Back to Three Forests Coalition Home

U.S. Forest Service, Manti-La Sal National Forest, Ferron-Price Ranger District. 1996 Continuing Education in Ecosystem Management Team (for the Manti-La Sal National Forest). Huntington Analysis Area Landscape Assessment. June.

RELEVANT TO:	GRASSLANDS/SHRUBLANDS
	AQUATIC/RIPARIAN
	FOREST
	LIVESTOCK GRAZING
	RECREATION
	MONITORING

DESCRIPTION

This analysis of ecological conditions in the 166,823 acre Huntington Watershed of the Ferron/Price Ranger District (Manti-La Sal NF) was prepared by a group of professionals from various agencies and disciplines following a six-week intensive training in ecosystem management. The team gathered information from agency personnel, local residents, scientific literature, museums and other sources to estimate reference conditions as well as current conditions; identified key resources at risk and their ecology; and identified management options that "may be available to influence the processes" (p. 1-3).

Many of the ecological conditions and information gaps noted in this analysis of Huntington Watershed raise questions for management and monitoring throughout the Dixie, Fishlake, and Manti-La Sal National Forests, given similar human activities, ecological conditions, and/or monitoring status.

MAJOR FINDINGS AND QUESTIONS RAISED FOR THE THREE FORESTS

[Note: Questions raised for the three Forests are noted in italics)

• Concern about possibility of subsidence as a result of coal mining in the Rilda Canyon breakout (3-4).
• "There appears to be a lack of information about the cumulative impacts of repeated seismic activities due to coal mining on the Forest." (3-4)

Has this lack of information been rectified in the 8 years since this report?

• Wet meadows and poorly-drained soils are important habitat for amphibians and birds and serve as filters and reservoirs to retain snowmelt. (3-6)

Do sufficiently large reference areas of wet meadows and poorly-drained soils exist on the Forest to compare with similar areas used for motorized recreation and livestock grazing?

• Only three perennial streams remain free-flowing in the watershed. (3-8)
• "The area adjacent to most streams and lakes is currently under heavy pressure from recreators, sheep, and cattle. Compaction and erosion are heavy." (3-9).

This requires cumulative impact analysis, as riparian areas are critical for wildlife and biodiversity on the Forest.

• "Erosion and soil loss are occurring in areas of user developed roads located in Miller Flat and riparian areas." (3-9).

• "Fecal Coliform and Fecal Streptococcus as monitored at 5 stations since 1974 often exceeed standards...Ratios higher than 4.4 indicate human pollution and have been recorded as high as 3,000." (3-9)

Five stations out of how many stations? What has been done since 1996 to address fecal coliform exceedances?

• "Soil losses in the upper canyons averages [sic] 6-8" but is as much as 2' in spots de to past grazing/erosion. This is mostly in the North Horn Formation which in this area has a component of sand making it highly erosive." (3-9).

What is the time frame for these losses?

Why is only "past grazing" implicated?

Is livestock grazing allowed in the North Horn formation?

• In the lower canyons erosion occurs during summer cloudbursts. "Steep slopes, Mancos shale, sparse pinyon/juniper cover types are the primary causes. Cattle grazing and trailing also contribute." 3-10.

On what basis are the primary causes being attributed? Is cattle grazing still being allowed in these erosive lower canyons?

• "Slumping is common where the North Horn material is cut by roads or other surface disturbing activities." (3-10).

Are ORVs and other recreational roads being allowed in the North Horn formation?

• "Erosion is occurring on private lands from summer home development and logging operations. Poor, unregulated stream crossing and skidding practices seem to be common." (3-10).

This requires cumulative impact analysis with Forest activities.

• "Selective logging and fire exclusion policies have encouraged the development of overly dense [Douglas fir] stands and have changed the species composition and structure of much of the forest." (3-14)

Why is livestock removal of herbaceous competition to tree seedling establishment not mentioned?

• "A lack of aspen regeneration in deteriorating stands can result from suppression of suckering by the overstory." (3-15).

What monitoring does the Forest use to determine the relative contribution of suppression of suckering versus livestock/elk browsing to lack of aspen regeneration?

• Table 3.2 indicates that aspen is the single largest vegetation type in the watershed.

