10. DRAFT_Attachement 3_Kaibab National Forest Plan.pdf

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service

Southwestern Region

MB-R3-07-17

February 2014

Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest Coconino, Yavapai, and Mojave Counties, Arizona

Cover: collage of four images―Kanab Wilderness, Abert squirrel, Ponderosa pine, and aspen.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TTY). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Printed on recycled paper – February 2014

Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest (Updated 08/2016) i

Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest

Coconino, Yavapai, and Mojave Counties, Arizona

Responsible Official: Calvin Joyner, Regional Forester 333 Broadway Blvd., SE Albuquerque, NM 87102

(505) 842-3292

For more information, contact: Heather Provencio, Forest Supervisor, or Ariel Leonard, Forest Planner

Kaibab NF Supervisor’s Office 800 S. 6th Street Williams, AZ 86046

(928) 635-8200 Mailroom_R3_Kaibab@fs.fed.us

Copies of this plan and supporting material may be accessed at: http://bit.ly/KaibabForestPlan

Administrative changes to this Plan were made after the Record of Decision was signed on 02/03/2014. These changes were made in accordance with the 2012 Planning Rule (36 CFR 219.13). Details of plan changes are listed starting on page vi.

mailto:Mailroom_R3_Kaibab@fs.fed.us http://bit.ly/KaibabForestPlan

Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest (Updated 08/2016) iii

Content

Chapter 1. Introduction

Plan Area Roles and Contributions of the Kaibab National Forest Summary of the Analysis of the Management Situation Plan Purpose and Framework Plan Development Plan Content

Plan Components Other Content

Plan Concepts Plan Organization Plan Consistency Plan Implementation

Chapter 2. Forestwide Desired Conditions and Strategies Forest Resources

Major Vegetation Community Types Pinyon-juniper Communities Ponderosa Pine Forests Mixed Conifer Forests

Frequent Fire Mixed Conifer Forests Mesic Mixed Conifer/Spruce Fir Forests

Aspen Standards for Vegetation Management in All Forested Communities Guidelines for Vegetation Management in All Forested Communities Guidelines for Activities following Large-scale Disturbance Events Sagebrush Shrublands Grassland Communities

Montane/Subalpine Grasslands Colorado Plateau/Great Basin Grasslands Semi-desert Grasslands

Desert Communities Gambel Oak Shrublands Wetland/Cienega Cottonwood-Willow Riparian Forest

Soils and Watersheds Natural Waters Constructed Waters Wildlife Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species Restricted and Narrow Endemic Species Nonnative Invasive Species Air Quality Caves, Karst, and Mines Cliffs and Rocky Features Cultural Resources Traditional Cultural Properties iv Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest

Forest Uses, Goods, and Services Recreation and Scenery Traditional and Cultural Uses Livestock Grazing Forestry and Forest Products Wildland Fire Management Transportation and Forest Access Potable Water Lands Special Uses

Recreation Special Uses Communication and Electronic Sites Energy Transmission and Development Mineral and Mining Activities

Chapter 3: Management Areas Designated Areas

Wilderness Existing Wilderness on the Kaibab NF Frank’s Lake Geologic-Botanic Area Arizona Bugbane Botanical Area Double A Wild and Free Roaming Burro Territory Kaibab Squirrel National Natural Landmark Grand Canyon Game Preserve Kaibab Plateau-North Rim Parkway National Scenic and Recreation Trails

Management Areas Recommended Wilderness Areas Wildland-urban Interface Areas West-wide Energy Corridor Developed Recreation Sites Garland Prairie Management Area Bill Williams Mountain Management Area Red Butte Management Area House Rock Wildlife Area Pediocactus Conservation Area

Chapter 4. Suitability Timber Suitability Grazing Suitability and Capability Recreation Suitability

Chapter 5. Monitoring and Evaluation Introduction Monitoring Strategies

List of Preparers Glossary and Acronyms

Glossary Essential Government Acronym Dictionary (EGAD)

Literature Cited

Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest v

Appendix A. Proposed and Possible Actions Appendix B. Relevant Laws, Regulation, and Policy Appendix C. Large Tree Retention Classes for Ponderosa Pine Appendix D. Kaibab National Forest Plan Revision Climate Change Approach... 205 Appendix E. Kaibab National Forest Major Potential Natural Vegetation Types..219 Appendix F. Electronic Sites and Utility Corridors

List of Figures Figure 1. Vicinity map of the Kaibab National Forest Figure 2. Management areas on the North Kaibab Ranger District Figure 3. Management areas on the Tusayan Ranger District Figure 4. Management areas on the Williams Ranger District Figure 5. Kaibab NF lands suitable and unsuitable for livestock grazing Figure 6. Recreation opportunity settings for the Williams Ranger District Figure 7. Scenic integrity objectives for the Williams Ranger District Figure 8. Recreation opportunity settings for the Tusayan Ranger District Figure 9. Scenic integrity objectives for the Tusayan Ranger District Figure 10. Recreation opportunity settings for the North Kaibab Ranger District Figure 11. Scenic integrity objectives for the North Kaibab Ranger District

