Wildlife, Fish and Rare Plant Specialist Report for the Hassayampa Livestock Grazing Allotment

Prescott National Forest Bradshaw Ranger District Yavapai County, Arizona

Prepared by: Dan Garcia de la Cadena Wildlife Biologist Prescott National Forest And Albert Sillas Fishery Biologist Prescott National Forest

August 2013

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Page | 2

A. Introduction The Prescott National Forest, Bradshaw Ranger District, proposes to continue the authorization of livestock grazing on the Hassayampa Allotment under an adaptive management system. This report serves as the Biological Assessment and Evaluation that documents the effects of two Action and the No Action alternatives on plant and animal species and habitat that have the following status: federally listed or proposed under ESA (Endangered Species Act), any designated or proposed critical habitat under ESA, and USDA Forest Service Region 3 sensitive species. This report also serves as the Wildlife Specialist Report that documents the effects of the alternatives on Prescott National Forest MIS (management indicator species), and species under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and Migratory Bird Treaty Act. See Appendix A-C for the complete lists of these species.

The best available science was used in the completion of this report. Upon review of PNF habitat data, it was determined that federally listed species under the ESA do not occur in the project area, but there is one candidate species proposed for listing which may migrate through the project area. Tables 1a & 1b summarize the effects to one federally proposed for listing/candidate species and Region 3 Sensitive species analyzed in detail in this report. Table 2 summarizes the effects to MIS at the project level and to the forest-wide trends. Table 3 summarizes the effects to golden, bald eagles and migratory birds.

Table 1a. Summary of effects for Federally Proposed Species within or near the Hassayampa Allotment. Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Species Name Status Proposed No Action No Grazing Action Endangered Species Act: Proposed for listing as Threatened under ESA on October 3, 2013 Candidate Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo species/Proposed No Effect No Effect No Effect for Listing

Table 1b. Summary of effects for Region 3 Forest Service Sensitive Species that may occur within or near the Hassayampa Allotment. Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Species Name Status Proposed No Grazing Action Western red bat Sensitive No Impact No Impact No Impact Pale Townsend’s big-eared bat Sensitive No Impact No Impact No Impact Lowland leopard frog Sensitive MIIH MIIH No Impact Phillip’s Agave Sensitive No Impact MIIH No Impact Desert sucker Sensitive MIIH MIIH No Impact

MIIH – May impact individual or habitat

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Table 2. Summary of effects on management indicator species (MIS) analyzed on the Hassayampa Allotment.

Action Alternatives 1 & 2 No Grazing Alternative 3 Species – Indicator habitat Forest-wide Forest-wide Project Level Effects Project Level Effects Trends Trends Mule Deer – early No change to habitat No effect to No change to habitat No effect to seral pinyon juniper quantity of early seral forest-wide quantity of early seral forest-wide & chaparral stage of pinyon-juniper habitat or stage of pinyon- habitat or and chaparral vegetation. population trends. juniper and chaparral population May increase habitat vegetation. trends. quality slightly due to Habitat quality would construction and improve in areas maintenance of water where heavy grazing developments. pressure has Alternative 1: No impacts previously occurred. to early seral PJ with dormant seasonal grazing by livestock. Alternative 2: Under year around grazing, competition and grazing of low shrub vegetation by both livestock and big game might impact quality of the habitat, but not the quantity.

Page | 4

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Table 2. Summary of effects on management indicator species (MIS) analyzed on the Hassayampa Allotment.

Action Alternatives 1 & 2 No Grazing Alternative 3 Species – Indicator habitat Forest-wide Forest-wide Project Level Effects Project Level Effects Trends Trends Spotted Towhee – No change in habitat No effect to No change in habitat No effect to late seral chaparral quantity of late-seral forest-wide quantity of late-seral forest-wide chaparral. habitat or chaparral. habitat or Habitat quality should not population trends. Habitat quality may population be impacted from improve with an trends. seasonal, rotational increase of insect grazing system. Soil species diversity and DFCs are to improve additional vegetative vegetative ground cover. cover for nests. Alternative 1: No impacts to nesting spotted towhees with dormant seasonal grazing occurring outside of the nesting season. Alternative 2: Under year around grazing, low shrub vegetation nests could be impacted by livestock while browsing and/or ground nests could be trampled by livestock while grazing in the uplands during the breeding season.

Table 2. Summary of effects on management indicator species (MIS) analyzed on the Hassayampa Allotment.

Action Alternatives 1 & 2 No Grazing Alternative 3 Species – Indicator habitat Forest-wide Forest-wide Project Level Effects Project Level Effects Trends Trends Macroinvertebrates Yearlong livestock grazing No effect to The No Action No effect to – aquatic habitat and in the project area using a forest-wide alternative would not forest-wide late seral riparian rest/deferred rotation trends. alter the quantity of trends. habitat. grazing system: aquatic habitat or late- The Action Alternatives seral riparian habitat. would not alter the quantity of aquatic habitat or late seral riparian habitat.

Page | 5

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Table 3. Summary of Effects for Eagles and Migratory Birds for the Hassayampa Allotment Species Status Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Proposed Action No Grazing Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act: Bald & Golden eagles Protected No Take No Take No Take Migratory Bird Treaty Act: Migratory birds ------No Take Unintentional No Take Take

Compliance with Federal Laws, Regulations, and Policies concerning Wildlife, Fish, and Rare Plant Management on National Forest lands.

The ESA § 7(d) requires that Federal agencies “shall not make any irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources with respect to the agency action which has the effect of foreclosing the formulation or implementation of any reasonable and prudent alternative measures which would not violate subsection (a)(2).” This project will not make irreversible or irretrievable commitments and the status quo will be maintained during the consultation process. This report was developed after considering the best available science for assessing resource conditions and then determining the ecological effects associated with livestock grazing.

Biological Evaluations are required under FSM 2672.4 to review all Forest Service planned, funded, executed, or permitted programs and activities for possible effects on endangered, threatened, proposed, or sensitive species. The biological evaluation is the means of conducting the review and of documenting the findings. The objectives of the Biological Evaluation are:

1. To ensure that Forest Service actions do not contribute to loss of viability of any native or desired non- native plant or contribute to animal species or trends toward Federal listing of any species. 2. To comply with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act that the actions of Federal agencies not jeopardize or adversely modify critical habitat of Federally listed species. 3. To provide a process and standard by which to ensure that threatened, endangered, proposed, and sensitive species receive full consideration in the decision making process.

Effects to endangered, threatened, proposed, or sensitive species and their habitats were considered for this project and those species that are found within or adjacent to the allotment are documented in this report.

Management Indicator Species (MIS): The Forest Service is required to address MIS in compliance with various regulations and Agency policy (36 CFR 219, Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2621 and 1920), which are, themselves, tiered to the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, as amended by the NFMA. The Prescott National Forest Plan was prepared under planning regulations issued in 1982. Effects to MIS were considered for this project and are documented in this report.

Page | 6

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (Executive Order 13186): The Forest Service is required to address the effects of agency actions and plans on migratory birds and identify where unintentional take reasonably attributable to agency action is having, or is likely to have, a measurable negative effect on migratory bird populations. Effects to migratory birds were considered for this project and are documented in this report.

Bald &Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1942: The Forest Service is required to address the effects of agency actions and plans on eagles protected under this law. Effects to eagles were considered for this project and are documented in this report.

B. Description of the Existing Condition

The Hassayampa Allotment is located on the Bradshaw Ranger District of the Prescott National Forest (PNF) and represents the project area for this environmental analysis, an area of approximately 10,500 acres.

The allotment is located in the southwestern portion of the District, approximately one-half mile southeast of Wilhoit, Arizona. The Forest boundary forms the allotment boundary on the west and the south sides of the allotment. (See Fig.1 Vicinity and Fig.2 Allotment map.)

Current Grazing Management The Hassayampa Allotment is permitted for 49 head of cattle, cow/calf, yearlong. Livestock grazing generally starts in the Quartz Mountain pasture then moves to the other pastures on the allotment, depending on water availability. There are 7 earthen stock tanks in the uplands away from the Hassayampa River corridor, but these tanks are unreliable. The reliable water sources are Middlewater Well adjacent to the Hassayampa River, and Orofino Wash Well #2, about ½-mile west of the river. There is some seasonal water available in the Hassayampa River itself.

The allotment has been managed for a total of 588 animal-unit-months (AUMs) of forage-use. (An AUM is defined here as a measure of the average amount of forage used by one cow-calf pair over the course of one month.)

Table 4. Pasture acreage on the Hassayampa Allotment Allotment Pasture Name Acres North Rootplow 279 South Rootplow 205 Quartz Mountain 2,026 Hassayampa Orofino 3,233 Middlewater 1,659 Carter (w/River Pasture) 3172 Total 10,574

Page | 7

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Figure 1. Hassayampa Vicinity Map

Page | 8

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Figure 2. Hassayampa Allotment Management Map

Page | 9

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Table 5. Pasture Rotations on the Hassayampa Allotment, 2008-2012 Year Pasture Dates 2012 Allotment-wide 3/1 – 4/15 North group 4/16 – 11/15 South group 11/16 – 2/28 2011 South group 3/1 – 3/31 North group 4/1 – 10/31 South group 11/1 – 2/28 2010 South group 3/1 – 3/31 North group 4/1 – 10/31 South group 11/1 – 2/28 2009 South group 3/1 – 3/31 North group 4/1 – 10/31 South group 11/1 – 2/28 2008 South group 3/1 – 5/30 North group 6/1 – 11/31 South group 12/1 – 2/28

The allotment has been managed recently by rotating the cattle between the four northern pastures used together (North and South Rootplow, Quartz Mountain and Orofino) and the two southern pastures used together (Middlewater and Carter Pastures). Livestock grazing generally occurs in the northern pasture group in the spring and summer then moves to the southern pastures in fall/winter, depending on water availability. There are 7 earthen stock tanks in the uplands, but these tanks are unreliable. The reliable water sources are Middlewater Well adjacent to the Hassayampa River in the southern pasture group, Collins Spring in the Carter Pasture, and Orofino Wash Well #2, about ½-mile west of the river in the northern pastures. There is occasionally seasonal water available in the Hassayampa River itself. The pasture rotations followed for the last five years is shown in Table 5. It is recognized that lack of reliable water sources to support the entire herd in either the north or south pasture group alone has resulted in opening the gates between the north and south pastures and scattering cattle throughout the allotment at times.

Grazing Distribution

The terrain in the Hassayampa Allotment influences how cattle distribute themselves across the landscape. Primary and secondary range areas were delineated using GIS analysis. Slopes of 0-10% were considered primary range and slopes of 10-30% were secondary range. Slopes of 0-10% and depending on the availability of palatable forage, are subject to receiving the greatest pressure from livestock grazing. Livestock use of slopes greater than 30% are used but with lesser frequencies. Additionally, forage quality, salting and distance from water are also factors in cattle distribution, so slope percentages are a broad-scale view of estimating distribution. Figure 3 shows these slope classes for the Hassayampa Allotment. The map in Figure 3 illustrates that about 9,180 acres of the allotment (87%) has slopes that fall into the primary and secondary range areas. The remaining 1,396 acres of the allotment (13%), with its steeper terrain and distance from water sources will be subject to less and/or no grazing pressure.

Page | 10

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Figure 3. Hassayampa Allotment slope breaks

Page | 11

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Vegetation Ecotypes The topography of the allotment varies from relatively wide riparian corridor to steep mountain slopes in the southern Bradshaw Range. Most of the allotment has steep terrain that is divided by drainages running through moderate to steep divides or canyons. Elevation on the allotment varies from about 4,000 feet near Collins Spring to over 5,750 feet near Quartz Mountain to the north. The main vegetation ecotypes on the Hassayampa Allotment consist of interior chaparral, pinyon-juniper chaparral, pinyon-juniper grassland and mixed broadleaf deciduous riparian forest (Table 6). Riparian areas are found along one major stream course of the Hassayampa River.

Table 6. Ecotype acreage on the Hassayampa Allotment

Vegetation Type Acres % of Project Area Interior Chaparral 3,938 37 Pinyon-Juniper Chaparral 3,215 30 Pinyon-Juniper Grassland 2,800 27 Mixed Broadleaf Deciduous 604 6 Riparian Forest Total acres 10,557 100

Chaparral Habitat

Interior chaparral habitat covers approximately 3,938 acres or 37% of the allotment. Chaparral communities include shrub oak, mimosa, ceanothus, catclaw, snakeweed and prickly pear cactus. Shrub density is variable across this type, and perennial grasses are often found inter-mixed, especially on south- facing slopes.

Pinyon-Juniper Habitat Pinyon-juniper covers approximately 6,015 acres or 57% of the allotment. Pinyon-juniper with chaparral includes a tree over story with Utah and/or alligator juniper, with shrubs in the understory. Grasses may be common, especially on the south-facing slopes.

Riparian Habitat The Hassayampa River is the primary drainage, with an interrupted and intermittent flow regime, traversing north to south through the allotment a distance of approximately 7 miles within the allotment and exiting the Prescott National Forest at that point. The riparian corridor consists of 604 acres or 6% of the allotment. Tributaries to the Hassayampa River within the allotment boundary, progressing from upstream to downstream include Orofino Wash, Buzzard Roost Wash, and Middlewater Creek. These stream courses are mainly intermittent with only short reaches of perennial water along the Hassayampa River. Collins Spring in the Carter Pasture is the only spring in the water inventory for the allotment.

Recent riparian-wetland area assessments rated key areas along three reaches of the Hassayampa River were rated as Proper Functioning Condition (Reach 1 – Upper); Nonfunctional (Reach 2 – Middle) and Functional-at-Risk (Reach 3 – Lower) (Hydrologist Specialist Report). Reach 1 has historic and current impacts related to mining operations and dredging. There are also high livestock use impacts to riparian woody species that contribute to limited potential for regeneration.

Page | 12

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Vegetation Desired Condition Assessments

The desired condition or Desired Vegetation status (DVS), as developed by the Interdisciplinary Team, is to manage for perennial grass canopy cover of mid to high similarity to PNC providing for ecological functionality and resiliency following disturbance while sustaining long term productivity of the land which will thus provide for the maintenance of satisfactory RMS with a static or upward trend.

Desired Vegetation Status and Rangeland Management Status (RMS) for key TEUI map units selected within the pastures on this allotment are shown in Table 7 below. TEUI 448 in the North Rootplow Pasture exhibits low perennial grass canopy cover that is not entirely a factor of the existing shrub cover. Desirable browse species were noted to be hedged at this site, as well. These factors lead to a determination of unsatisfactory Rangeland Management Status (RMS), since current management is likely causing the vegetation to trend away from desired conditions. The other inventoried map units show either mid similarity for the existing grass cover and composition, or are stable shrub dominated sites (TEUI 448 in the Quartz Mountain Pasture) where the high shrub canopy is the greater influence on grass cover than grazing management. For this reason, the RMS was rated as satisfactory because of the stable shrub cover that was noted as “robust” at the sampling site (Range Vegetation Report).

