August 31, 1998

Chapter 2 - Major Revision Topics

and the Need to Change

Current Management Direction

INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents information structured around the seven major revision topics to be addressed in the forthcoming draft environmental impact statement. Included in the discussions are compelling facts and trends that serve to describe the current conditions and the need to change management as it currently exists.

This information was not arrived at quickly or without effort. Dozens of inventories and assessments were conducted in order to gather the most pertinent, accurate and up-to-date information available for the National Forest System units under review. This process also included assessing land uses and ecosystem components of adjacent and surrounding lands, regardless of their ownership. This was done in order to capture a broader understanding of the ecosystems at work all across the Northern Great Plains, and how, within that context, National Forest System units might better be managed for this generation and generations to come.

In addition, a great deal of effort was made to assess the attitudes, needs and values of people who live near and use the Northern Great Plains. This was done in order to bring citizens into the planning process. By understanding their needs and concerns, Forest Service managers can better anticipate the effects of changes in management on people, and develop strategies to address such effects.

A whole host of assessments and inventories and various analyses were conducted. Some of them that helped support the findings described in this chapter include: landscape and vegetative reviews, such as a wetlands inventory, aquatics assessment, grassland structure, range capability, forest health, and noxious weeds; plant and animal reviews, such as threatened, endangered and sensitive species inventories, an assessment of management indicator species, neotropical bird validation, and prairie dog inventories; recreation reviews, including customer surveys and recreation facilities; special area reviews, such as Wild and Scenic Rivers and roadless area inventories, and Research Natural Area and Special Interest Area considerations; commodity production reviews, such as livestock grazing, and oil and gas development potentials; and community and lifestyle reviews, such as demographic trends, economic impact assessments, and payments to counties from federal receipts.

Scores of people helped gather this information, including Forest Service and non-Forest Service people alike. They include Forest Service professionals from both Region 1 (the Northern Region) and Region 2 (the Rocky Mountain Region), professionals from three national forests (the Custer, Medicine Bow/Routt, and Nebraska), Forest Service research professionals, and professionals located on all the national grassland and forest units engaged in this revision process. These professionals include scientists, technicians, public affairs personnel, land and resource specialists, and administrative and support staff, to name some of their disciplines.

In addition, other state and federal employees, and professionals from private organizations, other governments, and businesses, tribal leaders, county and state representatives, and other land managers helped fill in the gaps in this information-gathering process. They include such people as ranchers, environmentalists, community leaders, wildlife specialists, to name a few.

This chapter is organized around the major revision topics. Revision topics are a tool through which managers can identify and discuss significant subjects related to the land and resources they manage. Furthermore, revision topics are like umbrellas beneath which stand issues of most concern to people. For instance, one of the revision topics is titled "Rangeland and Forest Health." Forest Service managers know, through public scoping, that the health of the land is on the public's mind. And so, such issues as ecosystem functioning, grassland vegetation, biodiversity and the status of threatened, endangered and sensitive plant and animal species are addressed. Economics and a person's cultural tie to the land are also important to people, and so these issues are discussed under the revision topic "Community and Lifestyle Relationships." And so it goes.

Topics identified as important to people that are not considered major to the revision process are discussed in Chapter 3: Other Topics. Additional issues may arise between now and the release of the revised management plans and final environmental impact statement. Should such additional issues arise, they will be addressed prior to the release of the final documents.

The topics are ordered alphabetically. This ordering is not an indication of the importance of one topic over another. This chapter begins, then, with the first revision topic:

COMMUNITY AND LIFESTYLE RELATIONSHIPS

Introduction

Commodity and amenity benefits from the public lands within the Northern Great Plains assessment area have contributed to the social systems and economic base of many neighboring communities. Management decisions determine the public land uses and resource availability from those lands. In resource-based economies, public land decisions can affect the relationships between public land and communities and lifestyles. The capacity to handle change without major hardships or disruptions to social groups or institutions is an important component of community and lifestyle relationships.

Community and lifestyle relationships are assessed and described in the following ways:

· History - This narrative provides an historical context to the Northern Great Plains assessment area.

· Beliefs, Attitudes and Values - This section describes the results of public comments and interviews conducted with groups of people who identified with a use or interest in the national forests and grasslands in the Northern Great Plains.

· Demographic Changes and Trends - Trends and changes occurring in the assessment states and affected counties are described in this section.

· Economic Dependency and Diversity - Income, employment, and county economic diversity as they relate to national forest and national grassland activities.

· Federal Revenue Sharing - This narrative describes PILT and non-PILT payments to state and local governments, including counties.

· Coordination and Outreach - This narrative describes Forest Service efforts to coordinate with state, tribal and local governments.

Laws, Policy, and Direction

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires that natural and social sciences be integrated in all planning and decision making that affect the human environment. The human environment includes the natural and physical environment and the relationship of people to that environment. Forest Service land management planning regulations also instruct that social science knowledge be considered in forest and grassland planning. The Forest Service has developed a handbook that provides basic principles, techniques and general guidance for assessing social effects.

Northern Great Plains Human History

Archaeological evidence suggests that humans have had a presence on the Northern Great Plains for at least 10,000 years (Evans 19). Using primitive tools, prehistoric people hunted game, some now extinct, such as mammoths and early bison (von Ahlefeldt 2-47-48). Between 5,000 and 3,000 years ago, some people began to build mound dwellings along the Missouri River. Missouri River tribes on the Northern Great Plains include the Arikara, Hidatsa and Mandan (Evans 19). Other tribes occupying the Northern Great Plains include Cheyenne, Crow, Kiowa, Pawnee and Lakota (Sioux). Many of these tribes had mastered horses by the eighteenth century and were using them to follow and hunt buffalo as the herds moved across the prairie.

Life for these plains inhabitants would never be the same after early adventurers and explorers entered the area in the early 1700s (Cultural Resource Overview of the NNF 173). Soon, after President Thomas Jefferson sent Lewis and Clark in 1803 to record what lay west of the Missouri River, fur traders were floating down the rivers and striking out across the prairies. The fur trading industry peaked between 1820 and 1840, playing out prominently on the Northern Great Plains. Many fur trappers turned to buffalo when beaver populations declined and Eastern fashions changed (173). Fur trading posts continued to open all across the Northern Great Plains well into the 1860s.

The nation was on the move in the mid-1800s. Looking to California and Oregon as a sort of "Manifest Destiny," emigrants and East Coast residents pushed through the Great Plains to reach the riches of the West. Viewed by many travelers as a wasteland, the Great Plains became known as the Great American Desert. In 1862, the federal government encouraged homesteading on the Great Plains when it offered 160 acres of public domain to those willing to work the land. Many emigrants took the government's offer. In doing so, the new residents often clashed with American Indians. With their homes and cultures threatened, tribal people defended themselves, which set off a series of wars between the U.S. government and dozens of tribes.

As America's railway system expanded across the continent, millions of bison were slaughtered, a devastating blow to people inherently bound to the buffalo. And the destruction of the great bison herds flowed agreeably with the War Department's order to settle the "Indian question." The age of the free Plains Indians was fast coming to an end. The U.S. Cavalry was dispatched to protect settlers and railway workers. Wars were waged from Minnesota to Washington, from the plains of Texas to the Powder River Country of Wyoming. By the mid- to late-1870s, most tribal people were forced onto reservations. Euro-American settlers, meanwhile, were reshaping the Great Plains.

Cattlemen used the open range to feed and water their cattle. As Walter Scott Webb put it, "the physical basis of the cattle kingdom was grass, and it extended itself over all the grassland not occupied by farms" (207). Great cattle drives between the peak years of 1866 and 1880 pushed nearly five million head of cattle out of Texas to the north (225).

Railroads further enhanced the profitability of the open-range livestock industry. Cattle were transported by rail to the nation's growing population centers or seaports for shipping to Europe. In 1881, a hundred million pounds of beef crossed the Atlantic Ocean to England (Manning 117). Livestock operators were forming trade associations to promote their industry (Voigt, Jr. 27).

The cattle industry suffered a sharp set back from a drought in 1883; hundreds of thousands of cattle died (Brown 61). However, drought was not the only trouble facing the fledgling livestock industry. As reported by Robinson, Theodore Roosevelt, who ran cattle along the Little Missouri River, worried in the summer of 1886 about an over-stocked range:

The range was already full, but ranchers were still shipping or driving in more cattle. A hot July, grasshoppers and drought cut down the scanty supply of grass, and in the fall, fire destroyed part of what was left. The winter of 1886-1887 came six weeks early, with blizzards in mid-November, unusual cold, and deep snow that buried the grass. Cattle starved by the tens of thousands, the Texas doggies and eastern pilgrims going first. . . Probably 75 per cent (sic) of the cattle in the Northwest had died (190).

Homesteaders were also facing difficulties on the prairie. The 160 acres given to them by the government was not sufficient land to sustain a family on the climate and soils of the plains (Manning 107). The Kinckaid Act of 1904 recognized the settlers' dilemma and increased a homesteader's allotment to 640 acres (Manning 224). The Enlarged Homestead Act of 1909 further advanced homesteading. Previously uncultivated grasslands were tilled under in order to meet market demands for wheat before and after World War I (West 86). Much of this newly tilled land might better have been left idle. A drought in years to come would prove the undoing of many homesteaders.

The Forest Reserve Act of 1891 was designed to help curb environmental degradation occurring on federal lands; many had been stripped of timber or denuded of forage. Bernard Fernow took over as chief of the Division of Forestry in 1886 advocating a philosophy of sustained yield. That division soon gave way to the Forest Reserve System, administered by the U.S. Department of Interior. Gifford Pinchot, an early conservationist, became chief of the Forest Service in 1898.

In 1897, the government created a system to issue grazing permits on federal lands. Pinchot had managed to get the forest reserves moved to the Department of Agriculture by 1905. By 1906, the first public grazing fees were collected (The Bulletin 7; Ferguson 34). Although the fee was small, the dollars collected helped offset the costs of federal land management (Steen 87).

While most of the nation prospered during the 1920s, farm prices were falling, causing hardship on the Northern Great Plains. The 1930s drought would hit the country's heartland hard. Many ranches and homesteads failed and, by the early 1930s, environmental and economic devastation led to federal action to rescue the Great Plains.

Lands identified as less than marginal for cultivation were purchased through the Agricultural Adjustment Administration under the authority of the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933. Through that act and the later Emergency Relief Appropriations Act of 1935, the federal government purchased about 11 million acres and relocated nearly 24,000 families. These purchased lands were collectively called Land Utilization Projects.

President Franklin Roosevelt used the Civilian Conservation Corps to put the nation back to work in the 1930s. These civilian laborers transformed vast areas of the Great Plains through grassland restoration, erosion control and watershed management (Merrill i). The Soil Conservation Service arose from the Soil Erosion Service in 1935. Another legislative response was the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, which was designed to repair or prevent damage to the public rangeland.

Congress passed the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act in 1937, which gave permanent status and management direction for the Land Utilization Projects and still provides direction for national grasslands. In 1938, the Soil Conservation Service began administering the Title III lands named in the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act (Dethloff 24). Cooperative grazing associations were also forming. These associations were instrumental in grassland recovery and still administer grazing agreements on public lands today.

Movements in the 1940s to privatize federal lands, advocated by some Western legislators and stockmen's associations, were defeated. However, the legislative commotion contributed to the end of the Grazing Service and the General Land Office and to replacement by the Bureau of Land Management in 1947 (Ferguson 37).

After World War II, recreational demand on public lands increased notably. Wildlife interests and hunters pressured the government to recognize their escalating concerns about public lands. Water-quality issues continued to gain national attention. Irrigation for agriculture became an increasingly important tool all across the Great Plains.

The 1950s rendered important reorganization of federal properties. In 1953, the U. S. Forest Service was assigned management of about seven million acres of Land Utilization Projects (West 87). Other project lands were handed off to the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, and the Fish and Wildlife Service.

In 1960, 19 Land Utilization Projects were dedicated as national grasslands under authority of the US Forest Service. Today, about 3.8 million acres in 20 national grasslands are administered for multiple uses in 12 western states (Unger 1). Also in 1960, varied interests succeeded in their effort to sustain multiple benefits from public lands through the Multiple Use and Sustained Yield Act. This law states that National Forest System lands should be managed for diverse interests and sustained benefits over time.

The next two decades gave rise to more environmental legislation. Of note are the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, which ensures that federal agencies document and disclose expected effects of federal actions, and the National Forest Management Act of 1976, which requires planning and decisions for an appropriate mix of multiple uses on National Forest System lands, including national grasslands.

The U.S. Forest Service continues to administer the national grasslands under the same laws that apply to all National Forest System lands. These public lands offer multiple benefits and hold the attention of various interests. By virtue of history, tradition and use, any number of groups and individuals have a stake in the management of National Forest System land on the Northern Great Plains.

Beliefs, Attitudes and Values

The Forest Service considers the feelings, preferences, and expectations people have for the public lands and their management and uses important to decision making. Public land settings and products have emotional meanings to many people. Changes in Forest Service policy may result in practices that have an impact of people's feelings about agency activities: their likes, dislikes, perceptions and fears. Important components of these feelings include people's sense of personal freedom, self-sufficiency, and control over their future. Public involvement and interview data provide impressions about personal and community values.

Public Comments

The Forest Service began public outreach efforts for the revision process in 1995. Forest Service employees meet with people individually and in groups to discuss the planning strategy. The public was encouraged to express their concerns, issues, fears, preferences, likes and dislikes regarding national grassland and forest management. From meeting notes to form letters, about 3,150 comment documents were received and recorded. Following are some highlights of the public comments organized around the major revision topics and around other topics in alphabetical order by topic.