List of Tables Table 1. Timber suitability calculation for the Kaibab NF Table 2. Grazing capability calculations for the Kaibab NF Table 3. Areas unsuitable for grazing on the Kaibab NF Table 4. Suitability for mineral and energy activities on the Kaibab NF Table 5. Matrix for the Kaibab NF Monitoring Plan

Acknowledgement: We would like to thank the following friends and family of the Kaibab NF for their generous line drawing contributions: Andrew Sánchez Meador (pine trees), Carla Roybal (oak tree), Aubrey Maccoux LeDuc (Kanab Creek Canyon) and Donna Laing (nuthatch, cabin).

vi Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest (Updated 08/2016)

Administrative changes to this Plan were made May 2015 as the result of appeals filed and informal resolution agreement and in response to appeal resolution instructions provided by the Forest Service Chief's Reviewing Officer following administrative review. These changes to the Forest Plan highlight cave, karst, and hydrogeological resource management (p. 31, 57, 58, 70, 77, 189, 190) , clarify the relationship between grazing capability and suitability (p. 111, 112), and better explain the role of allotment management plans and annual operating instructions in making adjustments to livestock grazing using the adaptive management framework (p. 70).

Administrative changes to this plan were made August 2016 to address inconsistencies with language used in the supporting analysis document “Ecological Sustainability Report where the definitions and usage of the words rare and restricted are explicit. The original plan used the word rare in places where the term restricted is more accurate, including the section titled “Rare and Narrow Endemic Species” and all references to it. A non-substantive correction was made to this plan to replace the word “rare” with the word “restricted” on the following pages: 52, 54, 58, 59, 104, 153, and 215. This does not affect the implementation or analysis conducted for this plan.

Administrative changes to “Chapter 5 Monitoring Plan” of this plan were made August 2016 to improve alignment with the 2012 Planning Rule monitoring requirements. Changes include the addition and modification of monitoring questions as well as to the narrative sections of Chapter 5 that lay out the approach and changes to the legal framework. Detailed changes to content can be viewed at http://bit.ly/Chap5Changes

Changes were made August 2016 to Appendix D. Kaibab National Forest’s Plan Revision Climate Change Approach to incorporate new science, strategies, and policies since the original plan was drafted.

http://bit.ly/Chap5Changes

Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest 1

Chapter 1. Introduction

Plan Area The Kaibab National Forest (NF) is one of six national forests in Arizona. It covers 1.6 million acres, and is located in Coconino, Yavapai, and Mohave Counties. The Kaibab NF is broken into three geographically separate ranger districts: the North Kaibab Ranger District lies north of Grand Canyon National Park, the Tusayan Ranger District is south of Grand Canyon National Park, and the Williams Ranger District is southernmost, separated from the Tusayan Ranger District by private and Arizona State lands (Figure 1). The Kaibab NF shares boundaries with Grand Canyon National Park, the Prescott and Coconino NFs, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Arizona Strip District, the Navajo and Havasupai Indian Reservations, city of Williams, town of Tusayan, Camp Navajo (a National Guard training site), and private lands.

Figure 1. Vicinity map of the Kaibab National Forest

2 Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest

This plan1 covers the National Forest System lands within the Kaibab NF boundary, with the exception of Sycamore Canyon Wilderness, which is covered by the “Coconino National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan.” This plan provides guidance for all of the Kendrick Mountain Wilderness, including the portion within the boundaries of the Coconino NF.

Roles and Contributions of the Kaibab National Forest The distinctive history and characteristics of the Kaibab NF frame the roles and contributions it provides to the local area, State, region, and Nation. From the high-elevation lands of the Kaibab Plateau on the North Kaibab Ranger District to the rolling hills and open country of the Tusayan Ranger District to the scattered cinder cones and canyons of the Williams Ranger District, the Kaibab NF includes wide variations in landscape, vegetation, and wildlife. As such, the Kaibab NF provides unique resources and recreation opportunities that attract a wide spectrum of forest users.

The diversity of wildlife found on the Kaibab NF provides enjoyment and aesthetic value for the photographer, bird watcher, nature lover, hiker, camper, and hunter. The Kaibab NF is home to large mammals including mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), elk (Cervus elaphus), bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis), pronghorn (Antilocapra americana), mountain lion (Puma concolor), black bear (Ursus americanus), and many other species.

The Kaibab NF has a diversity of vegetation types due to the range of elevation and soil types.

Pinyon-juniper woodlands cover 40 percent of the Kaibab NF and are found at lower elevations.

