadows Pack Station.

Visitors on the PCT experience adequate water availability from natural sources; there are no water caches. Proper food storage is mandatory with bear resistant food canisters required on portions of the PCT, including in the vicinity of Cottonwood Pass in the Golden Trout Wilderness, and from Virginia Lake north to Donohue Pass in the John Muir and Ansel Adams Wildernesses. Through-travelers on the PCT have convenient resupply opportunities at Kennedy Meadows, Reds Meadow and Agnew Meadows where the trail passes near access roads outside of wilderness. Other resupply options occur with access on connecting trails (Table 11), most notably at Mulkey Pass, Trail Pass or Cottonwood Pass in the Golden Trout Wilderness, and Duck Pass or Mammoth Pass in the John Muir Wilderness. Two stock driveways cross or coincide with a short stretch of the PCT at the Olancha Pass and Wormhole Canyon trails (Table 11).

Page 54 of 86

Table 11. Connecting and side trails for the PCT on the Inyo NF. Key connecting trails are indicated in bold text.

Trail Length Wilderness Trail Name No. (miles) Area Notes Deer Mountain 3514 8 South Sierra Side Trail to Monache Meadow Olancha Pass 3602 8 South Sierra Stock driveway from Sage Flat to Monache Meadow Golden Strawberry-Bell 3522 4 Trout Side Trail to Strawberry Meadow/Bell's Cow Camp Wormhole Golden Stock driveway from Cottonwood Creek to Mulkey Canyon 3611 6 Trout Pass Dutch Meadow- Golden Mulkey Meadow 3530 4 Trout Side Trail to Mulkey Meadow Access Trail to/from Horseshoe Meadows Golden Trailhead: commonly used by through-travelers for Mulkey Pass 3528 2 Trout resupply Access Trail to/from Horseshoe Meadows Golden Trailhead: commonly used by through-travelers for Trail Pass 3504 2 Trout resupply Access Trail to/from Horseshoe Meadows Golden Trailhead: commonly used by through-travelers for Cottonwood Pass 3505 4 Trout resupply Fish Creek 2622 20 John Muir Used as Alternate Route to PCNST in big snow years Access Trail to/from McGee Creek Trailhead: McGee Pass 2902 14 John Muir rarely used by through-travelers for resupply Purple-Cascade 2712 3 John Muir Connector Trail from Fish Creek Trail Access Trail to/from Duck Pass Trailhead: Duck Pass 2710 6 John Muir sometimes used by through-travelers for resupply Deer Creek 2706 4 John Muir Side Trail to Deer Lakes Pumice Butte 2713 2 John Muir Side Trail to deer hunter camp Ansel Access Trail to/from Horseshoe Lake Trailhead: Mammoth Pass 2707 4 Adams sometimes used by through-travelers for resupply Upper Crater Ansel Meadow 2645 3 Adams Connector Trail from Mammoth Pass Trail Ansel Red Cones 2635 1 Adams Connector Trail from Mammoth Pass Trail Ansel Access Trail to/from Reds Meadow Trailhead: Rainbow Falls 2623 1 Adams commonly used by through-travelers for resupply Ansel Summit Meadow 2601 5 Adams Connector Trail from Summit Meadow Ansel John Muir Trail 2503 16 Adams Connector Trail for Loop Trips

Page 55 of 86

Trail Length Wilderness Trail Name No. (miles) Area Notes Ansel Shadow Creek 2614 7 Adams Connector Trail for Loop Trips Ansel Agnew Pass 2642 1 Adams Connector Trail from Rush Creek Trail Ansel Clark Lakes 2505 4 Adams Connector Trail from Rush Creek Trail Ansel Spooky Meadows 2606 4 Adams Connector Trail from Rush Creek Trail Ansel River north 2610 4 Adams Connector Trail for Loop Trips Ansel Davis Lake 2501 1 Adams Side Trail to Davis Lake Ansel Access Trail to/from Rush Creek Trailhead: Rush Creek 2605 9 Adams infrequently used by through-travelers for resupply Ansel Marie Lakes 2520 2 Adams Side Trail to Marie Lakes

Trends The popularity of long distance trails is growing and there has been an increase in numbers of visitors for through-hike use on the PCT. This trend is expected to continue. The number of Pacific Crest Trail through-hikers in early June each year is large enough that South Sierra Wilderness occupied campsite standards are occasionally exceeded. Outside of the occasional issues in the South Sierra, there are no known campsite occupancy issues within the remainder of the PCT corridor associated with through- hikers. This is because PCT through-hikers typically travel the portions of trail on INF during June when other visitor use is low. The capacity to accommodate through-hikers may change in the future with the trend for growing popularity of long distance travel on the PCT.

In the area where the PCT coincides with the John Muir Trail (JMT), there are known issues with capacity to accommodate large numbers of travelers in peak wilderness use season, especially in August. This problem is associated with long distance travel on the JMT, and does not affect PCT through-hikers who typically traverse this area in early summer. This issue is described in more detail under the next section titled, John Muir Trail.

The current trends in ecological conditions are expected to continue, including elevated fuel loads with risk of high severity wildfire, loss of meadows with conifer encroachment, and other ecosystem disturbance associated with climate change, such as extreme wind events. More information about these ecological trends can be found in

Page 56 of 86

Chapters 1, 2 and 3 of the assessment.

John Muir Trail While the John Muir Trail (JMT) is not a designated trail, it merits discussion here because the JMT offers an outstanding recreation experience which is similar to the PCT.

Visitors come from around the U.S. and the world to hike the 210-mile JMT, and enjoy the stunning scenery, along with outstanding opportunity for primitive and unconfined recreation. On the Inyo, much of the JMT coincides with the PCT (Figure 1). Another 15 miles of the JMT in the Ansel Adams Wilderness connects Thousand Island Lake and the Devils Postpile National Monument boundary. The same connector and side trails which serve the PCT also serve the JMT (Table 11).

Long distance travel on the JMT is growing in popularity, as with the PCT. The majority of JMT visitors travel the trail in July and August during peak use season in the wilderness. This causes problems with capacity of the land to accommodate so many visitors at the same time, which is most notable at Thousand Island Lake in the Ansel Adams Wilderness. On a typical August day, the majority of campsites along the JMT at Thousand Island Lake are filled, and the opportunity for solitude is limited. Other issues include improper disposal of human waste and illegal campfires.

National Recreation Trails: Whitney Portal and Methuselah

Current Condition There are two designated National Recreation Trails (NRT) on the Inyo NF: Whitney Portal and Methuselah Trails. A third trail on the Forest, the Discovery Trail in the Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest, has been recommended for NRT designation.

The Whitney Portal National Recreation Trail (WPNRT) is located in the shadow of iconic Mount Whitney, the highest peak in the lower forty-eight states (Figure 1). Designated in 1979, the WPNRT was established to protect the historic and scenic values of the original trail between the town of Lone Pine and the summit of Mount Whitney. WPNRT is 5 miles in length, connecting the Lone Pine campground at an elevation of 5,800 feet to the Whitney Portal trailhead at 8,300 feet. With this dramatic change in elevation from end-to-end, the WPNRT is steep and traverses several vegetation and climatic zones. The lower end of the trail starts in dry desert shrublands, graced with the pungent fragrance of sagebrush and wide-open views of the dramatic Sierra crest. The trail travels along the Lone Pine Creek corridor, with the upper end cooled and shaded by mixed conifer forests of Jeffrey pine, white fir and Sierra juniper trees. This trail is available for day use, with travel on foot, snowshoes or cross-country skis. Overnight camping and other forms of travel, such as with wheeled vehicles or stock, are not permitted. The lower elevations of the trail are generally open year round, while access

Page 57 of 86

to the upper portion is limited by snow in winter. The WPNRT is especially popular in spring when the display of desert wildflowers can be stunning. Under existing conditions the trail receives light to moderate use, with most traffic in close proximity to the campgrounds found at each end of the WPNRT.

The Methuselah National Recreation Trail (MNRT) is located within the Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest designated area, with the trailhead located at the Bristlecone Pine Visitor Center parking area. The MNRT was established in 1983 to showcase the forest of ancient bristlecone pines, where the world’s oldest living tree resides. This trail provides visitors with opportunity to wander among the gnarled pines and wonder at living trees which are thousands of years old. The Methuselah NRT loops 5 miles on the south side of the parking area. This is a high altitude site, at approximately 10,000 feet in elevation, with access limited by snow in winter. Thus, almost all use for the MNRT occurs in summer. This trail is available for day use, and travel on foot, snowshoes or cross- country skis. Overnight camping and other forms of travel, such as by wheeled vehicles or stock, are not permitted. Under existing conditions the trail receives moderate summer season use.