Table 7: Desired Vegetation Status and Rangeland Management Status by pasture

Pasture TEUI Map Desired Vegetation Trend Rangeland Management Unit Status Status

Carter 429 Mid similarity for C3 Satisfactory grasses* Hassayampa, Up

Middlewater 407 Mid similarity for C4 Satisfactory grasses, high end Hassayampa and C1 Orofino, Down and Up

Orofino 483 Mid similarity for C1 and C3 Satisfactory grasses Orofino, Up and Stable

Quartz 448 Low similarity No clusters; Satisfactory Mountain grasses; High Stable due to similarity shrubs high shrub cover

North 448 Low similarity No clusters; Unsatisfactory Rootplow grasses; High possible Down similarity shrubs

* Using 2012 canopy cover values for perennial grasses

Page | 13

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

C. Desired Future Condition The desired conditions and resource objectives for resources and infrastructure on this grazing allotment, based on the forest plan and the work of the interdisciplinary analysis team, include:

 management of the grazing operations using a system that is responsive to changing climatic or environmental conditions;  the maintenance of vegetation with mid- to high similarity to the potential natural plant community (PNC) providing for ecological functionality and resiliency following disturbance while sustaining long-term productivity of the land;  the installation and maintenance of structural improvements, such as water-supply systems, that enhance management control and flexibility and allow for effective distribution of forage use;  the maintenance of soils in satisfactory condition over the long-term with improving conditions in areas departing from satisfactory condition where livestock grazing is affecting the condition;  the maintenance of satisfactory conditions for water resources that meet total maximum daily load (TMDL) and other State water quality objectives;  the maintenance of functioning spring-fed riparian systems, and saturated soils where potential exists, that support vegetation within site potential and provide habitat for riparian-dependent plants and animals while providing water sources for wildlife and livestock needs;  the maintenance of fully functional riparian systems supported by herbaceous and multi-age woody vegetation, within site potential, that provides for geomorphically stable stream channels and banks and habitat for riparian-dependent plants and animals. Functional riparian systems support water quality and both hydrogeomorphic and biological attributes and processes;  protection and preservation of important historic and cultural sites; and  the maintenance of suitable habitats for management indicator species, Migratory Bird Treaty Act species, federally threatened and endangered species, Forest Service sensitive species, and for indigenous plant and animal species.

Forest Plan Management Direction The following management direction is for wildlife and fish habitat within the Prescott National Forest (USDA Forest Service 1986) relevant to this project:

 Manage for a diverse, well-distributed pattern of habitats for wildlife populations and fish species in cooperation with states and other agencies.  Integrate wildlife habitat management activities into all resource practices through intensive coordination.  Support the goals and objectives of the Arizona Wildlife and Fisheries Comprehensive Plan, as approved by the Southwestern Regional Forester and Director of the Arizona Game and Fish Department.

Wildlife, Fish and Rare Plant Species Management

 All water developments will consider small game and nongame needs and escape devices (p. 27).  All fencing will be to wildlife standards and consider local species' needs (p. 27).  Emphasize maintenance and restoration of healthy riparian ecosystems through conformance with Forest Plan riparian standards and guidelines. Management strategies should move degraded riparian vegetation toward good condition as soon as possible. Damage to riparian vegetation, streambanks and channels should be prevented (p. 141).

Page | 14

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

D. Alternatives Alternative 1: Dormant Season Grazing

The following proposal has been developed to meet the project’s purpose and need for action and consists of six components: Authorization, Adaptive Management, Resource Protection Measures, Structural Range Improvements, Road Closure, and Monitoring. The proposal follows current guidance from Forest Service Handbook 2209.13, Chapter 90 (Grazing Permit Administration; Rangeland Management Decision-making).

Authorization

The Bradshaw District Ranger proposes to continue to authorize livestock grazing on the Hassayampa Allotment under the following terms:

 A range of stocking from 294 to 656 Animal Unit Month’s on a dormant season basis (generally from October 1st through March 31st), annually. As an example, this livestock use strategy would provide for livestock numbers to range from 49 to 109 head of cattle, cow/calf pairs and bulls for 6 months.

 Livestock will be managed by dispersing in the Quartz Mountain, Rootplows, Orofino, and Middlewater Pastures during the dormant season, while Carter Pasture use period is restricted to when woody riparian plants along the Hassayampa River are fully dormant (generally December through February).

The term grazing permit will be issued for up to ten years. The permit will authorize livestock use within parameters identified in this proposal, and subsequent permits may be issued as long as resources continue to move further toward desired conditions or are being maintained in satisfactory condition, as appropriate.

Adaptive Management

The Proposed Action includes the application of adaptive management principles. Adaptive management is designed to provide sufficient flexibility to allow management to address changes in climatic conditions, seasonal fluctuations in forage production and other dynamic influences on the ecosystem in order to effectively make progress toward or maintain desired conditions of the rangeland and other resources. Adaptive management will also include the implementation of resource protection measures described below.

Under the adaptive management approach, regular/annual monitoring of short-term indicators may suggest the need for administrative changes in livestock management. The need for adaptation would be based on the magnitude or repeated re-occurrence of deviations from guidelines provided, or due to indications of a lack of progress toward desired resource conditions.

Resource Protection Measures

Allotment-wide Measures: On those portions of the allotment where no specific resource concerns were identified by the Interdisciplinary (ID) Team, livestock will be managed with the objective of maintaining or improving the condition of rangeland resources through the use of grazing intensity guidelines. Grazing intensity is measured by determining the level of utilization on forage plants. Utilization is the proportion or degree of current year’s forage production that is consumed or destroyed by animals

Page | 15

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

(Interagency Technical Reference 1996). Allowable utilization levels are guidelines to be achieved as an average over the long term to maintain or improve rangeland vegetation and long-term soil productivity. Relative utilization may be measured before and during the growing season and can be utilized as a tool to manage livestock so that expectations of end of growing season utilization measurements can be achieved.

Allowable utilization guidelines will be applied across the allotment to provide rangeland managers with information needed to adapt management through adjustments, as may be needed, on an annual basis. Utilization data can be used: (1) to identify use patterns; (2) to help establish cause-and-effect interpretations of range trend data; and (3) to aid in adjusting stocking rates when combined with other monitoring data (Interagency Technical Reference 1996). Examples of appropriate grazing intensity and forage use guidelines for areas of the allotment that are generally described to be in satisfactory condition include:

1. A management guideline of 35-45% utilization of key forage plants in upland key areas as measured at the end of the growing season or seasonal use period;

2. Up to 50-60% leaders browsed on key upland woody species;

3. Minimum stubble height on key riparian herbaceous species: four to six inches where sedges and rushes are key and eight inches where deergrass is key;

4. Up to 20% use by weight on key woody species within riparian areas; or less than 50% of terminal leaders browsed on woody species less than 6 feet tall.

Site-specific Measures: Through the allotment analysis process undertaken by the interdisciplinary team, some areas have been identified where the current condition of soils, riparian areas, and herbaceous components are in less than the desired condition. Soil conditions associated with pinion-juniper and chaparral hills were determined to be in impaired condition due to poor spatial vegetation cover and accelerated soil loss. These areas are located within portions of the Carter, North Root Plow, and Middlewater pastures. Implementing seasonal use from October through March will allow for warm growing season rest every year. This design feature is expected to lead to improvement in herbaceous plant vigor and cover, where the potential for improvement exists. A substantial portion of the allotment has chaparral vegetation with cover values approaching 60% or more. These high-density chaparral areas are considered stable states, with limited potential to improve in herbaceous plant cover unless the shrub component is manipulated by a disturbance agent (fire, mechanical brush control).

The Hassayampa River throughout the allotment is in less than functional condition due to unstable channels, very high sediment loads, and inadequate riparian vegetation. Collins Spring in the Carter pasture is non-functional due to head cutting which is dewatering the system and limiting the spring’s ability to provide water.

Because of riparian concerns throughout the allotment, the objectives for livestock management are to improve woody age class diversity of riparian species and improve composition of riparian species where capable. Implementing winter seasonal grazing is expected to facilitate improvement in the riparian zone

Page | 16

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

by allowing for growing season rest during the summer precipitation period, which is also a time that livestock tend to congregate in riparian areas to access shade from summer heat and to access reliable water found at wells in proximity to the riparian area. Reaches within each pasture differ in existing riparian condition and potential for recovery. Management objectives will be achieved by applying the following site-specific measures.

1. Up to 30% utilization of key herbaceous plants in the riparian corridor (TEUI 44); use active livestock management techniques (herding, salt and supplement placement, etc.) to disperse cattle throughout the pasture and discourage concentration and trailing within the river corridor.

2. Grazing may be deferred in areas showing recruitment until seedlings become established and can be maintained while withstanding browsing impacts.

3. Manage the Carter Pasture as a riparian pasture. Defer livestock grazing within the pasture annually until riparian vegetation is dormant (generally December through February); manage to encourage woody species recruitment and to establish and maintain effective herbaceous vegetation along the greenline, where present. Emphasize sedges and rushes and/or deergrass for the herbaceous component.

Construct a fence along the lower ½-mile of the Hassayampa River in the Carter Pasture to exclude livestock access to the riparian corridor.

In the event that the above resource protection measures do not accomplish site-specific resource objectives, additional optional measures may be implemented. These optional measures will be designed to address site-specific resource concerns and may include, but are not limited to, such things as temporary fencing, electric fencing, drift fences, additional livestock exclosures, water pipelines, storage and troughs; reconstruction of non-functional improvements and construction of new improvements such as spring boxes, drift fences, and water gaps.

Structural Range Improvements

Construction of New Range Improvements: This alternative includes construction of the following new structural improvements that have been developed to address resource concerns or improve grazing management. Upland water developments will provide livestock water away from riparian areas and allow for achievement of riparian management objectives. Monitoring may indicate that some of these improvements are not necessary; however, if some or all of these improvements are not implemented, the upper limit of permitted livestock numbers may not be achievable on a sustained basis, or seasonal use periods may be shortened. Different types of water developments may be employed depending on the location, and could include a catchment apron and storage tank (“trick tank”) with pipeline to water troughs, or pipelines to water troughs from existing spring developments or wells. The location of proposed range improvements are shown on the enclosed map for Alternative 1.

1. Increase water storage capacity at the Orofino Well #2 and increase the size of the existing corral.

2. Develop a dependable water source in Section 9 of the Orofino Pasture.

3. Develop a dependable water source in the area of Miner’s Tank in the Carter Pasture.

Page | 17

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

4. Develop a new water source in the Carter Pasture. This water system will be located in the uplands west of the river and may include such facilities as a well development, storage tank(s), pump/windmill, pipeline, troughs, and corral facilities.

5. Construct a riparian exclosure at the lower end of the Hassayampa River in the Carter Pasture if livestock use is expected outside the proposed December through February period, or if 3-5 years of monitoring data shows that desired conditions are not being met through limiting season of use alone.

6. Construct a new water development in the northeast part of the Quartz Mountain Pasture in the vicinity of the south half of section 35 or the north half of section 2. The water development may be a well with storage, pipeline, and troughs, an earthen stock tank, or a trick tank collection apron with storage, pipeline, and troughs.

Alternative 2: Yearlong Grazing and Fencing of Hassayampa River Corridor

The following proposal has been developed to meet the project’s purpose and need for action, while allowing for yearlong grazing on the allotment. Many components are the same as alternative 1, which are included by reference.

Authorization

The Bradshaw District Ranger proposes to continue to authorize livestock grazing on the Hassayampa Allotment under the following terms:

 Stocking by up to 588 Animal Unit Months yearlong. As an example, this provides for livestock numbers of up to 49 head of cattle, cow/calf pairs and bulls, yearlong.

 Livestock will be managed under a rotational grazing system using 3 upland pastures (Rootplows, Quartz Mountain, Orofino) that can be used in the spring/summer months, generally April 1st through September 30th once the Hassayampa River corridor is fenced in the Quartz Mountain and Orofino Pastures. The Middlewater Pasture will only be used in the dormant season, generally October 1st through March 31st because livestock will have access to the Hassayampa River corridor. The Carter Pasture contains the best riparian vegetation and will only be grazed when the riparian vegetation is fully dormant (generally December through February). The small riparian pasture created by fencing the Hassayampa River in the Orofino and Quartz Mountain Pastures would be used as a riparian pasture during the dormant season only for limited time or with fewer livestock number due to its small size.

Adaptive Management (Same as alternative 1)

Resource Protection Measures

Allotment-wide Measures:

1. A management guideline of 35-45% utilization of key forage plants in upland key areas as measured at the end of the growing season in areas of satisfactory condition;

2. Up to 50-60% leaders browsed on key upland woody species;

Page | 18

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

3. Minimum stubble height on key riparian herbaceous species: four to six inches where sedges and rushes are key and eight inches where deergrass is key;

4. Up to 20% use by weight on key woody species within riparian areas; or less than 50% of terminal leaders browsed on woody species less than 6 feet tall.

Site-specific Measures:

1. Construct approximately 2.5 miles of fence on the west side of the Hassayampa River in the Quartz Mountain and Orofino Pastures to exclude livestock from the riparian area during the growing season (generally April 1st through September 30th). Stocking levels during the warm growing season will likely need to be reduced below maximum permitted levels until this fence is constructed in order to meet allowable use levels in the Hassayampa River riparian corridor in the Quartz Mountain and Orofino Pastures.

2. The resultant Orofino riparian pasture may only be grazed during the dormant season (generally October through March), and may be deferred from grazing until riparian plants have attained adequate growth.

3. The Carter Pasture contains the best riparian resources and would only be grazed from December through February when plants are fully dormant; or construct a fence along the lower ½-mile of the Hassayampa River in the Carter Pasture to exclude livestock access to the riparian corridor if 3-5 years of monitoring data shows that desired conditions for the riparian area are not being met by limiting season of use alone.

4. In riparian pastures allow up to 30% utilization of key herbaceous plants in the riparian corridor (TEUI 44); use active livestock management techniques (herding, salt and supplement placement, etc.) to disperse cattle throughout the riparian pasture and discourage concentration and trailing within the river corridor.

5. Grazing may be deferred in riparian pastures showing recruitment of riparian species until seedlings become established and can be maintained while withstanding browsing impacts.

6. In areas of impaired soil condition in the Carter (TEUI 429) and North Root Plow Pastures (TEUI 448), light grazing use (0-30%) during the growing season and 35-45% use during the dormant season to improve vegetative ground cover.

7. Maintain existing upland pasture division fences to allow for grazing rotation and deferment in order to allow for improvement of vegetative groundcover and soil condition.

The management objectives for the impaired soil locations are to attain/maintain vegetative groundcover levels similar to the site potential for the Terrestrial Ecosystem Unit Inventory (TEUI) and improve the spatial distribution of plants and litter as a means to improve soil structure and promote soil stability. Implementing the grazing intensity guidelines and applying a rotational grazing strategy whereby growing season rest or deferment is given to each pasture at some point in the grazing season is expected to allow for improvement in the soil resource, where needed. Riparian management objectives are expected to be met by fencing off livestock access to the Hassayampa River in pastures used during the growing season (Quartz Mountain and Orofino) and by applying utilization standards to riparian areas grazed during the dormant season.

Structural Range Improvements

Page | 19

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

1. Construct approximately 2.5 miles of fence west of the Hassayampa River in the Quartz Mountain and Orofino Pastures to exclude livestock access during the warm growing season, generally April 1st through September 30th.

2. Increase water storage capacity at the Orofino Well #2 and increase the size of the existing corral.

3. Restore functionality of existing earthen stock tanks in the uplands or replace them with trick tanks or other reliable water sources. Existing upland water sources that may be reconstructed are: Rootplow Tank, Orofino Tank, Riggle Tank, Grassy Tank, and Carter Tank.

4. Construct a new water development in the northeast part of the Quartz Mountain Pasture in the vicinity of the south half of section 35 or the north half of section 2. The water development may be a well with storage, pipeline, and troughs, an earthen stock tank, or a trick tank collection apron with storage, pipeline, and troughs.

5. Develop a dependable water source in the area of Miner’s Tank in the Carter East Pasture.

6. Develop a new water source in the upland Carter Pasture. This water system will be located in the uplands west of the river and may include such facilities as a well development, storage tank(s), pump/windmill, pipeline, troughs, and corral facilities.

