Draft SNFPA Management Review and Recommendations

Impacts to Grazing

Background

The SNFPA imposes standards and guidelines to protect two Forest Service Sensitive species (Willow Flycatcher, and Yosemite Toad) from adverse impacts due to livestock grazing. Additional protections for fens, bogs, and stream banks, along with new standards of allowable use are also required. These new protections will impact active allotments and wilderness pack-stock use areas. The SNFPA FEIS estimated a twenty-percent reduction in Animal Unit Months (AUMs) across the bioregion under the standards and guidelines in Alternative Modified 8. Local impacts to individual permittees were expected to vary, but were likely to result in cancelled permits, or non-viable operations. At the request of the Regional Forester, the Team reviewed the standards and guidelines that affected grazing to determine if there were other ways to provide the desired level of resource protection while lessening impacts to permittees.

The Team held two field trips to discuss the SNFPA and issues related to grazing. On June 13, 2002 we traveled to the Stanislaus National Forest and discussed management for the Yosemite toad and great gray owl. Approximately 35 people attended the field review, including Forest Service biologists and range program managers, personnel from California State Fish and Game, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, representatives from conservation organizations, the California Farm Bureau, the livestock industry and local Forest Service permittees. The second field trip was held June 26, 2002, beginning at the Sierra National Forest Supervisor's Office in Fresno. Again, some 45 persons, representing a spectrum of interests, attended this daylong session. Discussions focused on the ROD language pertaining to habitat management for Yosemite toad and willow flycatcher. During the site visits, participants were able to witness first-hand the challenges field personnel experience in attempting to balance multiple objectives within the confines of a single meadow.

During the field trips, it became clear that a high level of anxiety stemmed from the unknown consequences of direction yet to be fully implemented. Many were speculating about whether the surveys required by the ROD could be completed on time, what the outcome of those surveys would be, and what the consequences of the ROD would be to permittees given the survey results. Consequently, much of the focus was on the desire to know more and to know it as soon as possible. Other points that surfaced in the discussions included, the need to recognize the cumulative effect of standards and guidelines for multiple species on a given allotment, the paucity of scientific information from which the standards and guidelines were derived, the need for flexibility to address site-specific conditions and anomalies, and concerns about the status of willow flycatcher and Yosemite toad populations in the Sierra Nevada.

The Team also observed that some permittees were ready and able to work within the management direction in the ROD while others were significantly impacted. The reported impacts varied significantly depending on the physical attributes of the allotment, the configuration of the targeted habitat within that allotment, and the stock management options unique to a given permittee. The discussion left us with the impression that most attendees understood the direction in the ROD and how it was to be applied at the Forest level. The rationale for the direction, however, was a subject of much disagreement and debate.

USDA Forest Service · Pacific Southwest Region