The Discovery trail was recommended for National Recreation Trail status at the same time as the Methuselah NRT, but has not been designated. The Discovery Trail is also located in the Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest and provides visitors an opportunity to see the ancient trees. The Discovery trail loops 1 mile on the north side of the Visitor Center parking area. Like the Methuselah NRT, the Discovery trail is only available for day use and travel on foot, snowshoes or cross-country skis. This trail receives moderate summer season use.

Trends Future visitor use of the NRTs is expected to remain similar to current conditions. The trends related to ecological conditions are described in Chapters 1, 2 and 3 of the assessment.

Research Natural Areas

Current Condition Research Natural Areas (RNAs) are National Forest (and other federal) lands permanently protected to maintain biological diversity and provide ecological baseline data, and opportunities for education and research. Only non-manipulative research is allowed within the RNAs. RNAs are selected based on vegetation target elements. The Bioregional Assessment Chapter 15 topic paper provides the context for the RNA program in the Pacific Southwest Region of the Forest Service (Region 5).

All of the RNAs recommended in the 1988 Forest Land and Resource Management Plan

Page 58 of 86

for the Inyo NF have been officially established, bringing the current total to seven RNAs on the Forest (Figure 2). Each of these RNAs is an important component of the national RNA system, providing unique contributions to the overall network. Table 12 provides a list of RNAs on the Forest, the target element(s) for each, and the year of establishment. See Figure 2 for the location of each RNA.

Table 12. RNAs on the Inyo NF, target elements, and establishment dates.

RNA Target Element Distinctive features or Establishment Date secondary elements

Harvey Monroe Hall Alpine meadows; Long history of 1933 Sierran mixed research subalpine forest

Indiana Summit Jeffrey pine First California RNA; 1932 Archaeology

Last Chance Meadow Foxtail pine Meadow/stream 1982

McAfee Alpine fell-field - 2004

Sentinel Meadow Lodgepole pine Limber pine 1983

Whippoorwill Flat Pinyon-juniper Limber pine 1991

White Mountain Bristlecone pine Limber pine 1953

The following synopsis of the Inyo NF RNAs is an abbreviated summary of the distinctive features of each RNA, taken from the General Technical Report “Forest Service Research Natural Areas in California” (Cheng 2004). The Bioregional Assessment Chapter 15 topic paper provides links to more detailed information on each RNA on the Inyo NF and throughout the Region.

Harvey Monroe Hall: This is one of the first RNAs established in California. The Carnegie Institute had transplant gardens at the south end of the RNA, which were used for numerous studies in the 1930s-1950s. A partial bibliography for the ecological survey listed over 40 references pertaining to the Harvey Monroe Hall RNA.

The RNA is only a few miles by road from Tioga Pass, and is bounded on the southeast by a gravel road. Recreation use is not heavy, but a hiking route to Mt. Conness passes through the RNA and occasional illegal camping has been noted here. As in most Sierran subalpine meadows, sheep grazing occurred in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Inyo NF Ecology plots observations indicate several Page 59 of 86

patches of wind-fallen trees occur in the RNA, following the same wind event that affected Reds Meadow in December 2011. Rephotography over the last several decades indicates that the Conness Glacier, which occurs in this RNA, has become reduced in size. Inyo NF Ecology plots indicate some vegetation growth in areas covered by ice as recently as the 1900s.

Indiana Summit: The Indiana Summit RNA was the first RNA established in California. A unique feature of this RNA is the piagi trenches, dug by Paiute Indians to harvest the larvae of piagi moths.

Although not authorized, activities that are common on lands surrounding Indiana Summit, such as OHV travel and woodcutting, occasionally occur in the RNA. A single Ecology plot in this RNA illustrates the typically late seral conditions, with several down logs and snags, and several small to mid-size trees below the main canopy. There is abundant evidence of logging in the areas surrounding the RNA, but none has occurred within the RNA.

Last Chance Meadow: The Last Chance Meadow RNA includes extensive stands of foxtail pine, with trees attaining ages of 1,000 – 1,500 years. It also includes the upper portion of a small permanent stream drainage. Three ecology plots demonstrate the widely-spaced forest structure, with some areas of frequent down logs and snags, and inclusions of unique shrub communities.

The Pacific Crest Trail passes along the southern border of the RNA, bringing recreationists to the edge of the RNA. Rock cairns mark little-used routes through the RNA.

McAfee: The McAfee RNA is within the most accessible, as well as one of the largest continuous areas, of alpine steppe in California. As a result, it has a long history of high altitude research, including many physiological studies, and projects related to climate change.

Due to the relatively easy access and research facilities, heavy manipulative research has occurred in the University of California Laboratory adjacent to the RNA. Within the RNA itself, manipulative research has been minimal.

Sentinel Meadow: A large body of knowledge exists for the structure of the major tree-dominated associations at Sentinel Meadow, which is useful for comparison with other sites. The presence of species such as mountain hemlock and western white pine suggests that this area receives more precipitation than expected given its location in the east side rain shadow of the Sierra Nevada.

Domestic livestock grazing has occurred in the past in sagebrush scrub communities within this RNA. The 1985 Owens Fire is the only recorded fire that has affected this RNA in its southwest corner. However, two Ecology plots, one

Page 60 of 86

conducted in lodgepole pine and the other in whitebark pine-lodgepole pine, both contain old burned snags and down logs with charcoal.

Whippoorwill Flat: The RNA is characterized by a well-developed pinyon forest with numerous “specimen” trees, and some clearings dominated by sagebrush. Signs of past Paiute and Shoshone inhabitance are plentiful, due to the large supply of pinyon pine nuts, an important food source.

The diverse geologic substrates and the juxtaposition of the pinyon forest with the bristlecone pine forest provide valuable opportunities for climate and basic ecological research. Forest staff, with assistance from the USGS, installed monitoring plots in this RNA in 2010 for the purpose of tracking pinyon pine densification and other compositional changes, but the plots have not yet been revisited. Two poorly maintained dirt roads at the eastern edge of the RNA provide access, where some woodcutting and prospecting have occurred. Feral burros roamed the area until their removal in the late 1970s, impacting shrubby and herbaceous vegetation in the area.

White Mountain: The White Mountain RNA is most well-known for the paleoclimatic research that has occurred there since the early 1950s. Research has also focused on edaphic restrictions of the different vegetation types.

The RNA is bounded on the upper edge by the well-traveled road that leads to the Patriarch Grove. A short trail from the Patriarch Grove enters the RNA. Aside from the trail use, direct human impact is negligible. The meadows within the RNA have received heavy grazing in the past.

Current research activities: RNAs are established to provide ecological baseline data, education and research opportunities. The Forest tracks the issuance of all research permits in Special Use Database System. This database is intended primarily for administrative purposes, but the Forest periodically extracts a list of projects, topics, and locations of research for various purposes. In 2012, a total of 191 research permits were authorized, 11 of which were known to be conducted in RNAs. However, spatial locations of many research projects were not available, or were difficult to access. Effective methods of sharing results from research conducted on the Forest (in or out of RNAs) are lacking, and specialists generally rely on searches of published literature to access information. The Forest monitoring database indicates that the Forest Service has conducted monitoring in or directly adjacent to RNAs in 21 projects; the majority of monitoring conducted by Forest Service staff occurs outside of RNAs.

Drivers & Stressors - indirect management issues: Chapters 1, 2 and 3 provide information on the current condition of ecosystems as a whole on the Forest. By definition, the RNAs represent the more pristine end of the scale with regard to ecological integrity of these ecosystems. Although RNAs are intended to represent ecosystems unimpacted by contemporary management, indirect effects of some Page 61 of 86

practices or human influences do exist in these areas. In particular, fire management and invasive species introductions can alter these ecosystems in such a way that interferes with the purpose of maintaining a pristine and biodiverse setting. Therefore, we selected fire return interval departure and invasive species as indicators to assess the condition of RNAs. In addition, we considered evidence related to changing species composition, especially as related to climate change, to assess the condition of the biodiversity of RNAs.

No invasive plant species are currently mapped within any of the RNAs; however, unreported populations may occur. Cheatgrass in particular is not unlikely in at least some of the RNAs, e.g. Whippoorwill Flat, Indiana Summit, Sentinel Meadow. More information is needed on the extent of invasive plants in the RNA system on the Forest.