As elevation increases, pinyon-juniper transitions to ponderosa pine forest, which covers 35 percent of the Kaibab NF. Other vegetation types include mixed conifer, grasslands, sagebrush shrublands, Gambel oak shrublands, and desert communities. Aspen, riparian, and wetland vegetation is present in small, yet important, areas.

The Kaibab NF lies mostly within Coconino County, which is the second largest county in the United States. Of the county’s 18,000 square miles, only 13 percent is privately owned. Its population of 134,000 averages only about 7 people per square mile. Due to the small percentage of private land in the area, the Kaibab NF has long played an important role in providing for a variety of resources, uses, and activities including ranching, logging, forest product collection, hunting, and cultural events.

American Indian tribes and people in nearby communities have long-time connections to the Kaibab NF. It contains lands traditionally used by the Navajo, Hualapai, Kaibab Band of Paiute, Hopi, Havasupai, Yavapai, and Zuni people. The communities around the Kaibab NF were later settled by Mormons, Spanish explorers, cattlemen, and loggers. This history continues to influence the culture today as western rural lifestyles and traditional uses are important to the local communities.

Recreationists engage in a variety of activities such as hiking, camping, sightseeing, and driving/riding for pleasure. Tourism has played an increased role over the last 20 years. The

1 Note: terms defined in the glossary and are underlined text throughout the plan. These terms are hyperlinked to the glossary in electronic versions of the plan.

Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest 3 proximity of the Kaibab NF to Grand Canyon National Park and historic Route 66 attracts visitors from across the Nation and throughout the world. Tourism-related activities contribute to local economic development and opportunities. Many area residents have jobs or businesses dependent on forest resources such as ranching, sandstone quarrying, wood harvesting, and outfitter-guiding.

Summary of the Analysis of the Management Situation The management situation was analyzed in the 2009 Comprehensive Evaluation Report (CER;

USDA 2009) and supplement to the CER (USDA 2010). The CER evaluated the need for change in light of how management under the 1988 plan (as amended) was affecting the conditions and trends related to sustainability. The CER integrated key findings from the ecological and the socio-economic sustainability reports. This integration displayed the key management needs for change, potential activities, and socioeconomic ecological interactions. These were used to identify where the conditions and trends indicated a potential need for change in the plan. The supplement to the CER contains additional analysis and information about projections of demand, benchmarks, and species considerations. Together, these documents meet the content requirements of the analysis of the management situation (AMS). These documents are available upon request and can be found on the Kaibab NF Web site at:

http://fs.usda.gov/goto/kaibab/plan_revision.

The CER/AMS and subsequent management reviews considered this information along with the Forest Service mission, Forest role and contributions, and anticipated demands. They identified four areas where there were priority needs for change in program direction. These are to:

• Modify forest structure and species composition to restore or maintain sustainability and restore historic fire regimes.

• Protect and regenerate aspen to ensure long-term healthy aspen populations.

• Protect and restore natural waters and wetlands to ensure healthy riparian communities.

• Restore grasslands by reducing tree encroachment and restoring fire.

The most apparent need for change is to reduce the risk of uncharacteristic fires and restore the structure, species composition, and function of forested ecosystems. This emerged as the highest need for change in the ecological sustainability report and as a very high need in the socio-economic sustainability analysis. The concordant socioeconomic and ecological benefits of restoring forest structure include providing quality wildlife habitat, improving scenic integrity, providing for commercial and personal use wood products, protecting cultural resources, protecting against undesired fire effects, improving public and firefighter safety, increasing understory diversity, and improving soil condition.

Restoring aspen also emerged as a high priority. Aspen is an important species because of its contribution to local ecological diversity and its high social and economic value associated with scenery and tourism. Aspen has declined in areas across the West due to the combined effects of ungulate browsing, insects, disease, severe weather events, and lack of fire disturbance. Aspen decline has been of particular concern on the Williams Ranger District.

Protecting natural waters came forward as an important need for change. Natural waters in arid landscapes are centers of high biological diversity. About half of the natural springs and other http://fs.usda.gov/goto/kaibab/plan_revision

4 Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest waters on the Kaibab NF are currently departed from reference conditions. Protection and restoration of these rare resources can be accomplished through actions such as controlling invasive species, maintaining or removing constructed modifications, fencing out large ungulates, and improving hydrologic function by reducing tree densities in adjacent vegetation types.

Besides ecological values, natural water bodies are associated with high social and economic values such as bird watching and traditional cultural uses.

Grasslands are much less abundant than they were historically, which reduces the amount of available habitat for grassland-associated species. The subalpine/montane grasslands on the North Kaibab Ranger District tend to be long and narrow; as a result, they are at a higher risk of loss as trees encroach from the edges and the openings close more quickly. There is a need to develop desired conditions and set objectives for grassland ecosystems on the Kaibab NF, which are lacking in the original forest plan.