7. Construct a riparian exclosure at the lower ½-mile of the Hassayampa River in the Carter Pasture if livestock use is expected outside the proposed December through February period, or if 3-5 years of monitoring data shows that desired conditions are not being met through limiting season of use alone.

Maintenance and access to range improvements is the same as described for alternative 1.

Road Closure (applies to both alternatives)

Vehicular traffic on an existing road located in the riparian corridor of the Hassayampa River is causing damage to plants establishing in the floodplain and disrupting the natural stream channel characteristics. Without protective plant cover in and adjacent to the river, there is the potential for increased sedimentation into the river and degradation of important habitat. The existing forest road proposed to be closed to public access is the 9402R. This road heads south from forest road 72 in section 33 within the Carter Pasture. This road is entirely contained within the riparian corridor of the Hassayampa River for its ¾-mile length that is on National Forest System lands. The road does not continue beyond the forest boundary where it is blocked by an existing fence. It is proposed to block with boulders or gate the road at or near the junction with forest road 72 while allowing a turn-around for vehicles at this road junction. There may be limited motorized use for administrative purposes by either the permittee or Forest Service personnel. Use of the road by the permittee to access range improvements may be approved by the Forest

Page | 20

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Officer in the annual operating instructions if it is determined that vehicular access would not damage the riparian resources.

Monitoring (applies to both alternatives)

Three types of monitoring will be used - implementation monitoring, periodic monitoring of short-term indicators of resource conditions, and effectiveness monitoring.

Implementation Monitoring: This monitoring will be conducted on an annual basis and will include such things as livestock actual use (# of head, # of months) and scheduled and unscheduled inspections to ensure that all livestock and grazing management measures stipulated in permits, AMPs and AOIs are being implemented (e.g. cattle numbers, on/off dates, rotation schedules, maintenance of improvements, grazing intensity).

Periodic Monitoring of Short-term Indicators of Resource Conditions: Short-term indicators of resource conditions such as forage utilization, residual forage, species composition, plant cover, frequency or density, and/or vegetative ground cover will be monitored on the allotment at key areas and at areas identified with site-specific resource concerns. Methods will include generally accepted monitoring protocols.

The purpose of periodic monitoring of short-term indicators is to determine:

1. If individual plants have had an opportunity to recover, grow and reproduce following grazing impacts.

2. If sufficient residual forage remains at the end of the growing season to provide for other resource values or requirements such as soil productivity, wildlife habitat, and dormant season use.

3. If maintenance or improvement of rangeland conditions are indicated.

4. If management adjustments are warranted for the following season to provide for the physiological needs of primary forage species and other resources identified as concerns.

Effectiveness Monitoring: Long-term monitoring, according to a Monitoring Plan to be established in the Allotment Management Plan, to evaluate the success of management in achieving the desired resource conditions will occur within key areas or on permanent transects at an interval of 10 years or less. Data collected on this allotment during the current management revision process will serve as baseline information used by managers to determine the effectiveness of meeting desired resource conditions. Effectiveness monitoring may also occur if data and observations from monitoring of short-term indicators suggest a need for additional information.

Both qualitative and quantitative monitoring methods will be used in accordance with the Interagency Technical Reference, Region 3 Rangeland Analysis and Management Training Guide, and the Region 3 Allotment Analysis Handbook.

Alternative 3: No Action/No Grazing

Alternative 3 is the No Action/No Grazing Alternative required by FSH 2209.13 Chapter 90. Under Alternative 3, livestock grazing on the Hassayampa Allotment would be discontinued and the Term Grazing permit would be cancelled after a 2-year notification to the permit holder (FSM 2231.62d/FSH 2209.13-16.24).

Authorization

Page | 21

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Under this alternative, livestock grazing would not be authorized.

New Range Improvements

Under this alternative, no new range improvements would be constructed on the allotment. The District Ranger may choose to authorize the road closure activities that are described for Alternatives 1 and 2 while not authorizing the continuation of livestock grazing that is part of those alternatives.

Maintenance of Existing Range Improvements

Under this alternative, maintenance of range improvements normally assigned to the permit holder would no longer occur. Allotment boundary fences would be maintained by adjacent active grazing allotment permit holders.

Cancellation of the Grazing Permit

After cancellation of the Term Grazing Permit, existing structural improvements that contribute to resource protection or that are important to other resources and functions, such as water sources for wildlife populations or fire control, would remain but would not be maintained unless this activity were funded under another resource area on the Prescott NF or by a cooperating partner. Removal of improvements losing their functionality would have to be authorized under a future NEPA decision if new ground disturbance were anticipated. Where allotment boundary fences are necessary, the maintenance of these fences could be reassigned to adjacent grazing permit holders in order to maintain the integrity of the boundaries of adjacent allotments.

The cancellation of the term permit under this alternative does not represent an official administrative closing of the allotment; rather it would represent the suspension of grazing on this allotment for an undetermined amount of time, until or unless a different decision is made.

E. Species Identification Process reviewed Prescott National Forest Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive (TE&S) species list and wildlife observations. Arizona’s Heritage Data Management System (HDMS) information was queried for TE&S species occurrences within and adjacent to the project area. Sensitive plants were surveyed within and adjacent to the allotment in 2002-2003 by M Baker (2003). Aquatic species occurrences were also identified from various sources (Desert Fishes Team 2004, Emmons and others 2010, 2011). Species or their habitats known in the Hassayampa Allotment or potentially impacted by actions in the project area are listed in Table 8. See Appendix D for the discussion and justification for those species not considered in detailed analysis for this allotment.

Table 8. Species occurrence in or adjacent to the Hassayampa Allotment Scientific Name Common Name Status Coccyzus americanus occidentalis Western yellow-billed cuckoo USFWS, P Lasiurus blossevillii Western red bat FS Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens Pale Townsend’s big-eared bat FS Agave phillipsiana Phillip’s agave FS Lithobates (Rana) yavapaiensis Lowland leopard frog FS Catostomus clarki Desert sucker FS Pipilo maculatus Spotted towhee MIS

Page | 22

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Odocoileus hemionus Mule Deer MIS Multiple species Macroinvertebrates MIS 1. USFWS = US Fish and Wildlife Service designation; P = Proposed for listing as Threatened; C = USFWS Candidate species; FS = Forest Service sensitive species; MIS = LRMP management indicator species.

F. Analysis of Effects Proposed Action The analysis of effects is based on how the action of the alternatives may affect species and their habitats in the project area. For the proposed action, a term grazing permit would be issued for up to ten years. The permit would authorize livestock use within parameters of the proposed action. Subsequent permits may be issued as long as resources continue to move further toward desired conditions or are being maintained in satisfactory condition. It incorporates monitoring of the various resources, adaptive management principles, range structural improvements, mitigation measures/resource protective measures, and best management practices.

Livestock grazing can affect wildlife and their habitat through direct competition for forage, alteration of wildlife habitat structural components, disturbance and displacement of individuals due to the presence of livestock, or unintentional trampling of nests or young. For either alternative 1 or 2, a term grazing permit would be issued for up to ten years. The permit would authorize livestock use within parameters of the alternative. Subsequent permits may be issued as long as resources continue to move further toward desired conditions or are being maintained in satisfactory condition. It incorporates monitoring of the various resources, adaptive management principles, range structural improvements, resource protective measures, and best management practices. There would be livestock grazing short-term impacts to vegetation and soil conditions in the uplands of the project area. The establishment of conservative utilization standards on upland areas in satisfactory condition, and the implementation of lighter grazing intensities on those areas not meeting desired conditions should result in vegetative improvement.

In riparian areas, livestock grazing in the short-term may reduce insect diversity and suitable habitat by reducing herbaceous ground cover, riparian tree/shrub density and recruitment. The current state of the riparian vegetation is such that the herbaceous habitat component is lacking, and the observed high utilization on shrubs and small trees is affecting the structural habitat diversity and the reproductive potential of woody riparian vegetation. As a result, the riparian avian fauna has been the most affected wildlife on the Hassayampa Allotment. Ground nesting species are most affected by cattle grazing, followed by shrub-nesting and canopy-nesting species (Krueper, et al. 2003). Bird species use different strata of vegetation and these strata have different vulnerabilities to grazing. The lower strata can be affected by short-term grazing. The shrub strata and most of its associated bird species can be adversely affected by cattle grazing, while the upper canopy and its birds are not. However, cattle grazing in the riparian zones over several decades can eliminate or reduce the upper canopy by preventing the establishment of saplings (Taylor, 1986). This is most evident in the upper riparian corridor located within the Quartz Mtn and Orofino Units and to a lesser degree in the Carter Unit. Reducing the level of use on riparian vegetation will be essential for the maintenance of important avian and other wildlife habitat along the Hassayampa River. Proposed water developments in the uplands would reduce livestock dependence on water sources at or near the river. The effects to sensitive species are the same for either grazing alternative. The riparian areas would only be accessed during the dormant season under either alternative. Alternative 1 dormant season grazing would be immediate, but Alternative 2 would not be effective until the proposed 2.5 mile fencing in the Quartz Mtn and Orofino Units has been constructed and existing fencing has been repaired to defer unauthorized year around grazing within the riparian corridor. Both action alternatives have the potential to impact regeneration of overstory tree species by

Page | 23

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

incidental browsing of seedlings during the dormant season. Recovery of riparian vegetation and avian species within the riparian corridor would occur most rapidly under Alternative 3. The increase in native forbs, grasses, sedges, rushes, shrubs, and riparian obligate trees, expected under the no grazing alternative, will provide the greatest benefit to migratory and resident avian species that inhabit the riparian corridor.

Alternative 1 – Dormant Season Grazing

This alternative would be beneficial to wildlife because livestock grazing in the allotment would occur only during the late fall and winter months when the vegetation is dormant. During this time big game species will usually make a seasonal movement south to lower elevations to avoid inclement weather. With dormant season grazing, there would be no competition on the allotment with livestock for palatable browse species during the spring and summer month’s important seasons for big game.

With the exception of some resident species, most of the bird species present during the spring and summer months will also migrate south for the winter and will not be present during the time livestock are grazing. Recovery of understory and shrub species within the Hassayampa River riparian corridor would occur slowly and in time, new forbs, grasses, sedges, etc., and shrub recruitment would be expected. Under Alternative 1, livestock grazing would not be restricted to the riparian corridor and the proposed water developments should facilitate better livestock distribution especially along the south facing slopes of the uplands. Alternative 2 – Yearlong Grazing/Riparian Fencing

This alternative would likely have greater impact on wildlife species in the uplands because livestock grazing would continue to occur year around within the allotment. Year around livestock grazing in the uplands will increase chances of incidental trampling and disturbance of ground and shrub nesting species of resident and migratory birds during spring and summer nesting. Competition for palatable browse species would continue to occur within the Hassayampa riparian corridor and the immediate uplands, there would be competition on the allotment with livestock and wildlife for palatable browse shrubs and forbs during critical spring and summer months when deer are present raising fawns.

Although only dormant season grazing would occur in the riparian corridor within select pastures, the proposed 2.5 mile fence would appear to confine livestock grazing to the riparian habitat and the uplands east of the river in the Quartz Mtn and Orofino pastures. But the proposed fencing would allow the understory vegetation and the recruitment of young seedling cottonwood and willows to become established in the future under a year around operation, because this alternative will manage the herd in the fenced riparian corridor within the two units during the dormant season. Monitoring guidelines are proposed to minimize impacts to the understory riparian during grazing and livestock will be removed once the following are met:

1. Minimum stubble height on key riparian herbaceous species: four to six inches where sedges and rushes are key and eight inches where deergrass is key;

2. Up to 20% use by weight on key woody species within riparian areas; or less than 50% of terminal leaders browsed on woody species less than 6 feet tall.

By implementing these guidelines, the riparian corridor understory component is expected to continue to improve over time.

Page | 24

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Alternative 3 – No Action/No Grazing Alternative

There would be an immediate beneficial impact to wildlife habitat under this alternative in the Hassayampa riparian corridor and the adjacent uplands where most of the heavy grazing has occurred over the years. Over time the understory habitat component of forbs, grasses, and sedges, etc. that is currently absent in the riparian corridor will begin to respond. The shrub species that have been heavily hedged will grow and regenerate. It is expected that the cover component and vertical structure important for many species of birds and mammals will begin to replace the existing open and sparsely vegetated understory amongst the large cottonwood galleries found on the north and south ends of the river corridor within the allotment boundary. Livestock impacts on vegetation would be removed with only wildlife grazing occurring at light intensities. The riparian areas have greater potential for recovery under the no action alternative. Riparian tree species reproduction (seedlings, saplings) such as cottonwoods and willows would still be browsed by wildlife, but would have greater opportunity for recovery with the absence of domestic livestock grazing.

Cumulative Effects The cumulative effects analysis area for the Hassayampa Allotment includes the 6th Level HUCs watersheds shown in Figure 4 and detailed in Table 10. Projects considered for cumulative effects to wildlife and their habitats for this analysis are shown in Table 11. The majority of the watershed acres are within Forest Service and other federal ownership. Management actions on these lands adhere to agency direction, objectives, and resource protection measures to minimize impacts to natural resources.

The map in Figure 4 on the following page shows the allotment boundary in relation to the four 6th level Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) watersheds that are included in the project area. The acres in each watershed are shown in Table 9 below:

Table 9. Watershed Acres and Percentages. 6th Code HUC Acres in Project Area Percent of Allotment Percent of Entire Watershed Comprised by Watershed in the Watershed Allotment Buzzard Roost Wash – 6,498 61% 37% Upper Hassayampa Moores Spring – Upper 3,102 29% 14% Hassayampa Sheppard Wash – 894 8% 4% Kirkland Creek Elmer Tank – Kirkland 80 1% <0.5% Creek

Page | 25

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Figure 4. Map of Cumulative Effects Area for the Hassayampa Allotment.

Page | 26

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Table 10. Cumulative Effects Activities on the Hassayampa Allotment Project Area Past, Present, and Future Activities on the Hassayampa Allotment – 6th Code Watersheds

Type of Activity Past Activities/Events Present Activities Future Activities

Several small fires registered as ignition Wildfire Suppression None unknown points; insignificant acreage burned.

