1

SIXTEEN SPRINGS ALLOTMENT GRAZING PLAN

SOIL, WATER AND AIR SPECIALIST REPORT

Sacramento Ranger District, Lincoln National Forest

Otero County, New Mexico

October 21, 2010

INTRODUCTION

This report is an analysis of existing conditions and effects related to soil, water, and air on the Sixteen Springs

Allotment, The Sacramento Ranger District, Lincoln National Forest, Otero County New Mexico. The

allotment contains approximately 15,150 acres. It falls within three 6th

order watersheds, Sixteen Springs

Canyon Creek, Burnt Canyon Creek and Outlet Elk Canyon Creek. In 2002, the Walker fire burned over a

portion along the southern boundary of the allotment, putting the analysis on hold. The Burned Area Emergency

Rehabilitation Team documented the watershed effects of the fire (Walker BAER analysis, 2003). Effects of

the fire were documented in 2003 within the burned area (BAER Report, Walker Project Record, 2003).

This report will summarize information about Soil Conditions, Riparian Areas, Water Quantity and Quality as it

relates to cattle grazing on the Sixteen Springs allotment.

Sixteen Springs Allotment lies within three HUC sixth code watersheds, Sixteen Springs Canyon 1306001001,

Outlet Elk Canyon 130600100104, and Burnt Canyon 130600100305. All major drainages and streams in the

allotment are intermittent and drain into the Rio Penasco which is an impaired stream. The 2008-2010 New

Mexico Integrated Report indicates the stream is impaired due to the inability to support cold water fishery.

The probable cause of impairment to the Rio Penasco is the increase in sedimentation and siltation. The Sixteen

Springs Allotment is contributing to impairment to the Rio Penasco with streambed modification/destabilization

from the Walker Fire caused by watershed runoff following forest fire and runoff from roads where incision has

occurred due to inadequate sized culverts. Grazing does not appear to be a major contributor in this allotment to

degradation of the Rio Penasco. There are no reaches eligible for Wild and Scenic River status in the proposed

action.

Grazing on the allotment is currently managed under an adaptive management system. The current seasonal

term grazing permit includes a variable-use provision that provides for the use of 1625 to 2275 AUM’s of

forage each year under a deferred rotation system on three pastures.

Many supporting documents for this report are included in the Project Record (PR). For example, wildlife

reports or sections can be found in the PR. Some sections from those documents are relevant to all the reports

for this project as a whole. In order to reduce redundancy, please see the PR for these types of supporting

information.

Different sources of data were used to create this report. Over the years, when site-specific analysis was

completed at the project level, different map scale units were used. Therefore, the acreage numbers for some

data may differ within this report and from other reports, as a function of the scale the data was collected.

A number of data tables and figures are a part of this report. The tables have been located within the body of

the text and generally appear as they are discussed. The maps and figures have been included at the end of the

report as Attachments.

2

Area of Analysis

The area of the watershed and air analysis of the Sixteen Springs allotments is described in table 1. The

allotment is located approximately 15 miles east of Cloudcroft, New Mexico in the northeastern part of the

District. Elevations range from 8,040 in the southwest corner, and 6,120 feet along the southeast corner. The

closest weather station in the area is Mayhill at 6500 feet in elevation and Cloudcroft at 8600ft. Mayhill

receives an average of 19 inches and Cloudcroft receives an average of 30 inches of precipitation. Elevation

plays a role in temperature and precipitation. Higher temperatures occur in the lower elevations. Mayhill has an

average summer high of 83 degrees while Cloudcroft has an average summer high of 73 degrees. The

Sacramento Mountains Hydrogeology Study indicates that the average precipitation based on the historical

records based on elevation for the Sacramento Mountain area for the allotment would receive on average 17-24

inches of rain. Most precipitation occurs during the summer months that occur during the monsoon season from

July –September. Typically 50% of the precipitation occurs. Tropical disturbances that come from the Gulf of

Mexico or eastern Pacific occur at the end of the monsoon season and at times contribute 25-30% of the

seasonal rainfall totals. There have been two major wet periods for the study area in the last five years. July

2008 Hurricane Dolly impacted the Sacramento Mountains making July the wettest month on record from

1902-2008 receiving 13 inches. Hurricane Dolly created a flood event for the area. Compared to the next

wettest period August of 2006, it was a monsoon season of frequent small storms (Newton, Timmons pg 12-15)

Sixteen Springs Allotment, resides in the Southern Sacramento Mountains in the High Mountain Aquifer

system. This system is variable due to the superficial exposure of the Yeso Formation. The Yeso formation

has layers of limestone, dolomite, sandstone, and siltstone. Springs are predominantly found in fractured

limestone and dolomite. High recharge areas occur where the Yeso formations are exposed west of the Mayhill.

There is extreme heterogeneity with the presence of regional fracture system in the High Mountain Aquifer.

Water that comes from wells and springs comes from fractured carbonate layers. The High Mountain Aquifer

System of Perched aquifers and springs are connected by regional fracture networks and local stream systems.

These perched aquifers and springs at higher elevations become part of the surface water system. Some of the

water is lost to evaporation and some recharges into another ground water system and discharges at a spring in a

lower elevation. This cycle continues until the water is so deep it cannot interact with the surface system. The

High Mountain Aquifer has a water chemistry that indicates that the water spends less time in the subsurface

than the surrounding aquifers and is a younger water that the surrounding aquifers leading to the possibility that

this aquifer recharges adjacent aquifers such as the Pecos Slope Aquifer and the Salt Basin (Talon, Newton et.

al 2009 pgs 1 & 51).

Vegetation is dominated by pinon/juniper woodlands and associated grasslands with a few stringers of

ponderosa pine along the canyon bottoms at the lower elevations. Limited mixed-conifer forest is present at

upper elevations but in not utilized by livestock due to steep slopes and the absence of understory vegetation.

Wet meadows primarily reside in the Sixteen Springs Canyon Watershed where numerous springs reside. Wet

meadows often resemble grasslands. Wet meadows are a type of marsh. They can be found in the mountains

on poorly drained soil. For most of the year wet meadows are without standing water but have saturated soils.

Sedges and rushes can be found in the area. Wet meadows help maintain the health of the watershed. Wet

meadows collect runoff reducing the occurrence of seasonal flooding and erosion. The vegetation of wet

meadows removes the excess nutrients accumulated by the water, acting as a natural filter aiding in the overall

water quality (EPA 2010).

3

Table 1. Acreage and Proportional extent of the Sixteen Springs Allotment within the Sixteen Springs Canyon Creek, Burnt Canyon

Creek and Outlet Elk Canyon Creek 6th

Code HUC.

Allotment

Acres within

Sixteen Springs

Canyon Creek

Watershed

Allotment

Proportional

Extent % of

Watershed

Acres within

Burnt Canyon

Creek

Watershed

Allotment

Proportional

Extent % of

Watershed

Acres within

Outlet Elk

Creek

Watershed

Allotment

Proportional

Extent % of

Watershed

Sixteen Springs 8478 56% 1872 12%

4799

32%

Key Resource Questions

1. What are the current soil and watershed conditions on the Sixteen Springs allotment?

2. What affects will proposed grazing alternatives have on soil water and riparian conditions within the Sixteen

Springs allotment?

3. Will air quality be adversely affected with the implementation of grazing actions proposed?

Methods Used for Data Collection and Analysis

A general assessment of watershed condition of the Forest was completed as part of the Environmental

Assessment for the Forest Land Management Plan (LNF 1986). The Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey was used in

conjunction with field observations and transects completed in 1994 were used to determine current soil

conditions.

