Skip to main content

Full text of "Beaver Dam intensive inventory, habitat management plan and final environmental analysis"

See other formats


BLM    LIBHAHY 


88006594 


/ 


nECEIVED 


Dur  cf  Land  Manacrm*>nt 


& 


;.::,°?.    MAR2  2  1976 


t/-i      jt 


'-•A  STATE  C,f% 
RENO,  NEVADA  ^ 


^ 


% 


* 


BEAVER  DAM  INTENSIVE  INVENTORY 

HABITAT  MANAGEMENT  PLAN 
AND 
FINAL  ENVIRONMENTAL  ANALYSIS 


CALIENTE  PLANNING  UNIT 

LAS  VEGAS  DISTRICT 

B.L.M. 


FEBRUARY,  1976 


merit 
Federal  Center 
i  25 


tf-  ,6  3i  3  3  73        35)  •■  -^oeWi^ 


."3 

13  ^ 


Intensive  Inventory  and  Analysis 

Beaver  Dam  N5-WHA-T24 

1975 


Revised  By: 

Denise  P.  Meridith 
District  Wildlife  Specialist 
Bureau  of  Land  Management 
Las  Vegas,  Nevada 


With  Assistance  From  and  in  Cooperation  With 

Norm  Raymond 
Fish  and  Game  Agent 
Nevada  Department  of  Fish  and  Game 


Da 


i^l^ 


///■5/7C. 


Da>te 


Concurred  B,y-:~""NDF 


Regiojwl  Supervisor 
Approved  By:   BLM 


District  Manager 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 

I.    Introduction  1 

II.   General  Description  2 

A.  Vegetation  2 

B.  Climate  2 

C.  Topography  3 

D.  Soils  3 

E.  Wildlife  - - - 4 

F.  Wild  Horses  6 

III.   Wildlife  Population  Conditions  8 

A.  Mule  Deer 8 

B.  Mountain  Lions  9 

C.  Small  Game  10 

D.  Other  Wildlife — - 11 

IV.   Wildlife  Harvest 12 

V.   Habitat  Requirements  14 

VI.   Wildlif  Habitat  Conditions - 15 

A.  Present  Situation 15 

B.  Potential  for  Habitat  Improvements  23 

VII.   Other  Problems  and  Possible  Solutions  25 


1- 


Introduction 

The  Beaver  Dam  Wildlife  Habitat  Area  (N5-WHA-T24)  is  located  in 
Lincoln  County,  Nevada  and  includes  627,  of  the  Nevada  Department 
of  Fish  and  Game  Management  Unit  No.  24  (see  maps  #1  and  #2). 
National  resource  lands  total  about  616,000  acres,  private  lands 
about  17,000  acres  and  the  Beaver  Dam  State  Park  covers  2,000 
acres. 

A  wide  variety  of  wildlife  resides  in  the  area:   over  300  species 
of  birds,  over  50  of  mammals,  over  15  of  reptiles  and  amphibians, 
and  several  species  of  fish.   Two  inventories  and  habitat  manage- 
ment plans  should  be  completed  for  the  area.   At  a  later  date, 
an  inventory  and  HMP  will  be  completed  for  the  aquatic  habitat 
in  this  WHA  (Beaver  Dam,  Clover,  Cottonwood,  Pine  and  Ash  Creeks). 

This  inventory  and  its  accompanying  HMP  deal  with  terrestrial 
wildlife  habitat.   It  is  an  update  of  the  inventory  completed  by 
Lewis  Myers  in  1971.   The  inventory  includes  a  general  description 
of  the  WHA,  wildlife  population  conditions,  harvest  and  habitat 
requirements  and  a  discussion  of  the  present  condition  of  wild- 
life habitat,  management  problems  and  possible  solutions. 


Map  No.    1 

B.L.M.  ADMINISTRATION 

NEVADA 


N5JWHA-T24 
BEAVER 
DAM 


rrwnii 


I  matt l 

Eatjc   ■          Clill 
±j?j£ J 

DLN  \ 


(^ADOW  VAUtYlCAMKilOUND 


MouguiO      t 
Bud.  Min    ,| 


-2- 


II.    General  Description 
A.   Vegetation 


Most  of  the  Beaver  Dam  area  supports  a  dense  juniper-pinyon 
woodland  with  sagebrush  and  cliffrose  understories .   Cliff- 
rose  and  bitterbrush  are  only  locally  abundant,  seldom  ex- 
ceeding 10  percent  of  the  composition,  and  they  are  typi- 
cally over-utilized,  decadent,  unproductive  plants.   Most 
of  the  area  lacks  a  good  variety  of  browse  species.   Typical 
stands  contain  an  over-abundance  of  sagebrush,  plentiful 
yellow-top  rabbitbrush,  and  a  tract  to  10  percent  of  cliff- 
rose.   Bitterbrush  replaces  cliffrose  at  higher  elevations. 
Middle  elevations  support  an  apparent  Pur shia- Cowan ia  hy- 
bridized complex.   Serviceberry  grows  with  cliffrose- 
bitterbrush  primarily  in  the  Barclay  summer  allotment,  locally 
on  the  south  slope  of  the  Sawmill  Range,  and  in  Pennsylvania 
Canyon. 

Browse  mixtures,  containing  clif frose-bitterbrush,  service- 
berry,  silk  tassel,  sagebrush,  manzanita,  rabbitbrush,  Gambel's 
oak,  and  Gregg's  snowbrush  occur  primarily  in  burned  areas 
on  the  south  slope  of  the  Sawmill  Range.   Burns  north  of 
the  Sawmill  Range  typically  revert  to  unproductive  sagebrush 
stands. 

Forbs  are  conspicuously  absent  from  most  areas,  chaining  and 
seeding  areas  being  the  commonest  exceptions.  Many  chainings 
and  seedings  have  reverted  to  dense  sagebrush-rabbitbrush 
stands  through  dncontrolled  livestock  use.   A  great  variety 
of  native  forbs  exists,  though  densities  are  quite  low. 
Important  native  species  include,  but  are  not  limited  to: 
Eriogonum  spp,  Lomatium  sp,  Perife temon  spp,  Phlox  spp, 
Emphorbia  sp,  Sphaeralcea  spp,  Erigeron  sp,  Balsamortiiza  sp, 
and  Trifolium  sp. 

Grasses  are  only  locally  abundant,  being  restricted  primarily 
to  chainings  and  seedings.   Residual  stands  of  blue  grams, 
needle  and  thread,  Nevada  bluegrass,  Indian  rice  grass,  and 
galleta  suggest  quality  bunch  grasses  were  once  important 
constituents  of  plant  cover. 


B.    Climate 


Precipitation  varies  with  altitude  from  8.8  inches  at 
Caliente  to  14  inches  in  the  highest  mountains.  Most  of  the 
area  falls  within  the  10-inch  precipitation  zone.  Most  pre- 


-3- 


cipitation  occurs  as  rainfall.   Snow  pack,  seldom  exceeds  one 
foot.   The  highest  peaks  may  maintain  winter  snow  packs  of 
3-4  feet.   The  following  chart  shows  the  monthly   distribution 
of  precipitation  in  Caliente. 

(inches) 


Month 

Av.  Prec. 

Jan 

.86 

Feb 

.80 

Mar 

.92 

Apr 

.74 

May 

.51 

June 

.38 

Month 

Av.  Prec. 

July 

.84 

Aug 

1.06 

Sept 

.53 

Oct 

.85 

Nov 

.63 

Dec 

.99 

Jan 

30° 

Feb 

35.7° 

Mar 

43.6° 

Apr 

52.5° 

May 

60.5° 

June 

68.2 

U.  S.  Department  of  Commerce,  1960 

Droughts  sometimes  occur  and  annual  precipitation  in  Caliente 
may  be  only  4-5  inches  (507o  of  normal). 

Mean  yearly  temperature  at  Caliente  is  53.0°F.,  with  extremes 
of  from  below  0°  in  winter  to  over  100°  in  summer.   Average 
monthly  temperatures  at  Caliente: 

July  76.0° 

Aug  74.0° 

Sept  66.1° 

Oct  54.1° 

Nov  41.7° 

Dec  33.4° 

High  winds  and  temperatures  contribute  to  high  evaporation 
rates  (50-70  inches/year).  Humidity  is  very  low,  dropping 
below  15%  during  the  summer  months. 

C.  Topography 

Topography  is  characterized  by  a  large  rolling  to  flat  high- 
land sloping  from  about  5,000  feet  on  the  west  to  6,000  feet 
on  the  east.   The  southern  portion  is  rough  and  mountainous 
(Sawmill  Range),  sloping  southward  from  peaks  about  7,000 
feet  high,  to  the  flat  Tule  Desert,  only  3,600  feet  high. 

D.  Soils 

Soils  of  the  area  are  lithosols  and  browns,  both  shallow  and 
weakly  developed.  Both  soils  are  products  more  of  geologic 
erosion  than  of  envrionmental  and  soil  forming  factors.   Soils 
are  relatively  unproductive,  being  suitable  mostly  for  range- 


-4- 


land.   Bare  soil  sites,  devoid  of  vegetative  cover  are  not 
uncommon  in  climax  situations.   Parent  materials  are  ig- 
neous, being  mostly  acidic  rhyolite. 


E.   Wildlife 


The  following  species  occur  in  the  Beaver  Dam  Wildlife 
Habitat  Area: 

Species  Lists  Follows: 

A.  Birds  (refer  to  N-5  District  Bird  List) 

Bird  species,  totalling  326,  have  been  listed  in 
the  District  Bird  List.   Most  probably  can  be  found 
in  the  T-24  habitat  area  with  aquatic  and  gallina- 
ceous species  being  the  commonest  exceptions. 

B.  Mammals: 

1.  Muledeer  (common) 

2.  Bighorn  (rare,  may  wander  into  Meadow  Valley  Wash) 

3.  Cougar  (widespread  in  small  numbers) 

4.  Bobcat  (common) 

5.  Coyote  (common) 

6.  Kit  fox  (fairly  common,  foothills,  desert) 

7.  Grey  fox  (common,  brushy-rocky) 

8.  Badger  (fairly  common,  dry  hills,  valleys) 

9.  Spotted  skunk  (brushy,  rocky) 

10.  Striped  skunk  (near  water) 

11.  Long- tailed  weasel  (not  found  in  very  dry  areas) 

12.  Ring-tailed  cat  (cliffs,  canyons,  attics) 

13.  Raccoon  (usually  near  water) 

14.  Big  free-tailed  bat  (uncommon) 

15.  Mexican  free-tailed  bat  (common,  caves,  buildings) 

16.  Pallid  bat  (common,  moist  areas) 

17.  Long-eared  bat  (common,  caves,  buildings) 
*18.  Spotted  bat 

19.  Hoary  bat  (common,  trees,  shrubs) 

20.  Red  bat  (very  uncommon,  fringe  species) 

21.  Big  brown  bat  (common,  buildings) 

22.  Western  pipistrelle  (common,  wet  areas) 

23.  Silvery-haired  bat  (forrested,  wet  areas) 

24.  Small -footed  myotis  (common) 

25.  Hairy-winged  myotis  (forrested,  wet  areas) 

26.  Little  brown  myotis  (very  common,  wet  areas) 

27.  Townsend  ground  squirrel  (common,  valleys) 

28.  Rock  squirrel  (common,  rocky) 


*  endangered  status  in  the  State  of  Nevada 


-5- 


29.  Antelope  ground  squirrel  (common,  -widespread) 

30.  Least  chipmunk  (common,  sage,  pinyon- juniper) 

31.  Say  chipmunk 

32.  Cliff  chipmunk  (common,  pinyon- juniper) 
33'  Botta  pocket  gopher 

34.  Little  pocket  mouse  (pinyon- juniper) 

35.  Great  Basin  pocket  mouse  (sage,  juniper- piny on) 

36.  Long- tailed  pocket  mouse  (valleys) 
37«  Ord  Kangaroo  rat  (sandy  sagebrush) 
38.  Merriam  kangaroo  rat  (valleys) 

39*  Beaver  (streams) 

kO.  Northern  kangaroo  mouse  (common,  sandy) 

Ul.  Southern  kangaroo  mouse  (common,  sandy) 

k2.  Western  harvest  mouse  (grassy) 

U3.  Canyon  mouse  (rocky) 

kk.  Deer  mouse  (very  common,  ubiquitous) 

k1?,  Pinyon  mouse  (rocky  pinyon- juniper) 

k6.  Desert  wood  rat  (very  common,  rocky  scrub) 

k"J ,  Bushy- tailed  wood  rat  (very  common,  rocks,  caves) 

U8.  Meadow  mouse  (common,  dense  grass) 

49.  Sagebrush  vole  (uncommon,  sagebrush) 

50.  House  mouse  (common,  habitatious ) 

51.  Porcupine  (uncommon) 

52.  Black- tailed  jackrabbit  (common,  shrubby) 

53*  Nuttall  cottontail  (common,  shrubby,  woodlands) 

5^.  Audubon  cottontail  (common,  shrubby) 

C.  Birds  -  See  Las  Vegas  District  Bird  Checklist 

D.  Amphibians  and  Reptiles 

1.  Great  Basin  spadefoot  toad 

2.  Western  toad 

3.  Southwestern  toad  (headwaters  of  Colorado  System) 
k.  Red-spotted  toad  (possible  southern  part  of  area) 

5.  Leopard  frog 

6.  Bullfrog  (introduced) 

7.  Banded  gecko  (rocky,  desert  to  woodland) 

8.  Zebra- tailed  lizard  (open  areas) 

9.  Leopard  lizard  (open) 

10.  Collared  lizard  (rocky) 

11.  Desert  spiny  lizard 

12.  Western  fence  lizard  (variable  habitat) 

13.  Sagebrush  lizard  (sagebrush,  manzanita,  woodlands) 
Ik.  Side-blotched  lizard  (variable  habitat) 

15.  Desert  horned  lizard  (washes,  flats) 

16.  Western  skink  (variable  habitat) 


-6- 


17.  Western  whip tail  (open  aspects; 

*18„  Do.^rt  Tortoise  (southern  part  of  P.  U.J 

L9C  Ringneck  snake 

10.  Red  racer 

21  Striped  whipsnake 

22.  Wc  lern  yell<  w-b>_l  J  ied  racer 

23.  W   tern  paten -nosed  snake 

24.  Cpher  snakt 

"  ".  California  I.  i  n^  snake 

(•  .  T..)ng-no^eci         ake 

27.  Western   ga.i.er     nakf 

?A  .  Western  gr-mnr    snake 

29.  :  i  gVi  t    snak( 

3D.  Jreaf   Basi.     i^Ltlesnake 

31.  Sidewinder    (possibly   southern  part   of   area) 

32.  '.oeckled   mttlesn-iit     (.possibly  southern  part  of  area) 

g0      Fish.s 

1.  Rainbow  trout  (iut  oduced,  Clover  Ci  „  ,  Beaver  Dam  Cr.) 

2.  Mountain  suckt-r  .Clover  Cr0^ 

3.  Suckled  dace   i.e".vei  Da\,  or.  i 

h0  '  irgin  River  s  ;  e  aacr  (Ge-iver  Dam  Cr.N 

Wi  Id  llorj;*  s 

Wild  horses  occupy  m«>M  of    the  Re..ver  Liarr.  WHA.   The  horse 

inventories  conduct  ci  in  1974  revealed  between  275  and  J80 
ai.imals: 


Rabbit,  Sheep,  Miller  Sprint.  jO-60 

Oakwells  15-20 

South  Mosie  10-1." 

Empy  Wash  15-20 

Two  seeding*  14-23 

Ash  Spring  5-10 

Sam's  Camp  Spring  4-6 

Gordon  Spring  4-6 

East  Pass  10-15 

Pine  Canyon  Dam  10-12 

Ella  Spring  20-25 

Carson  and  Johnson  Spring              15-20 

Bitter  Creek  12-15 

Fife  Spring  5-10 

Pine,  Cottonwood  ar.d   A  ,h  Spring  50-70 

Sheep  Spring  10-12 

Buckboard  15-20 

Etna  6-8 


Rarp     <?t-flt-iis     in     flip     <5f->it-o     nf    NairaAa 


-7- 


Horses  can  make  heavy  demands  on  the  habitat  of  an  area: 
they  each  consume  up  to  15  gallons  of  water  per  day  and 
utilize  12-14  AUMs  (animal  unit  months)  of  forage.   This 
pressure  is  all  compounded  by  the  fact  that  horse  use  is 
yearlong. 

Some  competition  between  horses  and  deer  is  apparent  on 
deer  yearlong  range  and  on  crucial  deer  winter  habitat  on 
Little  Mountain.   The  exact  extent  of  competition  for  forage 
is  not  known  because  of  the  lack  of  information  on  wild 
horse  food  habits.   But  horses  are  known  to  utilize  the 
following  plants: 

Delicious  sagebrush 

Bitterbrush 

Desert  almond 

Indian  ricegrass 

Needle-and- thread  grass 

Galleta  grass 

4-wing  saltbush 

White  sage 

More  research  is  needed  to  determine  food  habits,  horse 
seasonal  use,  and  methods  of  relieving  horse/wildlife  compe- 
tition. 


-7- 


Horses  can  make  heavy  demands  on  the  habitat  of  an  area: 
they  each  consume  up  to  15  gallons  of  water  per  day  and 
utilize  12-14  AUMs  (animal  unit  months)  of  forage.   This 
pressure  is  all  compounded  by  the  fact  that  horse  use  is 
yearlong. 

Some  competition  between  horses  and  deer  is  apparent  on 
deer  yearlong  range  and  on  crucial  deer  winter  habitat  on 
Little  Mountain.   The  exact  extent  of  competition  for  forage 
is  not  known  because  of  the  lack  of  information  on  wild 
horse  food  habits.   But  horses  are  known  to  utilize  the 
following  plants: 

Delicious  sagebrush 

Bitterbrush 

Desert  almond 

Indian  ricegrass 

Needle-and- thread  grass 

Galleta  grass 

4-wing   saltbush 

White   sage 

More  research  is  needed  to  determine  food  habits,  horse 
seasonal  use,  and  methods  of  relieving  horse/wildlife  compe- 
tition. 


-8- 


III.    Population  Conditions 
A.   Mule  Deer 

1.   Present  Numbers 


The  Beaver  Dam  wildlife  habitat  area  (T24)  contains 
approximately  68  percent  of  the  muledeer  habitat  within 
Nevada  Department  of  Fish  and  Game  management  area 
no.  24.   NDF&G  conducts  no  formal  herd  studies  due  to 
low  muledeer  densities  and  lack  of  well  defined  season- 
al range  use  patterns. 

The  Beaver  Dam  habitat  area  is  recognized  as  a  fairly 
intact  muledeer  herd  or  management  unit.   Its  840  square 
miles  of  deer  habitat  (68  percent  of  Area  24)  supports 
a  minimum  established  population  which  varies  from  about 
800  deer  to  8,000  deer  in  a  "boom  or  bust"  fashion. 

Herd  level  may  be  influenced  by  irregular  winter  migra- 
tions from  the  adjacent  Dixie  National  Forest  Lands  in 
Utah.   NDF&G  files  note  deer  influx  from  Utah  during 
the  1959  hunting  season. 

Analysis  of  harvest  offers  the  only  present  opportunity 
for  estimating  minimum  deer  numbers.   In  1959  -  1,152 
deer  were  harvested  in  Area  24  (NDF&G  files)  under 
"either  sex"  regulations  with  light  hunter  pressure 
(10  hunter  days/sq.  mile  of  less).   This  would  repre- 
sent approximately  10  percent  of  the  population,  for  a 
minimum  total  of  11,500  deer,  or  about  10  deer  per 
square  mile  of  habitat  (1,240  miles  of  habitat  in 
Area  24). 

During  the  late  1960's  harvest  dropped  sharply  to  about 
60  animals  under  "bucks  only"  regulations  with  light  hunt- 
ing pressure.   This  represents  about  4  percent  of  the 
herd,  which  computes  to  be  about  1,500  deer,  or  about 

1  deer  per  square  mile.   Using  this  same  method  of  cal- 
culation, a  buck  only  harvest  of  96  animals  in  1973 
would  indicate  a  present  population  of  2,400  deer  or  about 

2  deer  per  square  mile. 

2.   Herd  Composition  and  Productivity 

Herd  composition  data  is  too  fragmentary  for  conclusion. 
The  population  today  seems  to  be  stable.   But  because 


-9- 


of  low  elevations  (no  good  summer  habitat)  and  varia- 
tions in  precipitation,  the  types  and  amounts  of  forage, 
and  in  turn,  herd  productivity,  fluctuates  greatly. 

3.   Potential  Carrying  Capacity  and  Numbers 

Range  condition  data  is  not  available  for  the  period 
during  which  deer  numbers  were  high.   It  is  not  known 
to  what  degree  "hunting  pressure"  influenced  harvest 
during  the  early  1950' s  through  early  1960's.   Doubt- 
less, this  10-year  period  was  a  productive  period  for 
deer. 

Average  harvest  for  the  period  1956-1965  was  709  deer 
(buck  harvest  doubled  for  1964  B.O.  hunt).   Assuming 
this  represented  10  percent  of  the  population,  a  mini- 
mum 7,000  deer  inhabited  Area  24,  of  which  about  4,700 
(5  deer/mi^)  inhabited  the  Beaver  Dam  habitat  area. 
This  would  seem  a  reasonable  potential  carrying  capacity 
for  this  arid  area. 

B.   Mountain  Lion 

1.   Present  Numbers,  Population  Trend 

This  area  of  the  Lincoln  County  has  a  resident  popula- 
tion of  mountain  lions.  No  formal  surveys  have  been 
conducted  to  determine  population  trend.   Harvest  trend 
(which  increases  and  decreases  with  changing  snow  condi- 
tions and  hunting  pressures)  is  generally  not  believed 
to  be  an  indication  of  population  trend.   The  population 
of  lions  seems  to  be  stable  or  slightly  increasing  at 
the  moment,  but  there  is  a  great  need  for  research 
programs  to  determine  populations,  distributions,  trends 
and  the  effect  of  hunting. 

2„   Potential  Carrying  Capacity 

The  carrying  capacity  of  the  habitat  for  mountain  lions 
is  directly  proportional  to  the  carrying  capacity  of  the 
area  for  mule  deer.   If  forage  and  water  conditions  can 
be  improved  in  order  to  increase  the  numbers  of  deer 
(the  main  diet  of  the  lion)  and  cover  destruction  and 
poaching  or  harassment  of  lions  is  kept  to  a  minimum, 
this  WHA  can  support  a  much  larger  population  of  lions 
than  it  now  does. 


-10- 


C.    Small  Game 

1.   Present  Numbers,  Population  Trends 

The  major  small  game  species  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA 
include  Gambel ' s  quail,  chukar  partridge,  waterfowl, 
mourning  dove,  and  cottontial  rabbits. 

Table  #1  shows  adult/young  ratios  and  average  broods  of 
Gambel 's  quail  in  Lincoln  County.   Quail  production 
seems  to  be  improving  and  if  good  precipitation  is 
received  for  the  next  two  years  population  should  continue 
to  increase. 

Chukar  have  been  planted  in  Lincoln  County  since  the 
30fs;  in  1973,  1250  birds  were  released  at  Elgin, 
Clover  Creek  and  other  sites  in  Lincoln  County.   Pre- 
sent populations,  however,  are  very  low  and  there  is 
no  open  season  in  Lincoln  County. 

Low  numbers  of  rabbits,  mourning  doves,  and  waterfowl 
occur  on  private,  irrigated  lands  and  along  Clover 
Creek  and  Meadow  Valley  Wash.   Table  #2  shows  that  rabbit 
densities  have  decreased  drastically  in  the  past  2 
years.   Little  information  is  available  on  population 
trends  for  the  other  species.   But  their  populations 
seem  to  fluctuate  with  changes  in  annual  precipitation 
and  the  resulting  forage. 


Table  #1     Gambel's  Quail  -  Population  Data  -  Lincoln  County 


Total 

Birds 

Year 

Sampled 

Adult 

Young 

Adult /Young 

Ave.  Brood 

1965 

618 

117 

501 

100/428 

12 

1966 

3,783 

516 

3,267 

100/633 

9.6 

1967 

1,628 

237 

1,391 

100/587 

11.0 

1968 

6,504 

1,088 

5,404 

100/496 

11.8  (178) 

1969 

639 

101 

538 

100/532 

11.5  (41) 

1971 

247 

51 

196 

100/393 

8    (9) 

1972 

612 

149 

453 

100/304 

• 

7.6 

1973 

625 

97 

528 

100/540 

12.9 

1974 

1,644 

327 

1,317 

100/403 

8.7 

Table  #2     Cottontail  and  Pigmy  Rabbits  Population  -  Lincoln  County 

Year  Rabbit/Mile 

1967  1.27 

1968  2.27 

1969  1.2 

1970  1.7 

1971  2.1 

1972  .37 

1973  .58 


■  11- 


2.   Potential  Carrying  Capacity 

All  of  the  above  mentioned  species  have  sustained 
much  larger  populations  in  the  past  than  they  do  now. 
In  1968,  nearly  18,000  Gambel's  Quail  were  harvested. 
In  1969,  2.27  rabbits/mile  were  surveyed.   In  1970, 
over  9,000  doves  were  taken.   (See  Tables  #4,  2,  5). 
With  improvement  of  food,  water  and  protection  of  cover 
in  this  habitat  area,  there  seems  to  be  no  reason  why 
the  area  cannot  support  much  more  small  game  that  it 
presently  does. 

D.    Other  Wildlife 

1.  Present  Numbers,  Population  Trends 

Little  data  is  available  on  numbers  or  trends  of  popu- 
lations of  furbearers  or  non-game  species  in  the 
Beaver  Dam  WHA.   The  productivity  of  furbearers  and 
birds  of  prey  is  dependent  on  the  population  trends  of 
prey  species  like  deer,  rodents,  reptiles  and  insects. 
The  productivity  of  these  prey  species,  in  turn,  is 
dependent  on  precipitation  and  forage  conditions.  As 
climatic  and  forage  conditions  fluctuate  in  the  habi- 
tat area  (droughts  are  common),  the  population's  of 
furbearers  and  non-game  species  can  be  expected  to  rise 
and  fall. 

There  are  several  protected,  rare  or  endangered  species 
present  in  the  area.   Peregrine  falcons  (classified 
"endangered"  by  the  Federal  government)  have  been  sighted 
in  the  Clover  Mountains.   Prairie  falcons,  golden  eagles 
and  other  raptors  (protected  by  the  State)  may  also  pass 
through  the  area.   Desert  tortoises  (classified  "rare" 
by  the  State)  may  be  found  in  the  very  southern  section 
of  the  WHA.   Finally  the  spotted  bat  (classified  "en- 
dangered" by  the  State)  might  possibly  exist  in  the 
Clover  Mountain  area.   Cooperative  research  with 
Nevada  Department  of  Fish  and  Game  and  the  U.  S.  Fish 
and  Wildlife  Service  to  determine  distribution  and 
trend  of  these  animals. 

2.  Potential  Carrying  Capacity 

With  improvements  in  forage  and  water  availability  and 
protection  of  cover,  potential  for  increasing  the 
populations  of  furbearers,  songbirds,  rodents  and  rep- 
tiles is  high.   But  more  research  is  needed  to  determine 
population  trends  and  distribution  of  these  species. 


12- 


IV.   Wildlife  Harvest 

Tables  3-7  list  the  harvest  statistics  of  the  last  eight  years 
for  mule  deer  in  Beaver  Dam  Management  Area  24  and  for  other 
major  game  species  (Gambel's  quail,  mourning  dove,  cottontail 
rabbits  and  mountain  lions)  in  Lincoln  County.   Table  8  is  a 
summary  of  furbearers  harvest  in  Lincoln  County  in  1973-4. 


I-1 

(— ' 

t— ' 

i—1 

M 

t—1 

h- ' 

h-1 

I—1 

t— ' 

i— ' 

H- ' 

t— ' 

h< 

VO 

VO 

vo 

vO 

vO 

<X> 

VO 

vO 

vO 

vO 

vO 

vO 

vO 

fD 

-vl 

^J 

^J 

-^1 

ON 

On 

o> 

on 

on 

o> 

ON 

ON 

Ov 

pg 

U> 

N> 

i—1 

O 

vo 

00 

•^J 

on 

Ln 

4> 

to 

N3 

M 

rl 

ro 

vo 

00 

Ui 

LO 

ON 

ON 

u> 

vyi 

^j 

ON 

o 

Ul 

4> 

o 

ON 

Ul 

O 

VO 

o       o       o       o       o 


ro 


o       o 


I-1  U>  W  -p- 

O  I— '  O  O  i— ■  On  vo 


N>  Ui  O  O 

vo  ON  vO  OJ  O  -P- 


a 

H 

n 

O 

ON 

ON 

00 

o 

rr 

■^J 

i—1 

(jO 

n 

to 

Ln 

ON 

Ln 

i— » 

►-•  fO  hO  OJ  IO 

O  »vl  LO  O  O 

OOOOOOOOOOvOOU)4>|n> 


I— '  U>  U>  Ln 

OOOOOOOOONONJi-'i-' 


I? 


rt    0) 


H 

CO 

cr 

i—1 
rt> 

<-o 


O 
rt) 
rt) 

n 

PC 
to 

< 
rt) 
en 
rt 

03 

3 
to 
00 
rt) 
3 
n> 
3 
rr 

> 
H 
rt> 
to 

IO 

4> 


p"  tO  (-O  (jj  4> 

vOOOv_nU>ONON<_0-P-UlO-P*l— 'IjO 
•PsOLn-P*OOiUl»-'tj0aNN50N|-i 


to  t— ■  I-1  tO  N3 

to  -P-  Ln  O  O  v£> 


c  o 

O  rr 

?r  to 

en  t— ■ 


Ui  Ln  Co  IO         -P»        |tO 

O  4>  LO  O  "^1 


N3  I— '  I— '  h-»  i-j  (jO  Ln  -^J  ON  I— '         |LO 

h-'4>ON^>00Ln|>O(J0i_iON00ON 


rop»p,(sjp»p»p»Ln00Ovouj|.p» 

ONvOLoi-'vOLnrooLoLoOOh-' 


i-1        ro        ro        ro       |Ln 
oo4>oroaN.p«'.p»vo-Psroujm 


o 
to 
rr 

a> 

o 
a4 
rr 
to 
p- 
3 
ft) 
P- 

Pi 
p, 

o 

3 

fD 
rt> 
>-{ 


0) 
00 

i-{ 
rt) 
rr 

e 


ON 


ro        4>-        o        u>        ro        ro        ro 


oo 


ro 


Table 

4      Gambel's  Quail 

Harvest  - 

■  Lincoln  County 

Kill/ 

Total 

Kill/ 

Hunter 

Year 

Harvest 

Hunter 

Days 

Hunters 

Days 

1965 

2,873 

6.9 

2.5 

416 

1,118 

1966 

4,004 

8.2 

2.6 

484 

1,540 

1967 

12,660 

12.2 

3.5 

1,032 

3,600 

1968 

17,979 

13.9 

3.8 

1,287 

4,641 

1969 

14,858 

11.3 

3.0 

13,011 

4,918 

1970 

6,270 

6.3 

2.2 

990 

2,760 

1971 

2,745 

6.1 

2.4 

450 

1,110 

1972 

1,792 

2.9 

1.3 

598 

1,285 

1973 

7,373 

7.2 

3.2 

1,022 

2,242 

Table 

5      Dove 

Harvest  - 

■  Lincoln  County 

Total 

Kill/ 

Kill/ 

Tot  # 

Tot  # 

Year 

Harvest 

Hunter 

Hunter  Days 

Hunters 

Days 

1965 

2,795 

12.6 

4.8 

221 

572 

1966 

2,189 

11.0 

3.0 

198 

726 

1967 

7,980 

15.4 

3.9 

516 

2,016 

1968 

1969 

8,255 

12.9 

3.8 

637 

2,158 

1970 

9,495 

14.0 

4.8 

675 

1,980 

1971 

4,400 

9.5 

2.7 

465 

1,635 

1972 

7,293 

13.3 

3.3 

545 

2,197 

1973 

11,449 

13.6 

5.1 

840 

2,203 

Table  6 

Harvest 

Cottontail  and 

Pigmy- 

Rabbits 

-  Lincoln 

County 

Year 

Total  Kill 

Kill/Hunter 

Day 

K/H 

Hunters 

L  Days 

1965 

1,027 

0.9 

3.5 

286 

1,040 

1966 

14,096 

1.3 

5.6 

264 

11,022 

1967 

5,916 

1.7 

7.4 

792 

3,420 

1968 

6,201 

1.7 

7.4 

832 

3,653 

1969 

97,011 

1.5 

8.3 

1,170 

6,136 

1970 

6,945 

1.6 

6.7 

1,035 

4,185 

1971 

4,680 

1.4 

5.8 

795 

3,255 

1972 

3,128 

1.1 

4.2 

737 

2,661 

1973 

1,271 

0.8 

2.3 

542 

1,435 

Table  7      Mountain  Lion  Harvest  -  Lincoln  County 

Year  Total 

1969  10 

1970  11 

1971  7 

1972  10 
1973 


Table  8      Fur  Harvest  -  Lincoln  County,  1973-4 

Gray  Fox  207 

Raccoon  2 

Bobeat  134 

Coyote  386 

Badger  27 

Striped  Skunk  12 

Spotted  Skunk  9 

Ring-tail  cat  15 


14- 


V.   Habitat  Requirements 

Table  9  is  a  summary  of  the  habitat  requirements  of  the  major 
wildlife  species  in  the  Beaver  Dam  Habitat  Area. 


en 


CQ 

-p 

s 

•H 
CD 

K 

-P 
cd 
-P 

•H 


ON 

0) 
H 

■3 

EH 


U 

C    ft 

O    -H 

$3  d 


M 

a 

<l> 

1 ' 

h 

d 

a) 

£ 

-p 

cd 

> 

~~M/N 

H    -P    -P 

>>  bD 

DHOO.H 

U    cd  CM    > 


43 

CQ 

CO 

3 

CD 

^3    p            CU 

(D     h              CQ 

c4 

H 

im 

0) 

-P 

h 

p  43    U    O 

u  u  a>   u 

P  m  fttH 

cd 

-p 

CQ 

CQ 

CU 

o 

•H 

•H 

-P 

■P 

a 

o 

d 

43 

CQ 

O 

a 

fl 

CD   -P    -H    <H 

ft 

o 

a1  -p 

P 

CD 

a 

•H 

bo-p  a  -h 

u 

CQ 

M 

CQ 

^ 

(fl'H     3d 

CQ 

CU 

CU 

• 

O 

S3 

UJ 

MP    'T    U 

cd 

o 

a 

K 

Ch 

•H 

aj 

-*rs 

"2  X  ? 