Timber/Fuelwood None None None planned Sales

Veg Treatment Prescribed burning for Projects / Non- chaparral regeneration from None in past 13 years; chaparral Structural Range 1995-1999 performed on vegetation has recovered from past None planned Improvements / Rx 5103 acres. No mechanical activities. Burns vegetation treatments recorded in past 20 years. Contains portions of grazed allotments and one ungrazed pasture Past management of on the Crooks/Maverick allotment; allotments on NFS lands; Stocking levels of the surrounding No anticipated Livestock Grazing livestock grazing on other allotments are within current forage change land ownerships. capacity and are under adaptive management strategies w/associated structural improvements Numerous water Construct new developments constructed Continue maintenance of water water Water Supply on active grazing developments on active grazing developments; Improvements allotments; water for permits develop spring and livestock and mining uses add pipeline to since late 1800s existing well

Motorized and non- Recreational Same activities; 1.9 miles of No anticipated motorized trails; Dispersed Activities & existing designated trails – mainly change; no new recreation (primarily Fuelwood Cutting motorized trails planned hunting)

Page | 27

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Type of Activity Past Activities/Events Present Activities Future Activities

No new roads or Roads, Utility ROWs, 28 miles of roads on 28 miles of roads on National facilities planned; Land Development National Forest Land; Forest Land; utilities or ROWs no land exchanges and Land Exchanges utility corridors anticipated

Locatable and non-locatable Continuation of claims; gold and copper Locatable and non-locatable claims; current active Mining mining; mines listed as pending claims, in unknown status claims, future past producers claims unknown

USFWS Proposed Species

Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo Affected Environment: The yellow-billed cuckoo was proposed for listing under the ESA in the Federal Register on October 3, 2013. This species is associated with mature stands of cottonwood-willow riparian deciduous forest. It is also known to use dense thickets comprised of mixed hardwoods species with tamarisk included. Known to occur at confluence of Verde River & Sycamore Creek, on Sycamore Creek in SCWA, at Duff Spring, and at Perkinsville. It forages in the cottonwoods for large insects, in particular hairy or tent caterpillars. Sometimes eats small frogs and lizards (Alsup III, 2002). In the arid Southwest, yellow-billed cuckoos are primarily restricted to densely wooded rivers and streams and damp thickets with relatively high humidity (Corman and Wise-Gervais, 2005). (http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/418/articles/introduction). Surveys have not been conducted for the cuckoo; but it may migrate through and even forage in portions of the riparian habitat type within the project area. During field reconnaissance western yellow-billed cuckoo was not observed. The majority of the cottonwood/willow habitat associated with the springs observed did not appear to have a consistent dense understory, an important habitat criteria used for nesting by this species. The riparian zones are intermittent with sections of mature cottonwood riparian drainages important for migration. Yellow-billed cuckoos may utilize the riparian habitat within the allotment to migrate through and forage in, but not for nesting. The Arizona HDMS has a documented observation during the nesting season within private lands on the Hassayampa River south of the allotment boundary near the town of Wagoner. But the USFWS map clearly illustrates that the majority of the USFWS recognized occupied areas on the Hassayampa River in Arizona, are located approximately 20 miles south and off of National Forest in lower elevation desert riparian beginning near Wickenburg, AZ (See Map in Appendix D). Direct and Indirect Effects Alternative 1 Alternative 2 No Action Proposed Action Livestock grazing during the dormant Livestock grazing during the dormant season Since there would be no grazing season will not reduce insect diversity will not reduce insect diversity or negatively or associated management or negatively impact existing habitat in impact existing habitat in riparian areas. activities within the allotment, riparian areas. Yellow-billed cuckoos Yellow-billed cuckoos eat mostly hairy or then there would be no direct eat mostly hairy or tent caterpillars that tent caterpillars that in some years are impact to the species from in some years are abundant in the abundant in the riparian cottonwood livestock grazing or its riparian cottonwood overstory and not overstory and not impacted by grazing much management activities. impacted by grazing much less during less during the dormant season. Riparian area conditions in the the dormant season. mid-level and understory would (http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species be restored through natural /418/articles/habitat). Alternative 2 will continue to graze year processes. If yellow-billed cuckoo around in the upland habitats of the allotment had utilized this riparian corridor The proposed action including the pastures immediately adjacent to the riparian in the past, they may recolonize if adaptive management and utilization corridor and like Alternative 1, the fenced suitable habitat is restored over

Page | 28

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

guidelines for the riparian areas will riparian corridor within the Quartz Mtn and time. On experimentally replanted help to maintain or improve the habitat Orofino pastures will be grazed only during sites (11 ha) in s. California, conditions over time listed below. the dormant season. Currently there is little cuckoos foraged in second year Under the proposed action the existing to no recruitment of cottonwood and willows and nested in third year following riparian habitats will be minimally in the riparian corridor for future replanting, provided that impacted by grazing, and minimum replacement of cottonwood/willow galleries. cottonwood growth averaged 3 stubble requirements for key species in The multi-layering in the understory, a very m/yr. Sites with growth of 2 m/yr riparian areas will allow for important habitat component for yellow- not used for foraging or nesting maintenance of insects in foraging billed cuckoo is lacking and not present in by third year (Anderson and habitat. most of the riparian corridor. The proposed Laymon, 1989). fencing would allow the understory http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/sp Alternative 1 would not impact any vegetation and the recruitment of young ecies/418/articles/conservation individuals that may forage or migrate seedling cottonwood and willows to become through the allotment, because yellow- established in the future. This alternative will billed cuckoos are neotropical migrants manage the herd in the fenced riparian and they would not be present during corridor within the two units during the the dormant season grazing proposed dormant season, But adaptive management under this alternative. It is important to utilization guidelines are proposed in note that livestock grazing would not be pastures to minimize impacts to the concentrated in the riparian corridor and understory riparian during the dormant with the proposed water developments, season and livestock will be removed once livestock should have better distribution the following are met: especially along the warm south facing slopes of the uplands within the 1. Minimum stubble height on key riparian allotment. In addition, adaptive herbaceous species: four to six inches where management utilization guidelines in sedges and rushes are key and eight inches pastures are proposed to minimize impacts to the uplands and understory where deergrass is key; riparian during the dormant season and 2. Up to 20% use by weight on key woody livestock will be removed once the species within riparian areas; or less than following are met: 50% of terminal leaders browsed on woody 1. A management guideline of 35-45% species less than 6 feet tall. utilization of key forage plants in upland Therefore the riparian corridor is expected to key areas as measured at the end of the continue to improve over time. growing season or seasonal use period; 2.Up to 50-60% leaders browsed on key upland woody species; 3.Minimum stubble height on key riparian herbaceous species: four to six inches where sedges and rushes are key and eight inches where deergrass is key; 4Up to 20% use by weight on key woody species within riparian areas; or less than 50% of terminal leaders browsed on woody species less than 6 feet tall.

Cumulative Effects: Additional past, present and future activities (Table 10) that may impact western yellow-billed cuckoo include: livestock grazing, roads, mining, and recreational activities including dispersed camping and OHV use (potential indirect disturbance). Riparian areas are attractive use areas Riparian areas are attractive use areas for With no direct or indirect effects, for both livestock and humans. both livestock and humans. Livestock there would be no cumulative Livestock grazing on other allotments grazing on other allotments would follow impacts associated with livestock would follow management direction for management direction for riparian areas and grazing or management on the riparian areas and species. Mining and species. Mining and recreation use will western yellow-billed cuckoo.

Page | 29

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

recreation use will continue to impact continue to impact vegetation and create vegetation and create noise from human noise from human disturbance. Use of disturbance. Use of unimproved roads unimproved roads adjacent to and crossing adjacent to and crossing riparian zones riparian zones will continue as a potential will continue as a potential disturbance. disturbance. Proposed closure of road 9402R Authorization of livestock grazing, as would help minimize human disturbance in described in Alternative 1 with the the riparian corridor in the Carter pasture. adaptive management tools towards Authorization of livestock grazing, as desired conditions, in conjunction with described in Alternative 2 with the adaptive the cumulative past, present and future management tools towards desired activities would improve riparian habitat conditions, in conjunction with the for western yellow-billed cuckoo over cumulative past, present and future activities time. would maintain riparian habitat for western yellow-billed cuckoo. Effects Determination No Effect No Effect No Effect

Forest Service Sensitive Species

Species found on Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List for Southwestern Region. The list was updated on 9/18/2013 that resulted in five species being dropped from the list that was used in the initial analysis (common black hawk, Abert’s towhee, pocket free-tailed bat, Arizona toad, and longfin dace), and two species were added (A caddisfly and Verde breadroot). For the two species that were added, neither the species nor its habitat occurs within the project area (See Appendix C & E).

Western red bat Affected Environment: This species is associated with broad-leaf deciduous riparian forests and woodlands. Roosts by day in trees. Western red bats are solitary animals that prefer riparian areas dominated by walnuts, oaks, willows, cottonwoods, and sycamores where they roost in these broad-leafed trees. They roost only in tree foliage and are solitary by nature. The western red bat is an insectivore. When it emerges from it daytime roost it searches out primarily flying insects such as moths, flying ants and beetles. On occasion it will capture an insect on the ground. Studies indicate that Western red bats migrate during the winter to Mexico and Central America to hibernate. Western red bats have been documented on the Hassayampa river corridor south of the project area (See the HDMS map in Appendix D). Direct and Indirect Effects Alternative 1 Alternative 2 No Action Proposed Action Under Alternative 1, with dormant Alternative 2 will graze livestock Since there would be no grazing or season grazing proposed for the year around in the upland pastures associated management activities within Hassayampa Allotment including the and restrict grazing within the the allotment, then there would be no direct riparian corridor, implementation of this riparian corridor during the impact to the species from livestock alternative will have no impacts to dormant season after bats have grazing or its management activities. migrated south for the winter. Red Western red bat since grazing would Riparian area conditions would be bats are usually solitary roosters in occur during the time they have maintained through natural processes. migrated south into Mexico and Central the dense leaved branches of America. Dormant season grazing cottonwoods and other riparian Recruitment through regeneration of should help improve the understory species that would not be impacted cottonwood and willow species will not be condition of riparian habitats for by livestock grazing. They are able impacted by grazing and will begin to foraging Western red bat and increase to forage long distances and can establish itself in the understory and along insect diversity over time. easily forage outside of the the riparian channel. allotment. Water developments can injure/trap the occasional individual. Escape devices Water developments can injure/trap need to be installed into new and the occasional individual. Escape

Page | 30

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

existing water troughs to help reduce devices need to be installed into entrapment and facilitate drinking by all new and existing water troughs to bat species. help reduce entrapment and facilitate drinking by all bat species. Cumulative Effects: Additional past, present and future activities (Table 10) that may impact the Western red bat include: livestock grazing, roads, placer mining, and recreational activities including dispersed camping and OHV use (potential indirect disturbance). Riparian areas are attractive use areas Riparian areas are attractive use With no direct or indirect effects, there for both livestock and humans. areas for both livestock and would be no cumulative impacts to the Livestock grazing on other allotments humans. Livestock grazing on other Western Red Bat. would follow management direction for allotments would follow riparian areas and species. Recreation management direction for riparian use and placer mining will continue to areas and species. Recreation use impact vegetation and create noise from and placer mining will continue to human disturbance. Authorization of impact vegetation and create noise livestock grazing, using adaptive from human disturbance. management and utilization guidelines Authorization of livestock grazing, should move existing conditions using adaptive management and towards desired conditions, in utilization guidelines should move conjunction with the cumulative past, existing conditions towards desired present and future activities would conditions, in conjunction with the maintain suitable roosting habitat for the cumulative past, present and future Western red bat. activities would maintain suitable roosting habitat for the Western red bat. Effects Determination No impact to the species. No impact to the species. No impact to the species.

Page | 31

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Pale Townsend’s big-eared bat Affected Environment: This bat is a habitat generalist, occurring from semi-desert shrubland to montane forest. It roosts and hibernates in caves, abandoned mines, crevices in rock faces, and occasionally in abandoned buildings. Available shelter appears to be a limiting factor, as is human disturbance. They are generally in decline in most areas, and are listed as an Endangered species in Washington, a Sensitive species in Oregon, a Species of Special Concern in Texas, Montana and California. Because this species is sensitive to disturbance, it has been documented that they will abandon roost sites after human interference. In large portions of its western range, their dependence upon abandoned mines has put them at risk. Pesticide spraying also may affect their food source. This species feeds primarily on Noctuid moths, which are obligate users of vascular hydrophytes (plants wholly or partially submerged in water; they also grow in very moist soil). Although specializing in eating moths, they will feed on other insects such as beetles, flies and wasps and can forage throughout the allotment. AZGFD Heritage database (HDMS) identified three bat locations, one possibly within and two adjacent to the allotment (See HDMS map in Appendix D). Direct and Indirect Effects Alternative 1 Alternative 2 No Action Proposed Action

Roosting habitat (caves, mines) would Roosting habitat (caves, mines) Since there would be no grazing or not be impacted by livestock grazing. would not be impacted by grazing associated management activities within Grazing in the riparian areas and activities. Grazing year around in the allotment, then there would be no direct uplands (used for foraging by the bats) the uplands may reduce insect impact to the species due to livestock during the dormant season would not diversity in the short term by grazing or its management activities. impact Townsend’s big eared bats since reducing herbaceous ground cover Riparian area conditions would be they migrate and hibernate during the diversity, potentially trampling maintained through natural processes. winter season. hydrophytic plants. But adaptive

Dormant season grazing and utilization management utilization guidelines monitoring included in the proposed in pastures are proposed to action, should help improve the minimize impacts to the uplands condition of riparian habitats for and understory riparian during foraging Pale Townsend’s big-eared bat seasonal and year around grazing during the spring and summer months and should improve upland and when they would be present. riparian understory habitat over time. Water developments can injure/trap the occasional individual since open Water developments can injure/trap unobstructed troughs are readily used by the occasional individual since bats for drinking. Escape devices open unobstructed troughs are installed into new and existing water readily used by bats for drinking. troughs will help reduce entrapment and Escape devices installed into new facilitate drinking by all bat species. and existing water troughs will help reduce entrapment and facilitate drinking by all bat species. Cumulative Effects: Additional past, present and future activities (Table 10) that may impact the Pale Townsend’s big-eared bat include: livestock grazing, roads, placer mining, and recreational activities including dispersed camping and OHV use (potential indirect disturbance). Riparian areas are attractive use areas Same as Alternative 1. With no direct or indirect effects, there for both livestock and humans. would be no cumulative impacts to the Pale Livestock grazing on other allotments Townsend’s big-eared bat. would follow management direction for riparian areas and species. Recreation use and placer mining will continue to impact vegetation and create noise from human disturbance. Authorization of livestock grazing, as described with the adaptive management tools towards desired conditions, in conjunction with the cumulative past, present and future activities would maintain suitable

Page | 32

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

roosting and foraging habitat for the Pale Townsend’s big-eared bat. Effects Determination No impact to the species. No impact to the species. No impact to the species.

Lowland Leopard Frog Affected Environment: Lowland leopard frog occurs in perennial aquatic systems in grassland to pinyon-juniper woodlands from central to southeastern Arizona below the Mogollon Rim, generally below elevations of 6,200 feet (AGFD 2006). They are habitat generalist and can be found in rivers, streams, springs, and earthen cattle tanks. Adults breed primarily from January to May. Egg masses are attached to submerged vegetation, bedrock, or gravel in perennial water. Eggs hatch in 15-18 days. Larvae can metamorphose in 3-4 months or as long as 9 months. Dense streamside vegetation is important escape cover (Zwartjes and others 2005). Other important streamside vegetation structures include tree root wads, debris piles, and logs. This species are known to occur in the Hassayampa River in the project area (Emmons and Nowak 2012). Suitable habitat within the allotment is limited to short perennial reaches of water along the Hassayampa River mainly in the Quartz Mtn and Carter pastures. Recent riparian-wetland area assessments rated key areas along three reaches of the Hassayampa River were rated as Proper Functioning Condition (Reach 1 – Upper); Nonfunctional (Reach 2 – Middle) and Functional-at-Risk (Reach 3 – Lower) (Hydrologist Specialist Report). Direct and Indirect Effects Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Proposed Action No Grazing Dormant Season livestock grazing (LG) generally Yearlong livestock grazing No livestock grazing occurring in from October 1st through March 31th annually in the under rotational grazing system the project area: project area. Livestock would be dispersed across the in the project area. Creation of There would be no direct or allotment. Orofino riparian pasture and indirect LG effects to the species There would be potential for livestock disturbance to Carter pasture riparian or their habitat. There would be no species and their habitat during the six month period. exclosure in the project area. impacts to riparian herbaceous, Dormant season use generally However, impacts are minimized due to limited st woody species vegetation, livestock use of canyon confined areas of the stream in from October 1 through March streambanks, or to water quality. the Quartz Mtn pasture, species use of pool habitats, 31th annually for riparian Aquatic and riparian habitat and high stream drainage stability in occupied/suitable pastures. conditions would be maintained habitat from cobble/boulder/bedrock substrate and through natural processes. rootwads. With dormant season use of There would be no LG impacts to Short-term LG utilization of riparian herbaceous riparian areas along the the upland range conditions of the vegetation could result in decreased hiding cover used Hassayampa River: Same as project area. Vegetative ground by juveniles and adults and the potential for increased Alternative 1. cover (VGC) and litter would be predation. Short-term LG and trailing along streams maintained or improved through could impact water quality from animal waste causing natural processes. Improvement of nutrient loading. VGC may have indirect effects of Effects to aquatic/riparian habitat would be reduced by reduced runoff and sediments to implementation of Resource Protection Measures aquatic habitats in the project area. (RPMs), riparian site specific measures, structural range improvements, and the road closure. Minimum stubble heights on riparian herbaceous species of 4-6” would maintain adequate hiding cover. Forage use guidelines of 20% by volume on riparian woody species would maintain tree structure and root masses to protect streambanks and provide for vegetation structures used by the species as habitat. Management of the Carter Pasture as a riparian pasture with dormant season use (generally December through February) would improve riparian vegetation and stream conditions for this species.