Water Quality in New Mexico is reassessed and reported every 2 years by the State Department of

Environmental Quality in Status of Water Quality in New Mexico 2004 - (NMEQ 2004). Findings and

recommendations of the report are summarized in the effected environment section below. A memorandum of

understanding with the State of New Mexico and USDA Forest Service, Region 3 states that water quality will

be protected through the use of site specific best management practices. These practices are discussed in the

effected environment sections as well as listed in

Sediment delivered to channels from poorly located or poorly maintained roads and from areas that have

experienced high fire severity have the greatest potential to impair water quality in the proposed action area.

Some sources of sediment and estimates of quantity were documented in the Walker Fire (USFS 2003) for areas

within the burn. These findings are summarized in the Affected Environment section below. Additional

information from the Walker Fire Long Term Rehabilitation Assessment was available inside the burned area.

Different sources of data were used to create this report. Over the years, when site-specific analysis was

completed at the project level, different map scale units were used. Therefore, the acreage numbers for some

data may differ within this report and from other reports, as a function of the scale the data was collected.

A number of data tables and figures are a part of this report. The tables have been located within the body of

the text and generally appear as they are discussed. The maps and figures have been included at the end of the

report as Attachments.

4

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Geology and Landscape

The Sixteen Springs allotment is located lies about 15 miles east of Cloudcroft, New Mexico in the northeastern

part of the District. Elevations range from 8,040 in the southwest corner, and 6,120 feet along the southeast

corner. Approximately 35% of the allotment is steep with 31% moderately sloping, and 33% being nearly level.

Rock types of the analysis area ridge tops and mountain slopes are predominately limestone. The rock layers are

highly fractured and joined. This fracturing and jointing provides paths for water to percolate through the rocks

and also provides for the penetration of roots. Shallow excavations for roads and developments are generally

not limited. Alluvial fans at the mouths of drainages contain both water and gravity deposited materials from the

limestone slopes. Drainage bottoms contain predominantly water deposited materials from limestone.

Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey

A Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey for the Sacramento Ranger District (TES) was completed by the Forest Service

in 1984. The descriptions of the soils from this report were used in determining reference conditions for the

soils observed. The average annual precipitation is 12-18 inches. (Western Regional Climate Center)

http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/index.html).

The different TES Units found within the allotment are shown with unit descriptions and acreage in Table 2.

Table 2. Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey Units Descriptions

TES

Map

Unit

Acres

by

Map

Unit

Soil Classificaton

(Family)

Vegetation

Taxonomic

Unit

Map

Unit

Slope

Class

Soil

Erosion

Hazard

0004A 48

CUMULIC

HAPLUSTOLLS

HSC 4, 0 mesic PASM,BOGR2 0-10 Moderate

0005A 3

PACHIC ARGIUSTOLLS HSC 4, +1

fine, mixed BOGR2,PIED,JUDE2,JUMO 0-10 Moderate

0006A 2

PACHIC UDIC

ARGIBOROLLS

LSC 6, 0 fine, mixed POPR 0-10 Moderate

0010A 29

PACHIC ARGIUSTOLLS HSC 4, 0

Fine, loamy mixed mesic BOGR2,PIED,JUDE2,JUMO 0-10 Slight

0276A 758

LITHIC HAPLUSTOLLS

HSC 4, +1

loamy-skeletal, mixed, mesic PIED,JUDE2,JUMO,QUUN 0-15 Slight

0277A 1326

LITHIC ARGIUSTOLLS

HSC 4, +1 Clayey-skeletal, mixed,

mesic PIED,JUDE2,JUMO,QUUN 16-40 Moderate

0279A 2351

LITHIC ARGIUSTOLLS

HSC 4, +1

clayey-skeletal, mixed, mesic PIED,JUDE2,JUMO,QUUN 41-80 Severe

5

0281A 1843

PACHIC ARGIBOROLLS HSC 5, -1

fine, mixed PIPO,PIED,JUDE2,QUGA 0-15 Moderate

0283A 1088

TYPIC ARGIBOROLLS

LSC 5, 0

Clayey-skeletal, mixed PSME,PIPO,PIED,QUGA 16-40 Moderate

0285A 533

TYPIC ARGIBOROLLS

LSC 5, 0 Clayey-skeletal, mixed PSME,PIPO,PIED,QUGA 41-80 Severe

0286A 205

TYPIC ARGIBOROLLS HSC 5, 0

Fine, mixed PIPO 0-15 Moderate

0287A 54

TYPIC ARGIBOROLLS

HSC 5, 0

Fine, mixed PIPO 16-40 Severe

0291A 169

PACHIC UDIC

ARGIBOROLLS LSC 6, -1

loamy-skeletal, mixed PSME,PIPO,QUGA 16-40 Moderate

0292A 382

PACHIC UDIC

ARGIBOROLLS

LSC 6, -1 loamy-skeletal, mixed PSME,PIPO,QUGA 41-80 Severe

0293A 2085

LITHIC ARIUSTOLLS HSC 4, +1

Loamy-skeletal, mixed,

mesic PIED,JUDE2,JUMO,QUUN 0-15 Severe

0294A 1987

LITHIC ARGIUSTOLLS

HSC 4, +1

loamy-skeletal, mixed mesic PIED,JUDE2,JUMO,QUUN 16-40 Moderate

0295A 1987

LITHIC ARGIUSTOLLS

HSC 4, +1

loamy-skeletal, mixed

mesic PIED,JUDE2,JUMO,QUUN 41-80 Severe

Vegetation

The Walker fire burned approximately 2, 690 acres within the two watersheds, which 2053 acres resulted in

high or moderate burn severity to the soil on FS owned land. Watershed conditions within the burn are

improving. Sixteen Springs is a 21,687 acre watershed, approximately 1486 acres of the Sixteen springs

watershed was affected by this fire. High burns cover approximately 375 acres. Some 883 acres are the

moderate burns, and 228 acres for the low burn areas. Outlet Elk canyon is a 22,675 acre watershed, however

approximately 500 acres are the moderate to low burn areas on the Outlet Elk Canyon watershed. Watershed

conditions within the burn are improving. Most of the area with high severity fire was seeded, and much of it

mulched. Seeding results were mixed, especially the first year after the fire.

The allotment has pinion juniper (PJ), mixed conifer, ponderosa pine and grass lands. The significance of

canopy cover is that it influences the amount of precipitation that is infiltrated into the soil which effects water

quantity. Thick canopies prevent growth of herbaceous cover by reducing sunlight and precipitation.

Herbaceous plants improve water quality by trapping sediments from runoff. Table 3 contains a summary of

vegetation types impacted by the Walker Fire for the Sixteen Springs Allotment.

Table 3: Vegetation Impacted by the Walker Fire

VEG_TYPE Pre Walker Acres Acres Burned

6

Grassland 76 25

Mixed Conifer 2,164 731

PJ 10,792 1335

Ponderosa Pine 2,104 813

The Walker had the greatest impact in the PJ vegetation type. This has improved the quantity of herbaceous

cover that can be seen in the 2009 NAIP photography. Areas that had a canopy of 10-29.9% with a vegetation

type primarily of PJ were the primary areas impacted by the Walker Fire. Table 4 indicates canopy types that

were affected in the Sixteen Springs Allotment.

Table 4: Pre-Post Walker Fire Canopy

Canopy Pre-Walker Fire Post Walker

Grass/Forb, Tree cc <10%, Shrub cc <10% 3.0% 20.6%

Tree cc 10 - 29.9% 74.7% 58.2%

Tree cc 30 - 59.9% 16.6% 15.4%

Tree cc 60+% 5.8% 5.8%

Vegetation Cover Calculations

Table 5: Pre-Walker Fire Canopy and Vegetation

Canopy and Vegetation Type

Type (percent)

Canopy

60+%

Canopy

30 - 59.9%

Canopy

10 - 29.9%

Canopy

0 <9.9%

Acres (percent) 871 (5.8%) 1,614 (16.6%) 12,200 (74.7%) 452 (3.0%)

Mixed Conifer (14.3%) 39.54% 16.08% 10.50% 0.75%

PJ (71.3%) 32.60% 57.44% 78.53% 65.16%

Ponderosa Pine (13.9%) 27.85% 26.08% 10.35% 34.02%

Grasses (0.5%) na 0.43% 0.62% 0.07%

SOILS: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Soil condition field monitoring has been ongoing for years and the latest information was collected in 2007.