This plan focuses on the identified needs for change stated above. Over time, new information and changing conditions will emerge that call for changes in management. As these needs are identified, adaptive planning will be used to incorporate new information and amend the plan as needed.

Plan Purpose and Framework The land and resource management plan (hereafter referred to as the plan) guides the Kaibab NF in fulfilling its stewardship responsibilities to best meet the needs of the American people for the present and into the future. The plan provides a framework to promote ecological integrity and guide management on the Kaibab NF so that it is ecologically sustainable and contributes to social and economic sustainability. This plan provides Forest-specific guidance and information for project and activity decision making over the plan period, which is generally considered to be 10 to 15 years. It is strategic in nature and does not specifically authorize or prescribe any specific projects or activities.

Plan Development The National Forest Management Act directs that forest plans be revised on a 10- to 15-year cycle. Twenty-five years have passed since the regional forester approved the original Kaibab forest plan on April 15, 1988; this plan has been amended 10 times since that date. The last 25 years have provided new scientific information and understanding and changes in economic, social, and ecological conditions. This has resulted in a shift in management emphasis from outputs to outcomes.

This forest plan revision process was conducted in accordance with 1982 Rule Provisions as provided for in the transition language of the 2012 Land and Resource Management Planning Rule (36 CFR 219.17(b)(3)). This plan revision was initiated prior to the availability of the 2012 Rule, and as a result, the responsible official has chosen to use the 2012 Rule’s transition provisions to revise the plan.

The original plan was used as a basis for the revised plan, but some content was not retained because it reiterated existing law, regulation, and policy; did not reflect current scientific information; was outside of management control; or due to changed conditions on and around the Kaibab NF. Development of the revised plan was an iterative process utilizing best available scientific information, regional guidance, internal feedback, and collaboration with a wide variety

Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest 5 of government agencies, tribes, non-governmental organizations, and publics. Comments received during the formal 90-day public comment period in 2012 were used to further refine plan content and environmental analysis.

Plan Content This plan includes “plan components” and “other content.” Plan components are displayed in text boxes to distinguish them from other sections of the plan. Once approved, any substantive changes to plan components would require a plan amendment with appropriate analysis as required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). A change to “other content” may be made using an administrative correction process. Administrative corrections are used to make changes such as updates to data and maps, management approaches, and relevant background information, and to fix typographical errors. The public is notified of all administrative corrections of the plan.

Plan Components Plan components (decisions) include: goals/desired conditions, objectives, standards, guidelines, suitability of uses, management areas (including designated areas), and monitoring. They were developed collaboratively with input from a variety of external and internal stakeholders with broad interdisciplinary representation. Plan components do not reiterate existing law, regulation, or policy. An interdisciplinary team refined the final form and organization of the plan to make it as understandable, useable, and integrated as possible.

Desired Conditions (Goals) describe the aspirational picture for the Kaibab NF. Goals, as required by the 1982 Planning Rule provisions, are articulated as “desired conditions” in this plan. They are the ecological and socioeconomic attributes toward which management of the land and resources of the plan area are directed. They are not commitments or final decisions approving projects or activities; rather, they guide the development of projects and activities.

They have been written to contain enough specificity to allow for determining progress toward their achievement. Projects are designed to maintain or move toward desired conditions and to be consistent with the plan over the long term. In some cases, goals/desired conditions may only be achievable over hundreds of years.

Objectives describe how the Kaibab NF intends to move toward the desired conditions.

Objectives are concise projections of measurable, time specific intended outcomes. Objectives have been established for the work considered most important to address the needs for change and achieve desired conditions. They also provide metrics for evaluating accomplishments.

Guidelines are technical design criteria or constraints on project and activity decision making that help to make progress toward desired conditions. A guideline allows for departure from its terms, so long as the intent of the guideline is met. Deviation from a guideline must be specified in the decision document with the supporting rationale. When deviation from a guideline does not meet the original intent, a plan amendment is required.

Standards are technical design constraints that must be followed when an action is being taken to make progress toward desired conditions. Standards differ from guidelines in that standards do not allow for any deviation without a plan amendment.

6 Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest

Management Areas are delineated areas with a common set of plan components that differ from the general Forest. Management Areas are established to meet specific management needs.

Designated Areas are a special type of management area that are established by Congress or other administrative processes of the Federal executive branch because of unique or special characteristics. Examples of statutorily designated areas are national heritage areas, national recreation areas, national scenic trails, wild and scenic rivers, wilderness areas, and wilderness study areas. Examples of administratively designated areas are experimental forests, research natural areas, scenic byways, botanical areas, and significant caves.

Suitability of National Forest System (NFS) lands are identified as “suitable” for various uses.