Fire return interval departure (FRID) is a measure that provides a rough estimate of the difference between the current frequency of fire on the landscape and the frequency with which it occurred prior to Euro-American settlement (see Chapter 3 – Drivers and Stressors). For subalpine forest (Last Chance Meadow, Sentinel Meadow, White Mountain RNAs), the Forest-wide FRID dataset indicates low departure (i.e. fires occur with similar frequencies now as in the past). For pinyon-juniper (Whippoorwill Flat RNA), most areas of the Forest were also found to have low departure. However, Jeffrey pine (Indiana Summit RNA) is strongly departed at the Forest-wide scale, with fires occurring with a much lower frequency than in the past. No information about FRID was available for alpine and meadow settings (Harvey Monroe Hall and McAfee RNAs). It is important to note that these FRID data apply at a Forest-wide scale, and do not necessarily represent the conditions specific to RNAs. The only exception is Indiana Summit, where surrounding timber harvest and fire suppression have been documented as resulting in a reduction in fire frequency (Chapter 3).

Trends Past fire suppression has affected ecological conditions in many of the RNAs, as evident in changes in canopy profiles, fuel build-up, and, in some cases, species composition (Chapter 1 – Ecosystems). Because of the extent of these changes, it is not always feasible or wise to allow fires to burn under current conditions in these areas. The Region 5 and PSW Research Station RNA Committee drafted a policy in 2011 that outlines a strategy for fire management in RNAs, with the goal of maintaining them as accurate ecological reference areas. Suggestions include non-suppression of naturally-ignited fires when possible, low impact suppression tactics when suppression is required, and reintroducting fire and/or other forms of fuels reduction. This approach was aimed at resolving the apparent conflict between a) direction to manage accurate ecological reference areas with respect to historic fire regimes, and b) direction that constrains management techniques to restore historic fire regimes. Ecological conditions are likely to move away from the natural range of variation unless changes are made in fire management policies for RNAs to address past and current practices of fire suppression. Page 62 of 86

Changes in climate have the potential to affect existing RNAs in the coming years. Changes in vegetation composition and structure of target elements, and even loss of the target element communities within the RNA areas, is possible, depending on the degree and direction of climate change.

Invasive species will likely continue to spread on the Forest, potentially entering RNAs in some areas. The overall lack of ground disturbing activities and external vectors, e.g. cars, bicycles, horses, etc., provide some resistance to invasion. However, invasions are likely to occur in RNAs, unless active prevention and control methods are implemented.

Further information on trends for each of the assessment types is provided in Chapters 1, 2, and 3.

Scenic Byways – National Forest Scenic Byways and California State Scenic Highways

Current Condition

Lee Vining Canyon Scenic Byway Lee Vining Canyon Scenic Byway (Highway 120) is a National Forest Scenic Byway that was designated February 8, 1990. The twelve miles of roadway stretches between Highway 395 at 6,781 feet in elevation near the town of Lee Vining and the iconic Mono Lake to the Yosemite National Park entrance at Tioga Pass at almost 10,000 feet in elevation. This Byway is within the Mono Basin & Lee Vining Forest Place as described in Chapter 9. This Byway offers dynamic views of rich and vibrant meadows, glacial mountain peaks rising precipitously from the canyon floor, a winding roadway cut precariously in the hillside leaving one feeling the heart pounding force of nature that surrounds them. The seemingly short drive along this Scenic Byway has lots to offer for either a day trip from Yosemite or an extended stay within the many campgrounds that offer a variety of camping experiences.

Scenic integrity along the Byway is high. Nearly 45% of the landscapes seen from the Lee Figure 3. Lee Vining Canyon Scenic Byway Vining Canyon Scenic Byway contains naturally evolving to naturally appearing landscapes with almost 75% of the area inventoried as retention VQO. The majority of the visible landscape has relatively high scenic integrity Page 63 of 86

but developments altering scenic integrity exist within the foreground and middle ground of this roadway. The most prominent visual disturbances on the surrounding landscape are hydropower facilities and power lines. The disturbances are noticeable but do not dominate the valued scenery. Other developments that are noticeable, but for the most part are subordinate to the surrounding landscape character, are resorts, cabins and recreation facilities.

Ancient Bristlecone Scenic Byway Ancient Bristlecone Scenic Byway (State Route 168) is a California State Scenic Highway that was designated June 19, 1970. This route was later recognized as a National Forest Scenic Byway on July 13, 1992. This Byway starts at Highway 395 in Big Pine, CA and climbs 34 miles on State Route 168 and Forest Road 4S01 to the Patriarch Grove. This Byway lies within the White Mountain Forest Place as described in Chapter 9. Rising more than 6,000 feet in elevation from the Owens Valley, this Scenic Byway climbs through pinyon woodlands with occasional aspen stands. The road reaches the bristlecone pine forest at 9,000 ft, and offers vast views of the Owens Valley and Sierra Nevada mountains. Visitors that are drawn here from all over the world can enjoy opportunities such as short interpretive trails around the visitor center or camping. One can also appreciate an adventurous drive to the Patriarch Grove through this unearthly landscape as it meanders through the thin air of the White Mountains with one picturesque view after another. “Travelers on the byway face the overwhelming power and weight of time” as they experience the presence of the ancient bristlecone pines. (http://byways.org/stories/56901, January 15, 2005)

The Byway travels through a landscape that is largely naturally evolving with limited human intervention and very high scenic integrity. There are no visual disturbances to speak of along this byway. Developments that occur here are limited, but when they do exist they are off the main route and remain in harmony with the surrounding landscape. Figure 4. Ancient Bristlecone Scenic Byway

Page 64 of 86

Highway 395 Highway 395 in Mono and Inyo County is a California State Scenic Highway designated June 5, 2000. This Scenic Byway, spanning nearly 250 miles, passes through the Inyo National Forest as it travels through Mono and Inyo Counties. Mountain peaks ascend from the valley floor creating a backdrop both east and west, providing exemplary displays of land formations created by both ice and fire. Clouds spill over the Sierra Crest like water filling a glass, flowing down the escarpment resembling a veil of silk. Mono Lake, June Lake Loop, Mount Whitney (the highest mountain in the contiguous United States), and the Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest are just a few iconic places one can visit from this Byway. There are many small communities Figure 5. Highway 395 State Scenic Highway along this route that provide access to the Sierra Nevada, White, and Inyo Mountains.

A description of existing conditions for scenic stability across the Inyo National Forest see can be found in Chapter 9 – Scenic Character.

Trends Traffic is expected to increase on the Scenic Byways, as a result of predicted overall increase in visitor recreational use, as described in Chapter 9. Future trends related to scenic stability and driven by ecosystem disturbance processes are described in assessment Chapter 3.

Inventoried Roadless Areas

Current Condition Inventoried Roadless areas (IRAs) are statutorily designated areas under the Roadless Area Conservation Rule (RACR; USDA Forest Service 2001d; 36 CFR Part 294). These areas were first inventoried by the Forest Service in 1972, as part of the Roadless Area Review and Evaluation phase I (RARE I). A second inventory was completed for RARE II in 1978. Since 1978, portions of these IRAs have been designated by Congress as new wilderness or as additions to existing wilderness areas on the Inyo NF (refer to the Wilderness section of this chapter for additional information regarding wilderness designation on the Forest).

Currently on the Forest, there are 542,119 acres of IRAs (Figure 1; Table 13). As shown in Page 65 of 86

Table 13, some IRAs are very small in size; this is because the majority of the area was designated as wilderness in the years since the IRA was originally inventoried in the 1970s. The acreage designated as IRA constitutes twenty-six percent of lands administered by the Inyo NF. When IRA acreage is combined with wilderness acres, these two types of designated areas comprise 72% percent of the Forest land base.

Table 13. Inventoried Roadless Areas on the Inyo National Forest.