Page | 33

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Water developments in the uplands would reduce livestock dependence on stream perennial reaches. Additional measures may be implemented if desired conditions are not met through livestock management and include fencing that would eliminate direct LG impacts to species and their habitat. There would be LG impacts to vegetation and soil conditions in the uplands of the project area. Appropriate grazing intensity and forage use guidelines and water developments to improve livestock distribution would maintain or improve rangeland conditions towards satisfactory levels during the 10-year term grazing permit. The implementation of RPMs and range improvements would reduce erosion and sedimentation to aquatic habitats. Cumulative Effects: The cumulative effects area is the four 6th level HUC subwatersheds that occur on the allotment: Buzzard Roost Wash, Moore’s Spring, Sheppard Wash, and Elmer Tank (Figure 4). Past, present and future activities (Table 10) that may impact the lowland leopard frog include the following: Livestock grazing occurs throughout the watersheds. The majority of the lands in these watersheds are in Forest Service ownership. All lands administered by the Forest Service have Grazing Management Plans that provide for satisfactory vegetation and soil conditions, and for water quality. Improved watershed conditions on the PNF would provide for long-term benefits to aquatic/riparian habitats. Road densities in the Buzzard Roost Wash and Moore’s Spring subwatersheds are at low to moderate road miles per square mile. Road conditions and proximity to stream drainages are likely impacting hydrological conditions such as channeling runoff and sediments to these stream systems. Riparian vegetation management along the perennial water reaches help to maintain stream structure and reduce sediment input into aquatic habitats. There are numerous current mining activities within these subwatersheds. Mining activities follow Forest Plan direction for protection of riparian areas and to provide for water quality. Recreational activities are primarily dispersed uses such as motorized and non-motorized road and trail use, camping, hunting, and horseback riding. These uses are having localized impacts to stream systems in the analysis area. The effects of the Proposed Action on this species The effects of the Proposed With no direct or indirect effects, when added to the above cumulative effects would Action on this species when there would be no cumulative maintain or improve suitable habitat for the lowland added to the above cumulative impacts to the species. leopard frog. effects would maintain or improve suitable habitat for the lowland leopard frog.

Effects Determination May impact individuals of lowland leopard frog but is May impact individuals of No impact to the lowland leopard not likely to result in a trend towards federal listing or lowland leopard frog but is not frog. loss of viability for the species. likely to result in a trend towards federal listing or loss of viability for the species.

Desert Sucker Affected Environment: Desert sucker are found in rapids and flowing pools of streams and rivers primarily over bottoms of gravel-rubble with sandy silt in the interstices (AGFD 2002b). Elevation ranges from 480 to 8,840 feet. Spawning is generally in late winter and early spring in riffle areas. Eggs hatch in a few days. This species is known to occur in the Hassayampa River (Desert Fishes Team 2004). Suitable habitat within the allotment is limited to short perennial reaches of water along the Hassayampa River within the Quartz Mtn and Carter pastures. Recent riparian-wetland area assessments rated key areas along three reaches of the Hassayampa River were rated as Proper Functioning Condition (Reach 1 – Upper); Nonfunctional (Reach 2 – Middle) and Functional-at-Risk (Reach 3 – Lower) (Hydrologist Specialist Report). Direct and Indirect Effects

Page | 34

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Proposed Action No Grazing Dormant Season LG generally from October 1st Yearlong livestock grazing No livestock grazing occurring in through March 31th annually in the project area: under rotational grazing system the project area: There would be potential for livestock disturbance to in the project area. Creation of There would be no direct or species and their habitat during the six month period. Orofino riparian pasture and indirect LG effects to the species However, impacts are minimized by limited livestock Carter pasture riparian or their habitat. There would be no use of canyon confined areas of the stream in the exclosure in the project area. impacts to riparian herbaceous, Dormant season use generally Quartz Mtn pasture, species use of pool habitats, and st woody species vegetation, high stream drainage stability in occupied/suitable from October 1 through March streambanks, and to water quality. habitat from cobble/boulder/bedrock substrate and 31th annually for riparian Aquatic and riparian habitat rootwads. pastures. conditions would be maintained Short-term LG and trailing along streams could through natural processes. impact water quality from animal waste causing With dormant season use of There would be no LG impacts to nutrient loading. riparian areas along the the upland range conditions of the Effects to aquatic/riparian habitat would be reduced by Hassayampa River: Same as project area. Vegetative ground implementation of Resource Protection Measures Alternative 1. cover (VGC) and litter would be (RPMs), riparian site specific measures, structural maintained or improved through range improvements, and the road closure. Minimum natural processes. Improvement of stubble heights on riparian herbaceous species of 4-6” VGC may have indirect effects of would maintain adequate hiding cover. Forage use reduced runoff and sediments to guidelines of 20% by volume on riparian woody aquatic habitats in the project area. species would maintain tree structure and root masses to protect streambanks and provide for vegetation structures used by the species as habitat. Management of the Carter Pasture as a riparian pasture with dormant season use (generally December through February) would improve riparian vegetation and stream conditions for these species.

Page | 35

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Phillip’s Agave Affected Environment: This is a large suckering agave with very tall, open, unfruited flower stalk and a dense rosette. The flower stalk has few lateral branches that are perpendicular to the main stalk. It is usually found on south and southwest facing slope edges and atop benches, occasionally on northeast facing gentle slopes. It occupies cobble and gravelly, deep and well- drained soils at elevations from 2,300 to 5,100 feet, and is often associated with prehistoric sites. Our corporate GIS database has approximately 10 locations of Phillip’s agave on the north end of the allotment on various slopes adjacent to the Hassayampa riparian corridor (See map in Appendix D). Direct and Indirect Effects Alternative 1 Alternative 2 No Action Proposed Action

Under this alternative, seasonal Livestock grazing will have Since there would be no grazing or livestock grazing will have minimal minimal impact on Phillip’s agave associated management activities within impact on Phillip’s agave which tends to which tends to be found on cobble the allotment, then there would be no direct be found on cobble and gravelly slopes and gravelly slopes and well impact to Phillip’s agave because of and well drained soils with little drained soils with little vegetation livestock grazing or its management vegetation present. Alternative 1 will present. But the agave is located activities. have no impact to this species since near the riparian corridor where the grazing would not occur year around cattle tend to congregate increasing and livestock would only be present the risk of incidental encounters. during the time the agave is dormant. Alternative 2 with year around grazing could impact individual This action alternative including the plants through incidental trampling adaptive management proposed for the of young agave or if the livestock Hassayampa riparian corridor should are browsing the flowering stock of result in little to no impact on Phillip’s the plant. The known locations of agave or its habitat. the agave are located in the adjacent slopes of the riparian corridor. But based on the number of livestock permitted and the habitat inhabited by this agave, will have a minimal impact to Phillip’s agave (See map in Appendix D).

Cumulative Effects: Additional past, present and future (Table 10) activities that may impact the Phillip’s agave include: livestock grazing, roads, mining, and recreational activities including dispersed camping and OHV use on slopes (potential direct disturbance). Livestock grazing on other allotments Same as Alternative 1. With no direct or indirect effects, there would follow management direction for would be no cumulative impacts to the upland areas and species. Illegal off species. road OHV use has the potential for direct impacts to plants. Future activities that may affect the species will be mitigated through project planning and implementation. Mining activities are not located within the agave habitat on the uplands.

Effects Determination May impact individuals or habitat but is not likely to result in a trend No impact to the species No impact to the species. towards federal listing or loss of viability for the species.

Page | 36

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Management Indicator Species

Forest level habitat and population trends for management indicator species (MIS) were discussed in “Forest Level Analysis of Management Indicator Species for the Prescott National Forest” (USDA Forest Service 2010) and excerpted for the following MIS analyzed in the project area. MIS species for the forest and their status are listed in Appendix C. Management Indicator Species for which the majority of the habitat occurs and could be found in the Hassayampa Allotment are mule deer, and spotted towhee and impacts are discussed below.

Mule Deer Affected Environment: This is the MIS for early seral stage of pinyon-juniper and chaparral vegetation types (Forest service 2010). There are 635,637 acres of pinyon/juniper and 403,376 acres of chaparral vegetation on the forest. The species is present in habitat type within the project area. About 9,953 acres or 0.95% of the allotment is in various seral stages of pinyon/juniper and chaparral vegetation type. The population trend for this species is decreasing on the forest which is similar to statewide and region wide trends. Action Alternatives No Action Project Level Both Alternatives 1&2 would not alter habitat quantity of The No Action alternative would not Effects on MIS early seral stage of chaparral. Much of the chaparral habitat alter habitat quantity of early seral stage Habitat except for the lowest slopes near the Hassayampa riparian pinyon-juniper and chaparral. Therefore Quantity corridor, adjacent to the desert shrub habitat) on the allotment no change to habitat quantity of early is steep. Proposed water sources in the allotment will increase seral stage of pinyon juniper and distribution of cattle and concentrate use around the new chaparral vegetation. water developments but this impact will be minimal and would not change the habitat quantity. Project Level Construction of new and maintenance of existing water May somewhat reduce the quality of Effects on MIS improvements will benefit mule deer by providing reliable habitat that is available since existing Habitat Quality water sources across the allotment and improving overall water developments would not be habitat quality for mule deer and other wildlife. It will also maintained or expanded; natural water promote better distribution of livestock grazing. sources would remain the same on the Some forage competition with cattle (primarily forb spp. allotment. Forage availability would during the growing season) can occur under Alternative 2. increase with a decrease in competition. Livestock may compete with mule deer for browse forage Habitat quality would improve in areas (particularly in the spring/fall, since by summer they utilize where grazing pressure has occurred in grass species almost exclusively); this dietary overlap is the immediate upland habitat adjacent to relatively of short duration and will not measurably affect the riparian corridor. habitat quality. Fences can hinder deer movement somewhat; all fences are constructed to Forest Service big game standards. Some displacement by cattle may occur at water sources/developments. Under Alternative 1, dormant season grazing by livestock, will have little to no impact on preferred early seral browse species and there will be no grazing during spring and summer months.

Alternative 2 year around grazing by livestock will continue to heavily impact palatable early seral browse species adjacent to the riparian corridor. Effects to MIS The action alternatives would not alter habitat quantity and This alternative would not alter habitat Habitat/ would have a small change to habitat quality. The project quantity and would not change habitat Population/ area represents less than 1.0% of forest-wide habitat. quality. The project area represents less Forest-wide No effect/change to forest-wide habitat or population trends than 1.0% of forest-wide habitat. Trends No effect/change to forest-wide habitat

Page | 37

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

for mule deer. or population trends

Spotted towhee Affected Environment: This is the MIS for late seral stage chaparral vegetation type (Forest service 2010). There are 403,376 acres of chaparral vegetation on the forest. About 3,938 acres or 0.97% of the allotment is in various seral stages of chaparral vegetation type. Spotted towhees were observed and heard within project area during field reconnaissance. They are ground nesters and forage in the leaf litter for insects. The population trend for this species is decreasing. Action Alternatives No Action Project Level Alternatives 1 & 2 would not alter the quantity of late seral The no action alternative would not Effects on MIS stage chaparral. Especially since later seral stages of chaparral change the quantity of late seral stage Habitat can grow thick and decadent, becoming a barrier to cattle chaparral located within the allotment. Quantity movement. There would be no effects/change to late seral chaparral from grazing. Project Level Habitat quality would not have a discernible change in areas of Habitat quality may improve slightly Effects on MIS late seral chaparral accessible to cattle. Direct effects such as due to an increased herbaceous Habitat Quality trampling of spotted towhee nests are very unlikely since late component in an ungrazed understory, seral stages of chaparral are a barrier to cattle movement. which would increase the diversity in insect species. Effects to MIS This alternative would not alter habitat quantity and would The no action alternative would not Habitat/ have a small change to habitat quality. There may be changes alter habitat quantity and would have a Population/ in use patterns by livestock with construction of future water small change to habitat quality. The Forest-wide developments. The project area is 2.6% of forest-wide habitat. project area is 2.6% of forest-wide Trends Alternative 1: No impacts to nesting spotted towhees with habitat. seasonal dormant season grazing. No impact to forest-wide habitat or Alternative 2: low shrub vegetation nests could be impacted by population trends livestock as they are browsing and/or ground nests could be trampled by livestock. No effect/change to forest-wide habitat or population trends

Macroinvertebrates Affected Environment: This is the MIS for aquatic habitat and late seral riparian habitat (Forest Service 2010). Current population and habitat trends on the forest are considered stable. There are 79 miles of perennial and intermittent streams on the forest and 17,160 acres of riparian habitat. Streams within the allotment include 7 miles of the Hassayampa River. The majority of the river in the project area has intermittent or ephemeral stream flows. Suitable MIS habitat within the allotment is limited to short perennial reaches of water within the Quartz Mountain Pasture. Approximately 604 acres or 6% of the allotment is in various seral stages of riparian tree species along the Hassayampa River. Stream channels and riparian areas reflect the very flashy runoff regimes with high sediment bedloads due to geology, steep terrain, shallow soils, and steep gradient streams. Recent riparian-wetland area assessments rated key areas along three reaches of the Hassayampa River were rated as Proper Functioning Condition (Reach 1 – Upper); Nonfunctional (Reach 2 – Middle) and Functional-at-Risk (Reach 3 – Lower) (Hydrologist Specialist Report). Water quality monitoring for segments of the Hassayampa River downstream of the project area showed no exceedances in water quality parameters. Ratings of the warm water aquatic community (i.e. macroinvertebrates) for these stream segments were listed as inconclusive due to inadequate sampling (ADEQ 2010). Action Alternatives No Action Project Level Yearlong livestock grazing in the project area using a The No Action alternative would not alter Effects on MIS rest/deferred rotation grazing system: the quantity of aquatic habitat or late-seral Habitat The Action Alternatives would not alter the quantity of riparian habitat. Quantity aquatic habitat or late seral riparian habitat.