CU 

3  -O  o     •» 

H 

-     CU     S     CQ 

CU 

-P 

H 

•JoSfl 

-p 

CQ 

CQ 

H 

J-_  -H             fH 

•H 

•H 

-P 

0) 

0T  f>  H    O 
-P    En  H  «h 

CQ 

P 

43 

O 

h 

CQ 

O1  -P 

CD 

-P    CU    cd 

cd 

CQ 

CQ 

•H     IQ     g    Vl 

u 

CU 

• 

C 

43           CQ    O 

bD 

a 

ffi 

•H 

CD 

60 

cd 

fn 

o 

pq 

43  ^FL   fn^ 

mo   ^  la 

p  LT\    CU   H 

fc 

CD 

H 

?H 

CD 

-P 

CD 

,Q           CU 

-P 

•H 

CQ 

•H 

CQ 

-P 

H 

CU           -H 

CQ 

d 

43 

O 

P 

S     £ 

£> 

a1  -p 

CD 

CO 

f-i 

CQ 

CQ 

•H            CU 

o 

CU 

• 

53 

43            CQ 

CH 

a 

P3 

•H 

,£"^ 

CQ  ITS 

g  43    O^. 
43    CO    OJ    OJ 

M 

CU    d      1    H 
bO  Pi  OJ     i 

2 

CD 

•H 

cd  43   H  ON 

-P 

CQ 

?H 

CQ    ?-H 

•H 

-P 

ft 

CU     CQ     CQ 

P" 

CQ 

O 

Z 

CQ 

•n-P    43     CQ 

O1  43 

CD 

CD 

•-a  -P   fn   g} 

\.-H     O     M 

CQ 

Ji 

CQ 

ft 

CU 

O 

c 

CQ 

Ph  43    <H    bO 

0 

CH 

•H 

cd 

£3  -P 

cd  cd 

•H  -P 

Sh  -H 

ft^ 

•H  43 

u 


•H  v£> 
cd     i 

d  -d" 


a 

CQ   H 
CQ    d 

cd  d 


M 

o 

CD 

S3 

CD 

CQ 

rH 

CQ 

d 

cd 

d 

U 

•H 

bO  <+h 

CQ 

C  H 
O    cd 

>>  3 
S3    S3 


bD  <4H    ft  cd 


ft 

O 

u 

V 

-p 

O    co 
43 

£g 

O     CQ 

P. 


bD 
S3 

•H 

Sh 

d 

d 


CQ 
CQ 

cd 

Sh 
bD 
-p 
cd 

CD 
43 


o 

CD 
S3 
CD 

H 


CU   d 
CQ   d 

S3  -H 


O    ^    'H    <h 


CQ 
CQ 

cd 
U 
bO 


t 


$3 
o 

•H 

-p 
od 

-p 

CD 
bD 
CD 
> 


•\    CQ 
CQ    X 


-P 
CD  O 
bD  CD 
d  CQ 
CU    S3 

CO    -H 


o 

CD 

c 

CD 


-P  CQ  CQ     O  H 

Cd  43  CQ     CD  d 

<u  S-i  cd   cq  d 

Xi  O  H     S3  -H 

o  "w  bD  -h  tp. 


bD  O 


-p 

H 
cd 

CQ 


CQ 
CQ 

H 

o 

a 


CQ 
CD 

•H 

o 

CO 


CQ 

H       d 

CQ 

Sh    CU 

P 

<D  H 

a 

CU  -H 

o 

d    O 

•H 

o 

g 

CU    O 

CD 

H  d 

.C 

5  ° 

S 

^>  H 

cd   cd 

CQ 

•H 

H 

H  -P   H 

-3-       P    P 

^    cd 

g 

•H    Sh    CU 

<u  d   o 

OJ       o    V 

O 

cd    Q  43 

f>  -H    H 

U   -P    CD 

<H 

a^i 

O    cd    o 
«    S3    cd 

cd    o   cd 

J2     CU     Sh 

?H 
CU 

.a  M 

cu  a 

d  H    bD 

-P 

•  tq 

43   < 

cd 

a 

s 

o 

^ 

ON 


cd 

a 

CQ 

cd 
P 


>> 

CU  H 

H 

t— 

H 

a  ' 

cd 

ON 

•H 

a  j- 

-p 

H 

cd 

p  — ^ 

•H 

-d 

CQ    H 

> 

S3 
CU 
•H 
? 
CU 
Sh 
R 

CQ 

CQ 

cd 

■n 

•»  CO 

• 

Sh 

CD 

43 

CQ    ^ 

-3- 

bD 

CD 

CQ 

+^>     CQ 

-P 

? 

g 

o  d 

cd 

-d 

CD  H 

H 

CD 

S3 

H 

CQ    rH 

LTN 

Xi 

O 

d 

S3    O 

ON 

CJ 

ft  43 

•H    a 

H 

S3 

O 

CQ 

H 

CQ 

CU 

CQ 

S 

cd 

d 

•s   CQ 

u 

CQ 

CU 

43 

CQ   X 

•v 

bD  -P 

CU 

CQ 

-P     CQ 

a 

-P 

O 

> 

g 

o  d 

•H 

cd 

CU 

"2 

CU   H 

CNl 

CD 

CQ 

S3 

H 

CQ   rH 

x: 

$3 

O 

d 

C    O 

•\ 

o 

•H 

ft  43 

•h  a 

S3 

on 


on 
t- 

ON 


S3 
O 
-P 

cd 

-P 
CO 


OJ 


CO 
ON 


-P 

u 
cu 

43 
•H 
CU 
P 


bD 

> 


cd 

•H 

G 
ft 


0} 
(Q 

O 
fi 

CU 

P    1-3 
0"-^-H 
ft  Ph    !h 


CU 
t3 
CU 
CU 

a 

cu 
•p 

<u 
P. 


Ph 

x 

CO 


X 
cu 

bD 
aj 

CO 


•"3    -P    -P 

-^  CU    3 

Ph     bD   O 

CU 

*>& 

co  a  o 

p   cd   o 

H    -H     p 

X       P 

CO 

cu  cd  •> 
bDftd 

Ph 

2 

cd  -h    O 

CO     P    -H 

o 

bO 

P 

•H             -P 

-p 

Sh      CO     C 

o 

0   X!    CU 

p 

T)   -PH 

C    3 

0 

CU    o   o 

p 

CU 

HBO 

cd 

H 

X         P 

rQ 

cd    P   co 

CO 

cd 

fn     CU 

-P 

rH 

•H     g     C 

P 

■H 

CO     B     CU 

cd 

cd 

CU     0   XI 

H 

> 

t3    co    ps 

Ph 

CO 

•h    ca 

^ 

7}  S 

h 

xi 

~  cu 

Ph 

cd    bO 

co    cd 

•v 

O     CO 

d 

P 

3 

cu     *> 

X! 

T3     CU 

DQ 

p    co 

0 

Ph    fn 

-p 

Ph 
CU 

P 


CU 

-P     CO 


CO   X 
CO     CO 


X  X! 

CO     CO 


co   a3 
cu 


e  e 


a  box 

CU     O  fn 

p  co  w  cd  cu  X)  x 

o1  co   o  E  -P  cu  -P 

h  3  -P  bO     ' 

P  P  -h  cd   cd 


cu    tiO  X    co    co 


ca 

-p 
cd  o 
v  cu 

CJ    co 


P 

o 

%x 

•H    cd 
Ph  o 


CO 

CO 

CO 

p 

cd 

cd 

cu 

p 

•H 

-p     CO 

bU 

X> 

•H     CU 

•H 

p    CO 

cd 

X! 

O1   CO 

§ 

Ph 

co   cd 

cd 

0    P 

Sh 

ro 

S    bO 

bD 

fr 

CO 

P 
co    cd 

P 

P 

CO    cu 

CU 

cd 

Cd    Ph 

X 

cu 

cu 

a  >? 

CU    +3 

CO 

o 

-p 

CO 

P 

O     P 

H 

cd 

•H 

(U 

-  *Ef 

O 

•h    cd 

cd 

-P 

2, 

CO 

cd  riq 

>> 

fcfc 

2 

CO 

O1 

CO 

1   ° 

E? 

^ 

P 

i 

CO 

cd 

C0    "H 

s 

cd 

cu    P 

P 

cu 

h 

P   P 

o 

CO     O 

ro 

o 

0 

bD 

bD  ft 

CO 

H 
cd 

cd   2 
o   cd 


co 


P 
o 
en 


CO 

CO 

cd 

<u 

P 

CO 

-p     CO 

bO 

-p 

•H     CU 

o 

p    CO 

cd 

CU 

a1  co 

£ 

s 

ca   cd 
cu   P 

P 

•H 

ottontails,    m 
jackrabbits    g 

bD 

p 

cd        XI 

cu   cu  co  co 

H    ft  co    p 

-P  cd   P 

co    >»  P  x    cu   co 

•h  <-\  bD  P    bD  -P 

xi  X  cu  cu   cd   o 

-p   o  s  -p   co   cu   cu 

•H  O    -P     P     CO     P 

•     M  U    -H     p     P    -H 

fH     PlPPP-H     ft 


X 
CO 

gg 


CU 

-p 


cd  P 

(U     CO  P 

ft  CO  cu 

cd  X 

Sh  O 

H    MO 

X     CU  -H 


•H 

cd 

CO    Xi    -P 
CO     CO 


a  e 

bOX 
cu    cu 


^J    o    bD  p    bD  co 


co  -p    cu   o  S 

P    -P     P    -H  O     - 

cu  -H  -H    P  P    cu    cd  -h    cd    o1 
ftroftP<X«iOPcoco 

p 

cd 

cu 
co  X    ft 

CO     CO 

cd   P   S  cu  co 

P     P    r-j     bD  -P 

box  X   cd  o 

+?  -p   o   co  cu 

H    H    -H     P  CO 

cd   cd   P   P  P 

CO     CO    Ph  X  «H 


CU  CO  CO 

P  ca  -p 

P  cd  o 

■H  M  CU 


CO 

o 
o 


p 

cd 

B 

•H 

ft 

CO 


■p 
<u 

•H 

p 


o 


<U    CQ^~- 

H     CJ   X    CO 
H    -H     P    -P 

cd    B   P   cd 

e-=-  e  x 

CO 


CO  CO 

P    -  cu 

cd   co  •*  P 

•H     CU  CO  O 

X  H  P  > 

•H    -H  O  -H 

XI  +J  -P  P 

ft  ft  ft  p 

cu  cd  cd 

f-l  P  o 


I 


15- 


VI.   Wildlife  Habitat  Condition 
A.    Present  Situation 
1 .   Mule  Deer 
a.   Food 


Mule  deer  habitat  generally  recognized  as  "summer 
range"  does  not  occur  in  the  study  area.  Good 
muledeer  summer  range  is  typically  high  eleva- 
tion country  with  an  abundance  of  lush  herbaceous  and 
broadleaved  forage. 

McColm  (1968)  observed  summer  range  in  Nevada  is 
generally  found  above  7,500  feet  in  elevation.   The 
vast  majority  of  Beaver  Dam  deer  habitat  is  between 
5,000  and  6,000  feet  in  elevation.   The  highest  ele- 
vations of  the  Beaver  Dam  (6,000  to  7,000  feet  in 
the  Sawmill  Range),  are  marginal  as  summer  deer 
range. 

The  situation,  then,  is  one  of  muledeer  inhabiting 
a  winter  range  area  yearlong.   The  highest  elevations 
may,  during  exceptionally  good  moisture  years,  provide 
summer  range  only  of  a  marginal,  inferior  nature. 
See  Map  #3. 

Condition  of  muledeer  forage  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA 
can  be  described  on  an  allotment  basis.   (See  Map 
#4  for  outline  of  allotments). 

(1)  Pennsylvania  Allotment 

Condition  is  good.   Nearly  all  has  been  burned  in 
recent  years.  Much  of  the  southern  part  is 
chaparral,  containing  good  quantities  of  cliff- 
rose  and  serviceberry.  Higher  elevations,  contain 
adequate  quanitites  of  Martin's  ceanothus.   Forbs 
and  grasses  are  largely  lacking  except  in  Sawmill 
Canyon,  where  most  deer  and  small  animal  use  now 
occurs. 

(2)  Cottonwood  Allotment 

North-central  area  in  poor  condition  due  to  ex- 
cessive cattle  use.   Cattle  concentrate  in  this 


I        V 


■16- 


portion  of  the  allotment.   Bitterbrush,  service- 
berry,  and  snowberry  are  excessively  hedged  by 
stock. 

Northeastern  portion  in  good  condition  due  to 
burn  10-20  years  old  and  light  stock  use.   South- 
ern two-thirds  unburned  and  in  overall  good  con- 
dition due  to  light  stock  use.   Cottonwood  Canyon 
contains  adequate  quantities  of  serviceberry , 
Gambel's  oak,  and  willow. 

Herbaceous  vegetation  is  generally  inadequate  in 
amount,  varying  from  a  trace  to  5  percent „ 

The  Heaton-Lytle  (474)  and  Henri  (551)  chainings 
are  in  very  poor  condition.  Composition  is  pre- 
dominately sagebrush  and  young  juniper-pinyon. 

(3)  Sheep  Flat  Allotment 

The  northern  portion  consists  of  numerous  large 
crested  wheat  seedings.   These  are  mostly  in  good 
condition. 

Small  chainings  between  Sheep  and  Fife  Springs  are 
in  horrible  condition.   Sagebrush  and  young 
juniper-pinyon  predominate.  Bitterbrush  and 
cliffrose  are  not  present. 

Forage  conditions  are  poor  in  general  throughout 
the  central  portion  of  the  allotment,  from  Fife 
Spring  through  Sheep  Spring.   Cattle  use  has  been 
excessive,  resulting  in  elimination  of  palatable 
browse,  forb,  and  grass  species. 

The  higher  elevations  of  the  Sawmill  Range  are 
in  good  condition,  though  composition  is  only 
fair.   Forbs  range  from  2-4  percent  and  include 
lupine,  columbine,  phlox  and  others.   Serviceberry 
and  sagebrush  are  plentiful.   Bitterbrush  occurs 
only  in  traces.   Most  browse  is  chaparral,  including 
oak,  and  manzanita.   Ponderosa  pine  provides  the 
aspect.   (See  Photo  #1).   Grasses  do  not  exceed 
2-4  percent,  and  include  Nevada  bluegrass. 

(4)  Barclay  Allotment 

The  southern  slope  is  a  huge  burn  or  series  of 
burns.   (See  Photo  #2).  Winter  forage  conditions 


-17- 


are  good.   Bitterbrush  and  cliffrose  is  adequate 
for  increased  muledeer  use.   Serviceberry ,  sage- 
brush, rabbitbrush,  shrubby  buckwheat,  and  silk 
tassel  are  abundant.   Deer  make  significant  use 
of  silk  tassel  during  winter  in  this  area.   Low 
quality  shrubs  are  abundant,  and  include  manzanita, 
squawbush,  and  live  oak. 

Forb  and  grass  composition  is  low,  each  varying 
from  trace  to  2  percent  of  the  composition. 

The  Simkins  chaining  (See  Photo  #3)  completed 
during  1970  vastly  improved  3,500  acres.   Elimi- 
nation of  much  juniper  pinyon  woodland  has  made 
tremendous  release  effect  on  bitterbrush,  service- 
berry,  etc.   Seeded  crested  wheat  has  relieved  stock 
pressure  on  browse  and  improved  spring  forage 
conditions  for  muledeer.   Forbs,  including  clover, 
rangeland  alfalfa,  and  small  burnet  will  improve 
summer  forage  conditions  for  wildlife. 

The  northern  portion  of  the  Barclay  contains 
the  Beaver  Dam  chaining  project.   In  1956  -  1,200 
acres  were  one-way  chained  and  seeded  to  crested 
wheat,  intermediate  wheat,  western  wheatgrass 
and  yellow  clover. 

Spring-summer  forage  conditions  are  good.   A  great 
variety  of  grasses  and  forbs  exists,  totaling  about 
20  percent  of  the  cover.  Most  browse  is  sagebrush 
and  rabbitbrush.   Cliffrose  is  3-5  percent  of  the 
composition.   Use  is  not  excessive  so  quantity 
must  be  sufficient,   A  greater  variety  of  browse 
species  is  desirable. 

(5)   Enterprise  Allotment 

The  northern  pasture  is  in  good  condition  on  a 
yearlong  basis.   Between  1957-64  -3,760  acres 
were  sprayed  or  chained,  and  seeded  to  crested 
wheat.   A  large  crested  wheat  stand  is  circum- 
scribed by  a  chained  juniper-pinyon  area  which  con- 
tains a  very  good  stand  (15-20  percent)  of  desert 
bitterbrush,  sagebrush,  grasses,  and  forbs. 

The  middle  pasture  is  in  poor  condition.   Juniper- 
pinyon  encroachment  has  reduced  composition  of 


-18- 


cliffrose,  grasses  and  forbs.   Cliffrose  compo- 
sition is  fair,  probably  5-10  percent  over  most 
of  the  area.   Excessive  stock  utilization  has 
left  an  inadequate  quantity  of  browse  for  mule- 
deer.   Herbaceous  vegetation  is  inadequate. 

The  southern  pasture  provides  more  than  adequate 
quantities  of  forage.   The  south  Enterprise 
chaining  was  completed  in  1959.   Eight  hundred 
acres  were  chained  one  way  and  aerial  seeded 
to  crested  wheat.   Cliffrose  and  bitterbrush  com- 
position is  about  20  percent,  ad  in  combination 
with  other  shrubs  provides  more  than  adequate 
quantities  of  browse  for  muledeer.   A  good  variety 
of  native  perennial  grasses  and  annual  forbs  total 
about  20  percent  of  the  cover,  and  are  more  than 
adequate  in  quantity  for  spring- summer  use. 

The  Staheli  chaining  completed  in  1970  has  greatly 
improved  forage  on  3,000  acres.   Bitterbrush, 
fourwing  saltbush,  ephedra,  clover,  rangeland 
alfalfa,  and  small  burnet  were  included  in  a  seed 
mixture  in  addition  to  crested  wheat,  wildrye, 
and  smooth  browse.   Prior  to  chaining  this  area 
was  almost  entirely  unproductive  forage. 

(6)  Haypress  (Amaru)  Allotment 

Forage  is  inadequate  in  quantity  and  quality. 
Existing  cliffrose  (trace  to  10  percent)  is 
largely  unavailable  and  unproductive.   Cliffrose 
reproduction  is  not  present „   Decadent  plants 
produce  little  viable  seed.  Most  of  the  allotment 
is  9(4)  Juos  Pimo  Artr  with  understory  consisting 
of  nearly  all  sagebrush. 

An  experimental  BLM  200  acre  spraying  project 
greatly  reduced  sagebrush  (50-60  percent),  has 
greatly  increased  herbaceous  forage,  and  revitalized 
decadent  cliffrose  plants  by  stimulating  leader 
growth  from  dormant  lateral  buds.   These  cliff- 
rose plants  were  greatly  improved  in  availability 
and  productivity  with  only  0„2  percent  spray 
mortality. 

(7)  Crossroads  (Cannon) 

Most  of  this  allotment  (about  90  percent)  is  in 
poor  condition  due  to  heavy  stock  use.  Vast  stands 
of  nearly  pure  sagebrush  cover  most  of  the  area. 
Forage  is  inadequate  for  most  types  of  wildlife. 


19- 


Good  local  stands  of  cliffrose  occur  in  the  north- 
eastern and  southwestern  portions  of  the  allotment, 

The  Kurt-Cannon  and  Cave  Springs  chainings  provide 
ample  quantities  of  forage  on  about  1,300  acres 
(about  10  percent  of  the  allotment) „   A  good 
variety  of  perennial  grasses  (12-20  percent) 
is  available.   Forbs  are  conspicuously  absent, 
Bitterbrush  and  cliffrose  are  ample  in  quantity 
(10-14  percent).   Other  highly  palatable  browse 
species  are  absent,, 

(8)  Oakwells  Allotment 

Most  of  this  allotment  contains  good  stands  of 
cliffrose  and  bitterbrush  (5-15  percent),  though 
it  is  badly  overbrowsed,  primarily  by  cattle. 
Exceptions  are  the  extreme  northwestern  and  north- 
eastern corners  of  the  allotment,  which  both  con- 
tain excellent  cliffrose  and  bitterbrush  stands 
which  are  lightly  utilized  by  stock. 

Adequate  forage  is  not  available  for  muledeer  over 
most  of  the  allotment  area. 

(9)  Buckboard  Spring  Allotment 

Most  of  the  allotment  provides  inadequate  forage 
for  muledeer  with  type  consisting  of  dense 
juniper-pinyon  largely  lacking  in  under story. 

An  area  600-800  acres  in  size  north  of  Little  Mtn. 
and  another  600  acres  in  the  south-central  portion 
of  the  allotment  both  provide  good  forage  for 
.  muledeer. 

Cliffrose  and  bitterbrush  stands  comprise  15-30 
percent  of  the  cover.   Other  shrubs  include  sage- 
brush, ephedra  and  horsebrush.   Grasses  (cheat- 
grass,  bluegrama,  squirrel  tail)  comprise  2-4 
percent  of  cover  in  the  southern  area,  and  10-15 
percent  in  the  northern  (Little  Mtn.)  area. 
Forbs,  including  mallow  and  penstemon  are  only 
trace  in  occurrence. 

Stock  use  is  very  light.  Shrubs  form  indicates 
past  heavy  muledeer  use  has  occurred.  Muledeer 
use  this  area  primarily  as  winter  range. 


-20= 


(10)  Little  Mtrio   Allotment 

Stock  use  has  been  very  light  in  northern 
half  of  allotment,  where  most  muledeer  winter 
use  occurs.   Forage  conditions  are  fair.   Cliff- 
rose  comprises  about  2-4  percent  of  cover,  and 
reproduction  is  present.   Cliffrose  displays 
a  muledeer-induced  form  indicating  heavy  use 
in  past  years. 

An  exceptional  browse  area  extends  a  few  hundred 
acres  into  this  allotment  from  the  Buckboard 
Spring  and  Oak  Wells  allotments. 

Browse  quantity  is  adequate  for  present  rate  of 
muledeer  use.   Increases  in  herd  level  would 
necessitate  production  of  additional  forage. 

(11)  Sheep  Spring  Allotment 

Overall  condition  fair.   Clif frose-desert  bitter- 
brush  composition  good  (5-15  percent)  throughout 
most  of  the  allotment.   Utilization  by  stock  light 
except  Sheep  Spring  area,  particularly  2  miles 
north  and  2-3  miles  east,  where  utilization  is 
excessive. 

Grasses  and  forbs  inadequate  though  good  local 
stands  (5-10  percent  cover)  of  blue  grama  sod 
can  be  found. 

(12)  Uvada  Allotment 

The  west  one-half  is  in  good  condition.   Bitter- 
brush  and  cliffrose  composition  is  about  6-8  per- 
cent. A  variety  of  good  perennial  grass  species 
persist  as  about  6  percent  of  composition.   Forbs, 
consisting  mostly  of  lupine  and  penstemon  comprise 
about  4  percent  of  the  cover.  Higher  elevation 
makes  this  a  fairly  productive  area. 

The  Uvada  chaining,  439  acres  in  size,  contains 
a  dense  stand  of  sagebrush.  A  variety  of  peren- 
nial grasses  (15  percent)  plus  about  7  percent 
bitterbrush  make  it  fairly  good  spring- summer 
muledeer  habitat. 


21- 


The  Uvada  seeding,  790  acres  in  size,  harbors 
a  dense  growth  of  crested  wheat  (86  percent  cover) 
plus  a  few  (5  percent)  forbs.   Browse,  except  for 
a  small  quantity  of  sagebrush  (5  percent)  is 
non-existing.   This  area  would  be  suited  to 
late  winter-early  spring  muledeer  use,  though 
quite  poor  for  the  summer- fall  periods. 

(13)   Clover  Creek  -  Mustang  Flat 

Forage  surveys  show  sagebrush  to  be  the  dominant 
vegetation  in  this  allotment  (composes  over  407o 
of  the  ground  cover  in  most  sections).   Pinyon- 
juniper  stands  make  up  to  30%.   Rabbitbrush  and 
cliff rose  are  also  present  in  small  amounts. 

There's  a  relatively  good  variety  of  grasses  - 
Hilaria,  ricegrass,  squirreltail,  cheatgrass, 
blue  grama  -  composing  3-25%  of  the  ground  cover. 

As  in  many  parts  of  the  area,  forbs  are  very  scarce, 
These  22,600+  acres  receive  yearlong  cattle  use 
and  some  winter  deer  use. 


b.  Water 


Water  resources  are  extremely  limited  in  this  semi- 
arid  region.   During  summer  and  fall  months  deer 
seem  to  congregate  in  the  vicinity  of  water.  Live- 
stock and  wild  horses  also  congregate  near  water. 
Excessive  grazing  pressure  depletes  forage  resources 
within  the  livestock  service  area  of  waters.  High 
deer  mortality,  particularly  among  young-of-the-year, 
may  occur  during  this  time„ 

Approximately  140,000  acres  of  the  muledeer  habitat  is 
situated  within  a  one-mile  radius  of  water.   Approxi- 
mately 73  percent  (386,000)  of  the  muledeer  habitat 
is  greater  than  one  mile  from  a  known  water  source. 
Normally,  deer  winter  range  snow  conditions  preclude 
a  need  for  free  water „   The  Beaver  Dam  area  receives 
very  little  rainfall,  but  normally  snow  is  available 
and  utilized  throughout  late  winter.   During  dry 
springs  succulent  vegetation  may  be  lacking. 

Many  of  the  known  waters  include  livestock  well  facili- 
ties which  provide  water  on  a  temporary,  seasonal  basis, 
plus  small  reservoirs  (see  photo  #4)  which  are  dependent 
upon  ample  summer  showers.   Undiscovered  waters  doubt- 
less occur,  particularly  in  major  drainages  of  the 
Sawmill  Range. 


■22- 


c.  Cover 

Cover  as  juniper-pinyon  and  chaparral  is  more  than 
adequate.   Old  chaining  projects  left  no  intake  wood- 
land stands,  though  one  way  chaining  left  adequate  slash 
for  cover. 

Recent  chainings  (1969-70)  have  left  numerous  wooded 
sidehills,  draws,  and  rocky  areas. 

d.  Living  Space 

Space   is  not  considered  a   limiting    factor. 
2.      Small  Game   and  Non-Game  Habitat 

a.  Food 

The  best  habitat  for  small  and  non-game  animals  is 
located  along  Meadow  Valley  Wash  and  along  Clover 
Creek.   (See  Map  #3).   Gambel's  quail,  mourning 
dove,  chukar,  waterfowl,  songbirds,  reptiles  and 
amphibians  are  concentrated  in  these  areas.   These 
small  animals  utilize  the  seeds,  fruits  and/or  vege- 
tative parts  of  grasses,  forbs,  yucca,  pine,  cottonwood, 
willow  and  oak  as  well  as  any  cultivated  plants  like 
alfalfa  on  private  lands.   The  distribution  of  these 
animals  is  limited  to  the  areas  primarily  due  to  the 
lack  of  grasses  and  forbs  in  the  rest  of  the  Beaver 
Dam  Unit. 

Jackrabbits,  cottontails,  ground  squirrels,  chipmunks, 
mice,  rats,  and  some  reptiles  are  widespread  through- 
out the  unit.   For  these  animals,  the  seeds,  fruits 
and  vegetative  parts  of  sagebrush,  prickly  pear,  bitter- 
brush,  pinyon  pine,  Gambel's  oak,  yucca,  and  the  light 
scattering  of  grasses  provide  sufficient  forage. 

Birds  of  prey  and  furbearers  are  widespread  and  rely 
on  populations  of  small  animals  as  a  food  source,  and 
thus  are  indirectly  affected  by  forage  conditions. 

b.  Water 

During  dry  summer  months,  water  becomes  a  limiting 
factor  for  many  species  of  small  wildlife.   These 
animals  are  generally  restricted  to  natural  water 
sources  (Beaver  Dam,  Clover,  Cottonwood,  Pine  &  Ash 


23- 


Creeks,  Meadow  Valley  Wash,  and  existing  springs). 
The  livestock  water  facilities  usually  provide  water 
on  only  a  temporary,  seasonal  basis  or  are  not  a- 
vailable  to  small  animals  because  the  water  is  stored 
in  steep-sided  troughs. 

c.  Cover 

Cover  is  vital  to  small  animals  as  protection  against 
predators  and  harsh  weather  (heat,  cold,  wind,  rain  and 
snow),  and  as  resting  and  breeding  areas.   In  desert 
areas,  cover  in  the  vicinity  of  permanent  sources  is 
particularly  important.   In  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA,  sage- 
brush, greasewood,  Cottonwood,  willow  and  rabbitbrush 
along  the  Meadow  Valley  Wash  and  Clover  Creek  provide 
good  cover  for  quail,  chukar,  songbirds,  rabbits,  rodents 
and  reptiles. 

d.  Living  Space 

Space  is  not  a  limiting  factor  for  small  wildlife 
species  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA. 

B.    Potential  for  Habitat  Improvement 

In  summary,  the  main  problems  shared  by  big  game,  small  game 
and  non-game  wildlife  are   1)  lack  of  palatable  browse,  forbs 
and  grass  due  to  pinyon/juniper  encroachment  and  wildlife/ 
cattle/horse  competition  and  2)  poor  distribution  and  avail- 
ability of  permanent  water  supplies. 

There  are  two  ways  of  solving  forage  inadequacies:   habitat 
management  and/or  development  combined  with  proper  livestock 
and  wild  horse  management.   Theoretically,  horse/cow  and  deer 
preferences  are  diametrically  opposed,  80%  grass  and  80% 
browse,  respectively.   But  when  grass  is  scarce  as  it  is  in 
this  WHA,  cows  and  horses  will  compete  with  deer  and  other 
wildlife  for  browse  and  forbs.   Several  measures  should  be 
taken  to  improve  forage  for  horses,  cattle  and  wildlife  in 
the  Beaver  Dam  area. 

1)  Areas  of  heavy  pinyon/juniper  encroachment  should  be 
chained,  plowed  or  prescribed  burned.   Specific  locations 
should  be  identified  in  the  Habitat  Management  Plan  for 
the  Beaver  Dam  area.   These  areas  should  be  reseeded  with 
a  variety  of  grass,  browse  and  forbs  that  would  benefit 
horses,  cattle,  and  wildlife. 

2)  On  range  seeding  projects  for  livestock,  less  emphasis 
should  be  placed  on  crested  wheatgrass  and  more  thought 
given  to  planting  a  variety  of  grass,  browse  and  forbs. 


24- 


3)  Wildlife  and  wild  horse  activities  should  cooperate 
on  a  wild  horse  and  burro  plan  for  the  area  to  determine 
the  extent  of  competition  and  methods  of  solving  forage 
and  water  problems. 

4)  Wildlife  and  range  activities  should  cooperate  on  efforts 
to  complete  Allotment  Management  Plans  for  those  areas 

not  using  a  rest-rotation  grazing  system  and  to  revise 
old  AMPs  that  didn't  contain  multiple  use  considerations. 
Sufficient  numbers  of  AUM's  should  be  determined  and 
reserved  for  wildlife  in  these  plans.   This  is  especially 
important  in  AMP's  for  areas  containing  crucial  muledeer 
habitat  (Oak  Wells,  Enterprise,  etc.). 

5)  More  research  is  needed  to  determine  the  rate  of  pinyon/ 
juniper  encroachment,  forage  requirements  of  non-game  species, 
utilization  of  key  browse  species,  horse/deer  competition 

and  other  factor  that  would  have  a  bearing  on  future  habitat 
rehabilitation  projects.   Specific  studies  should  be  re- 
commended in  the  HMP. 

Water  deficiencies  can  also  be  rectified  in  the  Beaver 
Dam  WHA.   New  water  catchment  devices  should  be  installed 
for  both  deer  and  small  wildlife  species  in  the  Ella 
Mountain  and  Sawmill  Range  areas  and  in  the  Enterprise 
Allotment.   There  are  several  natural  water  sources  -  springs  ■ 
that  can  be  developed  for  wildlife.   Also  there  are  several 
livestock  watering  areas  which  can  be  made  accessible  to 
small  animals  with  the  addition  of  sumps  or  bird  ladders. 
Specific  sites  for  these  types  of  water  developments  should 
be  identified  in  the  HMPC 


-25- 


VI.    Other  Problems  and  Possible  Solutions 

Cover  in  the  form  of  pinyon  and  juniper  trees  is  more  than  suf- 
ficient throughout  the  WHA  for  deer  and  mountain  lions.   But 
cover  for  Gambel's  quail,  rabbits,  doves,  and  other  small  animals 
near  waters  is  not  so  prevalent. 

Brushy  thickets  occurring  in  drainages  and  large  cottonwood  and 
willow  trees  along  the  Meadow  Valley  Wash  and  Clover  Creek  should 
be  protected  and  enhanced,  if  possible. 

Protected  species  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA  may  have  particular  habi- 
tat-related problems  but  because  of  the  lack  of  research  on  spotted 
bats,  falcons,  and  other  raptors  and  desert  tortoises  it  is  dif- 
ficult to  identify  crucial  habitat,  habitat  problems  and  solutions. 
The  HMP  can  identify  studies  and  research  needed  in  these  areas. 
Many  of  the  non-habitat  related  problems  of  endangered  species 
(shooting,  harassment,  capture,  etc)  are  due  to  public  ignorance 
of  the  plight  of  these  species.   Improved  public  relations  efforts 
(HMP  should  suggest  methods  and  measures  like  brochures,  slide 
talks,  etc.)  can  do  much  to  educate  the  public  and  relieve  human 
pressures  on  threatened,  rare  endangered  species. 


HABITAT    MANAGEMENT      PLAN 
N5-WHA-T24 

BEAVER  DAM  WILDLIFE  HABITAT  AREA 
1975 

Bureau  of  Land  Management 

Las  Vegas  District  Office 

Las  Vegas,  Nevada 


HABITAT   MANAGEMENT   PLAN 


N5-WHA-T24 

BEAVER  DAM  WILDLIFE  HABITAT  AREA 

1975 


Bureau  of  Land  Management 

Las  Vegas  District  Office 

Las  Vegas,  Nevada 


REVISED  BY: 


Denise  P.  Meridith 
District  Wildlife  Specialist 
Bureau  of  Land  Management 
Las  Vegas,  Nevada 


Lynn  F.  Williams,  Phillip  V.  Range 

Area  Managers 

Bureau  of  Land  Management 

Las  Vegas,  Nevada 


IN  COOPERATION  WITH: 


CONCURRED  BY: 


APPROVED  BY: 


^k^- 


~7   D/te 


Norm  Raymond 

Fish  &  Game  Agent 

Nevada  Dept.  of  Fish  and  Game 


CHECKLIST  FOR  PREPARATION  AND  REVIEW  OF 
HABITAT  MANAGEMENT  PLANS  (HMP's) 


Name  of  HMP  and  WHA  Number 


NS-wHA-  TT-1 


Resource  Area 


C<*UwIl 


Assigned  To 


«lynn    Williams 


Date 


Initials 


1.  NSO  6521  completed. 

2.  Preliminary  meeting (s)  with  Nevada  Depart- 
ment of  Fish  and  Game  (or  other  appropriate 
cooperators)  to  discuss  tentative  HMP  and 
wildlife  objectives. 

3.  Prepare  draft  HMP. 

4.  Prepare  EAR  on  draft  HMP. 

5.  If  necessary,  prepare  second  HMP  draft 
based  on  adopted  recommendations. 

6.  Review  of  draft  by  District  Specialists. 

Range 

Wild  Horses 

Lands 

Minerals 

Watershed 

Forestry 

Recreation 

Area  Manager 

7.  Review  of  draft  by  District  Wildlife 
Specialist. 

8.  Review  of  draft  by  Chief,  Resource  Mgmt . 

9.  Final  review  (when  appropriate)  by: 

State  Office 
Service  Center 
Other 

10.  Review  of  final  draft  with  NDF&G  for 
agency  concurrence  and  signature. 

11.  Approval  of  District  Manager. 


Vt  > 


\»[l4 


DPM 


6     7 


//A/7/- 


IL/SLZX 


li/€/7i 


»JS/?  + 


jp^ 


/e/^rAr 


^<j 


lofazhtj 


Df»1 


yfetf-?* 


^^ 


^nhs 


///f?M 


INVENTORY 
WILDLIFE  HABITAT  PROJECT  AND /OR  HABITAT  MANAGEMENT  PLAN 


Form  NSO  6521 
Rev.    (February  1972) 
^(NDF&G-BLM  Coop.   Fono) 


District:  L<xS     Ve^aS  aT-OS'O 


Prepared  by:    Dentin  P.  Mgrijift    Lyi\,\  lAJ./lfqn^  Nor*  RyaJ 
Reviewed  by:  /5p^JUt     ft    Jh±^JL.JL  ^/t>/?Y 


Name 


BLM  District  Wildlife  Specialist 

NDF&G  District  Representative 

INVENTORY 
WILDLIFE  HABITAT  PROJECT  AND/OR  HABITAT  MANAGEMENT  PLAN  . 

of  Project  or  Plan      Beaver  Dam  Habitat  Management  Plan 


Date 


Date 


^Location  of  Project  or  Plan  .   r.ai-ipn+o  Planning  Tin-it. 


Species  Benefited    Mule  deer,  Gambel's  quail,  mourning  dove,  cottontail 
rabbjt.s,  mountain  lionr  rantors 


\~ 


Description  of  Job  or  Project    tc  rcvioc    HMP  first  completed  in  1/'71- 


in  ~~*~~   +  „  in-VH?  new  data  &  suggestions  &  to  comply  with  NSO  comments 


Justification  and  Priority     Area  contains  r»i»nri_a1  hi  g  ^ame  hahi  tat — which  in  in 
poor  and  worsening  noncj-it.;jnn . 


»  Cost  and  Manpower  Estimates 


$3000  and  2  man-months  needed  to  revise  plan 


Mpvaria    TVpt  -     r>f    TTi-gn    A-    flamp    poT^nnnnl     will     assist,    in    thff    rPVI SI rffl 

Cooperative  Funding  (if  any)      NDF&G  will  pav  their  own  salary  costs. 