The Sixteen Springs allotment was evaluated using protocols from Forest Service Handbook 2509.18-99-1 R3

Supplement titled Soil Management Handbook (Attachment B). Soil condition was evaluated by using a

combination of field inspections, topographic maps, and digital ortho-quads. The soil condition represents an

approximation. It is not possible to visit all areas. Interpretations were based on historical livestock use

patterns, TES data, and slope characteristics.

Table 6. Slope Acres and Percent for the Sixteen Springs Allotment

ALLOTMENT 0-15% 16-40% 40%+ TOTAL

Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres

Sixteen Springs 5047 33% 4731 31% 5427 36% 15205

7

The base maps used for the analysis are the United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute quadrangle

maps. Information from the forest service corporate Geographic Information System database (GIS) was used

to overlay multiple datasets over the quad maps.

Field data consisted of visiting generally representative areas. Soil condition information was then gathered and

used in the preparation of this report.

Soils of the Sixteen Springs analysis area are described in the Lincoln National Forest Terrestrial Ecosystem

Survey. The survey also contains suitability/limitations interpretations for various management activities. Soils

on the ridge tops are generally shallow 0 to 20 inches deep, contain a large amount of cobble and have slopes

ranging from 0 – 15 percent. Limitations for unsurfaced roads are listed as moderate to severe because of

shallow soils and the large amount of rock. Sheet and gully erosion potentially would be high due to shallow

depths. Revegetation potential for grasses and shrubs is generally moderate. Soils of the upper mountain slopes

are moderately deep, 20 to 40 inches, and up to 60 inches in the bottoms of small side drainages. They typically

contain a large amount of cobble and have slopes ranging from 16 – 40 percent with some short slopes up to 80

percent. Limitations for unsurfaced roads are listed as moderate. Sheet and gully erosion hazards range from

slight to moderate because of the large amount of cobble in the soil profiles. Soils of the lower mountain slopes

are deep and range in depth from 40 – 60 inches. The fine textures soils typically contain lesser amounts of

cobble and have slopes ranging from 0 to 15 percent. Limitations for unsurfaced roads are listed as slight

because of deeper soils. Sheet and fully erosion hazards range from slight to moderate because of the gentler

slopes. The very deep soils of the alluvial fans range in depth from 60 to 80 inches. The fine textured soils

typically contain lesser amounts of cobble and have slopes ranging from 0 to 15 percent. Limitations for road

construction are listed as slight because of deeper soils. Sheet and fully erosion hazards range from slight to

moderate because of the deeper soils and location at the mouths of drainages. Soils of the drainage bottoms

outside of the ordinary high water mark are very deep and range in depth from 60 to 80 inches. The fine

textured soils typically contain varying amounts of cobble and have slopes ranging from 0 to 15 percent.

Limitations for unsurfaced roads are listed as slight because of deeper soils. Sheet and gully erosion hazards

range from slight to moderate because of the gentler slopes.

Soil condition was rated satisfactory generally in areas under ponderosa pine over story prior to the Walker fire.

This condition still exists in under-burned and low soil burn severity areas. Pine needle litter is responsible for

most effective ground cover in these areas. There are localized areas of impaired condition where animals

concentrate such as around tanks, and in drainage bottoms.

Soil condition is an evaluation of soil quality based on an interpretation of factors which affect three primary

soil functions. The primary soil functions evaluated are soil stability, soil hydrology and nutrient cycling.

These functions are interrelated. (FSH 2509.18). Definitions of soil functions are as follows:

Soil Stability. The ability of the soil to resist erosion. Soil erosion is the detachment, transport, and

deposition of soil particle by water, wind or gravity. Vascular plants, soil biotic crusts, and vegetation

ground cover (VGC) are the greatest deterrent to surface soil erosion. Visual evidence of surface

erosion includes sheets, rills, and gullies; pedestalling, soil deposition, erosion pavement, and loss of the

surface "A" horizon. Erosion models may also be used to predict on-site soil loss.

Soil Hydrologic Function. The ability of the soil to absorb, store, and transmit water, both vertically and

horizontally. This function is assessed by evaluating or observing changes in surface structure, surface

pore space, consistence, bulk density and infiltration or penetration resistance. Increases in bulk density

or decreases in porosity results in reduced water infiltration, permeability and plant available moisture.

Nutrient Cycling. The ability of the soil to accept, hold and release nutrients. This function is assessed

by evaluating vegetative community composition, litter, coarse woody material, root distribution and

8

soil biotic crusts. These indicators are considered an important source of soil organic matter, which is

essential in sustaining long-term soil productivity. It provides a carbon and energy source for soil

microbes, stores and provides nutrients which are needed for the growth of plants and soil organisms

and by providing for cation and anion exchange capacities.

The definitions for soil condition ratings are as follows:

Satisfactory. Indicators signify that soil function is being sustained and soil is functioning properly and

normally. The ability of the soil to maintain resource values and sustain outputs is high.

Impaired. Indicators signify a reduction in soil function. The ability of the soil to function properly and

normally has been reduced and/or there exists an increased vulnerability to degradation. An impaired

category indicates there is a need to investigate the ecosystem to determine the cause and degree of

decline in soil functions. Changes in land management practices or other preventative measures may be

appropriate.

Unsatisfactory. Indicators signify that a loss of soil function has occurred. Degradation of vital soil

functions result in the inability of the soil to maintain resource values, sustain outputs or recover from

impacts. Unsatisfactory soils are candidates for improved management practices or restoration designed

to recover soil functions.

Historical accounts suggest that soils were stable and largely well vegetated prior to active fire suppression

(Garrett 2001). Current soil conditions ranges from satisfactory to unsatisfactory with the Walker Fire

depending on localized burn severity class, effectiveness of treatments, and level of natural recovery.

Microphytic crusts (biological soils crusts) “are formed from living organisms and their by-products, creating a

crust of soil particles bound together by organic materials” (Belnap, et. Al., 1999). They appear to play a

significant role in nutrient cycling, water infiltration, improve plant diversity, and erosion control. A number of

studies have demonstrated that the cyanobacterial component of these crusts fix significant amounts of nitrogen

(Harper and Pendleton 1993, Shield and Durrell 1964, Brotherson and Rushforth 1983). Herbivores benefit

from the improved nutrient status of plants grown in healthy, biologically crusted soils (Belnap and Harper,

1995). It has been demonstrated I other studies that presence of these crusts are linked with greater vascular

plant biodiversity (ladyman, et. Al 1994). Biological soil crusts have also been shown to limit passive burial of

exotic plants with large seeds such a Bromus tectorum (Larson 1995). Deser brush, desert grassland and pinyon-

juniper vegetation types, microphytic crusts are very important to help stabilize disturbed soils providing

ground cover in a pioneer species role (Belnap, et. Al 1999).

Biological soil crusts have been shown to be susceptible to degradation through a variety of disturbances, such

as fire and trampling, and may require lengthy periods in which to recover from such disturbances. A study of

microphytic crust at the Mohave Desert estimated that full recovery at a site would require over one hundred

years (Belnap, et.al.,1999). Within the Sixteen springs, areas exist where ungulates concentrate and plant and

crust density is low. Biological soil crusts would most likely improve in these areas under grazing management

that provides protection when soils are very

WATER QUANTITY AND QUALITY: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Surface water quality and water quantity peak flow is affected by hydrologic function, which is the ability of

soil to capture, hold and release water. Hydrologic function is strongly influenced by soil condition. However,

the effect of soil condition on water quality and quantity is generally based on a landscape scale and usually not

related to individual TES map units. For this reason water quality and quantity are addressed at the landscape

9

level rather than allotment scale. No change in hydrologic function at a watershed scale is expected, though

changes in hydrologic function are expected on some localized map units.