• "A combination of factors, beaver trapping, grazing, road building, logging, recreators, mining, dams and others led to changes in the hydrology of the [riparian] area." (3-21)

Such activities would cumulatively be continuing in the riparian areas.

• "Currently no quantitative riparian vegetation data has been collected for the main stem of Huntington Creek." (3-21) "The complexity of ... impacts make a condition and trend difficult to quantify." (3-22)

Have quantitative vegetation data been gathered for the main stem of Huntington Creek in the 8 years since this report?

This shows the importance of establishing reference riparian areas to make possible sustainable ecosystem management.

\

• On the left fork of Huntington Creek, narrow leaf cottonwood is no longer present. (3-22).

Are there plans for restoration of narrow leaf cottonwood here?

• Above Electric Lake, vegetation is only in "fair" condition and these "harsh sites" are slow to show recovery. "Sheep impacts are the most prevalent in this part of the drainage, however, recent livestock management plans have been addressing those problems." (3-23)

What has been the nature of these plans, and the impact of their implementation?

• In the area from the Forest Boundary to the Left Fork of Huntington Creek and to Electric Lake, dispersed recreation is "causing a negative impact to riparian vegetation" and is offsetting gains from livestock management. "Some areas are denuded of all vegetation"; cottonwood and willow regeneration are impacted by compacted soil and recreational use; sediment is entering the stream channels; water flow is more rapid without vegetation. (3-23).

What management actions and effects have taken place since 1996 to address this unsustainability?

• Bennetts Canyon, Scad Valley and Nuck Woodard Creek have segments showing "moderate to heavy impacts from cattle both in and adjacent to the creeks"; Spring Creek, North Fork Lake Canyon, South Fork Lake Canyon, Bennetts Canyon, Paradise Creek, and Scad Valley have some segments "with moderate to heavy impacts adjacent and in some cases in the creek, due to sheep"; and the mouth of the Left Fork Huntington Creek and South Hughs canyon are "heavily impacted due to recreation." (3-24).

This is a list of unsustainable impacts to riparian areas, which are perhaps the most critical ecosystem in the Forest.Moreover the report notes that "At present, the largest significant contiguous reverie corridor which remains intact is the Upper Scad/Staker Creek/Left Fork/Huntington habitat."(3-36). Also, there is "one small population of Bonneville cutthroat" in Spring Creek (3-36); Spring Creek is listed above as having "moderate to heavy impacts" due to sheep.

What has been changed since this 1996 report to improve conditions in this significant riparian region?

• Lakeside vegetation is trampled or denuded by vehicle traffic, fishermen, and remaining livestock use. (3-24)

What has been changed since this 1996 report?

• Livestock use is heavy on Booths willow/water sedges type and these may be important to deer and moose. (3-25).

Moose?

• Beaked sedge can be adversely affected by deep standing water and pitting from livestock use of these vegetation types "can be a problem." (3-25)

Is the Forest insuring that Booths willow and beaked sedge are reproducing well? Are other native willows absent that should be here?

• "The abundance and distribution of perennial grasses and forbes [sic] has been increasing and continues [sic] to slowly improve." (3-26).

The reference for improvement is "personal communication." Does the Forest have quantitative or systematic data on this?

What is the cover, abundance, and distribution?

Are these native perennial grasses and forbs, or exotic species?

• Increases in wildlife populations and human recreation "have absorbed most of the benefits" of improved livestock management in the uplands. "Favoring one chronic disturbance over another has led to only marginal improvement of the vegetation (3-27).

What management is proposed to allow actual recovery of native vegetation, wildlife, and ecosystem health?

• Bighorn sheep disappeared from the Huntington area near the turn of the century. (3-32)

Is reintroduction of bighorn sheep, as in Hells Canyon National Recreation Area of Oregon and Idaho a possibility?

• Beaver are present, but "in some cases their dams are removed to prevent flooding of roads." (3-33)

What options exist for increased presence of beaver and reduction of dam removal?

