Southwestern Region Report Cibola National Forest and ...a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · The Canadian River was inventoried in 1982 in a nation-wide rivers

United States Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

Southwestern Region

Cibola National Forest and National Grasslands

May 2011

Special Areas and Nature-based Tourism Specialist Report

Kiowa, Rita Blanca, Black Kettle and McClellan Creek National Grasslands Plan Revision

Environmental Impact Statement Analysis

Submitted by: __/s/ _________________________

Cynthia A. Geuss,

Land Management Planner

Cibola National Forest and National Grasslands

Chapter 2-Alternatives

Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 2


Specialist Report

Executive Summary

The pertinent issues derived from the need to change the Grassland-specific components of the

1985 Plan as identified in the 2008 Comprehensive Evaluation Report and Supplemental Analysis

of the Management Situation document include Managed Recreation and Scenic Resources, and

Managed Recreation and Scenic Resources-Special Areas. These needs for change are specific to

the following four resource areas: Natural Tourism, Scenic Byways and Santa Fe National

Historic Trail, Research Natural Areas, the Canadian eligible Scenic River.

The 1985 Land Management Plan is silent on natural tourism interpretive activities beyond

management of cultural resource sites. The preferred alternative would provide direction for

increased visitation and touring interpretive activities related to unique scenery, wildlife and

formally designated historic sites. The management approach in the revised plan would include

coordination with other agencies and non-governmental organizations in planning scenic byway

corridors, Important Bird Areas, nature trails and Watchable Wildlife stations.

The 1985 Plan is silent on the scenic byways and historic trail located in the vicinity of the

Grasslands. The preferred alternative would provide direction for management of these cultural

sites and associated scenic resources.

The preferred alternative would provide management direction for Research Natural Areas

(RNA). The planning process allows for future proposals of RNA by amendment during the life

of the plan if the ecological condition of a unit improves to the point where baseline conditions

for recommendation are met. The preferred alternative does not identify a vegetation type for

RNA recommendation. No need for change was identified for Research Natural Areas.

Currently, as part of plan revision, Mills Canyon Management Area is being considered for its

wilderness potential, but no recommendation for designation is made. Alternative A is silent on

wilderness on the National Grasslands. Potential wilderness is addressed in a separate

report/evaluation.

Alternative A provides a standard and management approach to preserve wild, scenic, and

recreation river potential and acquire private lands within the corridor in order to preserve the

unique qualities of the Canadian River. Standards for managing the river as Eligible Scenic are

carried over from Alternative A to Alternatives B and C. No need for change was identified for

the Canadian River.

See the Summary of Environmental Consequences below, for an overview of interdisciplinary

consequences on these four resource areas.

Overview of the Affected Environment

Canadian River, Eligible Scenic River

The Canadian River/Mills Canyon area on the Kiowa National Grassland contains a large semi-

primitive area including a 7,466-acre Inventoried Roadless Area, a 16-mile eligible Scenic River


segment, two developed campgrounds, and an interpretive site. The remarkable values associated

with the eligible Scenic River are scenery, geology, recreation, and history.

The Canadian River was inventoried in 1982 in a nation-wide rivers inventory by the National

Park Service. From 1998 through 2002, the Cibola plan revision team completed the

classification and eligibility process for potential rivers. The Canadian, Eligible Scenic River

remains in study status. A recent (10/2010) GIS recalculation of length resulted in a total of 19.19

miles. 16 miles of eligible Scenic River are on Forest Service lands and 3.19 miles are located on

other jurisdiction lands.

Research Natural Areas

Shortgrass prairie and mixed grass prairie were identified in the 1985 Land Management Plan for

study as possible Research Natural Areas on the National Grasslands. A third type, sandsage-blue

grama ecosystem was found to be of interest during that investigation. There are no designated

Research Natural Areas on the Grasslands.

Natural Tourism

The National Audubon Society has designated two Important Bird Areas on the Kiowa: Perico

and Sauz Creeks. The primary land use here is cattle grazing. The impact of grazing on Perico is

fairly light, however cattle use within the riparian corridor on Sauz Creek can be an issue.

Typically, grazing activities are managed to limit erosion and trampling along perennial streams,

but watering of livestock does contribute sediment into waterways (USDA Forest Service, 2008

b).

Eco-tourism on Black Kettle includes the Black Kettle Loop Trail, a segment of the Great Plains

Trail of Oklahoma sponsored by the State of Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation and

other state agencies. Black Kettle Loop is an auto-tour route that winds through western

Oklahoma Panhandle and Black Kettle National Grassland. Also within Black Kettle is Croton

Creek Wildlife Area, which provides nature-related recreation.

Santa Fe National Historic Trail and Scenic Byways

There is one National Historic Trail and two scenic byways on the Kiowa. The Santa Fe National

Historic Trail is a national landmark with a 2.4 mile trail segment located on the Kiowa National

Grassland. The Santa Fe Trail National Scenic Byway and La Frontera del Llano Scenic Byway

are scenic highway corridors that play an important tourism role by linking natural and cultural

points of interest along the routes.

Summary of Environmental Consequences

An interdisciplinary approach was used to evaluate possible environmental consequences for each

of the four resource areas addressed in this report. We developed individual matrices that

prompted review of the plan components for each resource area, by alternative. This examination

revealed whether management practices under any given alternative might have important

positive or negative consequences for the resource under consideration.

Canadian, Eligible Scenic River

Alternative A recommends leasing gas and oil with no surface occupancy in Mills Canyon. These

standards and guidelines are carried over from the 1985 Plan, Amendment #12 into Alternative B.


Therefore the potential for environmental consequences within the river corridor with respect to

gas and oil developments are positive.

Standards and guidelines for Alternative A, and Alternatives B and C would have positive

consequences for the Canadian eligible Scenic River. This guidance directs acquisition of private

lands within the Canyon to preserve the unique qualities of the river, but none recommend

designation.

Wind energy design requirements within Alternative B have positive consequences for the

eligible Scenic River corridor. The design guidelines minimize ground disturbing activities in

areas of high scenic integrity.

Alternative C may have consequences for Canadian eligible Scenic River by limiting the way

treatments are implemented for controlling invasive species (salt cedar) within riparian habitat.

With respect to salt cedar control, there is an interagency agreement and Forest Service decision

(USDA Forest Service, 2007(b)) to eliminate salt cedar and restore native riparian vegetation

along the Canadian River. The decision was signed on May 29, 2007.

A positive consequence of wilderness designation (Alternative C) would be the elimination of

vehicular access and distribution of invasive seed by vehicles.

Standards, guidelines and objectives from Alternatives A, and B and C were evaluated for

livestock use, heritage resources, roads and access and land adjustments, and found to have no

negative environmental consequences for the Canadian eligible Scenic River.

Natural Tourism

Alternative A does not provide direction for managing Natural Tourism on the National

Grasslands.

Alternative A, and B and C will have positive environmental consequences for Natural Tourism

because the designated road and trail system (roads and access resource) resulting from

implementation of the 2005 Travel Management Rule would minimize the impacts on areas of

high scenic integrity and heritage resources by prohibiting cross country motorized use and

unauthorized road development.

Objectives for motorized recreation in Alternative B and C would rehabilitate all unauthorized

routes where resource damage is occurring as in the area surrounding the SF National Historic

Trail.

Objectives for Wildlife Habitat Improvement in Alternative B will have positive environmental

consequences for Natural Tourism, which include bird watching, wildlife viewing, and trails for

accessing the Important Bird Areas and Watchable Wildlife stations.

Standards, guidelines and objectives from Alternatives A, B, and C were evaluated for general

recreation, roads and access, livestock use, and were found to have no negative environmental

consequences for Natural Tourism.

Historic Trails and Scenic Byways


Wind energy design requirements within Alternative B and C have neutral consequences for

achieving the desired conditions for the National Historic Trail and Scenic Byways. Guidelines

include restricting wind energy developments to 500 feet outside of National Historic Sites.

Alternatives A and B and C would have positive environmental consequences for achieving the

desired conditions for the Historic Trail and Scenic Byways because the designated road and trail

system (roads and access resource) resulting from implementation of the 2005 Travel

Management Rule will minimize the impacts on scenery and heritage resources by prohibiting

cross country use and unauthorized road development.