Miles of Roads Suitable For Miles of High Roads Name of Acres Miles of Clearance Suitable For Inventoried in Percent Motorized Vehicles Passenger Roadless Area Acres WUI1 in WUI Trails (ML2) Cars (ML3-5) Andrews Mtn. 9,906 none none 2.1 1.2 none Benton Range 9,639 none none 3.9 6.2 0.5 Birch Creek 28,785 none none none 4.5 0.7 Black Canyon 32,391 none none 14.3 1.2 1.1 Blanco Mtn. 7,823 none none 0.1 none 0.1 Boundary Peak 42,647 none none 11.3 9.0 2.1 Buttermilk 113 none none none 0.1 none Coyote North 11,933 2,524 21% none 0.2 0.1 Coyote Southeast 53,056 9,436 18% 27.0 0.9 1.0 Deep Wells 7,679 none none none 4.9 0.1 Dexter Canyon 17,051 none none 5.7 5.4 1.1 Excelsior 53,322 none none 1.7 50.2 none Excelsior Mtns. 6 none none none none none Glass Mountain 52,847 266 1% 7.2 23.9 1.4 Hall Natural Area 1,398 1,356 97% none none none Hoover - Mt.olsen 0 none none none none none Horse Mdw. 5,672 2,643 47% 1.0 3.6 0.2 Horton 876 623 71% none 0.7 none Huntoon 11 none none none none none Independence Creek 3,382 504 15% 0.8 1.6 0.4 Laurel Mcgee 8,762 7,127 81% 6.4 3.3 0.3 Log Cabin Saddlebag 1,683 628 37% 2.8 0.3 none Mono Craters 7,115 none none none 8.1 none Mt. Olsen 1,751 1,403 80% none none none Nevahbe Ridge 300 300 100% none none none

Page 66 of 86

Miles of Roads Suitable For Miles of High Roads Name of Acres Miles of Clearance Suitable For Inventoried in Percent Motorized Vehicles Passenger Roadless Area Acres WUI1 in WUI Trails (ML2) Cars (ML3-5) North Lake 417 373 89% none 0.5 1.1 Paiute 56,764 none none 23.1 6.1 none Rock Creek West 3,618 3,264 90% none none 3.1 San Joaquin 6,232 5,872 94% 3.0 1.4 1.5 Sherwin 3,138 2,185 70% 0.2 none none Soldier Canyon 40,551 none none 18.4 3.3 0.5 South Sierra 41,509 none none 0.8 20.9 4.0 Sugarloaf 11,726 none none none 3.8 8.9 Table Mtn. 451 430 95% none none none Tinemaha 7,930 1,821 23% 0.3 1.8 2.6 Tioga Lake 306 233 76% none none none Watterson 6,920 none none 4.3 none none Wheeler Ridge 2,697 1,103 41% 4.4 none 0.9 Whisky Creek 863 862 100% none none none Wonoga Pk. 849 198 23% none none 0.1 Acre Totals 542,119 43,151 139 163 32 1 Wildland Urban Interface

IRAs are managed to maintain certain values and characteristics such as high quality or undisturbed soil, water, and air resources; a diversity of plant and animal communities and their habitat; and primitive, semi-primitive non–motorized classes, and semi- primitive motorized classes of dispersed recreation. Despite the implication of their name, roadless areas can and do contain motorized roads and trails. However, reconstruction of existing roads and construction of new roads is generally not permitted (36 CFR 294).

Under current conditions, 139 miles of motorized trails, 163 miles of roads suitable for high clearance vehicles, and 32 miles of roads suitable for passenger cars, including paved roads, are located within IRAs on the Forest (Table 13). Developed sites also occur within some of these IRAs under existing conditions. There are campgrounds and other recreation facilities within the following IRAs: Hall Natural Area, Horse Meadow, Laurel McGee, San Joaquin, Boundary Peak, Coyote Southeast, North Lake, Rock Creek West, Tinemaha, Independence Creek, and South Sierra. The presence of many of these developed sites was acknowledged when IRA boundaries were mapped in the 1970s.

Page 67 of 86

Twenty-one of the IRAs (43,151 acres) geographically overlap with the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI; Table 13). In these areas, there is need and management mandates to establish wildfire defensible space around communities and developed sites where people congregate on the Forest. Under the RACR, road construction and tree cutting, sale or removal is generally prohibited, with limited exceptions for thinning of small diameter trees to reduce the risk of uncharacteristic wildfire. These exceptions do allow for some vegetation management and fuels reduction actions for the purpose of creating wildfire defensible space in the WUI. However, no new road construction is permitted, and the type and extent of vegetation management activity is limited by the RACR.

There is no existing compiled dataset to evaluate the current ecological conditions of IRAs in context of the eight roadless area characteristics defined in the RACR (USDA Forest Service 2001d). Nonetheless, a general evaluation of ecological conditions on the Forest can be found in assessment Chapters 1, 2 and 3.

Many of the characteristics which are desirable when considering the opportunity to designate additional wilderness, such as large blocks of undeveloped natural landscapes with undisturbed ecosystem conditions, can be found within IRAs. IRAs will also be considered along with other INF lands for the inventory and evaluation of additional wilderness on the Forest in accordance with policy (see FSH 1909.12 ch. 70). This inventory and evaluation for wilderness will be completed prior to the Responsible Official accepting comments on the proposed plan (see FSH 1909.12 ch. 10).

Trends General trends in ecological conditions on the Forest can be found in assessment Chapters 1, 2 and 3. Existing data is not sufficient to determine specific ecological trends within each unique IRA on the Inyo.

As discussed in assessment Chapter 9, overall visitor numbers and recreation use is expected to increase over time. With this increase in use, there will be greater pressure on Inyo NF lands for more access, recreation opportunities and associated infrastructure. Because visitor numbers, access and infrastructure are restricted within designated wilderness, future pressure to accommodate more visitors will be focused on lands outside of wilderness, including IRAs.

Other Special Areas There are other special areas on the Inyo NF, which are of interest and recognized, but not currently designated. These include areas with notable geological, zoological, historical, and paleontological attributes.

There are many prominent geologic features of scientific and public interest associated with the Inyo National Forest. These include the Mono Lake tufa, Panum Crater, Mono Craters, Obsidian Dome, Inyo Craters, Earthquake Fault, Glass Mountain, Long Valley Page 68 of 86

Caldera, Hot Creek Geologic Site, and the Big Pine Volcanic Field.

Hot Creek Geological Site is popular with visitors to the Forest. Many people visit the site to view the hot springs and geothermal features, and also enjoy fishing, hiking, viewing wildlife and picnicking. The area is open to day use only, and camping or night- time use is not permitted. Historically, this area was used as a swimming site. However, Hot Creek has been closed to the public for swimming since 2006 due to safety concerns. These safety concerns stemmed from unpredictable surges of scalding hot water in the Hot Creek geothermal springs, associated with geologic activity in the Long Valley Caldera.

The Devils Postpile is another significant geologic feature of interest located within the administrative boundary of the Forest. This designated area is managed by the National Park Service as part of the Devils Postpile National Monument.

Potential Need and Opportunity for Additional Designated Areas This section assesses the potential need and opportunity for additional designated areas on the Inyo NF. This section is not intended to be exhaustive or a commitment to recommend specific areas for special area designation, but instead to identify possible options known at this time for additional designated areas. Before the responsible official invites comments on the proposed plan, a wilderness inventory and evaluation is required (see FSH 1909.12 ch. 70), as is an inventory of the eligibility of rivers for inclusion in the Wild, and Scenic Rivers System (see FSH 1909.12 ch. 80); these inventories are not required during the assessment (36 CFR 219.7(c)(v) and (vi)). The following key questions serve as the framework for assessment of the potential need or opportunity for additional designated areas on the Inyo NF:

a) Do published documents identify a need or potential for a designated area?

An eligibility study of streams for possible inclusion in the Wild and Scenic River System was completed on the Forest between 1989 and 1993. The results of this eligibility study are summarized below. b) Are there specific ecosystems present on the Inyo NF that are not currently represented within the wilderness system or system of research natural areas? A GIS evaluation of ecosystems represented in Wilderness on the Forest has been completed and is summarized below. Also, an overview of the Forest’s Inventoried Roadless Area characteristics is presented within the context of opportunity for additional Wilderness designation.

A US Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region evaluation of under-represented ecosystems for Research Natural Areas (RNAs) has been completed and is summarized here.

Page 69 of 86

c) Are there rare or outstanding resources appropriate for designated areas? The Inyo NF encompasses outstanding geological resources associated with volcanic action, which are of strong interest to the scientific community as well as the general public. A summary discussion of these geological resources is presented here within the context of potential opportunity for designation of a Geological Special Interest Area. The public suggested four ecologically unique complexes that contain important ecological, recreational, and cultural values to consider for designation. Connecting multiple Inventoried Roadless Areas into four distinct ecological complexes, the public identified Excelsior, White-Inyo Bridge, Sierra Escarpment, and Glass Mountains as areas to consider for special designation. A summary is presented below under other potentially designated areas. In addition, there was a suggestion to explore some type of designation for the largest contiguous expanse of Jeffrey Pine forest in the “core timber area”. d) Are there known opportunities to highlight unique recreational or scenic areas? The Forest received a suggestion from the public to consider the Mammoth Lakes Basin as a unique recreational area. A consideration of the Mammoth Lakes Basin as a unique recreational area is presented here. e) Is there scientific or historical information that suggests a unique opportunity to highlight specific educational, historic, cultural, or research opportunities? The Forest received a suggestion from the public to consider the designation of the old Bodie Railway that ran from Mono Mills and the Jeffrey Pine forest to the town of Bodie as a national historic railway. Cultural and historic resources are addressed in Chapter 13. f) Has a need for specific designated areas been identified in the plans of States, Tribes, counties and other local governments? None known.

g) Are there known important ecological roles that could be supported by designation? The Forest received a suggestion from the public that one of the main ecological roles supported by designation and focused management is the protection and enhancement of habitat connectivity. A summary discussion is presented below under other potentially designated areas.