If soil conditions degrade significantly, then the water quality of the watershed can degrade due to a

compromised hydrologic function. Runoff is usually increased and the time that water sits on the land (water

residence time) decreases. This decrease of water residence time limits the ability of the soil to absorb and

transmit water resulting in a reduction of the capability to filter soluble solids and sediments thereby impacting

water quality. Turbidity is generally considered a gauge of watershed water quality and a low turbidity result

would indicate good water quality and stable soil conditions.

Similarly, as soil conditions degrade significantly, water quantity, in the form of runoff, increases due to a

compromised hydrologic function. The result is generally an increase in peak flow discharges. In the following

effects section, the analysis of increased water quantity will not be focused around increased runoff, but rather

be attributed to increases of water quantity in the aquifer, subflow and soil. Therefore, an increase in water

quantity will be a positive attribute rather than a negative one.

Sixteen Springs Allotment lies within three HUC sixth code watersheds: Sixteen Springs Canyon 1306001001,

Outlet Elk Canyon 130600100104, and Burnt Canyon 130600100305 which reside in the Southern Sacramento

Mountains. Drainages in the allotment flow east into the Rio Penasco.

There are two wells located near the allotment that was analyzed by New Mexico Bureau of Geology & Mineral

Resources. Well SM-0068 located in Outlet Elk Canyon was sampled on 10-Aug-0 having a pH range or 7.19-

7.5 and a TDS 502. Well readings are from Oct. 17, 2006 to June 17, 2009. The highest reading was Oct. 17,

2006 of 231.92 feet to the water table. The lowest reading occurred Feb. 18, 2009 of a water table reading of

168.79. The most recent reading conducted on June 17, 2009 was 172.24 ft.

The other well SM-006 is located at Sixteen Springs Canyon and was sampled on 11-Jul-07 with a pH range of

7.5-7.3 and a TDS 588. Well readings are from Dec. 11, 2006 to June 19, 2009. The highest reading was Dec.

11, 2006 of 497.6 feet to the water table. The lowest reading occurred Apr. 16, 2009 of a water table reading of

458.50. The most recent reading conducted on June 19, 2009 was 459.20 ft.

Both wells show that the water table is lowering in the area. The water quality is at an acceptable TDS for

livestock.

There are no known surface water flow gauging stations in the vicinity of the project area. Information can be

found at the USGS National Water Information System Website http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis. Interpreting

this data is not practical to ascertain if current management on an allotment scale is impacting water quantity at

a landscape scale.

Hydrology

Intermittent Sixteen Springs Creek

The main channel is in stable condition. There exist small seasonal seeps along Sixteen Springs Creek.

Intermittent Drainage 7981

A perennial stock pond (ID 1208) also referred as Bridge Canyon Tank exists at the start of the intermediate

drainage 7981. Drainage 7981 shows areas of exposed soil along the bank leading to Bridge Canyon Tank.

Gulling is occurring where Drainage 7981 feeds into Sixteen Springs off of county road C009.

Intermittent drainages 7993, 7986, 7985 & 7984

10

Intermediate drainages 7993, 7986, 7985, and 7984 still have not recovered from the Walker Fire and have

areas of bare vegetation and erosion.

Crooked Creek

Intermittent Drainage ID 12337

An intermediate drainage 12337 that feeds into Crooked Creek has an intermediate stock pond (ID 808) and

eventually crosses NFSR 9656 prior to feeding into Crooked Creek. The area located off of NFSR 9656 is

having erosion concerns from the Walker Fire.

Intermittent Drainage ID 12340

Intermediate drainage (ID 12340) has an intermediate stock pond (794) upstream and further downstream there

is another intermediate stock pond ID 795 which is located off of NRSF 9657A. Located near the stock pond is

a spring. This area was not impacted by the Walker Fire and remains in good condition.

Intermittent Drainage ID 12336

An intermediate stock pond ID 820 which is located near an intermediate stream ID 12336 which drains into

Crooked Creek, this area is part of the Walker burn area and is recovering nicely with vegetation.

Wet Burnt Creek

An Intermittent stock pond (ID 1199) is located off road 607D that parallels Wet Burnt Creek.

Intermittent Drainage ID 7998

A perennial stock pond exists off of NFSR 9659 that parallels the drainage ID 7998.

Outlet Elk Canyon Watershed Drainages

Elk Creek

Elk Creek is the most northern drainage on the allotment that parallels County Road 28.

Only a small segment of Elk Creek crosses the allotment and is in good condition with seasonal pockets of

moist meadows.

Stock Pond 794

Intermittent Stock Pond 794 has erosion concerns. There is little vegetation and a large area of bare soil.

Wet Burnt Canyon Drainages

Wet Burnt Creek

The portion of the Wet Burnt watershed in the Sixteen Springs Allotment drains into Wet Brunt Creek. This

portion of the allotment was not impacted by the fire and is in a stable condition. There exist small pockets of

seasonal moist meadows.

RIPARIAN AREAS AND STREAM CHANNELS: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Riparian vegetation and stream channel data for the allotments within this analysis are from on-the-ground

observations, aerial photo interpretation, corporate GIS database layers, and the Land Resource Management

Plan for the Lincoln National Forest (Forest Plan). Direction for managing riparian areas on the Forest is found

in the Forest Service Manual 2526 (USDA 2000), and the Forest Plan (USDA 1986).

11

Numerous named canyons or washes dissect the allotment. None of the canyons or washes within the project

area have surface water flowing. Water is present only after rains (ephemeral) or intermittently for short

durations. None of the streams have year round surface water flow (perennial). However, below the surface,

the water table may be shallow in spots or have subsurface flow. This subflow may be close enough to the

surface to sustain small areas of riparian type vegetation. Fluctuations in the subflow may cause the depth of

free flowing water, or capillary moisture, to not be within reach of roots for undefined periods of time. Drought

conditions and groundwater pumping are the primary causes for a reduction in subflow. The project area does

not include any mapped wetlands. There are no floodplains issues. There are a few areas that have a few

riparian plants present around seeps. Small areas of wet meadows are located on the allotment where seasonal

snow melt and precipitation collect on soils that have an impermeable layer creating small areas of wet

meadows.

Stock Pounds/Trick Tanks in Rotational Grazing

Sixteen Springs Allotment, has several stock ponds to allow for a deferred rotational grazing system to maintain

healthy vegetation coverage for the allotment. Stock Ponds sometimes referred as earthen dams retain sheet

flow from rain and snowmelt and are typically located in waterless areas so that wildlife and livestock can be

diverted away from sensitive areas and allow for a rotational grazing system that allows vegetation

opportunities to rejuvenate and maintain the integrity of the allotment (Trujillo, Delbert 2002). Sixteen Springs

Allotment stock ponds are in good condition with vegetation. Good range management has allowed the

allotment to heal and recover from the Walker fire. The area is quickly recovering and there is an increase in

herbaceous cover Stock ponds located from the impacted area keeping livestock away from the site. There is

only one area of concern located on the NW portion of the allotment located near the trick tank 794. This can

be easily corrected by allowing this section of the allotment to rest.

AIR QUALITY: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

The Clean Air Act established air quality standards for various classes of airsheds. Three classes were

established. Class I airsheds are the most restrictive and generally include National Parks and Wilderness areas.

Class II airsheds are generally rural areas.