Page | 38

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Project Level Dormant season use of riparian areas is expected to There would be no impacts from livestock Effects on MIS improve riparian vegetation. There would be short-term grazing activities to habitat quality of Habitat Quality impacts from livestock grazing and trailing along streams aquatic habitat and late seral riparian habitat. to streambanks and to water quality from animal waste Aquatic/riparian habitat and upland entering the aquatic system. Implementation of RPMs watershed conditions in livestock impacted would maintain vegetative structure and cover to protect areas would improve at a faster rate. MIS streambanks and provide for maintenance of aquatic habitat quality would be maintained or habitat. Water developments in the uplands would reduce improved at a higher rate than under the livestock dependence on stream perennial reaches. Action Alternatives. Effects to MIS This alternative would not alter habitat quantity and This alternative would not alter habitat Habitat/ would maintain or improve habitat quality. The project quantity or quality. The project area is 4% of Population/ area is 4% of forest-wide riparian habitat. forest-wide habitat. Forest-wide No effect to forest-wide trends. No effect to forest-wide trends. Trends

Page | 39

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Bald & Golden Eagle Protection Act

The purpose of this assessment is to document if there is “taking of eagles” with the proposed action, the no action, or other action alternatives on bald and golden eagles protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (B&GEPA). In the B&GEPA “take” is defined to include “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, or molest or disturb.” The FWS (USDA Fish and Wildlife Service) subsequently defined “disturb” as follows: “Disturb means to agitate or bother a bald eagle or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, (1) injury to an eagle, (2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior.” (Federal Register Vol.72/No.107/page31132 June 5, 2007)

The following table compares the known habitat and distribution for each species with the project area and proposed action.

Table 12. Federally protected species under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940 as amended.

Species Species background Project Information information Common name Project area is in chaparral/PJ The known distribution or vegetation Scientific Name habitat association for the species.

Bald eagle The species occupies Arizona Since no bald eagle nests or suitable primarily as a winter resident or foraging habitat exists within the Haliaeetus migrant, with 200-250 Hassayampa Allotment, implementing leucocephalus individuals normally found either of the proposed actions or their wintering in the state. These associated activities will not result in birds can be found statewide but take of the bald eagle or impact to its mostly in the White Mountains habitat. and along the Mogollon Rim. A small resident population of approximately 40 pairs nests primarily along the Salt and Verde rivers. The nearest bald eagle nest site from this allotment on the Prescott NF is located at Lynx Lake, which is located approximately 10miles to the northeast of the Hassayampa Allotment.

Page | 40

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Species Species background Project Information information Common name Project area is in chaparral/PJ The known distribution or vegetation Scientific Name habitat association for the species.

Golden eagle Within the Prescott NF the Golden eagle nests are not known to AZGFD HDMS database shows occur within the project area and Aquila chrysaetos several locations for the species golden eagles were not seen during canadensis within 5-10 miles from the reconnaissance field outings to the Hassayampa allotment boundary Hassayampa Allotment. Therefore (See map in Appendix D). implementing either of the proposed Golden eagles nest on rock actions and their associated activities ledges, cliffs or in large trees. will not result in take of the golden They may have several alternate eagle or impact to its habitat. nests and they may use the same nests in consecutive years or shift to alternate nest used in different years. In Arizona they are found in mountainous areas.

Bald eagle:

a) Affected environment within the project area: There is no suitable habitat within the analysis area.

b) Proposed Actions: Assessment of Take/Disturb: Since no bald eagle nests or suitable habitat exists within the Hassayampa Allotment, implementing either of the proposed action alternatives and their associated activities will not result in take to the bald eagle or its habitat.

c) No Action: Assessment of Take/Disturb: No take or disturbance will occur to bald eagles.

Golden eagle:

a) Affected environment within the project area: While foraging habitat does exist within the project area and there are abundant prey species present, there are no known nesting sites within the analysis area. Adult golden eagle sightings in the AZGFD HDMS database have not occurred near the Hassayampa allotment.

b) Proposed Actions: Assessment of Take/Disturb: Implementing either of the proposed action alternatives or their associated activities will not result in take of golden eagles or its habitat.

c) No Action: Assessment of Take/Disturb: No take or disturbance will occur to golden eagle.

Page | 41

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Migratory Bird Act

In accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Executive Order 13186, and the MOU signed December 2008, this project was evaluated for its effects on migratory birds.

A total of 92 species of migratory birds were assessed for their potential to occur on the PNF (PNF 2011).  13 species of migratory birds are addressed elsewhere based on status such as federally listed under ESA, federally protected under the Eagle Act, Forest Service sensitive, or Forest Plan MIS. All of these species are considered to occur on the PNF.

 20 other species would be expected to occur on the Prescott NF.

 13 species are not known whether or not they would occur on the PNF.

 13 species could potentially or possibly occur on the PNF.

 43 species would not be expected to occur on the PNF.

 2 species are yet to be determined regarding their status on the PNF.

This table is sorted by PNF/Reference/Species. The 13 species analyzed above due to federal, regional sensitive, or MIS status have been removed from the table. The 43 species that would not be expected to occur on the PNF have also been removed. This table contains 36 species that may occur within the PNF. Nesting and foraging information was taken from The Birder’s Handbook (Ehrlich, et. al. 1988) except where noted. Species shaded in the table below are those that may/or are known to occur within the Hassayampa Allotment.

TABLE 11. Migratory Bird Species Review and Assessment Species Habitat Type PNF? Reference Nesting substrate Diet Band-tailed Madrean BBA In tree at fork Acorns, seeds, Yes Pigeon pine/oak AZPIF berries, grains Black-chinned Dry chaparral In sage brush or Insects, seeds Yes BBA Sparrow & PJ shrub Black Hawk Mature Platform nest in Small mammals, cottonwood/ BCR large branches fish, reptiles and Yes willow riparian AZPIF occasionally other birds Black-throated PJ & oak BBA Out on branch of Insects Gray Warbler woodlands AF – Passage tree or shrub Yes UV – Breeding Tritle AZPIF Canyon Towhee Chaparral, 0.5 – 10.5 ft in Mostly seeds on open PJ, and cacti, brush or tree the ground (BNA) open Yes BBA (AZBBA) evergreen oak Grace's Warbler Open, mature BBA On smaller Gleans insects pine Yes AF – Mention horizontal branches from conifer foliage Tritle or in crown of tree (BNA)

Page | 42

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

TABLE 11. Migratory Bird Species Review and Assessment Species Habitat Type PNF? Reference Nesting substrate Diet Gray Flycatcher Pinyon- BBA In crotch of juniper Exclusively insects juniper AF – Breeding or sage, near base Yes TZ – Mention of thornbush AZPIF Gray Vireo Open PJ BBA Rim suspended Little known but Yes AF – Passage from forked twig presumably almost AZPIF entirely insects Olive Warbler Pine and Usually in pine tree Little known, but Yes BBA mixed conifer largely insects Phainopepla Open Often in upright Especially mistletoe woodlands w/ Yes BBA crotch of mistletoe berries in deserts mistletoe Pinyon Jay Pinyon- BBA In juniper of pine, Pine nuts, conifer juniper UV – occasionally oak and other seeds, Yes nonbreeding fruits, insects, bird AZPIF eggs and nestlings. Purple Martin Sonoran In tree hole, cliff Occasionally feeds BBA Desertscrub niche or other on ground taking Yes TZ – Mention & Pine cavity ants and other AZPIF insects Virginia's Chaparral BBA Hidden by Entirely warbler AF – Passage vegetation insectivorous Yes TZ – Mention Tritle Yellow Warbler Cottonwood/ BBA Usually in compact Few berries (sonorana ssp.) willow riparian Yes AF/UV - shrub Breeding Cordilleran Pine, mixed BBA - Forest- Ledges with Almost exclusively Flycatcher conifer wide overhead cover, insects (BNA) AF – Passage aspen Yes TZ-Mention cavities/bark, Tritle human structures AZPIF (AZBBA) Brewer’s Cold BBA - In shrub or low tree Includes few Sparrow desertscrub Williamson spiders; seeds of Valley – BCR forbs and grass Yes 16 AF/TZ – Passage AZPIF Bell's Vireo (c) Low elevation HDMS/BBA - 1’ – 5’ shrub, Some fruit taken riparian with Along Verde suspended by rim after July willows, Yes River between two twigs mesquite & AF – Breeding dense shrubs TZ - Mention Swainson’s High Known from Deciduous tree 20’ Small vertebras, Hawk elevation Chino Valley – 30’, Cliff 6’ – 70’ insects also rabbits, Yes grassland AF – Passage lizards, frogs, AZPIF toads, birds Red-faced Mixed conifer Known from Ground nest Exclusively insects Warbler and riparian field occasionally Yes forest observations on beneath PNF overhanging bank Flammulated Dry Known on PNF Snags, uses Insects also other Owl coniferous Yes – from field abandoned arthropods forests observations woodpecker holes

Page | 43

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

TABLE 11. Migratory Bird Species Review and Assessment Species Habitat Type PNF? Reference Nesting substrate Diet Ferruginous High Unknown HDMS/BBA Conifer 20’ – 40’, Birds, reptiles, Hawk elevation - None BCR 16 cliff 6’ – 55’ with insects. Almost grassland reported UV – commanding view exclusively small but would Nonbreeding, mammals expect passage them AZPIF Olive-sided Pine & Mixed BBA Conifer 5’ – 75’ Exclusively insects Flycatcher Conifer Unknown AF – Mention often high in tree AZPIF Sage Sparrow Cold desert BBA Ground usually in Insects, seeds, scrub Unknown AF – Mention sagebrush young fed insects AZPIF Le Conte’s Sonoran Shrub 2’ – 4’. Insects including Thrasher Desertscrub Mostly in dense, other terrestrial BCR 33 thickly branching arthropods, Unknown AZPIF cholla cactus, palo occasionally small verde , creosote verts. bush Gila Sonoran BCR 33 – Cactus, Saguaro Omnivore, insects, woodpecker desert Unknown Sonoran & hole usually not bird eggs, fruit (esp Mojave Desert used in year cactus) berries Burrowing Owl High HDMS/BBA - Ground in mammal Insects, rodents, elevation BCR 33 – burrow lizards, birds grassland Potentially Sonoran & Mojave Desert AZPIF Bendire's Open desert Shrub 2’ – 4’ In Insects, fruit. Thrasher scrub BBA dense willows, Mostly insects, Possible AF - mesquite, inverts, small verts. Nonbreeding sagebrush Less than 10% fruits and berries Elf Owl Saguaros & Cactus 15’ – 35’. In Insects, also other sycamore Possible BBA abandoned arthropods, rarely cavities woodpecker hole lizards and snakes MacGillivray’s High BBA Shrub 2’ – 3’. Insects (Little Warbler elevation AF/UV – Usually close to known) Possible riparian Passage ground in thick TZ - Mention shrubbery Red-naped Aspen and Deciduous trees Insects, tree sap. BBA Sapsucker mixed conifer 10’ – 20’. Prefers Also cambium , AF/UV – live birch, fruit, berries, Pine Possible Passage cottonwood, aspen, pitch often used TZ – Mention often near water instead of sap from AZPIF deciduous trees Sage Thrasher Cold desert BBA Ground. Concealed Insect, fruit scrub AF – in or occasionally including berries Possible Nonbreeding beneath sagebrush UV – Passage AZPIF Gilded Flicker Sonoran Snag 6’ – 15’. Will Insects. Especially Desertscrub use variety of ants. Also BBA – BCR 33 cavities: poles and occasionally sees, Possible AZPIF posts houses, acorns, nuts, grain banks, haystacks, boxes. Costa’s Sonoran BBA – BCR33 Deciduous 3’ – 5’. Nectar and spiders Hummingbird Desertscrub Possible AF – Breeding Also in yucca AZPIF

Page | 44

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

TABLE 11. Migratory Bird Species Review and Assessment Species Habitat Type PNF? Reference Nesting substrate Diet Prairie falcon Deserts, On cliff edge, Birds, small grasslands, & BCR 16 & 33 - occasionally in rock mammals, insects Possible cliffs BBA crevice, always and lizards facing open habitat Pine Grosbeak Spruce-fir Conifer 2 ‘ – 25’ Seeds, buds, fruit, Not likely BBA insects Least bittern Tavaci Marsh BCR 33 – BBA Ground, usually Fish, aquatic Nearby? TZ - Breeding near or over water inverts, insects

References:

 BBA-Breeding Bird Atlas,  HDMS—Heritage Database (AZGFD Database)  BCR—Bird Conservation Region—BOCC  BNA—Birds of North America (Online)  AF-Agua Fria IBA Species List  TZ-Tuzigoot IBA Species List  UV-Upper Verde IBA Species List  WW-Watson/Willow Lakes IBA SL  Tridle-Michael Micosia-Field Notes  AZPIF-AZ Partners in Flight Cons. Plan

Based on the vegetation types within the project area and the proposed grazing in the various vegetation types, 8 species might be expected to occur within the project area. Impacts to migratory birds include loss of nesting, foraging, and cover habitat. Snag retention would be compliant with the forest plan direction in this project and snags would only be removed as they pertain to safety. Removal and/or destruction of vegetation used by migratory birds may not always result in a taking under the MBTA.

Page | 45

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Alternative 1 – Dormant Season Grazing This alternative would be beneficial to migratory birds because livestock grazing would occur during the late fall and winter months. With the exception of some resident species, most of the migratory bird species present during the spring and summer months will also migrate south for the winter and will not be present during the time livestock are grazing. Recovery of understory and shrub species within the Hassayampa River riparian corridor would occur slowly by implementing light use (30% or less on grasses, 20% or less by weight on woody species) and in time, new forbs, grasses, sedges, etc., and shrub recruitment would be expected. No take is expected under this alternative.

Alternative 2 – Yearlong Grazing/Riparian Fencing This alternative would have more impact to migratory birds because livestock grazing would continue to occur year around. There is still the potential that low shrub and ground nesting migratory birds such as the Virginia warbler, black-chinned sparrow, canyon towhee and Bendire’s thrasher could be impacted by livestock grazing through incidental trampling, loss of cover and disturbance from grazing especially in the uplands adjacent to the riparian corridor. Recruitment of cottonwood, willow, and other deciduous riparian tree species seedlings should become established over time with construction of the proposed 2.5 mile riparian fence in the Quartz Mtn and Orofino Units, and implementing light use levels (30% or less on grasses, 20% or less by weight on woody species) to improve the understory herbaceous and woody species. Because of potential impacts to ground and low shrub nesting migratory bird species, unintentional take may occur under this alternative.

Alternative 3 – No Action/No Grazing Alternative There would be an immediate beneficial impact to migratory bird habitat under this alternative in the Hassayampa riparian corridor and the adjacent uplands where most of the heavy grazing has occurred over the years. Over time the understory habitat component of forbs grasses and sedges, etc. that is currently absent in the riparian corridor will begin to respond. The shrub species that have been heavily hedged will grow and regenerate. The cover component and vertical structure important for many species of birds and mammals will begin to replace the existing open and sparsely vegetated understory amongst the large cottonwood galleries found on the north and south ends of the allotment. Livestock impacts on vegetation would be removed with only wildlife grazing occurring at light intensities. The riparian areas have greater potential for recovery under the no action alternative. No take is expected under this alternative.

Table 12. Summary of Effects for Migratory Birds for the Hassayampa Allotment Species Status Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative Proposed 3 Action No Grazing Migratory Bird Treaty Act: Migratory birds ------No Take Unintentional No Take Take

Page | 50

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Important Bird Areas (IBAs) and Overwintering Areas

The nearest IBA to the Hassayampa Allotment is located 12 miles away in the Watson and Willow IBAs; therefore no IBAs are affected by the implementation of the proposed action and associated activities. Many overwintering areas are large wetlands; none of this habitat is present in the analysis area. The allotment provides limited wintering habitat for migrant bird species and can be a staging area for winter migrants before they migrate south for the winter. Since significant concentrations of birds are not known to occur here nor do unique or a high diversity of birds winter here, there will be no effects to important overwintering areas by implementing the proposed action.