An area may be identified as suitable or not suitable for certain uses, depending on its compatibility with desired conditions and objectives for the area. This plan addresses suitability for timber, grazing, recreation, minerals, and energy resource activities.

Monitoring is the part of the adaptive management strategy used to determine the degree to which on-the-ground management is maintaining or making progress toward desired conditions.

The monitoring plan includes questions and performance measures designed to evaluate implementation and effectiveness, and inform adaptive management.

Other Content The “other content” in this plan includes background information, existing conditions, management approaches, and contextual information. Management approaches are not plan decisions, but they help clarify how plan direction may be applied. Management approaches include information and guidance for projects and activity decision making to help achieve desired conditions and objectives. Management approaches describe priorities, considerations, and strategies for achieving desired conditions and articulate the strategies needed to effectively make progress toward desired conditions within the context of the operating environment of the plan.

Plan Concepts All lands is the concept that ecosystems transcend land ownership boundaries, thus, effective land and resource management requires cooperation and collaboration among the Forest Service, other land managing agencies, tribes, and private landowners. This plan was developed using an approach whereby plan components were developed considering the greater landscape and the Kaibab NF’s ecological, social, and economic role.

Sustainability is meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. Sustainability is composed of desirable social, economic, and ecological conditions or trends interacting at varying spatial and temporal scales, embodying the principles of multiple use and sustained yield (FSM 2020.5).

Resilience is the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity, and feedback (FSM 2020.5).

Scale. Desired conditions are described at multiple scales where appropriate. Descriptions at various scales are sometimes necessary to provide adequate detail and guidance for the design of

Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest 7 future projects and activities that will help achieve the desired conditions over time. The three scales used in this plan are: fine scale, mid-scale, and landscape scale.

Fine scale is an area10 acres or less in size. In forested ecosystems, it is a scale at which the distribution of individual trees (single, grouped, or aggregates of groups) is described. Fine-scale desired conditions provide the view that can be observed standing in one location on the ground. Fine-scale desired conditions typically contain greater variability, which is desirable for providing heterogeneity at smaller spatial scales.

Mid-scale desired conditions are composed of assemblages of fine-scale units and have descriptions that would be averaged across areas of 100- to 1,000-acre units.

Landscape scale is an assemblage of 10 or more mid-scale units, typically totaling more than 10,000 acres, composed of variable elevations, slopes, aspects, soils, plant associations, and disturbance processes. Landscape scale desired conditions provide the big picture overview with resolution that would, for example, be observable from an airplane or from a zoomed out Google Earth view. The landscape scale is also an appropriate scale for describing less common components that would not necessarily occur on every mid-scale unit within the landscape.

Potential natural vegetation (PNVT) is the vegetation that would occur in the presence of natural disturbance processes such as frequent fire return intervals. In some areas, there is a difference between the existing vegetation type and the potential vegetation type, such as where historic grasslands are currently encroached by trees. The potential natural vegetation, not the existing vegetation, determines which desired conditions apply. This term is synonymous with the term Ecological Response Unit used by Forests in the Southwestern Region.

Vegetation structure includes both the vertical and horizontal dimensions. Horizontal structure may refer to patterns of trees or groups of trees and openings, as well as tree size and tree density. Vertical structure may refer to the layers, appearance, and composition of vegetation between the ground and the top of the tallest vegetation and may include grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees.

Natural variability references past conditions and processes that provide important context and guidance relevant to the environments and habitats in which native species evolved. Disturbance driven spatial and temporal variability is vital to ecological systems. Biologically appropriate disturbances provide for heterogeneous conditions and subsequent diversity. Conversely, “uncharacteristic disturbance” such as high-intensity fire in plant communities that historically had a frequent low intensity fire regime can have the effect of reducing diversity, increasing homogeneity, and resulting in states that may be permanently altered.

Ranges of values presented in desired conditions reflect either natural or desired variation in the composition and structure within a community or resource area. Desired conditions may or may not be the same as historic conditions and may have wide ranges due to spatial variability in soils, elevation, aspect, or social values. Where desired conditions specify a range of values, the full spectrum of values within that range is desirable, although the desirable distribution of values within that range may vary

8 Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest depending on the resource. It may also be desirable to manage for desired conditions at the upper or lower end of a range in a particular area, such as lower vegetation density in the wildland-urban interface (WUI) to achieve the desired fire behavior within proximity of private property and human occupancy. Higher densities may be desired in other areas to meet habitat requirements for specific species.

Integration recognizes and identifies key relationships between various plan resources and activities. Plan components are integrated to address a variety of ecological and human needs. For example, desired conditions for ponderosa pine incorporate habitat needs for a variety of species, as well as the scenic components that recreationists desire. Interrelationships between parts of the plan are identified with crosswalks to show their systematic nature. In electronic versions of the plan, these crosswalks are hyperlinked (indicated by italicized text) to allow users to be easily redirected to the other relevant sections of the plan.