The project area is in a Class II air shed. Air quality in and around the area is high due to the relative isolation

from urban centers, limited access, good vegetative ground cover, and the large scale of the analysis area.

Currently, the air quality in the project area is within the standards and guidelines of the Forest Plan.

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

No perennial, free-flowing streams are found within the watersheds of the analysis area. Therefore no streams

are found to be eligible for designation as Wild and Scenic Rivers (USDA Forest Service, 1993).

Forest Plan Direction:

The Sixteen Springs allotment is classified and by the Forest Plan and exists within Management Area 2D,

which has been determined to be suitable for grazing.

12

The Lincoln National Forest Plan, as amended (Forest Plan), has many goals and objectives (USDA 1986). The

Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines for the soil and water resources, which are applicable to all areas of the

Forest, include:

Page 12 “Provide direction and support to all resource management activities with emphasis on

maintaining water quality and quantity.

Page 12 "Secure and provide an adequate supply of water for the protection and management of the

Forest.

Page 13 "Manage for a favorable flow of water for users by improving or maintaining all watersheds to

a satisfactory or higher condition.

Page 13 "Secure and provide an adequate supply of water for the protection and management of the

Forest.

Page 13 "Maintain on-site soil loss within established tolerance levels.

Page 13 "Manage riparian areas to provide optimum vegetation and ecological diversity.

Page 41 "Through the use of best management practices, the adverse effect of planned activities will be

mitigated and site productivity maintained.

Effects Analysis

The soils were analyzed strictly on the basis of the effects from grazing to livestock management. The

predicted effects of livestock use on soil conditions only evaluated the direct/indirect effects of livestock

grazing relative to existing base soil conditions regardless of outside variables.

The effects analysis reflects what would happen in the long term as it relates to potential recovery. It is

important to note that the actual soil condition class is not expected to change under the proposed action.

Change in soil condition class is a long-term process with many influences. This analysis does, however, reflect

the direction that is expected under each of the alternatives and provides a way to compare alternatives. The

predictions upon soil conditions show to what degree the change will impact soil condition direction as it relates

to livestock grazing. Variables other than grazing are discussed in the cumulative effects section.

SOILS: DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFECTS

Livestock utilization will continue to occur under the two action alternatives. Grazing at moderate intensity is

expected to provide sufficient residual biomass to protect soils and not contribute to any decline in soil

conditions. Monitoring annual forage conditions and water availability will allow the vegetation to not be

excessively impacted by grazing, potentially causing positive gains in plant vigor, forage plant frequency,

recruitment and watershed stability. Flexible stocking rates built into the proposed action should allow

management to respond proactively to changing resource conditions before problems occur. The continued use

of soil and water conservation practices is expected to minimize or mitigate any potential negative effects from

this alternative.

Alternative1. Current livestock management practices with structural improvements. (PROPOSED ACTION)

Livestock utilization will continue to occur. Allowable use levels of 35-45% are expected to provide sufficient

residual biomass to protect soils and not contribute to any decline in soil conditions. Grazing will continue to

be managed with a deferred rotational system and structural improvements which will assist with livestock

distribution on pastures. This system will allow for better management of the vegetation resource and gains in

plant vigor, forage plant frequency, recruitment and watershed stability. The proposed water developments will

aid in improving livestock distribution across the allotment. Flexible stocking rates built into the proposed

action should allow management to respond proactively to changing resource conditions before problems occur.

13

The continued use of Best Management Practices (BMPs) is expected to minimize or mitigate any potential

negative effects from this alternative.

Alternative2. Current livestock management practices. (CURRENT MANAGEMENT)

Livestock utilization with a yearlong seasonally deferred grazing scheme will continue to occur. Allowable use

levels of 35-45% are expected to provide sufficient residual biomass to protect soils and not contribute to any

decline in soil conditions. The seasonally deferred grazing system will allow the vegetation to not be impacted

by grazing for periods of time each year potentially allowing positive gains in plant vigor, forage plant

frequency, recruitment and watershed stability. Flexible stocking rates built into the proposed action should

allow management to respond proactively to changing resource conditions before problems occur. The

continued use of Best Management Practices (BMPs) is expected to minimize or mitigate any potential negative

effects from this alternative.

Alternative 3. No livestock grazing (NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE).

There will be no direct or indirect effects from livestock grazing. In the satisfactory soil condition areas, the

adequate diversity and vegetation ground cover would contribute to maintaining a satisfactory nutrient cycling

and soil structure. The hydrologic function and runoff would continue to be satisfactory. In any impaired soil

condition areas, the potential increase of vegetation ground cover and loss of potential livestock compaction

would contribute to an improved nutrient cycling and improved soil structure. The improved soil structure

would contribute to the functional hydrologic condition. Wildlife utilization is expected to increase due to

reduced competition with cattle.

The order of desirability of the three alternatives to meet or maintain Forest Plan goals and objectives, as it

relates to soils, are as follows: Alternative 3 (most desirable due to the accelerated recovery of any impaired

soil areas), then Alternative 1 (improved distribution), then Alternative 2 (slower recovery).

RIPARIAN AREAS AND STREAM CHANNELS: DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFECTS

Most of the effects discussed in this section pertain to ungulate grazing. The key factors most likely to affect

riparian areas are grazing intensity and frequency. Utilization levels provide the best measure of intensity.

Grazing intensity is more directly associated with ungulate distribution patterns than overall stocking numbers.

Frequency and timing of grazing is also important. Alternating rest and use of a pasture annually and or

seasonally can help riparian species recover from the prescribed intensity. The important consideration for

riparian plants is residual plant material, and the potential for plants to regrow prior to precipitation events.

Plants grazed late in the fall or early winter generally do not regrow in time for winter rains. Plants grazed in

the spring need adequate regrowth time before summer monsoons.

Using soil and water conservation practices to protect soil and water conditions will help to protect the stream

channels and riparian areas.

Alternatives 1 and 2. Current livestock management practices (ACTION ALTERNATIVES)

Allowable use levels of up to 45% are expected to provide sufficient residual biomass to protect stream

channels, and maintain the existing vegetation conditions in the canyon bottoms and limited potential riparian

areas. The adaptive management system will allow the vegetation to not be excessively impacted by grazing,

potentially resulting in positive gains in plant vigor, forage plant frequency, recruitment and watershed stability.

Flexible stocking rates built into the proposed action should allow management to respond proactively to

changing resource conditions before problems occur.

14

Alternative 3. No livestock grazing (NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE)

There is a lack of potential for riparian vegetation within the predominantly ephemeral drainages across the

Sixteen Springs Allotment. In addition, those few areas that currently support riparian vegetation are relatively

inaccessible to livestock due to topographic features. Therefore, the no grazing alternative would not be

expected to significantly improve riparian or stream channel conditions on this allotment.

None of the alternatives considered in this analysis is expected to have a significant effect on riparian areas or

stream channel conditions within the Sixteen Springs Allotment.

WATER QUANTITY AND QUALITY: DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFECTS

The way that land is used may impact the water quality in a watershed. Uses on public lands were primarily

grazing, recreation, wood cutting and historic mining. Current use is predominantly grazing and minor use

from recreation. Land uses on private land are those associated with grazing, rural development, agriculture

and recreational mining.

Best Management Practices for grazing management must be followed according to FSH2209.13 and the

Lincoln Forest Plan. By implementing BMPs and with the low stocking rate on the Sixteen Springs Allotment,

no major effects to the waters of the allotment are anticipated.

