NEPA--Environmental Assessment

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Deer Park Allotment Noxious weed treatment on the Deer Park Allotment is concentrated along the roads and system trails. Yellow toadflax, Canada thistle and Oxe Eye Daisy occur in Kendall Gulch, Deer Park Creek, Silverton railroad right of way, and Cunningham Gulch. These areas were spreading but containment is hopeful. Elk Creek Allotment Noxious weed treatment in this area has been concentrated along the roads. Yellow toadflax occurs in isolated patches along the Stony Pass road, with scatterings of Canada thistle occurring at dispersed campsites along roads. Eureka/California Gulch Allotment Noxious weeds are not an issue on this allotment. There is some Canada thistle along the Eureka Gulch road. Flume and Graysill Allotments Noxious weeds are not an issue on these allotments. There is some Canada thistle along the Bolam Pass road. Gladstone Allotment Noxious weed treatment on the Gladstone Allotment is concentrated along the Cement Creek road and old mining roads. Yellow toadflax, Canada thistle and Oxe Eye Daisy occur in much of the area along Cement Creek road. These areas were spreading but containment is hopeful. Little Molas/West Needles Allotment Oxe Eye Daisy occurs on Little Molas/West Needles Allotment in the Andrews Lake vicinity. Yellow toadflax occurs at several sites along the Old Lime Creek road. Treatment is on going and containment is expected. Maggie Gulch Allotment Noxious weed treatment in this area has been concentrated along the roads. Yellow toadflax occurs in isolated patches along the Stony Pass road, with scatterings of Canada thistle occurring at dispersed campsites along roads. Minnie Gulch Allotment Canada thistle is along the old mining road within the Minnie allotment but are remaining confined to disturbed sites. Treatment is on going as Canada thistle is difficult to control. Needles Mountains Area Canada thistle is present along Needle Creek and the Silverton railroad right of way. Treatment is on going as Canada thistle is difficult to control. Picayne/Mineral Point Allotment Canada thistle is along the Picayne Gulch road and the Animas Forks road but generally remains confined to disturbed sites. Treatment is on going as Canada thistle is difficult to control. 59
Red Mountain Allotment Yellow toadflax occurs in the vicinity of the substation along Mineral Creek. Treatment is ongoing and eradication of this site is expected. West Lime Allotment Noxious weed treatment in this area has been concentrated along the roads. Yellow toadflax occurs in isolated patches along the South Mineral and Clear Lake roads, with scatterings of Canada thistle occurring at dispersed campsites along roads. Treatment will continue to occur for many years before containment is expected. Summary Of Noxious Weeds Conditions Noxious weed will continue to be a problem in this landscape. Treatment will continue to be concentrated along travel corridors and other areas accessible by spray equipment. Biological control using insects will not be utilized over much of the landscape in that patches of sufficient size and density due not exist to support the insects. However, as situations evolve where insects will be appropriate that may be used. It is unlikely that noxious weeds will be eradicated, but instead, managed to an acceptable level over time. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES This section focuses on the vegetation and soils of the alpine zone (the alpine major vegetation type) within the project area, since this is the area most affected by sheep grazing. Vegetation and soils of the other vegetation types of the project area display no effects or only minor adverse effects from sheep grazing. Alternative 1 –No Action Under this alternative, livestock grazing would not occur so there would be no direct livestockinduced effects to the vegetation and soils of the project area, including those of riparian areas and wetlands. The existing plant communities would proceed along their current successional pathways, which would bring about changes in their composition, structure, and function. As is the case for all alternatives, natural disturbances including fire, disease, insects, and weather events are likely to occur and change ecological conditions in the vegetation types of the project area. The vegetation types of the project area would benefit from reduced livestock grazing intensity (Holechek 1981, McNaughton 1983) since grazing and overgrazing by sheep, and sheep impacts from trailing and bedgrounds would not occur. Grazing intensity is defined by Holechek et al. 1998 as the cumulative effects grazing animals have on rangelands during a particular time period. This would allow native forage plants (particularly forbs) to increase their vigor and root reserves, which would increase their chances for survival by increasing their ability to reproduce, compete, and withstand drought, disease, fire, and