Community and Lifestyle Relationships

Many commentators stated that livestock ranching is an important part of their lifestyle and has been, in some cases, for several generations in their families. Some people stressed the economic contribution of livestock grazing to local communities and governments. Continued livestock grazing was not only important to their livelihood but also to their local area. The Forest Service was encouraged to make management decisions that would lead to a stable and diverse economic base. The importance of one management approach or emphasis over another was discussed in some comments. Some commentators asked that natural resource protection and non-consumptive uses be given stronger consideration in Forest Service management.

Livestock Grazing

Many comments favored a continued program of livestock grazing, and some people stated that livestock grazing should be a dominate use; some referred to the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act as the foundation for their position. Other comments were concerned about grazing levels that compromise other resource values, such as wildlife habitat and recreation settings. Comments urged either increases or decreases in livestock grazing levels. Many respondents debated the benefits or drawbacks of livestock grazing on rangeland health.

Oil and Gas

Many comments regarding oil, gas, and minerals development wanted more protective measures in environmentally sensitive areas and suggested that roadless and recreation areas, and important wildlife habitats not be leased.

Plant and Animal Control

While many commentators agreed that noxious weeds are a problem, the suggestions for specific species and treatments varied. There was some concern about indiscriminate and widespread use of pesticides and herbicides. Comments on prairie dogs either encouraged the Forest Service to control prairie dogs or to stop killing them. Some commentators didn't support predator control and even suggested restoring some native predators. Other commentators encouraged predator control and offered ideas on methods to control predators.

Rangeland and Forest Health

Numerous comments encouraged protection and restoration of native biological communities, and preservation of habitats for threatened, endangered, sensitive, and rare species.

Other commentators stated that the government overreacts to species concerns, leading to restrictions on grazing, energy development, and recreation activities.

Many respondents asked that bison be returned to the Northern Great Plains because they are considered a positive natural biological contributor suited to the prairie ecosystem. Many commentators interested in bison also requested that prairie dog colonies be restored. There were many questions about how management indicator species are selected and used. There were also general comments about wildlife and game species.

Some commentators requested that native plant species and communities be restored and protected. Many stated concern over the influence of nonnative plant species.

Many comments supported the use of controlled or prescribed fire as a way to improve vegetation conditions. While some people opposed any timber harvest, others thought some timber harvest is needed on Nebraska's Pine Ridge and Wyoming's Thunder Basin National Grassland.

Many commentators supported maintaining the tree plantations in Nebraska's Sandhills. However, a few commentators thought the artificial forest should be allowed to return to native prairie.

Recreation, Travel Management and Visuals

An appreciation for the recreation opportunities offered on the national grasslands and forests was evident in many comments. Some commentators requested more recreation investments in campgrounds, picnic sites, trails, etc. Other people value the primitive nature of the public lands and discouraged additional recreation developments. Many people are concerned about growing conflicts associated with increasing public recreation use.

Off-road travel concerns were on the minds of many commentators. Many people asked for more control and enforcement of restrictions. Off-highway vehicle enthusiasts emphasized that the national grasslands and forests are among the few, if not the only, places for them to ride. They offered to work with the Forest Service to address off-road travel issues. Some commentators requested a system of non-motorized trails, fewer fences, and more gates through fences.

Hunting comments concerned wildlife habitat requirements; some discussed access for hunters; some addressed hunter trespass on private land. Some people want walk-in hunting areas to improve their hunting experiences. There were comments that either endorsed or opposed prairie dog recreational shooting. Interest was also expressed in creating or renovating ponds and improving stream and river segments to enhance sport fishing.

Special Designations

Many comments requested that roadless areas be recommended to Congress for Wilderness or that roadless areas be protected in some fashion to maintain their undeveloped character. A few commentators wanted no additional Wilderness or wanted motorized access maintained or expanded.

Comments both supported or opposed Research Natural Areas and Special Interest Areas. People also had questions about management direction for these areas and how particular activities could be affected.

While there was some support for Wild and Scenic River designations in principle, most commentators who addressed this topic opposed designations for the Little Missouri River in North Dakota and the Middle Loup River in Nebraska. There were also questions about the effects and implications of federal designation on private property.

Other Topics

Fossils

Many views were expressed on fossils. Some people supported only scientific collection; some stated that amateurs should be permitted to collect; others thought commercial collecting should be allowed.

Heritage Resources, Treaty Rights, Tribal Relations

Commentators encouraged the preservation and interpretation of cultural and historical sites. Comments on treaty rights discussed water rights and access to the national grasslands. Commentators also encouraged American Indian Tribal involvement in Forest Service management.

Land Use

People favored land exchanges because they can consolidate small, isolated public tracts, improving hunting opportunities, prairie dog management, and overall management efficiency.

Water Resources

Commentators were concerned about the quality of water for a variety of uses. Some people discussed the sources of pollution and requested that these issues be dealt with in management direction. Respondents also requested that riparian areas and wetlands be protected and they offered their ideas.

Group Interview Results

In the fall of 1997, the Forest Service conducted interviews with 19 groups of people who identified with a use or interest in the national forests and grasslands in the Northern Great Plains. These group discussions were led by trained moderators who asked a set of standard questions provided by the Forest Service. The questions were designed to explore principal management goals for the public lands. The use or interest segments interviewed for the study are listed below along with some of the key management goals for each segment.

Agriculture Segment

The primary management goals for the public lands identified by this segment are vigorous grass production, available water and suitable access. There is strong support to manage these federal lands as they believe the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act intended--to supplement grazing and stabilize local economic conditions. Some people believe that the intent was for local grazing associations and members to have more influence on management decisions than other types of users.

Oil, Gas, Minerals Segment

Access to leased lands and timely responses to applications were among top management goals for this segment. Participants felt the Forest Service could streamline processes and reduce costly delays by better planning and coordination and by anticipating needed information and completing inventories when conditions allow.

Wood Products Segment

This group believes a desired condition for the timber stands is needed, and timber management is an appropriate tool for achieving desired conditions for the forested lands. In their view, timber management could reduce the risk of insects and fire and improve overall forest health. The group believes there are sufficient timber resources to sustain a modest allowable sales quantity on the Nebraska National Forest. The quantity should be a common-sense program based on good inventory data and potential growth and yield.

Consumptive Recreation Segment (hunters, anglers, rock collectors, etc.)

These people have a strong appreciation for public lands where they can pursue their activities. Access is important; however, access doesn't mean driving anywhere but, instead, being able to get to the public lands. The condition of the vegetation, whether trees or grass, is important to providing quality wildlife habitat and recreation experiences.

Non-consumptive Recreation Segment (trail users, campers, sightseers, etc.)

For this segment, access to the public lands and the experiences they offer is a fundamental management goal. Access could be improved by installing easier-opening gates or cattle guards (instead of gates), and reducing fences overall. Improved visitor information and trail signs would enhance their recreation experience. This group believes that if recreation is encouraged on the public lands, it should be planned for and managed.

Conservation/Preservation/Environmental Segment

The health of the grasslands was considered the primary management goal. People spoke of the need for viable wildlife populations, properly functioning grassland ecosystems, and a healthy mosaic of native vegetation that includes habitat provisions for threatened, endangered, and sensitive plant and animal species. This group believes that a long-term vision for managing the national grasslands should be developed, especially with the involvement of all interested parties.

Wildlife Advocacy/Production Segment

This segment looks to the national grasslands to fill habitat niches that private lands are not providing. They appreciate that the public lands are open to everyone, and citizens have a say in how they are managed. Vegetation condition is considered a critical habitat component. Native grasses are desired, as is grass left to mature instead of being grazed uniformly. Livestock grazing and fire are regarded as tools to achieve vegetation diversity. Some people believe that heavy grazing can change the vegetative makeup, reduce grass diversity, and harm woody draws and sensitive areas. In their view, wildlife and livestock can both benefit if the environment is healthy.

Government Segment

This group values the natural resources and management opportunities found on the national forest and grassland units. The units represent large tracts of grassland that provide diverse vegetation, recreation sources, wildlife habitat, and economic contributions to communities.

American Indian Community Segment

American Indian communities want to be self-sufficient and they see the national forests and grasslands as resources that could potentially further their self-sufficiency and improve their economic conditions. They also look to these public lands for spiritual and cultural reasons and uses.

Adjacent Landowners Segment

This segment wants the Forest Service to be a good neighbor by building relationships with their neighbors. As good neighbors, the Forest Service should be accountable and trustworthy. They should respect the opinions of local residents and not try to dominate their neighbors. They should also respect the rights of private property owners and help reduce public trespass on the private lands.

Demographic Changes and Trends

Substantial demographic movement is still taking place within the Northern Great Plains assessment area. In general, rural areas are emptying out, and people are concentrating within a few metropolitan areas. As a report prepared by the Nebraska Rural Development Commission states, many Northern Great Plains rural counties were among the 600 counties that lost population between 1990-94, primarily in North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska.

Economists Mark Drabenstott and Tim Smith summarize the great changes that have occurred over the past 15 years. They describe the 1980s as a "dismal decade" for the rural heartland. They attribute the hardship and changes to three main causes: deep recessions in agriculture and energy, restructuring in manufacturing, and the emergence of the service industry. The 1990s has seen some rebounds; however, they observe that "the new rural growth is occurring in counties with scenic amenities or in emerging trade centers" (1). Generally, population growth in the region is occurring in urban and metropolitan areas (Northern Great Plains Overview 2).

Population

Overall, the populations of the Northern Great Plains assessment states are growing. Population estimates made in 1996 show all states with some increase. Montana experienced the most growth (about 10 percent, with most growth in the mountains); North Dakota had the least growth (0.7 percent).

Table CLR-1: Recent State Population Changes

Population changes over time are shown in the following table. North Dakota recorded its highest population in the 1930 census. South Dakota finally exceeded its 1930 population in the 1990 census. Wyoming recorded its highest population in the 1980 census. (The state's highest population is in boldface type.)

Table CLR-2: Historic Population Changes

Not all counties are fairing equally as Table CLR-3 shows. Many Northern Great Plains assessment counties are among rural counties losing population. Of the 39 counties making up the social/economic impact area for the Northern Great Plains assessment, 19 estimate population losses between 1990 and 1996, most of them in eastern Montana, western North Dakota, and western Nebraska. In difference, some counties showed large increases; both Shannon and Stanley Counties, South Dakota, posted population increases of about 20 percent in six years.

Table CLR-3: Population Changes of Affected Counties

State population projections made by the U.S. Census Bureau are shown through 2025 in the following table.

Table CLR-4: State Population Estimates and Projections

Wyoming's population could grow about 31 percent by 2025 from its estimated 1995 population. Montana's population is expected to grow by 22 percent over that time. South Dakota is looking for 16 percent growth over that period, and Nebraska could expect about a 15 percent population increase. North Dakota could see an increase of about 12 percent.

Age

The out-migration from rural heartland counties is draining many of their youngest. People leaving rural areas in the region are often in the 18-24 age group, recent high school graduates either heading to college or joining the work force (Northern Great Plains Overview 7). Eighteen of the 39 Northern Great Plains social assessment counties report that their populations have an average age above the national average of 35; the notable exceptions in the region are counties with higher percentage of American Indian populations and some Wyoming energy-producing counties.

Births are also down. As an Omaha World Herald article reported, "America's breadbasket is lacking (an) essential crop: the next generation." Writer Harlow Hyde warns that the region is "undergoing a severe drop in births that, if it continues, could empty many small towns in just one generation" (15-b). This shrinking birthrate is reducing the number of young people growing up on farms, traditionally the people most likely to assume family farms and ranches (The New Generation of American Farmers 6).

Education

While many better educated people are moving out of rural counties in the region, lesser educated people are moving in (Northern Great Plains Overview 7). The educational achievement of most Northern Great Plains assessment counties is less than that of other state residents. Most states, except North Dakota (18 percent), report that about 25 percent of their residents possess a college degree. Counties closer to higher education opportunities are more likely to have a better-educated population.

Ethnicity

Northern Great Plains states are not very ethnically diverse. By far, the largest minority group is American Indians. Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming all contain large American Indian reservations. American Demographics reported in December 1991 that the 1990 census counted 38 percent more American Indians in 1990 than in 1980. The report suggests that the increase was not from an increase in Indian births, but rather that more Americans with Indian heritage identified their race as Indian on the 1990 census forms, what the magazine identifies as a "returning to their roots."

Table CLR-5: American Indian Population in Assessment States

Household Income

Median household income in the Northern Great Plains affected counties often lags behind that found statewide. Exceptions are the metropolitan counties and western Wyoming energy-producing counties. High median household income counties include Campbell County, Wyoming, at over $37,000, compared to the statewide median household income of $27,000. Low median household income counties include Shannon and Corson Counties, South Dakota, which report 50 to 63 percent of the statewide median household income of $22,500. The following table shows population characteristics and median household incomes by Northern Great Plains states compared to the national average.

Table CLR-6: Population Characteristics of Assessment States (1990 Census Results)

The following table shows the same kind of data as in Table CLR-6, but by affected counties.

County Economic Dependency and Diversity

County economic dependency was measured by the dependency of jobs and income as related to national grassland and forest activities. County diversity was measured by an index and is related to the existing number of different economic sectors that can occur within an area. Summaries of economic dependency and diversity are displayed in Table CLR-8.