Objectives for motorized recreation in Alternative B and C would rehabilitate all unauthorized

routes where resource damage is occurring as in the area surrounding the National Historic Trail.

Standards within Alternative B and C for oil and gas leasing would have positive environmental

consequences for the National Historic Trail and Scenic Byways because no surface occupancy

would be allowed within the boundaries of heritage resource sites that are listed, or eligible for

inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.

Standards, guidelines and objectives from Alternatives A, B, and C were evaluated for general

recreation, and livestock use, and were found to have no negative environmental consequences

for the Historic Trails and Byways.

Research Natural Area

No ecosystems are identified for recommendation within Alternatives B or C. However, the

Forest Service designates and manages a network of special areas on National Forests and

Grasslands that are permanently protected and maintained in natural condition for the purposes of

conserving biological diversity, conducting non-manipulative research and monitoring, and

education. RNA designation is beneficial because areas that are representative of common

ecosystems in natural condition serve as a baseline or reference area to help answer resource

management questions. The baseline condition of RNAs can be compared with similar

ecosystems undergoing silvicultural or other land management prescriptions; they are useful for

monitoring succession and other long-term ecological change.

Today, scientists and land managers are working to restore the natural fire regime to RNAs and

other areas of the landscape (Forest Service (online), 2006) Again, there is controversy

surrounding the definition and use of manipulative versus non-manipulative activities on the

RNAs. Alternatives B and C do not recommend designation at this time, however it does not

preclude designation in the future should ecological conditions move closer to the historic range.

Cumulative Consequences

Alternatives B and C emphasize Forest Service-intergovernmental partnerships and relationships

with non-governmental organizations to develop and promote conservation, interpretive and eco-

tourism within the planning area. In addition to alternatives outcomes, there may be cumulative

consequences as a result of programs sponsored by other agencies that have positive benefits for

rural economic development and wildlife/habitat conservation.


Introduction

This report examines the likely consequences and outcomes of continuing management direction

of the no action alternative (the current, 1985 Cibola National Forest Land Management Plan)

and the likely outcomes of two alternatives to that plan, relative to special areas, areas of interest,

and nature-based tourism on the Kiowa, Rita Blanca, Black Kettle and McClellan Creek National

Grasslands:

• Canadian eligible Scenic River

• Santa Fe National Historic Trail, and two scenic byways: La Frontera del Llano Scenic

Byway and the Santa Fe Trail National Scenic Byway

• Research Natural Areas

Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policy that Apply

From Appendix J, Other Sources of Information, Regulations, MOUs, Guidance Eligible Scenic River Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968; FSM 2354.02 Trail, River, and Similar Recreation

Opportunities, Objective; FSM 2354.03 Trail, River, and Similar Recreation Opportunities,

Policy; FSM 2354.04 Trail, River, and Similar Recreation Opportunities, Responsibility; FSM

2354.21 Recreation, Wilderness, and Related Resource Management, Management of Study

Rivers; FSM 2354.42 (a-p) Wild and Scenic River Resource Protection and Management.

National Historic Trails National Historic Preservation Act Sections 106 and 110; 36 CFR 800 Parks, Forests, and Public

Property, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation; 36 CFR 60.4 National Register of Historic

Places, Criteria for Evaluation ; FSM 2300 Recreation, Wilderness, and Related Resource

Management; Santa Fe National Historic Trail Comprehensive Management and Use Plan (USDI

NPS 1990) and the Memorandum of Understanding between the National Park Service and the

Pike-San Isabel Cimarron-Comanche National Grasslands signed March 6, 1991 (USDA FS and

USDI NPS 1991); General Agreement Between the U.S. Department of Interior, National Park

Service, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Region 3, Concerning the

Santa Fe National Historic Trail, Agreement # 02-MU-11031600-022, dated Feb. 25, 2002.;

National Trails System Act of 1968; FSM 2353.11 Recreation, Wilderness, and Related Resource

Management, Chapter 50 Trail, River, and Similar Recreation Opportunities, Relationship

Between National Recreation, National Scenic, and National Historic Trails and NFS Trails.

Scenic Byways Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century or most recent reauthorizing legislation,

FSM 2380.13 Landscape Management, Scenic Trails and Byways (See Appendix J, Other

Sources of Information, Scenery).

Research Natural Areas FSM 4063.02 Research Natural Areas, Objectives; FSM 4063.03 Research Natural Areas, Policy;

FSM 4000 Research and Development, Chapter 4060, Research Facilities and Areas, Policy.


Natural Tourism See Appendix J, Other Sources of Information, Regulations, MOUs and Guidance for Scenery

and Scenic Byways.

Methodology and Analysis Process

An interdisciplinary approach was used to evaluate possible environmental consequences and

outcomes of plan alternatives for the features listed above, and for nature-based tourism. We

developed individual matrices that prompted review of the plan components for each resource

area, by alternative. This examination revealed whether implementation of any given alternative

might have important positive or negative consequences, or outcomes for the resource under

consideration.

As part of the planning process, two of the features evaluated in this report have been the subject

of repeated studies by the Forest Service; the Canadian River and Research Natural Areas. A

summary of those studies follows:

Canadian River, Eligible Scenic River The Canadian River, eligible Scenic River and potential Research Natural Areas have been the

subject of both qualitative and quantitative analysis by the Forest Service as required by the Wild

and Scenic Rivers Act, Section 5(d), 1968 and the 1982 planning rule provisions section 219.25,

respectively.

Wild and/or Scenic Rivers are segments of watercourses that contain a mixture of natural,

cultural, scenic and recreational values that are outstanding for their particular geographic area.

The Canadian River was inventoried in 1982 in a nation-wide rivers inventory by the National

Park Service. From 1998 through 2002, the Cibola plan revision team completed the

classification and eligibility process for potential rivers as defined by FSH 1909.12, Chapter 80.

Two candidate streams were evaluated on the Kiowa and Rita Blanca. Of those, only the

Canadian River met two or more of the eligibility criteria. The analysis determined that the river

is free flowing, and has the following outstanding and remarkable values: scenery, recreation,

geology and history. The final classification was ‘scenic’, but eliminated as ‘wild’ due to road

access. No suitability evaluation was done for the river segment, and it has not been

recommended for designation. (A suitability study provides the basis for determining which rivers

to recommend to Congress as additions to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. There are

two potential outcomes of a suitability evaluation: either the river segment is recommended for

Congressional designation, or not. If not, its status as an eligible river is removed and no longer

falls under Wild and Scenic River protections. However, the segment may be administratively

designated as a Special Area to ensure preservation of the outstandingly remarkable values. If the

segment were recommended for Congressional designation, the protections currently in place

would remain in effect.) As of this writing, this segment of the Canadian River remains eligible

for future designation, and protections conveyed by Amendment #10 of the 1985 Land

Management Plan remain in effect.

A recent (10/2010) GIS recalculation of length resulted in a total of 19.19 miles. 16 miles of

eligible Scenic River are on Forest Service lands and 3.19 miles are located on other jurisdiction

lands.


In 1997 and 1998 forest personnel visited and evaluated six candidate streams on Black Kettle

and McClellan Creek National Grasslands. None of those candidate streams met two or more of

the Wild and Scenic eligibility criteria and were eliminated from further consideration.

Research Natural Areas The 1985 Plan provides direction to study for possible designation, a 300 acre Research Natural

Area (RNA) on each of three Grasslands; Black Kettle, Kiowa, and the Rita Blanca. The

Southwestern Region’s 1984 RNA Progress Report indicated that shortgrass prairie representation

in the national RNA system was needed because of the importance and geographic distribution of

the ecosystem. Under a Cost-Share Program agreement, in 1987, The Nature Conservancy

evaluated the Kiowa and Rita Blanca for potential shortgrass prairie sites as called for in the plan.

Preliminary screening and two multi-day field trips were undertaken to gain understanding of

range conditions and identify the most promising sites. A final report was prepared by The Nature

Conservancy (Dunmire 1987) that describes field methods and findings of the research.

Dunmire’s report identified and described four primary sites with RNA potential for Kiowa and

Rita Blanca National Grasslands. The Southwestern Region RNA Taskforce visited those sites

again in 1988 to evaluate the areas for possible recommendation. In July 1988, the Taskforce

formally recommended that the Region proceed with designation for Unit 46 and portions of Unit

3 on the Kiowa. Unit 46 was considered to be an excellent example of blue grama-buffalo grass

ecosystem, and Unit 3 presented an excellent example of sandsage-blue grama ecosystem. Of

principle interest was a large area of sandhills prairie in good condition (Dunmire 1987).

