southwestern region report cibola national forest and...
Post on 19-Mar-2020
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 3
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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 4
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 5
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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 6
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 7
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 8
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 9
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 10
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)
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 11
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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 12
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 13
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 14
Black Kettle and McClellan Creek National Grasslands
Mixed Grass Prairie vegetation type: Ranked as 3, very
under-represented.
STEP Criteria YES (state
justification) NO (state justification)
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
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. 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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 15
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.
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.
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.
Area reflects its original, near-pristine condition as closely as possible.
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.
NA. Not recommended for establishment.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 16
Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands. Cottonwood Willow /riparian vegetation type: Ranked as 3, very under-represented
STEP Criteria YES (state
justification) NO (state justification)
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
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. 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.
Area contributes or continues to contribute to the preservation and
maintenance of genetic diversity, including threatened species, endangered
species, aquatic systems, and sensitive species.
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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 17
Conchas crayfish, which likely occurs in
Mills Canyon and may be one of three
known populations in the state.
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. 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.
Area serves as a control area for comparing results from manipulative
research.
No. Areas within CW vegetation type are not
suitable as reference or baseline areas.
Treatment of invasive species is ongoing.
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 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.
Area reflects its original, near-pristine condition as closely as possible.
No. Areas within CW vegetation type are not
in original or pristine condition.
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.
NA. Not recommended for establishment.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 18
Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands
Shortgrass vegetation type: Ranked as 2, under-
represented
STEP Criteria YES (state
justification) NO (state justification)
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 19
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 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.
Area contributes or continues to contribute to the preservation and
maintenance of genetic diversity, including threatened species, endangered
species, aquatic systems, and sensitive species.
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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 20
on these species through project NEPA.
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. 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.
Area serves as a control area for comparing results from manipulative
research.
No. Too much historical disturbance and
alteration to serve as a control area.
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 within vegetation type are too
fragmented, occur in small blocks, and are
significantly altered.
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 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.
Area reflects its original, near-pristine condition as closely as possible.
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
NA. Not recommended for establishment.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 21
candidate areas that do not contain exotic plant or animal life.
Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands
Sandsage vegetation type. Ranked as 3, very under-
represented
STEP Criteria YES (state
justification) NO (state justification)
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 (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
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. 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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 22
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.
Area contributes or continues to contribute to the preservation and
maintenance of genetic diversity, including threatened species, endangered
species, aquatic systems, and sensitive species.
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.
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 not appropriate for reference or
baseline areas for reasons stated above.
Area serves as a control area for comparing results from manipulative
research.
No. Areas are not appropriate for a control
area for reasons stated above.
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 with this vegetation type are too
fragmented and remnant systems are not
large enough.
Area shows little or no evidence of major disturbances by humans.
Activities, such as livestock grazing and other uses, have not affected the
No. Areas within vegetation type are highly
disturbed historically, as noted above.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 23
area beyond ability to recover. No evidence of timber cutting in past 50
years.
Area reflects its original, near-pristine condition as closely as possible.
No. Areas within vegetation type are not in
original or pristine condition.
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.
NA. Not recommended for establishment.
Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands
Piñon Juniper vegetation type: Ranked 2, under-
represented.
STEP Criteria YES (state
justification) NO (state justification)
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
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,
No. Areas of Pinon Juniper (PJ) vegetation
type are not high quality, there is nothing
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 24
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.
unique about these areas of PJ, and the
scale of their presence is not large enough
to be considered.
Area contributes or continues to contribute to the preservation and
maintenance of genetic diversity, including threatened species, endangered
species, aquatic systems, and sensitive species.
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.
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 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.
Area serves as a control area for comparing results from manipulative
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).
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. 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.
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 ability to recover. No evidence of timber cutting in past 50
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).
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 25
Area reflects its original, near-pristine condition as closely as possible. No. 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.
NA. Not recommended for establishment.
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 26
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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 27
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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 28
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
Other Guidance Section).
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 29
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
Other Guidance Section).
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
Other Guidance Section).
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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 30
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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 31
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 32
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.
Wind energy design requirements within Alternative B have positive consequences for the
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
Wind energy design requirements within Alternative B have positive consequences for the
National Historic Trail and Scenic Byways. Guidelines include restricting wind energy
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 33
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 34
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 35
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.
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 36
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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 37
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
Printed on recycled paper • Month Year 38
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
top related