Wild and Scenic Rivers This section summarizes the status of Wild and Scenic Rivers which are currently designated on the Forest. In addition, the status of one river which was recommended for Wild and Scenic designation in the 1988 Plan is reviewed. Finally, the findings from a previous Wild and Scenic River eligibility evaluation of streams on the Forest are Page 70 of 86

recounted here. Before the responsible official invites comments on the proposed plan, an inventory of the eligibility of rivers for inclusion in the Wild, and Scenic Rivers System is required and will be completed (see FSH 1909.12 ch. 80); but this inventory is not conducted here as part of the assessment (36 CFR 219.7(c)(v) and (vi)).

Two rivers on the Inyo NF were designated by Congress as Wild and Scenic Rivers prior to adoption of the 1988 LRMP: the North Fork Kern River and the South Fork Kern River. The 1988 Plan and the 1994 Comprehensive Management Plan for the North and South Forks of the Kern Wild and Scenic River provide direction for managing these two designated Wild and Scenic Rivers on the Inyo. For the 60 miles managed by the Inyo NF, these two rivers retain their wild, scenic and recreation characteristics under current conditions.

One river was recommended for designation in the 1988 LRMP: the Middle Fork San Joaquin River. The Middle Fork San Joaquin flows through two National Forests: the Inyo and the Sierra National Forests. The Sierra NF was assigned responsibility as the lead unit for making a recommendation to Congress for wild and scenic designation of the Middle Fork San Joaquin River. Congress has not yet taken action for wild and scenic designation of this river. Thus, the current status of the Middle Fork San Joaquin River remains as recommended for designation. In the interim, the Inyo’s 1988 LRMP provides direction for managing segments of the Middle Fork San Joaquin River on the Forest to retain the characteristics which make this river a candidate for designation. The majority of this river and the adjacent terrestrial corridor are located within designated wilderness, and are thus protected in a “wild” condition. For the portion of the river corridor outside of wilderness, recreation is the primary management activity. Recreation has been managed in a manner which is consistent with historical uses in the area and which has retained the scenic and recreation characteristics of the river and corridor. Thus, the 28 miles of the Middle Fork San Joaquin River on the Inyo NF remain suitable for wild and scenic designation under current conditions. Following adoption of the 1988 Plan, the Inyo NF completed an eligibility study of another 326 miles of river segments found on 28 streams on the Forest (USDA Forest Service 1990a; USDA Forest Service 1990b; USDA Forest Service 1991; USDA Forest Service 1992; USDA Forest Service 1993a; USDA Forest Service 1993b). To be eligible for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic River System a river must be free flowing and have one or more outstandingly remarkable values, including scenic, recreation, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic or cultural values. From this study, the Forest determined that 169 miles of river segments on 19 streams met the eligibility criteria (Table 14). Another 157 miles of river segments on 9 streams did not meet the eligibility criteria, along with a few segments of streams with other eligible segments. The 9 streams determined as not eligible include the following: Baker Creek; Coyote Creek; George Creek; Horton Creek; Independence Creek; Mulkey Creek; Ninemile Creek; Redrock Creek; and Rush Creek.

Page 71 of 86

Table 14. Outstandingly remarkable values for river segments on Inyo NF streams found eligible for inclusion in the Wild and Scenic River system.

STREAM ORV ORV ORV ORV ORV ORV NAME RIVER SEGMENT CLASS SCE* REC* GEO* FW* HIS* CUL* MI. 1-Headwaters to Big Pine Wilderness Creek (NFK) Boundary WILD 4.9 2-Wilderness Big Pine Boundary to Creek Private Property REC y y 3.6 Convict 1-Headwaters to Creek Convict Lake WILD y y 6.9 Cottonwood 1-Headwaters to Creek Forest Road (Sierra) 16S02 SCE y y 4.7 Cottonwood Creek 2-Forest Road (Sierra) 16S02 to DWP REC y 1.5 Cottonwood 3-DWP to Creek Wilderness (Sierra) Boundary WILD y 3.9 Cottonwood 4-Wilderness Creek Boundary to (Sierra) intake REC y y 1.9 Cottonwood Creek 1-Headwaters to (Whites) Forest Boundary SCE y 19.6 1-Two-forked source to un- Deadman named trib, Sec. Creek 12, T3S, R26E WILD 2.3 2-Un-named Deadman tributary to Road Creek 3S22 SCE 2.3 3-Road 3S22 to 1/4 mile Deadman downstream of Creek Hwy 395 REC y 4.1

Page 72 of 86

STREAM ORV ORV ORV ORV ORV ORV NAME RIVER SEGMENT CLASS SCE* REC* GEO* FW* HIS* CUL* MI. 4-1/4 mile downstream of Deadman Hwy 395 to Big Creek Springs REC y 3.0 1-Headwaters to Glass Creek Obsidian Dome SCE y y y 3.4 2-Obsidian Dome to Glass Creek Deadman Creek REC y 2.5 Golden 1-Headwaters to Trout Creek Kern River WILD y y y 19.0 3-Fish Hatchery to Forest Hot Creek Boundary REC y y y y 2.9 1-Wilderness Boundary to Laurel Creek LADWP property SCE y y y y 3.8 1-Headwater trib Lee Vining to RNA Creek Boundary WILD y 1.4 2-Saddelbag Lk/RNA Lee Vining Boundary to SH Creek 120 REC y y y 3.0 3-SCE powerhouse to Lee Vining DWP diversion Creek pond REC y y y 5.9 1-NFK and SFK to Lone Pine Wilderness Creek Boundary WILD y y 2.7 2-Wilderness Lone Pine boundary to Creek Forest Boundary REC y y 3.9 1-NFK and SFK to Lone Pine Wilderness Creek (NFK) Boundary WILD y y 2.5

Page 73 of 86

STREAM ORV ORV ORV ORV ORV ORV NAME RIVER SEGMENT CLASS SCE* REC* GEO* FW* HIS* CUL* MI. 2-Wilderness Lone Pine boundary to Creek (NFK) Forest Boundary REC y y 0.4 1-Headwaters to McGee Wilderness Creek Boundary WILD y y 5.9 1-Headwaters to Wilderness Mill Creek Boundary WILD y y 3.9 2-Wilderness Boundary to Mill Creek Private Property SCE y y y 1.4 3-Private Property to Mill Creek Lundy Lake REC y y 0.7 1-Big Springs to Owens River private property REC y 0.8 1-Headwaters to Wilderness Parker Creek Boundary WILD y 7.5 1-Headwaters to Wilderness Rock Creek Boundary WILD 5.0 2-Wilderness Boundary to Rock Creek Toms Place REC y y y 11.5 3-Toms Place to Rock Creek Forest Boundary REC y y y 7.0 South Fork 1-Headwaters to Bishop inlet at South Creek Lake WILD y 3.6 2-Dam outlet at South Fork South Lake to Bishop Habeggers RV Creek Park REC y 5.6

Page 74 of 86

STREAM ORV ORV ORV ORV ORV ORV NAME RIVER SEGMENT CLASS SCE* REC* GEO* FW* HIS* CUL* MI. 1-Headwaters to South Fork Wilderness Mill Creek Boundary WILD y y y 1.2 2-Wilderness South Fork Boundary to Mill Mill Creek Creek SCE y y y 1.9 1-Headwater Walker tribs to Walker Creek Lake WILD y y y y 3.0 *ORV=Outstanding remarkable values; SCE=scenic; REC=recreation; GEO=geologic; FW=fish and wildlife; HIS=historic; CUL=cultural In 2009, 38 miles of river segments on 4 of these eligible streams were designated by Congress as Wild and Scenic Rivers with passage of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act: Cottonwood Creek in the White Mountains, along with Deadman Creek, Glass Creek and the upper Owens River which are collectively named the Owens River Headwaters Wild and Scenic River. There are no known changes in the conditions of the 9 streams previously found ineligible which would change that determination. Likewise, there are no known changes in condition of the 131 miles of eligible river segments on 15 streams which would preclude them from eligibility, though this has not been validated through field reviews. The 15 eligible streams, along with the previously recommended Middle Fork San Joaquin River, present opportunity for designation of additional Wild and Scenic Rivers on the Forest, though no specific need has been identified.