County Economic Dependency

County economic dependency indicates the approximate percentage of the total economy of each county that can be attributed to either grazing or mineral extraction from the national grassland or forest unit within those counties. The grazing sector, or industry, generally includes cattle feedlots, ranch fed cattle, and range fed cattle, but for activites associated with a national grassland of forest unit only the range fed cattle is included. Range fed cattle is connected with the cattle feedlots and ranch fed cattle as indirect and induced effects.

At the present time, there is no acceptable data on the dependency of each county concerning the recreation/tourism industry attributable to the national grassland or forest units. Dependency in the wood-products' sector was calculated only for Dawes County, Nebraska, and is discussed in narrative fashion.

The basic economic (export-generated) structure of each county's economy was determined and was expressed in terms of total employment and income for each economic sector. An input/output model, called IMPLAN, was used to estimate economic activity from livestock grazing. Next, the percentage of livestock grazing attributable to the national grassland and forest units was calculated. For example, 18.7 percent of employment in Billings County, North Dakota, is attributable to grazing; however, about 32.6 percent of the livestock grazing in Billings County occurs on the Little Missouri National Grassland. The two percentages were multiplied to arrive at the 6.1 percent displayed in the Economic Dependency/Diversity Summary Table for Billings County. The same procedure was used to determine income dependency.

The same process as above was used to determine the role of the minerals industry in the national grassland and forest units. Several different sectors were analyzed in the minerals industry, including coal mining, natural gas and crude petroleum, natural gas liquids, and railroads.

Some counties have very little or no national grassland or forest acreage, but can attribute part of their economy to adjacent national forest or national grassland activities. Economic impacts to these counties from national grassland or forest activities may be underestimated. For example, livestock permittees may reside in an adjacent county, but head-months were counted only in those counties with National Forest System acres.

Livestock Grazing

Rangeland forage is an important food source for domesticated livestock, including cattle and sheep. On National Forest System lands on the Northern Great Plains, cattle grazing is by far the most prevalent type of livestock grazed. Although sheep grazing occurs on the Buffalo Gap, Grand River and Thunder Basin National Grasslands, it is considerably less in relation to cattle grazing.

Population growth, consumer tastes, disposable income, the financial condition of the livestock industry, and international trade contribute to demands for the use of rangeland forage. Rangelands represent about 770 million acres or 34 percent of the nation's land base.

Two major factors affecting future demand for beef are expected to counterbalance each other, at least to some degree: the rise in the nation's population (from 264 million in 1995 to a projected 287 million in 2005) and the decline in annual per capita beef consumption (69.4 pounds in 1995 to a projected 63.2 pounds in 2005).

Livestock production from National Forest System lands on the Northern Great Plains is very important to the people who hold grazing permits; however, the national grasslands and national forests of the Northern Great Plains play a relatively minor role in the total production of cattle and sheep. Total production from the 35 impacted counties is less than nine percent of the national cattle herd size. Of that, only a fraction is derived from the national grasslands and national forests on the Northern Great Plains.

Of the affected counties, there are only eight in which cattle grazing on the national grassland and forest units is responsible for more than one percent of the total basic economy, and only one county can attribute more than five percent of employment (Billings County: 6.1 percent) to cattle grazing on the national grassland and forest units. Cattle grazing is a lesser contribution in terms of income.

Many counties do have significant grazing economies, such as Cherry County, Nebraska, and Campbell County, Wyoming, but not much of that grazing occurs on National Forest System lands. Counties with the highest dependence on livestock grazing tend to be those with the smallest and least diverse economies.

The demand for grazing permits on the Northern Great Plains national grasslands and national forests is high, although the availability of such permits is low. A grazing permit is attached to the "base property" of a private landowner. One must own and use that base property for grazing to qualify for grazing on national grasslands or national forests on the Northern Great Plains. Base property with a federal grazing permit sells for significantly more per acre than property without such a permit. Grazing associations and permittees have shown a consistent willingness to fill permits that become available. Alternative sources for grazing capacity (feed, rented land, etc.) is more expensive than grazing on federal land for a permittee who has already invested in a grazing permit by owning base property.

Oil and Gas and Minerals

Total oil and gas income is large in relation to employment because: (1) the industry is not labor intensive; (2) gas and oil leave the county with little value added; and (3) profits from gas and oil businesses in the county may end up in the bank accounts of proprietors who live elsewhere. If an oil and gas company is headquartered in a small county, economic statistics can be misleading. Billings County, North Dakota, is again a good example. Economic data shows that 69.7 percent of the total income in Billings County is attributable to the oil and gas industry, but only results in 1.1 percent of the employment.

The coal industry (including railroad transport) is different in this respect because more labor is involved in the mining and transport of coal. Only the Little Missouri and Thunder Basin National Grasslands have significant minerals activity. Where mineral activity was minimal, the numbers in relation to total county mineral activity were rounded to zero. This was the case in the Buffalo Gap National Grassland and parts of the Little Missouri National Grassland.

The Thunder Basin National Grassland produces significant quantities of coal. In 1995, 24.2 percent of all coal produced in Campbell County, Wyoming, came from the Thunder Basin National Grassland. For the entire impact area, 25.5 percent of all coal in 1995 was produced on the Thunder Basin National Grassland.

Nationwide, coal production and use are accelerating. Total U.S. production grew from 613 million tons in 1970 to more than a billion tons in 1995. Production is projected to increase to nearly 1.3 billion tons by 2015. Most of this production growth is expected to come from mines in the West. Eastern mines continue to lose market share to Western mines. In 1970, Eastern mines produced about 93 percent of total U.S. coal. In 1995, the Eastern market share was 53 percent. By 2015, that share may dip to about 46 percent.

The shift from Eastern to Western coal has been led by Midwestern and Southeastern utilities, which have reduced fuel costs while switching from high-sulfur Eastern coal to low-sulfur, low-cost subituminous coals from such states as Wyoming, Colorado and Utah.

Wood Products

This sector was calculated for Dawes County in northwestern Nebraska. Total wood products exports are approximately 2.1 percent of the total exports of the county. This includes foreign and domestic exports. About 1 percent of the local employment and 1.1 percent of the total income can be attributed to the wood products industry. Two small sawmills exist in the area. Income and employment from Nebraska National Forest activities are negligible at this time.

Currently, there is no sustained yield of merchantable timber harvested from any of the units under review. Only a small amount, if any, is likely in the future, simply because so little merchantable timber is found on the units. Timber programs for the three participating national forests are summarized below:

Custer National Forest Units

Personal-use firewood permits are available on the Little Missouri and Sheyenne National Grasslands, but not on the Grand or Cedar River National Grasslands. Some personal-use post, pole and sawlog production could potentially exist on the Little Missouri National Grassland in the future, especially on the Medora Ranger District. On the Sheyenne National Grassland, some cottonwood stands, mostly occurring as old shelterbelts, could be harvested, and could support a small, local, wood-pallet manufacturing operation. At most, a sustained harvest of .2 to .3 MMBF could be provided, according to district personnel.

Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest (Thunder Basin National Grassland)

No commercially suitable timber lands are identified on the Thunder Basin National Grassland. Stands of ponderosa pine, at about 2 MBF per acre, are interspersed among the grasslands. No inventory volumes are available. A few areas may have ponderosa pine stands with as much as 7 MBF per acre. Personal-use firewood permits are available on the Thunder Basin National Grassland.

Nebraska National Forest Units

Timber inventories for the Pine Ridge Ranger District of the Nebraska National Forest were last conducted 15 years ago. A current estimate of 3,500 MBF per acre on approximately 25,000 acres (for a total 87.5 MMBF) occurs. Two timber sales been conducted since 1990. The Homestead sale in 1990 provided 1,161 MBF of sawtimber, and the Rocky Buttes sale in 1994 provided 1,018 MBF of sawtimber. Personal-use firewood permits are available on the Pine Ridge Ranger District.

Although the Samuel R. McKelvie and Bessey Ranger District (both administered by the Nebraska National Forest) have timber resources, the tree stands are hand-planted "plantations" mostly recognized for their recreational value. Total volume is estimated at about 563 MBF. In the last five years, about 2,000 posts have been sold to a local milling firm.

County Economic Diversity

County economic diversity is based on an index, called the Shannon-Weaver Entropy Index, and includes all the different economic sectors within those counties. The Shannon-Weaver Indices are measures of diversity within a county economy. The index is influenced by the number of sectors within each county and by factors within each sector. The index varies between 0 and 1, with higher numbers indicating greater diversity.

The last year for reliable data to the calculate the index is 1993. The comparison year was 1982. Table CLR - 8 shows all counties gaining in economic diversity from 1982 to 1993. However, this does not show the effects of declining oil prices declining and increases in tourism. For this reason, the four year period from 1990 through 1993 was examined. More than half the counties showed a decline in diversity during this period. Generally, Nebraska and Wyoming counties were up, and South Dakota, North Dakota and Montana counties were down.

Table CLR-8: Economic Dependency and Diversity of Affected Counties*

* Data Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Regional Economic Information Service

Returns to Local Units of Government, Including Counties

Local governments, including counties, having federal lands within their administrative boundaries are entitled to payments from one or more federal revenue programs. A long list of federal legislation provides for this revenue, including the Payments in Lieu of Taxes Act of 1976. These revenue programs take two basic forms: "payments in lieu of taxes" (PILT payments) and various federal revenue-sharing programs (referred in total as non-PILT payments). Much of this revenue helps support such county concerns as road maintenance and education.

Counties and other units of local governments receiving PILT and non-PILT payments tend to depend on this revenue source. Decisions made in the three management plans under revision may affect these payments through changes in the levels of goods and services provided.

Table CLR-9 displays the average PILT and non-PILT payments made to affected counties between 1988 and 1995. Payments, as shown by the table, are not evenly distributed between these counties. The formulas used to determine county payments are complex and are subject to financing by Congress, acres of National Forest System lands within a county, the previous year's federal receipts, market prices for minerals, and the laws governing allocation of non-PILT payments in a given state.

Generally, total county payments are relatively low as compared to mineral receipts in counties where federal receipts are derived; however, grazing receipts may still be significant to county budgets. These counties generally get the predetermined PILT payment. South Dakota gets a little more because it directs many non-PILT payments to local school districts and avoids deductions from the PILT payment.

Counties with mineral receipts receive the largest payments. These are counties within the Little Missouri National Grassland and the Thunder Basin National Grassland, both of which produce oil and gas receipts. All PILT and non-PILT receipts are dwarfed by the revenue sharing associated with coal production on the Thunder Basin National Grassland. These receipts are shared directly with the State of Wyoming, since they are not Bankhead-Jones receipts, but rather Mineral Leasing Act receipts. Mineral Leasing Act receipts are not National Forest System receipts; rather, they are Bureau of Land Management (BLM) receipts. Coal receipts have ranged from between about $53 million to more than $60 million in recent years, half of which is returned to the State of Wyoming, which uses the money to support its schools, among other programs.

Planning Coordination and Outreach

The Forest Service continually coordinates with scores of state and local governments, associations, tribes, partners, groups and other entities. This ongoing process is an effort to better identify common goals and visions for the National Forest System lands and adjacent lands on the Northern Great Plains. As part of this effort, the Forest Service tries to keep abreast of the many plans, like county land-use plans, developed by other counties or other entities. Such entities include: county and tribal governments, state wildlife agencies, recreation and tourism agencies, regional economic development groups, state and local transportation departments, and research colleges and universities, to name just a few.

In the fall and winter of 1996-97, Forest Service district rangers and legislative coordinators contacted county, state, regional agencies that were in the vicinity of Forest Service units on the Northern Great Plains. The outreach had two goals:

· to assess whether existing local economic development, growth, or other trends or plans can be facilitated by national forest and national grassland management, and

· to assess the current and future impact of national forest and national grassland management on local infrastructure, such as police, fire, water, sewer, schools, and roads.

Most agencies expressed a desire to be kept informed of the agency's planning and management activities. Some presented land-use plans that would require close coordination with Forest Service management. A few expressed a desire that the Forest Service be involved in local land-use plans. Many cases of existing coordination and cooperation in joint ventures were cited. A few opportunities were brought forward for future coordination and cooperation, such as South Dakota's desire to facilitate the permit process on public lands for the motion picture industry. Such a process could facilitate movie productions such as Dances With Wolves, which brought millions of dollars into South Dakota. (See Planning Coordination and Outreach with State and Local Entities. This paper can be reviewed at the Supervisor's Office in Chadron, Nebraska.)

LIVESTOCK GRAZING

Introduction

Livestock grazing is a traditional, permitted use on National Forest System (NFS) lands on the Northern Great Plains. Providing livestock forage while providing for wildlife, recreation and other uses or natural resources remains a challenge for Forest Service managers. Grazing levels and methods will be developed to achieve desired vegetative conditions.

Laws, Policy and Direction

Fourteen grazing associations operate on Forest Service units affected by this revision process. A grazing association is a user group of grazing permittees organized to assist with administering grazing use on the national grasslands. Each grazing association has a set of rules guiding its operation. These include: (1) a grazing agreement, (2) rules of management, and (3) a set of by-laws. Individuals not part of the grazing associations on national grasslands or other NFS lands have grazing use administered through a "direct" grazing permit system. Authorities to administer livestock grazing are outlined in Forest Service Manual 2201. Analysis of NFS lands as outlined in CFR 222.2 and 219.20 must be completed in the development of forest plans to determine lands suitable and the potential capability in considering grazing management systems and the facilities to implement them.