Adaptive management is a system of management practices based on clearly identified intended outcomes and monitoring to determine if management actions are meeting those outcomes. If needed, it facilitates management changes that will best ensure that those outcomes are met or re-evaluated. Adaptive management stems from the recognition that knowledge about natural resource systems is sometimes uncertain (36 CFR 220.3), particularly for dynamic issues such as climate change, invasive species, and disturbances that are not easily predicted.

Climate change is addressed throughout this plan, indirectly through desired conditions in the form of functional ecosystems and resilient landscapes, and directly in management approaches and the monitoring plan where appropriate. Appendix D provides a more detailed explanation of the strategy the Kaibab NF is using to address climate change.

Plan Organization Chapter 1 – Introduction briefly describes the planning area, the analysis of the management situation, purpose of this plan, plan components, how these components are organized within the plan, project consistency with the plan, and how the plan is implemented through project-level planning.

Chapter 2 – Forestwide Desired Conditions and Strategies includes forestwide desired conditions (goals), objectives, standards, and guidelines and is split into two sections: “Forest Resources” and “Forest Uses, Goods, and Services” (activities). Standards and guidelines are typically located in the relevant activity section of the plan, but when standards or guidelines pertain to multiple activities, they are located in the applicable resource section.

Chapter 3 – Management Areas contains the plan components applicable to specific areas that call for site-specific management. The management areas chapter is divided into two sections:

“Designated Areas” and “Management Areas” (MAs). Designated areas have specific designations such as wilderness or botanic areas. MAs include wildland-urban interface, utility corridors, developed recreation sites, and other places such as Red Butte and Bill Williams Mountain that call for special site-specific management.

Chapter 4 – Suitability is the appropriateness of applying certain resource management practices to a particular area of land in consideration of the relevant social, economic, and ecological factors. Suitability is determined based on compatibility with desired conditions and objectives in the plan area. Suitability is determined for timber production, livestock grazing, recreation, Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest 9 minerals, and energy resource activities. Descriptions of the criteria used in making the determinations are provided along with the results. The identification of an area as suitable for a particular use or uses is guidance for project and activity decision making and is not a commitment or a final decision approving projects and activities. It also does not mean that a particular use will or will not occur in the area.

Chapter 5 – Monitoring and evaluation of plan implementation is used to determine progress toward achieving desired conditions and objectives, and to determine how well management requirements, such as standards and guidelines, are being applied. The monitoring strategy provides a framework for subsequent monitoring and evaluation designed to inform adaptive management.

Plan Consistency As required by the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) and the National Forest System Land Management Planning Rule, all projects and activities authorized by the Forest Service must be consistent with the plan by being consistent with applicable plan components (decisions).

In addition to consistency with plan direction, Forest projects and activities are developed to be consistent with applicable laws, regulations, and policies. “Projects and activities” cover all actions under 16 U.S.C. 1604(i).

When a proposed project or activity is not consistent with a plan component, the responsible official has the following options:

• Modify the proposal so that the project or activity will be consistent;

• Reject the proposal; or

• Amend the plan contemporaneously with the approval of the project or activity so that the project or activity is consistent with the plan as amended. The amendment may be limited to apply only to the project or activity.

Plan Implementation Project-level planning is the mechanism for plan implementation. Project planning translates the desired conditions and objectives in the plan into proposals that identify specific actions, design features, and project-level monitoring. Proposal development for projects addresses site-specific needs developed locally with input from experts and stakeholders and consideration of the most current and relevant information. Project decisions are made following public involvement and analysis. Important considerations in project development include consistency with the plan, consistency with higher-level direction, projects’ potential effects on achieving desired conditions at multiple scales, and feedback from project- and plan-level monitoring regarding the effectiveness of management strategies.

Forest projects and activities are to be consistent with the direction in this plan as well as with that from current law, regulation, and policy. This plan does not reiterate higher-level direction;

instead, it includes a partial list of applicable laws, regulations, executive orders, and policy for reference in Appendix B.

In order to ensure a project is consistent with the plan, its design and implementation should consider its setting, any Management Areas it overlaps, and the guidance for any resources or conditions that may be present in the area (e.g. cultural resources, nonnative species, geologic

10 Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest formations, wildlife, etc.). Additionally, it should consider any potential conflicts with other authorized projects and activities. Project design should be consistent with Forest-wide plan direction except where superseded by Management Area direction, which takes precedence.

When using this plan to develop project specifications, it is important to keep in mind that desired conditions for all scales are applicable regardless of the size of the project. Smaller projects need to consider the larger scales in terms of how they contribute to the desired conditions within the context of the larger-scale unit, and larger projects need to consider the design features required to ensure that the fine scale desired conditions are achieved and maintained across the project area.