grazing (Heitschmidt and Stuth 1993). An increase in the abundance and vigor of plant species would increase the amount of ground cover (vegetation and litter), which would likely increase infiltration, and decrease runoff and erosion. This alternative would result in improved ecological conditions compared to current conditions, since the sites where adverse effects from sheep trailing and sheep bedding are occurring would likely improve. Also under this alternative, the desired conditions for BLM lands and Forest Service lands would continue to be met. Noxious weeds would continue to be present in the analysis area under this alternative. Permitted livestock would no longer contribute to the spread of noxious weeds, but recreational stock, wildlife and a wide variety of other sources would continue to spread noxious weeds. The spread of populations would be more dependent upon treatment intensity than upon livestock grazing. 60
Page 1 and 2:
United States Department of Agricul
Page 3 and 4:
Silverton Landscape Grazing Analysi
Page 5 and 6:
These issues led the agency to deve
Page 7 and 8:
administered with shared facilities
Page 9 and 10:
Engine Creek/Deer Creek Allotment T
Page 11 and 12: Gladstone Allotment This allotment
Page 13 and 14: Gulch. In 1956, the numbers decreas
Page 15 and 16: Figure 1-1. Project Analysis Area 1
Page 17 and 18: Specific Management Emphasis Areas
Page 19 and 20: Livestock Grazing Permits Livestock
Page 21 and 22: Figure 1-3. Management Emphasis Are
Page 23 and 24: Desired Conditions for Bighorn: Red
Page 25 and 26: Figure 1-4. 2008 Data Collection Po
Page 27 and 28: Figure 1-6. Wilderness Overlap 24
Page 29 and 30: Issues ____________________________
Page 31 and 32: CHAPTER 2 - ALTERNATIVES This chapt
Page 33 and 34: Alternative Livestock Bedding 2 3 S
Page 35 and 36: Alternative Noxious Plants/Invasive
Page 37 and 38: Table 2-2. Project Design Criteria
Page 39 and 40: Alternative Minimization of Threat
Page 41 and 42: Alternative 2 - Current Management_
Page 43 and 44: Elk Creek Allot • Do not use the
Page 45 and 46: Figure 2-1. Proposed Action - Avoid
Page 47 and 48: Monitoring for Alternative 3 Monito
Page 49 and 50: • Photographs and Photo-points: P
Page 51 and 52: years in an emergency situation, su
Page 53 and 54: Comparison of Alternatives ________
Page 55 and 56: Water Quality _____________________
Page 57 and 58: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES Alternat
Page 59 and 60: from water or bedgrounds (Arnold an
Page 61: 2008). It differs from the wetland
Page 65 and 66: unlikely that any of these species
Page 67 and 68: Recreation Special Use Permits for
Page 69 and 70: livestock management would not chan
Page 71 and 72: Concurrent to this grazing analysis
Page 73 and 74: Alternative 2 Habitat conditions fo
Page 75 and 76: intensity on alpine plants appeared
Page 77 and 78: the other two species due to the co
Page 79 and 80: lack bighorn sheep escape cover. Th
Page 81 and 82: trailing route, and lack of bighorn
Page 83 and 84: Similar to Alternative 2, selecting
Page 85 and 86: ptarmigan is expected under Alterna
Page 87 and 88: CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Global warming i
Page 89 and 90: Wildlife - Management Indicator Spe
Page 91 and 92: and it will not be discussed in det
Page 93 and 94: Selecting Alternative 2 would have
Page 95 and 96: for MIS in the landscape. Wildlife
Page 97 and 98: The alpine tundra group would benef
Page 99 and 100: species of conservation concern as
Page 101 and 102: management options, while others ma
Page 103 and 104: prior to evaluating them for the NR
Page 105 and 106: present state. In general, where un
Page 107 and 108: CHAPTER 4 - CONSULTATION AND COORDI
Page 109 and 110: APPENDIX B - CITATIONS AND REFERENC
Page 111 and 112: Martin, K.D., T.J. Schommer, and V.
Page 113 and 114:
Regional Office, Durango, CO. Weste
Page 115 and 116:
Species Habitat Present In the Spec
Page 117 and 118:
Species Mammals (13) Allen’s big-
Page 119 and 120:
MIS Species Preferred Habitat Broug
Page 121 and 122:
Likelihood of Species Status* Prefe
Page 123 and 124:
APPENDIX D - BIGHORN RISK ASSESSMEN
Page 125 and 126:
Silverton Grazing Risk Assessment T
Page 127 and 128:
Silverton Grazing Risk Assessment a
Page 129 and 130:
Silverton Grazing Risk Assessment b
Page 131 and 132:
Silverton Grazing Risk Assessment N
Page 133 and 134:
Silverton Grazing Risk Assessment i
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Silverton Grazing Risk Assessment M
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Silverton Grazing Risk Assessment A
Page 145 and 146:
Silverton Grazing Risk Assessment R
Page 147 and 148:
Silverton Grazing Risk Assessment m
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Silverton Grazing Risk Assessment H
Page 153 and 154:
Silverton Grazing Risk Assessment F
Page 155 and 156:
Silverton Grazing Risk Assessment F
show all

NEPA--Environmental Assessment

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?