In 1991, an Establishment Record was prepared by the Nature Conservancy for Unit 46; Kiowa

Shortgrass Research Natural Area, but was not recommended by the Forest Supervisor or

Regional Forester due to conflicts between restrictive RNA management guidelines and the long-

term fire effects research being conducted by Rocky Mountain Research Station at the site. FSM

4000, Chapter 4063 Research Natural Areas states that Research Natural Areas are primarily for

non-manipulative research, observation, and study. However, the Federal Committee on

Ecological Reserves (Ecological Reserves 1977) has said that deliberate manipulation may be

utilized to maintain the unique feature that the RNA was established to protect. As a result, there

is ongoing discussion (disagreement) whether the prescriptive fire use in the research study is

considered manipulative research and thus invalidates establishment of the shortgrass RNA in the

future.. Other scientific disagreement is centered upon cattle grazing within the area. Some

researchers believe livestock grazing mimics historical use by large ungulate populations (bison),

and others consider livestock grazing to be human manipulation of the ecosystem, that invalidates

establishment of a shortgrass RNA in Unit 46.


As part of the current planning process, in 2009, RNA needs were ranked according to the

distribution of currently protected lands across Potential Natural Vegetation Type (PNVT)

classes, ecoregions and sections, and Terrestrial Ecosystem Unit Inventory (TEUI) climate

gradients. This evaluation was conducted by the respective District Rangers, district resource

specialists and forest planners using the regional Research Natural Area Process for Forest Plan

Revision under the 1982 Planning Rule Provisions (Southwestern Region 2009) and

Southwestern Region Terrestrial Ecosystem Unit Inventory data. Shortgrass prairie was

reevaluated and failed to meet eligibility criteria due to ongoing research, human disturbances,

and modifications such as fences, plowing, water developments, roads, and utility corridors.

Shinnery oak and mixed grass prairie on Black Kettle and McClellan Creek evaluated, but failed

to meet eligibility criteria because the areas were small and fragmented, or exhibited various

degrees of human disturbance from plowing, grazing, invasive species, and herbicide use. The

evaluation table ‘RNA Evaluation: Review of Representative Ecological Conditions’ follows on

the pages below.

On May 18 and 19, 2010, as a result of scoping comments received, three areas identified by

Dunmire (1987) were reevaluated by Kiowa Rita Blanca District staff using cover frequency

transects and ocular observation to document current conditions. These were Kiowa Units 100

and 3; and Unit 19 on the Rita Blanca. Kiowa Unit 46 was not reevaluated.

On Unit 100, the evaluation revealed that canopy cover had shifted since 1987 and visually

galleta is the most dominant species, although the frequency transect shows that galleta and blue

grama are equal in canopy cover at 32% each. Bare ground in 1987 was less than 10%, but in

2010 bare ground is 20%. Based upon structural improvements and shift in plant composition the

staff determined this unit is not a good candidate for shortgrass RNA designation (Safranek

2010).

In 1987, Unit 3 was proposed as good candidate as RNA for sandsage-blue grama ecosystem. At

that time, the sand sage cover was reported as 10-20%. In May 2010, District staff measured

canopy cover both inside and outside a small exclosure within the Unit. Line intercept transects

showed that shrub canopy within the exclosure was 50% and outside the exclosure it was 33%.

This is much higher than is considered a climax community for sand sagebrush. The staff

determined that Unit 3 is not suitable for RNA designation for a number of reasons: existing

infrastructure, an old field, current cultivation (corn) surrounding the area, and the shift in canopy

cover (Safranek 2010).

In 1987, Unit 19 of the High Lonesome was considered a good candidate as RNA for shortgrass

ecosystem. No transects were read for this evaluation, but observation indicates that there is a

much higher incidence of three-awn and forbs than were present in 1987. Broom snakeweed,

which was rare in 1987, is common in 2010. Staff determined that this area is not suitable for

RNA designation because of past human disturbance, historical grazing pressure and shift in

canopy composition (Safranek 2010)


RNA Evaluation: Review of Representative Ecological Conditions

Black Kettle and McClellan Creek National Grasslands

Shinnery Oak vegetation type ranked as 3, very under-

represented.

STEP Criteria YES (state

justification) NO (state justification)

1 Review Research Natural Area (RNA) Representative Assessment Spreadsheet.

•••• Are there areas on your Forest that contain the Potential Natural Vegetation Type (vegetation type) classes that fall into the 2 or 3 rankings for low representation for a particular vegetation type class?

•••• Is there an outstanding example of an aquatic habitat that may be appropriate as a potential RNA?

•••• If you have previously proposed RNAs in your current forest plan, do they fall within vegetation type classes with rankings of 2 or 3?

YES

NO

NA

2 Use the Conditions listed below to determine if these low-representative vegetation type class areas or aquatic habitats are appropriate for RNA establishment.

State reason why

the area meets the

criterion

State reason why the area does not

meet the criterion


Area contributes to a wide spectrum of high-quality representative areas that

represent the major forms of variability found in forest, shrubland, grassland,

alpine and aquatic habitats and natural situations of scientific interest and

importance that, in combination, form a national network of ecological areas

for research, education, and maintenance of biological diversity. RNA

represents a specific vegetation type or ecosystem as identified by the

regional ecological RNA evaluation.

No areas are appropriate for RNA

establishment for the following reasons:

Areas of shinnery oak are small,

fragmented, and not intact. Various degrees

of human disturbance, some of which are

unknown in context of timing, intensity, and

duration have occurred. Spike herbicide has

been applied to many areas of shinnery oak

in the past. Fire history of shinnery oak

areas is unknown except for the past 15

years. At least 55 years of grazing have

occurred on shinnery oak areas, some

under management, some not. Grazing

history preceding gov’t. ownership is largely

unknown and poorly documented. Open-

range grazing policy prevailed during that

time, and some land was under private

ownership.

Area contributes or continues to contribute to the preservation and

maintenance of genetic diversity, including threatened species, endangered

species, aquatic systems, and sensitive species.

Grasshopper Sparrow is the only sensitive

species, and it is not listed and is a migrant.

We are not aware of any analysis of genetic

diversity, thus cannot address genetic

diversity of veg or wildlife. Additionally, there

is much variability in soil types and veg

response to soil conditions.

Area serves as a baseline or reference area for the study of long-term

ecological processes such as disturbance, hydrologic processes, climate

change, or other processes.

No, areas within this vegetation type are not

good baseline or reference areas for study.

Individual shinnery oak areas are small in

size, and even cumulatively, too small a

scale. Too much variability has occurred in

management history. Too much human

disturbance has occurred. Black locust has

colonized within the shinnery oak areas.


Open swine grazing is part of the history of

these areas.

Area serves as a control area for comparing results from manipulative

research.

No, areas not suitable for control. Past fire

regimes are largely unknown, and variable

grazing management has occurred, some of

which are unknown. Past human

disturbance is unknown and not well

documented before fed ownership.

Area boundaries encompass an area large enough to provide essentially

unmodified conditions within their interiors, which are necessary in

accordance with the objectives stated in the establishment record (FSM

4063.02), and to protect the ecological processes, features, and/or qualities

for which the RNA was established.

Although not required, entire small drainages are ideal because they

maintain interrelationships of terrestrial and aquatic systems.

No, areas are not large enough to provide

conditions immune to edge effects or

outside influences. Areas are highly

fragmented. The Black Kettle and McClellan

Creek National Grasslands (BKMC) do not

own entire drainages where areas within

this vegetation type occur.

Area shows little or no evidence of major disturbances by humans.

Activities, such as livestock grazing and other uses, have not affected the

area beyond its ability to recover. No evidence of timber cutting in past 50

years.

No, areas show much evidence of major

disturbance by humans. Areas evolved

under grazing. Some fuel wood cutting has

occurred.

Area reflects its original, near-pristine condition as closely as possible.

No, areas are not original or pristine, for all

reasons stated above.

The best available, qualified area was chosen. In certain geographic regions

and in certain community types, it may be impossible to find candidate areas

that do not contain exotic plant or animal life.