Wilderness This section evaluates the ecosystems currently represented in designated wilderness. A GIS analysis was used to assess whether specific land types or ecosystems present in the plan area are either not currently represented or minimally represented within wilderness. Before the responsible official invites comments on the proposed plan, a wilderness inventory and evaluation is required and will be completed (see FSH 1909.12 ch. 70). The wilderness inventory and evaluation is not required, and has not been completed, during the assessment phase (36 CFR 219.7(c)(v) and (vi)). This section also presents confounding management conditions within Inventoried Roadless Areas as relevant information for conducting the wilderness inventory and evaluation to be conducted at a later stage in the plan revision process. A GIS evaluation was completed for ecosystems currently represented in designated wilderness on the Forest. Elevational zones, in 1000-foot increments, were used as a simple proxy for ecosystems. This proxy was selected because altitude has influence on biotic distribution. A cross-check of the elevational zones with ecosystems mapped in Page 75 of 86

the Forest’s Terrestrial Ecological Unit Inventory showed the majority of ecosystems which are present on the Forest are found above 6000-7000 feet (e.g. alpine and subalpine ecosystems, montane forests and shrublands, aspen, meadow and riparian ecosystems), and that Mojave desert-type ecosystems (e.g. xeric shrublands and blackbrush) roughly corresponded with the elevational zones below 6000-7000 feet. Results of the GIS evaluation showed that 95 percent of designated wilderness on the Forest occurs above an elevation of 6000-7000 feet, while only 5 percent of wilderness occurs at lower elevations. Thus, the majority of ecosystems which are present on the Forest are represented within designated wilderness, while Mojave desert-type and mid and lower elevation sagebrush steppe ecosystems are minimally represented. When reviewing the larger region in which the Inyo NF occurs, Mojave desert-type ecosystems are well-represented on adjoining public lands managed by the National Park Service (NPS) in Death Valley National Park and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) with field offices in Bishop and Ridgecrest, California. Designated wildernesses managed by the BLM and NPS which represent Mojave desert-type ecosystems include Piper Mountain, Inyo Mountains, , Argus Range, Surprise Canyon, Manly Peak, Malpais Mesa, , Sacatar Trail and other wilderness areas on BLM lands, and Death Valley National Park Wilderness. Because Mojave desert-type ecosystems are well-represented on other public lands which adjoin the Inyo NF, there may not be compelling need for designation of additional wilderness on the Forest to represent desert-type ecosystems. Many of the characteristics which are desirable when considering the opportunity to designate additional wilderness, such as large blocks of undeveloped natural landscapes with undisturbed ecosystem conditions, can be found within Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs). Existing IRAs, along with all other lands within the plan area not currently designated as wilderness, will be considered during the inventory and evaluation for additional wilderness. As a result, IRAs are briefly reviewed here within the context of confounding management direction and conditions. A full listing of IRAs on the Inyo NF is found previously in the section of Chapter 15 titled, Inventoried Roadless Areas (Table 13). Currently on the Forest, there are 542,119 acres of land within 40 different IRAs. More than half of the IRAs on the Forest are located partly or entirely within the Wildland- Urban Interface (Table 13). The Wildland-Urban Interface zone, commonly referred to as WUI, surrounds areas of human habitation and development. In the WUI zone there is critical need for providing wildfire defensible space to protect life and property during a wildfire. The Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (USDA Forest Service 2004) provides management direction to conduct vegetation and fuels reduction treatment activities in the WUI zone. This management direction specifies that the Forest will create a zone of reduced fuels in the WUI and thereby decrease wildfire intensity and rate of spread. If lands within the WUI were designated as wilderness, the ability to manage vegetation, reduce fuels and create wildfire defensible space would be constrained. Thus, the confounding management direction for treating vegetation, reducing fuels, and providing wildfire defensible space on lands located in WUI should Page 76 of 86

be considered when completing the inventory and evaluation for recommending additional wilderness designation on the Forest.

Research Natural Areas This section evaluates the potential need and opportunity for designation of additional Research Natural Areas (RNAs). Two approaches were used to assess whether specific land types or ecosystems present in the plan area are either not currently represented or minimally represented within RNAs. First, Region 5 had compiled proposed and potential RNAs for all Forests in the Region in 2005, with results for the Inyo NF shown in Table 15.

Table 15. R5 RNA database records for INF (1/6/2005):

Representative Status Name Assessment Types Subalpine Forest, Proposed (Nominated) Whitewing Mountain Alpine Potential Aspen Grove Aspen Potential Coyote Ridge Sagebrush, Alpine

Secondly, we examined the Forest TEUI dataset (see Chapter 1 – Ecosystems) to determine which assessment types were absent or under-represented in the RNA system. Assessment types not currently represented in RNAs in Region 5 include xeric shrublands and blackbrush. While identified as target elements in established RNAs on other forests in Region 5, aspen and mountain mahogany assessment types are only minimally represented in RNAs on the Inyo NF, and mixed conifer is not represented at all. Although sagebrush occurs in more than one RNA in Region 5, it is not a target element in any, and does not occur in contiguous, representative stands in any. Special types (as described in Chapter 1) that are not represented in the designated RNAs on the Inyo NF include alkali flats and aspen. Dry forb occurs in very small amounts in the Sentinel Meadow and Indiana Summit RNAs. It was noted in public comment that these unique dry meadows or pumice flats are abundant in the Glass Mountains and there may be a good candidate for RNA designation in this area. Finally, although not identified as a separate assessment type, carbonate areas, especially within the sagebrush and pinyon-juniper zone of the White and Inyo Mountains, often support unique plant communities. Examples include numerous canyons and ridges that currently occur outside wilderness from the Marble Canyon Narrows in the Inyo Mountains to the Mollie Gibson Mine area in the White Mountains. This terrain also includes numerous alkali flats.

Some of the types listed above, which are not represented in RNAs, are common in wilderness areas, and, therefore, are protected from many current management activities (e.g. red fir, mixed conifer, mountain mahogany). However, it should be noted that Page 77 of 86

wilderness is not necessarily excluded from management activities such as grazing, fire suppression, concentrated recreation, and manipulative research.

Other assessment types, including sagebrush, and xeric shrublands/blackbrush have lower proportions of acreage within wilderness (29%, 19% respectively). Those portions of these types that are in wilderness are generally at the upper elevations of these ecosystems, in transition areas to pinyon pine or other forested ecosystems. However, lower elevations of xeric shrublands/blackbrush and sagebrush present unique opportunities to highlight research opportunities. Xeric shrubland and blackbrush, a type which is representative of the Mojave Desert ecological section (Chapter 1), is not present on any other NFS units in Region 5, except in very small amounts on the Angeles and San Bernardino National Forests. The xeric shrubland and blackbrush assessment type is forecasted to expand, and sagebrush is expected to contract, within the assessment area over the next few decades, as the climate warms (Chapter 3 – Drivers & Stressors). A better understanding of its ecological role would therefore help to inform management practices. Aspen and alkali flats are special types that are not represented in RNAs on the Forest. The former does occur in wilderness areas, but the latter does not. Management practices in these areas would be informed by research on the ecological role and natural range of variation in these special types that support high levels of biodiversity and provide scenic and recreation opportunities on the Forest.

Geological Special Interest Areas The section evaluates the potential need and opportunity for designation of geological special interest areas. This evaluation uses information from published guides about geologic features of interest on the forest. The Inyo National Forest encompasses numerous volcanic landforms, particularly in the region of Mono Lake and Long Valley in the northern portion of the Forest. The volcanic features in this region hold national and global geological interest for both scientists and the general public. The “entire region has geological and natural attractions of enormous interest…such as the ignimbrite deposits of Bishop tuff and the obsidian flows of Mono- Inyo Craters.” (Rossi et al. 2003). There are numerous volcanic features on the Inyo NF which are publicized in geologic guidebooks (Decker and Decker 2007; Sharp and Glazner 1997), including the following: Glass flows at Obsidian Dome Mountains of glass at Mono Craters Boiling springs and fumaroles at Hot Creek Steam explosion pits at Inyo Craters Fissure at Earthquake Fault Caldera at Long Valley Trees killed by CO2 emissions at Horseshoe Lake All the above features of geologic interest hold potential for opportunity to be designated as a Geological Special Interest Area (SIA). In particular, Hot Creek is a very Page 78 of 86

popular and highly visited site. The Hot Creek Geological Site showcases hydrothermal features, such as boiling springs and holes in the ground which vent hot gases from underground (e.g. fumaroles, in scientific terms). The Hot Creek hydrothermal features are associated with the Long Valley Caldera. The Hot Creek Geological Site is not currently designated as a geologic special interest area, yet the area contains outstanding hydrothermal features which would make this site a possible candidate for designation.