Approved : 


-7 


^x^^^g 


Supervisor,  NDF&G    Date 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 

I.    Introduction  1 

II.   Management  Plan  Objectives  2 

III.   Management  Methods  3 

A.  Livestock  Grazing  3 

B.  Utilization  of  Wildlife 4 

C.  Timber  Management  4 

D.  Habitat  Development  and/or  Improvement  5 

1.  Water  Developments  5 

2.  Forage  Developments  6 

E.  Access  Development  or  Improvement  8 

F.  Land  Aquisition,  Classification  and  Withdrawal  8 

G.  Fire 9 

H.   Wild  Horse  Management  9 

IV.   Management  Evaluation 10 

V.   Provision  for  Review  and  Modification  11 

VI.   Implementation  Schedule  12 

References 

Appendix 


Map  No.    1 

B.L.M.  ADMINISTRATION 


NEVADA 


WHA-T24 
BEAVER 
DAM 


lUiixjftaasa 


e 


$) 


-1- 


Introduction 

The  Beaver  Dam  Wildlife  Habitat  Area  (N5-WHA-T24)  is  located  in 
Lincoln  County,  Nevada  and  includes  62%  of  the  Nevada  Department 
of  Fish  and  Game  Management  Unit  No,  24  (see  maps  #1  and  #2), 
National  resource  lands  total  about  616,000  acres,  private  lands 
about  17,000  acres  and  the  Beaver  Dam  State  Park  covers  2,000 
acres, 

A  wide  variety  of  wildlife  resides  in  the  area:   over  300  species 
of  birds,  over  50  of  mammals,  over  15  of  reptiles  and  amphibians, 
and  several  species  of  fish„   Two  inventories  and  habitat  manage- 
ment plans  should  be  completed  for  the  area.   At  a  later  date, 
an  inventory  and  HMP  will  be  completed  for  the  aquatic  habitat 
in  this  WHA  (Beaver  Dam,  Clover,  Cottonwood,  Pine  and  Ash  Creeks), 

This  inventory  and  its  accompanying  HMP  deal  with  terrestrial 
wildlife  habitat.   It  is  an  update  of  the  inventory  completed  by 
Lewis  Myers  in  1971.   The  inventory  includes  a  general  description 
of  the  WHA,  wildlife  population  conditions,  harvest  and  habitat 
requirements  and  a  discussion  of  the  present  condition  of  wild- 
life habitat,  management  problems  and  possible  solutions,, 


I,....,  ■ f 

jo  7    Cliff 

^^  -Li J 


616,000  acres  -  national  resource 
lands 
17,000  acres  -  private  lands 
2,000  acres  -  Beaver  Dam  State  Park 


-2- 


II.   Management  Plan  Objectives 

The  overall  goal  of  this  HMP  is  to  document  ways  of  increasing 
the  carrying  capacity  of  the  terrestrial  habitat  in  the  region 
for  the  widest  variety  of  wildlife  species.   Specifically  the 
objectives  are: 

1.  To  make  more  permanent  water  sources  available  to  wild- 
life by  constructing  water  catchment  devices  in  the  Ella  Mt. 
and  Sawmill  Range  areas  and  the  Enterprise  Allotment. 

2.  To  improve  the  availability  of  already  existing  waters 
to  wildlife  by  developing  springs,  installing  bird  ladders 
in  livestock  waters,  etc. 

3.  To  employ  habitat  treatment  methods  on  about  25,000  acres 
to  (a)  increase  the  composition  of  palatable  forbs  from  the 
present  trace  to  5-10%  and   (b)  increase  bitterbrush-cliff- 
rose  composition,  reproduction  and  availability  on  Barclay, 
Enterprise,  Sheep  Flat,  Cottonwood,  Oak  Wells  and  Sheep 
Spring  Allotments. 

4.  To  maintain  or  improve  riparian  habitat  for  small  animals 
along  the  Meadow  Valley  Wash  and  Clover  Creek  and  near  other 
water  sources. 

5.  To  increase  the  edge  effect  by  leaving  islands  of  cover 
for  wildlife  during  chaining,  plowing  or  burning  vegetative 
type  conversions  in  heavily  wooded  areas. 

6.  To  assist  the  range  activity  in  the  development  of  Allot- 
ment Management  Plans  and  other  means  of  grazing  manage- 
ment on  areas  containing  crucial  wildlife  habitat  by  providing 
basic  data  on  the  habitat  requirements  of  wildlife. 

7.  To  initiate  studies  that  will  identify  habitat  condition 
and  trend  of  crucial  areas  for  endangered  and  other  non-game 
species,  areas  of  heavy  competition  among  cattle,  horses  and 
wildlife,  and  gather  other  information  which  will  aid  in 
the  management  of  this  area. 


■3- 


III.    Management  Methods 

A.    Livestock  Grazing 


Proper  livestock  management  is  very  important  in  this  area 
because  it  directly  affects  the  condition  and  trend  of  vege- 
tation needed  by  wildlife.   When  grasses  are  depleted, 
cattle  will  compete  with  mule  deer  and  other  wildlife  for 
use  of  palatable  browse  and  forbs.  When  cattle  and  deer 
are  not  properly  managed,  they  can  be  a  detriment  to  their 
habitat  and,  thus  to  each  other.   But  when  properly  managed, 
the  range  can  actually  be  improved  and  the  two  species  can 
complement  each  other. 

Parts  or  all  of  27  livestock  allotments  under  Section  3 
permit  are  included  within  this  Wildlife  Habitat  Area. 
Many  of  these  contain  crucial  wildlife  habitat.   It  is  recom- 
mended that  wildlife  and  range  activities  give  high  priority 
to  cooperation  on  the  development  of  the  following  Allot- 
ment Management  Plans: 

Enterprise  (crucial  deer  yearlong  habitat) 

Clover  Creek  (crucial  deer  yearlong  habitat  and  important 
small  and  non-game  habitat) 

Oak  Wells  (crucial  deer  winter  habitat) 

Little  Mountain  (crucial,  deer  winter) 

Pennsylvania,  Sheep  Flat,  Cottonwood  and  Mustang  Flat 
(crucial  deer  yearlong  and  important  small  and 
non-game  habitat) 

The  two  activities  should  also  cooperate  on  revision  of  the 
Barclay  Summer  AMP  (crucial  deer  winter  habitat)  to  give  more 
consideration  to  multiple-use  of  the  area. 

There  are  certain  considerations  that  should  be  taken  into 
account  during  the  developments  of  these  plans. 

First  of  all,  less  emphasis  should  be  given  to  the  planting 
of  crested  wheat  grass  (which  has  limited  value  to  wildlife) 
and  more  emphasis  given  to  utilizing  a  variety  of  palatable 
browse,  forbs  and  grasses. 

Allotments  shown  on  Table  1  should  be  reexamined  to  identify  any 
needed  changes  in  animal  unit  months  (AUM's)  allotted  to  deer. 
Table  1  shows  deer  demands  for  optimal  deer  density. 


g 


CI 

co  S 

h3 

a 

to 

Cd 

3= 

W   5C 

^ 

CO 

CO 

r1 

O 

O    CO 

o 

M 

cd 

cd 

W 

Cd 

Cd 

h- 1 

Cu    C 

0) 

< 

03 

3 

ft) 

CO      03 

ft) 

3* 

J 

H- 

»-| 

o    rr 

Cu 

3 

0) 

CD 

03 

03 

Pi 

o 

£     en 

3 

0> 

cr 

o 

3 

T3    V$ 

3 

ft) 

ft) 

rr 

O 

rt    ft) 

K" 

rr 

H 

r( 

l-l 

l-l 

r-i 

< 

g    rr 

03 

D. 

cr 

?r 

►1 

h-"3 

3 

ft) 

ft) 

rt 

CO 

rt    ft> 

IB 

o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

CD 

p.    JU 

O 

0) 

H- 

cr 

H- 

H>    H 

CO 

T3 

T) 

i—1 

CO 

O  T3 

s: 

M 

h- ' 

I—1 

t— ■ 

t— ' 

H 

r| 

t-  3 

0> 

rt 

o 

re 

3   m 

vj 

rt 

►1 

3 

a 

TJ 

03 

p) 

03 

03 

to 

(-■  (JQ 

03 

1      0) 

t— ' 

►^ 

►*J 

o 

53    co 

r-1 

11 

«< 

«< 

^ 

>< 

*< 

n 

O 

co 

•-4 

f  co 

< 

h- ■ 

1— ' 

2 

03 

O   T3 

I—1 

K- 

H 

03 

T3 

CL 

<< 

03 

03 

03 

rr 

CL 

O     « 

en 

en 

s: 

03 

CO 

CO 

CO 

a 

ft 

•-J 

rt 

3 

rt 

rt 

• 

CO 

CL    h* 

rt 

(-•• 

c 

c 

c 

C 

n 

rt 

H- 

M 

h* 

3 

3 

a 

B 

H 

3 

x 

i-1 

ft) 

3 
(JQ 

n> 

03 

tw 

rt 
ft) 
1 

IB 

ft) 
>-l 

ft) 
1 

rt 

ft) 

3 

3 

CO 

2 

3 

CO 

Ln 

o> 

ON 

3    co 

rr 

3 

o 

03 

O 

o 

O 

rt 

O 

o 

w 

V 

» 

o   o 

rr 

3 

CO 

i-l 

* 

c 

en 

i-l 

c 

o 

o 

o 

1    c 

)-( 

o 

rt 

rt 

rt 

rt 

rt 

rr 

rt 

rt 

o 

o 

o 

rt    rt 

rt 

III            I 

1     3" 

ar 

3d 

en 

3 

3- 

o 

o 

O    1      1 

i    3"  rr 

rt 

I      1      1     O     1 

i    rt> 

CO 

i— ■ 

CO 

co 

— 

— 

-   1     1 

i 

3 

03 

o 

r- ' 

O 

h- • 

1— ■ 

O    co 

ft> 

CO 

3 

O 

T) 

o 

o 

+ 

1 

+ 

3    ^ 

i 

rt 

n> 

"3 

rt 

x> 

xs 

ft)    O 

S 

ID 

i 

ft) 

ft) 

ft) 

I    X) 

03 

i-l 

Hi 

rr  ft> 

r-1 

3 

o 

03 

t-h 

O 
3 
ft) 

I 
r-h 

rt 

3* 

h-1 

O 

C 

i-( 

rt 

:r 

vC 

-vl 

• 

00 


W   I- 'I— '   I — '   I — '   U)   I— 'l— '    NJ  O^roLnUHIOCnUWUW^vj  (-"NJ 

HONOMHCOOO^OMjMXlOOOCOHMNj^vHOHVOCOrO 

HOMjJONHH^UirOfO^O^OlOOO^UU^UUOfOOCO 


OiLnLnLnl^ijiUULnUiiJiCnCnLnCnuiCnLnlncnLnLnHUiH 

O  O 


\j\ 


o 


UHnHiouroHW 

OOUUiCOHOOUWN) 


OOCO^JCTiNJWCTN-P^^J^^Cyi-J 

^OWUNJffi^OlC^vOONHvO 


-P*  ro 
Ln    00 


UHUHHUOHU)Nt-'OOONOHO)^HO\NOUlOU 


KiKjKiSKlSSSSKlSCOCOSISISISCOKjKjKlSISKjCOK; 
r-Jr-'t-'    +    r-'+    +    +    +    h-'+C     3     +    +    +    +    3     r-'l-'l-'-r    +    l-'C     I-1 

HHHOM-,0\^C>CM-]^CT)C^OVffiO)CM^I-'l-,Hff)CT)HffiH 
N   N)   M  N)  NJ  NlhOhO  N>N> 


00 


N3 


•P^    I — 'I — '  NJ    N)    H  HHOlH^WHMUlNUlUlUlUO 

UiUiOOviLnMLOMvOUOOOW^WHOOMUiOOUiCftsl 
vOvlUOOUvOCOOOU^UiOCOCBUO\^ 


M    M    H 
LO    -^J    ^J 

VOvO^^vJ^CDOH 


n: 


rt 


NJ 


S  co 
o  ft) 
3  03 
co 
rr  o 

co    3 


>  a 

i  ft> 

-  H 
CO 


cd 


cd 

0Q 

O 
0) 

3 
ft) 


O 
ft) 
ft) 
1 


o 
ft) 

3 

03 

3 

C3- 


■4- 


The  goal  would  be  to  maintain  habitat  suitable  for  sus- 
taining 4000-4700  mule  deer  (5  deer/square  mile)  in  the 
WHA  (minimum  of  8,000  AUMs)  under  average  climatic  condi- 
tions. 

When  livestock  fencing  is  proposed  in  AMPs,  consideration  should 
be  given  to  deer  movements.   The  Caliente  Management  Frame- 
work Plan  recommends  that  fencing  should  not  be  less  42" 
in  order  not  to  interfere  with  deer  migrations. 

Original  spring  sources  should  be  fenced  to  protect  the 
original  supply  of  water,  to  protect  riparian  vegetation 
and  guarantee  wildlife  access  on  a  yearlong  basis  -  water 
can  be  piped  to  livestock. 

Finally,  in  AMPs  the  need  for  modification  of  livestock 
water  sources  should  be  identified.   Many  steep-sides 
troughs  do  not  allow  small  animals  (birds,  furbearers,  squir- 
rels, reptiles,  etc.)  access  to  the  water.   It  is  recom- 
mended that  bird  ladders  or  ramps  be  installed  in  all  troughs 
which  do  not  provide  such  access.   Also,  livestock  waters 
should  be  made  available  to  wildlife  yearlong,  even  during 
periods  of  non-use  by  cattle. 

B.  Utilization  of  Wildlife 

The  annual  harvests  of  mule  deer^  bucks,  mountain  lions, 
Gambel's  quail,  mourning  doves,  furbearers,  waterfowl  and 
rabbits  do  not  seem  to  be  having  an  adverse  effect  on  these 
populations.   These  populations  appear  capable  of  sustaining 
light  to  moderate  hunting  pressure  during  short  seasons  like 
the  ones  being  held  this  year. 

Chukar  and  crested  tinamou  releases  have  not  been  success- 
ful enough  to  merit  open  seasons  in  Lincoln  County. 

Harvests  in  the  past  have  been  much  higher  (see  harvest 
figures  in  the  Intensive  Inventory  and  Analysis).   It  is 
probable  that  with  habitat  improvements  and  the  resulting 
increases  in  game  populations,  the  quality  of  hunting  in 
the  Beaver  Dam  Area  will  be  improved. 

C.  Timber  Management 

In  untreated  pinyon- juniper  woodlands,  harvests  of  Christmas 
trees  and  posts  should  continue  to  be  encouraged.   Removal 
of  these  trees  (especially  through  clear-cutting  of  small 
areas  several  acres  in  size)  will  help  thin  dense  stands  and 
thus  improve  the  edge  effect  desirable  to  most  species  of 
wildlife.   This  will  also  decrease  vegetative  competition 


-5- 


and  result  in  the  production  of  more  species  of  plants 
which  are  palatable  to  wildlife. 

D.   Habitat  Development  and/or  Improvement 

1.   Water  Developments 

About  70  percent  of  deer  habitat  is  more  than  one  mile 
from  known  water  sources.  The  two  methods  of  increas- 
ing water  availability  for  deer  as  well  as  other  wild- 
life are  (a)  through  construction  of  new  water  catch- 
ments and   (b)  through  spring  development. 

Table  II  gives  a  list  of  potential  sites  for  water  catch- 
ments.  These  water- storing  devices  are  needed  to  main- 
tain or  increase  27  square  miles  summer  habitat  (also 
see  Map  #3  for  locations) .  Guzzlers  should  be  placed 
so  as  to  be  as  inconspicuous  as  possible.   Shiny  metal 
parts  should  be  painted  a  dull,  flat  color.   Livestock 
should  be  excluded  from  these  guzzlers  by  construction 
of  a  fence.   Design  for  the  guzzlers  is  included  in 
Appendix  No.  1. 

Spring  locations,  utilization  and  needs  for  development 
are  shown  in  Table  III.   Efforts  should  be  made  to  assess 
the  development  needs  of  those  springs  which  have  not 
yet  been  visited.   See  Appendix  No.  2  for  suggested 
type  of  bird  ramp.   The  following  springs  should  be  given 
top  priority  for  development: 

a.  Garden  Spring  (see  photos  #1  and  #2) 

Spring  source  needs  fence  protection.   Install  bird 
ladder  in  trough. 

b.  East  Setting  Spring 

Fence  spring  source.   Install  spring  box,  pipeline, 
trough  and  bird  ladder. 

c.  Quaking  Aspen  Spring  (see  photos  #3  and  #4) 

Fence  spring  source  providing  water  for  wildlife  at 
the  source  while  piping  water  \   mile  north  to  campers, 


TABLE  2 

Locations  of  Recommended  Water  Catchments  to  be 
Constructed  for  Wildlife 


Number 


Location 


Priority 


T.3S. 
T.3S. 
T.3S. 
T.4S. 
T.4S. 
T.4S. 
T.5S. 
T.5S. 
T.5S. 
T.5S. 
T.5S. 
T.5S. 
T.5S. 
T.5S. 
T.6S. 
T.6S. 
T.6S. 
T.6S. 
T.6S. 
T.6S. 
T.6S. 
T.6S. 


R.71E. 
R.70E. 
R.70E. 
R.71E. 
R.71E. 
R.70E. 
R.71E. 
R.71E. 
R.70E. 
R.70E. 
R.70E. 
R.69E. 
R.67E. 
R.67E. 
R.71E. 
R.70E. 
R.70E. 
R.69E. 
R.69E. 
R.68E. 
R.68E. 
R.67E. 


SW£  Sec. 
NE^  Sec. 
SE^  Sec. 
Sec.  17 
SW^;  Sec. 
SE^  Sec. 
SW%  Sec. 
SW^;  Sec. 
SE%  Sec. 
Sec.  34 
SW£  Sec. 
NE%  Sec. 
SE%  Sec. 
SW^  Sec. 
SW^  Sec. 
SE%  Sec. 
SW^NW%  S 
NW^  Sec. 
NW%  Sec. 
NE%  Sec. 
NW%  Sec. 
SW%  Sec. 


29 
36 
27 

19 
23 
31 
30 
26 

13 
34 
20 
28 
6 

12 
ec. 
19 
20 
9 
6 
2 


15 


13 
14 

15 

6 

7 

8 

1* 

2* 

3 

4 
11 
12 
21 
22 

5 
10 

9 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 


*  Installed  in  FY  '75 


d.  Topah  Spring 

Two  water  sources  about  600'  apart.   Repair  old 
fences.   Install  new  spring  boxes.   Pipe  upper 
spring  to  lower  spring  box.   Install  new  400-500 
gallon  trough  with  expanded  metal  bird  ramp. 

e.  Unnamed  Spring 

Fence  spring  source.   Install  new  spring  box.   Pipe 
water  100  feet  or  less  and  install  400-500  gallon 
trough  with  expanded  metal  bird  ramp, 

f .  Bunker  Spring 

Install  spring  box.   Pipe  water  25  feet  to  400-500 
gallon  trough  with  bird  ramp. 

g.  *Sheep  Spring  (see  Photo  #5) 

Fence  source.   Install  spring  box,  pipe  and  400-500 
gallon  trough  with  bird  rampD 

h.   Ella  Spring 

Remove  old  mustang  trap  to  permit  better  use  by 
deer. 

i.  Lime  Mt.  Well  (see  photo  #6) 

Clean  out  trough.   Add  bird  ramps. 

j .   Pine  Canyon  Stock  Tank 

Circular  (50'  diameter)  steel  trough  needs  bird  ramps. 

2.   Forage  Development 

Pinyon/ juniper  encroachment  is  one  of  the  most  important 
limiting  factors  for  wildlife  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA.   These 
trees  crowd  out  the  browse,  forbs  and  grass  needed  as 
forage  for  wildlife.   Six  areas  (totaling  about  26,000 
areas)  have  been  outlined  on  Map  #3  as  wildlife  habitat 
needing  rehabilitation  to  improve  deer  forage: 

a.   Ella  Spring  (7,700  acres) 

Severely  degraded,  potential  deer  summer  habitat. 

*Private  land  -  easement  needed  before  development. 


Photo  #1   -  Garden   Sprin 


pi.  j.iiS 


Photo  #5   -   Sheep   Spring 


tot©  #6   «•   Lime  Mt. 


c       c  c  c 

C  C    C  O    O    V  c 

3  3  3  Z  Z   >-         9 


c  c  c 

C 

a 

c  c  c 

www 

J* 

to    >» 

>>    CO      «3 

J4 

41     41     41 

c 

V     U 

O     M    0)    V    o 

o   c 

9DD 

>N     >%     >S 

3 

^TJ 

C  TJ    >s  ►»   C 

C   5 

en 

1-1 

o 

41 

en 


w 


to 
o 

I 

to 
w 

aS 

06 

* 

OS 
W 

S 

PQ 


CO 

s 

at 

A 

tj 

CO 

H 

TJ 

•^ 

U 

JO 

i-i 

00 

J3 

c 

00 

O     (Q     CO 

»     (0     (0 

CO 

CO 

CO 

C 

»  -o  -o 

"O    TJ   "O 

TJ 

tj 

TJ 

o 

K     H 

b    M    h 

U 

>-■ 

U 

(0 

•>  i-l    -H 

t4rl<f< 

•H 

■r* 

•H 

a> 

H   J    J3 

j3J3.fi 

J3 

J3 

J3 

■ 

> 

•rl     00    00 

00   00   00 

00 

00 

00 

41 

o 

to   c   c 

3    O    O 

c  c  c 

c 

c 

c 

> 

tj 

o   o  o 

o 

o 

o 

O 

c 

c 

cr  to    co 

c 

c  c 

§ 

CO     to     CO 

g 

CO 

e 

CO 

CO 

TJ     C 

" 

3 

3 

3 

^  3 

3 

3 

1— 1 

o 

o 

*           *           * 

O 

o  o 

o 

fk      «      « 

O 

» 

o 

•s 

n 

■  o 

1-1 

c 

c 

h    h    h 

c 

e  c 

c 

J-i     I-i     J-. 

c 

u 

• 

u 

• 

c 

u 

u 

»-l        C 

to 

J* 

M 

0)     0)     <u 

J* 

J*  J* 

J* 

41    41     tl 

J* 

4) 

< 

41 

< 

M 

41 

41 

41   J* 

3 

c 

c 

V    tl    HI 

c 

c  c 

c 

41     41    41 

c 

41 

• 

41 

• 

C 

4) 

41 

41     C 

O 

3 

S3 

"O   "O   T3 

3 

3  3 

3 

T)   TJ   TJ 

3 

TJ 

Z 

tj 

Z 

3 

TJ 

TJ 

TJ    3 

^ 

W 

C 

00 

•H 

CO 

00   c 

o 

H 

C    -W 

00 

> 

00 

i-i    H 

c 

h 

Jx! 

00 

c 

t-i   a 

00 

• 

1-1 

41 

(J 

c 

•H 

i—l 

a  to 

c 

CO 

J-I 

CO 

O 

T-l 

i—i 

fc 

i— 1 

• 

to 

•H 

00 

41 

a 

41 

«J 

J-I 

1—1 

a 

4>            00 

CO 

oo 

c 

u 

c 

as 

to 

oo  as 

to 

a 

41 

to 

^       c 

cu 

C     00 

00   41     00 

a 

•H 

c 

to 

2 

1-1 

ai 

OO-H     c 

c   a  c 

to 

U 

CO 

CO 

•H     C 

c 

•u 

a  oo  u 
E  c  a 

C     U    -H 

•H      CO    i-l 

a  oo 

BO 

CO 

oc 

1-    o 

o      • 

• 

• 

C 

4J 

•H        D-     V- 

-J   <    u 

41 

to  c 

CO 

CO 

c 

a  >^ 

>>    CO 

c 

C 

41 

co  i-i  to 

CO 

v<  to    o- 

*■»        a 

c 

i-i 

PU 

Cw 

1-1 

to  c 

C     41 

•U 

U 

H 

O    w 

f-i 

a      to 

41    00  to 

•1-1 

TJ     U 

J-I 

CO 

co  as 

£ 

£ 

a  c 

tn  473    a; 

tu 

to  c 

to    c 

> 

ai   a. 

41 

41 

a 

J-    CJ 

CJ 

41 

41     S>s 

1-1  J= 

41 

E  to 

1—1 

i—l 

C72 

w 

CM 

41 

41 

•u 

•o 

41 

<U    J3      CO 

JJ   j*    CO 

a 

co 

TJ 

TJ 

j^  j>i 

41    U-> 

e 

e 

•H 

E    X    H 

N 

J     U    J 

to     co     fi- 

CO 

C  J= 

TJ 

TJ 

TJ 

C     (J 

C     -H 

i-i 

•H 

£ 

(0    O    4 

O 

CO    3    41 

ts     3     O 

u 

C    n 

•H 

•H 

3 

3    CO 

1-1    i-H 

►J 

J 

CO  CO   o 

o 

^  as  pq 

uan 

o 

3  < 

X 

£ 

£ 

CQ    »"> 

CJx   u 

c 

o 

1-1 

■u 

CN 

o 

m 

41 

to 

«^  vfi 


CN    CT>  vfi 


O 


O   CM    CN 


i— i  cn  ^n 

CN 


00     ^H 

en 


N    N    0>J    O 
•— I    CN    •— I    CO 


ON   O 


41 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

. 

■ 

0£ 

W 

w 

U 

W 

w 

W 

U 

W 

W 

C 

•—I 

o  r 

o>  r 

^ 

i— i 

o  r 

~ 

on:    : 

r^ 

i— •  r 

o 

CO 

r^ 

r^ 

NO 

r~ 

r^ 

NO 

Nfi 

r>~ 

r» 

aS 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

i 

G 

•w 

as 

as 

aS 

as 

as 

as 

as 

as 

as 

•> 

#i 

n 

« 

* 

p« 

tm 

m 

. 

-C 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

c 

00 

oo  r 

oo  r 

" 

r^ 

r>.  r 

E 

r^  r    r 

r^ 

no  r 

NO 

3 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

m 

• 

| 

o 

H 

H 

H 

H 

H 

H 

H 

H 

H 

H 

NO 


to 

NO 


CO 

tj 

CU 
CD 
Z 


*J 

C 

o 
o 


CO 

o 


TO 

01 

fl 
O 

cu 
o 

CO 


• 

• 

CO 

c 

c 

0) 

CO 

.X 

.* 

>N 

>N 

CO 

fl 

O     CD 

o 

o 

O 

O 

c 

o 

o 

c 

)-i 

O 

U 

o 

0 

01 

u 

o 

O 

C    ^ 

s 

c 

c 

a 

3 

c 

c 

3 

tj 

c 

TJ 

c 

c 

>sTJ 

c 

c 

• 
CO 

p 

CO 

0* 

CO 

u 

CD 

TJ 

o 

CO 

TJ 

M 

o 

3 

n 

•vt 

^ 

• 

u 

u 

a 

»  jD 

« 

a 

CO 

co    a* 

01 

o> 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

TJ    o» 

CD 

> 

TJ     CD 

TJ 

» 

TJ 

-a 

TJ 

u 

TJ 

U  TJ 

tj 

o 

w    U 

u 

CO 

U 

U 

U 

CJ 

u 

ft 

tj 

fl        O 

ft 

TJ 

ft 

t4 

ft 

o 

fl 

Xi      • 

• 

v-l 

X    X 

X 

V-i 

X 

x 

XI 

X 

60   CO 

CO 

c 

* 

0> 

60    CO 

60  ft 

60 

60 

60 

•» 

60 

C    ct) 

at 

tH 

V-i 

S* 

CO 

V 

CD 

c 

c 

X 

•u 

C 

c 

C 

CO 

C 

o  o 

u 

o 

cu 

01 

TJ 

TJ 

> 

o     • 

o 

3 

o 

o 

o 

TJ 

o 

CO     u 

u 

X 

CD 

01 

J-l 

^ 

o 

CO    r-l 

CO 

CD 

O 

CO 

to 

CO 

l-l 

CO 

o 

o 

60 

TJ 

tj 

fl 

ed 

• 

-a 

CO 

1- 

u 

•H 

M 

•H 

X 

CD 

CO 

M       QJ 

•K 

o 

4J 

■k 

■ 

a 

X 

«* 

0)     » 

•k 

43 

•> 

•N 

60 

4-1 

a) 

n 

0)     4J 

01 

X 

CD 

CD 

t-i 

60 

01 

>     CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

c 

CJ 

to 

> 

> 

CO 

g 

> 

> 

01 

c 

> 

O  TJ 

tj 

• 

TJ 

tj 

o 

• 

CJ 

TJ 

o     • 

0 

o 

O 

01 

o 

o 

*o  w 

r-l 

CO 

w 

u 

CO 

to 

c 

O 

P 

C 

TJ     CO 

TJ 

«* 

X 

TJ 

-a 

TJ 

CO 

TJ 

ft 

f-l 

ct) 

fl 

fl 

aj 

» 

tH 

3 

0) 

i— t 

C 

•  X 

JO 

u 

X 

X 

« 

u 

o 

• 

X 

O 

■  o 

• 

CO 

fl 

• 

■ 

P 

• 

t* 

U    00 

60 

u 

60 

60 

u 

O 

c 

CU 

60 

c 

• 

u   u 

• 

U 

0) 

CO 

U 

u 

01 

i-i 

V   c 

c 

o 

C 

c 

01 

o 

^ 

> 

c 

-* 

< 

CD     O 

< 

0) 

4J 

Ul 

01 

CD 

CO 

> 

0) 

CD     O 

o 

o 

o 

01 

c 

o 

o 

c 

• 

01 

• 

0) 

0) 

CD 

01 

o 

01 

TJ    CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

TJ 

» 

tj 

CO 

3 

2 

TJ 

z 

TJ 

TJ 

X> 

X 

TJ 

TJ 

CO 

w 

OS 

B 

OS 

w 

PQ 


CO 

z 


•  60 

co  c 

CD  fl 

OS  u 
a 

M  CO 

cu 

tj  a 

t— I  CD 

3  CD 

o  x 

PQ  co 


60 

c 
fl 

Vi 

a 

CO 


h 


CO   »-l 

CU    01 

^ 

OS  3 

01 

60 

01 

CO       • 

C 

u 

i— i  i— i    c 

* 

fl 

o 

60 

-4    r-i      (Q 

.  a* 

60  U 

c 

CU  f<  o 

CO    cu 

c  a 

^ 

fl 

3   32 

CD     t-i 

•H     CO 

u 

u 

.* 

oS  O 

m 

CO 

a 

>.  60  O 

a.  c 

Cu 

CO 

CO    C    O 

CU     t-i 

CO    o 

H-HOd 

•— (     CD 

CO 

cu 

^ 

O   >-i 

Xt    > 

TJ     Wi 

c 

u 

>4Ht 

Wi    o 

3    «0 

fl 

o 

co   o  cu 

5^ 

S  O 

04 

as 

EQ   OS  OS 

CO 

cu 

OS 


X 

u 


00 

c 
fl 
n 
a 
co 

60 

fl 

OQ 

I 
cu 

CU 

u 
U 

u 

01 

> 
o 

r-H 


CO 

cu 

OS 

i— i 

•       60    CO 

.— i 

a  c  cu 

I— 1 

CD 

0»   fl    OS 

«— I 

3 

CU    u 

cu 

w  at) 

3 

•H 

co   cu 

i—l 

cu         B 

c 

CD 

TJ    a)    co 

3 

X 

«0   ^h     C 

o 

aj 

ki  ^    c 

Irf 

•u 

O  W   3 

PQ 

CO 

o 
cu 

CO 


vD 


CM   CM 


ON 

i—i 

CM 

CM 

«« 

00 

1—1 

1—1 

CO 

in 

ao 

«3 

m 

CO 

CM 

«tf 

f-H 

CO 

CO 

co 

CO 

^-1 

CO 

CM 


CM 


co  <r  o 

CM    CM    CM 


i-i  m 
^  co 


cu 

ex 
c 

CO 

OS 
I 

a 

•H 

X 
co 

C 

o 

H 


hi 

u 

w 

w 

H 

W 

a>  z 

00 

r» 

z. 

f-H 

- 

O  = 

E 

ON 

vO 

vO 

vO 

r^ 

r-^ 

vO 

• 

• 

• 

* 

• 

• 

OS 

OS 

OS 

OS 

OS 

OS 

ft 

• 

• 

K 

m 

«x 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

vo  r 

vO 

SO 

• 

m 

~ 

m  r 

S 

m 

W 

W 

w 

00 

Is*  r 

s 

o 

vO 

vO 

l»» 

CO 

m 


co 

in 


os 


CO 


28 


o 

c 


c  c  c  c 

X  M  M  X 

c  c  c  c 

3  3  3  3 


c 

3 


c 

w.    C 
T3   3 


C    C 

3   3 


w 
a; 

T-t 

u 
o» 

CO 


CO 

U 

«  iH 
09    X) 

i-l     O 

60   CO 

C  U 

O      •>    3 

CO    1-"     O 
CO     U 

•>  a>  4J 

CU     4-1 

o    •  5 

CO  C 

*    O  «H 

M    O  CO 

v   O  h 

w 

Q 


CO  U 

CU  0) 

•u  CU 

• 

CO  • 

cO  co 

u  co 

CJ  u 

O  CJ 

O 

CO  « 

■O  CO 

U  T3 

•H  U 

£>  CO 

OOr-t 

C  -H 

S  g 

<u  c 

>  CO 


s 


c  c  c  c 

3  3  3  3 

o  o  o  o 

c  c  c  c 

X  X  X  M 

C  C  C  C 

3  3  3  3 


O 

c 
c 

3 


CU 
•O 


CO  CO 

-o  -o 

u  u 

JO  x> 

60  00 

c  c 

o  o 

CO  co 


u    u 

CU     O) 
01     0» 


o 

•  c 

<   X 

•  c 

55  3 


if 

o  o 
c   c 

c   c 

3   3 


w 

> 

3 


CO 

J 

0) 


CO 

> 


T3 
CO 
0> 

X 
i 

v- 

CJ 

u 

0> 

> 

o 

<-* 
c_> 


60   60 
C    C 


60 

c 


ex  a 

•H  CO  03 

U     60 

a  c  x:  x: 

CO    i-J     CO  CO 

I*  <  < 
a 

co    P  W 

CD  01 

.*    3  a 

to  o  a 

O  J  3 


3 

o 


<o 
01 

OS 

01 

CO 

1-1 
a. 

0) 

■u 

c 

W 


c 
cu 


a 

3 
a 

60  60 
C  C 
i-t  i-l 
I-    u 

a  a 

GO    GO 

a  a 
o»  o> 

cu    cu 

x:  jc 

CO   CO 


01 
4J 

CO 

>  ^ 

t-l     4-» 

60  a  to 

C  w    > 


CO 


60   U 

c   a 


to 

o 

X> 


U 

a 
co 


co 


o»  ^ 

3    iH     tO 

to  £  O 


cu 
u 
CO 

> 


60 

c 

60  U 

c  a 

i-(  co 
u 
a  *j 

CO  i-l 

X> 

3  xi 

O    CO 

a  os 


St 

c 

en 

0 

•r-t 

•> 

■U 

00 

CJ 

CM 

CV 

CO 

•> 

r^ 

CM 

00 


<t  m  m  i^. 

H   H   (M    M 


o 
en 


r->  o\ 


oo  st  m 
rH  cm  en 


«tf  st 
cm  en 


cu 

u 

c 

W 

CO 

00 

OS 

vO 

& 

OS 

•H 

X 

•h 

co 

* 

c 

CO 

3 

St 

o 

• 

H 

H 

u 

vO 
OS* 


GO 

St 


w 

W 

H 

w 

I— 1 

O  r 

ON   = 

~ 

CJN 

r^ 

r^ 

sO 

vO 

CO 

en 


CO 

en 


co 
en 


co 

CM 


29 


b.  Oak  Wells  (9,200  acres) 

Severely  degraded,  in  potential  deer  summer  habitat. 

c.  Bunker  Pass  (4,000  acres) 

Badly  degraded  critical  deer,  summer  habitat,  but 
with  treatment  good  release  of  bitterbrush  and 
serviceberry  can  be  attained. 

d.  Marble  Reservoir  (2,000  acres) 

Seedings  of  extremely  poor  composition,  in  potential 
deer  summer  habitat. 

e.  Sheep  Spring  (2,300  acres) 

Seedings  of  very  poor  composition,  potential  deer 
summer  habitat. 

f.  Mahogany  Knoll  (700  acres) 

Seeding  of  extremely  poor  composition,  potential 
deer  summer  habitat. 

These  areas  should  be  chained,  then  reseeded  with  a  com- 
bination of  the  following  plants: 

Smooth  brome     )   higher  elevations 

Curl leaf  mahogany) 

Russian  wildrye 

Bluestem  wheatgrass 

Alfalfa 

Chickpea  milkvetch 

Utah  sweetvetch 

Arrowleaf  balsamroot 

Small  bur net 

Fourwing  saltbush 

Antelope  bitterbrush 

Woods  rose 

True  mountain  mahogany 

Habitat  treatment  should  not  aim  towards  complete 
elimination  of  pinyon,  juniper  and  sagebrush,  especially 
where  stands  of  the  palatable  Artemesia  tridentata 
wyomingensis  occur.   Juniper,  pinyon  and  sage  brush  are 
important  sources  of  energy  and  cover  for  deer  during 
the  later  winter-early  spring  period.   These  species  also 
provide  some  food  and  good  cover  for  smaller  animals. 


I        ZONA 


-8- 


Therefore  10-15  acres  of  each  100  acres  to  be  treated 
should  remain  undisturbed.   These  can  usually  be  steep 
slopes,  rocky  outcrops  or  fragile  soil  areas.   Irregular 
shaped  chainings  with  interspersed  area  of  cover  will 
increase  aesthetic  appeal,  edge  effect  and  value  to 
wildlife. 