Historical Summary

Historically, wild ungulates, such as bison, antelope, deer and elk, grazed the prairies. Domestic stock first entered the range during the last half of the 19th century, brought to the plains by ranchers and homesteaders.

The Custer National Forest Management Plan was approved in 1987, which included national grassland units in North and South Dakota. Of the 1,260,118 acres identified in the plan for the Custer's four national grassland units on the Northern Great Plains, 1,073,516 acres is listed as suitable and open for grazing.

The Medicine Bow National Forest Management Plan was approved in 1985. The Medicine Bow-Routt administers the Thunder Basin National Grassland. All of the Thunder Basin National Grassland, a total of 572,518 acres, is listed as suitable and open for grazing.

The Nebraska National Forest Management Plan was approved in 1984. The plan indicates 1,000,013 of 1,059,444 acres as suitable and open for grazing on the Nebraska National Forest and its associated units.

Current Conditions

To understand the following discussions, animal unit months or AUMs must be defined. The Forest Service defines an AUM as the amount of forage required to sustain a 1,000-pound animal for one month. The amount of forage required is 780 pounds of air-dry weight.

Process to Determine Current Grazing Levels

Information from each unit was gathered in the following format at the allotment level:

Permitted Use (Numbers shown on permit):

· Number of livestock

by type of permit

by class of livestock

by kind of livestock

· Total AUMs permitted

Authorized Use (Numbers based on annual operating instructions and reflected on the "bill for collection"):

· Number of livestock

by type of permit

by class of livestock

by kind of livestock

· Total AUMs authorized

Other information gathered at the allotment level:

· Grazing system

· Total acres

Information for each administrative unit was gathered in the following format for each pasture:

· Total acres

· Date on and off of livestock

This information was placed in a computer data structure, so that queries could be run to develop the following products:

· Number of livestock by class and kind for each unit (authorized and permitted)

· Total AUMs for each unit (authorized and permitted)

· Total acres being used by:

class of livestock

kind of livestock

time of use

type of grazing system

type of permit

· Areas being used for grazing versus not being used

· Occupancy of pastures by time of year

· Duration of grazing by pasture

The following table outlines current grazing use in terms of permitted and authorized animal unit months (AUMs). To understand AUMs and what AUM numbers represent, one must first recognize the definition of an AUM , or, rather, the definitions, because several are put into practice on public lands on the Northern Great Plains. The Forest Service defines an AUM as "the amount of forage required to sustain a 1,000-pound animal for one month." The Natural Resource Conservation Service defines an AUM as "the amount of forage required to sustain a 1,000-pound animal of better-than-average milking ability with a calf less than six months postpartum" (essentially a cow/calf pair).

When one calculates AUMs for an area, consistency in definition is necessary. For example, the McKenzie Ranger District of the Little Missouri National Grassland commonly uses the Forest Service definition above. At the same time, many people near the Fort Pierre National Grassland commonly use the Natural Resource Conservation Service definition. To convert AUMs from the Fort Pierre National Grassland into equivalent AUMs of the McKenzie Ranger District, a 1.32 AUM value is given to Fort Pierre's reported AUM figures, a result of the Fort Pierre's use of the Natural Resource Conservation Service's AUM definition, which includes cow/calf pairs.

If this step were not taken, AUM numbers for comparison purposes would become meaningless. Because different definitions are used in different areas on the Northern Great Plains, one definition was applied for consistency's sake.

Some people are also familiar with the term "head month" instead of animal unit month. A head month is defined as the amount of time that livestock use forage, regardless of the type of livestock. For example, one yearling cow grazing in an area for one month equates to one head month. A cow/calf pair grazes in a particular area for month also equals to one head month. However, forage requirements are not the same for a yearling as for a cow/calf pair. Using an AUM calculation enables a consistent comparison. Adjusting head months to AUMs requires a conversion factor for the particular type of livestock.

The AUMs displayed in the table have been adjusted by the 1.32 factor to account for a cow/calf pair. Permitted use is that which is displayed on the permit or grazing agreement. Authorized use is reported on a yearly basis and is displayed on the annual "plan of instructions."

Custer National Forest Units

The following table outlines current grazing use on the Custer's national grassland units.

Table LG-1: Current Grazing Use on the Custer National Forest Units

Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest Unit

The following table outlines current grazing use on the Thunder Basin National Grassland.

Table LG-2: Current Grazing Use on the Thunder Basin National Grassland

Nebraska National Forest Units

The following table outlines current grazing use on these units.

Table LG-3: Current Grazing Use on the Nebraska National Forest Units

Benchmark Analysis Summary

The benchmark analysis determines capable rangelands as outlined in CFR 219.20, section a. The first step of this analysis process is determining lands capable of being grazed. The second step takes capable lands and identifies which of those are suitable or appropriate for livestock grazing. Lands suitable for grazing and browsing will be identified in the draft environmental impact statement by alternatives, and their condition and trend will be determined. The present and potential supply of forage for livestock, wild and free-roaming horses and burros, and the capability of these lands to produce suitable food and cover for selected wildlife species will be estimated based on criteria to determine suitable lands.

Process to Determine Capable Lands

Definition

A capability analysis identifies areas on the units with physical characteristics conducive to livestock grazing, including areas producing adequate forage accessible to livestock.

Criteria to Determine Capable Lands

· Areas with less than 40 percent slopes;

· Areas producing more than 200 pounds of forage per acre;

· Areas of stable soil types;

· Areas accessible to livestock;

· Areas with water or the potential to have water.

Information Needed to Determine Capable Lands

· Slope by 10 percent breaks;

· Forage production;

· Location of unstable soils;

· Location of areas of rock, roads, water bodies, bare ground, etc.;

· Areas inaccessible to livestock;

· Location of water sources.

Results of Inventory and Analysis

Table LG-4: Capable Rangeland on the Custer National Forest Units

Table LG-5: Capable Rangeland on the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest Units

(Thunder Basin National Grassland)

Table LG-6: Capable Rangeland on the Nebraska National Forest Units

Maps that show the capable areas can be viewed at the district offices.

A suitability analysis identifies where grazing is appropriate considering economics, environmental consequences of livestock grazing, rangeland conditions, and other uses or values of the area. The analysis also clearly identifies those areas where grazing is not appropriate. Examples include, but are not limited to: developed recreation sites, high recreation use areas, Research Natural Areas, research facilities, administrative sites, research study enclosures, special use sites, wildlife winter ranges, critical habitats for threatened and endangered species, areas managed for scenic values, trailheads and certain trails, and archeological sites, among others.

Another factor to consider is not just what is being allocated, but when areas are being used or disturbed by livestock grazing. An appendix is being developed that will show timing of use by unit, and how much of an area has been disturbed or utilized. Timing of use indicates how much of a unit is being utilized by livestock at any one point in time. This appendix will appear in the draft environmental impact statement.

Demand Assessment

Rangeland forage is an important food source for beef cattle and sheep. The demand for rangeland forage is directly linked to the demand for beef and lamb meat by consumers. Population growth, consumer tastes, disposable income, the financial condition of livestock businesses, and possibly international trade are among the most important determinants of future demands on rangeland forage utilized by livestock.

Both federal and non-federal entities manage the nation's forests and rangelands. Private individuals and state and local governments manage about 67 percent of the total forest and rangeland base. Rangelands represent about 770 million acres or 34 percent of the nation's land base.

Range-fed cattle, calves, sheep and lambs are emphasized in this assessment. Beef cattle and sheep represent the largest inventories of livestock that use grazed roughages in the United States. Beef cattle (431 million AUMs in 1988) far and away are the largest consumers of rangeland forage. The combined total demand for grazed forage by dairy cattle, goats and horses is minuscule in comparison to the forage demand of beef cattle and sheep. The feed demand by horses, including recreational horses, could potentially approach or surpass the demand by sheep .

Harvested forage, such as hay and concentrate, provide livestock most of their diet. The main sources of rangeland forage consumed by beef cattle and sheep are deeded non-irrigated rangeland and pasture, publicly owned grazing land, deeded irrigated pastures, and crop residues. Although the importance of enterprise-owned land is evident, since it provides more than 70 percent of forage consumed by beef cattle and sheep, other sources may represent the only available sources during certain seasons of the year.

OIL AND GAS

Introduction

The 1987 Reform Act authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to develop procedures and regulations governing leasing for oil and gas resources within the National Forest System. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) formerly exercised this authority. The BLM offers leases for sale, but only after the Forest Service has completed required National Environmental Policy Act analysis and decisions. Final regulations and procedures the Forest Service uses to implement the 1987 Reform Act were completed on April 20, 1990.

Laws, Policy and Direction

The need to address this issue in the revision is to implement the direction found in 36 CFR 228.102 and its parent law, the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act of 1987. This regulation requires a leasing analysis be conducted and authorizes the Forest Service to determine what areas of National Forest System lands with federal minerals the BLM will be authorized to offer for leasing.

Historical Summary

In 1987, the Custer National Forest Management Plan was approved. One of the plan decisions made all the grassland units administratively available for leasing oil and gas. In September 1991, the "Record of Decision" for the northern half of the Little Missouri National Grassland made most National Forest System (NFS) lands (except 24,931 acres: Dutchman's Barn, Long X Divide, Twin Buttes, and Blue Buttes) administratively available for leasing and also made site-specific leasing authorizations with leasing stipulations for areas administratively available for leasing.

In August 1995, the "Oil and Gas Leasing Record of Decision" for the southern half of the Little Missouri National Grassland and for the Cedar River National Grassland made all the federal mineral estate under these NFS lands administratively available for leasing, as well as making site-specific leasing authorizations with leasing stipulations.

In 1984, the Nebraska National Forest Management Plan was approved. One of the decisions of the plan was that all Nebraska National Forest System lands, except a small area (1,600 acres) within the Pine Ridge RARE II area (now the Pine Ridge National Recreation Area) were administratively available for oil and gas leasing. The plan also defined areas available for leasing with no-surface occupancy. These areas were the rest of the Pine Ridge RARE II area at 4,959 acres, the area around Toadstool Park (approximately 2,640 acres), and public domain lands adjoining Merritt Reservoir (880 acres).

The Nebraska Wilderness Act of 1985 established the Soldier Creek Wilderness at 7,794 acres. This act also withdrew the area from mineral entry and leasing as well as withdrawing the 6,559-acre Pine Ridge National Recreation Area.

The "Oil and Gas Leasing Decision Notice" for the federal mineral estate under the Buffalo Gap National Grassland in the western half of Fall River County was signed in September 1995. This decision made all of these NFS lands administratively available for leasing, and included the site-specific leasing authorizations with leasing stipulations.

The Medicine Bow National Forest Management Plan approved in 1985 made all the lands in the Thunder Basin National Grassland administratively available for oil and gas leasing. The "Oil and Gas Leasing Record of Decision" for the Thunder Basin National Grassland, signed in April 1994, made the entire unit administratively available for leasing. This decision also included site-specific leasing authorizations with stipulations.

Current Conditions

Currently, all NFS lands are legally available for leasing on national grassland units of the Custer National Forest and on the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest's Thunder Basin National Grassland. On the Nebraska National Forest, all NFS lands except Soldier Creek Wilderness and Pine Ridge National Recreation Area (a total of 14,353 acres) are legally available for leasing.

Everything legally available, on the Little Missouri National Grassland, is currently administratively available for leasing, except 24,931 acres.

The 1995 monitoring reports for the three national forests provided the following information. There are 1,003 leases on the Little Missouri National Grassland and 528 producing oil and gas wells. The Nebraska National Forest administers 40 leases and has 14 operating oil and gas wells. The Thunder Basin National Grassland has approximately 325 producing oil and gas wells.

The table below identifies the acreage having a no surface occupancy stipulation applied.

Table OGM-1: Acres with No Surface Occupancy (NSO) Stipulation Assigned

Demand Assessment

Of the 11 National Forest System units under review, three produce oil and gas: the Buffalo Gap, Little Missouri, and Thunder Basin National Grasslands.

Buffalo Gap National Grassland (BGNG): Only a tiny fraction of total oil production for this area (Fall River County, South Dakota) comes from the BGNG. No natural gas is produced. The overall economic impact and demand is small, especially compared to the Little Missouri and Thunder Basin National Grasslands.

Little Missouri National Grassland: The Little Missouri National Grassland produces more oil and gas than any of the other units under review. Oil and gas is produced from three North Dakota counties within the boundaries of the Little Missouri National Grassland. They are Billings, Golden Valley and McKenzie Counties. Approximately six percent of all oil production from the overall impact area came from production off of the Little Missouri National Grassland in 1995. Approximately eight percent of all gas from the overall impact area came from the Little Missouri National Grassland in 1995.

Thunder Basin National Grassland: Oil production on the Thunder Basin National Grassland is about six percent of the total coming from the Little Missouri National Grassland. Gas production is about 10 percent of the total coming from the Little Missouri National Grassland.

Reasonably Foreseeable Development (RFD) documents project oil and gas developments for the planning area. The tables that follow display findings from the following RFDs and assessments:

· Reasonably Foreseeable Development Scenario for Oil and Gas, Grand River National Grassland, April 1, 1997.

· Reasonably Foreseeable Development Scenario for Oil and Gas, Sheyenne National Grassland, April 1, 1997.

· Draft Revised RFD for the Little Missouri and Cedar River National Grassland, July, 21, 1997.

· Oil and Gas Leasing Environmental Assessment, Western Half Fall River County South Dakota, September, 1995.

· Oil and Gas Resources of the Oglala National Grassland, Nebraska, and Part of Buffalo Gap National Grassland, South Dakota, April, 1997.