Alternative 1. Current livestock management practices with structural improvements. (PROPOSED ACTION)

Water quality is expected to improve steadily with water developments that allow for improved livestock

distribution. Water quality is influenced by soil and vegetation condition. There is no expected decline in soil

or vegetation condition. The seasonally deferred grazing system will allow the vegetation to not be impacted

by grazing for periods of time each year potentially allowing positive gains in plant vigor, forage plant

frequency, recruitment and watershed stability. This will allow the vegetation resource to have gains in overall

health and recruitment. Since vegetation cleans the water by trapping sediments, it is expected that there will be

a potential for improvement in water quality. Water quantity will not be impacted notably, because the water

developments will not be significant at the landscape scale. The continued use of Best Management Practices

(BMPs) is expected to minimize or mitigate any potential negative effects from this alternative.

Alternative 2. Current livestock management practices. (CURRENT MANAGEMENT)

Water quality is expected to improve steadily or remain stable with current management practices. Water

quality is influenced by soil and vegetation condition. There is no expected decline in soil or vegetation

condition. The seasonally deferred grazing system will allow the vegetation to not be impacted by grazing for

periods of time each year potentially allowing positive gains in plant vigor, forage plant frequency, recruitment

and watershed stability. Since vegetation cleans the water by trapping sediments, it is expected that there will

be a potential for improvement in water quality. Water quantity will not be impacted, because there will be no

changes to the allotment management. The continued use of Best Management Practices (BMPs) is expected to

minimize or mitigate any potential negative effects from this alternative.

Alternative 3. No livestock grazing (NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE)

Water quality would be expected to improve with improved soil condition and plant recruitment resulting from.

There will be no effect to water quantity from no livestock grazing.

The order of desirability of the three alternatives to meet or maintain Forest Plan goals and objectives, as it

relates to water quantity and quality, are as follows: Alternative 3 (most desirable due to the accelerated

recovery of any impaired soils which results in better water quality), then Alternative 1 (improved distribution),

then Alternative 2 (slower recovery).

15

AIR QUALITY: DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFECTS

Activities resulting from this grazing project will not significantly affect the factors contributing to a high

quality air shed. Therefore, none of the alternatives being considered is expected to have an effect on the air

resources in this Class II airshed.

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS: DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFECTS

There will be no effects on Wild and Scenic Rivers under any of the alternatives being considered because there

are none designated within the analysis area.

CUMULATIVE EFFECTS:

Past, present and foreseeable future projects or actions that have affected or will affect the project area include

historic heavy grazing, prescribed and natural fires, wildfire suppression, invasive exotic plants and water

developments. Other activities being conducted over the watersheds include recreation, farming, wildlife

management, and activities associated with rural residential communities. These occurrences have contributed

incrementally to effects that have changed ecological conditions of the area. The proposed action and

alternatives, because they are designed to implement properly managed grazing will not contribute effects that

would adversely change the ecological conditions of the analysis area. The proposed action will not preclude

future projects designed to eliminate invasive exotic species, eliminate invasive brush, or those designed to

return fire to a more natural role in the ecosystem.

Historic heavy livestock grazing throughout the watersheds around the turn of the 19th

to the 20th

century

resulted in a reduction in native grasses and an increase in shrubs. In some areas, removal of vegetation by

grazing resulted in soil loss followed by site occupation by non-native grasses. Soil and water conservation

practices to mitigate grazing effects have since been implemented on Federal lands, with a general improvement

in conditions. Historic fuel wood harvesting in the project area was conducted prior to acceptance of soil and

water conservation practices. This has also contributed to historic soil loss and increase in shrubs. Soil loss,

however, is most likely irretrievable in human time frames (100 years), and methods to reverse site occupation

by exotic grasses in a wildland situation have not been developed.

Wildfire suppression activities since the establishment of the National Forest is contributing to the trend of

increased shrubs, with associated decreases in grasses on National Forest land. The largest sources of air

pollution, on or off the forest, are smoke from wildland and prescribed fires, and dust from unpaved roads.

Prescribed burning, to reduce fuels and maintain more natural ecological conditions, can affect the air quality at

the time of the burning. The effects are expected to be minimal and of short duration. The New Mexico

Environment Department (NMED) regulates prescribed burning in the state in accordance with the State

Implementation Plan and any prescribed burning in the project area would be coordinated through the NMED

Air Quality Bureau and would follow the State Implementation Plan.

Recreation impacts are primarily from vehicle use on un-surfaced roads. This will increase sediment in

drainage channels, and in the case of off-road use, severely disturb vegetation and soils. Presently, OHV use is

not significant in this area. However, as this outdoor recreation activity grows in popularity, unregulated use

some times creates wildcat roads, which can pose an impact to watersheds. Rural and urban development (all

off Forest) in the watersheds has resulted in loss of vegetation, increased polluted runoff from roads and

disturbed areas, and increased groundwater use.

16

Livestock grazing may impact soil, water and riparian function in a number of ways including compacting the

soil surface (hydrologic function), removing plant material (stability), or changing the plant community

composition (nutrient cycling). All soils on these allotments must be managed to maintain or improve long-

term productivity (Forest Plan goals and objectives). This can be accomplished by implementing practices

(such as, but not limited to: annually prepare an operating plan with the permittee to allow for current allotment

conditions; make periodic field checks to identify needed adjustments in season and livestock numbers

including stock counts, forage utilization, assessment of rangeland to verify soil and vegetative condition and

trend; and use necessary techniques to achieve proper distribution, or lessen the impact on areas which are

sensitive or which would naturally be overused including riding and herding to shift livestock locations, using

salt or supplement feed, range improvements, prescribed burning, trail construction, seeding, or prevention of

intensive livestock grazing or concentrated livestock use on soils that have low bearing strength and are wet.

See Soil and water conservation practices descriptions and guidelines.

Each of the alternatives considered in this analysis will mitigate or eliminate grazing effects for soil, water,

riparian and airshed conditions through the use of best available information in grazing management and soil

and water conservation practices and therefore, will not contribute to adverse cumulative effects.

Prepared By:

/s/ Jennifer Hill 10/21/2010

______________________________ ____________________________

Jennifer N. Hill Date

Forest Soil Scientist

/s/ April Banks 10/21/2010

__________ ____ _____________________________

April E. Banks Date

Forest Hydrologist

Lincoln National Forest

17

Reference Literature

An Introduction to Biological Soil Crusts. http://www.soilcrust.org/crusts101.htm

USGS Canyonlands Research Station, Southwest Biological Science Center 2290 S. West Resource Blvd Moab,

UT.

Belnap, J., and K.T. Harper. 1995. Influence of cryptobiotic soil crusts on elemental content of tissue in two

disert seed lpants. Arid soil Research and rehabilitation 9:107-115.

Council on Environmental Quality, Washington D.C., July, 1986 Reprint of 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508,

Regulations for Implementing The Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act.

Geology and Aggregate Resources District II, New Mexico State Highway Department, Santa Fe New Mexico,

1972

Keys to Soil Taxonomy, Soil Survey Staff, United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources

Conservation Service, Tenth Edition 2006

Ladyman, J.A. R., and E. Muldavin. 1996. Terrestrial cryptogams of pinyon-jumiper woodlands in the

southwestern United states: a review. General Technical Report RM-GTR-280. US Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado 33 pp

Larson, K.D. 1995. Effects of microbiotic crusts on the germination and establishment of three range grasses.

M.S. Thesis, Boise State University, Boise, Idaho.