Not applicable, no areas are chosen for

recommendation.


Black Kettle and McClellan Creek National Grasslands

Mixed Grass Prairie vegetation type: Ranked as 3, very

under-represented.



1 Review RNA Representative Assessment Spreadsheet

•••• Are there areas on your Forest that contain the vegetation type classes that fall into the 2 or 3 rankings for low representation for a particular vegetation type class?



YES

NO

NA


State reason why

the area meets the

criterion


meet the criterion

Area contributes to a wide spectrum of high-quality representative areas that represent the major forms of variability found in forest, shrubland, grassland, alpine, and aquatic habitats and natural situations of scientific interest and importance that, in combination, form a national network of ecological areas for research, education, and maintenance of biological diversity. RNA represents a specific vegetation type or ecosystem as identified by the regional ecological RNA evaluation.

No. Essentially same points as for shinnery

oak above, for all criteria below.

Additionally, more plowing occurred in

mixed grass vegetation type than in

shinnery oak. Approx. ½ of mixed grass was

plowed. Soil loss occurred during Dust Bowl

era, mainly from plowing. Some of mixed

grass was once shinnery oak, but now no

shinnery oak occurs in these areas.

Area contributes or continues to contribute to the preservation and maintenance of genetic diversity, including threatened species, endangered species, aquatic systems, and sensitive species.


Area serves as a baseline or reference area for the study of long-term ecological processes such as disturbance, hydrologic processes, climate change, or other processes.

Area serves as a control area for comparing results from manipulative research.











years.





NA. Not recommended for establishment.


Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands. Cottonwood Willow /riparian vegetation type: Ranked as 3, very under-represented



1 Review RNA Representative Assessment Spreadsheet

•••• Are there areas on your Forest that contain the vegetation type classes that fall into the 2 or 3 rankings for low representation for a particular vegetation type class?



YES

NO

NA


State reason why

the area meets the

criterion


meet the criterion



alpine, and aquatic habitats and natural situations of scientific interest and

importance that in combination form a national network of ecological areas




No. Impacts of past grazing are evident in

the Cottonwood-Willow (CW) vegetation

type. Also, impacts of hydrologic alteration

(acequias, irrigation diversions at Springer,

NM) are evident. Invasive species are

evident, and some noxious plants (e.g.,

saltcedar, bull thistle, musk thistle, and

American. or Siberian elm) occur. Changes

in watershed, some off-grasslands, have

caused changes in the hydrologic regime.




No. There are no threatened & endangered

species (T&E) present. Little is known about

genetic diversity of most all species. Some

sensitive species do occur; however, there

is nothing unique in CW, except for the


Conchas crayfish, which likely occurs in

Mills Canyon and may be one of three

known populations in the state.




No. There is a long history of human

disturbance within the CW vegetation type

Grasslands-wide; it is very impacted. U.S.

Forest Service (USFS) has no control over

management and processes occurring

above Mills Canyon. The hydrologic system

is very impacted.


research.

No. Areas within CW vegetation type are not

suitable as reference or baseline areas.

Treatment of invasive species is ongoing.




years.

No. Areas have experienced much

disturbance. Roads, trails, livestock grazing,

modification for irrigation, campgrounds,

and housing structures are present or have

occurred in all areas within this vegetation

type. Perico Creek also has CW, but federal

ownership of this creek basin is fragmented

and small.


No. Areas within CW vegetation type are not

in original or pristine condition.






Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands

Shortgrass vegetation type: Ranked as 2, under-

represented



1 Review RNA Representative Assessment Spreadsheet.

Are there areas on your Forest that contain the vegetation type classes that

fall into the 2 or 3 rankings for low representation for a particular vegetation

type class?

Is there an outstanding example of an aquatic habitat that may be

appropriate as a potential RNA?

If you have previously proposed RNAs in your current forest plan, do they

fall within vegetation type classes with rankings of 2 or 3?

YES

NO

YES. Unit 46 was

previously proposed

in ‘85 plan but not

designated.

Subsequently, USFS

Rocky Mountain

Research Station

launched a fire and

grazing study circa

1997 on the

previously proposed

area, with another 8-9

years anticipated

before completion.

Because of the

considerable burning

and grazing

interventions as parts

of the study, RNA

designation would

interfere with this

RMRS study.


2 Use the Conditions listed below to determine if these low-

representative vegetation type class areas or aquatic habitats

are appropriate for RNA establishment.

State reason why

the area meets the

criterion


meet the criterion

Area contributes to a wide spectrum of high-quality representative areas

that represent the major forms of variability found in forest, shrubland,

grassland, alpine, and aquatic habitats and natural situations of scientific

interest and importance that in combination form a national network of

ecological areas for research, education, and maintenance of biological

diversity. RNA represents a specific vegetation type or ecosystem as

identified by the regional ecological RNA evaluation.

No. Areas within this vegetation type do not

meet criteria. Many past disturbances have

occurred, many of which are undocumented

and unknown regarding timing, intensity, and

duration. There has been varying grazing

history over 55 years of federal ownership.

Some areas were plowed, some were not,

and all were grazed. No natural fire was

allowed due to suppression policy. Grazing

has been the biggest impact. Historical

stocking rates are unknown. Areas have

been highly modified with fences, water

developments, roads, and utility corridors.

Playa lakes have been highly altered, i.e.,

pitted, or modified by irrigation structures.




No. Past grassland reclamation projects

(i.e., plantings and seedings) may not have

been genetically compatible with historical

strains of native plants. Exotic species are

currently present, and there is a varied

history of livestock grazing and

management. No T&E species are present.

Ten rare or uncommon species (alpine

fever-few, Andean prairie-clover, Bald Eagle,

dotted checkerspot, Greene milkweed,

Mountain Plover, one-flowered milkvetch,

Rhena crossline skipper, Spellenberg’s

groundsel, swift fox) may occur on

shortgrass vegetation type areas within KRB

NGs, but current management activities

consider and avoid/mitigate adverse effects


on these species through project NEPA.




No. Only a large-scale playa complex within

this vegetation type would qualify as

reference, but playas are dynamic in size,

ephemeral in nature, and have been altered

by pitting and other management activities

on the landscape both on and off federal

land. Playas are often located in small land

blocks of federal ownership that are highly

fragmented; they are also intermingled

within shortgrass prairie that has also been

altered. In general, playas are too small and

fragmented and otherwise altered to be

considered.


research.

No. Too much historical disturbance and

alteration to serve as a control area.








No. Areas within vegetation type are too

fragmented, occur in small blocks, and are

significantly altered.



area beyond ability to recover. No evidence of timber cutting in past 50

years.

No. Much disturbance has occurred (see

above); many disturbance activities occurred

before federal ownership and are

undocumented.


No. Much disturbance has occurred (see

above).

The best available, qualified area was chosen. In certain geographic

regions and in certain community types, it may be impossible to find



candidate areas that do not contain exotic plant or animal life.


Sandsage vegetation type. Ranked as 3, very under-

represented






type class?





YES (but sandsage

vegetation type is

even more disturbed

than shortgrass

vegetation type

discussed above)

NO

NA

2 Use the Conditions listed below to determine if these low-representative vegetation type class areas or aquatic habitats are appropriate for RNA establishment

State reason why

the area meets the

criterion


meet the criterion








No. There are many exotic species. There is

a plant diversity imbalance. Natural fire has

been removed. Topsoil has been lost due to

disturbances. Many previous agricultural

disturbances have occurred. One would

have a hard time finding sandsage that

represents a pristine ecological condition.

Yucca is present disproportionately. Sage is


at a higher density than historically

occurred. Forbs and buckwheat presence

are out of balance. Big bluestem and

needlegrass should be more highly

represented. There is an overall imbalance

in the plant community.




No. Areas within vegetation type are not

genetically or ecologically in balance. No

T&E species are present. Rare or

uncommon species that may occur in

sandsage vegetation type include

panhandle spurge, dotted checkerspot,

Rhena crossline skipper, and Lesser

Prairie-chicken. Current and future

management activities consider and

avoid/mitigate adverse effects on these

species through project NEPA.




No. Areas not appropriate for reference or

baseline areas for reasons stated above.


research.

No. Areas are not appropriate for a control

area for reasons stated above.