Page | 51

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

G. Signatures Prepared by:

/s/ Dan Garcia de la Cadena December 12, 2013 Dan Garcia de la Cadena, Wildlife Biologist Date Prescott National Forest

/s/ Albert Sillas December 3, 2013 Albert Sillas, Fishery Biologist Date Prescott National Forest

Page | 52

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

References Arizona Game & Fish Department. Arizona's Natural Heritage Program: Heritage Data Management System (HDMS) (Web application). 2010. Available at: http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/edits/species_concern.shtml. (Accessed: Feb-July, 2012). Arizona Game and Fish Department. 2002. Desert sucker (Catostomus clarki). Unpublished abstract compiled and edited by the Heritage Data Management System, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, AZ. 4 pp.

Arizona Game and Fish Department. 2006. Lowland leopard frog (Rana yavapaiensis). Unpublished abstract compiled and edited by the Heritage Data Management System, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, AZ. 10 pp.

Audubon. Arizona’s Important Bird Areas Program (Web application). 2010. Available at: http://iba.audubon.org/iba/viewState.do?state=US-AZ (Accessed Feb-July, 2012). Alsup III, Fred J. 2002. Birds of North America. In association with Smithsonian Institution. DK Publishing Inc., New York, New York. 1008 pp. Baker, Marc. 2009. Review of the distribution, abundance, autoecology and uniqueness of vascular plant species of interest and identification of geographic areas associated with these species within the Prescott National Forest, Arizona. Prepared by Southwest Botanical research for the Prescott National Forest under order no. AG-8191-P-0015. 26 pages. Baker, M. A. 2003. Preliminary botanical survey of the Bradshaw Ranger District, Prescott National Forest, Yavapai County, Arizona. Southwest Botanical Research, Chino Valley, Arizona. Birds of North America Online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology and the American Ornithologists’ Union (Web application). 2010. Available at: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna. Accessed: Feb-July, 2012). Corman, Troy E., Wise-Gervais, Cathryn. 2005. Arizona Breeding Bird Atlas. University of New Mexico Press. Albuquerque, New Mexico. Desert Fishes Team. 2004. Status of unlisted native fished of the Gila River Basin, with recommendations for management. Report Number 2. Emmons, I. and E. Nowak. 2012. Prescott National Forest riparian herpetofauna surveys 2010- 2012 Draft Final Report. Report submitted to Prescott National Forest by Colorado Plateau Research Station, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.

Holechek, J. and D. Galt. 2004. More on Stubble Height Guidelines. Rangelands 26 (4):3-7. Available at: http://www.bioone.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.2111%2F1551- 501X%282004%29026%5B0003%3AMOSHG%5D2.0.CO%3B2 Holechek, J.L. and D. Galt. 2000. Grazing Intensity Guidelines. Rangelands 22 (3):11-14. Latta, M.J., C.J. Beardmore, and T.E. Corman. 1999. Arizona Partners in Flight Bird Conservation Plan. Version 1.0. Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Technical Report 142. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, Arizona. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life (web application). 2010. Version 3.0, Arlington, Virginia, USA: NatureServe. Available: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer.

Page | 53

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

New Mexico Rare Plants. New Mexico Rare Plant Technical Council (NMRPTC); University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM (web application). 2010. Available: http://nmrareplants.unm.edu/. (Accessed: Feb-July, 2012). Shaw, Harley G. 1993. Bradshaw Ranger District Merriam’s Turkey Habitat Monitoring Project Final Report. District records. 49 pp. Sullivan, B.K. 1993. Distribution of the Southwestern Toad (Bufo microscaphus) in Arizona. Great Basin Naturalist, Volume 53, No. 4, pages 402-406.

Thiel, Chris. 2013. Personal communication. Natural Resource Specialist, Prescott National Forest.

USDA Forest Service. 2010. Prescott National Forest. Forest Level Analysis of Management Indicator Species (MIS) for the Prescott National Forest, 2009 update. October 2010. USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region. Regional Foresters’ Sensitive Species List (Web application). 2010. Available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/resources/tes/index.shtml#content. USDA Forest Service, 2013. Prescott National Forest. Hassayampa Vegetation Specialist Report; 8/9/12. Submitted by Chris Thiel and David Evans.

USDA Forest Service, 2012. Prescott National Forest. Hydrology and Water Resources Specialist Report for the Hassayampa Livestock Grazing Allotment; 2013. Submitted by Loyd Barnett, Contract Hydrologist.

Voeltz, J.B. and R.H. Bettaso. 2003. 2003 Status of the Gila Topminnow and Desert Pupfish in Arizona. Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Technical Report 226. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, Arizona.

Zwartjes, Patrick W.; Cartron, Jean-Luc E.; Stoleson, Pamela L. L.; Haussamen, Walter C.; Crane, Tiffany E. 2005. Assessment of Native Species and Ungulate Grazing in the Southwest: Terrestrial Wildlife. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-142. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 74 p. plus CD. Tewksbury, J.J., A.E. Black, N. Nur, V. A. Saab, B. D. Logan, and D. S. Dobkin. 2002. Effects of anthropogenic fragmentation and livestock grazing on western riparian bird communities. Studies in Avian Biology 25:1017-1029. Sedgwick, James A., Knopf, Fritz L. 1987. Breeding Bird Response to Cattle Grazing of a Cottonwood Bottomland. Journal of Wildlife Management Vol. 51, No. 1: 230-237. Taylor, Daniel M. 1986. Effects of Cattle Grazing on Passerine Birds Nesting in Riparian Habitat. Journal of Range Management, Vol. 39, No. 3. 254-258. Krueper, David, Bart, Jonathan, and Rich, Terrell D. 2003. Response of Vegetation and Breeding Birds to the Removal of Cattle on the San Pedro River, Arizona (U.S.A.). Conservation Biology. Vol 17, No. 2. 607-615. Knopf, Fritz L., Sedgwick, James A., Cannon, Richard W. 1988. Guild structure of a riparian avifauna relative to seasonal cattle grazing. Journal of Wildlife Management 52: 280-290.

Page | 54

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

APPENDIX A

FEDERALLY LISTED PLANTS AND ANIMALS OF THE PRESCOTT NATIONAL FOREST September 2013 Scientific name Common name ESA Status Migratory Bird status Birds: Empidonax traillii extimus Southwestern willow flycatcher E PIF Strix occidentalis lucida Mexican spotted owl T PIF Coccyzus americanus Western yellow-billed cuckoo PT** BOCC/PIF occidentalis Fish: Gila intermedia Gila chub E NA Poeciliposis occidentalis Gila topminnow E NA occidentalis Ptychocheilus lucius Colorado pikeminnow EXPN NA Xyrauchen texanus Razorback sucker E NA Meda fulgida Spikedace E NA Oncorhynchus gilae Gila Trout T NA Tiaroga cobitis Loach Minnow E NA Gila robusta Roundtail chub C NA Reptiles: Gopherus morafkaii Sonoran desert tortoise C NA Thamnophis eques megalop Northern Mexican gartersnake PT NA Thamnophis rufipunctatus Narrow-headed gartersnake PT NA Critical Habitats: Strix occidentalis lucida Mexican spotted owl Empidonax traillii extimus Southwestern willow flycatcher Gila intermedia Gila chub Meda fulgida Spikedace Xyrauchen texanus Razorback sucker Tiaroga cobitis Loach Minnow Thamnophis eques megalop Northern Mexican gartersnake – (proposed) Thamnophis rufipunctatus Narrow-headed gartersnake – (proposed) Coccyzus americanus occidentalis Western yellow-billed cuckoo – (potential) * Status Definitions:  E Listed Endangered under the ESA: Any species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. (Appendix A)  T Listed Threatened under the ESA: Any species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. (Appendix A)  PT Proposed Threatened; **YBC Proposed for listing as Threatened on 10/3/13.  C Candidates are those species for which the Fish and Wildlife Service has enough information on file to propose listing as threatened or endangered, but listing has been precluded by other agency priorities.  EXPN Experimental population, non-essential  BCC Birds of Conservation Concern – FWS National Priority List  PIF Partners in Flight priority bird species (Latta, 1999)

Federally listed species on the USFWS website for Yavapai County that do not occur on the PNF:  Arizona cliffrose (Purshia subintegra) - Endangered  Page springsnail (Pyrgulopsis morrisoni) – Candidate  Black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes) – Endangered  California condor (Gymnogyps californianus) – Endangered  Headwater chub (Gila nigra) - Candidate  Chiricahua leopard frog (Lithobates chiricahuensis) – Threatened  Desert pupfish (Cyprinodon macularis) - Endangered

Page | 55

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

APPENDIX B

REGIONAL FORESTER'S SENSITIVE ANIMAL AND PLANTSPECIES LIST FOR THE PRESCOTT NF – September 2013 ANIMALS: Birds Migratory bird status Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald eagle BOCC Accipiter gentilis Northern goshawk BOCC, PIF Falco peregrinus American peregrine falcon BOCC Coccyzus americanus occidentalis Western yellow-billed cuckoo BOCC, PIF Amphibians & aquatic reptiles Lithobates (Rana) yavapaiensis Lowland leopard frog Thamnophis eques megalops Northern Mexican gartersnake Thamnophis rufipunctatus Narrow-headed gartersnake Fish Gila robusta Roundtail chub Catostomus clarki Desert sucker Catostomus insignis Sonora sucker Reptiles Gopherus morafkai Morafka’s desert tortoise Snails Pyrgulopsis glandulosa Verde Rim springsnail Pyrgulopsis sila Brown springsnail Insects Wormaldia planae A caddis fly

Mammals Lasiurus blossevillii Western red bat Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens Pale Townsend’s big-eared bat PLANTS: Agave delamateri Tonto Basin agave Agave phillipsiana Phillips agave Arenaria abberrans Mt. Dellenbaugh sandwort Asclepias incialis ssp. uncialis Greene milkweed Carex ultra (=C.spissa var.ultra) Cochise sedge Desmodium metcalfei Metcalfe’s tick-trefoil Erigeron saxatalis Rock fleabane Eriogonum ericofolium var. ericofolium Heathleaf wild buckwheat Eriogonum ripleyi Ripley wild buckwheat Hedeoma diffusum Flagstaff pennyroyal Heuchera eastwoodiae Eastwood alum root Lupinus latifolius spp. leucanthus Broad-leafed lupine Pediomelum verdiensis Verde breadroot Penstemon nudiflorus Flagstaff beardtoungue Phlox amabilis Arizona phlox Polygala rusbyi Hualapai milkwort Salvia dorii spp. mearnsii Mearns sage

* Status Definitions:  BOCC Birds of Conservation Concern – FWS National Priority List  PIF Partners in Flight priority bird species (Latta, 1999)

Page | 56

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

APPENDIX C

Prescott National Forest Management Indicator Species Excerpted from the FEIS for PNF FLMP, November 1986, Page 95 Pertinent portions of Table 28. Indicator Species Vegetation Early Seral Late Seral Snag Component

Ponderosa Pine Abert Squirrel Goshawk (BOCC, PIF) Hairy Woodpecker P. Nuthatch Turkey Pinyon Juniper Mule Deer Plain Titmouse (PIF) Plain Titmouse Chaparral Mule Deer Rufous-Sided Towhee N/A Grassland/ Antelope Antelope N/A Desert Shrub Riparian ------Lucy’s Warbler (PIF) N/A Aquatic ------Macroinvertebrates N/A

Prescott National Forest Management Indicator Species Excerpted from the Forest Level Analysis of Management Indicator Species (MIS) for the Prescott National Forest, 2009 update. October 2010. TABLE 9. MANAGEMENT INDICATOR SPECIES, TRENDS (2009 MIS REPORT)

SPECIES HABITAT POPULATION TREND Turkey Ponderosa pine, late seral Increasing Goshawk Ponderosa pine, late seral Decreasing Hairy woodpecker Ponderosa pine, snags Stable

Pygmy nuthatch Ponderosa pine, late seral Stable Tassel-eared squirrel Ponderosa pine, early seral Stable Juniper (Plain) titmouse Pinyon/juniper snags Decreasing

Mule deer Pinyon/juniper/chaparral, Decreasing early seral Pronghorn antelope Grassland, desert shrub Declining

Spotted (Rufous-sided) Chaparral, late seral Decreasing towhee Lucy’s warbler Riparian, late seral Increasing

Aquatic Macroinvertebrates Riparian, aquatic, late seral Stable

* Status Definitions:  BOCC Birds of Conservation Concern – FWS National Priority List  PIF Partners in Flight priority bird species (Latta, 1999)

Page | 57

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

APPENDIX D

USFWS Map of Yellow-billed Cuckoo current distribution now proposed for listing as Threatened.

Vicinity of Project Area

Page | 58

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

AZGFD Heritage Database Western Red Bat locations adjacent to Hassayampa Allotment.

Vicinity of Project Area

Page | 59

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

AZGFD Heritage Database Pale Townsend’s Big-eared Bat locations within and adjacent to Hassayampa Allotment.

Vicinity of Project Area

Page | 60

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

AZGFD Heritage Database Golden Eagle Locations adjacent to Hassayampa Allotment.

Vicinity of Project Area

Page | 61

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Page | 62

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

APPENDIX E

Species Excluded From Detailed Analysis The following species are not known to occur on or near the project area, and populations will not be affected by the proposed alternatives. For this reason, they are not included in the previous detailed analysis. The following abbreviations describe the status of each species:

E - Listed Endangered under the ESA: Any species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. T - Listed Threatened under the ESA: Any species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. C - Candidate Taxon, Ready for Proposal S - Sensitive: Those species listed on the Regional Forester's Sensitive Species list for the Southwestern Region of the Forest Service MIS - Management Indicator Species: Species identified in the PNF FLMP FEIS (page 95) for various vegetation types and seral stages. (Population trends from USDA Forest Service 2010). PIF - Partners in Flight priority bird species (Latta et al. 1999)

Page | 63

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Table 10. TEP, Sensitive, & MIS Species excluded from analysis for the Hassayampa Allotment Species Status Species background information Project Information Common name ESA The known distribution or habitat association for Project area is in Scientific Name FS the species. shrub, chaparral, and Pinyon-juniper MIS vegetation at an PIF elevation from 4,000- 5,750 feet. Occurs in the Upper Hassayampa 5th code watershed. Southwestern willow E This flycatcher breeds principally in (at low Neither the species flycatcher PIF elevations) dense willow, cottonwood, and tamarisk nor its habitat occur Empidonax traillii thickets and woodland along streams and rivers, and within the project extimus (at high elevations) pure, streamside stands of area or would be Geyer willow. Breeding success may be heavily impacted by this affected by predation and brown-headed cowbird project. egg-parasitism. They are known to occur along the Verde River. The allotment does not contain suitable habitat (primarily lacks the dense riparian understory layer). Southwestern willow Critical Habitat has been designated along the This Critical Habitat flycatcher Verde River. does not occur within Critical Habitat nor would be impacted by this project. Northern goshawk S This species is associated with stands of ponderosa Neither the species Accipiter gentillis PIF pined forest. It nests in mature stands and uses all nor the necessary other age classes to forage in. There are no known amount of habitat MIS PFAs within the Wagoner Allotment. occur within the project area or would be impacted by this project. Peregrine Falcon S The species nests on a rock shelf or eyrie on cliffs Neither the species throughout the state, even at some distance from Falco peregrinus nor its habitat occur water. Nesting sites are known on the Bradshaw within the project District. The nearest peregrine eyrie from the area or would be project area is located at Thumb Butte near Prescott. impacted by this To protect nesting peregrine falcons, the Thumb project. Butte cliff face and surrounding area are closed to rock climbing each winter and spring to allow for undisturbed falcon nesting.

