My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP04908
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
4001-5000
>
WSP04908
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:16:08 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:44:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.765
Description
White River General Publications-Correspondence-Reports - White River National Forest Issues 2000
State
CO
Basin
Statewide
Date
11/1/1999
Author
USFS
Title
White River National Forest Land Management Plan
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
103
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Q:J"r:;t5 <br />....-.1 .. <br /> <br />Noxious weeds currently infest at least 90.000 acres of the Forest Alternatives Band E <br />have the most potential for the spread of weeds; Alternatives D and I have the least <br /> <br />Domestic livestock grazing. The level of grazing by domestic livestock is not expected <br />to change dramatically from the current situation in any alternative. <br /> <br />Fire management. Prescribed fire projects in forested areas are expected to make up a <br />majority of the fuels management portion of the annual planned program. More acres are <br />burned using prescribed fire in Alternatives D and B than in other alternatives. The most <br />acres of fuels treatment will occur in Alternatives F and I, with Alternative I having the <br />least annual treatment <br /> <br />Alternatives that limit the amount of resource production, such as C, E and I, may lead to <br />a trend in larger and longer-duration fires. <br /> <br />Wildlife. Grassland habitat management through prescribed burning will be greatest in <br />Alternatives C and D. Aspen management through prescribed burning will be greatest <br />under Alternatives I, D and C. Mixed shrublands will be managed by prescribed burning <br />the most in Alternatives B, D and E. Late-successional forest habitats are expected to <br />increase in all alternatives. Alpine habitats (areas above timberline) will change the most <br />under Alternatives E and F, which allocate the most acres to ski-based resorts and aerial <br />transportation corridors. Sagebrush, cottonwood riparian, and pinyon-juniper habitats are <br />not expected to change significantly in any altemative. Special habitats such as cliffs, <br />caves and waterfalls may be affected the most by alternatives that promote dispersed <br />recreation such as I, C and E, or from increased trail access in Alternatives E, Band C. <br />These impacts are not expected to significantly change viability conditions for any <br />management indicator species on the Forest <br /> <br />Mule deer and bighorn sheep will benefit from management areas that favor the specific <br />habitat needs of each species. Deer will benefit from Alternatives D, , and B, which have <br />the most acres dedicated to mule deer habitat management; the most acres dedicated to <br />bighorn sheep prescriptions are in Alternatives I and D. <br /> <br />Interior forest habitats (forest stands that are large enough that the middle portions of the <br />stands are not affected by the ecological changes that occur at the boundaries of these <br />stands) are important for a wide range of wildlife species. Alternative F, followed by <br />Alternatives Band D, will have the most impact on interior forest patch sizes in lodgepole <br />pine and spruce-fir stands as a result of timber management and road building. <br />Alternatives C and E will have the least impact on interior forests. <br /> <br />The connectivity of habitats across the landscape provides for the movement of species <br />to suitable habitats or to escape predation. Alternatives C. D and 1 maintain the best <br />conditions for unimpeded animal movement on the Forest; Alternatives B, E and F all <br />result in conditions that impede dispersal or movement of some species. <br /> <br />Elk habitat quality is maintained above the minimum level of concern in all alternatives. <br />Alternative I provides the greatest amount of eik security habitat of all the alternatives. <br />The largest number of recreational visitor days for big game hunting is expected in <br />Alternative F, followed by Alternatives E, B. C and D. <br /> <br />Overall, the wildlife resources and associated habitats on the Forest are in good <br />condition. Forest management actions are not expected to significantly affect species <br /> <br />-- 25 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.