Leonard, J. H. Kaltenecker, J. Williams, and D. Eldridge. 2001. Biological soil crusts: ecology and

management. Technical Reference 1730-2. U.S.D.A. BLM National Science and Technology Center

Information and Communications Group, P.O. Box 25047, Denver, CO 80225-0047

New Mexico Environment Department Air Quality Bureau. 2004. New Mexico's 2004 Integrated 305(b)

Assessment and 303(d) Listing Report. NMED. Fe, New Mexico. Online at

http://www.nmed.state.nm.us/environ/water/assessment/305-02.html

Newton, Talon; Timmons, Stacy; Rawling, Fedrick Partey; Kludt, Trevor; Land, Lewis; Timmons, Mike; and

Walsh, Patrick, Oct. 2009, “Sacramento Mountains Hydrology Study Open File Report 518,” New Mexico

Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, Aquifer Mapping Program

Soil Survey Manual, Soil Survey Division Staff, United States Department of Agriculture, Handbook No. 18,

October 1993

Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey Handbook, FSH 2509.14 R-3 United States Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service Region 3, Albuquerque, New Mexico

Trujillo, Delbert, Best Management Practices for Grazing Activities on the Coyote Ranger District Jarosa

Grazing Allotment, Winter 2002, New Mexico Environment Department , Watershed Protection Section of the

Water Quality Bureau Vol.7 No 4 9 pages 5-6

USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, 1986. Lincoln National Forest Plan as amended.

18

USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, 1989, Riparian Area Survey and Evaluation System (RASES).

USDA Forest Service, 1999, Forest Service Handbook 2509.18, Soil Management Handbook, R3 Supplement

No. 2509.18-99-1.

USDA Forest Service, 2000, Forest Service Manual 2526, Riparian Area Management.

USDA Forest Service, 2001, Forest Service Handbook 2209.21-2001-1, Range Analysis and Management

Handbook.

USDA Forest Service, 2002, Forest Service Handbook 2509.22 – (R3) Soil and Water Conservation Practices

Handbook, Southwest Region Directive, Chapter 20: Resource Management Activities

US Environmental Protection Agency, 2010, Wetland Types,

http://www.epa.gov/wetlands/types/wmeadows.html

USGS National Water Information System. Online at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis

Western Regional Climate Center. Online at http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/index.html

.

19

ATTACHMENT A: FIGURES

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey (TES) Map of the Sixteen Springs Allotment

2. Soil Condition Rating Guide

3. Index of TES Map Units for the Sixteen Springs Allotment

Taken from Forest Service Handbook: 2509.22 – (R3) Soil and Water Conservation Practices Handbook,

Southwest Region Directive

Chapter 20: Resource Management Activities

22 - RANGE MANAGEMENT.

The use of National Forest System (NFS) lands for grazing in the Southwestern Region generally predates the

establishment of individual Forests. Grazing continues as a recognized tool for vegetation management on NFS

lands and is considered a compatible use of public lands. Designated ranges are managed to accommodate

grazing along with other uses. NFS rangelands are divided into allotments for administration. Allotments are

used by rancher permittees who pay a mandated fee for each month of use for each animal (and its 6 month or

older offspring).

Range vegetation management involves such activities as range analysis, allotment management planning and

improvement, and a grazing permit system. It includes controlling overall livestock numbers, season of use,

livestock distribution, constructing structural and non-structural improvements, maintaining or enhancing

diverse landscapes for the benefit of the overall biological aspects of the ecosystem including fish and wildlife

and other resources, and restoration of deteriorated rangelands. The actual physical activities include grazing,

trampling, ponding, salting, fencing, sediment traps, fuelwooding, prescribed burning, using herbicides, site

preparation, seeding, and other activities associated with forage establishment. Livestock can be an effective

tool in managing vegetation.

Successful range vegetation management is measured by the results on-the-ground through production

utilization surveys (range inspections) and compared to the environmental protection attainment identified and

addressed in range analyzes and allotment plans made by interdisciplinary teams through the IRM process.

Water and soil management concerns can be effectively included into the Range Management Planning Process

when the Allotment Management Plan is written or revised. Allotment planning is accomplished using the

Region's IRM process and must be consistent with the Forest's Land Management Plan.

22.1 - Range Analysis, Allotment Management Plan, Grazing Permit System, and Permittee Operating

Plan.

1. Objective. To manage rangelands through IRM and ensure they are meeting Forest Land Management Plan

objectives.

2. Explanation. An analysis of a potential and/or existing grazing area is conducted by an interdisciplinary

team to evaluate its productive capabilities, inherent hazards, resource values, and uses for the purpose of

meeting Forest Land Management Plan objectives. Following this analysis the Forest Service, in cooperation

with the permittee, prepares a written allotment management plan and authorizes livestock grazing as per

20

stipulations in the management plan. These documents include measures to protect other resource values, such

as water quality, riparian area resource management, and to coordinate livestock grazing with other resource

uses. Specific methods for controlling when, where, amount of utilization, and numbers of livestock to be

grazed are covered in the plan. Also included are needed rangeland improvements, monitoring methods, and an

implementation schedule.

A permittee operating plan is prepared, reviewed, and revised annually to reflect direction in the allotment

management plan.

The amount of livestock use is determined primarily through measurement of vegetative utilization.

Allowable use is set to meet the objectives of the Forest Land Management Plan. The maintenance of soil

productivity and stability is considered in determining allowable use.

3. Implementation. The District Ranger is responsible for analysis of range allotments, completion of

environmental assessment reports, preparation of management plans, and processing of grazing applications.

The Forest Supervisor or District Ranger approves management plans and issues grazing permits with

stipulations and conditions. Most permits are issued for 10 year terms. Revise allotment management plans as

needed to meet the Forest Land Management Plan objectives.

Annually prepare an operating plan with the permittee to allow for current allotment conditions. The permittee

carries out the plans under the immediate direction and review of the District Ranger. Take corrective action if

a permittee does not comply with grazing permit conditions designed to protect soil and water resources.

22.11 - Controlling Livestock Numbers and Season of Use.

1. Objective. Safeguard water and soil resources under sustained forage production. Managed forage

utilization by livestock to maintain healthy ecosystems for all resource objectives.

2. Explanation. In addition to proper stocking rate and season of use specified in the grazing permit, periodic

field checks are made to identify needed adjustments in season and livestock numbers. Checks include:

a. Range readiness evaluations to assure that the soil is not too wet and that sufficient forage

growth has occurred.

b. Stock counts to assure that only permitted livestock enter the allotment.

c. Forage utilization measurements to provide data, for grazing use pattern, improved livestock

distribution, and stocking.

d. Assessment of rangeland to verify soil and vegetative condition and trend.

e. Assessment of streambanks to assure banks are not being degraded and contributing sediment to

water courses.

When standards for allowable utilization are established they are incorporated into the allotment

management plan.

3. Implementation. Allotments are administered by the District Ranger. Provisions are carried out by the

grazing permittee as permit requirements. Field check and measurements are made periodically by the

Forest Service. Livestock numbers and seasons of use may be changed annually to reflect current years

climatic condition.

22.12 - Controlling Livestock Distribution.

1. Objective. To manage sustained forage production and forage utilization by livestock while protecting soil

and water resources. Maintaining healthy ecosystems for wildlife and other resources.

21

2. Explanation. Livestock use within allotments is typically not uniform due to variations in topography, water

availability, vegetation type and condition. Several techniques are used to achieve proper distribution, or lessen

the impact on areas which are sensitive or which would naturally be overused. These techniques include:

a. Construction of fences, and implementation of seasonal or pasture systems of management.

b. Water development in areas that receive little use and closing off water developments when

proper use has been achieved.

c. Riding and herding to shift livestock locations.

d. Using salt or supplement feed as tools to gain proper distribution of livestock.

e. Range improvements, prescribed burning, trail construction, or seeding.

f. Prevention of intensive livestock grazing or concentrated livestock use on soils that have low

bearing strength and are wet.

Open herding, limiting trailing, and use of new bed grounds are additional techniques used for sheep.

Developing sufficient watering places is one way to limit the amount of trailing. Livestock distribution

needs are determined through evaluations of range conditions and trends, including watershed condition

assessments and utilization studies.

