Walker Basing Allotment Management Plan Environmental Assessment

Decision Notice

Finding of No Significant Impact
for
Walker Basin Cattle Allotment Management Plan

USDA Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Coconino National Forest
Beaver Creek Ranger District, Yavapai County, Arizona

An Environmental Assessment (EA) dealing with the development of a revised allotment management plan for the Walker Basin Allotment on the Coconino National Forest is available for review in the Forest Supervisor's Office at 2323 E. Greenlaw Lane, Flagstaff, Arizona 86004. The Environmental Assessment evaluates three alternatives in detail with one other eliminated from detail study. The detailed alternatives considered are: (1) No Action, which would continue with current management and stocking levels; (2) Alternative B, a deferred rotation system with some rest provided and additional pasture division; (3) Alternative C, a deferred rotation system with less pasture divisions than alternative B.

Based on the analysis and evaluation described in the Environmental Assessment, it is my decision to adopt Alternative B as the Preferred Alternative and is based on the following decision criteria:

1. Provides an opportunity to increase cattle numbers, yet recognizes and protects wildlife habitat and other resource values such as riparian habitat and watershed. Shorter duration of cattle grazing within pastures, will allow big game use to occur while reducing the amount of grazing use on regrowth. Reduces the amount of competition for forage between elk, deer, antelope, and cattle by implementing proper use standards for livestock and providing rested pastures. Alternatives A and C do not adequately reduce the overgrazing occurring on the allotment by both cattle and big game and livestock.
2. Provides the opportunity for resting pastures, without reducing the allotment carrying capacity and cattle numbers, due to the increased number of pastures. Alternatives A and C do not provide this without decreasing cattle numbers.
3. Eliminates livestock use within identified Merriams turkey habitat during nesting periods. Uses fence construction specifications to lessen impacts to big game migration. Alternatives A and C provide these, although as cattle continue to overgraze preferred areas, which could occur under these alternatives, quantity and quality of forage would not be optimized.
4. Lessens the amount of permittee labor during rounding up cattle while moving from pasture to pasture, thus reducing the cost of management by the permittee.

The actions of Alternative B are consistent with the Final Land and Resource Management Plan for the Coconino National Forest. The following is my reasoning for the finding:

1. The action does not change the management emphasis within Management Areas located within the allotment.
2. Supports standards and guidelines as provided in the Forest Plan for all activities occurring on the allotment.
3. Initiates monitoring to determine how well objectives are being met and how closely management standards have been applied to support requirement CFR 219.12(k) for the Forest Plan.
4. Meets requirements as prescribed in 36 CFR 219.20(a and b).
5. Provides management prescriptions that involve vegetative manipulation of Pinyon and Juniper tree cover within the guidelines of 36 CFR 219.27(a and b).

I have determined that this action is not a major federal action, individually or cumulatively, and will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Therefore, an environmental impact statement is not needed. This determination is based on the following factors:

- This action will not adversely affect threatened, endangered, sensitive species or their habitats determined under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.

- There are no farmlands, wetlands, or ecologically critical areas located on the allotment. Cultural resources will be protected.

- The physical and biological effects are limited to this immediate geographical area, which has no special uniqueness such as park land and the action does not set a precedent for other projects that may have significant effects.

- There are no known effects on the human environment that are highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks, and based on scoping, effects of this action are not likely to be controversial.

- There are no known significant irretrievable or irreversible commitment of resources, and the action does not threaten violation of Federal, local law or requirements imposed for protection of the environment.

This decision is subject to administrative review pursuant to 36 CFR 217. Any appeal of this decision must be fully consistent with 36 CFR 217.9, Content of Notice of Appeal, including the reasons for appeal. The appeal must be filed with David F. Jolly, Regional Forester, Southwestern Region, 517 Gold Avenue SW Albuquerque, NM 87102-0084, and a copy sent simultaneously to Alan S. Defler, Forest Supervisor, Coconino National Forest, 2323 E. Greenlaw Lane, Flagstaff, Arizona 86004 within 45 days of the date of legal notice of this decision in the Arizona Daily Sun newspaper. For additional information concerning this decision or the Forest Service appeal process, contact Gerald Mundell, Range Staff Officer, Coconino National Forest, at the above address, or phone (602) 527-7400.

Alan S. Defler
Date: 11/13/90

Last Revised: 26 April 2000