Consideration of scale is also important when evaluating progress toward desired conditions because the range of variability and distribution of conditions is affected by the scale at which they are viewed. For example, when desired conditions are articulated at larger scales, they represent an average of fine-scale conditions across broader areas. This may make conditions appear less variable when they are evaluated at large scales, even though variability exists at the smaller scales.

Plan- and project-level monitoring and evaluation are the tools for gathering information on progress toward desired conditions, the effectiveness of plan implementation, and the appropriateness of plan direction. This information is subsequently used to determine management needs and adjust management strategies, which, in part, determine the form of future projects and activities. As such, monitoring and evaluation are key elements of plan implementation, as they guide future management occurring under the plan. The monitoring plan contained in Chapter 5 of this document, in conjunction with project-level monitoring, will provide the framework for enabling adaptive management on the Kaibab NF.

Chapter 2. Forestwide Desired Conditions and Strategies

Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest 11

Chapter 2. Forestwide Desired Conditions and Strategies

This chapter lays out the desired conditions and the strategies the Kaibab NF intends to use to achieve them. Desired conditions define what the Kaibab NF should look like and what goods and services it should provide. Strategies consist of objectives, standards, and guidelines; they define when, where, and how to achieve the desired conditions. They define the actions needed to move toward desired conditions and the sideboards needed to constrain those actions in the form of objectives, standards, and guidelines.

Throughout this chapter, plan components (plan decisions) are displayed within text boxes. Text outside of boxes does not constitute plan decisions; it is background material, explanations, or descriptions of management approaches.

Desired conditions and strategies (objectives, standards, and guidelines) related to the major vegetation types are presented first in this plan because they provide the setting or habitat where the other resources occur and activities take place. These desired conditions are integrated and are intended to reflect not only healthy ecological systems, but also the social and economic considerations needed for long-term sustainability.

Forest Resources Major Vegetation Community Types The major vegetation communities on the Kaibab NF are presented in the order from those occupying the greatest acreage to the least. The mapped boundaries of the vegetation communities are based on of the potential natural vegetation type that would occur in the presence of natural disturbance processes such as fire. Appendix E displays the approximate location and area of the major vegetation community types on the Kaibab NF. The PNVT determination for a specific location is should be based on soils and other site-specific indicators.

Pinyon-juniper Communities The pinyon-juniper vegetation communities are collectively composed of the pinyon-juniper grassland, pinyon-juniper sagebrush, and pinyon-juniper persistent woodland communities.

Pinyon-juniper communities generally occur at elevations between 5,300 and 7,400 feet. They occur on all three districts and cover about 630,000 acres on the Kaibab NF. Pinyon-juniper communities are the setting for a variety of uses and activities including wood cutting, livestock grazing, camping, hunting, and pinyon nut gathering.

Under their natural disturbance regime, these plant communities are dominated by one or more species of pinyon pine and/or juniper with at least 10 percent tree canopy. Pinyon is occasionally absent, but one or more juniper species are always present. They can occur with a grass/forb-dominated understory (pinyon-juniper grasslands forest communities), a shrub-dominated understory (pinyon-juniper sagebrush forest community), or a sparse discontinuous understory of some grasses and/or shrubs (pinyon-juniper persistent woodland forest community). Two-needle pinyon pine (Pinus edulis) is common; as well as one-seed (Juniperus monosperna), Utah (J.

osteosperma), Rocky Mountain (J. scopulorum), and alligator (J. deppeana) juniper. Much of the

12 Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest pinyon-juniper vegetation communities are currently denser than they were historically because of changes in wildfire occurrence. Greater tree density has increased competition for water and nutrients. This, in turn, has caused a reduction in understory plant cover and diversity, a loss of ground cover, and subsequent increases in soil erosion.

Pinyon-juniper communities provide important winter and spring range for wildlife. Mature pinyon-juniper stands are particularly important for several bird species of conservation concern, many of which rely on the habitat features provided only by mature stands. Such features include large-diameter trunks for nest cavities and greater berry and seed production. On the North Kaibab Ranger District, pinyon-juniper habitat provides primary and critical winter range and transitional habitat during migration for mule deer. Similarly, pinyon-juniper habitat on the Williams and Tusayan Ranger Districts provides winter and transitional range for elk and other game species.

Desired Conditions Common to All Pinyon-juniper Communities

• Pinyon-juniper communities occur as a shifting mosaic interspersed with openings across the landscape. The configuration of vegetation and openings provides foraging and browsing opportunities for wildlife, and enough sighting distance and hiding cover for pronghorn to escape predators.

• Old growth occurs throughout the landscape, generally in small areas as individual components, or as clumps. The location of old growth shifts on the landscape over time as a result of succession and disturbance (tree growth and mortality).

• At the mid-scale and above, canopy cover is at least 10 percent with a mix of young and mature groups and clumps of trees.