No. Areas with this vegetation type are too

fragmented and remnant systems are not

large enough.



No. Areas within vegetation type are highly

disturbed historically, as noted above.



years.


No. Areas within vegetation type are not in

original or pristine condition.






Piñon Juniper vegetation type: Ranked 2, under-

represented.






type class?





YES

NO

NA


State reason why

the area meets the

criterion


meet the criterion



No. Areas of Pinon Juniper (PJ) vegetation

type are not high quality, there is nothing







unique about these areas of PJ, and the

scale of their presence is not large enough

to be considered.




No. T&E species are less prevalent in PJ

areas than in any other vegetation type

present on Kiowa National Grassland. There

is nothing unique about the genetic diversity

of PJ areas.




No. Areas with PJ vegetation type are not

appropriate for baseline or reference. There

have been long-term grazing disturbances,

as well as roads and infrastructure

construction. Many PJ lands on Kiowa NG

were originally settlement lands grazed by

sheep and goats.


research.

No. Areas within the PJ vegetation type are

not appropriate to serve as a control area.

All land within PJ vegetation type have been

previously impacted (see above).








No. Areas are not large enough. The scale

of PJ areas is too small to be considered as

an RNA. Fragmented federal land

ownership and administration boundaries

within this vegetation type are not

compatible with RNA recommendation.




years.

No. Areas of PJ show lots of evidence of

major disturbances, including wood cutting

over the last 100 years (huge stumps are

still present).


Area reflects its original, near-pristine condition as closely as possible. No. See above.





Completed May 27, 2009, over audio-video conference: Cibola NF&NG employees: Nancy Walls, Tom Smeltzer, Champe Green, Susan

Millsap, Mary Lane, Chuck Milner, and John Baumchen.


Assumptions In the analysis for this resource, the following assumptions have been made:

• The land management plan provides a programmatic framework for future site-specific

actions.

• Land management plans do not have direct effects. They do not authorize or mandate any

site-specific projects or activities (including ground-disturbing actions).

• Land management plans may have implications, or environmental consequences, of

managing the forests under a programmatic framework.

• The plan decisions (desired conditions, objectives, standards, guidelines, management

areas, monitoring) will be followed when planning or implementing site-specific projects

and activities.

• Law, policy, and regulations will be followed when planning or implementing site-

specific projects and activities.

• Monitoring will occur and the land management plan will be amended, as needed.

• We will be funded similar to past budget levels (past 5 years).

• The planning timeframe is 15 years; other timeframes may be analyzed depending on the

resource (usually a discussion of anticipated trends into the future).

Revision Topics Addressed in this Analysis The pertinent issues derived from the need to change the Grassland-specific components of the

1985 Plan as identified in the 2008 Comprehensive Evaluation Report and Supplemental Analysis

of the Management Situation document are explained below. This analysis addresses needs for

change for Managed Recreation and Scenic Resources; and Managed Recreation and Scenic

Resources-Special Areas. These needs for change are specific to the following four resource

areas: Canadian River, eligible Scenic River; scenic byways and National Historic Trail; nature-

based tourism; and Research Natural Areas.

Managed Recreation and Scenic Resources The 1985 Land Management Plan is silent on nature-based tourism and associated interpretive

activities beyond cultural resource sites. The revised plan needs to provide direction addressing

opportunities for visiting, touring, and enjoying guided and interpretive activities related to

scenery, wildlife and formally designated special areas. The management approach in the revised

plan would encourage coordination with other agencies and non-governmental organizations in

planning scenic byway corridors, Important Bird Areas, bird trails and Watchable Wildlife

stations. Black Kettle National Grassland, in partnership with National Park Service will feature

interpretive exhibits at Washita Battlefield Visitor Center.

The 1985 Plan is silent on the scenic byways and historic trail located in the vicinity of the Kiowa

National Grassland. The revised plan would provide direction for management of these cultural

features and associated scenic resources. These features are located in areas with high scenic

integrity; some direction associated with them will be found in the scenery plan components of

the revised plan.

Managed Recreation and Scenic Resources-Special Areas


The revised plan needs to provide direction for identification and evaluation of special areas and

Research Natural Areas (RNA). The 1982 planning rule provisions section 219.25 directs that

forest planning shall provide for the establishment of Research Natural Areas. Planning shall

make provision for the identification of examples of important forest, shrub land, grassland,

alpine, aquatic, and geologic types that have special or unique characteristics of scientific interest

and importance and that are needed to complete the national network of Research Natural Areas.

The planning process allows for future proposals of RNA by amendment during the life of the

plan if the ecological condition of a unit improves to the point where RNA designation criteria are

met.

While Alternative A provides direction to evaluate 300 acre RNAs on each of three Grasslands,

the evaluation of ecological conditions in the 1980s, 2008, and 2010 resulted in no

recommendation for designation. Unlike Alternative A, Alternatives B and C do not provide

direction for RNA study and recommendation, but provide for evaluation consistent with section

219.25 (above). No need for change was identified.

Within the 1985 Plan, guidelines for the Kiowa Rita Blanca Management Area direct

management of the Canadian River to preserve wild, scenic, and recreation river potential and

acquire private lands within the corridor in order to preserve the unique qualities of the river.

Standards for managing the river as Eligible Scenic are carried over from 1985 plan within the

revised plan (Alternative B). No need for change was identified for the Canadian River.

Summary of Alternatives

Canadian River, Eligible Scenic River Alternative A

Guidelines under Kiowa Rita Blanca Management Area direct management of the Canadian

River to preserve wild, scenic, and recreation river potential and acquisition of private lands

within the corridor to preserve the unique qualities of the river. There are no desired conditions or

objectives for the Canadian River; however standards and protections for wild/scenic/recreation

river are contained within the forest wide prescriptions (Amendment #10). Under this option, the

river segment would remain ‘eligible’ for future designation and protections described in the

1985 Forest Plan Amendment #10 would continue to apply in accordance with FSM 2354.

Alternative B

The Desired Condition for Alternative B is consistent with the standards and management

prescriptions from Alternative A. Standards for managing the river as eligible Scenic are carried

over from 1985 plan. Alternative B recommends preserving the wild, scenic and recreation river

qualities found in Mills Canyon, but does not recommend Scenic River designation. An objective

under this alternative is to close or rehabilitate all unauthorized motorized vehicle stream

crossings in the corridor within ten years of plan approval.

Alternative C

Alternative C would treat management direction for the Canadian Eligible Scenic River the same

as Alternative B. However, Forest Service direction (FSH 1909.12, Ch72.31) allows for several

assumptions in evaluating wilderness need, one of which is that demand for wilderness increases

with an increasing population. Research has found that not all population increases are equally

likely to result in an increase in wilderness use. Minority populations have a negative correlation


with wilderness and primitive area use. Taking these findings into account, the expected

population growth of Albuquerque and Santa Fe may not generate a proportionate increase in

wilderness use, particularly because both cities are compromised of approximately 50 percent

racial and ethnic minorities (U.S. Census 2000).

Scenic Byways, National Historic Trail Alternative A

Alternative A has no desired conditions, objectives, guidelines or standards for managing historic

trails and scenic byways on the National Grasslands. Although, the Scenic Byways are currently

managed in cooperation with other state and federal agencies. The Santa Fe National Historic

Trail is managed as a cultural resource in cooperation with the National Park Service.

Alternative B

Alternative B includes Desired Conditions for the Santa Fe National Historic Trail, Santa Fe Trail

National Scenic Byway, and La Frontera del Llano Scenic Byway (state designation only, as of

this writing).

The desired condition for the Santa Fe National Historic Trail is to demonstrate the inherent

physical integrity and cultural, natural and scenic resources consistent with the (USDI, National

Park Service) Santa Fe National Trail Comprehensive Management and Use Plan. Objectives

include closing and/or rehabilitating roads that impact the trail segment.

The desired condition for the Santa Fe National Scenic Byway is to provide access to remnant

portions of the Historic Trail; scenery (landscape view) is of open grassland and sweeping plains.

The desired condition for La Frontera del Llano Scenic Byway near Mills would connect historic

and scenic attractions; and retain high scenic integrity including the vast open spaces and wildlife.