· Oil and Gas Leasing on the Thunder Basin National Grassland, Final Environmental

Impact Statement, April 22, 1994.

Qualitative estimates of petroleum occurrence are based on Bureau of Land Management handbook definitions as follows:

· High Potential: The demonstrated presence of a mature source bed, suitable reservoir strata--with satisfactory porosity and permeability--and traps into which petroleum has migrated.

· Moderate Potential: The inferred presence of a mature source bed, suitable reservoir strata, migration pathways, and traps with a hydrocarbon charge.

· Low Potential: The inference that a mature source bed, suitable reservoir strata, migration pathways, or charged traps may not be present.

Oil and Gas Occurrence and Development Potential

The following tables show the occurrence and development potential for the planning units.

Table OGM-2: Oil and Gas Occurrence and Development Potential on the Custer National Forest Units

Table OGM-3: Oil and Gas Occurrence and Development Potential on the Thunder Basin National Grassland

Table OGM-4: Oil and Gas Occurrence and Development Potential on the Nebraska National Forest Units

PLANT AND ANIMAL CONTROL

Introduction

Under certain conditions, some plant and animal species can cause unacceptable economic and environmental effects. Sometimes, management activities on National Forest System (NFS) lands include control of noxious or exotic plants, insects, predators and rodents.

Under current interagency agreements, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) oversees predator control; however, the Forest Service establishes the acceptable population levels and management guidelines. Such decisions and information will be shown in the three revised management plans.

In addition, as noxious and exotic plant populations expand, strategies to slow their encroachment are needed. Direction to address noxious and exotic plants will be provided in the three revised management plans.

Animal Damage Management

Black-tailed Prairie Dog

Prairie dogs can cause agricultural damage when they become locally abundant. Livestock grazing permittees are often concerned about the effects of a prairie dog's foraging and burrowing on livestock forage. Many landowners who own land that border National Forest System (NFS) lands worry about prairie dogs dispersing from federal lands to their lands and then establishing new colonies or repopulating old inactive colonies. Under existing Forest Service management plans for prairie dogs, colonies on NFS lands near other land jurisdictions usually carry a higher priority for poisoning than colonies that occur within larger blocks of contiguous federal land. Some interior prairie-dog colonies more distant from other lands, however, are sometimes poisoned to respond to concerns of grazing permittees or to prevent interior colonies from expanding toward other land jurisdictions. The average number of acres of prairie-dog colonies on NFS lands poisoned annually during the last 10 years (1988-97) is shown in Table 1. The primary rodenticide used was and continues to be two-percent zinc phosphide on steam-rolled oats.

Acres of black-tailed prairie dog colonies poisoned on Northern Great Plains NFS lands during the last 10 years. Acreages refer only to those areas where grain baits (two-percent zinc phosphide) were applied and do not include all areas where burrow fumigants were used.

Table PAC-1: Acres of Prairie Dog Colonies Poisoned Per Year by Unit

Information presented in Table 1 illustrates that poisoning on NFS lands has recently decreased. This is due in part to favorable vegetative growth conditions in recent years, which reduces colony growth rates and population recovery rates after poisoning.

Livestock grazing management is another way to help regulate the growth and establishment of prairie-dog colonies on mixed-grass prairie (Cable and Timm 1987, Cincotta et al. 1987, Knowles 1986, Licht and Sanchez 1993, Uresk et al. 1981, Uresk 1987). Considerations include careful evaluation of proposed new water developments to reduce the likelihood of creating additional sites for new colonies in those areas where additional colonies are not desired. Conservative livestock-grazing rates that result in dense and moderate to high levels of grassland cover around and between colonies also help to regulate the size and abundance of colonies. Periodic annual rests from livestock grazing can also play an important part in managing prairie-dog colonies. Major reductions in livestock grazing (46 percent) were made in 1978 in the Conata Basin area of the Buffalo Gap National Grassland to help regulate the size of prairie-dog populations in that area; most of those reductions remain in place. Additional, but less substantial, adjustments in grazing levels have occurred on some of the other national grassland units, and although they were made primarily for other purposes, they no doubt have influenced the dynamics of prairie dog colonies. It is important to remember that livestock grazing management is more effective in helping regulate prairie dog colonies in mixed-grass prairie than in shortgrass prairie and during periods of normal and favorable precipitation rather than during drought.

Predators

Predators, mostly coyote and red fox, are sometimes taken by government agents on Northern Great Plains NFS lands to reduce predation on livestock. In addition, eagles are sometimes caught on some units and relocated to reduce livestock losses on public or neighboring lands. Predator management activities are provided by a variety of government agencies and vary by state and, in some cases, by county. In North Dakota and Nebraska, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is the lead agency responding to requests for assistance from livestock producers. The South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks conducts an operational predator management program on NFS lands through an agreement with APHIS. In Wyoming , two county weed and pest boards conduct predator management on the Thunder Basin National Grassland while another county weed and pest board recently entered into a new agreement with APHIS for predator-control services. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service authorizes eagle trapping and relocation.

The Forest Service and APHIS, as federal agencies under the Animal Damage Control Act of March 2, 1931, share a joint responsibility for limiting wildlife damage to livestock and other private property located on or near NFS lands. The responsibilities of each respective agency are further identified in a 1993 Memorandum of Understanding. Under this agreement, APHIS is identified as the lead agency in conducting predator management, including when, where and how to reduce predator damage on or near NFS lands. The primary responsibilities of the Forest Service ensure that predator-control programs on NFS lands comply with management direction in land and resource management plans (forest and grassland management plans) and approval of all pesticide uses for predator control.

APHIS is also the lead agency for evaluating predator management alternatives through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. In 1993, APHIS, in cooperation with the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management, issued a final environmental impact statement on the "animal damage control program" that included an evaluation of several alternatives to the current animal damage control program administered by APHIS. In addition to this national-level evaluation, APHIS is serving as the lead agency in the preparation of state-wide environmental analyses for animal damage control. State-wide analyses have been completed for North Dakota and eastern Wyoming, and the Nebraska analysis is nearing completion. APHIS has issued a categorical exclusion for the cooperative program with the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks.

The amount of predator-damage control varies between Northern Great Plains NFS units. To help assess the amount of predator control, information on the number of requests for predator-control assistance involving Northern Great Plains units has been collected. Over the last several years in North Dakota, only one request was made for predator-control assistance on the Sheyenne National Grassland. Eighty-nine requests occurred on the Little Missouri National Grassland during the last three years. In South Dakota, requests for assistance from livestock producers totaled 154 and 36 over the last three years on the Buffalo Gap and Grand River National Grasslands, respectively. No requests were made on the Fort Pierre National Grassland over the same time period. Predator control on NFS lands in Nebraska is restricted to the Oglala National Grassland, where the number of requests for assistance over the last three years was 18. Requests for assistance from county weed and pest boards in the Thunder Basin National Grassland area ranged from 60 to 100 annually during recent years.

Insects

During the last 10 years (1988-97), insecticide spraying to control and reduce grasshopper populations has occurred only on the Little Missouri and Thunder Basin National Grasslands. The average number of acres sprayed annually on the Little Missouri during this period was approximately 15,700. Spraying on this national grassland occurred 8 out of the last 10 years, with no spraying in 1996 and 1997. In response to major grasshopper population increases, larger spraying programs have occurred in the past on the Little Missouri National Grassland. For example, approximately 369,000 and 257,000 acres were sprayed in 1985 and 1986 respectively. The last grasshopper spraying project on the Thunder Basin National Grassland occurred in 1988 when approximately 150,000 acres of public land were sprayed.

A 1987 Memorandum of Understanding between the Forest Service and APHIS identifies each agency's responsibilities regarding grasshopper spraying. APHIS is the lead agency for completion of the programmatic environmental analyses in accordance with NEPA, while the Forest Service is responsible for the site-specific environmental analyses for spraying projects on NFS lands. The Forest Service cooperates with APHIS in environmental analyses for spraying projects in areas of mixed land ownerships. Forest Service officials are also responsible for approving pesticide use during insecticide spraying projects involving NFS lands.

Noxious Weeds and Exotic Plants

Laws, Policy and Direction

The Federal Noxious Weed Act of 1974 authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to use an integrated weed management approach to control and contain the spread of noxious weeds on NFS lands and from NFS lands to adjacent lands. Through that act, the Forest Service has an obligation to work cooperatively in identifying noxious weed problems and developing control programs in areas where National Forest System (NFS) lands are located (see CFR 222.8). These regulations authorize specific direction for the prevention of the introduction and establishment of noxious weeds, containment and suppression of existing noxious weed infestations, formal and informal cooperation with state agencies, local landowners, weed control districts and boards, and other federal agencies in the management and control of noxious weeds, and the education and awareness of employees, users of NFS lands, adjacent landowners, and state agencies about noxious weed threats to native plant communities and ecosystems.

Historical Summary

The Forestwide management direction in the Custer National Forest Management Plan establishes direction for an integrated pest management approach to noxious weed treatment. The four national grassland units administered by the Custer National Forest currently have information on infestation levels based on field surveys conducted since 1987. In May 1986, a Forestwide Environmental Impact Statement was completed with each unit having a separate Record of Decision. The reasons for completing the analysis were to update available information and control methodologies, to analyze environmental consequences of control methods, and to conform with site-specific requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). A specific outline to monitor noxious weeds is contained in the current Forest Plan Monitoring Requirement section, Chapter 4. It states that 20 percent of the acres treated annually should be monitored and reported every five years. If there is a variability of greater than 10 percent increase in acres infested, further evaluation and action is required.

In 1984, the Nebraska National Forest Management Plan was approved. It provides direction to treat noxious weeds in the following priority:

· Leafy spurge, Russian and spotted knapweed;

· Invasion of new plant species classified as noxious weeds;

· Infestation of new areas;

· Expansion of existing infestations of Canada and musk thistle, and other

noxious weeds;

· Reduction of acres currently infested.

In 1993, a Nebraska National Forest environmental analysis was completed to control undesirable plant species. The reasons for completing the analysis were to update available information and control methodologies, to analyze environmental consequences of control methods, and to conform with site-specific requirements of the NEPA. Monitoring requirements are stated in Chapter 4 of the current Forest Plan. These involve quarterly reporting based on the Management Attainment Report and the annual Pesticide Use Report.

The Medicine Bow and Thunder Basin National Grassland Forest Plan , approved in 1985, set direction identical to that contained in the Nebraska National Forest Management Plan. In 1995, an environmental analysis was completed for the treatment and control of undesirable plant species.

Monitoring requirements are not established in the current plan. However, quarterly reporting in the Management Attainment Report and annual Pesticide Use Report is required.

Inventory Process

Working through the Northern Great Plains Interagency Steering Committee and Agreement, the National Park Service put together a listing of the presence or absence of noxious weeds. This report was completed in April 1998 and can be viewed on an internet sit located at http://www.calmit.unl.edu/ngp. The following information sources were used:

· State of Montana, Department Of Agriculture, Helena, Montana. Data only reported at statewide level. The data is not broken down at this time by county.

· Nebraska Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant Industry, County Infestation Report, 1995.

· North Dakota Department of Agriculture, County Weed Board Annual Report, 1995.

· Annual Report, South Dakota Weed and Pest Program, 1995.

· Wyoming Weed and Pest Program Coordinator, 1995.

Current Conditions

The following units on the Custer National Forest have infestation levels of the following species:

Table PAC-2: Noxious Weed Levels on the Custer National Forest Units

The Grand River unit treats all 300 acres annually. The county weed board is aware that the weeds are being treated, but feels a more aggressive action is needed. The Medora unit infestation level has increased from an estimated 2,000 acres of leafy spurge in 1987 to its current level of between 7,500 to 10,000 acres. Since 1987, the unit has been treating on the average of more than 1,000 acres per year. The infestation level on the McKenzie unit has increased by 10 percent in the last five years. However, the unit, in cooperation with McKenzie County and local grazing associations, has been part of a long-term (20- to 25-year) leafy spurge control program. The unit has been treating about 250 acres of leafy spurge per year. The Sheyenne unit has increased from 5,000 acres of leafy spurge in 1987 to 11,000 leafy-spurge-dominated acres in 1995. Today, there is some level of leafy spurge present on 30,000 acres of the unit's 70,000 acres. The unit uses an integrated pest management approach to treat on the average of almost 4,200 acres per year. This has been a joint effort with the local grazing association.

Even though many exotic species are not considered noxious, one issue is the use of exotic plants during revegetation projects. It was quite common to utilize exotic species to quickly stabilize soils to prevent erosion after disturbance had occurred. Such projects can convert native vegetation to a non-native species associations. The following tables provide estimates of crested wheatgrass acres on the following units:

Table PAC-3: Crested Wheatgrass Levels on the Custer National Forest Units

The Thunder Basin National Grassland does not have a current inventory of noxious weed species and infestation levels. However, treatment activities have been conducted over the past several years. The average number of acres treated on the Thunder Basin National Grassland between 1994 to 1996 was 160 acres per year. Following are the species treated and percentage of acres treated of the total 160 acres per year:

Leafy spurge: 46%

Spotted knapweed: 3%

Canada thistle: 49%

Musk thistle: 2%

The Thunder Basin National Grassland also contains an estimated 200 acres of crested wheatgrass.