• The mature groups of trees are structurally diverse, containing large live trees, as well as trees with dead or broken tops, gnarls, and burls. Snags, green snags, and downed trees > 10″ at root collar are present and average 1 to 2 per acre. Some tree groups have 30 to 40 percent canopy cover that provides habitat for nesting, bedding, and foraging.

• The composition, structure, and function of vegetative conditions are resilient to the frequency, extent, and severity of disturbances (e.g. insects, diseases, and fire) and climate variability.

• Plant litter (leaves, needles, etc.) and understory plant cover contributes to soil stabilization, prevents erosion, promotes nutrient cycling, improves water retention, provides cover and forage for small mammals, and conditions necessary for pinyon seed germination.

• Nurse trees provide understory microclimate with improved nutrient and soil properties, higher soil moisture, lower temperatures, and lower light levels, which increases the survival of pinyon seedlings under harsh conditions.

• There are opportunities for collecting forest products (firewood, pinyon nuts, posts, and poles, etc.) in a manner consistent with other desired conditions.

• A robust crop of pinyon pine nuts is regularly produced.

Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest 13

Pinyon-juniper Grasslands The pinyon-juniper grassland vegetation community is composed of the pinyon-juniper grassland and juniper grassland vegetation types. Pinyon is occasionally absent, but one or more juniper species are always present. Except in some post-fire communities, these areas historically had at least 10 percent tree canopy cover with an understory dominated by grassland species, often on deep soils with gentle topography. Areas that historically had less than 10 percent tree canopy cover are classified as grasslands. This distinction is necessary for differentiating between vegetation types and their respective desired conditions, but it is recognized that transition between pinyon-juniper grasslands and grassland savanna actually occurs along a gradient.

Desired Conditions for Pinyon-juniper Grasslands

• Pinyon-juniper grasslands are generally uneven-aged and open in appearance. Trees occur as individuals, but occasionally are in small groups and range from young to old.

• Scattered shrubs and a dense herbaceous understory including native grasses, forbs, and annuals are present. A herbaceous understory maintains soil productivity, provides quality habitat, resists soil erosion, and can support frequent, low-intensity surface fires.

• The composition, structure, and function of vegetative conditions are resilient to the frequency, extent, and severity of disturbances (including insects, diseases, and fire) and climate variability.

• Understory composition is within the natural range of variability and contains diverse native herbaceous plant species that provide nutrition for pronghorn and other species.

• Depending on soil type and vegetation potential, bare soil varies between 10 and 60 percent. Basal vegetation varies between 5 and 50 percent ground cover. Organic litter varies between 30 and 50 percent of the ground cover. The relative proportion of vegetation canopy cover averages 40 to 60 percent grass, 10 to 30 percent forbs, and 5 to 20 percent shrub.

• Fires are typically low severity with a 0- to 35-year return interval (Fire Regime I).

Pinyon-juniper Sagebrush (Pinyon-juniper Shrub) In the pinyon-juniper sagebrush vegetation community, sage is the dominant shrub in most areas.

In some areas other shrub species may be dominant and sagebrush may not even be present. This vegetation type may better be described as pinyon-juniper shrublands, but for consistency with the potential natural vegetation types (PNVTs) identified for the Southwestern Region, they are referred to as pinyon-juniper sagebrush communities.

Pinyon-juniper sagebrush communities are concentrated in areas dominated by cold season precipitation regimes. They are usually found on sites with coarse-textured, gravelly, or lithic soil characteristics. Pinyon is occasionally absent, but one or more juniper species are always present.

These systems have open woodland canopies interspersed with Colorado Plateau and Great Basin shrub species such as big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata Nutt.), rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa (Pall. Ex (Pursh)), fourwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens (Pursh) Nutt.), and winterfat (Krascheninnikovia lanata (Pursh)).

Typical disturbances include fire, insects, and disease. Contemporary disturbances include mechanical removal of overstory trees. Fire absence since Euro-American settlement has not

14 Land and Resource Management Plan for the Kaibab National Forest resulted in dramatic increases in tree densities as with other woodland types, presumably since fire occurrence may not have been significantly altered in this community type following Euro- American settlement.

Desired Conditions in Pinyon-juniper Shrub

• The pinyon-juniper sagebrush shrub forest type is a mix of trees and shrubs that occur as shifting vegetation states (herbaceous dominated, shrub dominated, and tree dominated) in even-aged and uneven-aged patches with a variable understory. There is a mix of large and small to mid-size juniper.

• The shrub component consists primarily of sagebrush, but oak, cliffrose, and other shrub species may also be present. Depending on structural stage, the understory is dominated by shrubs. The shrub component consists of one or more shrub species, which are well distributed. Shrubs typically are in a closed-canopy state during the later successional stages.

• Litter and rock comprise the greatest percentage of ground cover.