Objectives for La Frontera del Llano Scenic Byway are to construct signage and an interpretive

site to associate the Byway with the Kiowa National Grassland and Mills Canyon. The

Management Approach for Alternative B emphasizes partnerships and projects to support rural

economic goals and protect the resources for which the trail or byway was designated. The

Grasslands may coordinate to maintain consistency in signage and appearance of the trail and

associated features.

Relevant law, policy, and regulation would apply (see Relevant Law, Policy, Regulation, and

Other Guidance Section).

Alternative C

Management for Scenic Byways and National Historic Trail would be the same as Alternative B,

but with wilderness.

Relevant law, policy, and regulation would apply (see Relevant Law, Policy, Regulation and


Nature-based Tourism Alternative A

Alternative A has no management direction for nature-based tourism; however some programs are

currently established and managed in cooperation with other agencies and NGOs.


Alternative B

Alternative B advocates eco-tourism with an emphasis on bird watching and wildlife viewing.

Other opportunities would include auto tour routes, developed recreation sites and interpretive

programs. Objectives include off-site educational enrichment programs and development of

signage and interpretive materials. Management approaches include cooperation with other

agencies and NGOs in planning Scenic Byway Corridors, Important Bird Areas, Watchable

Wildlife stations, interpretive services and auto-tour routes to ensure promotion of Grassland

visitation.

Relevant law, policy, and regulation would apply (see Relevant Law, Policy, Regulation, and


Alternative C

Management for nature-based tourism would be the same as Alternative B, but with wilderness.

Relevant law, policy, and regulation would apply (see Relevant Law, Policy, Regulation and


Research Natural Areas Alternative A

Research Natural Areas (RNA) are addressed in the 1985 plan within the forest wide standards

and guidelines and the Summary of the Analysis of the Management Situation. The standards and

guidelines stipulate that approximately 300 acres in each of Black Kettle, Kiowa and Rita Blanca

National Grasslands would be studied for possible designation as RNAs for the study and

protection of native vegetation. The Summary of the Analysis of the Management Situation for

Research Natural Areas identified mixed grass prairie on Black Kettle and short grass prairie

vegetation on Kiowa and Rita Blanca as suitable types for evaluation. Alternative A contains no

desired conditions or objectives for Research Natural Areas, and they are not addressed in

monitoring.

Alternative B

A review and analysis of ecological conditions for each under-represented and very under-

represented vegetation type was conducted to determine their potential for designation as

Research Natural Areas (Appendix G). No vegetation type on any of the Grasslands was found to

meet the criteria for RNA designation.

Alternative C

Alternative C would be the same as Alternative B with regard to Research Natural Areas.

Description of Affected Environment (Existing Condition)

The Grasslands are located in northeastern New Mexico and the panhandles of Texas and

Oklahoma. This region of the country is predominantly rural and has an economic base consisting

largely of agricultural industries. There are a number of unique recreation and cultural features

associated with the rural western landscape.

Canadian River, Eligible Scenic River


The Canadian River/Mills Canyon area on the Kiowa National Grassland contains a large semi-

primitive area including a 7,466-acre Inventoried Roadless Area, a 19.19-mile eligible Scenic

River segment, two developed campgrounds, and an interpretive site. The Roadless Area and the

outstanding and remarkable values associated with the eligible Scenic River provide opportunities

and enjoyment of unique historic, scenic, geologic, and recreation features. Mills Canyon is the

most prominent geomorphic feature in Harding County and the campground provides one of the

only developed outdoor recreation areas in the county. The area is important to the local history

of the region and has potential to be an important destination along La Frontera del Llano Scenic

Byway (USDA Forest Service 2008).

There are two existing conditions that impact the outstanding values for which the Inventoried

Roadless Area and eligible Scenic River were identified: uncontrolled motorized use and invasive

plants (salt-cedar) along the Canadian River. Human activity, including the use of various types

of motorized vehicles, is evident throughout the canyon. User created roads and trails exist along

the river and cross the river. Vehicle tracks across meadows and up steep slopes further detract

from natural ecosystem integrity and appearance (USDA Cibola National Forest 2008). Access

changes resulting from implementation of the 2005 Travel Management Rule should cause a

decline in off-road use in Mills Canyon.

The dominance of invasive plants along the Canadian River detracts from the scenic quality,

water quality, wildlife habitat, naturalness, and other values of this area; although recent

treatments for invasive species have resulted in a decline of Salt Cedar.

Research Natural Areas Shortgrass prairie and mixed grass prairie were identified in the 1985 land Management Plan for

study as possible Research Natural Areas on the Grasslands. A third type, the sandsage ecosystem

was also found to be of interest during that round of research. There are no designated Research

Natural Areas on the Grasslands. However, there are several on-going research projects being

conducted in the area.

Nature-based Tourism Bird and wildlife watching are developing into popular activities on the Grasslands. The National

Audubon Society has recognized two Important Bird Areas on the Kiowa: Perico and Sauz

Creeks. Perico is a wide but shallow canyon, carved out of Dakota Sandstone. Water flows in the

creek intermittently, but usually there are pools of residual water at the base of several cliffs–

enough most years to allow the Cliff Swallows to make mortar for their nests. In spite of the lack

of predicable water, riparian vegetation has sprouted along the course of this channel, including

cottonwoods, willows, hackberry and sumac. The primary land use here is cattle grazing, but the

impact is fairly light. Because the regime is based upon rapid rotation, the animals only stay four

or five days in any one pasture. At the present time, grazing is compatible with maintaining a

fully functional ecosystem for birds and other wildlife (Audubon 2010).

Units 97, 99 & 100 along Sauz Creek comprise a rolling short-grass prairie with a stream that

seldom completely runs dry. The riparian vegetation lacks cottonwoods or willows; however

there is an abundance of sedges, reeds, cattails and other aquatic vegetation, especially around the

larger pools. Nearby is a good-sized playa that is transformed into a pond of almost four acres

after good rains. Aquatic life in the creek is varied, with a variety of fish and other life-forms.

Culturally, the area has a long history of ranching, as well as a period of homesteading until the


Dust Bowl years (Audubon 2010). This site is very important to birds, and it offers the only

persistent wetland on the Kiowa or Rita Blanca Grasslands. It is an important wintering area and

migratory stopover for many species of ducks, and attracts Cinnamon and sometimes Blue-

winged Teal in summer. Northern Rough-winged Swallow, Rock Wren, and Say's Phoebe nest in

the mud banks bordering the creek, while "good" years produce a bumper crop of Lark Bunting

on the uplands (Audubon 2010).

Nature-based tourism on Black Kettle includes the Black Kettle Loop Trail, a segment of the

Great Plains Trail of Oklahoma sponsored by the State of Oklahoma Department of Wildlife

Conservation and other state agencies. Black Kettle Loop is an auto-tour route that winds through

western Oklahoma Panhandle and Black Kettle National Grassland. Within the Loop, are over

30,000 acres of mixed-grass prairie that shelter over 100,000 wintering geese. The landscape

includes mixed-grass prairie, wooded ravines, rolling red hills, shinnery oak mottes, creeks,

wetlands and the Washita River. Within Black Kettle National Grassland is a mixture of both

short and tall grass species dominated by Little Bluestem. Also within Black Kettle is Croton

Creek Watchable Wildlife Area, which provides nature-related recreation while conserving native

plants and animals in their natural habitats (Watchable Wildlife 2010).

Scenic Byways and National Historic Trail There is one National Historic Trail and two scenic byways on the Kiowa. The Santa Fe National

Historic Trail is a nationally designated landmark with a 2.4 mile trail segment located on the

Grassland. In 2001, the Forest Service developed an interpretive kiosk and day use/ picnic site

near the trail route in accordance with the (USDI) Santa Fe National Historic Trail

Comprehensive Management and Use Plan. The site provides interpretive and recreational

opportunities to a wide variety of visitors, and contributes to local tourism. The Grasslands

segment is especially important since most of the Trail is located on private land and not

accessible to visitors. The primary conflict to maintaining the historic and scenic qualities of the

Trail area is unregulated motorized use (USDA Forest Service 2008).