Juniper titmouse MIS This is the MIs for late seral and the snag The indicator habitat Baeolophus ridgwayi component of pinyon-juniper habitat. for this species does not occur within the project area

Pronghorn antelope MIS This is the MIS for early and late seral stage The indicator habitat Antilocapra americana grassland/desert shrub vegetation types. No for this species occurs grassland occur on the allotment and the desert within the project shrub habitat is too dense to support antelope. area, but is not suitable habitat.

Page | 64

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Table 10. TEP, Sensitive, & MIS Species excluded from analysis for the Hassayampa Allotment Species Status Species background information Project Information Common name ESA The known distribution or habitat association for Project area is in Scientific Name FS the species. shrub, chaparral, and Pinyon-juniper MIS vegetation at an PIF elevation from 4,000- 5,750 feet. Occurs in the Upper Hassayampa 5th code watershed. Razorback sucker E In the lower Colorado River Basin, populations Neither the species Xyrauchen texanus isolated to Lakes Mohave, Mead, and the lower nor its habitat occur Colorado River below Havasu. Populations have within the project been reintroduced into the Verde River. Found in area or would be backwaters, flooded bottomlands, pools, side impacted by this channels and other slower moving habitats. project. Razorback sucker Critical habitat is designated for 124 miles of the No designated critical Critical Habitat Verde River from Perkinsville downstream to habitat occurs within Horseshoe Dam. the project area or would be impacted by this project. Gila Chub E Gila chub have been recorded in approximately 30 Neither the species Gila intermedia rivers, streams, and spring-fed tributaries nor its habitat occur throughout the Gila River basin in New Mexico, within the project northern Sonora, Mexico, and central and area or would be southeastern Arizona. Gila chub and designated impacted by this critical habitat occur in Sycamore Creek, Little project. Sycamore Creek, and Indian Creek in the Agua Fria River drainage on the PNF. They also occur in Williamson Valley Wash downstream of forestlands in the Verde River drainage. Gila chub commonly inhabit pools in smaller streams, cienegas, and artificial impoundments throughout its range. Gila chub Designated critical habitat occurs in Sycamore No designated critical Critical Habitat Creek, Little Sycamore Creek, and Indian Creek in habitat occurs within the Agua Fria River drainage on the PNF. the project area or would be impacted by this project. Colorado E, EXPN Currently, natural populations are restricted to Neither the species pikeminnow upper Colorado River Basin of Colorado, Utah, nor its habitat occur Ptychocheilus lucius New Mexico, and Wyoming. Extirpated from lower within the project Colorado River by 1970’s. Experimental area or would be nonessential populations have been reintroduced impacted by this into the Verde and Salt rivers in Arizona. This project. species occurs in rivers with high silt content, warm water, turbulence, and variable flow by season.

Page | 65

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Table 10. TEP, Sensitive, & MIS Species excluded from analysis for the Hassayampa Allotment Species Status Species background information Project Information Common name ESA The known distribution or habitat association for Project area is in Scientific Name FS the species. shrub, chaparral, and Pinyon-juniper MIS vegetation at an PIF elevation from 4,000- 5,750 feet. Occurs in the Upper Hassayampa 5th code watershed. Gila topminnow E Currently occurs in the Gila river drainage, Arizona, Neither the species Poeciliopsis particularly in the upper Santa Cruz River, Sonoita nor its habitat occur occidentalis and Cienega creeks, and the middle Gila River; and within the project occidentalis in the Rio Sonora, Rio de la Concepcion, and Santa area or would be Cruz River. There are no extant populations on the impacted by this forest from introductions made in the early project. 1980’s.Occurs in small streams, springs, and cienegas below 1,350 m (4,500 ft) elevation, primarily in shallow areas with aquatic vegetation and debris for cover. Gila trout T Species introduced into Grapevine Creek (Agua Species and its habitat Oncorhynchus gilae Fria River drainage) on the Bradshaw RD. do not occur in the project area or would be impacted this project. Spikedace E Currently occurs in portions of the upper Gila River Neither the species Meda fulgida (NM), middle Gila River, lower San Pedro River, nor its habitat occur Aravaipa Creek, Eagle Creek, Fossil Creek, and within the project upper Verde River (AZ). In the upper Verde River, area or would be spikedace have become rare to nonexistent. Found impacted by this in moderate to large perennial streams, where it project. inhabits slow to moderate velocity waters over gravel and rubble substrates. Spikedace Critical habitat is designated along 107 miles of the No critical habitat Critical Habitat Verde River from the confluence with Fossil Creek occurs within the upstream to Sullivan Dam. project area or would be impacted by this project. Loach Minnow E Currently occurs in portions of the upper Gila River Neither the species Tiaroga cobitis (NM), San Francisco River, Blue River, Aravaipa nor its habitat occur Creek, Eagle Creek, White River, Black River, within the project Fossil Creek (AZ). They are extirpated from the area or would be Verde River. Found in moderate to swift flow impacted by this velocities with shallow water with gravel and project. cobble substrates. Loach minnow Critical habitat is designated along 74 miles of the No critical habitat Critical Habitat Verde River from the confluence with Beaver Creek occurs within the upstream to Sullivan Dam. project area or would be impacted by this project.

Page | 66

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Table 10. TEP, Sensitive, & MIS Species excluded from analysis for the Hassayampa Allotment Species Status Species background information Project Information Common name ESA The known distribution or habitat association for Project area is in Scientific Name FS the species. shrub, chaparral, and Pinyon-juniper MIS vegetation at an PIF elevation from 4,000- 5,750 feet. Occurs in the Upper Hassayampa 5th code watershed. Roundtail chub C/S In the lower Colorado River basin, occurs in the Neither the species Gila robusta Little Colorado, Bill Williams, Gila, Salt, and Verde nor its habitat occur rivers and most of their perennial tributaries of AZ within the project and NM. Commonly found in pool habitats and near area or would be instream cover. Known only in the Verde River on impacted by this the PNF. project. Sonora sucker S Occurs in Gila and Bill Williams river basins of AZ Neither the species Catostomus insignis and NM, and in Gila basin of northern Sonora, nor its habitat occur Mexico. Commonly found in pool habitats. Known within the project only in the Verde River on the PNF. area or would be impacted by this project. Mexican gartersnake PT Occurs primarily in permanent marshes and streams Neither the species Thamnophis eques at middle elevations in central, south-central and nor its habitat occur megalops southeastern Arizona. This species is known from within the project along the Verde River. area or would be impacted by this project. Narrowheaded garter PT Occurs from central Arizona to western New Neither the species snake Mexico and south to central and western Chihuahua nor its habitat occur Thamnophis and northern and western Durango, Mexico. In within the project rufipunctatus Arizona, known primarily from streams draining the area or would be Mogollon Rim and the White Mountains. Highly impacted by this aquatic species, associated with riffle/pool project. complexes of cool, clear, rocky mountain streams. Known at Mormon Pocket on the Verde River and on Oak Creek. Verde Rim S Total range: Nelson Place Spring complex that form Neither the species springsnail the headwaters of Sycamore Creek, Yavapai nor its habitat occur Pyrgulopsis glandulosa County, central Arizona. Known only on Prescott within the project NF. area or would be impacted by this project. Brown springsnail S Total range: Endemic to Brown Spring, Yavapai Neither the species Pyrgulopsis sila County, northwestern Arizona. Spring is located on nor its habitat occur private lands. Known only on Prescott NF. within the project area or would be impacted by this project.

Page | 67

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Flagstaff beardtongue S This plant is restricted to small, scattered limestone Neither the species Penstemon nudiflorus and sandstone outcrops of relatively undisturbed nor its habitat occur habitat sat elevations arranging from 4,500 to 7,000 within the project ft. According to AZ HDMS, occurs in “dry area or would be Ponderosa pine forests”, within which the required impacted by this soil types are not present on the allotment. project. Cochise sedge S This plant grows in saturated soil near perennial Neither the species Carex ultra seeps, streams, and springs. In Yavapai County nor its habitat occur known only from the Hieroglyphic and Mazatzal within the project ( C. spissa var. ultra) Mountains. area or would be impacted by this project. Greene milkweed S Broad range but is always rare and has small Neither the species Asclepias uncialis spp. populations. Reported to prefer stable climax or nor its habitat occur uncialis near climax plains grassland communities. Reported within the project to not tolerate competition from weedy annuals. Not area or would be known to occur in Yavapai County (found in AZ in impacted by this Coconino, Pima, and Santa Cruz Counties). project. Flagstaff pennyroyal S This species is endemic to Northern Arizona and is Neither the species Hedeoma diffusum found on the Coconino and Prescott National nor its habitat occur Forests. It grows primarily on dolomitic limestone within the project outcrops or soils derived from dolomitic limestone. area or would be However, it has been found on sandstone in Prescott impacted by this National Forest. Known to occur in Sycamore project. Canyon on Chino Valley RD. According to AZ HDMS, the species occurs in the Ponderosa pine zone, within which the required soil types are not present on the allotment.

Page | 68

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Table 10. TEP, Sensitive, & MIS Species excluded from analysis for the Hassayampa Allotment Species Status Species background information Project Information Common name ESA The known distribution or habitat association for Project area is in Scientific Name FS the species. shrub, chaparral, and Pinyon-juniper MIS vegetation at an PIF elevation from 4,000- 5,750 feet. Occurs in the Upper Hassayampa 5th code watershed. Arizona phlox S According to AZ HDMS, the species grows on Neither the species Phlox amabilis “open exposed limestone rocky slopes” (none of nor its habitat occur which occur on the allotment) and is endemic to within the project central Arizona, from the Juniper Mountain area or would be Wilderness, Table Top Mountain, and Granite Dells impacted by this Area in the Prescott area, and near Montezuma project. Castle National Monument between 3200 to 6850 feet. According to Baker (2009), Arizona phlox is an Arizona endemic with a large portion of its distribution occurring within the Prescott National Forest. Due to the presence of widespread habitats and challenging taxonomy, Baker does not recommend widespread surveys on the Prescott National Forest. Eastwood alum root S Heuchera eastwoodiae is known only from central Neither the species Heuchera eastwoodiae Arizona and is found on moist slopes in ponderosa nor its habitat occur pine forests and canyons. within the project Also on : A-S, Coc, Ton NFs area or would be impacted by this project. Broad-leafed lupine S Species is mostly restricted to Santa Maria and Neither the species Lupinus latifolius spp Bradshaw Mountains, Moist places in woods, shady nor its habitat occur leucanthus to open areas, many plant communities between within the project 4,800 and 7,000’. Coast to montane coniferous area or would be forest. Only known on Prescott NF. impacted by this project. Heathleaf wild S This species is known only from northern and Neither the species buckwheat central Arizona on the Coconino and Prescott nor its habitat occur Eriogonum ericifolium National Forests. The type specimen for this within the project var. ericifolium species was collected near Fort Whipple, which is area or would be now Prescott in 1865. It also occurs in the Verde impacted by this basin northwest of Clarkdale. The plant is restricted project. to a limestone substrate described as white or chalky gray and powdery, which is an old lakebed deposit; this soil type does not occur on the allotment.

Page | 69

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Table 10. TEP, Sensitive, & MIS Species excluded from analysis for the Hassayampa Allotment Species Status Species background information Project Information Common name ESA The known distribution or habitat association for Project area is in Scientific Name FS the species. shrub, chaparral, and Pinyon-juniper MIS vegetation at an PIF elevation from 4,000- 5,750 feet. Occurs in the Upper Hassayampa 5th code watershed. Hualapai milkwort S This species is known only from northern and Neither the species Polygala rusbyi central Arizona on the Coconino and Prescott nor its habitat occur National Forests at elevations of 3000 to 5000 feet. within the project Habitat given on a specimen collected by Paul area or would be Boucher in 1985 states that the plant was collected impacted by this on the Verde formation with Canotia and Juniper as project. associated plants. This location was a few miles northeast of Cottonwood, Arizona. Other locations include areas around Camp Verde and Montezuma Well National Monument. The indicator “white rocks” of the Verde formation are not present on the allotment. Metcalf’s tick-trefoil S Oak/pinyon woodlands(New Mexico rare plant Neither the species Desmodium metcalfei book) Also on Coconino, Coronado and Gila NF. nor its habitat occur within the project area or would be impacted by this project. Mearns sage S Endemic to central Arizona in portions of Yavapai Neither the species Salvia dorii spp. and Coconino counties. Occurs at elevations of nor its habitat occur mearnsii approximately 3,120 to 5,120 feet in open desert within the project scrub or pinyon-juniper woodland with sparse area or would be vegetative cover. Occurs on powdery gypseous impacted by this limestone soils of Tertiary lakebed deposits and on project. red-brown clay and sandy soil of the Supai/Hermit Formation. These soil types do not occur on the allotment. Known from the Verde Valley, Sedona, and along Oak Creek.

Page | 70

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Table 10. TEP, Sensitive, & MIS Species excluded from analysis for the Hassayampa Allotment Species Status Species background information Project Information Common name ESA The known distribution or habitat association for Project area is in Scientific Name FS the species. shrub, chaparral, and Pinyon-juniper MIS vegetation at an PIF elevation from 4,000- 5,750 feet. Occurs in the Upper Hassayampa 5th code watershed. Mt. Dellenbaugh S The habitat for this species is meadows or near Neither the species sandwort meadow edges within oak and pine forests at nor its habitat occur Arenaria aberrans elevations between 5500-9000 feet. It is known within the project only from northern and north-central Arizona. area or would be Little is known about the biology of this plant; impacted by this however, it is likely that this species is adapted to at project. least low intensity fires due to its presence in the ponderosa pine habitat (Phillips, 2004). EnviroSystems (2003) found Mt. Dellenbaugh sandwort in the Burnt Canyon survey area and at several locations on Mingus Mountain. Associated plants at the Burnt canyon site included ponderosa pine, alligator juniper, wavyleaf oak and lousewort. According to Baker (2009), populations have been recorded sporadically within Prescott National Forest. The species is rather difficult to identify. No data were found on the effects of grazing on the species, but it is probably not eaten by domestic grazing animals due to its bristly nature and small size. Ripley wild S This species is known only from northern and Neither the species buckwheat central Arizona in Coconino, Maricopa, Mojave, nor its habitat occur Eriogonum ripleyi and Yavapai Counties. From AZ HDMS: “ within the project SUBSTRATE: Heavily calcareous soils (Tertiary area or would be limestone/gypsiferous lakebed deposits at Frazier's impacted by this Well, Hualapai Reservation), sandy clay soil on the project. edge of sandstone mesas, and volcanic tuffs and ashes and redeposited limestone to chalky clay”. These substrates are not known from the allotment. It is found in the creosote community of the Sonoran desert shrub and pinyon-juniper woodland of the Great Basin conifer woodland. The elevation range of this species is 2,000 to 6,000 feet. Known to occur on the Chino Valley RD. Rock fleabane S This species is known only from northern and Neither the species Erigeron saxatalis central Arizona on the Coconino, Kaibab and nor its habitat occur Prescott National Forests. The habitat is canyon within the project walls with moist north-facing slopes between 4400 area or would be and 7000 feet. From AZ HDMS “Most populations impacted by this occur on inaccessible cliffs.” project.

Page | 71

Hassayampa Allotment Wildlife, Fish & Rare Plant Specialist Report

Tonto Basin agave S This species (since it was cultivated by Native Neither the species Agave delamateri Americans) is often found in association with nor its habitat occur archeological features, including multi-room within the project foundations, check dams and alignments. It is area or would be usually found on the tops of benches, edges of impacted by this slopes, and on gentle slopes overlooking major project. drainages and perennial streams. Sonoran desert scrub 2800-3400 ft. A previous botany survey in the project area misidentified this species as being present, but a more recent survey correctly identified it as Phillip’s agave.

Page | 72