United States Department of Agriculture Manti-La Sal National Forest Plan Revision Species of Conservation Concern Public Comment Report Forest Service Manti-La Sal National Forest March 2017 i In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected]. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender. ii Content Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... 2 SCC Background Information……..……………………………………………………………………………………………….2 Suggested species for addition to the SCC List………………………………………………………………………….…3 General comments ....................................................................................................................... 3 Rationale provided for addition of certain species ...................................................................... 3 Utah Native Plant Society Recommendations ............................................................................. 4 Suggested species for removal from the SCC list ............................................................................. 4 Rationale provided for the removal of certain species ................................................................ 4 Questions regarding species on the Forest ..................................................................................... 4 Questions regarding the SCC process ............................................................................................. 5 Process comments from NGO partners ........................................................................................ 5 Species valued by the public ............................................................................................................ 6 Additional data sources recommended for consideration .............................................................. 7 Resource conflict concerns that may be impacted by SCC .............................................................. 7 Potential threats to recommended SCC species .............................................................................. 9 Recommendations for mitigating potential threats. .................................................................... 10 Attachments 1. On-line Comment Form SCC response spreadsheet……………..………………11 2. November public meeting SCC response spreadsheet………………………….16 3. Utah Native Plant Society email – 11-23-16 ……………………………………....26 4. Grand Canyon Trust email – 09-14-2016-16 ……………………………………….27 5. Utah Native Plant Society letter – 02-20-2017…………………………………....29 6. Utah Native Plant Society response spreadsheet…………………………………51 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Public comments regarding the proposed species of conservation concern list were solicited in the Fall of 2016 through public meetings, open houses, on-line and mail-in comment forms. 8 public meetings were held in September in Price, Castle Dale, Moab, Monticello, Blanding, Manti, Mt. Pleasant and Provo, Utah with a total of 184 people in attendance. Attendees were provided the opportunity to participate in an on-line comment form or mail in response for which there were 13 responses. 2 public workshops were held in November of 2016 in Monticello and Price, Utah with a total of 58 attendees. The September meetings were hosted as open houses and the November workshops in a world café approach designed to solicit feedback, the majority of the SCC comments were provided during the November workshop where participants were asked a series of SCC specific questions (Attachment 2). Public comments provided can be consolidated in to the following areas: Suggested species for addition to the SCC List Suggested species for removal from the SCC List Questions regarding species on the Forest Questions regarding the SCC evaluation process Species valued by the public Recommendations of additional data sources for consideration Potential resource conflicts with SCC and management for SCC Potential threats to SCC and mitigation strategies for those threats SCC BACKGROUND INFORMATION Background materials describing Species of Conservation Concern, the process for selecting them, and the tools for selection including ‘best available scientific information (BASI) were available to the public both through the Forest website https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/mantilasal/landmanagement/planning) and in paper at public meetings. Handouts included the following which can be found in Attachment 1: BASI Handout Potential SCC Review Procedural Report SCC Criteria Flowchart SCC Selection Process Flowchart SCC Poster (on display at meetings) – What are SCC and How are they Determined? 2 SUGGESTED SPECIES FOR ADDITION TO THE SCC LIST A total of 11 recommendations were received between public workshops and on-line comment form regarding additional species for consideration on the SCC list (Attachment 1). American pika solicited the most public support for addition and contributors provided several studies for potential reference within the Forest Plan which are listed in a subsequent section. American Pika (3) Astragalus isleyi (1) Greenback Cutthroat Trout (1) Bighorn Sheep (1) Black footed ferret (1) Sage Grouse (1) Wild Horses (1) All species should be protected (2) General Comments American Pika - National Park Service “Glad to see high elevation/alpine species on the list.” 1 “There are not enough plants on the list.”1 Regarding species for which there is not existing baseline information, “it would be irresponsible not to address species that the FS does not know enough about to evaluate their needs. The FS must consider for Species of Concern all species recommended for such that they have insufficient evidence for.”2 Rationale provided for Addition of Certain Species “Although Pika are currently maintaining populations in the La Sals, they will likely be affected as drought and climate warming continue. Pika populations have already disappeared in other mountain habitats in the Southwest.” 2 “Though I am not aware of any data on pikas in the Manti-La Sal NF, there is clearly data throughout the Western US indicating a decline of the species in many locations.” 2 “I do not have data but spend many days above treeline every summer and have just observed far fewer pikas.” 2 Astragalus isleyi “has a G1 ranking ExH and data is being collected on this species both by USFS and the Utah Natural Heritage Program.” 2 1 Public Workshop Comment, Monticello, Utah – 3 November, 2016 2 SCC On-line Comment Form 3 Utah Native Plant Society (UNPS) Recommendations The Utah Native Plant Society provided an individual review for 54 plant species, recommending each for inclusion on the SCC list. See Attachment 5 for the complete list.1 Due to date that the UNPS letter was received, some of the comments they provided are still being assessed at the time this report was written. SUGGESTED SPECIES FOR REMOVAL FROM THE SCC LIST A total of 6 comments were received during the public workshops and on-line comment forms regarding suggested removals from the SCC list: Peregrine Falcon (1) Cutthroat Trout (1) Sage Grouse (1) Astragalus isleyi (1) All species should be removed (1) Too many plant species listed (no specific recommendations) (1) Rationale provided for removal of certain species “The UDWR determines that Sage Grouse is not an SCC on any forest lands in Carbon County.”1 QUESTIONS REGARDING SPECIES ON THE FOREST The following questions were asked during the November Public Workshops. The best available answer was provided at that time and is included in the Appendix, see Attachment 2 for reference. “Where are pika located and are they rare?” “Can Aspen be included on the list?” Two participants asked whether the Forest has big horn sheep and how would they be managed? “Where are cutthroat, are