The Santa Fe Trail National Scenic Byway and La Frontera Del Llano Scenic Byway are scenic

highway corridors that pass through the Kiowa National Grassland. The Santa Fe National Scenic

Byway runs east-west direction through Clayton, then north past Rabbit Ear Mesa toward the

Colorado state line. La Frontera Del Llano Scenic Byway passes north-south through the Mills

Units. The Grasslands play an important role in contributing to the scenic quality of the corridors

and provides public picnic areas and interpretive sites along the routes. Currently, there are no

uses on the Kiowa that conflict with the scenic resources along the byway corridors and that trend

is likely to continue. Visitation in these areas is projected to follow the national trend and increase

as the nationwide interest in historical and cultural tourism increases (USDA Forest Service

2008).

Environmental Consequences

The land management plan provides a programmatic framework that guides site-specific actions

but does not authorize, fund, or carryout any project or activity. Because the land management

plan does not authorize or mandate any ground-disturbing actions there can be no direct effects.

However, there may be implications, or longer term environmental consequences, of managing

the forests under this programmatic framework.


An interdisciplinary approach was used to evaluate possible environmental consequences for each

of the four resource areas addressed in this report. We developed individual matrices that

prompted review of the plan components for each resource area, by alternative. This examination

revealed whether implementation of any given alternative might have important positive or

negative consequence in achieving the desired condition for the resource under consideration, e.g.

Canadian, Eligible Scenic River. The following alternatives were identified as having potential

consequences in attaining the desired conditions for the resource named.

Canadian, Eligible Scenic River

Alternative A recommends leasing gas and oil with no surface occupancy in Mills Canyon. These

standards and guidelines are carried over from the 1985 Plan, Amendment #12 into Alternative B.

Therefore the potential for environmental consequences within the river corridor with respect to

gas and oil developments are positive. Standards for gas and oil leasing in Alternative B also

exclude surface occupancy from within 300 feet of all riparian or wetland areas and will have

positive environmental consequences for other riparian areas outside of the river corridor.

Standards and guidelines for Alternative A and B and C would have positive consequences for the

Canadian eligible Scenic River. This guidance directs acquisition of private lands within the

Canyon to preserve the unique qualities of the river. River corridors identified in the National

Rivers Inventory, or otherwise identified for study are protected by Amendment #10 (Wild,

Scenic/Recreation Eligible River Areas, October, 7 2002), and carried forward into Alternatives B

and C.


eligible Scenic River corridor. The design guidelines minimize ground disturbing activities to

limit impacts to wildlife and areas of high scenic integrity.

Alternative C may have neutral consequences by limiting the way treatments are implemented for

controlling invasive species (salt cedar) within the riparian habitat. With respect to salt cedar

control, there is an interagency agreement and Forest Service decision (USDA Forest Service

2007(b)) to eliminate salt cedar and restore native riparian vegetation along the Canadian River.

The decision was signed on May 29, 2007. As of this writing, aerial eradication has been

completed and future treatments should be limited to backpack herbicide application. Carrying

out these treatments is essential to restoring ecosystem and watershed functions (USDA Forest

Service 2008). When the flow is reduced by drought or impoundments outside of agency

jurisdiction, salt cedar will out-compete cottonwood-willow. The undependable flow is a limiting

factor to restoration.

A positive consequence of wilderness designation (Alternative C) would be the elimination of

vehicular access and the distribution of invasive seed by vehicles.

Standards, guidelines and objectives from Alternatives A and C were evaluated for livestock use,

heritage resources, roads and access and land adjustments, and found to have no negative

environmental consequences for the Canadian eligible Scenic River.

Historic Trails and Scenic Byways


National Historic Trail and Scenic Byways. Guidelines include restricting wind energy


developments to 500 feet outside of National Historic Sites, and should not interfere with other

landmark views from the byways. Interpretive improvements and historic markers increase

visibility and encourage recreation visits to the area. This tourism may contribute to economic

growth in the rural economy. Additionally, the desired conditions for Alternative B limit

development to rural and ranch related structures; scenery objectives emphasize pastoral

landscapes and high scenic integrity.

Alternative A and B will both have positive environmental consequences for the Historic Trail

and Scenic Byways because the designated road and trail system (roads and access resource)

resulting from implementation of the 2005 Travel Management Rule will minimize the impacts

on scenery and heritage resources by prohibiting cross country use and unauthorized road

development. Objectives for motorized recreation in Alternative B would rehabilitate all

unauthorized routes where resource damage is occurring as in the area surrounding the National

Historic Trail; other existing routes would be evaluated for closure to protect plant and animal

species and important species habitats.

Standards within Alternative B for oil and gas leasing would have positive environmental

consequences for the National Historic Trail and Scenic Byways because no surface occupancy is

allowed within the boundaries of heritage sites that are listed, or eligible for inclusion on the

National Register of Historic Places. Additionally, no surface occupancy would be allowed in any

developed recreational facility or interpretive site.

Standards, guidelines and objectives from Alternatives A and C were evaluated for general

recreation, and livestock use, and were found to have no negative environmental consequences

for the Historic Trails and Byways.

Nature-based Tourism

Alternative A does not provide direction for managing nature-based tourism on the National

Grasslands, however cooperative programs with state and federal agencies, and NGOs are in

place to facilitate conservation of natural and cultural resources; and to promote rural economic

development.

Alternative A and B and C will have positive environmental consequences for nature-based

tourism because the designated road and trail system (Roads and Access resource area) resulting

from implementation of the 2005 Travel Management Rule will minimize the impacts on areas of

high scenic integrity and heritage resources by prohibiting cross country motorized use and

unauthorized road development.

Objectives for motorized recreation in Alternative B would rehabilitate all unauthorized routes

where resource damage is occurring as in the area surrounding the National Historic Trail; other

existing routes would be evaluated for closure to protect plant and animal species and important

species habitats.

Objectives for Wildlife Habitat Improvement in Alternative B would have positive environmental

consequences for nature-based tourism, which include bird watching, wildlife viewing, and trails

for accessing the Important Bird Areas and Watchable Wildlife stations. Objectives within

Alternative B include fenced grazing exclosures that are effective and ecologically functional.


Guidelines direct that exclosures associated with water to be evaluated and maintained, modified,

or removed.

Standards, guidelines and objectives from Alternatives A and C were evaluated for general

recreation, roads and access, livestock use, and were found to have no negative environmental

consequences for nature-based tourism.

Research Natural Areas

There are no desired conditions for Research Natural Areas within Alternative B. However, the

Forest Service designates and manages a network of special areas on National Forests and

Grasslands that are permanently protected and maintained in natural condition for the purposes of

conserving biological diversity, conducting non-manipulative research and monitoring, and

education. RNA designation is beneficial because areas that are representative of common

ecosystems in natural condition serve as a baseline or reference area to help answer resource

management questions. The baseline condition of RNAs can be compared with similar

ecosystems undergoing silvicultural or other land management prescriptions; they are useful for

monitoring succession and other long-term ecological change.

The 2009 review of ecological conditions ranked each vegetation type for representativeness

according to standard evaluative criteria (See table under Analysis and Methodology). They are:

Black Kettle and McClellan Creek

Shinnery Oak, ranked as 3, very under-represented

Mixed Grass prairie, ranked as 3, very under-represented

Kiowa and Rita Blanca

Cottonwood Willow Riparian, ranked as 3, very under-represented

Shortgrass prairie, ranked as 2 under-represented

Sandsage, ranked as 3, very under-represented

Piñon-Juniper, ranked as 2, under-represented

Until recently, the primary course of action was to leave RNAs alone. However, with the

emphasis on ecosystem management, more attention is being placed on restoration of natural

processes such as fire and control of invasive species which alter the composition and functioning

of natural communities. Today, scientists and land managers are working to restore the natural

fire regime to RNAs and other areas of the landscape (Forest Service (online), 2006) Again, there

is controversy surrounding the definition and use of manipulative versus non-manipulative

activities on the RNAs. Because we are not recommending designation at this time, does not

preclude designation in the future should ecological conditions move closer within the historic

range of variability. See the table ‘RNA Evaluation: review of Representative Ecological

Conditions’ above, under the section titled ‘Research and Methodology’.

Cumulative Environmental Consequences

Grasslands-wide and lands immediately adjacent the Grasslands is the cumulative effects analysis

area. This area was chosen because the research, natural, and recreation areas addressed in this

report are geographically diverse.