The  public  should  be  informed  during  the  specific  plan- 
ning and  implementation  of  these  habitat  rehabilitation 
projects.   There  are  many  minconceptions  and,  as  a  result, 
much  public  hostility  towards  chaining.   News  release 
should  be  written  describing  the  proposed  chainings  and 
their  benefits  to  wildlife. 

E.  Access  Development  or  Improvement 

Hunter  access  is  generally  adequate  throughout  most  of  the 
WHA.  Most  of  the  roads  in  the  Clover  Mountains  are  well 
signed. 

F.  Land  Acquisition,  Classification  and  Withdrawal 

As  stated  in  the  introduction,  17,000  acres  of  the  Beaver  Dam 
WHA  is  privately  owned. 

Those  areas  most  important  to  wildlife  include: 

Sheep  Spring  -  T.6S.,  R.69E.,  Sec.  28. 

Rabbit  Spring  -  T.2S.,  R.69E.,  Sec.  34. 

Oak  Wells  -  T.3S.,  R.69E.,  Sec.  35. 

Miller  Spring  -  T.3S.,  R.69E.,  Sec.  24. 

Along  Meadow  Valley  Wash  - 

T.2S.,  R.68E.,  Sees.  4-9,  17,  18-21,  30. 
T.7S.,  R.67E.,  Sees.  7,  20,  21,  26,  27,  28,  34,  35. 
T.8S.,  R.67E.,  Sees.  27,  34. 
T.6S.,  R.66E.,  Sec.  2. 

T.3S.,  R.67E.,  Sees.  2,  3,  10,  11,  14,  15,  21,  22, 

28,  32,  33. 

Along  Clover  Creek  - 

T4S.,  R.68E.,  Sees.  7,  21,  27,  28. 
T.5S.,  R.69E.,  Sees.  2,  8,  11,  13,  14,  15,  16,  17, 

22,  24,  25,  30,  31,  32,  37. 


•9- 


Consideration  should  be  given  to  obtaining  rights-of-way 
or  to  obtaining  these  areas  through  exchanges  when  and  if 
these  become  the  only  ways  of  assuring  hunter  access  and 
habitat  maintenance  or  development  for  wildlife. 

At  the  moment,  none  of  the  crucial  areas  in  the  Beaver  Dam 
WHA  (see  Intensive  Inventory  for  Crucial  Areas)  are  being 
recommended  for  classification  or  withdrawal.   Future  studies, 
however,  may  reveal  certain  crucial  non-game  or  endangered 
species  habitat  that  would  require  withdrawals  for  protection. 

G.   Fire 

The  Caliente  Management  Framework  Plan  recommended  that  the 
small  acreages  (each  15-50  acres  in  size)  of  the  south 
slope  of  the  Sawmill  Range  (area  covers  65,000  acres)  be 
control  burned  (see  Map  #3  for  the  area  involved) .   This 
area  is  too  steep  to  chain.   The  prescribed  burning  of  this 
predominantly  manzanita  and  oak  covered  area  followed  by 
seeding  (with  some  plants  described  under  habitat  improve- 
ment) will  increase  composition  of  palatable  forage  and 
improve  the  edge  effect.   Again  a  news  release  should  de- 
scribe the  burning  and  its  benefit  to  wildlife. 

H.   Wild  Horse  Management 

As  stated  in  the  intensve  inventory,  horses  are  found  through- 
out the  Beaver  Dam  WHA.   They  compete  with  deer  on  deer  year- 
long range  and  on  crucial  winter  range  in  Little  Mountain. 
Horses  in  large  numbers  will  put  heavy  pressure  on  deli- 
cious sagebrush,  bitterbrush,  desert  almond,  Indian  rice- 
grass,  needle-and-thread  grass,  fourwing  saltbush  and  other 
plants  eaten  by  deer  and  other  wildlife.  Horses  also  compete 
with  livestock  and  wildlife  for  scarce  supplies  of  water. 

Jim  Brunner,  Range  Conservationist,  has  written  a  sample  Wild 
Horse  Management  Plan  for  the  Panaca  Plateau  (which  includes 
the  northern  part  of  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA).   The  wildlife 
and  wild  horse  and  burro  activities  should  cooperate  on  in- 
ventories like  those  outlined  in  the  plan  to  determine 
preferred  forage  for  horses  and  conflicts  with  deer  and  live- 
stock and  to  determine  the  number  and  whereabouts  of  excess 
horses  as  well  as  methods  of  removing  them. 


IV.   Management  Evaluation 

The  following  studies  should  be  made  to  evaluate  the  effective 
of  this  HMP. 

1.  Annual  pellet  counts  to  document  changes  in  deer  and 
other  wildlife  use  in  areas  where  habitat  improvements  have 
been  added  (refer  to  BLM  manual  6630). 

2.  Cooperate  with  NDF&G  on  any  capturing  and  tagging  (and/or 
radio  transmitter)  project  to  identify  any  shifts  in  seasonal 
use  as  the  result  of  habitat  improvement. 

3.  Vegetation  condition  and  trend  studies  should  be  accomplish- 
ed on  all  crucial  vegetative  types.   The  3-phase  cooperative 
exclosure  plat  constructed  by  the  NDF&G  and  BLM  will  be 
maintained.   Photos  should  be  taken  periodically  of  crucial 
areas,  water  sources,  habitat  manipulation  projects,  etc. 

These  studies  should  be  carried  out  with  the  cooperation  of  BLM 
range  and  NDF&G  personnel. 


V.    Provision  for  Review  and  Modification 

Due  to  the  large  size  of  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA  and  the  present  lack 
of  knowledge  about  wildlife  populations,  this  HMP  should  be 
reviewed  annually  and  modified  as  new  information  (particularly 
about  non-game  species)  becomes  available. 

The  following  studies  and  inventories  should  be  conducted  in 
the  Beaver  Dam  WHA: 

1.  Develop  a  study  plot  to  determine  the  rate  of  pinyon/ 
juniper  encroachment  in  the  Beaver  Dam  Area.   The  large 
number  of  young  trees  indicates  that  the  landscape  is  changing, 
pinyon  and  juniper  trees  are  rapidly  replacing  browse,  grasses, 
and  forbs.   Aging  all  the  trees  in  a  small  plot  area  will 

give  some  indication  of  how  fast  the  trees  are  invading. 
This  information  may  help  in  determining  priorities  for 
habitat  rehabilitation  and  modifying  implementation  sched- 
ules. 

2.  Conduct  an  inventory  of  prairie  and  peregrine  falcon, 
golden  eagle  and  other  bird  of  prey  nesting  sites  in  the 
Clover  Mountains.   These  are  protected  birds  and  crucial 
nesting  areas  must  be  identified  so  that  their  habitat 
can  be  protected. 

3.  Conduct  a  study  of  the  distribution  and  food  habits  of 
the  desert  tortoise.   This  is  also  a  protected  species  and 
little  is  known  about  it  here  in  Nevada.   Again  more  infor- 
mation is  needed  before  its  habitat  can  be  properly  managed 
or  developed. 

4.  Conduct  an  inventory  to  identify  crucial  mountain  lion 
habitat  and  habitat  needs. 

5.  Cooperate  with  wild  horse  activity  on  horse  studies  like 
those  discussed  under  "H.  Wild  Horse  Management". 

6.  Inventory  springs  listed  in  Table  III  and  identify 
development  needs. 

It  is  recommended  that  all  of  these  studies  be  cooperative  efforts 
with  the  Nevada  Department  of  Fish  and  Game  and  the  University 
of  Nevada  at  Las  Vegas.   Technical  assistance  from  the  Denver 
Service  Center  (particularly  from  the  non-game  specialist)  would 
also  be  helpful. 

Some  of  the  results  of  these  inventories  (especially  information 
about  endangered  species)  should  be  included  in  pamphlets  for 
distribution  to  the  public. 


1Z- 


VI.    Implementation  Schedule 

Table  IV  is  the  proposed  implementation  schedule  for  the  Beaver 
Dam  HMP.   It  involves  the  following: 

Inventory  and  Analysis 

This  would  include  the  inventory  of  the  springs  not  yet  sur- 
veyed (see  Table  III).   Using  as  a  standard  $1,500  per  man 
month,  this  one-half  man  month  of  work  would  cost  about  $750. 

Studies  and  Research 

This  would  include  both  the  studies  recommended  under  "Manage- 
ment Evaluation"  and  those  discussed  under  "Provision  for  Review 
and  Modification".   About  two  man  months  and  $3,000  would  be 
needed  each  year.   Total  cost  is  $15,000. 

Habitat  Treatment  Planning 

One  man  month  would  be  needed  each  year  to  plan  for  habitat 
treatment  (chainings,  burnings)  proposed  for  each  successive  year. 

Evaluation  and  Revision 

One  man  month  was  needed  to  revise  the  HMP  this  year.   One-half 
man  month  will  probably  be  necessary  to  modify  the  plan  during  the 
program  year  when  the  spring  inventory  is  completed  and  one- fourth 
man  month  each  successional  year  to  add  new  information. 

Public  Affairs  and  Assistance 

Time  is  scheduled  for  writing  news  releases,  brochures,  etc. 

Environmental  Analysis 

One  man  month  is  needed  to  complete  an  environmental  analysis 
report  on  the  Beaver  Dam  HMP  habitat  improvements.   An  additional 
report  may  have  to  be  completed  on  new  proposals  that  result  in 
from  the  spring  inventory  in  the  program  year. 

Mechanical  Revegetation 

The  total  cost  of  chaining  almost  26,000  acres  (and  reseeding 
these  areas  with  a  variety  of  browse,  grasses  and  forbs)  at 
about  $40/acre  is  approximately  $1,040,000.   The  chainings 
should  be  accomplished  in  the  following  order:   Ella  Spring 
(7,700  acres  -  Program  year),  Oak  Wells  (9,200  acres  -  Program 
year  +  1),  Bunker  Pass  (4,000  acres  -  Program  year  +  2),  Marble 


Reservoir  (2,000  acres  -  Program  year  +  3)  and  Sheep  Spring 
and  Mahogany  Knoll  (3,000  acres  -  Program  year  +  4). 

Revegetation,  Burning 

The  Sawmill  prescribed  burning  is  shown  under  program  year  +  3. 
It  will  cost  about  $975,000  to  reseed  65,000  acres  with  a  good 
variety  of  browse,  grasses  and  forbs. 

Water  Developments  -  Springs 

Two  spring  developments  have  been  scheduled  each  year  at  a  cost 
of  $1,000  a  piece.   The  total  cost  for  spring  developments  should 
be  about  $10,000.   This  schedule  can  and  should  be  modified 
after  the  spring  inventory  in  the  program  year. 

Water  Developments  -  Catchments 

Two  guzzlers  were  constructed  this  current  year.   Four  a  year 
are  recommended  over  the  next  five  years  at  a  cost  of  about 
$5,000  per  guzzler  and  two  man  months  per  year.   Total  cost 
is  $110,000. 

Maintenance  -  Water  Developments 

Time  and  money  should  be  scheduled  for  maintenance  of  guzzlers 
and  spring  developments.   Total  cost,  as  presently  scheduled, 
is  $8,000  over  the  five  year  period. 


-a 
n> 
1-1 

3 

Co 
3 

3 
o 
3 


<~.  Co 
2   O 
Co     -4 
H-    00 

3 
rr 
n> 
3 
B) 
3 
o 
ft) 

s: 

CU 

rr 
(D 
i-l 

O 
fD 
< 

ft) 

i—1 
O 

■d 

3 
fD 
3 
rf 

£    N> 

to    4> 
rf    ui 
(I 
i-( 

O 
fD 
< 
fD 
1— » 

o 
o 
3 
ft) 
3 
rr 

(A 

i 

o 
to 

rl 

o 
5" 

3 
ft) 
3 
rr 
en 

s:  to 

Co    .p- 
rr    ro 
ro 
11 

O 
ft> 
< 

ft) 

H- » 
O 

■o 

3 
ft) 
3 
rr 
CO 

1 

0") 

■a 

H' 

3 

JO. 
CO 

pa  o 

ft)    o 
<     Co 

ro 

JQ 
fD 

rr 
Co 

rr 
H- 
O 

3 

CO 

c 
1 

3 
p- 
3 
JO 

- 
po  o 

fD     O 

<    ro 

fD 
JQ 
fD 
rr 
111 
rr 

H- 
O 

3 

fD 
0 

Co 

3 
r* 

n 

Co 

7>  oo 
m  oo 
3    o 
<    o> 

M- 
11 

o 
3 
3 
ro 
3 
rr 

CO 

I—* 

> 

3 

Co 
r- ' 
■< 
en 

H- 

en 

^  co 
►fl   O 

c   o 

a-  i-" 

H- 

O 

> 
i-h 

M> 
0) 
H- 
1 
CO 
— 

-    i- 
m  .r> 

<     CO 
CO     vC 

c 

CO 

rr 
r* 
O 
3 

Co 
3 
Q. 

70 

ro 

< 

en 

H- 

O 

3 

/-.    to 

X   ro 
Co    -P- 
er   o 
H" 
rr 

CO 

rr 

H 
rl 

fD 
CO 

rr 

3 
fD 
3 
rr 

CO 

3 
D- 

T) 

CO 

3 
3 

3 
JO 

^—.   to 

rr   lo 
C    o 

a. 

H* 
fD 
to 

Co 

3 

a. 

po 

ro 

to 
fD 
Co 
M 

n 

3" 

i-i   O 
3    to 

<     Ul 

fD 
3 
rr 
O 

CO 
3 
Pi 

> 

3 

CO 

t— ' 
^ 
(0 
H- 
CO 

c 
o 
1-1 

7? 

I 

c_ 
o 
o- 

o 
o 

o. 

fD 

CO 

C 
cr 

CD 
O 

n 

r* 
< 
r* 

■< 

H 
to 
00 
Ul 

C 

H* 

^^ 
D. 

K< 
Ml 
fl 

Ui 

ui 

Ul 

O   O 

O   O 

O  en 

-  rr 

CO 

n 

c 
I-I 

M 
ft 

3 

rr 

H< 
(I 
CO 

M 

ro 

1 

i 

1 

- 

1 

- 

1 

G 
3 
H- 

rr 

CO 

1— • 

- 

H-* 

2 

ui 
* 

N> 

o 
* 

ro 
* 

I*) 

o 

00 

>!- 

Cn 

U) 

Ui 

Ul 

Ul 

LO 

Ul 

o  o 
o  o 

O  en 
-  rr 
CO 

— 
□ 

CO 

a 

Mj 
O 
CO 
M 

ro 

■P- 

ro 

i 

0)    ^j 

o  » 
i   -j 
ro   o 

en    O 

t— * 

- 

t— » 

- 

G 
3 

rr 
en 

Ln 

to 

M 

ro 

Ui 

ro 
Ui 

Ul 

Ul 

ro 

Ul 

2 
2 

* 

ro 
O 

ro 

CO 

oo 

i 

Co 
Ui 

CO 

^1 

Ul 

Ul 

U) 

o  n 

o  o 

O  en 

-  rr 

CO 

1-1 

0 
H 

Co 
3 

Kj 

re 

H 

+ 

0^ 

-P- 

ro 

I 

Co     vD 

n  » 
)-l    ro 

ro    o 

CO     o 

I 

M 

H 

G 
3 

H' 

rr 

en 

M 

N) 

H- » 

ro 

ro 
Cn 

ro 

Ul 

ro 

2 
2" 

Ui 
5{- 

ro 
O 

ro 
><• 

ON 

o 

1 

CO 
Ui 

CO 

~o 

Ul 

Ul 

I*) 

o  n 
o  o 

O  en 
-  rr 

CO 

hd 

O 
IK 
»1 

CC 

3 

rt 

a 
1 

+ 

to 

I—1 

-P- 

ro 

1 

Co    .p- 

0  •» 

1  o 
ro    o 
en    o 

I 

i—1 

ro 

G 
3 
I-1- 
rr 

CO 

ro 

to 

M 

h-i 

to 
Ui 

ro 

Ui 

Ul 

ro 

2 

— 
2 

CO 

* 

ro 

o 

ro 

■P- 
Ui 

oo 
o 

I 

CO 
Ul 

CO 
-J 
Ul 

Ui 

IjJ 

o  o 
o  o 

O  en 
-  rr 
en 

i-( 
O 
Oc 
11 

CO 

3 

h< 

ro 
Co 
1 

+ 

oo 

ro 
O 

■p- 

ro 

s§ 

01   o 

Co    ro 
O  » 
i-t    O 

ro    o 

en     O 

M 

to 

G 
3 

H- 

rr 
en 

to 

ro 

(-■ 

1— * 

- 

ro 
Ui 

ro 

Ul 

Ul 

ro 

2 
2" 

ro 

O 

ro 

1 

ro 

o 

i 

CO 
Ul 

co 
-J 

Ul 

LO 

O 

0  0 

0  0 

-  en 

en    rr 

T3 
i-l 

O 

i-l 

Co 
3 

< 
n> 

CD 

rl 

+ 
-0 

ro 

-P- 

ro 

' 

to    co 
o   » 
i-l    o 
ro    o 
en    o 

(— ' 

G 
3 
r* 

rr 
en 

to 

ro 

M 



ro 

Ul 

ro 

Ul 

to 

.     . 

2 
2 

2 

w 
t-1 


4> 


REFERENCES 


Brunner,  J„,  1974.  Wild  Horse  Management  Plan;   Panaca  Plateau. 
Bureau  of  Land  Management,  Las  Vegas,  Nevada. 

Dasmann,  W. ,  1971.   If  Deer  are  to  Survive.   Stackpole  Books. 
Harrisburg,  Pennsylvania.   128  pp. 

Deibert,  1968.  Mule  Deer  Condition  and  Food  Habits  on  Two  Nevada 
Range So  MS  Thesis.  University  of  Nevada.   Reno,  Nevada. 

Drewien,  G.,  1971.   Food  habits  and  Weight  Relationships  of  Mourning 
Doves  in  Northern  Nevada.  MS  Thesis.  University  of  Nevada, 
Reno,  Nevada. 

Martin,  Zim  and  Nelson,  1951.  American  Wildlife  and  Plants:  A 
Guide  to  Food  Habits.   Dover  Publications,  Inc.  New  York, 
New  York.   500  pp. 

Myers,  L.   1971.   Intensive  Inventory  and  Habitat  Management  Plan: 

Beaver  Dam.  Bureau  of  Land  Management,  Las  Vegas,  Nevada  35  pp. 

Stanton,  F.,  1973.  Wildlife  Guidelines  for  Range  Fire  Rehabilitation. 
Bureau  of  Land  Management  (Denver  Service  Center),  Denver, 
Colorado.   48  pp. 


» 


Appendix  } 


* 


->j  //  oJ. "J '•"!;>! 

7         6'.J) 


float  s/Myc  flS^WJy 


¥>Asi*4tecUed) 
"1 


>'//  ^.-nV/,','.0, 


//'  C 


y-Wc 


V 


\ 


V 


o^" 


*0* 


w- 


/2 


=H 


\ 


Z3"  —  - 


tJS 


s-y 


7^u4 


1 


"A" 


W 


;  ± 


^:  g  ..... .   / 


<  r 


Ir-?CC( 


*#   V-C^C  V,  ^  U.  C  k.C{        TlM!  «■  '/;  U  -  O  -   (^  *N  *  *-  V  ^^  « 


VC  kV-L. 


U 


»«».,    SSUS*, 


_j 


-J". 

*   0: 


I 


l;'i      R. 


r* 


i    > 


> 


T' 


i     s> 


*  I f  f 


^     iff  > 

ki:l>  s. 

•  •  i 

:  i    iu  to 

■    I  i  a 

'  >  IS 


ir 


n 


6\ 


■  u ; 

i    >    i' 


C& 


;    01   | 


o     I 


D 

> 

7. 

I   G^ 

Z 

m 

!    C 

< 
> 

Lx 

h 

> 

?.;nj 

r- 

|7-f 

-n 

~'r  n 

i/i 

! 

HI 

r'*' 

n 

Q1 

!i ' 

r 
n 

> 

'£> 

(?"" 

m 

h 

r> 

,■ 

o 

«>.- 

■ ' 

5 

2; 

'T3 

i  > 


7 

!c."> 
I 

•'!■; 


i:; 


-i 


u 


!l- 


i 


iif;  ^  ■*    \ 

1    ..   ■       ■    v.  ■«    * 


1   A   %A£M  i 

\VVv a>  " 

■         w   \  >    •  ^    \  i.    v- 
c        W\  V     v>\  \t*  V  \ 


"=         U>'.-1 


J 


T 


i\ 


\ 


> 


.  •  •  • 


MATERIAL  LIST 

Two  ea.  -  60d  nails  or  larger 

for  hooks 
Two  ea.  -  1/2"  rebar  98"  long 
One  ea.  -  1/2"  X  8"  pipe  over  one 

leg  as  a  hinge.  Photo  2 

Type  of  screen  as  preferred 


PHOTO  I 


O 

■9 


^v"  %  s 


( — 


PHOTO  2 


Rebar  is  heated  and  bent  at  angles 


STOCK  WATER  TANK  BIRD  LADDER 


6620 


FINAL 
ENVIRONMENTAL   ANALYSIS   RECORD 

for 

Beaver  Dam  Habitat  Management  Plan 
E.A.R.  No.  NV-050-6-114 


Caliente  Planning  Unit 
Las  Vegas  District 
Las  Vegas,  Nevada 


Prepared  by:   Denise  P.  Meridith 

Environmental  Specialist 


February,  1976 


UNITED  STATES  GOVERNMENT 

Memorandum 


DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  INTERIOR 
BUREAU  OF  LAND  MANAGEMENT 


IN  REPLY  REFER  TO: 
1791 

(N-053) 


To        District  Manager,  Las  Vegas  Date: 

From     Area  Manager,  Caliente-Virgin  Valley  Resource  Area 

Subject  :  E.A.R.  No.  NV-050-6-114 

This  final  environmental  analysis  report  discusses  the  impacts  of 
implementing  actions  proposed  in  the  Beaver  Dam  Habitat  Management 
Plan.   The  major  actions  discussed  are: 

1)  Improving  the  availability  of  already  existing  waters  to  wildlife 
by  developing  springs  and  constructing  water  catchments. 

2)  Employing  habitat  treatment  methods  (chaining  or  prescribed 
burning) . 

3)  Initiating  studies  to  identify  habitat  condition  and  trend  of 
crucial  wildlife  areas. 

4)  Assisting  the  range  and  wild  horse/burro  activities  in  development 
of  allotment  management  and  horse  and  burro  management  plans. 

Analysis  of  the  proposed  actions  indicates  that  the  Beaver  Dam  HMP 
will  have  some  temporary  adverse  impacts  on  the  environment  (creation 
of  dust  or  smoke,  displeasing  effects  on  aesthetics,  temporary 
displacement  of  wildlife,  etc.).  Most  of  the  long-range  impacts, 
however,  will  be  favorable  for  vegetation,  wildlife,  and  human 
resources. 

A  list  of  mitigating  measures  that  were  recommended  in  the  E.A.R. 
is  attached. 

None  of  the  actions  that  affect  livestock  grazing  in  the  Beaver  Dam 
area  (chaining,  prescribed  burning,  seeding)  should  be  implemented 
until  a  grazing  environmental  impact  statement  for  the  Caliente 
Planning  Unit  (scheduled  for  FY  1978)  is  prepared.   These  are  considered 
significant  and  controversial  actions. 

Based  on  the  information  in  this  final  E.A.R.,  it  is  determined  that 
all  the  other  aspects  of  the  proposed  action  do  not  constitute  major 
Federal  actions  significantly  affecting  the  human  environment. 


Therefore,  it  is  recommended  that  no  impact  statements  be  prepared 
for  these  actions  and  that  they  be  implemented  as  proposed. 


This  final  E.A.R.  complete  with  replies  to  comments  on  the  draft 
should  be  forwarded  to  the  State  Clearinghouse  f/fr  their  information. 


Date       ' 


Phillip  V//Range 
Caliente-Virgin  Valley 
Resource  Area  Manager 


I  Concur: 


y^/?t 


Date 


The  following  mitigating  measures  are  recommenaea; 

1.  Minimize  dust  by  chaining  or  burning  when  wind  condi- 
tions are  right. 

2.  Watershed,  wildlife,  minerals,  recreation  and  forestry 
activities  will  cooperate  to  identify  specific  sites 
for  prescribed  burnings  and  chainings.   Consult  with 
State  of  Nevada  Health  Department  (Air  Pollution  Divi- 
sion) before  development. 

3.  Mixing  of  concrete  for  water  catchments  and  spring 
developments  should  be  done  in  contained  facilities 
to  reduce  the  chance  of  soil  pollution. 

4.  Leave  piles  of  downed  trees  on  the  site  to  help  reduce 
runoff  of  soil  and  water  and  to  improve  cover  for  small 
animals. 

5.  Restrict  all  heavy  vehicles  used  in  transporting  men 
and  equipment  to  existing  roads,  trails,  and  washes  on 
fragile  watershed  areas. 

6.  Minimize  damage  to  valuable  understory  vegetation  during 
chaining. 


7.  Use  a  mixture  of  browse,  grass  and  forbs  to  reseed 
chaining  and  burning  sites. 

8.  Check  for  and  avoid  mining  claim  markers  during  chaining 
or  burning  operations. 

9.  Leave  patches  of  trees  (10-15  acres  in  size)  scattered 
throughout  the  treated  areas  for  wildlife  cover, 
Christmas  trees,  pinyon  nuts  and  aesthetic  values. 

10.  Fence  reseeded  areas  to  exclude  livestock  for  two 
growing  seasons. 

11.  Fences  around  waters  and  habitat  rehabilitation  sites 
will  be  constructed  to  allow  wildlife  easy  access. 

12.  Clean  up  spring  development  and  water  catchment  sites 
quickly  and  thoroughly  after  construction  is  completed. 

13.  Provide  water  for  livestock  and  wild  horses  and  burros 
away  from  the  fenced,  improved  source.   For  instance, 
pipe  water  from  a  fenced  spring  development  to  a 
separate  trough  for  livestock  and  horses. 

14.  Aprons  of  water  catchments  should  be  painted  natural 
colors  (pale  beige,  green  or  grey)  to  blend  with  the 
surroundings . 


VI 


15.  The  District  landscape  architect  will  help  design 

all  chaining  and  burning  projects.   Treated  areas  should 
have  irregular  boundaries  and  buffer  zones. 

16.  Archaeological  surveys  should  be  made  of  all  selected 
chaining  or  burning  sites  and  water  development  areas 
before  development. 

17.  Any  culturally  important  pinyon  nut  gathering  areas 
will  be  excluded  from  treatment.  Enlist  aid  of  the 
Indian  Tribal  Council  in  identifying  these  areas. 

18.  Commercial  and  individual  collections  of  Christmas 
trees,  firewood  and  juniper  posts  should  be  concentrated 
in  areas  slated  for  habitat  rehabilitations. 

19.  Inform  the  public  of  all  proposed  projects  prior  to 
development  through  news  releases,  feature  articles, 
slide  shows,  etc. 

20.  Cooperate  with  Nevada  Department  of  Fish  &  Game,  U.  S. 
Fish  &  Wildlife  Service,  and  interested  groups  and  indi- 
viduals during  inventories  and  habitat  development  projects, 


21.    Consult  with  Utah  BLM  on  any  rehabilitation  projects 
near  the  Utah-Nevada  border. 


Table  of  Contents 


Introduction 

I„   Description  of  the  Proposed  Action  and  Alternatives 

II.    Description  of  the  Existing  Environment 

A.  Non-Living  Components 

1.  Air  and  Climate 

2 .  Land 

3.  Water 

4.  Hazards 

B.  Living  Components 

1.  Vegetation 

2.  Wildlife 

3.  Livestock 

4.  Wild  Horses  and  Burros 

C.  Ecological  Interrelationships 

D.  Human  Values 

1.  Landscape  Character 

2.  Socio-Cultural  Interests 

III.   Analysis  of  the  Proposed  Action  and  Alternatives 

A.  Environmental  Impacts  of  the  Proposed  Action 

1.  Anticipated  Impacts 

a.  Non-Living  Components 

b.  Living  Components 

c.  Ecological  Interrelationships 

d.  Human  Values 

2.  Possible  Mitigating  Measures 

a.  Non-Living  Components 

b.  Living  Components 

c.  Ecological  Interrelationships 

d.  Human  Values 

3.  Recommendations  for  Mitigation  or 
Enhancement 

4.  Residual  Impacts 

50   Relationship  Between  Short-Term  Use  and 

Long-Term  Productivity 
6.    Irreversible  and  Irretrievable  Commitment 

of  Resources 

B.  Environmental  Impacts  of  the  Alternatives 

1.  Alternative  #1 

2.  Alternative  #2 


IV, 

V, 

VI, 
I 

VII, 
VIII, 


Persons,  Groups  and  Government  Agencies  Consulted 

Intensity  of  Public  Interest 

Participating  Staff 

Summary 

References 


Page 

1 
2 

7 

7 

7 

7 

8 

9 

9 

9 

9 
10 
10 
10 
11 
11 
11 

14 
14 
14 
14 
16 
18 
19 
20 
20 
20 
21 
21 

22 
25 

25 

25 
25 
25 
26 

28 

28 

28 

28 

30 


-1- 


I.    Introduction 

The  Beaver  Dam  Wildlife  Habitat  Area  contains  616,000  acres  of 
national  resource  lands,  17,000  acres  of  private  lands  and  2,000 
acres  which  are  included  within  Beaver  Dam  State  Park.   (See 
Maps  No.  1&2) .   This  area  includes  627,  of  Nevada  Department  of 
Fish  and  Game  management  unit  No.  24. 

This  area  is  recognized  as  a  fairly  intact  deer  herd  unit  with 
occasional  significant  winter  influx  of  deer  inhabiting  Dixie 
National  Forest  in  western  Utah.  Good  mule  deer  summer  habitat 
is  lacking.   Deer  inhabit  most  of  the  area  yearlong  with  only 
local  seasonal  movements.   Deer  harvest  has  declined  about  907. 
since  1959.   Condition  of  most  habitat  is  poor. 

Small  game  animals  which  include  Gambel's  quail,  mourning  dove, 
cottontail,  and  a  few  chukar  are  largely  restricted  to  lands  along 
Meadow  Valley  Wash  and  Clover  Creek.   Small  numbers  of  waterfowl 
also  rest  along  Meadow  Valley  Wash. 

Non-game  animals  found  here  include  raptors,  numerous  songbirds, 
mammals,  reptiles,  amphibians  and  fish.   Several  threatened,  en- 
dangered or  protected  species  are  also  found  in  the  area  -  prairie 
and  peregrine  falcons,  desert  tortoise  and  possibly  the  spotted  bat, 

This  habitat  management  plan  discussed  methods  of  maintaining, 
improving  and  expanding  terrestrial  wildlife  habitat  in  T-24„ 
It  is  an  update  of  the  HMP  completed  by  Lewis  Myers  in  1971 ■> 
A  separate  HMP  will  be  completed  at  a  later  date  for  aquatic  habi- 
tat in  the  area. 


Introduction 

This  Environmental  Analysis  Report  evaluates  the  impacts  of  actions  pro- 
posed in  the  Beaver  Dam  Habitat  Management  Plan. 

The  Beaver  Dam  HMP  was  revised  in  June,  1975.   It  was  approved  by  the 
Regional  Supervisor  of  the  Nevada  Department  of  Fish  and  Game  in  De- 
cember, 1975  and  by  the  District  Manager  of  the  Bureau  of  Land  Manage- 
ment in  January,  1976.   The  Beaver  Dam  Wildlife  Habitat  Area  (from  now 
on  referred  to  as  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA)  includes  over  600,000  acres  of 
national  resource  lands  in  the  Caliente  Planning  Unit  (see  Maps  No.  1  &  2) . 

The  overall  objective  of  the  HMP  was  to  document  ways  of  maintaining 
and/or  improving  the  terrestrial  habitat  for  mule  deer,  Gambel's  quail, 
mourning  dove,  cottontail  rabbits,  mountain  lions  and  non-game  species  in 
the  area.  An  HMP  on  aquatic  habitat  in  the  area  will  be  completed  at  a 
later  date. 

The  draft  environmental  analysis  report  was  also  written  in  June,  1975. 
Comments  on  the  E.A.R.  were  solicited  and  received  from  the  State  Clearing- 
house, Nevada  Department  of  Fish  and  Game  and  the  BLM  Nevada  State  Office. 
Many  of  the  comments  were  incorporated  into  this  final  E.A.R.   All  the 
comments  were  answered  individually  and  appear  in  the  appendix. 

The  final  E.A.R.  also  differs  from  the  draft  in  that  the  proposal  to 
obtain  private  lands  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA  was  modified.   The  final 
proposed  action  recommends  that  cooperative  agreements  or  easements  be 
established  with  the  private  landowners,  if  necessary,  to  protect  wild- 
life habitat. 

None  of  the  actions  that  affect  livestock  grazing  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA 
(chaining,  prescribed  burning,  seeding)  should  be  implemented  until  a 
grazing  environmental  impact  statement  for  the  Caliente  Planning  Unit 
(scheduled  for  FY  1978)  has  been  prepared. 


Meridith,  1976 


Map  No.    1 

B.L.M.  ADMINISTRATION 


5IWHA-T24 
BEAVER 
DAM 


'-CU 


Si 


V 


Si 


\i 


U 


tl 


II 


u 


I.   Description  of  the  Proposed  Action  and  Alternatives 

The  actions  suggested  in  the  HMP  can  be  summarized  as  follows: 

1.    To  improve  the  availability  of  already  existing  waters  to 
wildlife  by  developing  springs  and  modifying  livestock 
troughs  to  accommodate  wildlife.   The  following  projects 
have  highest  priority  for  completion: 

Garden  Spring 

Spring  source  needs  fence  protection.   Install  bird  ladder 
in  trough . 

East  Setting  Spring 

Fence  spring  source.   Install  spring  box,  pipeline,  trough  and 
bird  ladder. 

Quaking  Aspen  Spring 

Fence  spring  source  providing  water  for  wildlife  at  the 
source  while  piping  water  \   mile  north  to  campers. 

Topah  Spring 

Two  water  sources  about  600'  apart.   Repair  old  fences.   Install 
new  spring  boxes.   Pipe  upper  spring  to  lower  spring  box. 
Install  new  400-500  gallon  trough  with  expanded  metal  bird  ramp. 

Unnamed  Spring 

Fence  spring  source.   Install  new  spring  box.   Pipe  water  100 
feet  or  less  and  install  400-500  gallon  trough  with  expanded 
metal  bird  ramp. 

Bunker  Spring 

Install  spring  box.   Pipe  water  25  feet  to  400-500  gallon 
trough  with  bird  ramp. 

Sheep  Spring 

Fence  source.   Install  spring  box,  pipe  and  400-500  gallon 
trough  with  bird  ramp. 

Ella  Spring 

Remove  old  mustang  trap  to  permit  better  use  by  deer. 


Meridith,  1976 


<) 


*l 


M 


Lime  Mountain  Well 


Clean  out  trough.   Add  bird  ramps. 

Pine  Canyon  Stock  Tank 

Circular  (50'  diameter)  steel  trough  need  bird  ramps, 
four  expanded  metal  ramps  4-5'  wide  and  6'  long. 


Install 


2.   To  make  more  permanent  water  available  to  wildlife  by  con- 
structing water  catchment  devices  in  the  Ella  Mountain, 
Sawmill  Range  and  Enterprise  Allotment  areas.   The  following 
are  the  suggested  catchment  locations  and  priorities  for 
construction  (see  Map  #3): 


Location 


T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
T. 
To 
T. 


3 
3 
3 
4 
4 
4 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
5 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 


S. 
S. 

s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 
s. 


R. 
R. 
R. 
R. 
R. 
R. 
R. 
R. 
R. 
R. 
R. 
R. 
R. 
Ro 
R. 
R. 
R. 
Ro 
R. 
R. 


71 
70 
70 
71 
71 
70 
70 
70 
70 
69 
67 
67 
71 
70 
70 
69 
69 
68 
68 
67 


SUk  Sec. 
NE%  Sec. 
NE^;  Sec. 
Sec.  17 
SW^  Sec. 
SE%  Sec. 
SE%  Sec. 
Sec.  34 
SW%  Sec. 
NE^  Sec. 
SE%  Sec. 
SW%  Sec. 
SW%  Sec. 
SE%  Sec. 
SW^NW%  Se 
NW%  Sec. 
NW%  Sec. 
NE%  Sec. 
NW%  Sec. 
SW%  Sec. 


29 

36 
27 

19 
23 
26 

13 

34 

20 

28 

6 

12 

c.  15 

19 

20 

9 

6 

2 


Priority 

11 
12 
13 

4 

5 

6 

1 

2 

9 
10 
19 
20 

3 

8 

7 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 


3.   To  employ  habitat  treatment  methods  (chaining  or  prescribed 

burning),  on  about  26,000  acres  to  a)  increase  the  composition 
of  palatable  forbs  from  the  present  trace  to  5-10%,   b)  increase 
composition  of  grasses,  c)  increase  bitterbrush/clif frose 
composition,  reproduction  and  availability. 