Comments from the public also recommended features such as the Inyo-Mono Craters volcanic chain as candidates for National Natural Landmark status.

Unique Recreation Areas This section evaluates need and opportunity for designation of unique recreation areas on the Forest. The evaluation is prompted by a suggestion received from the public that the Mammoth Lakes basin holds potential for designation as a unique recreation area. The suggestion was founded on the outstanding scenery, quality recreation and concentrated visitor uses which currently occur here, with hope that designation as a unique recreation area might provide greater opportunity to garner funding for managing this heavily visited area. The Mammoth Lakes basin is graced with numerous, large glacial lakes, including Lake Mary, Lake George, Lake Mamie, Horseshoe Lake and Twin Lakes. The lakes are surrounded by spectacular mountain scenery on the Mammoth Crest, Sherwin Crest and Mammoth Mountain. The Mammoth Lakes basin is a popular recreation destination with a wide array of year- round recreation opportunities. The area is easily accessed in summer by paved roads, including Lake Mary Road, Lake Mary Loop, Twin Lakes Loop and Lake George Road. In winter, Lake Mary Road and the lower end of Twin Lakes Loop are plowed as far as Tamarack Lodge, and the remainder of roads are closed by snow and then used for winter recreation. Free public transportation is provided for access to the Mammoth Lakes basin in summer by the Eastern Sierra Transit Authority and in winter by Mammoth Mountain Ski Area. Summer recreation includes boating, paddle boarding, fishing, camping, picnicking, hiking, running, horseback riding, bicycling on paved paths, mountain biking on trails, sight-seeing, wildlife viewing, and access to resorts, lodges, marinas and recreation residences. Winter recreation includes cross-country skiing, snow-shoeing, sledding, ski mountaineering, snowmobiling during a limited season, and access to resorts, lodges and recreation residences, plus special events such as Nordic races and biathlon competitions. The area is also the gateway to recreation opportunities in the John Muir and Ansel Adams Wildernesses, with three major trailheads at Coldwater, Lake George and Horseshoe Lake. Under current conditions, the Mammoth Lakes basin receives heavy recreation use, especially in July and August, and on holidays. On peak use days, there is crowding, competing uses within a relatively confined area, and inadequate parking for visitors.

Page 79 of 86

Thus, the area is sometimes near or at capacity to accommodate visitors under current conditions. In addition, there is demand for additional recreational opportunities and infrastructure, such as a facility for biathlon activities and additional paved paths for bicycling, walking or running. While the Mammoth Lakes basin offers outstanding recreation, the area may not be unique on the Forest. There are many other recreation hubs on the Forest which offer similar outstanding recreation opportunities and access into a setting with stunning scenery, and are also at or near capacity with heavy use. These other recreation hubs include Whitney Portal, Bishop Creek, Reds Meadow valley and others.

Other Potentially Designated Areas The Forest received suggestions from the public highlighting other rare and outstanding resources that should be considered for special designation, recognizing undeveloped lands and habitat connectivity as important ecological role supported by special designation. Combining multiple Inventoried Roadless Areas, distinct ecological complexes were identified through public comment, each of which contains important ecological, recreational, and cultural values to consider for designation.

According to the commentor, the Excelsior and Deep Wells IRAs combined with the Excelsior East and Huntoon IRAs on the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest create a continuous Great Basin landscape of over 200,000 acres. These volcanic, pinyon-covered slopes interspersed with sagebrush steppe, dune fields, alkali flats, seasonal wetlands and few perennial springs consist of the Anchorite Hills, Pizona Hills and Excelsior Mountains. Referred to as the Excelsior Complex, this distinct ecological complex facilitates subalpine habitat connectivity between the White Mountains and that found farther north in the eastern Bodie Hills and Wassuck Range.

The public identified the canyon and ridge system extending north and east from Glass Mountain, along the steep escarpment down to Long Valley as representing a unique combination of shrub and forest uplands intersected by perennial watercourses and the only transverse (east-west) range in the eastern Sierra. This east-west range contains unique ecosystems and habitat connectivity from the high elevations of the Sierra to the ranges of the Great Basin. Referred to as the Glass Mountains, the ecological complex is made up of the Benton Range, Watterson, Glass Mountains, and Dexter Canyon IRAs, encompassing over 86,000 acres.

Referred to as the White-Inyo Bridge, the public identified the southern portion of the White Mountains south to the Inyo Mountains (gap between the White Mountains and Inyo Mountain wilderness areas), as providing a north-south corridor from the Mojave desert to the alpine Great Basin habitat, as well as enhance the east-west corridor from the Death Valley-Deep Springs Valley Mojave ecosystem to the Owens Valley and Sierra eco-regions. The White-Inyo Bridge could encompass Blanco Mountain, Black Canyon, Birch Creek, Soldier Canyon, Andrews Mountain, and Paiute IRAs to create a 76,000- Page 80 of 86

acre complex of undeveloped natural lands.

The suggested Sierra Escarpment complex captures both the steep escarpment of the Eastern Sierra front and the unique, disjoint island of subalpine habitat on the Coyote Plateau. The Coyote Plateau is a well-loved recreation destination with outstanding opportunities for hunting, fishing, dispersed camping, and exploration. The Sierra Escarpment complex includes the South Sierra, Tinemaha, Independence Creek, Coyote Southeast, Coyote North, Sherwin, and Mount Olsen IRAs.

Influence of Resources, Budgets, and Risk Factors on Accomplishment of Plan Objectives The Inyo National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1988) provides general goals for management of research natural areas, special interest areas, wild and scenic rivers, and wilderness (pages 68-69), as follows: All botanical Research Natural Areas are established and targets are met. All qualified aquatic and geologic candidates are identified and recommended for establishment. Special Interest Areas (botanic, geologic, scenic, zoologic) are managed to fulfill the intent and purpose for which the areas are established. The newly designated North Fork of the Kern and South Fork of the Kern Wild and Scenic Rivers are managed to protect their wild and scenic qualities. The Middle Fork of the San Joaquin is managed so as not to preclude its designation as a Wild and Scenic River. Classified wilderness is managed to protect and perpetuate the wilderness character of the area; to provide opportunities for primitive recreation; to maintain wildlife and fish, scenic, and watershed values; to maintain or enhance the quality of the wilderness experience. The following paragraphs present a brief discussion of resource, budget and risk factors which influence the forest’s ability to accomplish these management goals in the existing Plan. The Inyo NF draws 2.5 million annual visits from both local residents and tourists who may travel from southern California, other states and even foreign countries. Many who visit the Forest come to enjoy the outstanding scenery, wild lands or primitive recreation available in wilderness, on wild and scenic rivers, along scenic byways, and at the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area or Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest. In large measure, the Inyo NF accomplishes the Plan goals to manage designated areas so that their scenic and natural qualities are protected while providing for public visitation in these areas. Nonetheless, there is room for improvement and challenges which will require creative solutions, as follows. The trend for a declining federal budget constrains many aspects of land and resource management, and the ability to meet existing plan objectives for designated areas. As a Page 81 of 86

consequence the agency has fewer personnel to actively manage designated areas, such as backcountry rangers to monitor and protect conditions for wilderness character or interpretive staff to conduct conservation education programs in the Mono Basin National Forest Scenic Area. There is also less capital to maintain trails or other infrastructure associated with designated areas. This is especially critical within the context of increasing recreational use(s) of the forest and greater diversity in public expectations for designated area management. This decline in agency budget and increasing public demand creates greater need for partners to fill the gap. Volunteer groups or other organizations may complete trail maintenance or site restoration work in wilderness. For example, there has been a significant contribution from a diverse set of partners including Backcountry Horsemen, Pacific Crest Trail Association, Sierra Club Service Trips, American Hiking Society, Volunteers, and Friends of the Inyo, among many others, who have conducted trail maintenance, water quality and campsite monitoring, and habitat restoration within designated areas. Increasing need for partner contributions requires agency commitment for working with partners and investment in sustaining partnerships. Coordinating designated area management between multiple agencies creates complex challenges for meeting Inyo NF Plan objectives. This circumstance applies to wilderness areas, the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail and the John Muir Trail. For example, the contiguous wilderness areas in the southern Sierra Nevada Mountains are managed by numerous national parks and national forests, including the Inyo. If other managing agencies which have lands adjoining the Inyo should decide to decrease permitted use of these wildernesses in other areas, then there could be a ripple effect for increased level of use within wilderness on the Inyo and a potential need for changed management to protect wilderness character. There are other influences beyond the span of control in forest management which impact land and resource conditions and the ability to meet plan objectives for management of designated areas. For example air pollution from outside sources and loss of vegetation from wildfire can degrade ecosystem conditions or scenic quality in wilderness. Another example, unauthorized uses, such as establishment of marijuana gardens, may impair water quality and other ecological resources in designated areas. These could also be categorized as risk factors.