3. Implementation. Livestock distribution practices are carried out by the permittee under the direction and

review of the District Ranger. Direction is incorporated in the allotment management plan and the annual

operating plan, which are integral parts of the grazing permit and provides current Forest Service

instructions. The instructions reflect current allotment conditions and vegetative trends.

22.13 - Rangeland Improvements.

1. Objective. To improve, maintain or restore range resources, including soil and water through the use of

rangeland improvements.

2. Explanation. Rangeland improvements are intended to enhance forage quality, quantity, and/or availability,

and to provide protection to the other resources. Building fences to control the movement of livestock, improve

watershed condition, and develop watering sites are just a few of the types of rangeland improvements

implemented by the permittee or Forest Service as identified in the allotment plan. If a structure is causing soil

erosion or water quality degradation the allotment plan will identify it and state corrective measures. Other

measures may include stream channel stabilization efforts such as riprapping, gully plugging, and planting; or

mechanical treatments such as pitting, chiseling, or furrowing. Reseeding and/or fertilization may be done

alone or in conjunction with any of these measures.

3. Implementation. The permittee is involved as a cooperator in rangeland improvements and may actually

complete the work under Forest Service direction. Implementation may also be done by Forest Service crews or

contractors. Range improvement needs are recognized in the range allotment planning process and are

scheduled for implementation in the allotment plan and the 10-Year Forest Plan Implementation Schedule.

22.14 - Determining Grazing Capability of Lands.

1. Objective. To maintain or improve soil stability, soil productivity, and water quality by grazing the land

within its capability.

2. Explanation. This practice is an administrative and preventative control. Soil condition classes, based on the

relationship of current and natural soil loss tolerances, are used to determine grazing capability. Only land with

soils in stable condition are considered as "full capability" range. Grazing capability ratings are then used in

conjunction with other grazing considerations to determine the actual grazing capacity of an area.

22

3. Implementation. Soil condition class is determined by qualified soil scientists using Terrestrial Ecosystem

Survey (TES). A range conservationist will use the soil condition class in determining the grazing capacity.

22.15 - Revegetation of Areas Disturbed by Grazing Activities.

1. Objective. To establish a vegetative cover on disturbed sites to prevent accelerated erosion and

sedimentation.

2. Explanation. Where soil has been severely disturbed by past overgrazing and the establishment of

vegetation is needed to minimize erosion, the appropriate measures shall be taken to establish an adequate cover

of grass or other vegetation acceptable to the Forest Service and outlined in the allotment management plan.

This measure is applied where it is expected that disturbed soils in parts of the area will require vegetative cover

for stabilization and the problems will not be mitigated by other management plan provisions.

3. Implementation. Through the IRM process an estimate of the need is determined and included in the

allotment plan. Where the ground cover is needed, objectives that will provide for vegetative establishment will

be included in the allotment plan. The Forest Service shall identify on-the-ground disturbed areas that must be

treated.

The Forest Service, shall provide instruction as to soil preparation and the application of suitable seed mixtures,

mulch, and fertilizer, and the timing of such work. It is the responsibility of the District Ranger to make sure

that revegetation work is done correctly and in a timely manner.

22.16 - Erosion Control Structure Maintenance.

1. Objective. To ensure that constructed erosion control structures are stabilized and working.

2. Explanation. Erosion control structures are only effective when they are in good repair and stable

conditions. It is necessary to provide follow-up inspection and structural maintenance in order to avoid these

problems and ensure

adequate erosion control.

3. Implementation. During the period of grazing the permittee will implement and adhere to the Forest Service

prescribed grazing protection measure

23

2.42 - Exhibit 01--Continued

USDA Forest Service R3-FS-2500-1 SOIL CONDITION RATING GUIDE

CONDITION CATEGORY Function Indicator Satisfactory Impaired Unsatisfactory

Surface

Structure ¹ Moderate/strong granular or single grained. ¨

Sub-angular blocky or weak granular. ¨

Massive or platy. ¨

H Y

Surface Pore Space ¹

Many/common tubular pores, high vertical continuity. ¨

Common/few tubular pores. ¨

Few tubular pores, low vertical continuity. ¨

D R

Rupture Resistance ¹

Loose to slightly hard (dry) Loose to friable (moist). ¨

---- Very hard to very rigid (dry), Extr. firm to very rigid (moist). ¨

O L

Near Surface

Subzones ¹ No surface crusting or subsurface compaction. ¨

Water compacted or non-biotic surface crust present. ¨

Mechanically compacted. ¨

O G

Bulk Density Bulk density not increased. ¨

Moderate bulk density increases (5-15%). ¨

Significant increase in bulk density (>15%). ¨

I C

Infiltration No decrease in infiltration. ¨

Moderate decrease in infiltration. (10-50%). ¨

Significant decrease in infiltration (>50%). ¨

Penetration

Resistance No increase in resistance. ¨

Moderate increase in resistance (10-50%). ¨

Significant increase in resistance (>50%). ¨

Modeled Soil Loss

Current soil loss < tolerance. ¨

Current soil loss > tolerance. ¨

Visible Sheet

Rill & Gully

Erosion

Sheets/rills/gullies not evident.

Rills/gullies are small, discontin- uous, poorly defined & not connected into any pattern. ¨

Rills/gullies actively expanding, well-defined, continuous & connected

into a definite pattern. ¨ S T A B

Pedestaling No/slight pedestaling of plant, litter and rocks. No evidence of exposed roots. ¨

Grasses, forbs and rock fragments are pedestaled. Small, fibrous root strands of forbs & grasses are exposed on the soil surface. ¨

Trees and shrubs are pedes- taled and may be hummocked. Shallow, lateral roots of trees and shrubs are exposed. ¨

I L I

Erosion Pavement ²

None to slight. If erosion pavement exists it is discontinuous or localized. ¨

-----

Erosion pavement is continuous or exists in interspaces between canopy cover of trees & shrubs. ¨

T Y

Soil Deposition

Not unusual or excessive. ¨

Soil and/or litter deposition is present. Fine litter may be patterned as small debris accumulations. ¨

Soil and/or litter is deposited on the uphill side of logs, brushpiles, etc. Soil may be moving offsite. ¨

Surface ("A") Horizon

"A" horizon is present, well distributed, not fragmented. ¨

"A" horizon is present, but not evenly distributed. Changes in physical properties exist. ¨

"A" horizon is absent or present in association with prominent plants. Properties are similar to those of the underlying subsoil. ¨

N C U Y T C

Vegetative

Community

Composition

Distribution of desirable, perennial plants reflects species by vegetative layer (i.e. trees, shrubs, forbs and graminoids) as identified in the potential plant community. ¨

Changes in vegetation composition indicate a shift towards a drier, less productive plant community. There may also be an increase in annual plants, shallow-rooted grasses, taprooted woody perennials or invasive plants. ¨

The perennial forb and/or graminoid vegetative layers are absent or sparse.

¨

R L I I E N N G

Litter

Litter is distributed evenly across the soil surface and is associated with all vegetative layers. ¨

-----

Litter is either absent or is associated only with prominent plants and not evenly distributed across the soil surface. ¨

T Coarse Woody Material

Pipos/Quga-----5-10 t/ac. Pipos/Fear2-----7-14 t/ac. Abco/Fear2-----8-16 t/ac. ¨

-----

Pipos/Quga-----<5 t/ac. Pipos/Fear2-----<7 t/ac. A bco/Fear2-----<8 t/ac. ¨

Root Distribution¹

Many/common roots in surface horizons. ¨

Moderately few roots in surface horizons. ¨

Few/very few roots in surface horizons. ¨

24

1/ Categories and/or descriptions defined in USDA Handbook No. 18, Soil Survey Manual, October, 1993. 2/ Certain soils within desert ecosystems inherently contain erosion pavement (desert pavement) surfaces. Desert pavements are not used to indicate soil condition. Page 2 of 2