Currently, Nebraska National Forest units report the following infestation and treatment levels for the following species:

Table PAC-4: Noxious Weed Levels on the Nebraska National Forest Units

Estimated acres of crested wheatgrass are listed for the following units:

Table PAC-5: Crested Wheatgrass Levels on the Nebraska National Forest Units

Inventory Results

Results of inventory based on the sources of the inventory process. The following is a listing of noxious weeds in the Northern Great Plains based on occurrence:

Table PAC-6: Noxious Weed Occurrence by State

Demand Assessment

Under certain conditions, some plant and animal species can cause unacceptable economic and/or environmental effects. Sometimes management activities on NFS lands include control of noxious or exotic plants, insects, predators and rodents. Control is a cooperative effort involving the Forest Service, local and state governments, and other federal regulatory agencies.

Invasions of noxious and exotic plants are reducing or eliminating native plant species. Currently, management plans direct managers to treat noxious and exotic species on a priority basis. Control is emphasized on newly infested areas, priority areas and minor infestations. Research is needed to develop effective control methods.

RANGELAND AND FOREST HEALTH

Introduction

Rangeland and forest health is defined as the degree to which the integrity of the soil and ecological processes of rangeland and forest ecosystems are sustained. The determination of whether a rangeland or forested area is healthy, at risk, or unhealthy is based on the following criteria:

· degree of soil stability and watershed function;

· integrity of nutrient cycles and energy flows; and

· presence of functioning recovery mechanisms (Rangeland Health; New Methods to Classify, Inventory, and Monitor Rangelands, National Academy Press, Washington D.C., 1994).

For planning purposes, rangeland health includes the interactions of the biological environment (terrestrial species) with the rangeland ecosystem.

Furthermore, as the public's interest in maintaining the biological integrity and diversity of public lands increase, direction to address issues of biodiversity will be provided in the three revised management plans.

Laws, Policy and Direction

According to National Forest Management Act regulations (CFR 219.26), grassland and forest planning must provide for a diversity of plant and animal communities and tree species consistent with the overall multiple-use objectives of the planning area. This diversity is best explained using the term "rangeland and forest health." Also, the suitability and potential capability of National Forest System (NFS) lands for producing forage for grazing animals and for providing habitat for management indicator species must be determined (CFR 219.20).

Historical Summary

Range-condition analysis methodologies used by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and ecological status methodologies used by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management have been used to evaluate rangeland health. Recently, scientific debate has intensified over the use of these methods to assess rangeland ecosystems, leading to disagreements over the use of these methods and the interpretation of the results. Scientists are drawing different conclusions about the condition of range and forested land from the same data and about the value of the available data.

Range condition ratings of excellent, good, fair and poor have typically been used to describe the condition of the range for livestock forage production. These ratings are not necessarily indicators of rangeland health.

For the purpose of this topic, rangeland health is described in terms of vegetation composition and structure, primary productivity and disturbance processes. (Please refer to the "Livestock Grazing" revision topic for existing rangeland condition ratings.)

Vegetation

Range Vegetation

Functioning Landscapes

The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Augustana College, and the EROS Data Center cooperatively prepared a report on functioning landscapes within the Northern Great Plains. The report, titled "Report for The Nature Conservancy, Northern Great Plains Steppe Assessment Map, 1997," delineates and describes the composition, integrity and quality of "intact" grassland areas larger than 50 square miles (128 square kilometers). "Intact" areas were those that had not experienced intensive land management. Composition was based on estimates of the percent of grass and forest cover types from Landsat Thematic Mapper satellite imagery at 30-meter resolution. Integrity was based on the size, shape and the relationship of the areas to other "intact" grassland areas. The determination of quality was based on land-use patterns pertaining to agricultural development. The assessment shows where the areas of higher grass cover and low agricultural use are in relationship to the national forest and national grassland units.

North Dakota

Not many intact areas are left. Areas in the eastern part of the state are small and sometimes barely the threshold size for delineation. The Sheyenne National Grassland has high grass cover and low agricultural development. There are a few areas of moderate size in western North Dakota, one of which includes the Little Missouri National Grassland.

Nebraska

The Pine Ridge, in northwestern Nebraska, is Nebraska's only savanna. The rest of the intact areas are grasslands. The largest area is in the Sandhills region. The Samuel R. McKelvie National Forest and Bessey Unit of the Nebraska National Forest fall within that area.

South Dakota

The Missouri River is a dividing line between two major land-use practices: crop cultivation in the east and grazing in the west. There are a few small areas in eastern South Dakota, but these areas contain croplands to some degree. Western South Dakota contains many grassland areas of medium size and good quality. The Buffalo Gap and Grand River National Grasslands are part of these areas. The Oglala National Grassland, in northwestern Nebraska, is contiguous to the western half of the Buffalo Gap National Grassland.

Wyoming

Wyoming has the fewest number but the largest areas with high grass cover and low agricultural use. The biggest area is 29,765 square kilometers, adjacent to an area of 21,656 square kilometers. The Thunder Basin National Grassland falls within these two areas.

Potential Vegetation Composition and Condition

Vegetation types on the planning units vary widely. Vegetation types on the Little Missouri, Cedar River and Grand River National Grasslands are typical of a mixed-grass prairie. The dominant herbaceous vegetation types include wheatgrass-bluestem-needlegrass and wheatgrass-needlegrass associations.

The badland areas of the Little Missouri National Grassland contain silver sage, shadscale, creeping juniper and Wyoming big sagebrush shrubland species, including Rocky Mountain juniper forests. The woody draw areas are typical of an ash complex. Riparian areas contain a mix of broadleaf/hardwood/herbaceous species. The Little Missouri National Grassland also has complexes of limber pine and ponderosa pine.

The Sheyenne National Grassland is one of the last remnants of tallgrass prairie types in the United States and includes big bluestem, switchgrass, Indian grass, and rough dropseed. The Sheyenne National Grassland also contains large areas of an oak savanna type, with the riparian areas dominated by broadleaf/hardwood species.

The Thunder Basin National Grassland is in a broad transition area between the plains of the central United States and range physiographic provinces to the west. It occupies a north-south transition area between the southern and middle Rocky Mountains. Because of its location, the Thunder Basin National Grassland contains plants characteristic of the Black Hills and Northern Great Plains, such as hawthorne, big bluestem, little bluestem and creeping juniper, and plants characteristic of the southern and central Great Plains, such as buffalo grass, blue grama and prickly pear cactus. The area also has plants characteristic of the Intermountain Basin, such as extensive sagebrush communities, greasewood and bluebunch wheatgrass. Foothill and lower-elevation mountain species, such as ponderosa pine, Rocky Mountain juniper, Oregon grape and boxelder, also occur.

The Nebraska National Forest units are dominated by ponderosa pine, plains grassland and prairie community types. The Samuel R. McKelvie National Forest and Bessey District are a typical Sandhills prairie dominated by sand bluestem, little bluestem, prairie sand reed, sand lovegrass, switchgrass, porcupine grass, and needle-and-thread. Dominant broadleaf plants are leadplant, snowberry, rose, sandcherry, plum, chokecherry, silky prairie clover and stiff sunflower.

The western half of the Buffalo Gap National Grassland and the Oglala National Grassland contain similar vegetation types. These areas are typical of a mixed-grass prairie. The dominant species are western wheatgrass, buffalo grass and blue grama. Needle-and-thread and green needlegrass are important associated species. Common shrubs include western snowberry, silver sagebrush and skunkbush sumac. Isolated areas of greasewood or sagebrush are also found. Eastern ponderosa pine and riparian ecosystems also occur on these units.

Ponderosa pine occurs on the Oglala National Grassland, with an understory of little bluestem and needle-and-thread. The riparian areas are characterized by cottonwood stands, with western wheatgrass and needle-and-thread understories. Woody draws contain ash complexes.

The eastern half of the Buffalo Gap National Grassland contains three major ecosystem types. The wheatgrass/blue grama ecosystem is found in the Pierre Hills and is dominated by western wheatgrass, blue grama, and buffalo grass. The badlands ecosystem is dominated by western wheatgrass and blue grama on drier sites. On wetter sites, buffalo grass and green needle grass may be present. Riparian and woody draw ecosystems are dominated by cottonwood or green ash with western wheatgrass and buffalo grass in the understory.

The Fort Pierre National Grassland contains two dominant ecosystem types. The wheatgrass/blue grama ecosystem occurs in the Pierre Hills and is dominated by western wheatgrass and blue grama. The wheatgrass/bluestem/needlegrass ecosystem is present in the Coteau du Missouri area and includes porcupine grass and prairie junegrass.

The Pine Ridge of the Nebraska National Forest is dominated by one major ecosystem unit. The eastern ponderosa pine ecosystem occurs on the Pine Ridge Escarpment and is dominated by ponderosa pine with needle-and-thread, little bluestem and prairie sandreed as the understory. The mixed-grass prairie occurs north of the Pine Ridge Escarpment and is dominated by western wheatgrass, green needlegrass and needle-and-thread. The shortgrass prairie ecosystem occurs south of the escarpment and is dominated by buffalo grass and blue grama. The riparian areas are dominated by cottonwood, green ash, and boxelder with blue grama and sedge in the understory.

A description of the existing vegetative composition for each unit is still being developed and will be displayed in the draft environmental impact statement.

Vegetation Structure

The actual diversity of grassland composition and structure across the national grasslands and forests is a long-standing issue of concern. To help address this issue, residual cover measurements were collected and summarized to help characterize grassland structure on these public lands. The term "residual cover" refers to the standing vegetation left after the growing season and after grazing by both wild and domestic animals.

Grazing can directly reduce cover levels through forage removal, and the frequency and intensity of grazing can also influence plant species composition and vigor, thereby indirectly increasing or decreasing the amount of cover that a site can produce. Timing and duration of rest from grazing can also influence current cover levels as well as potential cover production on a site. For example, a site dominated by mid-grass species can produce more cover than a comparable site where annual heavy livestock grazing has reduced mid-grass composition and increased the composition of short-grass species. Knowledge about residual cover levels within grassland watersheds is valuable for assessing effects of rangeland management on soils, hydrology, long-term plant productivity, wildlife habitat, and recreation opportunity (Jasmer and Holechek 1984). Residual cover levels alter microclimate at the soil surface and also influence the diversity of plant and animal species found in an area.

Visual obstruction readings (VOR) are commonly used to measure and quantify residual cover levels on the northern plains and elsewhere (Robel et al. 1970, Sousa 1987, Duebbert and Lokemoen 1977, Grosz and Kirby 1986, Manske et al. 1988, Mattise et al. 1981, Sedivec et al. 1995). VORs are a measure of the height and density of grassland vegetation and represent the height that residual cover totally (100%) screens a calibrated pole from view. These measurements should not be confused with stubble heights, which are a measure of the height of residual vegetation, rather than a combined measurement of both height and density. In this assessment, residual cover levels are expressed as an average VOR (inches). All residual cover monitoring summarized in this assessment occurred in the fall or early winter after livestock grazing. A more detailed description of the use of the visual obstruction method for monitoring grassland structure is available from the U.S. Forest Service office in Chadron, Nebraska.

An average VOR by itself is not a perfect or complete descriptor of grassland structure, because the variability of the cover, or patchiness, may be important to many wildlife species that depend on grassland cover for various life functions. Size and shape of cover patches and their distribution across the landscape can also influence the use of grasslands by wildlife. This assessment was limited to average VORs.

Uplands were prioritized for residual cover monitoring for this assessment. It should not be assumed that this distinction implies that cover levels along lowlands are any less important. In fact, on the more arid grasslands located in the western part of the assessment area, lowlands have the capability of being major contributors to grassland structure, because they are more conducive to the establishment and growth of mid- and tallgrass species. Also, as filter strips, residual cover along lowlands serves an important ecological function related to enhancing soil stability and water quality.

Monitoring results are provided for most of the national grassland and forest units in the assessment area. However, residual cover levels on the Cedar River and Thunder Basin National Grasslands were not monitored. Because of its proximity and similar management to the Grand River National Grassland, we are assuming that residual cover conditions on the Cedar River unit are similar to those found on the Grand River National Grassland. The Thunder Basin National Grassland was not monitored because this unit is more representative of short-grass prairie and shrublands and typically does not produce a wide range of grassland cover levels. Residual cover monitoring on the Nebraska National Forest's Pine Ridge Ranger District was not identified as a management priority, so monitoring on that unit was minimal, and the results were not summarized.

This monitoring program was limited solely to public lands, and none of the monitoring results apply to other land jurisdictions in or near the NFS lands. Although it would desirable from an ecosystem management standpoint to put the results of this monitoring into context of cover levels at a broader scale, it is highly unlikely that residual cover measurements for other land jurisdictions will be collected and made available.

The diversity of grassland structure occurring on uplands after livestock grazing on each national grassland and forest is summarized in the following tables. Knowing the full range of cover levels that can occur in an area is key to understanding and managing grassland structural diversity, so estimates of the potential capability of the moderately productive sites within each of the national grasslands and forests are also provided. These estimates are based on residual cover measurements taken in reference areas and in winter and lightly grazed areas over a period of years. Reference areas on the national grasslands where specific management techniques can be applied to help determine biological site potential are scarce to non-existent, and the need for sufficiently sized reference areas on each National Forest System (NFS) unit for monitoring and experimentation will be addressed as part of this planning effort. The estimates of site potential provided in this report should be considered tentative and may be changed as more information is collected in the future. It should be noted that these estimates of site potential are conservative, and most sites dominated by mid- or tallgrass species and with high plant vigor can be expected to produce or exceed the estimate during most years in the absence of livestock grazing. The information that these estimates are based on is available from the U.S. Forest Service office in Chadron, Nebraska.