The  following  (also  shown  on  Map  #3)  are  the  areas  suggested 
for  chaining: 

Ella  Spring  (7,700  acres) 

Severely  degraded,  potential  deer  summer'  habitat. 


Meridith,  1976 


I  < 


I 


' 


V 


1 1 


( 


Oak  Wells  (9,200  acres) 

Severely  degraded,  in  potential  deer  summer  habitat. 

Bunker  Pass  (4,000  acres) 

Badly  degraded  critical  deer,  summer  habitat,  but  with  treat- 
ment good  release  of  bitterbrush  and  serviceberry  can  be 
attained. 

Marble  Reservoir  (2,000  acres) 

Seedings  of  extremely  poor  composition,  in  potential  deer 
summer  habitat. 

Sheep  Spring  (2,300  acres) 

Seedings  of  very  poor  composition,  potential  deer  summer  habitat. 

Mahogany  Knoll  (700  acres) 

Seeding  of  extremely  poor  composition,  potential  deer  summer 
habitat. 

Suitable  portions  of  these  areas  would  be  chained,  then  reseeded. 
Drilling  will  be  used  where  possible.   Hand  planting  and/or 
boradcasting  will  be  used  on  areas  where  drilling  is  impractical. 
The  following  are  suggested  rates  of  seeding: 

-  Pounds  Per  Acre  - 


Species 


North  Exposures  &  Shady  Areas 
Broadcast      Drilled 


Sunny  Exposures 
(south,  west,  east) 
Broadcast      Drilled 


ses: 

Smooth  Brome  4 

Russian  Wildrye  1 

Bluestem  Wheatgrass  % 

s: 

"Alfalfa  2 

Chickpea  Milkvetch  0 

Utah  Sweetvetch  0 

Arrowleaf  Balsamroot  1 

Small  Burnet  1 

js: 

Curl leaf  Mtn.  Mahogany  0 

Birchleaf  Mtn.  Mahogany  1 

Fourwing  Saltbush  1 

Antelope  Bitterbrush  1 

Woods  Rose  1 


2 
1 

\ 

1 

0 

0 

\ 


h 

1 

2 

h 


1 
1 


h 


h 


Meridith,  1976 


/ 1 


i  I 


I  I 


1 1 


i  \ 


I  I 


I  I 


At  least  10-15  acres  of  each  100  acres  treated  would  remain 
undisturbed.   Such  irregular  shaped  chainings  would  increase 
aesthetic  appeal,  edge  effect  and  value  of  the  project  to  wild- 
life. Also  debris  (downed  trees)  would  be  left  in  place  to 
reduce  erosion. 

In  addition  to  the  above-mentioned  project,  small  acreages 
(each  15-50  acres  in  size)  of  the  south  slope  of  the  Sawmill 
Range  are  to  be  controlled  burned  (see  Map  #3  for  area 
involved) . 

This  area  is  too  steep  to  chain.   The  prescribed  burning  of 
this  predominantly  manzanita  and  oak  covered  area  followed 
by  seeding  (with  same  plants  described  under  chaining)  is 
supposed  to  increase  composition  of  palatable  forage  and  improve 
the  edge  effect. 

The  public  will  be  informed  during  the  specific  planning  and 
implementation  of  these  habitat  rehabilitation  projects  through 
news  releases,  newspaper  feature  articles,  etc. 

4.   To  assist  the  range  activity  in  the  development  of  Allotment 

Management  Plans  or  other  means  of  grazing  management  on  areas 
containing  crucial  wildlife  habitat  by  providing  basic  data 
on  the  habitat  requirements  of  wildlife.  Allotments  pre- 
sently identified  as  containing  crucial  wildlife  habitat  and 
which  are  in  need  of  AMPs  include:   Enterprise,  Clover  Creek, 
Oak  Wells,  Little  Mountain,  Pennsylvania,  Sheep  Flat,  Cotton- 
wood, and  Mustang  Flat  Allotments. 

5«   To  establish  cooperative  agreements  and/or  easements  with 

owners  of  the  following  private  lands  when  and  if  this  becomes 
necessary  to  assure  hunter  access  to  national  resource  lands 
or  to  provide  vital  maintenance  or  development  of  wildlife 
habitat: 

Rabbit  Spring  -  T.  2  S. ,  R.  69  E. ,  SecD  34. 
Oak  Wells  -  T.  3  S.,  R.  69  E.,  Sec.  35. 
Miller  Spring  -  T0  3  S.,  R0  69  E.,  Sec.  24. 
Along  Meadow  Valley  Wash  - 

T.  7  S.,  R.  67  E.,  Sees.  7,  20,  21,  26,  27,  28,  34,  35. 

T.  8  S.,  R.  67  E0,  Sees.  27,  34. 

T.  6  S.,  R.  66  E.,  Sec. 
Along  Clover  Creek  - 

T.  4  S.,  R.  68  E.,  Sees.  7,  21,  27,  28. 

T.  5  S.,  R.  69  E.,  Sees.  2,  8,  11,  13,  14,  15,  16, 
17,  22,  24,  25,  30,  31,  32,  37. 

6.   To  initiate  studies  that  will  identify  habitat  condition 

and  trend  of  crucial  areas  for  endangered  and  other  non-game 


Meridith,  1976 


species,  areas  of  heavy  competition  among  cattle,  horses  and 
wildlife  and  to  gather  the  information  which  will  aid  in  the 
management  of  the  area. 

7.   To  cooperate  with  wild  horse  and  burro  activity  on  a  horse 
and  burro  management  plan  for  the  area. 

The  implementation  schedule  for  these  projects  is  included. 
It  covers  a  span  of  six  years. 

Each  of  the  suggested  actions  is  composed  of  a  series  of  stages 
and  discrete  actions.   For  instance,  habitat  rehabilitation  would 
involve  1)  selection  of  the  site,  2)  the  actual  chaining  or 
burning,  3)  reseeding,  and  4)  posting  or  fencing  the  area, 
if  necessary.   In  turn,  selection  of  the  site  involves  on-the- 
ground  selection,  pellet  counts,  soil  sampling,  etc. 

Alternatives  to  the  present  proposed  action  are:   1)  modification 
of  the  implementation  schedule  and  2)  no  action. 


Meridith,  1976 


1 


-) 


■        I         X         O        N        A 


> 

H 

o 

3" 

cr  rt 

fD 

ro   (d 

01 

cu 

fD 

rt    00 

fD     fD 

Hi 

3-  01 

H- 

CD 

no 

cr  en 

c 

rt-    3" 

n 

M  o 

fD 

H-   5 

01 

n    3 

CO 

D. 

n    rt 

O 

(0     fD 

3.  T3 

3 

rt 

O 

Co     ID 

rt 

3    Co 

a.  ra 

rt- 

3 

3 

B    n 

o 

O 

M 

3    rt 

c 

fD     3- 

a 

V!     fD 

fD 

CO     01 

o 

"o   cr 

o 

fD     01 

01 

3     O 

rt 

rt    M 

01 

C 

O    rt 

0 

3    fD 

i-h 

rt    0 

3 

3"    Cu 

P> 

fD     X 

3 

0)     H- 

fD     3 

rt 

C 

o 

•o   g 

3 

H 

rt 

O    3 

3 

._..   c 

01 

fD     S 

n    o- 

1 

rt    fD 

01     l-t 

o 

€    O 


H 

CO 

O 

o 

of 

rt 

o 

fD 

n 

3 

01 

•n 

S 

C 

C 

rt 

rt 

n 

3" 

Co 

3" 

Co 

rt 

rt 

r> 

H 

O 

ft- 

O 

3 

w 

O 

01 

n 

c 

H* 

01 

a. 

rt 
fD 

cr 

fD 

H- 

01 

3 

fD 

< 

a. 

o 

H 

o 

< 

3 

M 

n 

01 

rt 

rt 

C 

CO 

(u 

3 

h-1 

a. 

pi 

3 

rt 

C 

Ci 

s 

o 

o 


Q  oo 

E§ 

3    °° 

rt 

fD 

3 
Co 
3 
r> 

fD 

1 

Cu 
rt 
fD 

a 

(D 
< 

m 

M 
O 

■o 

s 

ID 

3 
rt 
01 

a 

fD 
< 

fD 
H 
O 

■a 
3 
fD 

3 
rt 
0) 

1 

fl 

CO 
rt 

o 
& 

3 
ft 
3 
rt 
01 

B>    Nl 
rt    -t- 
fD     NO 

rt 

O 
fD 
< 

fD 
rt" 
0 

-a 
3 
fD 
3 
rt 
01 

1 

C/l 

rt 

rt- 

3 
00 
01 

<  ° 
n 

rt 
Co 
rt 

H- 
O 

3 

63 

C 
rt 

3 

rt- 

3 
00 

^^ 

<  ° 

fD 
rt 
CU 
rt 
H- 

0 
3 

fD 

n 

3" 

§ 

3 
rt- 

n 

CU 

H 

3      a' 

rt 
o 

3 
3 
ID 
3 
rt 
CO 
rt- 

3- 
Co 
H 
~< 
CO 

H- 
01 

5-  o 

h-    rt- 

H- 

O 

> 
i-h 
Ml 
Co 

M- 

rt 

0) 

<~N        1- 

PI    •£> 

<    u. 

CO     vC 

C 

CO 

rt 

H- 

0 

3 

CU 

3 
Q. 

?5 
fD 

< 

01 

rt- 
O 

3 

3-    o 
H- 

rt 

Co 

rt 

H 

rt 
(D 
Co 

rt 
3 
fD 
3 
rt 

CO 

3 

a. 

-a 
f— • 

Co 

3 
3 
rt* 

3 
00 

t/1    »— 
rt    OJ 
C     O 

a 

rt* 

fD 
01 

Co 

3 

a. 
» 

fD 
01 

(D 
CO 
rt 

n 

3- 

^v    NJ 

l-H    O 
3     N3 
<     U> 

fD 
3 
rt 
O 
rt 
>< 

Co 

3 

a. 

3* 

CO 

01 

rt> 
01 

C 
0 

rt 

7T 

<_ 
0 
3" 

o 
o 

Q. 

fD 

CO 

c 

3- 

B) 

n 

rt 

< 

ri 

< 

Kl 
00 
Ol 

1 

c 

— 
— 
rtl 
It 

H 

Ln 

* 

O   O 
O    O 
O    01 

-  rt 

01 

n 

c 

M 
►1 
II 

9 
ri 

►< 
ft 

go 

N> 

1 

1 

' 

1— 1 

1 

rt- 

1 

c 

3 
H- 
rt 
01 

H 

- 

rt- 

BE 
2 

to 
O 
* 

IO 

•*- 

O 

oo 

Id 

1? 

°    01 

— 

a 

•- 

N> 

-> 

IO 

1 

Si 

- 

H 

rt- 

- 

c 

3 

H- 
rt 
0) 

5 
rtj 

a 

-1 

l_n 

to 

rt- 

IO 

Ln 

Ui 

Ul 

NJ 

Ul 

■x 

SE 

I-1 

io 

o 
* 

ro 

UJ 

o> 

00 

1 

Id 

Ul 

CO 

1? 

°    01 

"a 
rt 
O 
DC 
-i 
- 
5 

■< 

n 

IB 

rt 

+ 

O 

*> 

No 

1 

rt   to 

fD     O 
CO     O 

1 

t— ' 

1— ■ 

c 

3 
rt- 
rt 
01 

h* 

N) 

M 

IO 

NJ 

i_n 

NJ 

2 
2 

H" 
\_n 

to 
O 
* 

to 

* 

ON 

o 

1 

LJ 

UJ 

1? 

°   01 

£" 

T3 
rt 
0 
30 

rt 

-CO 

3 

Mj 

fD 
Co 
rt 

+ 

to 

I-- 

£- 

N) 

1 

Co     J>- 
n  - 
rt    o 
fD     O 
01    o 

1 

H 

to 

3 
rt- 
rt 
01 

N> 

NO 

M 

H 

NO 

r-o 

l_n 

r-o 

2 

N> 

ol- 

N> 

o 
* 

IO 

* 

* 

00 
O 
* 

' 

Ul 

Ln 

UJ 

°   01 

13 
rt 

0 
0Q 

ii 

io 
o 

4> 

NO 

CO     l_n 

n  » 
rt    o 
fD     O 
0)    o 

CU     M 

0  » 
rt     O 
fD     O 

01  O 

h-1 

M 

a 

3 

H- 

rt 
01 

5 

II 

rt 

+ 

N> 

IO 

1— ' 

l-> 

M 

N) 

NJ 

ai 

Ui 

M 

to 
O 
X- 

IO 
* 

1 

o 

1 

Ul 

Ul 

UJ 

h 

0   01 

a 

rt 

Co 

to 
ai 

-c- 

NO 

' 

CO     LO 

n  - 

rt    o 
fD     O 
01    o 

I—1 

c 

3 
5T 

ro 

rt 

-+ 

to 

IO 

M 

H 

N) 
Ul 

K) 

S 

s 

I 


II.    Description  of  the  Existing  Environment 
A.   Non-Living  Components 
1.   Air  and  Climate 


The  Beaver  Dam  WHA  is  located  in  the  Great  Basin  desert. 
Precipitation  (between  8  and  9  inches  per  year),  and  humidity 
(less  than  15%  during  the  summer)  are  low.   Temperatures  can 
reach  over  100  degrees  during  the  summer.  Winds  can  also 
reach  high  levels,  as  high  as  50-80  m.p.h.   Droughts  occur 
occasionally.   This  climate  precludes  farming, 
without  irrigation;  it  favors  range  vegetation  for  livestock. 

Due  to  the  lack  of  industry  and  automobile  traffic,  the 
air  quality  in  the  area  is  usually  good.   Occasionally 
high  winds  can  cause  some  dust  pollution. 


2.   Land 


Topography 

The  elevation  of  the  Tertiary  volcanic  mountains  in 
the  area  ranges  from  slightly  less  than  5,000  to 
over  7,000  feet.   Generally  the  northern  part  of  the 
WHA  is  characterized  by  large,  gently  rolling  areas 
with  many  wide  draw  floors  and  high  flat  ridges „   The 
southern  portion  (Sawmill  Range)  is  steep  and  moun- 
tainous with  deep,  narrow  draws.   The  deep,  sheer- 
walled  Meadow  Valley  Wash  forms  the  western  border 
of  the  Habitat  Area. 


b.    Soils 


Soils  of  the  area  are  lithosols  and  browns,  shallow 
and  weakly  developed.   Parent  materials  are  igneous. 
Erosion  is  a  problem.   Soil  sites,  devoid  of  any 
understory  vegetation  are  not  uncommon,  particularly 
in  the  dense  pinyon/juniper  woodlands. 

Minerals 

There  is  presently  little  mining  in  this  WHA  (there 
are  several  small  gold  and  silver  properties) „  There 
may  be  some  mining  claims  in  the  area.  Most  of  the 
Caliente  region  has  some  potential  for  oil,  gas  and 
geothermal  resources.  Increased  exploration  can  be 
expected  as  a  result  of  the  nationwide  energy  crunch 
but  probably  little  or  no  production  will  result. 


Meridith,  1976 


• 


• 


I 


'I 


I 


I 


d.   Land  Uses 

Livestock  grazing  (over  20  allotments  exist  within  the 
Beaver  Dam  WHA) ,  mining,  recreation  (hunting,  fishing, 
camping,  picnicking,  geologic  and  botanic  sightseeing, 
wildlife  photography,  etc.),  small  commercial  ventures 
(occupying  about  13  acres  of  land  in  Panaca  and  Caliente), 
Christmas  tree  and  pinyon  nut  harvesting  are  some  of 
the  land  uses  occurring  on  national  resource,  state  and 
private  lands  in  the  area.   There  are  two  state  parks  - 
Kershaw-Ryan  and  Beaver  Dam  -  within  the  Beaver  Dam 
WHA,  which  are  enjoyed  by  many  people. 

There  are  several  impor  tant  rights-of-way  that  occur 
in  the  area.   Routes  93  and  25  are  the  major  roads. 
The  Union  Pacific  Railroad  runs  along  the  western 
boundary  (from  Panaca  south  through  Elgin)  and  through 
the  center  (from  Caliente  east  through  Crestline)  of 
the  WHA, 

e0    Land  Use  Planning 

The  Unit  Resource  Analysis  and  Management  Framework 
Plan  for  the  Caliente  Planning  Unit  were  completed  in 
1972.   Decisions  from  the  MFP  that  affect  this  WHA 
are  listed  in  the  Appendix, 


The  entire  URA  and  MFP  are  presently  being  updated. 


3.   Water 


Surface  water  is  scarce  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA.  Major 
water  sources  include  Beaver  Dam  Creek,  Clover  Creek, 
Cottonwood  Creek,  Pine  Creek  and  the  largest,  Meadow 
Valley  Wash.  Meadow  Valley  Wash's  average  flow  is  11.3 
cubic  feet/second  or  about  8,200  acre-feet/year.   In 
addition,  Matthews  Canyon  and  Pine  Canyon  washes  have 
flows  during  times  of  heavy  rainfall  or  rapid  snowmelt. 
Two  water  catchments  were  constructed  by  BLM  in  this  WHA 
in  1975.   These  sources  will  benefit  mule  deer  and  small 
animals . 

But  most  cf  the  water  available  to  livestock,  wildlife  and 
people  comes  from  underground  sources „   Table  1  lists  the 
major  springs  found  in  the  WHA.   Ground  water  recharge  for 
these  springs  is  derived  mostly  from  precipitation  within 
the  drainage  area.   A  lot  of  ground  water  in  the  area  is 
discharged  through  evapotranspiration  (phreatophytes  include 
greasewood,  rabbitbrush,  meadow  grass  and  salt  bush,  cotton- 
wood,  willow  and  saltcedar)  and  pumping  for  irrigation. 

Meridith,  1976 


CO 


■  > 

■  1 


>    vO 


i  ! 

H 

H 

H 

h 

H 

H 

M 

h 

J 

o 

• 

• 

• 

• 

■• 

• 

• 

• 

» 

•; 

o> 

-   CT\ 

~-j 

2 

* 

-i 

z 

r  -j 

--j 

~ 

1 

z  oo 

00 

:) 

CO 

SO 

01 

01 

to 

to 

-) 

u) 

CO 

i 

* 

ft 

* 

ft 

• 

• 

* 

• 

* 

m 

" 

s* 

■ 

■ 

w 

V 

v 

•• 

7* 

pa 

pa 

JV» 

!  ■> 

,"i 

PO 

pa 

;  j 

i 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

J 

»J 

■^j 

<j> 

rr> 

•*J 

•»l 

O 

•~j 

-j 

;> 

O 

^  »-» 

^.i 

Z 

^ 

vo» 

z 

Z   O 

i— ■ 

z 

=  o 

k' 

3 

M 

M 

to 

pi 

M 

M 

"  fi 

W 

M 

IQ 

• 

« 

■ 

• 

• 

• 

• 

« 

It 

I  '   : --•    fO   k-< 
O   •>>•   O   W   N> 


>■  '    CO 


to 

vji  ^)  c 


t-o  .-•)  o 


o 


er»  vo  N> 


3     O 


o  *i 

c, 

M 

J3. 

« 

rjj 

r>  i  i 

o 

I  \  .O 

Pi 

'  1 

pa 

^  » 

O 

. 

' 

t-1 

•-■' 

,.j  |  ^ 

P3 

c: 

c 

p* 

P- 

-    3 

'» 

: 

.j 

■ 

r: 

?■> 

o 

O    to 

H« 

p-  3 

o 

3 

o. 

o. 

Ou 

j-  .) 

n 

^J    P 

f  .- 

.0 

rr 

;i 

H 

,:    rl 

K- 

:j 

.1 

f-h  re 

7? 

jc 

a 

a. 

.%i 

'  3 

VI     ^ 

rr 

w 

o* 

re 

n 

d 

-ft 

rr 

(j 

j 

vj 

Ki 

ro 

en 

PJ 

h-J 

oi  3 

(j 

3'   »-•• 

X 

re 

i  j 

■•■)<■> 

re 

pj 

, 

o 

o 

»-t 

•o 

re 

re 

'3    re 

<; 

3 

CO 

3 

CT 

»--j 

3 

XI 

j2j 

■l 

pa  pa 

IB 

i1 

i-t   a. 

H« 

C/j  0  5 

re 

CO 

t3 

H* 

M     O 

>] 

rr 

f  f 

. 

re    3 

3 

en 

P- 

►tJ 

M 

p. 

3 

TJ 

nr 

•a 

to 

H 

CJ 

CO 

1  ■■  pi 

n 

3 

3 

-J 

ca  ^ 

«.<; 

TJ 

3 

B> 

Oi 

3    M 

o 

.{      > 

rr 

^ 

•o 

K- 

r.* 

■\J 

n    3 

3 

• 

• 

1 

•       O 

O 

K 

OQ 

to 

03 

CQ    *X3 

o 

>-»•    CJ 

p* 

y- 

M 

3 

1 

CQ   "3 

rr 

^"> 

9 

3 

P- 

w 

en 

u 

JO 

3 

'•j 

K"-0) 

?3 

>-•- 

J 

'i 

<t 

3 

m- 

") 

OQ    re 

oq 

0Q 

3 

re 

3 

-;, 

CO 

re 

1 

1 

,  ' 

Co 

$tf  cr< 

CO 

.W 

3 

.1 

3 

oq 

03 

M 

- 

TJ 

(-• 

r< 

; 

> 

1 

rt 

re 

■X3 

re 

09 

►*> 

r/i 

ft 

M 

M 

»-• 

h1- 

^ 

o 

on 

M 

en 

3 

CO  %. 

h-> 

r* 

:j 

fj 

re 

P* 

• 

0Q 

•u 

1 

3 

I 

> 

> 

*' 

n 

3 

»1 

H- 

OQ 

•- 

CR> 

< 

OQ 

»-•• 

3 

H 

o 

rj 

00 

r- 

P> 

P- 

OQ 

> 

m 

J 

3 
J*.' 

>1 

-:;] 

. 

pa 

?3 

M 

v> 

O 

-. 

G   a. 

a. 

CL 

c 

SI 

a 

5S   Cu 

c 

Ou   O. 

a. 

c 

cj 

a 

cn 

o. 

O-   Ou 

c: 

c: 

sO 

M 

3    re 

re 

re 

3 

• 

re 

•     re 

3 

(D    re 

re 

3 

3 

3 

3 

re 

O      .) 

3^ 

3 

c 

CO 

?r  re 

<T> 

re 

?r 

> 

re 

>  re 

7? 

re    re 

re 

7? 

X 

7? 

7T 

re 

re    re 

7<* 

7? 

CJ 

3    n 

H 

n 

3 

• 

1 

•     n 

3 

*\    >-i 

»-t 

3 

3 

3 

3 

M 

n   •-{ 

3 

3 

►*" 

CO 

o  » 

m 

%• 

o 

V 

O 

■»    ■» 

*j 

O 

O 

O 

O 

«• 

»«    •♦ 

O 

O 

K-* 

XJ 

*: 

«: 

$: 

[1 

£ 

£ 

§ 

j: 

£ 

H 

re 

3     O, 

at 

en 

3 

C3 

3 

en    cn 

en 

3 

3 

cn 

01    J5 

3 

3 

o 

Q 

Q 

O 

O 

O    O 

O 

O 

o   c 

O- 

p- 

■ 

< 

3 

3 

3 

3     3 

3 

3 

3    Pi 

o 

13 

re 

CO 

OQ 

0Q 

CO    0Q 

0Q 

0Q 

0Q     H« 

<: 

CO 

■ 

or 

P- 

a*  o- 

cr 

>*• 

a*  >-. 

re 

en 

1 

•1 

K 

»i    1 

1 

'-t 

>■{ 

O 

Ci. 

Cu 

cu 

a.  ex. 

a. 

CL. 

O-    CO 

3 

a 

CO 

ca 

cn    o) 

CO 

w 

cn    o 

CM 

3 

O* 

0Q 

p. 

cr* 

M 

►*■ 

0u 

i-i 

OJ 

O- 

ftj 

CO 

f? 

e    . 

*<  *<  a.  3 
re  re  rt-  O" 
ca    cn  vj 


1    re 


a  :  v:  vj  v«; 

3  re  re  re 

X  cn  cn  cn 
3 


c  c:  a       a 

3     3    3  3 

3    3    3  3 


ms  k:  z       c:  c: 

re    o    o         3  3 

en  pc  ?r 

3  3 


a 

c 

m 

3 

(0 

?r 

o. 

3 

CA 

a 

re 

<: 

c 


(1, 


z  f> 

CO 


w 


»/1 
en 


:.  > 


* 

Ul 
CO 


*> 


-»l 

cr> 

cr» 

o 

™ 

r  ^-i 

oo 

C'J 

W 

PI 

■    i 

H 

H 

H 

H 

►  1 

H 

o 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

■>] 

v> 

- 

:  vji 

J»- 

s-i 

5 

o» 

Cr> 

.:  i  ^ 

3 

CO 

en 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

•;> 

• 

• 

« 

* 

• 

• 

r 

•4 

•* 

■ 

■ 

■ 

■ 

i 

PJ 

TV 

73 

?a 

& 

^ 

i 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

•  i 

CT» 

-  J 

-4 

cr» 

cr> 

<T* 

• 

\o 

~ 

»=  o 

5 

►-•• 

3 

-j 

00 

■ 

• 

PI 

pi 

PJ 

n 

W 

'   J 

i 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

« 

ro 

,_.  -J 

*• 

C/«  <• 

-O 

U    M 

N> 

i  ■•)   <o 

Ul 

Ul 

<o  '      UJ 

P' 

.-  i  1  ) 

Ul    M 

CD 

•.-'•    W 

l-J 

Ul 

^    COU) 

i--» 

• 

<>>  i— •  r-* 

03 

ivj  ro 

■/> 

w 

c :  m 

O 

t . 

M 

'J     h  « 

h 

SB 

O 

::)     I-1 

Co 

••' 

5: 

Ci     Pi 

cx 

fj 

:j 

a 

ro 

p« 

fl>     CO 

P- 

x: 

p.  TJ 

to 

CD 

»i 

n 

:'. 

M 

ptJ  p. 

ro 

ii) 

P1 

ro    3 

TJ 

»-• 

i  1   09 

1 

l-» 

• 

CO 

o 

K 

t-> 

co 

o 

n 

< 

cr 

ro 

i— • 

»-i 

<U 

o 

>J 

^t 

.n 

ro 

CO 

<D 

• 

^ 

w 

TO 

CO 

■X) 
M 
P> 

3 
09 


o 

V 

■/a  r^  w 

pi 

>TJ 

o  :< 

>-' 

.T>     O     .'> 

O 

P- 

Co    c: 

o 

'i 

;i.  ►-•  rj 

O 

3 

»•<    a. 

< 

<r 

r-'   o 

w' 

n 

r.) 

n 

>— • 

pd  i^  m 

O     CO 

;t 

A 

O     3     Co 

ro 

TJ 

/    3  -O 

1           : 

(»   09   ^ 

tj 

B> 

o 

*cJ 

X 

<t 

H 

CO    1'- 

rt 

ro 

W  S3 

H- 

tt 

tj    :3 

ro 

co 

o  i--  « 

3 

10Q 

ro 

• 

»  »-•  »-• 

0q 

o 

h* 

?5* 

3  r-»  p* 

m 

3 

•        CO 

ro 
ro 

<W 

ad  *j 

*• 

ro   n 

}-'    CO 

;•) 

i    '* 

en 

TJ 
M 

3 
09 


CO  W 

IB  C 

fv  >-• 

TJ  O. 
A 

CT  't 

•a 

1  ?d 

)•••  iTj 

0^  • 


'1 


1 
I 

J-  ■ 


M 
CO 

o 


ex  ex 

ro  o 

a  <£, 

n  co 


Ol    CO 

o    o 

<     3 

ro  oo 
cr 
>^- 
co  M 
o  ex 
d    co 

09     - 

cr 


H 

cx 

CO 


rx 
ro 
ro 
n 


3"  CX  CX 

ro  ro  ro 

p>  ro  ro 

<  »i  n 


cx  cx  cx 

ro  o  o 

ro  <  < 

n  ro  ro 


CD  W  CO 

o  o  o 

3  3  3 

09    09  C9 

cr  cr  cr 

H-  >-"•  H- 

r{  H  r-t 

CX    CX  CX 

CO  CO  CO 


cx 

ro 

H    rr    rt) 

to    ro    n 

P>    CD    w 

3     »-• 

cr  »  cx 
o  o 
j:  co  < 

3*  ro 
o  <• 

ri 

ro    co 

o 

cr  3 

H-  09 

M   cr 

CX    H- 

co    n 
<•     a. 

CD 

TJ    «. 

H 

c   o 

CO    o 

o 

Co 

CO 


n 
o 

c 

rr 


> 


CX   5S 

ro  • 

o    ro  > 

0  n  • 
r>  «. 

P> 

CO     cx 

•     o 

< 
rt  ro 
ro  -  ' 
Co 

|_J    CO 

-      O 

3 

01  09 

3"  cr 

o     >■*• 
H    i-{ 

ro    cx 
en 
cr  - 
»■*• 

CO 


c:  co  cx 

3     O     O 
7?  3     < 

3  09    ro 

o    cr. 

H     r-- 
3    *1    O 

CX   O 

CO     o 

v        P 

CO 

cx  . 

o 

<    cx 

ro  ro 
ro 
H 


3 


CX 

ro 
X  O  rt 
3     O     ^ 

on- 
£    Co 

3    co    co 

•      O 

3 

rr  0q 

ro    cr 

£0      h- 

»-'  n 

cx 
co 


cx 
o 
< 

rt 


CO  CO 

O  O 

CO  09 

cr  cr 

K-  r'- 

n  n 

cx  cx 

co  co 


cx  cx 

ro  ro 

ro  ro 

•■i  M 


CO 

O 

O     3 

O    09 

r>    cr 


to 


»i 

•       CX 
CO 

cr  - 
►»• 

09     O 

3*  n 
o   o 

n   co 

3    co 


cx 
ro 
rt 
n 


CO  cx 

O  io 

3  ro 

09  M 

cr  » 
»■«■ 

rt  CX 

CX  O 

CO  < 

«  ro 
o 

O  M 

r^  o 

Co  3 

CO  09 

.  cr 

CX  H 

(0  D. 

ro  co 
^t 


O 

m 
co 


o 
o 

3 

(T 


3      3 

O      O 


CXSi    3 

M    ro    o 
p-   CO 
rt 
co 


3 
O 


a. 
si 


3CX  C33  C  3  33 

O    1  300  3  O  OO 

Si  7T  7? 

3  3 


as 

3 

si 

3 

cTD 

O 

ro 

O 

ro 

CO 

a 

< 

NJ 

z 

z  u> 

z. 

OJ 

co 

CO    • 

co 

CO 

CO 

• 

• 

• 

« 

** 

<• 

M 

- 

73 

M 

Jtf 

?u 

• 

• 

• 

• 

o> 

OX 

-^1 

--j 

\o 

~ 

=   vO 

~ 

o 

►-• 

pj 

pj 

■* 

pi 

PI 

CO 


ON 


H 

>  1 

• 

') 

f> 

'   ] 

co 

3 

• 

^) 

3* 

h^ 

pa 

a 

o> 

CD 

Co 

PI 

:j 

N 

(0 

-P-  4> 


W   N   H 
\jy   i>  OD 


vn  ^j 


to 
O 


W    M    H   H 


CO 


ro 

^j 

<• 

'n 

Ci 

M 

o 

00 

rt 

m 

>-*- 

o 

U> 

-J 

■P* 

ixf 

O 

O   K   W 

CO 

CO 

PI 

e:  f 

<  J 

s: 

fi 

O 

PJ    »-*•  c 

3" 

3* 

3 

"U     o 

P 

»-■• 

cr 

£ 

7T"   >-«   O 

re 

re 

rr 

-o    c 

?f 

h-1 

cr 

►-•   7? 

re 

IB 

re 

re    o 

►-■ 

H- 

CO 

s:  re    O* 

x> 

'O 

H 

H     rl 

Cfl 

o 

rt 

na 

i0    »-i    O 

*C 

•o 

K 

H 

t— •          Co 

CO 

co 

►1 

>  > 

►1 

CO 

H- 

Htfl    '( 

"3 

\J 

t+> 

CI     01 

!-'• 

CO 

*d 

3 

O    "O     Ou 

M 

r* 

n 

3"  3* 

"J 

-3 

n 

09 

"*» H-    CO 

H- 

H« 

re 

0} 

rt 

I-*- 

3 

3 

CO    01 

>-*• 

3 

"O     3   X) 

0Q 

09 

?3 

TJ     *U 

3 

09 

1*             H* 

CO 

re 

a 

rt  1 

OQ 

•*X 

<  /-s  3 

C 

• 

3     3 

M 

CO   XJ    09 

"O 

OQ    0Q 

1 

rt    i-t 

'O 

►*• 

re    h- 

>-• 

< 

^  < 

re 

Co 

p> 

3 

rt 

rt 

re 

ID 

A 

3 

*~s 

**~* 

rt 

£0 

3    3 

3     3 
O     O 

§£ 
3 


3    • 

?r  > 

3    • 

o 


(0   re 
re   re 


0)     CO 

o   o 

3    3 
OQ   0Q 

o*  cr 
p.  p, 

rt    M 

cl  a. 

CO     CO 


o 
< 

re 


en 

3 

3 

O 


c-acicj 

3     3    3  3 

7?   7?  7?  7? 

3     3    3  3 

O     O     O  O 

*:  t,  c  s 

3    3    3  3 


O 
*-* 
O 
< 

re 
>-t 

O 
rt 

• 
i 

re 
ta 

< 


re 

CO 

zr 


a 
o 

p>  < 
3  re 
Ou  . 

g  co 
5   o 

t-J  3 
H-«  0Q 

to   cr 

CL    1-J 

CO    cu 

«        CO 

o 

o  o 

o  o 

o>  o 

CO  33 
•      co 

• 

0U 

re  rt 
re  re 
n  ft 


M  O 

(a  o 

h-  o 

3  o 

cr  « 
o 


rt 
ri 

0 
C 
r» 


O 
re 

re 


CL 

•     o 
< 

rt  re 

re  « 

01 

K-"    CO 

-    o 
3 

CO  OQ 

=r  cr 

O     H- 

re    a. 
cr  » 

K-  - 

H 

C3u 

CO 


CO 

o 
re 


< 


pi 
50 

?3 
to 

CO 

o 

?3 
O 
P3 
CO 


n 

o 


<3  a 

3  3 

X  7T 

3  3 


c:  ex 

3    3 

C 

c:  c  c  c: 

3    * 

O    O 

■  3 

3    3    3    3 

xv; 

7T 

*-  ?r  ?r  ?i- 

3 

3 

3    3    3    3 

3 
O 


n 

3 

re 

O 

(X 

CO 

a 

re 

< 

Table  2  shows  a  chemical  analysis  of  well  water  in  the 
Meadow  Valley  area.   Sulfate  and  dissolved  solid  con- 
centrations are  high  in  this  area  as  they  are  throughout 
most  of  the  Las  Vegas  District.   The  reasons  for  the  high 
mineral  content  of  water  in  southern  Nevada  include 
1)  high  evaporation  rates  leaving  high  concentrations  of 
salt  at  or  near  the  surface,  2)  slow  movement  of  water 
through  the  ground,  dissolving  metallic  and  non-metallic 
substances  (like  sulfides,  borate,  gypsum,  etc.)  prevalent 
in  the  soil  and,  3)  Large  amounts  of  dust  washed  into 
ground  water  supplies. 


4.   Hazards 


There  is  no  history  of  any  landslide  or  other  earth  failure 
hazards  in  the  area. 

Floods  present  the  primary  hazard  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA. 
In  1906  and  1910,  major  floods  occurred  along  Meadow  Valley 
Wash  and  Clover  Creek.   Lesser  floods  occurred  in  1907, 
1908,  1911,  1914,  1922,  and  1938.   In  1955  two  flood  control 
dams  were  built  in  Clover  Valley.   Flash  floods  can  occur 
in  other  areas  during  thunderstorms. 

In  1960,  a  study  was  prepared  jointly  by  the  Lincoln  County 
Flood  Control  District,  Meadow  Valley  Soil  Conservation 
District,  the  Department  of  Agriculture  and  Soil  Conservation 
Service  and  BLM.   The  study  recommended  the  construction  of 
numerous,  small  retainer  dams  along  tributaries.   The  Pre- 
liminary Lincoln  County  Master  Plan  (1974)  encouraged  the 
installation  of  these  projects  along  with  the  seeding  and 
planting  of  erosion-prone  areas.   The  Meadow  Valley  Wash 
remains  classified  as  a  flood  prone  area  by  the  U.  S. 
Geological  Survey. 


B.   Living  Components 
1.    Vegetation 


Most  of  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA  supports  a  dense  pinyon/ juniper 
woodland  with  sagebrush  and  cliffrose  understories.  For  a 
more  detailed  description  of  vegetation  in  the  area,  refer 
to  the  Beaver  Dam  Intensive  Inventory. 