References Caprio, A., M.B. Keifer, K. Webster. 2006. Long-term effects of the 1992 Rainbow Fire, Devils Postpile National Monument, California.

Cheng, Sheauchi. Tech. ed. 2004. Forest Service Research Natural Areas in California. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-188. Albany, CA: Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 338 pp.

Decker, R. and B. Decker. 2007. Volcanoes in America’s National Parks. Published by

Page 82 of 86

Odyssey Books and Guides a Division of Airphoto International Ltd., Hong Kong. Distributed in the USA by W.W. Norton & Company, New York, NY. Pages 169-173.

Ettema, N. Sims, L. 2010. Stream Habitat Conditions for California Golden Trout on the Kern Plateau. Inyo National Forest report.

Ettema, N. and L. Sims. 2012. Stream habitat conditions in N. Fork Cottonwood Creek, White Mountains, CA. White paper filed at Inyo National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Bishop, CA. December 2012.

Keeler-Wolf, Todd. 1990. Ecological surveys of Forest Service Research Natural Areas in California. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-125. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 177 pp.

NASA Science News. 2010. Downloaded from http://science.nasa.gov/science- news/science-at-nasa/2010/02dec_monolake/.

Nash, J.M. 2010. C. Millar quoted in “Dancing with climate change.” In High Country News, Oct. 1, 2010.

Rossi, M., P. Papale, L. Lupi and M. Stoppato. 2003. Volcanoes, a Firefly Guide. Published by Firefly Books, Inc., Buffalo, NY. , Page 237.

Sharp, R.P. and A.F. Glazner. 1997 Geology underfoot in Death Valley and Owens Valley. Published by Mountain Press Publishing Company, Missoula, MT. Pages 251- 296.

US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Federal Register, volume 76, No. 196, October 11, 2011, pgs. 63105, 63112.

USDA Forest Service and US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004. Conservation Assessment and Strategy for the California Golden Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss aguabonita) Tulare County, California. Written by Stanley J. Stephens, Christy McGuire and Lisa Sims. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Inyo and Sequoia National Forests, and US Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento Office.

USDA Forest Service. 2013a. Proposed FSH1909.12 – Land Management Planning Handbook, Chapter 10 – The Assessment, Section 14 – Assessing Designated Areas, 02/14/2013.

USDA Forest Service. 2013b. Personal communication from John Louth, Bristlecone Pine Forest Manager, via email dated April 15, 2013.

USDA Forest Service. 2012a. Inyo National Forest, Landtype Association Scale, Terrestrial Ecological Unit Inventory, 12/21/12 Draft. Written by Slaton, M.R., V. McClean, C. Clark, K. Nelson, S. Yarborough, B. Goehring, T. Ellsworth and M. DeRose. Inyo NF, Region 5. Page 83 of 86

USDA Forest Service. 2012b. Long Term Condition and Trend Monitoring on the Kern Plateau summary by Dave Weixelman, range ecologist, USFS Range Program, 8/19/2012 powerpoint.

USDA Forest Service. 2011a. Templeton and Whitney Allotments Synthesis Report, April 25, 2011, pg.4.

USDA Forest Service. 2011b. Red List Assessment for Great Basin Bristlecone Pine (Pinus longaeva). Completed by Mary Mahalovich and Kathleen Nelson. Washington Office, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

USDA Forest Service. 2011c. Mono Basin Grazing Environmental Assessment and Decision Notice, Finding of No Significant Impact. Inyo National Forest.

USDA Forest Service. 2010a. Draft interpretation of results, Kern Amendment 6 and Proper Functioning Condition data collection, Summer 2010, Whitney allotment, by Todd J. Ellsworth, 1/2011, pg. 3.

USDA Forest Service. 2010b. Proper Functioning Condition and Amendment 6 Assessments and Ratings for Templeton Allotment Summer 2010. Lisa Sims, Inyo National Forest Aquatic Biologist.

USDA Forest Service. 2008. Applying the concept of wilderness character to National Forest planning, monitoring, and management. Rocky Mountain Research Station, General Technical Report, RMRS-GTR-217WWW.

USDA Forest Service. 2007. Commercial Pack Station and Pack Stock Outfitter/Guide Permit Issuance, Record of Decision. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Inyo National Forest. R5-MB-136c. January 2007.

USDA Forest Service. 2006a. Commercial Pack Station and Pack Stock Outfitter/Guide Permit Issuance, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 1 – Chapters 1-4. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Inyo National Forest. R5-MB-136. December 2006.

USDA Forest Service. 2006b. Commercial Pack Station and Pack Stock Outfitter/Guide Permit Issuance, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 2 – Appendices. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Inyo National Forest. R5-MB-136. December 2006.

USDA Forest Service. 2005a. Trail and Commercial Pack Stock Management in the Ansel Adams and John Muir Wildernesses, Record of Decision. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Inyo and Sierra National Forests. R5-MB-100. December 2005.

USDA Forest Service. 2005b. Trail and Commercial Pack Stock Management in the Ansel Adams and John Muir Wildernesses, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 1 –

Page 84 of 86

Chapters 1-3. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Inyo and Sierra National Forests. R5-MB-099. December 2005.

USDA Forest Service. 2005c. Trail and Commercial Pack Stock Management in the Ansel Adams and John Muir Wildernesses, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 2 – Chapters 4-5. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Inyo and Sierra National Forests. R5-MB-099. December 2005.

USDA Forest Service. 2005d. Trail and Commercial Pack Stock Management in the Ansel Adams and John Muir Wildernesses, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 3 – Appendices. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Inyo and Sierra National Forests. R5-MB-099. December 2005.

USDA Forest Service 2004. Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision. Pacific Southwest Region, R5- MB-046. January 2004.

USDA Forest Service. 2001a. Wilderness Management Plan for the Ansel Adams, John Muir and Dinkey Lakes Wildernesses, Inyo and Sierra National Forests. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. April 2001.

USDA Forest Service. 2001b. Adams, John Muir and Dinkey Lakes Wildernesses, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Chapters 1-9, Volume 1 of 2. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. March 2001.

USDA Forest Service. 2001c. Adams, John Muir and Dinkey Lakes Wildernesses, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Appendices, Volume 2 of 2. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. March 2001.

USDA Forest Service. 2001d. Roadless Area Conservation Rule. 36 CFR Part 294.

USDA Forest Service. 1994. Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) North and South Forks of the Kern Wild and Scenic River, and Record of Decision (ROD) signed on 9/30/1994. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Sequoia National Forest.

USDA Forest Service. 1993. Memo regarding wild and scenic river study on Inyo National Forest. Memo dated Jun 7, 1993 and signed by Dennis W. Martin, Forest Supervisor. 5 pages with enclosure. On file at Inyo National Forest Supervisors Office, Bishop, CA.

USDA Forest Service. 1988. Inyo National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan.

USDA Forest Service. 1982a. Golden Trout Wilderness Management Plan. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Inyo and Sequoia National Forests. March 1982.

USDA Forest Service. 1982b. Final EIS and Study Report, North Fork Kern Wild and Scenic River Study. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Sequoia NF, 1982 –

Page 85 of 86

with April 1985 Addendum; published in Federal Register August 19, 1985.

USDA Forest Service. 1982c. Comprehensive Management Plan for the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail.

USDA Forest Service. 1977. Hoover Wilderness Management Plan, Inyo Supplement. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Inyo and Sequoia National Forests. September 1977.

USDA Forest Service. 1976. Hoover Wilderness Management Plan. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Toiyabe National Forest. 1976.

US District Court for the Northern District of California. 2008. Order for Injunctive Relief. Case 3:00-cv-01239-EDL. High Sierra Hikers Association et al., Plaintiffs, v. Randy Moore, et al., Defendents and National Forest Recreation Association, et al., Defendents- Intervenors.

US District Court for the Northern District of California. 2002. Amended Order Granting Injunctive Relief. Case 3:00-cv-01239-EDL. High Sierra Hikers Association et al., Plaintiffs, v. Bradley Powell, et al., Defendants.

Page 86 of 86