Information on precipitation is also presented since precipitation and the resulting growing conditions have a significant effect on potential and existing cover levels. Results are presented by two-inch precipitation zones because of the influence of annual precipitation on cover production. The results are also presented in two formats. If range sites or pastures were the sampling unit, the estimated percent of the monitoring area in each cover class is presented. If the individual random transects were the sampling unit in the sampling design, the percent of the total number of transects in each cover class is presented.

Results for NFS Lands in the 14- to 16-Inch Precipitation Zone

Potential residual cover levels for moderately productive sites on the Buffalo Gap, Grand River, Little Missouri and Oglala National Grasslands is conservatively estimated as an average VOR of four inches or greater given average precipitation amounts and patterns, no or minimal livestock grazing during the current year, and some multi-year accumulation of cover (carry over). These sites are also more apt to produce the heavier cover levels when dominated by mid-grass species and plant vigor is high. These national grasslands mostly occur in the 14- to 16-inch precipitation zone.

Buffalo Gap National Grassland - Residual cover levels within range sites were randomly sampled on the eastern half of the Buffalo Gap National Grassland during the fall of 1995 and 1996. Badlands sites were not sampled. Results for all range sites combined were as follows:

Table RFH-1: Residual Cover Levels Within Range Sites (Buffalo Gap National Grassland)

Based on precipitation at three weather stations on the grasslands, growing season precipitation in 1996 ranged from 106 to 129 percent of average, so growing conditions appeared to be favorable. In 1995, the Philip weather station had incomplete data, but precipitation at Cottonwood and Interior was near average to above average.

Grassland structure on public land appears nearly balanced across all cover classes, with the exception of somewhat reduced area in the less than two-inch VOR class. It is unknown if residual cover levels on the intermingled private lands would make up that slight deficit. However, it is likely that this class would become more prevalent during years of normal and unfavorable precipitation patterns.

Monitoring results for the western half of the Buffalo Gap National Grassland are still being analyzed. These results will be displayed in the draft environmental impact statement.

Grand River National Grassland - Residual cover levels were randomly sampled during the fall of 1995 and 1996. Soils maps were not available to stratify sampling by soils or range site. Residual cover levels for upland sites were as follows:

Table RFH-2: Residual Cover Levels for Upland Sites (Grand River National Grassland)

Growing season precipitation during 1995 at two weather stations near the national grassland was 117 and 125 percent of average, which indicates that cover production conditions were favorable. Precipitation during the 1996 growing season at three weather stations were variable and averaged 88, 89 and 132 percent of average, and it's difficult to characterize precipitation patterns across the grassland with that type of variability.

The monitoring results suggest that most of the residual cover on the national grassland was in the less than two-inch and two-inch cover classes while cover in the four-plus inch class was scarce. Some of the higher residual cover readings were from sites dominated by crested wheatgrass.

Oglala National Grassland - Residual cover levels were randomly sampled in 1994, 1995 and 1996. Monitoring results were as follows:

Table RFH-3: Residual Cover Levels (Oglala National Grassland)

Approximately 80 percent of the transects were located on sandy, clayey and limy upland range sites. These are moderately productive range sites.

Growing season precipitation was obtained from weather stations at Harrison, Nebraska, and Ardmore, South Dakota. The 1994 weather information ranged from 62 percent of average at Harrison, which is located south of the grassland, to 95 percent of average at Ardmore, which is located just north of the national grassland. Precipitation during 1995 and 1996 at both stations was average to above average indicating good growing conditions.

The monitoring results show residual cover levels strongly skewed towards the less than two-inch class during all three years. Few transects supported cover levels in the four-plus inch class.

Little Missouri National Grassland - Residual cover levels on flat to gently rolling grasslands were randomly sampled in Slope, Billings, Golden Valley and McKenzie Counties during the fall of 1996 and 1997. Sites within the canyonlands were not sampled. Residual cover levels for all sampled range sites combined were as follows:

Table RFH-4: Residual Cover Levels (Little Missouri National Grassland)

More than 90 percent of these transects were located on silty, clayey, sandy and shallow range sites, which are moderately productive range sites.

Growing season (April through September) precipitation during 1996 at seven weather stations across the national grassland ranged from 78 to 109 percent of average. The average percent range of precipitation for 1997, however, is not yet available. Vegetative growth conditions during 1996 were likely near average to slightly less than average.

The results in the above table indicate that cover in the less than two-inch class is abundant, with 52 percent and 61 percent of transects averaging less than two inches in 1996. Only a few transects supported residual cover in the three- or four-plus-inch classes.

Results for NFS Lands in the 17- to 19-Inch Precipitation Zone

Fort Pierre National Grassland - Residual cover on clayey and shallow clay range sites in a large block was sampled from 1992 through 1997. These are the two major range sites on the grassland, and residual cover levels for the two range sites combined were as follows:

Table RFH-5: Residual Cover (Fort Pierre National Grassland)

The large sample block was considered representative of the cover levels occurring across the rest of the national grassland.

Potential residual cover levels for moderately productive sites on the Fort Pierre National Grassland are conservatively estimated as an average VOR of six inches or greater given average precipitation amounts and patterns, no or minimal livestock grazing during the current year, and some multi-year accumulation of cover (carry over). These sites are also more apt to produce the heavier cover levels when dominated by mid-grass species and plant vigor is high. This national grassland occurs in the 17- to 19-inch precipitation zone.

With the exception of 1992, growing season precipitation during this six-year period was average to above average. In four of the six years, precipitation was well above average. For example, precipitation in 1995 was 132 and 145% of average at the Kennebec and Pierre weather stations.

Residual cover levels appear to be near balanced across most of the cover classes. Cover in the less than two-inch class appears low; however, it's likely that a return to more average precipitation patterns will shift additional cover into this class. The amount of area in the five- and six-plus inch cover classes will likely decrease with the return to more average precipitation patterns.

Samuel R. McKelvie National Forest - Residual cover on the sands/choppy sands range sites was monitored in representative blocks. Results were as follows:

Table RFH-6: Residual Cover (Samuel R. McKelvie National Forest)

Monitoring results for residual cover in the dry valleys and sandy lowlands were as follows:

Table RFH-7: Residual Cover in Dry Valleys and Sandy Lowlands (Samuel R. McKelvie National Forest)

Additional data will be collected and analyzed to re-establish a potential cover value for the hills and valleys. This information will be displayed in the draft environmental impact statement.

Growing season precipitation at the Valentine weather station and at the nearby Valentine National Wildlife Refuge was above average in 1992 and average in 1994. However, 1995 growing season precipitation was more than 130 percent of average at both stations, indicating very favorable growing conditions that year.

These results demonstrate that areas supporting intermediate and the higher cover levels are scarce in the hills and especially in the valleys and lowlands. The data also suggest that a significant area on the national forest has cover in the less than two-inch class.

Results for NFS Lands in the 19- to 21-Inch Precipitation Zone

Sheyenne National Grassland - Residual cover levels on lowland, midland and upland sites in the sandhills and on the deltaic plain were sampled in 1994, 1996 and 1997. Only those sites capable of currently producing higher cover levels (greater than six-inch VOR) were monitored. Sites that can no longer produce the higher cover levels due to changes in plant species composition were excluded from monitoring, and this needs to be considered when interpreting the monitoring results below. Residual cover levels for midland and uplands sites were as follows:

Table RFH-8: Residual Cover Levels on Midland and Upland Sites (Sheyenne National

Grassland)

Midland and upland areas are the primary sites used by ground-nesting birds. The lowland areas are more productive, but they also tend to be wetter and are commonly flooded in spring and early summer, which make them unavailable for ground-nesting birds.

Potential residual cover levels for uplands and midlands is conservatively estimated as an average VOR of eight inches or greater given average precipitation amounts and patterns, no or minimal livestock grazing during the current year, and some multi-year accumulation of cover (carry over). Potential for the lowlands is conservatively estimated to be an average of 10 inches or more. These sites are also more apt to produce the heavier cover levels when dominated by mid-grass species and plant vigor is high. This national grassland occurs in the 19- to 21-inch precipitation zone.

Growing season precipitation during 1994 at the Lisbon and McLeod weather stations was near average. Precipitation at Lisbon and McLeod in 1996 was 98 percent and 68 percent of average, which makes it difficult to characterize general precipitation and vegetative growth conditions across the grassland for that year. Precipitation in 1997 at the two stations has yet to be received and analyzed.

The distribution of cover levels on uplands and midlands shows that the heavier cover levels in the six- and eight-plus inch classes were minimal in 1994 and 1996. The proportion of the area in the heavier cover classes would be substantially less if the area excluded from sampling was included. Percent area in the less than two-inch would be substantially larger. Cover on the deltaic plains tended to be higher than elsewhere on the national grassland.

Nebraska National Forest (Bessey Ranger District) - Additional data is being compiled and evaluated for possible inclusion in this analysis. Please consider the following data table incomplete.

Residual cover levels on the sands/choppy sands range sites were monitored in representative blocks. Monitoring results are as follows:

Table RFH-10: Residual Cover Levels (Bessey Ranger District)

Additional data will be collected and analyzed to re-establish a potential cover value for the hill sites on the Bessey Ranger District.

Growing season precipitation at the Halsey Nursery weather station was normal to above normal in 1987 and 1988 and normal to below normal in 1989 and 1991.

These results suggest that cover in the 3.5-plus inch class is scarce on the national forest. The data also suggest that a significant area on the national forest is in the less than two-inch class.

Summary

The information on potential and existing residual cover levels will be used to help assess and predict the effects of management alternatives and direction on various rangeland health parameters, wildlife habitat and on some recreational uses of the national forests and national grasslands.

It is highly probable that grassland structural diversity is not evenly distributed across geographic areas within individual national grasslands and national forests and some cover classes may be under-represented in these areas based on local management objectives. Because monitoring results in this report are presented at the scale of the individual grassland or forest, non-uniform distributions within individual units are not apparent. Habitat and vegetation analyses at the project level should identify and address these finer scale issues.

Productivity Analysis

Existing forage production for livestock grazing of graminoids was determined from field survey or plot survey data. Potential forage production estimates for the Nebraska National Forest units and the Thunder Basin National Grassland were developed based on Natural Resource Conservation Service technical guides. Potential productivity for Custer National Forest national grassland units was determined from field data collected to develop ecological classifications. Custer National Forest potential production data is similar to production values reported by Rocky Mountain Experiment Station, Natural Resource Conservation Service county soil surveys and others. Existing production was compared to potential production and was described as a percent of potential production. The following tables show existing production as a percent of potential production:

Table RFH-11: Existing Graminoid Production vs Potential Graminoid Production

on the Custer National Forest

Table RFH-12: Existing Graminoid Production vs Potential Graminoid Production on the

Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest Unit (Thunder Basin National Grassland)

Table RFH-13: Existing Graminoid Production vs Graminoid Potential Production on the

Nebraska National Forest Units

Knowing the existing and potential production will aid in determining current and potential forage availability and what the effects of different management approaches could be. The analysis also shows where the higher productive sites are located so existing productivity of other sites can be compared to those sites.

Rare Plant Communities

Through a contract agreement with the Forest Service, the Nature Conservancy inventoried rare plant communities in the Northern Great Plains. The inventory is documented in a report titled "Rare Plant Communities of the Northern Great Plains." The Nature Conservancy classified community types at the association level and then ranked them according to their relative endangerment (Grossman et al. 1994). The ranking system is intended to help establish conservation priorities. Community types are ranked on a global, national, and state scale of 1 to 5. A rank of G1 (Global 1) indicates that that community type is critically imperiled globally; a rank of G5 implies that the community type is at little to no risk of global elimination. Similar definitions apply to national and state ranks. Community types with a G1 to G3 ranking often need further study and documentation to determine appropriate protection.

The report used the preliminary global ranks established for the Northern Great Plains community types (see Schneider et al. 1997) to identify a list of G1 and G2 communities in the Northern Great Plains. The current number of G1 and G2 community types found in the Northern Great Plains currently stands at 52. The Nature Conservancy is tabulating these community descriptions by eco-section so that Forest Service managers will know if these community types may exist on their units. Forest Service managers could use the community type descriptions prior to project-level work to estimate effects on these community types and develop conservation priorities and practices.

Forest Vegetation

The Little Missouri National Grassland has stands of ponderosa pine, cottonwood, bur oak, green ash, aspen, rocky mountain juniper, as well as a stand of limber pine. The Sheyenne National Grassland has several oak savanna stands along with river broadleaf forests and woodlands. These tree stands have not received much evaluation for insect and disease problems.

The following table shows acres of forested land by unit:

Table RFH-14: Forested Land on the

Custer National Forest Units

Ponderosa pine stands also exist on the Thunder Basin National Grassland. No field studies or inventories have been completed on these stands. The following table shows acres of forested land:

Table RFH-15: Forested Land on the

Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest Unit (Thunder Basin National Grassland)

The Nebraska National Forest has two large tree plantations on the Bessey Ranger District and the Samuel R. McKelvie National Forest, and several natural stands of ponderosa pine and hardwoods on the Pine Ridge Ranger District. The largest plantation on the Bessey District contains about 20,000 acres of ponderosa pine, jack pine, Eastern red cedar, and some Scotch and Austrian pines. The McKelvie unit contains about 7,000 acres of the same species.