The desired conditions for Nature-based tourism, and the Santa Fe National Historic Trail and

Scenic Byways emphasize Forest Service-intergovernmental partnerships and relationships with

non-governmental organizations to develop and promote conservation, interpretive and eco-

tourism within the planning area. There may be cumulative consequences as a result of programs

sponsored by other agencies or NGOs that have positive benefits for rural economic development

and wildlife/habitat conservation. The following describes four of these programs on the

Grasslands:

Santa Fe National Historic Trail: The Forest Service is currently working under a Memorandum

of Understanding (MOU) with the National Park Service to manage our segment of the Santa Fe

National Historic Trail. The Park Service has developed a strategic plan for the future that

includes interpretation, education and a marketing strategy to promote the trail locally, regionally,

and nationally (Santa Fe National Historic Trail, Final Strategic Plan 2003). The management

approach for Alternative B emphasizes partnerships and projects to support economic goals and

protect the resources for which the trail or byway was designated. The Grasslands may coordinate

with other agencies to maintain consistency in signage and appearance of the trail and associated

features.

There is potential for wind energy development across multi-jurisdictional lands. The cumulative

environmental consequences of large-scale utility development could degrade the high scenic

integrity areas surrounding the Santa Fe National Historic Trail and Scenic Byways.

Important Bird Areas Program: This program is managed by the National Audubon Society; the

mission is to conserve and restore natural ecosystems, focusing on birds and other wildlife for the

benefit of humanity and the earth’s biological diversity. Audubon-designated Important Bird

Areas identify, prioritize and protect vital bird habitat. Important Bird Areas (IBA) are sites that

provide essential habitat for one or more species of bird. IBAs include sites for breeding,

wintering and/or migrating birds. As demand for wildlife viewing and birding increases, more

interpretive sites would be developed to meet the need with an emphasis on bird trails and

outdoor classrooms for youth groups, school children and outdoor enthusiasts. Wildlife

improvements within the Sauz Creek and Perico Creek riparian areas would contribute to

protecting IBA habitat.

The Great Plains Trail of Oklahoma: This program is managed by the Oklahoma Department of

Wildlife Conservation; the mission is to manage Oklahoma’s wildlife resources and habitat to

provide scientific, educational, aesthetic, economic and recreational benefits for present and

future generations of recreationists who appreciate wildlife. The Great Plains Trail of Oklahoma

was developed to take advantage of Oklahoma’s rural character, showcase the many wildlife

species, and promote rural economic development. One of America's newest wildlife routes, the

Great Plains Trail covers the Oklahoma Panhandle. The ecotourism potential of the trail has

brought together a number of public and private groups, including the Oklahoma Department of

Wildlife Conservation, the State Parks Division, The Nature Conservancy, the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, Ducks Unlimited, the Northwest Cattlemen's Association, and several local

chambers of commerce. A stop at Black Kettle National Grassland and the Washita Battlefield

National Historic Site are two of many highlights along the Black Kettle Loop tour.


Watchable Wildlife: The mission of Watchable Wildlife is to help communities and wildlife

prosper. In 1990 eight federal agencies including the Forest Service signed a MOU to provide a

framework for cooperative activities to develop and implement Watchable Wildlife Programs on

federal lands. Watchable Wildlife is committed to helping local communities realize the

economic potential of nature-related recreation while conserving native plants and animals in

their native habitats (Watchable Wildlife 2010).

Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources

The land management plan provides a programmatic framework that guides site-specific actions

but does not authorize, fund, or carryout any project or activity. Because the land management

plan does not authorize or mandate any ground-disturbing actions, none of the alternatives cause

an irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources.

Adaptive Management

All alternatives assume the use of adaptive management principles. Forest Service decisions are

made as part of an on-going process, including planning, implementing projects, and monitoring

and evaluation. The land management plan identifies a monitoring program. Monitoring the

results of actions will provide a flow of information that may indicate the need to change a course

of action or the land management plan. Scientific findings and the needs of society may also

indicate the need to adapt resource management to new information. The Forest Supervisor

annually evaluates the monitoring information displayed in the evaluation reports through a

management review and determines if any changes are needed in management actions or the plan

itself. In general, annual evaluations of the monitoring information consider the following

questions:

• What are the effects of resource management activities on the productivity of the land?

• To what degree are resource management activities maintaining or making progress

toward the desired conditions and objectives for the plan?

• What changes are needed to account for unanticipated changes in conditions?

In addition to annual monitoring and evaluation, the Forest Supervisor reviews the conditions on

the land covered by the plan at least every 5 years to determine whether conditions or demands of

the public have changed significantly. The forest plan is ordinarily revised on a 10-year cycle and

the Forest Supervisor may amend the plan at any time.

Consistency with Law, Regulation, and Policy

All alternatives are designed to guide the Kiowa, Rita Blanca, Black Kettle and McClellan Creek

National Grasslands’ management activities in meeting federal law, regulations, and policy.

List of Preparers

Cynthia A. Geuss, Land Management Planner

1985, BA Geography, University New Mexico


1999, MCRP (Masters, Community and Regional Planning), Natural Resources and

Environmental Planning, University New Mexico

1989-2009, USDA Forest Service, Cartographer and Cartographic Program Manager,

Southwestern Region, Regional Office, Albuquerque, NM

2009-Current, USDA, Cibola National Forest, Land Management Planner, Socioeconomic Lead,

Southwestern Region, Albuquerque, NM

Angela K. Safranek, Rangeland Management Specialist

1985, BS in Rangeland Ecology, Colorado State University

20 years as Forest Service Rangeland Management Specialist, Rocky Mountain Region, Routt,

Black Hills, and Medicine Bow National Forests

3 years as Forest Service Rangeland Management Specialist, Southwestern Region, Kiowa and

Rita Blanca National Grasslands

References

Dunmire, William W, 1987. Potential Research Natural Areas, Kiowa and Rita Blanca National

Grasslands Cibola National Forest: An Evaluation of Shortgrass Prairie Sites on the

National Grasslands in New Mexico, Texas and Oklahoma

National Audubon Society, 09/2010. Important Bird Areas in the U.S., Available at:

http://iba.audubon.org/bird/iba

USDA, Cibola National Forest, Safranek, Angela, et.al. 2010. 2010 Evaluation of proposed

RNAs, Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands

Federal Committee on Ecological Reserves. 1977. A Directory of Research Natural Areas on

Federal Lands of the United States of America. Washington, DC

USDA, Forest Service, Southwestern Region. 2009. Research Natural Area: Process for Forest

Plan Revision under the 1982 Planning Rule Provisions

USDI, National Park Service, Santa Fe Trail Association. 2003. Santa Fe National Historic Trail

Final Strategic Plan

Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation. 10/2010. Great Plains Trail of Oklahoma: Black

Kettle Loop. Available at: http://www.wildlifedepartment.com/blackkettle.asp

Watchable Wildlife Incorporated. 10/2010. Mission Statement. Available at:

http://www.watchablewildlife.org

USDA, Forest Service. 2008a. Socio-Economic Sustainability Report: Kiowa, Rita Blanca, Black

Kettle, and McClellan Creek National Grasslands

USDA, Forest Service. 2008b. Ecological Sustainability Report: Kiowa, Rita Blanca, Black

Kettle, and McClellan Creek National Grasslands


USDA, Cibola National Forest. 2008. Kiowa National Grassland Wilderness Evaluation Report:

Canadian River Potential Wilderness Area

USDA, Forest Service. 2007(a). Final Environmental Impact Statement for Canadian River

Tamarisk Control; Cibola National Forest, Harding and Mora Counties New Mexico

USDA, Forest Service. 2007(b). Record of Decision, Canadian River Tamarisk Control: Cibola

National Forest, Harding and Mora Counties, New Mexico

FSH 1909.12, Land Management Planning Handbook, Chapter 70, Wilderness Evaluation

USDA, Forest Service, Northern Region. 2006. Research Natural Areas of the Rocky Mountain

Region, Intermountain Region, Southwestern and Great…. Available at:

http://rna.nris.state.mt.us/rna (incomplete reference)

University of New Mexico, Bureau of Business and Economic Research (UNM-BBER) 2005.

Socioeconomic Assessment of the Region 3 National Grasslands

U.S. Census Bureau. 2002. American Fact Finder. Available at: http://www.factfinder.census.gov

Documents

Southwestern Region Report Cibola National Forest and ...a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · The Canadian River was inventoried in 1982 in a nation-wide rivers