2.    Wildlife 


The  major  species  in  the  area  are  the  mule  deer,  Gambel's 
quail,  mourning  dove,  cottontail  rabbit,  desert  tortoise, 
mountain  lion  and  raptors.   For  a  thorough  discussion  of 
wildlife,  known  habits  and  habitat  requirements,  refer  to 
both  the  Beaver  Dam  Intensive  Inventory  and  HMP. 


Meridith,  1976 


'&**.&:#■  >■**  <*£<**{&  •'*•"-■ 


7/\6L£    2l 


TiVU  ll.--Q>aalcal  analraet.   la  Hr»  par  ainiaa.  af  watar   frwa  tKe  H..aow  Vallay  araa 
(rial,   lulfiu   ky    the  0.1.    C.eleglcel   larva*) 


Owner    .e*7er 


I pacific 
Cal-  Meaae-       Hear-  fatal       ceaaeet* 

tote  clam,  alias         keaate     Cklerlaa     Kara-  aaee 

cell.ctee  (Ca)  (M«)  (BO.)  (CI)  aaaa        l>l.<^H 

»  »'o 


U-^4' 


laa.      I,   T.    J   I.,    t.    4t  I.        Varenlp  Vaek   tyring  10-25-41 

•aa.      T.  T.    1  I..   1.    70  I.        Iprlat  Valla;  Creek  10-23-13 


Iprlni  Valley 
U  3.1  H  U  44  111 

Jl  10  )U  X  141  373 


T.I        tvrface   weter   eeaele. 

7.0        turfece  watar   eenple   t.k.e   at    kr14ge   avar 


laa.    II.  T.  II..   1.    at  I.       lartai  teller  Craak 

in/tt-1041  real   111..   ».ll 

fac.    U.   T.  1  I.,   1.   it  I.        lariat  "Ilia*  Craak 

laa.    II,   T.  1  I.,   I.    »t  I.        lyrlng   Valley   Craak 

l»/tt-llal  Jeaee   loaa  wall 

laa.    II.   T.  1  I..   ».    M   I.        X..dow  Valla;  Vaak 

11/41    Ul  Delaue   Iroth.re    •    Bortk   vail      10-14-43 


Tveaty-oae  alia  heldlae. 
cotr.l    vail 


11/44-13.1  C.   lenoatk  Lee   -    South   vail         12-    »-4J 

11/17-1441  noy   Kurt    -    Ho.    1  vail  10-17-IJ 

lac.    4,   T.    I  I.,   I.    M  I.  faaeee   Iprlat  4-13-43 


tail,  v.llar 


10-15-41 

15 

17 

411 

13 

141 

M7 

10    25- 4 J 

«••«  Valla* 

411 

10-14-41 

71 

IS 

Ml 

41 

Ul 

711 

10-15-41 

71 

t.l 

Ott  Valla, 

It* 

41 

HI 

471 

10-17-i] 

J] 

4.7 

U7 

41 

ID 

Mt 

11/41- 5V1 
U/M-7.1 

21/41-143 


U/41-vc) 

2S/44-4M 
II/4I-1M1 
ll/ll-ltal 
31/17- Ul 
31/47-llcl 

41/44- 14*1 

41/44-2541 

41/47-1141 

71/47-llcl 

123/43-1341 

141/44-3341 


Harry  I.   lorlackor  vail 

leeece   LDC   Owrck  vail 

I.I.C.I.    -  Oheervetloe  vail        11-    5-41 


Dclaue  Irctltara   -   lartk  vail  11-   4-41 

Dalaaia   lroth.r.   -   Soutk  vail  11-   4-41 

Doa  Veoewertk   -   *..    1  vail  10-28-45 

Doa  Vedavortk  -  Is.    1  vail  10-21-43 

Craat    Le«    -    Ho .    1   vail  12-   4-45 

Ckaeter  Oikorrov  -   far.    I  vail  11-  4-U 

Every  Conway  -  Hleelc  vail  11-    5-43 

Every  Cooavay  -  Lover  vail  11-   3-43 

Every  Cooavay   -  Dppar  vail  11-   3-43 

Jeaee   H.    Iredehav  vail  11-   3-41 

Hlldrad    lrcealovc    vail  II-    3-41 

1.   J.   KcGoralck  vail  10-10-41 


U  U  4*0  33  137 

Vatlot.oe  Vallar 
41  t.l  lit  30  Ul 


•anacl   Vail 

•Z 

41 

t.l 

214 

u 

Ul 

•1 

13 

141 

117 

307 

11 

t.l 

lit 

IS 

111 

11-   4-41 

11 

11 

1M 

It 

210 

1.030 

7.1 

11-   4-41 

13 

21 

231 

123 

230 

•  10 

7.1 

11-    1-43 

34 

31 

11* 

107 

244 

1.700 

7.4 

i-mt 

21 

U 

1.130 

212 

134 

3. 310 

-   - 

11 

11 

301 

43 

212 

1 

.020      . 

7.1 

1U 

41 

300 

274 

343 

2 

.240 

7.3 

137 

M 

442 

117 

til 

1 

,7M 

7.4 

111 

ia 

42* 

71 

330 

1 

330 

7.5 

73 

31 

32* 

33 

310 

1 

.010 

7.7 

2* 

7.3 

Lovar  MeeAov 

U3 
Vallar 

31 

tl 

410 

1.2 

70 

13 

340 

37 

234 

7t3 

7.7 

33 

11 

272 

24 

174 

312 

7.1 

34 

14 

240 

21 

174 

322 

7.7 

43 

14 

340 

43 

143 

112 

1.0 

lot 

17 

244 

»5 

341 

1 

,340 

7.» 

L32 

10 

230 

32 

431 

1 

.430 

terfece   vatar    .aaele   talee   at    gage   alia   la 
caayaa  ketweee   Iprt  eg   ana   lagla   Valla*. 


urfaca   vatar    a.aple    tehee   la   renyea 
ketw.ee   E«gl.   ana    aoee    Velloye. 


1.1        e.rfeco   vatar    eeeplo   takaa   la   ca 
ketneee   keee   eae   Dry   Valley*,. 


1.7        Bwrfece   vatar    ..nale    takaa   at    aawtk  af 

Coeter   Caayaa.      Alaa:      CarVonata    (CO,), 
10  gam. 


an   Spring,    2  rflti    north   ml   Vanaca.      4  1a. 
Illlea    (110,).    31;     lraa    (7a).    0;    Sedlua 
(He).    31;     7ai.nl—    (I),    4.1;     lulfata 
(10.).    21;    Vlvarlao   (D.    1-4;    lit  rata 
(aX),),    2.1;    were*   (I).   0.1;    tmolral 
eollaa.    271. 


Half  vlla  vaat   af  Nuct. 

Alaa:      Illlea   (110,).    13;    lvalue  (la)  *> 
foteaalua   (I).    733;    Selfete   (SO.).    307; 
riuorloa    (F).    12.    «t  rat.    ( B0   )  .    0;    kraa 
(I).    1.0;    W..ol..a   tellee.    2:240. 


Two  allaa   eoatk   af   Cell  rate. 

Tkra*  allaa   aoatk  af  Celleete. 

Bait  alia  vaat   af   Callaata. 

1.0       Thrae  all.i    aoatk  af  Ilcie. 

Hear   lox.    Veveda. 

it   Cl.od.la.      Alaa:      Illlea   (SlOa),    27; 
Soalua    (Ha)    ♦  Potaaalaa   (r)  ,    42;    Sulfate 
(SO4),    514;    lltrata    (BC-,)  ,    I.I;    Diaeolaal 
aollAa,    til. 


1.      Watar   teaparatura  ahova  la   takla    13. 


3.  Livestock 

See  Beaver  Dam  HMP. 

4.  Wild  Horses  and  Burros 

See  Beaver  Dam  Intensive  Inventory  and  HMP. 

C.    Ecological  Interrelationships 

A  complex  web  of  ecological  cycles  and  interrelationships  is 
at  work  within  the  Beaver  Dam  Wildlife  Habitat  Area. 

Solar  energy  strikes  the  earth;  some  is  reflected  back  into  the 
atmosphere,  some  is  absorbed  by  the  soil  and  plants.   Through 
photosynthesis,  the  energy  is  used  to  produce  sugars,  proteins 
and  carbohydrates.   Some  plants  die  and  their  nutrients  are  re- 
cycled into  the  soil.   Others  are  consumed  by  the  herbivores 
(plant-eating  animals)  present  in  the  area.   Some  of  the  major 
herbivores  include  mule  deer,  quail,  chukar,  horses,  cotton- 
tails, jackrabbits,  doves,  reptiles  and  rodents.   In  turn,  these 
animals  either  die  of  natural  causes  or  are  eaten  by  predators 
like  coyotes,  raptors,  bobcats,  mountain  lions  and  foxes. 
Scavengers  in  the  form  of  ravens,  insects  and  others  clean  up 
carrion.   Those  dead  animals  which  aren't  consumed,  decay  and 
are  recycled  into  the  soil. 

Soil  micro-organisms  are  responsible  for  organic  matter  de- 
composition whereby  plant  and  animal  residues  are  broken  down 
and  nutrients  are  released  for  assimilation.   During  the  decaying 
process  by  which  humus  is  formed,  soil  aggregate  stability 
is  enhanced  and  CO2  is  given  off  which  ultimately  escapes  to  the 
atmosphere,  where  it  may  again  be  used  by  plants. 

In  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA>  pinyon  and  juniper  trees  are  a  dominant 
form  of  vegetation.   They  grow  rapidly  in  the  absence  of  suc- 
cession -  controlling  wildfires  and  in  areas  where  other,  more 
palatable  vegetation  is  overgrazed  by  livestock  or  wild  horses 
and  burros.   Pinyon  and  juniper  trees  tend  to  crowd  out  other  forms 
of  vegetation:   allelopathic  substances,  litter  and  shade  retard 
growth  of  understory  plants.   Only  a  few  wildlife  species  like 
pinyon  mice  and  pinyon  and  scrub  jays  are  adapted  to  life  in 
these  dense  woodlands,  using  the  trees  as  sources  of  both  food 
and  cover. 

The  water  cycle  is,  of  course,  another  important  aspect  of 
ecological  interrelationships  in  this  area.   Precipitation  falls 
in  the  form  of  snow  or  rain.  A  very  small  amount  infiltrates 
the  soil.  Most  is  either  evaporated  (as  a  result  of  high  summer 
temperatures,  low  humidity  and  high  winds)  or  runs  off  down  gullies, 
carrying  off  the  soil  and  loose  pebbles.   The  lack  of  understory 
vegetation  beneath  dense  pinyon/juniper  stands  makes  many 
areas  prone  to  erosion.  Water  that  infiltrates  the  soil  is 

Meridith,  1976 


thirstily  absorbed  by  the  roots  of  plants  and,  that  which  is 
not  used  in  photosynthesis,  is  transpired  into  the  atmosphere „ 

Most  of  the  animals  and  plants  in  desert  areas  like  this  one 
have  adaptations  which  allow  them  to  survive  with  little  water. 
Plants  have  extensive  root  systems  to  take  advantage  of  the 
small  amounts  of  water  which  infiltrate  the  soil  and  leaves 
with  small  surface  area  to  cut  down  transpiration.  Animals  have 
physiological  (special  metabolic,  excretory  and  respiratory 
systems)  and/or  behavioral  (nocturnal  habits,  estivation,  etc.) 
adaptations. 

Thus,  the  combination  of  scarce  surface  water  supplies  and 
pinyon/juniper  encroachment  are  two  primary  influences  on 
ecological  interrelationships  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA.   These 
two  factors  are  presently  limiting  the  diversity  of  vegetation 
and  wildlife  and  numbers  of  livestock  and  horses  that  can  exist 
within  the  donfines  of  this  ecosystem. 

Though  few  people  live  within  the  boundaries  of  the  WHA,  man 
has  also  had  ai  important  effect  on  the  ecology.  He  acts  as  a 
predator  (hunting  harvests,  road  kills,  etc.).  He  has  altered 
the  ecology  by  putting  out  natural  fires  and  allowing  pinyon- 
juniper  woodlands. to  expand  and  get  denser.  His  livestock  has 
heavily  grazed  some  areas,  eliminating  palatable  forage  species. 
In  some  areas  he's  replaced  native  vegetation  with  introduced 
crested  wheatgrass.  He's  built  roads,  corrals  and  in  other  ways, 
changed  the  landscape  character  of  the  area. 

D.   Human  Values 

1.  Landscape  Character 

The  mountains  in  this  WHA  are  aesthetically  appealing.   They 
are  cool  and  moist  compared  to  the  parched  desert  lowlands 
that  cover  much  of  the  Las  Vegas  District.  A  person  can 
retreat  to  many  isolated,  quiet  and  refreshing  spots  to 
relax,  view  desert  wildf lowers  or  birdwatch.  Areas  like 
Quaking  Aspen  Spring  and  Beaver  Dam  Creek  are  particularly 
appealing  to  recreationists . 

2.  Socio-Cultural  Interests 

a.   Archaeology 

The  area  encompassed  by  the  Beaver  Dam  Wildlife  Habitat 
has  been  utilized  by  man  for  at  least  the  last  7,000 
years.   Initial  occupation  was  by  carriers  of  a  Desert 


Meridith,  1976 


11 


Archaic  culture.   These  hunter-gatherers  were  highly 
mobile  and  moved  in  relation  to  resource  availability. 
This  same  area  was  later  occupied  by  Puebloan  groups 
ca.  A.D.  1000.   Sometime  after  1000  A.D.  the  area  was 
occupied  by  the  Southern  Numic- speaking  Southern 
Paiute.  As  a  result  of  this  long-term  and  heter- 
ogeneous occupation  of  the  area,  an  abundant  archae- 
ological record  remains.   Site  types  include  deep,  well- 
stratified  caves,  rockshelters  with  varying  degrees 
of  deposition,  open  air  sites,  lithic  scatters  and 
numerous  petroglyph  sites. 

At  present,  only  a  small  portion  of  the  land  within 
the  wildlife  habitat  has  been  intensively  surveyed  for 
cultural  resources,  yet  this  small  sample  indicates 
the  potential  for  numerous  cultural  resource  loci  on 
the  unsurveyed  portions. 

b.  Historical  Values 

Lincoln  County  was  first  visited  by  white  people  in 
the  1820' s;  Jedediah  Smith  was  one  of  the   first 
explorers o 

In  the  1860's,  the  discovery  of  mineral  values  en- 
couraged the  immigration  of  whites.   In  1863,  Paiute 
Indians  led  William  Hamblin,  a  Mormon  missionary,  and 
some  of  his  followers  to  Panaca. 

Lincoln  County  was  formed  in  1866. 

Caliente  was  first  established  in  the  1900' s  as  a 
railroad  center. 

Some  of  the  sites  which  remain  today  to  document  the 
history  of  the  area  include  the  Panaca  charcoal  kilns, 
and  an  abandoned  railroad  station  in  Caliente. 

c.  Socio-Economic  Factors 

The  two  largest  towns  in  the  area  are  Panaca  and 
Caliente,  both  located  along  the  western  border  of 
the  WHA.   In  19^70*  "the  population  of  Panaca  was  539, 
while  about  900  lived  in  Caliente.  By  1990,  these 
populations  are  expected  to  increase  to  700-770  and 
1260-1350,  respectively. 

Table  3  shows  the  types  of  industries  employing 
Lincoln  County  residents.   The  median  family  income 
in  Lincoln  County  in  1969  was  $8,864.  Almost  12% 
of  all  families  have  incomes  below  the  poverty  level. 

Meridith,  1976 
12 


CO  0 

o  r- 

c  re 

-t  i/> 

o  v> 
re 


at 

C   3 


CXI 

c  -o 

-j  re 

re  -t 

ai  n 

c  re 

3 
O    rt 


3" 
(V 

o 

re 

«/> 

C 


o 


O 

■o 

c 


o 

l/>"0  fB    rt 

rt(t  3    W 

O)    -J  -o    — < 

rt  r>  — • 

re  re  o  r> 

3  "<  o 

n>   rt  3    c 

3  re    3 

X3  O  3  rt 
— ■  -t)  rt  •< 
O 

y<.    c^  O) 

3   O  </> 
re   rt 
3    Ol 
rt  — < 


O  O 

re    rt  l»  rt 

3   a  3  a> 

-O    —  "O  — 


o  co  o 

v<  rf  *< 

3  Oi  3 

re  rt-  re 

3  re 


n 

o 

c 

3 

rt- 

rt^ 


VO 

o 
ro 


VO 

-J 

8 

vO 


o 
e 


VO 

o 

CD 

re 

3 
(V 

-J 
Ol 


-o 
o 

-a 

c 


o 

3" 
Ol 
"J 
Q> 
O 
rt 
re 
1 


o  -n     co  -n 

O  Ore  -*• 

<  </>  c      -j  Oi~3 

re  re   -»       <  3   Oi 

-J  -|    -••       -*•  Q.   3 

3  <  «/>  o  r> 

3  — •  rt  re      -j    re 

re  O     I  wi      re  • 

3  re  -l  oi 

rt  i/i   re  — •  -*• 

— <  3 

en  re  i/> 

rt  i/>  C 

re  rt  -I 

Q.  Oi  Oi 

rt  3 

re  o 
re 


3 

-i 

-o 

^C 

o 

1 

3>  O. 

-1 

c 

Oi 

o 

lO    c 

CU 

cr 

3 

3 

3 

T   V 

n. 

— ■* 

C 

l/l 

— *- 

-*•  rt- 

re 

-*• 

-h 

rt 

3 

S3 

n 

Oi 

-1 

m 

o 

C 

^^ 

c 

«-r 

o 

rt- 

rt 

c 

rt 

C 

-*• 

-t 

-*• 

re 

—J 

— *• 

O 

—A* 

3 

3 

rt 

to 

— <  en 

4*  ^ 

*»  en 

00  — < 


00       CO 

ro     — < 


Co 

vo    oo 


oo     ro 
ro     en 


en     *-j 

— »     >J 


O 
VO 


to 

ro 

-•4 

-■J 

en 

>>j 

o 

00 

-~j 

o 

00 

en 

ro 


o    o 

-P»      CO 


O      O      O      — ■ 


cn     oo     — • 


en 


cn 
o 


ro 

4k 

ro 
o 

CO 

vO 

-t» 

— 

vO 

cn 

00 

00 
CTl 

cn 

~j 

o 

VO 

VO 

cn 
cn 

00 

cn 
cn 

cn 

o    o 
cn     cn 


O 
O 


o 


o 

a 


o 

Co 


3 

■o    CO  O  —i 

— •  re  o  o 
O  o  C  rt 
v<    rt   3    0» 

reS£^ 

3 


3 

X3    CO  CO  —i 

— ■  re  rt  o 
o  n  Oi  rt 
*<    rt  rt  Oi 

3  o  re  — 

re  -j 

3 


O 

OD  rt- 
v<    Oi 

CO 

re  <-> 

o  o 

rt  C 
O  3 
-J    rt- 

v< 
Oi 

i/>  m 

3 

-o-o 

Q  — ■ 
-i  o 
O  v< 

3re 
rt  3 


co  o 

re  -h 
o 

rt  > 

O    — ■ 

-»    — ' 


3  3 

"O  O. 

— •  C 

O  m 

v<  rt 

3  -l 

re  -* 

3  Oi 


o 

03  rt 

v<    Ol 

O  — ' 

-h  co 

re    C"> 

m  -H  O   O 

3   O    rt  c 

T3   rt  o    3 

— ■  Oi    -i    rt 

O    — <        >< 

*<  Oi 

3  o  <«  m 

re  o        3 

3    C     TPT3 

rt  3    re    — ■ 

rt-IO 

«<    O  << 

re  3 
3   re 


o 

CO  rt- 

v<    Oi 

o 

CO 

-n 

re  o 

m 

o  o 

=1 

— 1 

rt  c 

-a 

o 

O    3 

— i 

r+ 

-»    rt 

o 

a> 

v< 

*< 

—* 

Oi 

^ 

vn    m 

IB 

l/J 

3 

3 

r-f 

T3"0 

rt 

DJ 

re  — * 

rt 

-5    O 

O 

r>  v< 

.n  3 
3  re 

rr   3 

o 


o 
o 


-o 


o 

-< 


CO 

-< 


c; 
co 

-» 

r— 

co 

m 
n 

-H 
33 


VO 

o 


About  83%  of  the  6,800,000  acres  in  Lincoln  County 
are  managed  by  BLM.   Two  of  the  major  activities 
that  would  be  affected  by  this  HMP  are  agriculture  and 
hunting.  As  stated  earlier,  there  are  many  allotments 
within  this  WHA  (see  Map  #4) „   Cattle  raising  is  an 
important  industry  in  the  area. 

Over  400  hunting  licenses  are  issued  annually  in 
Lincoln  County  for  big  and  small  game.   Mule  deer  is 
probably  the  most  important  game  species  in  Lincoln 
County.   Of  the  12,300  hunter  days  utilized  for  mule 
deer  in  the  Las  Vegas  District,  in  1970,  10,981 
(over  85%) occurred  in  Lincoln  County,   In  addition, 
1980  days  were  spent  hunting  for  dove,  2760  for  quail 
and  4185  for  rabbit. 


Meridith,  1976 


I  s 


III.   Analysis  of  the  Proposed  Action  and  Alternatives 
A.   Environmental  Impacts  of  the  Proposed  Action 
1 .    Anticipated  Impacts 

a.    Non-Living  Components 
Air  and  Climate 


The  proposed  actions  have  no  effect  on  climate.  Any 
effect  they  have  on  air  quality  is  temporary.   During 
the  construction  of  water  catchments  (transportation  of 
men  and  materials  to  and  from  the  sites,  digging  holes, 
etc)  and  during  and  immediately  after  chaining  (before 
vegetation  reestablishment) ,  dust  may  be  a  problem. 
Also  the  prescribed  burning  will  add  carbon  dioxide, 
water  and  particulates  (in  the  form  of  smoke  and  soot) 
to  the  atmosphere  during  the  operation.   The  degree  of 
the  negative  impact  these  actions  have  on  air  quality 
depends  on  wind  velocities  and  direction,  soil  moisture 
and  vegetative  conditions  at  the  times  and  sites  chosen 
for  the  operations. 

Land 

The  proposed  action  would  have  no  effect  on  the 
topography  or  minerals  of  the  area. 

There  will,  however,  be  effects  on  soils  and  erosion 
potential.   First  of  all,  chaining  will  churn  up  the 
soil  surface,  breaking  up  any  vesicular  crusting 
present.   The  degree  of  tilling  depends  on  soil  charact- 
eristics and  density  of  vegetation  present.   The  loss 
of  this  vesicular  crust  would  leave  an  area  subject  to 
wind  and  water  erosion. 

According  to  Gifford  (1973)  chained -with-windr owing 
plots  yield  from  1-2  to  5  times  more  water  during  a  run- 
off event  than  native  pinyon- juniper.  However,  runoff 
from  debris-in-lace  plots  (as  proposed  here)  was  not 
greater  than  that  measured  from  natural  woodland  and 
resulting  sediment  yields  were  similar  to  those  from 
adjacent  unchained  woodland  areas.   Infiltration  rates 
on  chain-with-debris-in-place  treatment  are  not  as 
greatly  affected  due  to  much  less  mechanical  disturbance 
of  surface  soils.   Debris  left  on  the  soil  surface  acts 
as  both  retention  and  detention  storage,  nearly  elim- 
inating all  runoff  because  water  is  held  on  the  land- 
scape until  the  soil  can  absorb  it  while  also  reducing 
evaporation  losses  by  reducing  wind. 


Meridith,  1976 
14 


Burned  areas  (where  there  will  be  little  debris  left) 
may  be  immediately  subject  to  erosion  during  storms. 
However  after  the  browse,  grass  and  forbs  become 
established  on  these  areas,  soil  stability  will  be 
greatly  improved. 

Still  another  cause  of  erosion  will  be  vehicles  and 
equipment  that  may  cross  fragile  watershed  areas  on 
their  way  to  and  from  water  catchment  sites. 

Land  Uses 

The  proposed  action  would  have  both  favorable  and 
unfavorable  impacts  on  land  uses.   The  entire  plan 
is  designed  to  benefit  wildlife  and  would  in  turn 
benefit  some  recreationists  -  hunters,  wildlife  photo- 
graphers, zoological  sightseer s0   Chainings,  burnings 
and  seedings  will  ultimately  benefit  ranchers  by 
providing  more  forage  for  livestock  as  well  as  wildlife. 
Cooperative  agreements  that  allow  BLM  to  maintain  or 
improve  wildlife  habitat  on  private  land  may  also  in- 
directly benefit  landowners.   The  proposed  actions 
are  complementary  to  most  of  Caliente  MFP  decisions. 

On  the  other  hand,  improperly  planned  chainings, and 
prescribed  burnings  can  be  offensive  to  campers, 
picnickers  and  botanical  sightseers,  who  prefer  un- 
interrupted "groves'*  of  pinyon  pine.  Mining  claim 
markers  could  also  be  damaged  or  obliterated  by 
chaining  and  burning.   Christmas  tree  harvesting  will 
of  course  be  temporarily  disrupted  in  chaining  or 
burning  areas.   But  in  the  long  run  higher  quality 
Christmas  trees  will  be  produced  on  these  sites.   Pinyon 
nut  harvesting  will  also  be  inhibited  by  burning  and 
chainings . 

A  possible  conflict  may  develop  between  wildlife 
projects  and  future  oil,  gas  and  geothermal  develop- 
ment (refer  to  draft  E.A.R.  for  Oil,  Gas  and  Geothermal 
Development  in  the  Caliente-Virgin  Valley  Resource 
Area  for  a  detailed  discussion  of  the  effects  of  this 
type  of  action  on  wildlife).  As  of  yet,  however,  no 
specific  oil,  gas  or  geothermal  exploration/development 
sites  have  been  identified  within  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA. 

Water 

The  proposed  actions-spring  improvements,  water  catch- 
ments, chainings,  burning,  seedings-will  have  a  variety 
of  effects  on  water  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA.   During  the 


Meridith,  1976 


construction  phase  of  spring  development,  the  spring 
and  surrounding  area  will  be  disturbed,  making  the 
water  unavailable  for  wildlife  and  livestock.   This 
effect  is  temporary,  though,  and  more  water  will  be 
available  for  livestock  and  wildlife  after  the  work 
is  completed.   Fencing  the  original  sources  for  wild- 
life, while  piping  water  to  troughs  for  livestock  and 
horses  will  improve  water  quality  of  the  springs; 
horses,  burros  and  livestock  will  no  longer  be  able 
to  trample  and  muddy  the  sources.   Bird  ladders  and 
floats  will  make  more  surface  water  available  to  small 
birds  and  mammals. 

Water  catchments  will  collect  and  store  rainwater 
during  storms  and  make  this  water  available  yearlong 
to  big  game,  small  game  and  non-game  species.   This 
will  increase  the  carrying  capacity  of  the  area  for 
wildlife. 

If  downed  timber  isn't  left  after  chaining,  run-off 
will  be  a  problem  until  vegetation  is  reestablished. 
Once  it  is,  runoff  will  be  less  than  it  is  on  areas 
dense  with  pinyon  and  juniper  trees. 

Hazards 

The  seedings  with  grass,  browse  and  forbs  that  follow 
chaining  and  prescribed  burning  will  reduce  the 
chance  of  flash  floods  by  slowing  down  runoff  after 
thunderstorms. 

b.   Living  Components 

Vegetation 

Both  chaining  and  prescribed  burning  will,  of  course, 
have  a  major  effect  on  vegetation  on  the  areas  shown 
on  Map  #3.   The  initial  effect  of  chaining  will  be  to 
uproot  large,  mature  trees.   Some  understory  browse 
plants  that  don't  have  the  physiological  capacity  for 
regrowth  through  sprouting  may  be  harmed.  Also,  the 
small  trees  left  standing  may  be  stimulated  to  grow 
more  quickly  than  they  would  have  without  chaining. 

But  the  beneficial  effects  of  a  well-planned  chaining 
are  numerous,  j  Some  browse  plants  return  with  increased 
vigor  and  growth  after  chaining.   The  stand  is  opened 
up  by  chaining,  allowing  grasses,  forbs  and  shrubs  to 
increase  production. 


Meridith,  1976 
16 


Prescribed  burning  on  areas  too  steep  to  chain,  will 
reduce  the  numbers  of  large  trees  as  well  as  thick 
accumulations  of  litter  that  prohibit  growth  of  grass, 
forbs  and  browse. 

The  edge  effect  (the  amount  of  interfacing  between 
woodlands  and  open  areas  relished  by  most  species  of 
wildlife)  is  also  increased  by  chaining  and  burning. 

The  percentage  of  trees  left  standing,  the  severity  of 
chaining' s  effect  on  understory  browse,  the  types  of 
vegetation  that  are  reestablished,  the  longevity  of  the 
project,  in  general,  the  success  of  chaining  can  all  be 
controlled  by  careful  planning. 

Wildlife 

The  Beaver  Dam  Intensive  Inventory  and  HMP  identify 
lack  of  permanent  water  and  lack  of  palatable  browse, 
grasses  and  forbs  as  major  limiting  factor  for  wild- 
life in  this  WHA.   Wildlife  will  be  temporarily  dis- 
placed during  the  construction  stage  of  bird  ladders, 
water  catchments  and  spring  developments.  But  once  the 
improvements  are  completed,  more  permanent  water  will 
be  available  for  more  species. 

The  r eduction  of  habitat  for  pinyon  jays,  pinyon  mice 
(and  the  other  few  species  adapted  to  pinyon /juniper 
woodlands)  caused  by  chaining  and  burning  will  be  counter- 
acted by  the  increase  in  carrying  capacity  for  deer, 
quail,  raptors,  songbirds  and  most  other  species 0 
Browse,  grasses  and  forbs  preferred  by  these  species 
would  be  planted  and  encouraged  to  grow. 

Also,  debris  (downed  trees)  left  on  the  site  will 
provide  additional  cover  and  den  sites  for  small 
rodents  and  reptiles. 

Finally,  the  studies  proposed  will  reveal  valuable 
information  about  game  non-game  species,  their  dis- 
tribution and  habitat  preferences  that  will  help  BLM 
make  habitat  management  decisions. 

Livestock,  Horses  and  Burros 

Livestock,  wild  horses  and  burros  would  benefit  from 
water  and  forage  improvements  as  much  as  the  wild- 
life would.   A  mature  pinyon/ juniper  stand  with  little 
understory  vegetation  has  no  nutritional  value  to  these 


Meridith,  1976 
17 


animals.   Chaining  and  burning  followed  by  reseeding 
would  increase  the  forage  available  to  wildlife  and 
horses,  burros  and  livestock. 

Spring  developments  would  make  water  available  to 
wildlife  while  still  allowing  livestock,  horses  and 
burros  access.   Water  catchments,  however,  would  be 
solely  for  wildlife  use  with  livestock,  horses  and 
burros  being  excluded  from  the  source  by  fences. 

Wildlife  input  into  allotment  management  plans  and 
horse  and  burro  plans  may  recommend  reductions  of  the 
numbers  of  livestock,  horses  and  burros  allowed  in 
certain  areas.   This,  of  course,  in  the  short  run 
would  be  detrimental  to  the  certain  number  of  animals 
chosen  for  removal.   But,  in  the  long  run,  a  healthy 
population  of  livestock,  horses  and  burros  in  harmony 
with  their  environment  will  result. 

Ecological  Interrelationships 

The  ecological  interrelationships  will  be  changed 
dramatically  by  the  chaining/burning  and  reseeding 
actions.   The  change  of  the  vegetative  community  from 
mature  pinyon/juniper  stands  to  a  diversified  grass, 
forbs  and  browse  composition  will  affect  ecological 
cycles,  plant/animal  and  predator/prey  interactions. 

After  the  grasses,  forbs  and  browse  become  reestablished, 
water  runoff  will  be  reduced.   Rainfall  will  be  more 
readily  absorbed  through  the  roots  of  the  new  plants. 
Instead  of  being  completely  transpired  from  trees, 
some  water  will  be  redirected  through  animals  which 
consume  the  more  succulent  grasses,  forbs  and  browse. 

The  burning  will  cause  quicker  recycling  of  plant 
nutrients. 

Animal  interrelationships  will  be  altered  as  pinyon 
jays,  mice  and  other  animals  adapted  to  mature 
pinyon/juniper  communities  move  out  and  are  replaced 
by  other  birds,  mammals  and  reptiles  which  prefer  the 
newly«created  niches. 

A  greater  variety  of  prey  species  will  be  available 
as  succulent  forage  and  new  cover  (downed  trees  make 
good  dens)   appears.   New  food  sources  will  in  turn 
attract  more  predator  species.   Raptors  will  probably 
utilize  dead  trees  as  perches.   The  intensified  edge 
effect  will  also  help  improve  hunting  conditions  .  ; 
for  predators. 


Meridith,  1976 


The  water  developments  will  complement  these  effects 
caused  by  chaining,  burning  and  reseeding.  New  water 
sources  will  also  help  attract  a  wider  variety  of  prey 
and  predator  species  into  areas  previously  off-limits 
because  of  water  shortage. 

d.   Human  Values 

Landscape  Character 

The  proposed  actions  will  change  the  face  of  the  land- 
scape.  The  spring  and  water  catchment  developments 
would  add  permanent  artifacts  (troughs,  pipelines, 
aprons,  etc.)  that  could  disrupt  the  undisturbed 
appearance  of  some  areas. 

Chaining  and  burning  will  immediately  alter  landscape 
character.  At  first  burned  or  downed  trees  will 
litter  large  areas.  After  vegetation  has  become  re- 
established, the  areas  of  trees  left  standing  inter- 
psersed  with  lush  areas  of  grass  and  forbs  will  have  a 
more  pleasing  aesthetic  appearance. 

Socio-Cultural  Values 

Poorly  planned  chaining,  burning,  and  water  developments 
could  be  detrimental  to  archaeological  sites.   Such  a 
loss  would  be  irreversible. 

There  are  no  identified  historic  sites  which  would  be 
damaged  by  any  of  the  proposed  actions. 

Socio-Economic  Values 

Other  adverse  economic  or  social  impacts  include 
1)  temporary  loss  of  areas  for  pinyon  nut  collection, 
post  cutting  and  Christmas  tree  gathering,  2)  some 
public  disapproval  of  "ugly"  chaining  or  burning 
projects. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  proposed  actions  would  have  two 
major  favorable  impacts.   First  of  all,  habitat  for 
livestock  grazing  would  be  improved.  Grazing  is  an 
important  economic  activity  in  this  WHA.   Secondly, 
some  recreational  opportunities  would  be  increased. 
Improved  wildlife  habitat  means  improvement  in  the 
quality  of  hunting.  Better  hunting  would  benefit 
local  people  in  2  wyas:   1)  an  increase  in  their  own 
hunting  pleasure,  2)  more  revenue  from  the  increased 
number  of  hunters  passing  through  the  two  towns  - 
Panaca  and  Caliente. 


Meridith,  1976 
19 


2.   Possible  Mitigating  Measures 

a.  Non-Living  Components 

Air  and  Climate 

Careful  choice  of  time  when  chaining  and  burning  will 
take  place  (time  of  lowest  wind  velocity;  most  condi- 
tions for  chaining,  traveling,  etc.)  can  reduce  the 
amount  of  dust  created  by  these  operations. 

Land 

Soil  tests  should  be  made  to  determine  best  areas  for 
burning  or  chaining.  Mixing  of  concrete  should  be  done 
in  contained  facilities  to  reduce  the  change  of  soil 
pollution.   Piles  of  downed  trees  left  on  the  site  will 
help  reduce  runoff  of  soil  and  water.   If  heavy  vehicles 
used  to  transport  men  and  equipment  to  project  sites  are 
restricted  to  existing  roads,  trails  and  washes,  damage 
to  fragile  watershed  areas  will  be  kept  to  a  minimum. 

Areas  of  chainings  or  burns  should  be  checked  for 
mining  claim  markers  prior  to  beginning  the  operation. 

b.  Living  Components 

Vegetation 

Care  should  be  taken  during  chaining  to  do  as  little 
damage  as  possible  to  valuable  under story  vegetation. 

A  mixture  of  browse,  grass  and  forbs  should  always  be 
used  to  reseed  the  treated  area. 

Wildlife 

Fences  around  waters  and  habitat  rehabilitation  sites 
should  be  constructed  to  wildlife  specifications  to 
allow  easy  access. 

Patches  of  trees  10-15  acres  in  size  scattered  over 
the  treated  area  will   1)  preserve  some  habitat  area 
for  pinyon  jays,  pinyon  mice  and  other  species  adapted 
to  mature  pinyon/ juniper  woodlands   2)  maximize   the 
edge  effect  and  3)  leave  areas  of  cover  preserved  for 
wildlife. 

Clean  up  of  sites  after  construction  of  spring  develop- 
ments and  water  catchments  should  be  quick  and  thorough, 
in  order  to  encourage  wildlife  to  return  to  the  area 
as  soon  as  possible. 