Several insect and disease studies have been performed on the Bessey District, Bessey Tree Nursery, Samuel R. McKelvie National Forest, and the Pine Ridge Ranger District. In October 1997, a biological evaluation, R2-98-1: Evaluation of Forest Overstory and Regeneration Conditions at the Bessey and McKelvie Units of the Nebraska National Forest , was completed. This document contains management recommendations to regenerate and protect the forest health of these forested stands. Several other studies have been conducted by the Rocky Mountain Experiment Station that focus on the predominance of disease in the plantations. These studies indicate a considerable amount of root-rot and fungus in these plantation stands.

Studies and field evaluations for gypsy moth in the Pine Ridge area have also been conducted. While a gypsy moths are present on the Pine Ridge, it has not yet affected tree stands on NFS lands.

The following table shows acres of forested land by unit:

Table RFH-16: Forested Land on

Nebraska National Forest Units

Ecosystem Processes and Functions

Historically, the primary disturbance processes on the Northern Great Plains were fire, drought and herbivory. These disturbance processes still influence ecosystems on the Northern Great Plains to varying degrees. Other influences include floods, wind, blizzards and insects. These processes have occurred with varying frequencies and intensities over the last 10,000 years and have influenced the composition and structure of rangelands and forests.

Drought was and is the overriding factor common to all areas across the Northern Great Plains. It affects herbivory patterns, and the size, frequency and intensity of fires. According to Judith P. von Ahlefeldt's Historical Ecology and Ecosystem Variation in Northern Mid-Continent Grasslands, U.S.A. , severe droughts last five years and occur on average every 22 years.

Tallgrass Prairie

Moderate to severe droughts occur periodically in tallgrass prairie and can decrease plant production and diversity. Though pre-drought production levels may return rapidly with more normal precipitation, effects on diversity may be more persistent. Human activities likely exacerbate these effects. For example, under presettlement conditions, large herbivores likely migrated from drought-impacted areas, whereas fenced herbivores can severely damage pastures before being removed.

Fire plays a key role in the formation and maintenance of the tallgrass prairie. Historically, large fires were more predominate during drought conditions, but were limited in size by the presence of green matter and higher humidity conditions. Fires would occur every three to five years.

The tallgrass prairie was less affected by bison, which preferred shorter, actively growing forage. Herbivores preferred the forage during the early part of the growing season, but did not use the forage when it became taller and courser.

Mixed-grass Prairie

Herbivory and fire were the most important factors in determining vegetation composition in the mixed-grass prairie.

Fire was a frequent event in the northern mixed-grass prairie. In general, fire reduces standing crop of both cool- and warm-season species during dry years and maintains or increases standing crop in wet years. Fire improves herbage quality and decreases litter; it also increases bare ground, allowing more light to penetrate the canopy during the growing season.

Grazing on mixed-grass prairie increases short-statured, or rhizomatous, species, such as western wheatgrass and blue grama, over the taller or bunchgrass species, such as little bluestem. Grazing decreases litter, but litter accumulation does not appear to limit productivity. Although heavy grazing or the exclusion of grazing does not increase decomposition, moderate grazing increases decomposition and affects soil chemical properties. Thus, grazing is important in maintaining the ecosystem processes that occurred when large number of bison dominated the Great Plains grasslands.

Short-Grass Prairie

Precipitation is the dominant controlling variable in vegetation structure and species numbers on the short-grass prairie. In an area where precipitation averages 13 to 15 inches per year, any variation of precipitation has an immediate effect. However, many short-grass species have adapted to moisture and temperature variations. Plants lost during a drought can limit future production even after an increase in moisture. However, water increases may increase the biomass of surviving plants, may increase the numbers of existing species, and may promote colonization of new species.

The species composition of short-grass species is more sensitive to environmental variables, water availability and grazing history than to grazing variables such as intensity. Short-grass species will adapt to grazing by spreading out rather than growing up. In areas with a long history of grazing and low productivity, moderate grazing has no negative effect on plant production. However, an evaluation of grazing based on species presence alone may be misleading. Changes in land-use, such as grazing, may not result in changes in species composition for some time. Over the long-term, changes in species composition may be small compared to changes in other ecosystem attributes, such as soil nutrients. The long-term sustainability of a system is also dependent on site-specific conditions.

Like grazing, fire removes plant material and recycles nutrients. Fire may either compete with grazers or favor them by exposing or stimulating new plant growth .

Broad Cover Changes in the Northern Great Plains

Summary information from the Natural Resource Conservation Service's National Resource Inventory (NRI) data for the Northern Great Plains indicates a change in the amount of cropland, rangeland and forestland between 1982 and 1992. The following table shows the change in these broad cover uses:

Table RFH-17: Percent Change in Broad Cover Uses

Decreases in cultivated cropland, forestland and rangeland are primarily due to urbanization, such as home subdivisions and roads. The increase in non-cultivated cropland is due to previously cultivated lands being added to the conservation reserve programs.

In addition, Natural Resource Conservation Service data also describes changes to rivers, lakes and wetlands. In general, acres of rivers have increased about one percent, acres of lakes have increased by 1.3 percent, and acres of wetlands have decreased about one percent.

The Natural Resource Conservation Service also reports that soil loss from wind erosion on cultivated cropland in the Northern Great Plains averages 3.7 tons/acre/year; wind erosion on rangeland in the Northern Great Plains averages 3.4 tons/acre/year. In addition, "Universal Soil Loss" data for the Northern Great Plains indicates that water erosion on cultivated cropland averages 2.3 tons/acre/year; water erosion on rangeland averages 1.2 tons/acre/year.

Water Resources

Forest Service policy directs that watershed management activities comply with multiple-use objectives and specific forest and grassland management plan objectives. Forest Service managers are also instructed to design all management activities to minimize short-term impacts on the soil and water resources and to maintain or enhance long-term productivity, and water quantity and quality (FSM 2500).

As outlined in 36 CFR 219.23, forest planning should:

· estimate current consumptive and non-consumptive water uses;

· identify of significant existing impoundments, transmission facilities, wells, and other human-made developments;

· estimate the probable occurrences of various levels of water volumes;

· comply with requirements of the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and all substantive and procedural requirements of federal, state, and local governmental bodies with respect to the provision of public water systems and the disposal of waste water;

· evaluate existing or potential watershed conditions; and,

· adopt measures, as directed in applicable executive orders, to minimize risks of flood loss, restore and preserve floodplain values, and protect wetlands.

Current Conditions

The following is a listing of linear miles of streams and surface acres of lakes on units where data is available:

Table RFH-18: Miles of Streams and Acres of Lakes on the

Custer National Forest Units

Table RFH-19: Miles of Streams and Acres of Lakes on the

Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest Unit (Thunder Basin National Grassland)

Table RFH-20: Miles of Streams and Acres of Lakes on the

Nebraska National Forest Units

In cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service is completing an assessment of water quality and aquatic conditions. This assessment will outline the status of water quality and quantity of surface and ground water, aquatic habitats (streams, rivers, lakes, wetlands and riparian areas) and the aquatic species that use those habitats. It will also describe the impacts of human activities on water quality and aquatic habitats and organisms, as well as programs and projects being undertaken to protect and restore these resources. The assessment will examine patterns and, where enough data is available, assess future trends.

Thirty-two fourth-order, hydrologic-unit watersheds exist on the national grassland and national forest units in the assessment area. Preliminary information from 305 (b) reports shows that all these watersheds contain miles of streams that do not fully support their uses. Several planning units are within these impaired watersheds, based on the evaluations of the main-stem stream. Even though the main-stem stream may not flow through a NFS unit, the larger watershed containing the national forest or national grassland unit is impaired. Tributary streams located on the planning unit may not necessarily be impaired. A watershed is consider impaired or not fully supporting their uses based on 25 percent of the state water- quality standard parameter values not being met. These standard parameter values are state water-quality standards.

The following tables display impaired watersheds by unit:

Table RFH-21: Impaired Watersheds on the

Custer National Forest Units

Table RFH-22: Impaired Watersheds on the

Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest Unit (Thunder Basin National Grassland)

Table RFH-23: Impaired Watersheds on the

Nebraska National Forest Units

On the Sheyenne National Grassland, water-quality monitoring indicates tordon from leafy spurge treatments showing up in two shallow (30- to 40-feet) wells on the national grassland. In these areas, tordon is no longer used to treat leafy spurge. Instead, 2,4-D, which breaks down more quickly, is now used.

Riparian/Wetland

Riparian/wetland areas are functioning properly when there is adequate vegetation, landform, or large woody debris to:

· disperse stream energy during high water flows, thereby reducing erosion and improving water quality;

· filter sediment, capture bedload, and aid floodplain development;

· improve flood-water retention and groundwater recharge;

· develop root masses that stabilize streambanks against cutting action;

· develop diverse ponding and channel characteristics to provide the habitat and the water depth, duration, and temperature necessary for fish production, waterfowl breeding, and other uses, and support greater biodiversity.

The Forest Service's Rocky Mountain Region uses the range statistical report to summarize rangeland riparian condition. The report uses the following categories to define riparian conditions:

1. Acres verified "meeting" Forest Plan objectives where the riparian areas have been field-evaluated and are at an upper mid-seral stage;

2. Acres estimated "meeting" Forest Plan objectives where, based on ocular inspection, the acres are at an upper mid-seral stage;

3. Acres verified "moving toward" Forest Plan objectives where they have been field-evaluated and there is an upward trend to an upper mid-seral stage;

4. Acres estimated "moving toward" Forest Plan objectives where, based on ocular inspections, the acres have an upward trend;

5. Acres verified "not meeting or moving toward" Forest Plan objectives where they have been field-evaluated and there is not an upward trend;

6. Acres estimated "not meeting or moving toward" Forest Plan objectives where, based on ocular inspections, the acres do not have an upward trend;

7. Undetermined status where no field evaluations or ocular inspections have taken place.

The following table shows the reporting categories for riparian conditions where data has been collected:

Table RFH-24: Riparian Condition on the

Custer National Forest Units

Table RFH-25: Riparian Condition on the

Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest Unit (Thunder Basin National Grassland)

Table RFH-26: Riparian Condition on the

Nebraska National Forest Units

Additional Information on Woody Draws

In 1986, the North Dakota Game and Fish Department established permanent, randomly distributed plots across the Little Missouri National Grassland to inventory woody draws of ash. During 1992 and 1993, 88 plots were sampled using techniques developed by the Forest Service (Uresk 1990), and classical forest survey methods (e.g. tree-ring core sampling, and seedling/sapling counts) (Curtis 1959).

The results of the sampling suggest that about 30 percent of the flat-bottomed ash draws are in "very good to good condition," about 35 percent are in a "degraded to highly degraded condition," which means they are not self-perpetuating, and the remaining 35 percent is in a "questionable" status. It appears, based on DBH size-class information and tree-core sampling, that degraded ash draws have been limited from recruiting young saplings into the canopy for 35 years. That is to say, the observed conditions are not the result of drought, disease or some unknown natural process. Based on the longevity of ash trees on the Little Missouri National Grassland, 35 percent to potentially as high 50 percent of the flat-bottomed woody draws could die out in the next 20 to 30 years if management practices remain constant. The primary cause of the degraded conditions of the ash draws sampled appears to be mechanical damage and soil compaction resulting from livestock grazing" (Preliminary Report: Vegetative Conditions of Ash Draws on the Little Missouri National Grassland, North Dakota Game and Fish Department).

Opportunity to Improve the Existing Direction

Water-quality monitoring has been done on the Sheyenne National Grassland where pesticides and herbicides have been applied. This unit is part of the inner beach of ancient glacial Lake Agassiz, which created the area's sandy soil and provides for its subsurface water. Because areas surrounding the grassland have significantly higher concentrations of agricultural pesticides and herbicides, requests have been made to place public water wells on the Sheyenne National Grassland. Monitoring should be done to ensure that the large-scale control of leafy spurge with agricultural chemicals does not affect water quality.

Monitoring and evaluation of existing conditions are needed on all national grassland units to determine existing aquatic and riparian conditions. Such monitoring can help determine whether or not desired conditions are being met.

Riparian area monitoring completed on the Nebraska National Forest units does not include consideration of the condition of aquatic habitat quality. Even though about 80 percent of riparian areas has been inventoried and classified for ecological condition, no correlation has been developed to determine riparian condition to aquatic habitat condition.

The Thunder Basin National Grassland does not currently have a complete riparian inventory. Direction is needed to complete the evaluation process of current conditions on both the riparian and aquatic conditions.

In summary, riparian health and ecological site status are characteristics of riparian systems. Riparian health should be judged on the functions it provides based on the criteria provided earlier to determine if the riparian/wetland is in proper functioning condition. All riparian systems should not be expected to have identical functions.

Plant and Animal Species at Risk

Animals

Animals are part of the rangeland and forest health equation. Indigenous animal species play vital ecological roles in soil development, nutrient cycling, energy flow, decomposition, pollination and many other ecological processes and functions, and it behooves us to acknowledge this, whether or not we have a good understanding and appreciation of their ecological roles. Exotic animal species, on the other hand, can severely disrupt biological systems and ecological processes and functions that evolved and developed over time in the absence of these exotic organisms. This assessment simply identifies those wildlife species indigenous to the Northern Plains region considered at risk of range-wide extinction or extirpation from all or part of the Northern Plains. The viability of these species and/or their populations are in question. Some deletions or additions to the following lists of species may occur in the future.

Wildlife species included in this assessment are also limited to those that are known or suspected of occurring on or near the national grasslands and forests on the Northern Plains. Species are also included if potential habitat for the species may occur on NFS lands and is within the current range of the species, or if it is a downstream species that could be affected by management activities in the upper watershed on NFS lands.