• Mule deer declines "are likely the result of the drought and not the result of elk displacing deer on winter range (a condition which is not common) as some people think." See also "Winter range is considered to be the limiting factor for mule deer and elk populations in this area. The quality of deer and elk winter range has steadily decreased as juniper savannahs have been replaced by pinyon; juniper savannahs harbor a relatively lush herbaceous cover that is not present in the pinyon community." (3-33)."

What evidence exists that elk do not displace deer on winter range other than "personal communication" as referenced in this report?

Why is livestock removal of herbaceous cover not mentioned as a factor in the replacement of juniper by pinyon?

• "Dave Mills thinks that some high value sage communities are being replaced with less desirable grass communities." (3-33).

Has the Forest been tracking the condition and/or loss of sage communities?

Does the Forest have reference sage communities by which to judge the impact of livestock-grazed sage communities?

• "The [Huntington Creek Watershed] area is heavily roaded, is used extensively for recreation, is dammed, and is otherwise impacted in ways that are likely to have lasting negative impacts on some species. Identification and analysis of these impacts would require a level of detail that can't be offered in this report." (3-34)

• "There are no populations of Colorado River cutthroat in the watershed today." (3-36)

Are reintroductions of Colorado River cutthroat possible if habitat conditions were to improve?

• "In theory, grazing by domestic livestock only actually takes place on the "suitable range...which in this watershed comprises about; 20% of the total area within the cattle allotments...In actuality, in this watershed, there is evidence that the cattle use significantly more than 20% of the area" (3-38)

How is the Forest dealing with this gap between theory and reality regarding cattle grazing?

• "The cattle still overgraze several riparian areas, and the sheep still overuse many of the ridgetops" (3-39)

• Miller Flat is grazed by sheep, which are moved out "during holiday weekends in the summer to accommodate the increase in recreationists and reduce user conflicts: and winter use "occurs primarily at Miller Flat which is heavily sued by snowmobilers, cross country skiers, and snowplay enthusiasts (3-43).

What cumulative impacts analysis is available regarding the impacts on the vegetation, water-holding capacity, riparian areas, wildlife in Miller Flat?

• A rest-rotation system for camping "adjacent to streams and lakes in riparian areas" was instituted along Huntington Creek in the 1980s with buck and pole barriers, but there has been a "dramatic increase in recreation users, and/or lack of commitment in monitoring and moving the barriers as originally planned." (3-44)

What has the Forest done to address this problem since 1996?

• Timber accounts for "significantly less" than 10 percent of the economy in the Huntington Canyon area; the percent of dependence on livestock is not mentioned except that "Emery County remains one of the least productive in the state.." (3-47)

• Table 4-1: The causes of changes in the following conditions are listed as follows:
• Hydrologic function and geofluvial morphology: dams; roads; subsidence; destruction of beaver dams; mining; change in geology No mention is made of livestock grazing. And how is a "change in geology" a cause of change in hydrologic function?
• Continued erosion: amount and quality of roads; compaction; changes in vegetation communities. "Changes in vegetation communities" is not a "cause" of continued erosion. Livestock grazing is not mentioned.
• Changes in flora and fauna: logging; fire suppression; flood control; introduction of non-native species; overharvesting of select species; more utilization by humans. Livestock grazing is not mentioned!
• Changing recreation values: Increasing number of users leads to increased user conflicts; changing demographics..more urban and fewer locals; inc. Wealth and associated leisure time. Motorization and the dramatic increase in off-road vehicle use is not mentioned!

• "Beaver is the keystone species which has a direct effect on shaping the landscape. Dams constructed from aspen trap nutrient-rich sediment providing important riparian and aquatic habitats. Beaver dams also slow spring runoff, raise the water table, create ponds and wetlands for fish and other aquatic fauna." (4-13)

RELEVANCE TO FOREST MANAGEMENT

• Absence of monitoring information (e.g., regarding loss of wildlife or plant biodiversity) does not mean absence of adverse effects.
• Livestock grazing needs to be re-examined in light of cumulative impacts with wildlife and motorized recreation; and in light of the increased understanding of the critical role of riparian areas for the Forest and the keystone role of beaver for the Forest landscape.
• "Multiple use" means cumulative impacts must be analyzed in light of the best available ecological information.
• Reference areas are critically needed on the Forest to help answer many of the questions raised in this report.