Meridith,  1976 

20 


Heavy  vehicles, carrying  equipment  and  men  should  use 
existing  roads,  trails  and  washes  to  reduce  damage  to 
wildlife  habitat  in  the  vicinity  of  projects  and  to 
disturb  the  wildlife  itself,  as  little  as  possible. 

Livestock,  Horses  and  Burros 

Reseeded  areas  should  be  fenced  to  exclude  livestock 
for  two  growing  seasons  to  allow  the  vegetation  to 
become  established.   This  requires  careful  planning  to 
insure  that  forage  is  available  elsewhere  for  livestock. 

Likewise,  fencing  all  the  springs  or  guzzlers  off  solely 
for  wildlife  would  be  fatal  to  livestock,  wild  horses 
and  burros.   Provisions  should  be  made  for  these 
animals,  like  piping  water  to  separate  troughs  for 
them  to  use. 

Total  removal  of  livestock  and  horses  would  eliminate 
their  competition  with  wildlife  for  water,  forage  and 
living  space.   But  this  would  not  be  compatible  with 
multiple  use  objectives  or  with  the  Wild  Horse  and  Burro 
Act  of  1971.  Allotment  Management  Plans  and  Horse  and 
Burro  Plans  should  consider  the  habitat  needs  of  all 
animals  present  and  seek  ways  of  satisfying  their  needs 
without  overtaxing  environmental  resources. 

c.  Ecological  Interrelationships 

All  the  above  mitigating  measures  would  relieve  some 
damage  to  ecological  interrelationships  caused  by  the 
proposed  action. 

d.  Human  Values 

Landscape  Character 

Aprons  of  water  catchments  should  be  painted  natural 
colors  (pale  beige,  green  or  grey)  to  blend  in  with  the 
surrounding  environment.   The  sites  should  be  thoroughly 
cleared  of  debris  after  construction  is  completed. 

The  aid  of  landscape  architects  should  be  solicited  to 
design  all  chaining  and  burning  projects.   Treated  areas 
should  have  irregular  boundaries.  Also,  small  areas  of 
trees  should  be  left  standing  to  minimize  the  visual 
impact  of  opening  up  the  formerly  dense  pinyon /juniper 
stands  to  provide  some  shade  and  cover. 


Meridith,  1976 


21 


Socio-Cultural  Values 

Archaeological  surveys  should  be  made  of  all  specific 
chaining  or  prescribed  burning  sites  and  water  develop- 
ment areas  before  development  in  order  to  protect  any 
possibly  irreplaceable  archaeological  values. 

Known  pinyon  nut  gathering  areas  should  be  excluded  from 
treatment.  Commercial  and  individual  collections  of 
Christmas  trees,  firewood  and  juniper  posts  should  be 
concentrated  in  areas  slated  for  habitat  rehabilitations. 
Leaving  some  acres  of  trees  standing  within  treatment 
areas  will  also  help  minimize  post,  firewood  and 
Christmas  tree  loss. 

It  is  important  that  the  public  be  informed  of  proposed 
projects  in  this  WHA.   Many  people  misunderstand  the 
purposes  and  benefits  of  pinyon  and  juniper  tree  removal. 
News  releases,  articles,  slide  shows,  etc.,  should  be 
developed  and  distributed  to  identify  areas  for 
rehabilitation  and  to  describe  the  reasoning  behind  such 
actions  and  what  the  expected  results  will  be. 

3.   Recommendations  for  Mitigation  or  Enhancement 

The  following  mitigating  measures  are  recommended: 

1.  Minimize  dust  by  chaining  or  burning  when  wind  condi- 
tions are  right. 

2.  Watershed,  wildlife,  minerals,  recreation  and  forestry 
activities  will  cooperate  to  identify  specific  sites 
for  prescribed  burnings  and  chainings.   Consult  with 
State  of  Nevada  Health  Department  (Air  Pollution  Divi- 
sion) before  development. 

3.  Mixing  of  concrete  for  water  catchments  and  spring 
developments  should  be  done  in  contained  facilities 
to  reduce  the  chance  of  soil  pollution. 

4.  Leave  piles  of  downed  trees  on  the  site  to  help  reduce 
runoff  of  soil  and  water  and  to  improve  cover  for  small 
animals. 

5.  Restrict  all  heavy  vehicles  used  in  transporting  men 
and  equipment  to  existing  roads,  trails,  and  washes  on 
fragile  watershed  areas. 

6.  Minimize  damage  to  valuable  understory  vegetation  during 
chaining. 


Meridith,  1976 


22 


7.  Use  a  mixture  of  browse,  grass  and  forbs  to  reseed 
chaining  and  burning  sites. 

8.  Check  for  and  avoid  mining  claim  markers  during  chaining 
or  burning  operations. 

9.  Leave  patches  of  trees  (10-15  acres  in  size)  scattered 
throughout  the  treated  areas  for  wildlife  cover, 
Christmas  trees,  pinyon  nuts  and  aesthetic  values. 

10.  Fence  reseeded  areas  to  exclude  livestock  for  two 
growing  seasons. 

11.  Fences  around  waters  and  habitat  rehabilitation  sites 
will  be  constructed  to  allow  wildlife  easy  access. 

12.  Clean  up  spring  development  and  water  catchment  sites 
quickly  and  thoroughly  after  construction  is  completed. 

13.  Provide  water  for  livestock  and  wild  horses  and  burros 
away  from  the  fenced,  improved  source.   For  instance, 
pipe  water  from  a  fenced  spring  development  to  a 
separate  trough  for  livestock  and  horses. 

14.  Aprons  of  water  catchments  should  be  painted  natural 
colors  (pale  beige,  green  or  grey)  to  blend  with  the 
surroundings. 

15.  The  District  landscape  architect  will  help  design 

all  chaining  and  burning  projects.   Treated  areas  should 
have  irregular  boundaries  and  buffer  zones. 

16.  Archaeological  surveys  should  be  made  of  all  selected 
chaining  or  burning  sites  and  water  development  areas 
before  development. 

17.  Any  culturally  important  pinyon  nut  gathering  areas 
will  be  excluded  from  treatment.  Enlist  aid  of  the 
Indian  Tribal  Council  in  identifying  these  areas. 

18.  Commercial  and  individual  collections  of  Christmas 
trees,  firewood  and  juniper  posts  should  be  concentrated 
in  areas  slated  for  habitat  rehabilitations. 

19.  Inform  the  public  of  all  proposed  projects  prior  to 
development  through  news  releases,  feature  articles, 
slide  shows,  etc. 

20.  Cooperate  with  Nevada  Department  of  Fish  &  Game,  U.  S. 
Fish  &  Wildlife  Service,  and  interested  groups  and  indi- 
viduals during  inventories  and  habitat  development  projects 


Meridith,  1976 
23 


21.   Consult  with  Utah  BLM  on  any  rehabilitation  projects 
near  the  Utah-Nevada  border. 


Meridith,  1976 
24 


4.  Residual  Impacts 

Most  of  the  temporary  adverse  impacts  --  dust,  temporary 
displacement  of  wildlife,  littering  of  the  landscape  with 
burned  or  downed  trees  after  habitat  rehabilitation  projects, 
temporary  exposure  of  treated  areas  to  some  erosion  --  are 
unavoidable.   Others  --  like  changes  in  ecological  inter- 
relationships, loss  of  potential  Christmas  trees,  firewood 
and  posts  --  will  last  until  pinyon  and  juniper  trees  reinvade 
the  treated  area  (trees  can  begin  to  dominate  a  site  again  in 
12-15  years) . 

5.  Relationship  between  Short-Term  Use  and  Long-Term  Productivity 

In  the  short  run,  most  of  the  impacts  of  the  proposed 
action  will  be  detrimental  to  the  environment:   trees  will 
be  uprooted,  large  areas  of  burned  stumps  or  piled 
debris  will  be  visible,  wildlife  will  be  driven  out  of  treat- 
ment areas  or  away  from  water  sources,  noise  and  dust  will 
accompany  construction  of  many  projects,  etc.  But  in  the 
long  run  (starting  in  from  2-5  years  after  habitat  rehab- 
ilitation and  starting  almost  immediately  after  water  develop- 
ments are  completed) ,  the  advantages  of  these  actions  will  be 
great:   production  of  grass,  forbs  and  browse  will  increase, 
more  water  and  forage  will  be  available  to  livestock,  horses 
and  burros,  etc.   In  the  long  run,  the  beneficial  impacts  far 
outweigh  the  adverse  temporary  impacts. 

6.  Irreversible  and  Irretrievable  Commitment  of  Resources 

If  all  the  mitigating  measures  are  instituted,  the  only 
irreversible  and  irretrievable  commitment  will  be  the  loss 
of  some  pinyon  and  juniper  trees  and  the  reduction  in  numbers 
(or  at  least  a  change  in  distribution)  of  species  adapted 
to  the  present  conditions.   These  commitments  will  be  small 
since  islands  of  trees  in  the  treatment  area  will  remain 
untouched.   These  commitments  will  actually  not  be  permanent 
either  since  new  trees  will  eventually  reinvade  the  treated 
area. 

B.   Environmental  Impacts  of  the  Alternatives 

1.   Alternative  #1 

One  alternative  to  the  proposed  action  is  altering  the 
implementation  schedule.   The  plan,  as  it  now  exists, 
allows  time  for  inventories  and  studies  before  projects 
are  initiated  and  time  for  evaluation  and  maintenance  of 
projects  after  they  are  completed. 


Meridith,  1976 
25 


Minor  changes  in  the  schedule,  like  constructing  3  catch- 
ments in  the  first  year  and  3  in  the  next  (instead  of  2 
and  4)  will  not  have  an  effect  on  the  environment. 

But  major  changes  like  rushing  through  projects  or  de- 
laying them  indefinitely  will  have  adverse  effects  on 
the  environment.   Carrying  out  the  projects  without 
sufficient  study  may  result  in  loss  of  archaeological  and 
aesthetic  values,  damage  to  fragile  watersheds,  inefficient 
chaining  (which  results  in  rapid  reinvasion  of  trees)  and 
a  waste  of  time,  money,  effort  and  resources.  Recommended 
mitigating  measures  would  remain  the  same  but  there  would 
be  more  residual  adverse  impacts  and  there  would  be  a  larger 
irreversible  and  irretrievable  commitment  of  resources.   The 
long-termed  productivity  would  be  reduced. 

On  the  other  hand,  a  long  delay  in  implementing  the  proposed 
action  may  lead  to  a  continuing  deterioration  of  wildlife 
habitat.  Without  treatment,  pinyon/juniper  woodlands  will 
probably  get  denser  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA,  water  will  reamin 
remain  scarce  and  the  carrying  capacity  for  a  wide  variety 
of  wildlife  species  will  decrease. 

2.   Alternative  #2 

No  Action  is  another  alternative  to  the  proposed  action. 
This  would  mean  that  no  studies  or  inventories  would  be 
conducted,  no  water  development  would  be  constructed,  no 
springs  developed  and  no  chaining/burning/seeding  actions 
would  take  place. 

There  would  be  no  impact  on  air,  climate,  landscape  charac- 
ter, or  archaeological  and  historical  values,  or  wildlife 
adapted  to  pinyon/juniper  vegetation. 

But  no  action  will  allow  pinyon/juniper  woodlands  to  spread 
and  get  denser.   Also  water  will  remain  scarce  or  unavailable. 
Unmanaged  wild  horses  and  burros  populations  will  continue 
to  grow  rapidly.   No  information  will  be  gathered  on  vege- 
tation or  wildlife  habitat,  and  therefore,  the  wildlife  program 
will  have  little  input  into  allotment  management  plans 
or  horse  and  burro  plans. 

The  results  of  all  this  will  include  1)  increased  loss 
of  soil  due  to  erosion  2)  increased  water  runoff  and 
flash  flood  potential  3)  increased  loss  of  forage-pro- 
ducing plants  and  the  resulting  loss  of  plant  diversity 
and  stability  as  well  as  loss  of  food  for  wildlife, 
livestock  and  horses  4)  increased  competition  among  wild- 
life, horses  and  livestock  for  small  quantities  of  water 


Meridith,  1976 


2fi 


and  decreasing  forage   5)  loss  of  habitat  of  endangered 
or  protected  species  because  little  is  known  about  their 
distribution  or  habitat  requirements  6)  damage  to  fragile 
watershed  areas   7)  loss  of  revenue  as  the  livestock 
industry  and  quality  of  hunting  decline.   Some  short-term 
adverse  impacts  (like  dust  or  smoke,  ugly  burned  stumps, 
etc.)  would  be  avoided  by  taking  no  action  but  long-term 
productivity  would  be  greatly  reduced.   The  irreversible 
and  irretrievable  commitment  of  resources  (particularly 
diversified  vegetative  and  wildlife  species)  would  be 
large  if  no  action  is  taken  in  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA. 


Meridith,  1976 
27 


IV.   Persons,  Groups  and  Government  Agencies  Consulted 

Nevada  Department  of  Fish  &  Game 
Nevada  State  Clearinghouse 
U.  S.  Fish  &  Wildlife  Service 


V.    Intensity  of  Public  Interest 

Governmental  agencies  (BLM,  NDF&G,  FWS,  etc.)  sportsman  and  con- 
servation groups  and  Lincoln  County  residents  would  all  be  inter- 
ested in  the  actions  proposed  in  the  Beaver  Dam  Habitat  Management 
Plan. 


VI.   Participating  Staff 

Robert  J.  Sulenski  -  Environmental  Coordinator 

Phillip  V.  Range  -  Caliente-Virgin  Valley  Resource  Area  Manager 

Richard  Enriquez  -  Staff  Wildlife  Specialist 

Terry  Driver  -  Staff  Range  Conservationist 

Frank  E.  Bingham  -  Chief,  Division  of  Resource  Management 

James  Gegen  -  Soil  Scientist 

Brian  W.  Hatoff  -  Archaeologist 


VII.   Summary 

Analysis  of  the  proposed  action  and  alternatives  indicates  that  the 
Beaver  Dam  Habitat  Management  Plan  will  have  some  temporary  adverse 
impacts  on  the  environment  (creation  of  dust  or  smoke,  displeasing 
aesthetics,  temporary  displacement  of  wildlife,  etc.)  but  that  the 
long-run  impacts  are  favorable  for  vegetation,  wildlife  and  human 
resources. 

Date  Denise  P.  Meridith 

Environmental  Specialist 


Meridith,  1976 


28 


RECOMMENDATION  FOR  APPROVAL: 


Date 


3/?/?<f 


Date 


i*/it> 


Date 


-^/^hk 


rank  E. 


Ffank  E.  Bingham 

Chief,  Division  of  Resource  Management 


6t*iA^_ 


Phillip  VJ  R/»nge 

Caliente-Virgin  Valley  Resource  Area  Manager 


APPROVAL: 


DateT      / 


Meridith,  1976 


29 


UNITED  STATES 
DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  INTERIOR 
BUREAU  OF  LAND  MANAGEMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL  ANALYSIS  WORKSHEET 


1.    Action 


Implementation  of  Beaver  Dam  HMP 


2.    Stages  of  implementation 

Habitat  Treatments  (Chaining  or  Prescribed  Burning) 


3.    DISCRETE  OPERATIONS 


4 

.  COMPONENTS,  SUBCOMPONENTS. 
AND  ELEMENTS  IMPACTED 

s 

ANTICIPATED 
IMPACTS 

6.  REMARKS 

A.  AIR 

Air  Quality 

Dust  (Particulates) 

+L 

■m 

+L 

0 

Dust  and  exhaust  emissions 

Chemicals  (CO,  etc.) 

+L 

-m 

0 

0 

will  result  from  the  vehicles 

and  machinery  used. 

£ 

B.  LAND 

Soil  Pollution 

0 

+L 

0 

-M 

Runoff  will  occur  as  land  is 

z 

u 

Z 

Erosion  Potential 

+L 

+M 

0 

-H 

cleared  and  churned  up.   But  once 

o 
5. 

B 

o 

vegetation  is  reestablished, 

erosion  and  flood  hazard  will  be 

o 
z 

greatly  reduced. 

> 

z 
o 
z 

« 

Flood  Hazard 

0 

+M 

0 

-H 

C.  WATER 

Water  Supply 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Some  chemicals  &  sediments  mav 

Contamination 

enter  water  supplies  as  earth 

Animal  Waste 

0 

0 

0 

0 

is  churned  up  and  runoff  occurs. 

Chemicals 

0 

+L 

0 

-L 

But  after  vegetation  becomes  re- 

Sediment 

0 

m 

0 

-L 

established  this  sort  of  contam- 

ination is  a  lot  less  likely. 

A.  PLANTS  (Aquatic) 

N/A 

H 

z 

u 
z 

o 

0. 

1 
o 

o 
o 

z 

> 

J 

(Continued  on  reverse) 


Form  1790-3  (June  1974) 


DISCRETE  OPERATIONS 


COMPONENTS.  SUBCOMPONENTS, 
AND   ELEMENTS  IMPACTED 


ANTICIPATED 
IMPACTS 


B.     PLANTS  I  Terrestrial ) 

Grass 


-L 


-Hi 


+H 


Chaining  or  burning  will  seri- 


Forbs 


-L 


+H 


+-H 


ously    thin   out   pinyon/ -juniper 


Conifers 


-H 


+L 


and  reseeding  will  allow  grasses. 


Brush  &  Shrubs 


-Hi 


4fl 


forbs   &  browse    to  become   re- 


established, 


C.     ANIMALS  '  Aquatic  . 
N/A 


D.     ANIMALS  'Terrestrial' 

Mammals  (wildlife) 


-Hi 


Animals  will  be  initially  dis- 


Birds 


+M 


-Hi 


placed  from  the  area  chained  or 


Reptiles 


-M 


+L 


-Hi 


burned  or  by  men  &  vehicles 


Livestock 


-Hi 


studying  the  area.   But  once 


Horses  &  Burros 


-M 


-Hi 


grass,  forbs  &  grass  return, 


Invertebrates 


-L 


+L 


-Hi 


most  animals  will  benefit. 


Si 


A.     ECOLOGICAL  PROCESSES 
Nutrient  Cycle 


+M 


+L 


-Hi 


Chaining  &  burning  will  quickly 


Hydrologic  Cycle 


-m 


return  nutrients  to  soil  6>  increase 


Food  Chain 


-M 


+L 


-HM 


number  of  plants  &  animals  after 


vegetation  is  established  will 


stimulate  nutrient,  hydrologic  6* 


food  cycles 


A.  LANDSCAPE  CHARACTER 

Visual  Impact 


-Hi 


At  first  burning  or  chaining 


Sound 


+L 


+L 


+L 


will  have  great  adverse  impact 


on  landscape  appearance.  Noise 


will  be  prevalent  temporarily 


during  the  operation.   As  vegeta- 


B.    SOCIOC  JlTURAl  INTERESTS 


tion  returns,  landscape  charac- 
ter will  improve. 


Archaeological  Values 


-X 


Chaining,  burning  &  revegetatior, 


Socio-Economic  Values 


may  obscure  or  destroy  archaeclc- 


Cultural 


gical  sites,  or  traditional  pinycn 


gathering  areas  not  yet  identified. 


INST 
4r::or.  —  Enter  action  being  taken  analytic  step  for  which 
worksheet  is  being  used,  environniental  viewpoint  of  lm- 
pact     and  any  assumptions  relating  to  impact 

a  Worksheet  is  normally  used  to  analyze  " Anticifratea 
Imf-ac:?"  of  action,  '•:'-  e:  p*  it  may  be  used  to  analyze 
"Hesiaua.  Impact!  "  Worksheets  may  also  be  used  to 
compare  impacts  before  and  after  mitigating  measures 
are  applied 

b  Slate  viewpoint  that  best  describes  environmental  im- 
pact For  example,  a  fence  viewed  down  the  fence 
line  nas  greater  impact  than  the  same  fence  viewed 
over  an  entire  allotment  Generally  narrow  viewpoints 
better  illustrate  specific  impacts  than  will  broad 
*  lewpcints 

c  Assumptions  mav  be  made  to  establish  a  base  for 
analvsis     c  ;      estimates   '.n_<    -.i'.-c:      5*j«:"t    :■■  \ea- 


i :a*( t  v. ;  .f 

proposed    project 


-  Identify      differen* 


phases    of 
.' .  -.  e . 


r.att  t  • 


l\ ■:•(:<  •'.:••*■.■■•■   -  Identih      separate      actions 

prising     i  particular     stage     of     implementation      t  i 

"•'!-•  •         -,f  :.*«     "jM    :•■'<■      •!.:     :•  i    an 

•;•<•---.  -  -  o-f,    i'aani    .7r.;  :■*'■  acini 


E.errir.:-  rr :  :>  t«  -  Enter  under  appropriate  heading  all 
em  lrc-nmenta.'  elements  susceptible  tc  impact  from  action 
and  alternate  es  Re  levan:  elements  not  contained  in  the 
digest  sho_)c  als-.  be  entered  See  BLM  Manual  17511, 
Appendix  2     En\  ironn  ental  Digest 


RUCTIONS 

I  ~  ^r:ic::ta:ea  )mf>s.c:  —  Evaluate  anticipated  impact  or.  eacr 
element  and  place  an  entrv  in  the  appropriate  squa-e  -nd.- 
eating  degree  of  impact  as  low  L;  medium  (Mi  .'.igr.  H 
nc  impact  iOj.  or  unknown  or  negligable  ^X  ■  Preceec 
each  entrv  bv  a  plus  >-•  or  minus  <-,  sign  ind.cating  a 
beneficial  or  adverse  tvpe  of  impact  If  type  :'  iirp&ct 
reflects  a  matter  of  opinion  or  is  no'  known  -  :  -  ;,re- 
ceed  with  a  sign  For  example  construction  of  i  »  .n:  tt.... 
on  open  range  has  t  definite  visual  impact.  *  :•-.  c  .  -:  •  ■: 
some  people  the  effect  is  detrimental  while  tc  others  _•  _s 
an  improvenient  Bi  not  entering  a  plus  -  )  or  nines  - 
sign  the  worksheet  is  kept  factual  and  unbiased  L'  both 
degree  and  tvpe  of  impact  are  unknown  place  an  x  ir  the 
appropriate  square 

a  The  measures  of  impact  f  x.  . -.  i.  meazun  jr.  -  ,  - 
are  relative  and  their  meaning  may  vary  slightly  free 
action  to  action  The  'errr.  "o..  "should  no-  be  ap- 
plied tc  impacts  of  a  negligible  nature  For  example 
we  know  that  a  pickup  trucV  driving  down  a  proposed 
fence  line  laying  wire  has  some  impact  on  au  ruali'i 
Howe\  er.  the  significance  of  this  impac  I 
normally  great  enough  tc  warrant  even  a  "  :. 
In  cases  like  this  the  impact  will  usualh  b( 
"'.•"  or  the  elemen'  left  off  the  worksheet 
b  It  is  recognizee  that  some  em  ironmenial  elements  n.a\ 
defy  accurate  tr  easurement  or  m-depth  anaivs.s  » r.r - 
in  current  Burea.  capabilities  or  expertise  The  r.atu-e 
|  of    the    actio:,    as    wei!    as    tvpe    and    degree    o!    xfi.' 

shou.d   cuide    _r    -r.e    decision  v.    seek    outside   expe't.se 
or  assistance 


is     not 
-at.r.g 


Ente-  carifving  information 


UNITED  STATES 
DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  INTERIOR 
BUREAU  OF  LAND  MANAGEMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL  ANALYSIS  WORKSHEET 


1.    Action 


Implementation  of  Beaver  Dam  HMP 


2.    Stages  of  implementation 

Spring  and  Water  Catchment  Developments 


/4f  7  < 

j/ 

/  / 

4 

COMPONENTS,  SUBCOMPONENTS, 
AND  ELEMENTS  IMPACTED 

5.  ANTICIPATED 
IMPACTS 

6.  REMARKS 

A.  AIR 

Air  Quality 

Dust  (Particulates) 

+L 

+L 

0 

+L 

A  slight  degradation  of  air 

Chemicals  (CO.SxO) 

+L 

+L 

0 

+L 

quality  will  result  because 

of  dust  &  exhaust  emission  from 

vehicles  &  equipment  used  in 

construction. 

B 

B.  LAND 

Soil  Pollution 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Minor  erosion  may  result  from 

z 
a 
z. 

Erosion  Potential 

+L 

+L 

0 

+L 

0 

clearing  small  sites  for  devel- 

0 
a 
s 
o 
u 

opment  &  from  vehicles  used  on 

fragile  watershed  areas. 

o 
z 

> 

z 
o 

z 

« 

Flood  Hazard 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

C.  WATER 

Water  Supply  Contamination 

-L 

-L 

0 

-L 

+H 

Water  mav  be  made  unavailable 

(Animal  Waste) 

0 

0 

-H 

0 

-H 

during  construction,  but  in  the 

(Chemicals) 

0 

+L 

0 

0 

long  run  supply  will  increase 

(Sediment  Load) 

0 

+L 

-L 

0 

-L 

Fencing  will  eliminate  contamin- 

ation by  livestock,  horses  & 

burros.   Some  chemical  and  sedi- 

ment may  accidently  pollute 

water  during  construction. 

A.  PLANTS  (Aquatic) 
N/A 

H 

z 

z 

o 

a 

u 
c 
z 
> 

J 

(Continued  on  reverse) 


Form  1790-3  (June  1974) 


DISCRETE  OPERATIONS 


COMPONENTS,  SUBCOMPONENTS, 
AND  ELEMENTS  IMPACTED 

ANTICIPATED 
IMPACTS 

REMARKS 

B.  PLANTS  (Terrestrial) 

Grass 

-L 

-L 

+M 

0 

+L 

Some  vegetation  may  be  des- 

Forbs 

-L 

-L 

+M 

0 

+L 

troyed  during  transportation 

Conifer 

-L 

-L 

0 

0 

+L 

and  construction.   But  fencing 

Brush  &  Shrubs 

-L 

-L 

4M 

0 

+L 

will  protect  reestablished 

vegetation  within  enclosures. 

c 

0 

O 

V) 

H 
Z 

C.  ANIMALS  (Aquatic) 
N/A 

Id 

E 

0. 

J 
u 

o 
g 

> 

J 

D.  ANIMALS  (Terrestrial) 

Mammals  (wildlife) 

-M 

-M 

-HM 

-L 

+H 

Animals  may  be  temporarily  dis- 

Birds 

-M 

-M 

+M 

-L 

■m 

placed  by  noise  &  movement  of 

Reptiles 

-L 

-L 

-HM 

-L 

■m 

men  &  machines.  In  long  run  all 

Livestock 

-M 

-M 

-L 

-L 

■m 

animals,  but  particularly  wildlife 

Invertebrates 

-L 

-L 

+M 

-L 

m 

(now  crowded  out  by  some  cows, 

Horses  &  Burros 

-M 

-M 

-L 

-L 

+M 

horses  &  burros)  will  benefit 

£E 

A.  ECOLOGICAL  PROCESSES 

Nutrient  Cycle 

0 

-L 

0 

0 

fM 

from  increased  water. 

Cycles  may  be  temporarily  dis- 

EX 

Hydrologic 

0 

-L 

0 

0 

■m 

turbed  as  wildlife  &  vegetation 

S2 

Predator /Prey     Relat. 

-L 

-L 

-L 

-L 

+H 

are  disturbed,  but  after  com- 

pletion of  project  ecological 

SJ 

processes  will  be  beneficial. 

A.  LANDSCAPE  CHARACTER 

Visual  Impact 

-L 

-M 

-L 

-L 

-L 

Noise  disturbance  will  be 

Sound 

-L 

-M 

0 

-L 

0 

temporary.  But  the  spring  dev. 

Id 

3 

or  attachment  will  slightly 

1 

disrupt  the  desert  landscape. 

2 

< 
S 

B.  SOCIOCULTURAL  INTERESTS 

Archaeological  Values 

-L 

-M 

-L 

-L 

-M 

Some  arch,  values  may  be  lost. 

> 

Socio-Economic  Values 

+L 

+L 

0 

+L 

+M 

Economy  will  benefit  from  work 

Cultural 

0 

0 

3 

0 

0 

force  and  increased  hunter  trade 

in  the  future. 

INST 

1.  Action  —  Enter  action  being  taken,  analytic  step  for  which 
worksheet  is  being  used,  environmental  viewpoint  of  im- 
pact, and  any  assumptions  relating  to  impact- 

a.  Worksheet  is  normally  used  to  analyze  "Anticipated 
Impacts"  of  action;  however,  it  may  be  used  to  analyze 
"Residual  Impacts."  Worksheets  may  also  be  used  to 
compare  impacts  before  and  after  mitigating  measures 
are  applied. 

b.  State  viewpoint  that  best  describes  environmental  im- 
pact. For  example,  a  fence  viewed  down  the  fence 
line  has  greater  impact  than  the  same  fence  viewed 
over  an  entire  allotment.  Generally,  narrow  viewpoints 
better  illustrate  specific  impacts  than  will  broad 
viewpoints. 

c.  Assumptions  may  be  made  to  establish  a  base  for 
analysis  (e.g.  estimated  time  periods,  season  of  year, 
etc.). 

2.  Stages  of  Implementation  —  Identify  different  phases  of 
proposed  project  (e.g.  a  road  project  consists  of  survey, 
construction,   use,   and  maintenance  stages). 

Discrete  Operations  -  Identify  separate  actions  com- 
prising a  particular  stage  of  implementation  (e.g.  the 
construction  stage  of  the  road  project  has  the  discrete 
operations  of  clearing,  grading,   and  surfacing). 

4.  Elements  Impacted  —  Enter  under  appropriate  heading  all 
environmental  elements  susceptible  to  impact  from  action 
and  alternatives.  Relevant  elements  not  contained  in  the 
digest  should  also  be  entered.  See  BLM  Manual  1791, 
Appendix  2,  Environmental  Digest. 


RUCTIONS 

5.  Anticipated  Impact  —  Evaluate  anticipated  impact  on  each 
element  and  place  an  entry  in  the  appropriate  square  indi- 
cating degree  of  impact  as  low  (L),  medium  (M),  high  (H), 
no  impact  (O),  or  unknown  or  negligable  (X).  Preceed 
each  entry  by  a  plus  (+)  or  minus  (-)  sign  indicating  a 
beneficial  or  adverse  type  of  impact.  If  type  of  impact 
reflects  a  matter  of  opinion  or  is  not  known,  do  not  pre- 
ceed with  a  sign.  For  example,  construction  of  a  wind  mill 
on  open  range  has  a  definite  visual  impact;  however,  to 
some  people  the  effect  is  detrimental  while  to  others  it  is 
an  improvement.  By  not  entering  a  plus  (+)  or  minus  (-) 
sign  the  worksheet  is  kept  factual  and  unbiased.  If  both 
degree  and  type  of  impact  are  unknown,  place  an  (x)  in  the 
appropriate  square. 

a.  The  measures  of  impact  (e.g.  low,  medium,  and  high) 
are  relative  and  their  meaning  may  vary  slightly  from 
action  to  action.  The  term  "/ou"should  not  be  ap- 
plied to  impacts  of  a  negligible  nature.  For  example, 
we  know  that  a  pickup  truck  driving  down  a  proposed 
fence  line  laying  wire  has  some  impact  on  air  quality. 
However,  the  significance  of  this  impact  is  not 
normally  great  enough  to  warrant  even  a  "low"  rating. 
In  cases  like  this,  the  impact  will  usually  be  marked 
"O"  or  the  element  left  off  the   worksheet. 

b.  It  is  recognized  that  some  environmental  elements  may 
defy  accurate  measurement  or  in-depth  analysis  with- 
in current  Bureau  capabilities  or  expertise.  The  nature 
of  the  action  as  well  as  type  and  degree  of  impact 
should  guide  in  the  decision  to  seek  outside  expertise 
or  assistance. 

6.     Remarks  -  Enter  clarifying  information. 


J 


UNITED  STATES 
DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  INTERIOR 
BUREAU  OF  LAND  MANAGEMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL  ANALYSIS  WORKSHEET 


1.    Action 


NO  ACTION 


2.    Stages  of  implementation 


4.  COMPONENTS,  SUBCOMPONENTS, 
AND  ELEMENTS  IMPACTED 


5.  ANTICIPATED 
IMPACTS 


6.  REMARKS 


A.  AIR 

Climate 


Air  Quality 


Dust 


Chemicals 


B.  LAND 

Soil  Pollution 


If  pinyon/ juniper  woodlands 


Erosion  Potential 


4-H 


get  denser,  erosion  and  flood 


Flood  Hazards 


+H 


hazards  will  increase  due  to 


increasing  lack  of  understory 


vegetation. 


C.    WATER 

Water  Supply 


-M 


Contamination 


With  no  improvements  water 


quantity  will  stay  low  or  decrease 


(Animal  Waste) 


m 


Uncontrolled   livestock,  horses   & 


(Chemicals) 


+-L 


burros  will  continue  to  muddy  & 


(Sediment  Load) 


+M 


contaminate  water  sources, 


Chemicals  &  sediments  will  continue 


to  pollute  water  as  erosion  &  flood 


hazards  increase. 


A.  PLANTS  (Aquatic) 

N/A 


(Continued  on  reverse) 


Form  1790-3  (June  1974) 


DISCRETE  OPERATIONS 


COMPONENTS,  SUBCOMPONENTS, 
AND  ELEMENTS  IMPACTED 

ANTICIPATED 
IMPACTS 

REMARKS 

B. 

PLANTS  (Terrestrial) 

Grass 

-H 

With  no  chaining  or  burning  to 

Forbs 

-H 

thin  woodlands,  P/J  will 

Conifers 

+H 

continue  to  crowd  out  grass. 

Brush  &  Shrubs 

-M 

forbs,  brush  &  shrubs 

e 

0 

U 

w 
H 
Z 

C. 

ANIMALS  (Aquatic) 
N/A 

Id 

Z 

u 

a 

z 

> 

-i 

D. 

ANIMALS  (Terrestrial) 

Mammals  (wildlife) 

-H 

With  no  improvements,  habitat 

Livestock 

-M 

(forage  &  water)  will  deteriorate 

Horses  &  Burros 

-M 

to  the  disadvantage  of  most 

Birds 

-M 

animals. 

Reptiles 

-L 

Invertebrates 

-L 

££ 

A. 

ECOLOGICAL  PROCESSES 

Nutrient  Cycle 

-M 

As  habitat  deteriorates, 

Hydrological  Cycle 

-M 

ecological  processes  are 

(_>Z 

Pred./Prey  Relationship 

-M 

disrupted  or  altered. 

E-> 

A 

LANDSCAPE  CHARACTER 

Visual  Impact 

0 

Sound 

0 

1 

•  z 

< 

s 

B. 

SOCIOCULTURAL  INTERESTS 
Archaeological  Values 

0 

> 

Socio-Economic 

0 

Cultural 

0 

INST 

1.  Action  —  Enter  action  being  taken,  analytic  step  for  which 
worksheet  is  being  used,  environmental  viewpoint  of  im- 
pact, and  any  assumptions  relating  to  impact. 

a.  Worksheet  is  normally  used  to  analyze  "Anticipated 
Impacts"  of  action;  however,  it  may  be  used  to  analyze 
"Residual  Impacts."  Worksheets  may  also  be  used  to 
compare  impacts  before  and  after  mitigating  measures 
are  applied. 

b.  State  viewpoint  that  best  describes  environmental  im- 
pact. For  example,  a  fence  viewed  down  the  fence 
line  has  greater  impact  than  the  same  fence  viewed 
over  an  entire  allotment.  Generally,  narrow  viewpoints 
better  illustrate  specific  impacts  than  will  broad 
viewpoints. 

c.  Assumptions  may  be  made  to  establish  a  base  for 
analysis  (e.g.  estimated  time  periods,  season  of  year, 
etc.). 

2.  Stages  o/  Implementation  -  Identify  different  phases  of 
proposed  project  (e.g.  a  road  project  consists  of  survey, 
construction,   use.   and  maintenance  stages). 

Discrete  Operations  _  Identify  separate  actions  com- 
prising a  particular  stage  of  implementation  (e.g.  the 
construction  stage  of  the  road  project  has  the  discrete 
operations  of  clearing,  grading,  and  surfacing). 

4.  Elements  Impacted  —  Enter  under  appropriate  heading  all 
environmental  elements  susceptible  to  impact  from  action 
and  alternatives.  Relevant  elements  not  contained  in  the 
digest  should  also  be  entered.  See  BLM  Manual  1791, 
Appendix  2,  Environmental  Digest. 


RUCTIONS 

5.  Anticipated  Impact  -  Evaluate  anticipated  impact  on  each 
element  and  place  an  entry  in  the  appropriate  square  indi- 
cating degree  of  impact  as  low  (L),  medium  (M),  high  (H), 
no  impact  (O),  or  unknown  or  negligable  (X).  Preceed 
each  entry  by  a  plus  (+)  or  minus  (-)  sign  indicating  a 
beneficial  or  adverse  type  of  impact.  If  type  of  impact 
reflects  a  matter  of  opinion  or  is  not  known,  do  not  pre- 
ceed with  a  sign.  For  example,  construction  of  a  wind  mill 
on  open  range  has  a  definite  visual  impact,  however,  to 
some  people  the  effect  is  detrimental  while  to  others  it  is 
an  improvement.  By  not  entering  a  plus  (+)  or  minus  (-) 
sign  the  worksheet  is  kept  factual  and  unbiased.  If  both 
degree  and  type  of  impact  are  unknown,  place  an  (x)  in  the 
appropriate  square. 

a.  The  measures  of  impact  (e.g.  low,  medium,  and  high) 
are  relative  and  their  meaning  may  vary  slightly  from 
action  to  action.  The  term  "/ou"should  not  be  ap- 
plied to  impacts  of  a  negligible  nature.  For  example, 
we  know  that  a  pickup  truck  driving  down  a  proposed 
fence  line  laying  wire  has  some  impact  on  air  quality. 
However,  the  significance  of  this  impact  is  not 
normally  great  enough  to  warrant  even  a  "low"  rating. 
In  cases  like  this,  the  impact  will  usually  be  marked 
"O"  or  the  element  left  off  the   worksheet. 

b.  It  is  recognized  that  some  environmental  elements  may 
defy  accurate  measurement  or  in-depth  analysis  with- 
in current  Bureau  capabilities  or  expertise.  The  nature 
of  the  action  as  well  as  type  and  degree  of  impact 
should  guide  in  the  decision  to  seek  outside  expertise 
or  assistance. 

6.     Remarks  -  Enter  clarifying  information. 


VIII.   References 


Brunner,  J.,  1974 „   Environmental  Analysis  Record:   Delamar  Valley 
Allotment  Management  Plans.   Bureau  of  Land  Management. 
Las  Vegas.   92  pp. 

Bureau  of  Land  Management,  1973.   Caliente  Unit  Resource  Analysis 

and  Management  Framework  Plan.   USDI :   BLM,  Las  Vegas,  Nevada. 

,  1974.   Economic  Supplement  -  Las 


Vegas  District.   USDI:   BLM,  Reno,  Nevada.   174  pp. 

Gifford,  G„,  1973„   "Runoff  and  Sediment  Yields  from  Runoff  Plots  on 
Chained  Pinyon-Juniper  Sites."  Journal  of  Range  Management. 
Vol.  26,  No.  6;  pp.  440-443. 

Meridith,  D„,  1975.   Beaver  Dam  Intensive  Inventory  and  Habitat 
Management  Plan  (Revision).   Bureau  of  Land  Management,  Las 
Vegas,  Nevada. 

Rush,  1964.   Ground  Water  Appraisal  of  Meadow  Valley  Area  (Report  27) 
Department  of  Conservation  and  Natural  Resources.   Carson 
City,  Nevada.   43  pp„ 

Tansch,  R„ ,  1972.   Plant  Succession  and  Mule  Deer  Utilization  on 
Pinyon/Juniper  Chainings  in  Nevada  (Masters  Thesis). 
University  of  Nevada,  Las  Vegas,  Nevada. 

United  States  Forest  Service,  1973.   Draft  Environmental  Statement: 
Pinyon-Juniper  Chaining  Program  on  National  Forest  Lands  in 
the  State  of  Nevada.  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture: 
U.  S.  Forest  Service.   Ogden,  Utah.   58  pp. 

United  States  Geological  Survey,  1974.  Water  Resources  Data  for 
Nevada.  U.  S.  Department  of  the  Interior:   U.  S.  Geological 
Survey.   Carson  City,  Nevada 0   244  pp. 

Willie  &  al.,  1975.   Preliminary  Lincoln  County  Master  Plan. 
Lincoln  County  Commission.   Pioche,  Nevada.   47  pp. 


Meridith,  1976 


APPENDIX 


Caliente  MFP  Step  III  Decisions  Affecting 
The  Beaver  Dam  WHA 


Recreation 


1.  Where  feasible,  game  populations  will  be  increased  in  the 
Clover  Mountains.   Roads  in  this  area  will  be  maintained  regularly 
to  facilitate  hunter  access.   Public  access  across  national 
resource  lands  will  be  maintained. 

2.  In  the  Meadow  Valley  Wash  area,  identify  and  obtain  access 
routes  across  private  lands  where  such  access  is  limited.  Wherever 
possible,  present  upland  bird  populations  will  be  improved. 

3.  Maintain  access  into  Clover  Mountains  where  wild  horses  or 
burros  may  be  viewed.  Where  practical,  water  developments  within 
these  areas  will  be  constructed  to  facilitate  recreational  ob- 
servation of  wild  horses  and  burros. 

40   All  developments  or  operations  within  the  Clover  Mountains 
will  consider  aesthetic  values  (buffer  zones  will  be  provided 
around  chainings,  seedings  and  sprayingswwhere  they  may  be  viewed 
from  any  existing  transportation  route). 


Minerals 


1.  Small  areas  around  crucial  wildlife  habitat  areas  and  water 
sources  should  be  withdrawn  from  the  general  mining  laws  subject 
to  valid  and  existing  rights. 

2„   Mineral  and  energy  sources  will  contain  surface  protection 
stipulations  for  the  protection  of  other  resources,  especially 
fragile  watershed,  wildlife  and  recreational  values. 

3.   Exploration  for  geothermal  energy  sources  will  be  encouraged, 
Prior  to  issuance  of  a  permit  or  lease  for  geothermal  exploration 
or  development,  a  thorough  examination  will  be  made  to  determine 
if  conflicts  exist  with  other  resources. 


Wild  Horses  and  Burros 

1.  Inventory  wild  horsesand  burro  populations  and  determine 
allotments  where  they  are  found. 

2.  Determine  the  allowable  numbers  of  wild  horses  and  burros  in 
each  habitat  area  to  maintain  the  ecological  balance  and  prevent 
environmental  degradation. 

3.  In  areas  of  known  wild  horse  and  burro  use,  fences  will  be 
carefully  planned  so  movement  of  horses  are  not  necessarily  restricted, 


Meridith,  1976 


4.   Develop  Wild  Horse  Management  Plan  for  wild  horse  selected 
problem  areas.  Manage  w^ld  horses  in  place  as  one  component  of 
the  ecosystem.   Priority  allotment  areas  include:   Little  Mountain, 
Rabbit  Spring,  Sheep  Spring,  Oak  Wells,  Buckboard,  Cottonwood, 
Pennsylvania,  Sawmill-Clover  Mountain,  Clover  Creek,  and  Mustang 
Flat. 


Watershed 


1.  Priority  watersheds  for  chemical  or  mechanical  vegetation 
manipulation  are  Sheep  Spring,  Rabbit  Spring,  Oak  Wells  and 
Little  Mountain. 

2.  Other  priority  watersheds  for  mechanical  vegetation  manipu- 
lation include  Buckboard,  Pennsylvania  and  Cottonwood. 

3.  Improve  watershed  cover  and  conditions  in  the  Beaver  Dam 
watershed  (a  fragile  watershed)  by  restricting  uses  which  disturb 
the  soil  and  vegetative  cover. 

4.  Watershed  intensive  analysis  and  activity  planning  will  be 
initiated  based  on  the  following  multiple  used  priorities. 
East  Panaca  Geographic  Area,  Pennsylvania  watershed. 

5.  Improve  and  maintain  w ater  and  environmental  quality  by  reducing 
excess  silts  in  high  runoff  water  flows  in  Clover  Creek,  Meadow 
Valley  Wash  and  Beaver  Dam  Creek  by  improving  watershed  cover  condi- 
tions.  Develop  Watershed  Management  Plans  with  priority  on  the  East 
Panaca  Geographical  Area. 

6.  Reduce  chemical  pollution  at  water  sources  and  improve  environ- 
mental quality  by  fencing  livestock  away  from  water  sources  and 
piping  water  to  a  suitable  drinking  trough.   Place  bird  ladders 

in  troughs. 

7.  Protect  the  following  watershed  improvements  from  wildfire: 
Sheep  Flat,  Barclay  summer  and  Enterprise  seedings  and  the  Staheli 
and  Simpkins  chainings.  Rehabilitate  wildfire  areas  immediately. 


Lands 


1.    If  suitable  land  exchange  can  be  arranged,  acquire  those 
private  lands  containing  archaeological  sites  located  along  the 
Meadow  Valley  Wash  Road  six  miles  south  of  Caliente. 


Meridith,  1976 


Forestry 


1.    Investigate  the  possibility  of  establishing  a  Christmas  tree 
farm  on  the  Sheep  Spring  chaining. 

20    Concentrate  forest  product  sales  in  areas  proposed  for 
chaining. 


Livestock 


1.    Continue  implementation  and/or  maintenance  of  Allotment  Manage- 
ment Plans  on  Mustang,  Oak  Springs,  and  Barclay  Summer  allotments. 

2„        Develop  and  maintain  AMP's  on  all  allotments.   Priority  will 
be  on  the  allotments  which  can  be  improved  through  livestock  manage- 
ment alone:   Crossroads,  Sheep  Spring,  Enterprise  and  Barclay 
Winter  allotments. 

3.  Use  mechanical  and/or  chemical  treatment  or  fire  to  reduce 
woody  competition  and  to  permit  growth  of  good  forage  plants  on 
those  areas  which  have  been  identified  through  Allotment  Manage- 
ment Planning. 

4.  Livestock  waters  will  remain  functioning  throughout  the  year 
for  use  by  wildlife,, 

5.  Water  troughs  will  be  equipped  with  bird  ladders  or  other 
devices  to  facilitate  small  animal  use. 

6.  Reclassify  the  Little  Mountain  Allotment  for  cattle  use  only. 

7.  When  possible,  construct  all  fences  in  important  big  game  areas 
to  wildlife  specifications. 


Wildlife 


1.  Conduct  studies  to  identify  crucial  mountain  lion  habitat 
areas.   Consider  mountain  lions  in  all  Habitat  Management  Plans. 

2.  Inventory  and  protect  crucial  small  game  and  non-game  habitat. 

3.  Conduct  inventory  to  determine  habitat  areas  of  threatened 
and  protected  species.   Develop  special  management  plans. 

4.  Intensive  inventories  will  be  made  of  Ash,  Pine  and  Cottonwood 
Creeks . 

5.  Wildlife  specialist  will  work  closely  with  Range  Specialist 
in  developing  Allotment  Management  Plans  for  those  allotments 
involving  crucial  wildlife  habitat. 

Meridith,  1976 


6.  Cooperate  in  the  development  of  wild  horse  and  burro  manage- 
ment plans. 

7.  Construct  big  game  catchments  identified  in  Habitat  Manage- 
ment Plans. 

8.  Develop  new  waters  for  quail,  dove,  chukar,  cottontails 
and  non-game  use  in  the  Clover  Mountains, 

9.  Control  burn  portions  of  the  south  slope  of  Sawmill  Range 
(see  Management  Framework  Plan  overlays), 

10.  Mineral  examinations  will  be  made  of  crucial  wildlife  areas 
to  identify  potential  conflicts, 

11.  Maintain  or  improve  riparian  vegetation  along  Meadow  Valley 
Wash  and  Clover  Creek. 

12.  Leave  unchained  patches  of  pinyon/juniper  of  10  to  15  acres 
for  every  100  treated.   Design  projects  in  irregular  shapes  to 
increase  edge  effect  and  maintain  treated  areas  as  close  to  cover 
as  possible. 

13.  Develop  additional  summer  habitat  through  chaining  and 
seeding  projects. 


Meridith,  1976 


UNITEp^A>ES  GOVERNMENT 

Memorandum 


DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  INTERIOR 
BUREAU  OF  LAND  MANAGEMENT 


y 


IN  REPLY  REFER  TO: 

1791 
CN-911.5) 


To 


:  District  Ma*rager,  Las  Vegas 


Date: 


DEC  1  8  1975 


_  Associate 

From    :  state  Director,  Nevada 

Subject  :  Review  of  EAR  for  Beaver  Dam  Habitat 
Management  Plan 

Attached  are  the  respective  comments  on  the  subject  environmental 
analysis  record  received  from  the  State  Planning  Coordinator  and 
the  Nevada  Department  of  Fish  and  Game.   Please  prepare  your  draft 
responses  to  each  of  those  offices  and  submit  them  to  this  office 
for  review.   The  final  product  will  then  be  signed  and  transmitted 
under  my  signature  to  those  offices.  Your  drafts  should  address 
the  specific  comments  where  possible. 

Also  attached  are  the  comments  from  the  NSO  Division  of  Resources. 
We  concur  with  these  staff  review  comments  with  the  exception  of 
the  second  portion  of  comment  "C  under  III  -General  Comments.   The 
Division  of  Resources  thought  that  the  statement  recommending  an 
EIS  not  be  prepared  was  included  in  the  EAR  because  the  EAR  title 
page  had  mistakenly  been  placed  in  front  of  the  district's  cover 
memorandum  after  the  document  had  arrived  in  the  State  Office  for 
review. 


7^Z 0l. 


Enclosures  -  3 

Encl.  1  -  Comments  from  State  Clearinghouse  and  Nevada 

Department  of  Fish  and  Game 
Encl.  2  -  Comments  from  NSO  Division  of  Resources   , 
Encl.  3  -  EAR 


,/, 


c  o 

7-    ,  ■ 


te> 


STATE  OF  NEVADA 

GOVERNORS   OFFICE   OF    PLANNING    COORDINATION 

Capitol  Building,  Room  45 

Capitol  Complex 

Carson  City,  Nevada        897  10 

(702)    883  4865 


November    21,     197^ 


Mr.    E.    I.    Rowland 

State  Director 

U.  S.  Bureau  of  Land  Management 

300  Booth  Street 

Reno,  Nevada  89502 

Re:   Beaver  Dam  Habitat  Management  Plan  EAR,  SAI  CiV#7600OO26 

Dear  Mr.  Rowland: 

The  Nevada  Clearinghouse  has  completed  its  review. of  the  Beaver  Dam 
Habitat  Management -Plan  Environmental  Analysis  Record.   The  review  indi- 
cates general  agreement  with  the  proposed  management  plan  with  one  major 
exception.   This  concern  relates  to  the  proposal  on  page  *>>  action  5 
in  which  it  is  proposed  to  obtain  substantial  amounts  of  private  land 
to  "assure  hunter  access  to  national  resource  land." 

Nevada  strongly  objects  to  such  acquisition,  especially  in  counties 
where  federal  ownership  of  land  equals  99/»  of  the  total  county.   The 
property  tax  for  funding  county  and  local  government  is  severely  limited 
because  of  the  vast  federal  land  holdings  and  efforts,  such  as  you  pro- 
pose, to  reduce  the  amount  of  land  on  the  tax  rolls  is  opposed,  especially 
in  light  of  the  fact  that  need  for  such  acquisition  has  not  been  adequately 
demonstrated.   Subject  proposal  should  be  deleted. 

Technical  comments  from  the  Department  of  Fish  and  Game  are  also 
attached.   You  should  respond  to  their  comments  directly  with  a  copy  to 
this  office. 


BDA/db 
enc 

cc :  Department  of  Agriculture 
Department  of  Fish  and  Game 


Sincerely, 


Bruce  D.  Arkell 

State  Planning  Coordinator 


"A\ 


MIKE  OCALLAGHAN 
GOVERNOR 


GLEN   K.   GRIFFITH 
Director 


>0  VALLEY  ROAD 


P.O.  BOX  10678 


RENO.  NEVADA  89510 


TELEPHONE  (  702  )  784-6219 


November  20,  1975 


Mr.  Bruce  D.  Arkell 
Planning  Coordinator 
Governor's  Office 
Capitol  Building,  Rm.  45 
Carson  City,  Nv.  89701 

Dear  Mr.  Arkell: 


Attached  you  will  find  the  comments  of  the  Nevada  Department 
of  Fish  and  Game  concerning  the  Beaver  Dam  Habitat  Management  Plan 
SAI  #76800026. 

There  is  the  possibility  that  all  of  these  comments  may  not 
be  pertinent  to  the  subject  document  since  the  reviewing  office 
has  not  received  a  copy  of  the  revised  Beaver  Dam  Habitat  Manage- 
ment Plan  as  referenced  on  Page  1.   The  document  receiving  com- 
ments is  the  Beaver  Dam  Habitat  Management  Plan  N5-WHA-T24 
Caliente  Planning  Unit,  prepared  by  Denise  P.  Meridith,  Environ- 
mental Specialist,  dated  June  1975. 

Sincerely, 


GLEN  K.    GRIFFITH,    DIRECTOR 


<!  Cu</j&*JL*> 


A.  J^ck  Dieringer 
Assistant  Chief 
Division  of  Fisheries 


AJD:vh 
Enc: 


Page  1 


EAR  Reviewed    Beaver  Dam  Habitat  Management  Plan    SAI#   76800026 
Reviewing  Agency   Nevada  Department  of  Fish  &  Game 
Person/s  Preparing  Review    Nick  J.  Papez 

POLICY  CONSIDERATIONS 

1.    Major  direct  and  secondary  impacts  on  State. 

Page  13   Mention  should  be  made  that  increased  livestock  grazing 
and  trampling  on  vegetation  and  soil  disturbance  will  have  con- 
siderable impact  particularly  during  drought  periods.   The  result 
of  such  impacts  will  directly  affect  all  wildlife  species  either 
directly  through  loss  of  escape  cover,  water  and  food  sources  or 
indirectly  by  lowered  carrying  capacity  through  crucial  winter 
and  spring  survival  periods.   Grazing  in  this  area  by  livestock 
and  "wild"  and  free-roaming  horses  and  burros  will  definitely 
impact  wildlife. 

Page  15-16  Wildlife:  This  section  should  present  impacts,  both 
direct  and  indirect,  upon  all  wildlife  species  resulting  from  im- 
proper grazing  practices  during  all  seasons  of  the  year. 

Page  16   Livestock  grazing  during  drought  periods  will  directly 
affect  watershed  values,  ground  water  tables  and  increase  erosion 
potential. 


Page  2 

TECHNICAL  CONSIDERATIONS 

3.  '   General  comments. 

Pages  2-6  This  suggests  a  horse  and  burro  management  plan 
superimposed  over  the  existing  HMP.  Priorities  here  should 
be  re-aligned  to  exclude  or  totally  eliminate  horse  popula- 
tions from  such  an  important  wildlife  area. 

Pages  7-12   Description  of  existing  environment  is  too  brief 
and  general. 

Method  of  seed  application  should  be  identified.   Aerial  ap- 
plication of  expensive  seed  as  bitterbrush  and  majogany  is 
wasteful  unless  done  between  chaining  or  hand  planted.   On  a 
burn  treatment  these  species  should  be  hand  planted  on  select- 
ed sites. 

4.  Technical  comments. 

Page  4   Seeding  mixture  recommended  is  very  good,  but  the 
seeding  rate  of  each  species  should  be  identified. 

Page  5   Re:  Sawmill  Range  controlled  burn:   Seed  species  and 
rate  should  be  identified. 

Page*  16   We  do  not  agree  with  the  statement  that  "livestock, 
wild  horses  and  burros  would  benefit  from  water  and  forage  im- 
provements as  much  as  wildlife  would".   We  strongly  feel  they 
can  and  will  "out  compete"  all  wildlife  species  for  water, 
forage  and  space  during  critical  periods  such  as  cold  weather 
and  drought  periods. 

Page  18   Livestock,  horses  and  burros.   Mention  is  made  here 
of  mitigating  measures  involving  total  removal  of  livestock 
and  horses  to  eliminate  livestock  competition  with  wildlife  for 
water,  forage  and  living  space.   In  the  same  paragraph  it  is 
also  stated:  "but  this  is  not  compatible  with  multiple  use 
objectives  or  with  the  Wild  Horse  and  Burro  Act  of  1971". 
Since  in  many  cases,  livestock  and  wild  horses  are  not  com- 
patable  with  wildlife  water,  forage  and  specie  needs,  we  believe 
it  logical  the  priorities  be  established.   A  key  wildlife  seasonal 
range  of  water  source  should  be  protected  from  livestock  and  horse 
use. 

5.  Other  Specific  Comments. 

Page  1   This  reviewing  office  has  not  received  a  copy  of  the 
revised  Beaver  Dam  HMP  as  referenced  to  on  this  page. 


Page  3 

6.    Suggested  alternatives,  remedial  actions  and/or  mitigating  measures. 

Alternative  One  is  more  acceptable  than  two,  but  the  proposed 
action  schedule  should  be  the  first  alternative. 


*    UNITED  STATES  GOVERNMENT 

mg  y  DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  INTERIOR 

JM  €  tllO  rail  Ull  ttl  BUREAU  OF  LAND  MANAGEMENT  in  reply  refer  to: 

Nevada  State  Office  1791 

Room  3008  Federal  Building  (N-930,4) 

300  Booth  Street 
Reno,  Nevada   89509 

To      :  Chief,  Planning  Coordination  Staff  (N-911.5)   Date:  December  17,  1975 
From    :  chief,  Division  of  Resources 

4 

Subject  :  Review  0f  EAR  for  Beaver  Dam  tfMP 

The  following  staff  review  comments  are  provided  for  your  coordination  with 
the  District.  \ 

| 
L   Watershed/Forestry 

A.  HMP  Implementation  Schedule  t  Costs  of  catchments  appear  low — 
$5,000/unit. 

B.  Page  5  -  What  is  the  erosion  hazard  of  controlled  burning? 
Are  controlled  and  prescribed  burning  synonymous? 

Co   Precipitation  of  8-9  inches  per  year  indicates  that  marginal 
results  can  be  expected  with  reseeding  of  most  browse  and 
forb  species  listed  on  page  4. 

D.  The  EAR  does  not  fully  consider  the  detrimental  effects 
(erosion  hazard)  of  controlled  burning  65,000  acres. 

E.  P-J  chaining  should  be  complimentary  to  erosion  control  on 
the  shallow  soil  sites. 

Fo    Page  10  -  How  do  soil  micro-organisms  fit  into  the  ecological 
interrelationships?  Do  humans  fit  into  the  ecology? 

G.    Page  11  -  Socio-Economic  Factors  -  Is  there  any  value  or 

demand  for  P-J  posts,  firewood,  and  other  woodland  products? 

H.    Page  13  -  P-J  chaining  debris  will  aid  in  soil  stabilization 
objective. 

I.    Page  14  -  Fencing  of  water  developments  will  reduce  fecal 
and  total  coliform  counts. 

J.    Page  14  -  Hazards  -  Will  "down"  vegetation  (P-J)  and  fences 
present  any  safety  hazard  to  animals?   Appropriate  entry 
of  comment  should  be  in  Section  III.A.l.b. 

K.    Page  18  -  First  sentence  -  More  posts  should  be  immediately 
available.   Reinvasion  of  P-J  will  occur  and,  in  perhaps 
6  to  10  years,  Christmas  trees  should  be  available.   MFP 
decision  supports  this  comment. 


Lo    Page  18,  Item  II0A02.a  -  Prescribed  Burning  Plan  development, 
including  cooperation  with  State  of  Nevada,  Environmental 
Health  Department,  Air  Quality  Division,  should  be  mentioned. 

M.    Page  18  -  What  mitigating  measures  can  be  taken  to  enhance 

water  quality?   Runoff  reduction  will  decrease  sediment  yield 
(PPMofTDS). 

N.    Page  20  -  Indian  Tribal  Council  should  be  notified  of  proposed 
pinyon  chaining. 

0.   General  Comment  -  Pine  and  Mathews  Canyon  Watersheds  are  in  the 
HMP  area.   No  mention  of  research  results  with  University  of 
Nevada  or  hydrologic  study  data  was  included. 

These  comments  represent  a  "quickie"  review  of  the  HMP.   The  65,000  acres 
of  controlled  burning  is  alarming.   Perhaps  an  EIS  on  the  controlled 
burning  should  be  forthcoming. 

II.   Recreation 

A.    The  HMP  mentioned  hunting  quality  would  be  increased.   This 

statement  should  be  explained  further.   Perhaps  what  is  meant 
is  the  quantity  of  wildlife  available  would  be  increased. 
In  recreation,  quality  refers  to  enjoyment  of  the  hunter's 
experience  and  quantity  refers  to  number. 

Bo   We  can  find  no  reference  to  ORV  use  and  its  effect  on  the 
objectives  of  the  HMP.   Do  we  need  to  protect  the  values 
created  by  the  HMP  or  is  there  critical  wildlife  habitat 
that  should  be  restricted  from  or  closed  to  ORV's? 

C.   The  existing  recreation  opportunities  have  not  been  fully 
stated,,   We  cannot  accept  the  statement  -  Land  Use  - 
".. o recreation,  hunting,  fishing,  etc."  Every  recreation 
opportunity  existing  should  be  narrated,  including  primitive 
values. 

D0    There  are  three  State  Parks  in  the  WHA0   These  should  be 
discussed  under  the  existing  situation*   The  effects  on 
these  State  Parks  should  also  be  discussed.   For  example, 
water  and  air  quality  from  a  recreation  point  of  view. 
Aesthetical  impacts  of  chaining  and  burning  is  visible 
from  the  Parks. 

E.    Visual  management  techniques  should  be  added  to  mitigating 
measures.   Are  the  chainings  and  burning  still  practical 
after  the  required  visual  management  constraints  are  applied? 
Should  this  constraint  be  part  of  the  proposal? 

-2- 


F.    Don  Fowler  and  Dr»  Richard  Brooks  should  be  consulted  for 

information  on  cultural  values  in  the  area.   They  have  done 
work  in  the  area  and  their  reports  should  be  utilized  to 
show  the  probable  impact  of  our  proposal  on  the  cultural 
resources.   It  is  not  adequate  to  say  "BLM  has  not  conducted 
archaeological  surveys"  because  there  is  known  data  avail- 
able if  we  take  the  time  to  do  the  research. 

Adding  to  the  existing  situation  would  allow  an  analysis  of 
the  impact  of  the  project  and  the  mitigating  measures. 
After  mitigating  measures  are  applied,  is  the  project 
practical  or  economical? 

III.  General  Comments 

A.    It's  hard  to  believe  that  65,000  acres  of  controlled  burn 
doesn't  have  a  significant  effect  on  the  human  environment 
and  doesn't  constitute  a  major  federal  action. 

B0  As  the  proposed  project  is  on  the  Stateline,  the  environmental 
analysis  should  include  the  affected  area  across  the  boundary. 
Utah  should  have  a  change  to  review  the  project  and  the  EAR. 

C.    The  report  was  signed  in  September;  therefore,  the  title  page 
should  show  September,  not  June.   Instruction  Memorandum  No. 
75-325  (WO)  indicated  that  the  statement  on  the  necessity  of 
an  EIS  should  not  be  part  of  the  EAR. 


-3- 


REPLIES  TO  NSO  DIVISION  OF  RESOURCE  COMMENTS: 


Comment:  "HMP  Implementation  Schedule 
$5,000/unit." 


Costs  of  catchments  appear  low  -■ 


Answer:    Two  such  water  catchments  were  installed  in  the  Caliente  Planning 
Unit  in  1975  at  a  cost  to  BLM  of  $3,000  a  piece.   Therefore,  the 
cost  stated  in  the  E.A.R.  is  not  low.   In  fact,  it  was  estimated 
at  $5,000  to  take  into  account  rising  inflation  costs  in  the  near 
future . 

Comment:   "Precipitation  of  8-9  inches  per  year  indicates  that  marginal 
results  can  be  expected  with  reseeding  of  most  browse  and 
forb  species  listed." 

Answer:   Low  precipitation  does  limit  the  effectiveness  of  reseeding  through- 
out southern  Nevada,   But  some  past  projects  (like  Horsethief 
chaining  in  Lincoln  County)  have  been  successful.  Most  of  these 
projects  have  occurred  in  areas  with  10  inches  or  more  of  precipi- 
tation.  Amount  of  rainfall  and  chances  of  success  will  be  evaluated 
on  individual  reseeding  projects  and  priorities  will  be  set  ac- 
cordingly.  These  areas  mentioned  in  the  E.A.R.  are  only  potential 
rehabilitation  areas. 

Comment:   Socio-Economic  Factors  -  Is  there  any  value  or  demand  for  P-J 
posts,  firewood,  and  other  woodland  products? 

Page  20  -  Indian  Tribal  Council  should  be  notified  of  proposed 
piny on  chaining. 

Answer:   Yes.   Permits  for  P-J  posts,  firewood  and  woodland  products  are 
issued  for  the  Caliente  area  by  BLM.   The  impacts  of  the  HMP  on 
this  resource  is  mentioned  under  III.A.l.d.  (Socio-Economic  Values). 
The  major  one  is  temporary  loss  of  areas  for  pinyon  nut  collection, 
post  cutting  and  Christmas  tree  gathering. 

Mitigating  measures  discussed  in  the  E.A.R.  include: 

1)  Known  pinyon  nut  gathering  areas  should  be  excluded 
from  treatment,  2)  commercial  and  individual  collection 
of  Christmas  trees,  firewood  and  juniper  posts  should 
be  concentrated  in  areas  slated  for  habitat  rehabilitations 
and  3)  areas  of  trees  will  be  left  standing  within  re- 
habilitation areas  to  minimize  post,  firewood  and  Christmas 
tree  loss. 


In  any  case,  the  loss  of  Christmas  trees  in  chained  areas  is 
temporary.   In  10-12  years,  the  trees  will  return  and  probably 
be  better  specimens  than  those  presently  growing  under  crowded 
conditions. 


The  Indian  Tribal  Council  should  be  notified.   Information  from 
this  group  and  other  members  of  the  public  will  be  used  to 
identify  known  pinyon  nut  gathering  areas  (which  will  be  excluded 
from  rehabilitation). 

Comment:   "Item  II„A.2.a.  -  Prescribed  Burning  Plan  development,  including 

cooperation  with  State  of  Nevada,  Environmental  Health  Department, 
Air  Quality  Division,  should  be  mentioned." 

Answer:   These  agencies  and  others  will  be  consulted  prior  to  any  prescribed 
burning. 

Comment:   "Fencing  of  water  developments  will  reduce  fecal  and  total 
coliform  counts." 

Answer:   We  agree.   The  E.A.R.  states  that  fencing  will  improve  water  quality 
of  the  springs.   (Refer  to  Anticipated  Impacts  -  Water).   The 
reduction  of  fecal  and  total  coliform  counts  are  two  ways  in  which 
quality  will  be  improved. 

Comment:  Hazards  -  Will  "down"  vegetation  (P-J)  and  fences  present  any 

safety  hazards  to  animals?  Appropriate  entry  of  comment  should 
be  in  Section  III.A.l.b. 

Answer:   Downed  vegetation  will  not  present  a  safety  hazard  to  animals. 
In  fact  it  will  benefit  wildlife  by  providing  more  cover  for 
small  animals  like  rabbits  and  rodents.   As  stated  under  "Miti- 
gating Measures"  fences  around  waters  will  be  constructed  to 
wildlife  specifications  to  allow  easy  access. 

Comment:   "The  HMP  mentioned  hunting  quality  would  be  increased.   This 

statement  should  be  explained  further.   Perhaps  what  is  meant  is 
the  quantity  of  wildlife  available  would  be  increased.   In  recreation, 
quality  refers  to  enjoyment  of  the  hunter's  experience  and  quantity 
refers  to  number." 

Answer:    If  the  condition  of  and  quantity  of  game  wildlife  is  improved,  it 

follows  that  the  enjoyment  of  the  hunter's  experience  will  increase. 
Both  hunting  quantity  and  quality  will  be  improved  as  a  result  of 
implementation  of  the  HMP. 

Comment:   "We  can  find  no  reference  to  ORV  use  and  its  effect  on  the  ob- 
jectives of  the  HMPo   Do  we  need  to  protect  the  values  created 
by  the  HMP  or  is  there  critical  wildlife  habitat  that  should  be 
restricted  from  or  closed  to  ORV's?" 


Answer:   ORV  use  has  not  yet  conflicted  with  wildlife  in  the  Beaver  Dam 

WHA.   The  wildlife  activity  has  identified  no  areas  that  need  to 
be  closed  to  ORV's. 


Comment:   "The  existing  recreation  opportunities  have  not  been  fully 
stated.  We  cannot  accept  the  statement  -  Land  Use  -  "  ... 
recreation,  hunting,  fishing,  etc."  Every  recreation  opportunity 
existing  should  be  narrated,  including  primitive  values. 

Answer:   Whether  an  E.A.R.  is  long  enough  or  is  detailed  enough  will  always 
be  a  subjective  opinion.   Many,  many  recreational  and  other  land 
uses  (everything  from  rockhounding  in  the  Clover  Mountains  to 
mountain  climbing  in  the  Highland  Range)  could  have  been  mentioned 
and  even  delved  into  in  detail.   But  the  E.A.R.  emphasized 
the  recreational  activity  most  affected  by  the  proposed  action  -- 
hunting.   The  importance  of  hunting  is  described  under  "Description 
of  Existing  Environment  -  Socio-Economic  Factors"  and  the  impacts 
of  the  proposed  action  on  hunting  are  described  in  HI.A.l.d. 
Other  recreational  opportunities  throughout  the  Caliente  Planning 
are  discussed  in  detail  in  the  Caliente  Unit  Resource  Analysis, 

Comment:   There  are  three  State  Parks  in  the  WHA,   These  should  be  discussed 
under  the  existing  situation.   The  effects  on  these  State  Parks 
should  also  be  discussed.   For  example,  water  and  air  quality  from 
a  recreation  point  of  view,   Aesthetical  impacts  of  chaining  and 
burning  is  visible  from  the  Parks. 

'Visual  management  techniques  should  be  added  to  mitigating  measures. 
Are  the  chainings  and  burning  still  practical  after  the  required 
visual  management  constraints  are  applied?   Should  this  constraint 
be  part  of  the  proposal? 

Answer:   There  are  only  two  State  Parks  within  the  boundaries  of  the  Beaver 
Dam  WHA  --  Beaver  Dam  a nd  Kershaw-Ryan,   Cathedral  Gorge  is  north 
of  the  WHA,   There  will  be  no  effect  on  water  quality  in  these 
areas.   Air  quality  may  be  very  temporarily  degraded  from  dust  and 
smoke  during  chaining  or  burning.   Both  the  distance  between  these 
parks  and  proposed  projects  (minimum  of  four  miles  in  mountainous 
country)  and  buffer  zones  around  projects  (see  MFP  recreation 
decision  in  the  appendix)  will  effectively  shield  the  projects 
from  view  of  the  parks. 

Visual  management  techniques  already  appear  under,  mitigating 
measures  (refer  to  "Landscape  Character").   It  is  possible  to 
conduct  habitat  rehabilitation  projects  with  a  minimum  of  aesthetic 
damage. 


Comment:   "Don  Fowler  and  Dr.  Richard  Brooks  should  be  consulted  for  information 
on  cultural  values  in  the  area.   They  have  done  work  in  the  area 
and  their  reports  should  be  utilized  to  show  the  probable  impact 
of  our  proposal  on  the  cultural  resources.   It  is  not  adequate  to 
say  "BLM  has  not  conducted  archaeological  surveys"  because  there 
is  known  data  available  if  we  take  the  time  to  do  the  research." 


Answer:   A  brief  description  of  archaeology  of  the  area  has  been  added  to 
'•Description  of  the  Existing  Environment."  Not  much  of  the  WHA 
has  been  intensively  surveyed. 

The  following  statement  appears  under  mitigating  measures: 
"Archaeological  surveys  should  be  made  of  all  proposed  chaining 
or  prescribed  burning  sites  and  water  development  areas  in  order 
to  protect  any  possibly  irreplaceable  archaeological  values." 
This  is  recommended  as  a  stipulations „   Therefore  before  any  project 
is  begun  the  Las  Vegas  District  archaeologist  will  determine  if 
any  archaeological  values  are  present  on  a  project-by-project 
basis  and  how  best  to  salvage  or  preserve  them.  Whether  he  makes 
this  determination  on  the  basis  of  this  own  new  on- the-ground 
investigations  or  on  the  basis  of  existing  outside  data  is  up 
to  the  discretion  of  him  and  the  District  Manager. 

Comment:   It's  hard  to  believe  that  65,000  acres  of  controlled  burn  doesn't 
have  a  significant  effect  on  the  human  environment  and  doesn't 
constitute  a  major  federal  action. 


Answer:   All  the  proposed  chainings  and  burnings  that  appear  in  the  Beaver 
Dam  HMP  are  considered  major  actions  with  significant  impacts  on 
the  environment.   That  is  why  the  cover  memo  which  accompanied 
this  E.A.R.  stated  that  "none  of  the  actions  that  affect  livestock 
grazing  in  the  Beaver  Dam  area  (chaining,  prescribed  burning, 
seeding)  should  be  implemented  until  a  grazing  environmental 
impact  statement  for  the  Caliente  Planning  Unit  (scheduled  for 
FY  78)  has  been  prepared,," 

But  it  has  been  determined  that  the  other  actions  proposed  in 
the  E.A.R.  (water  catchments,  spring  developments,  etc.)  do 
not  constitute  major  federal  actions  significantly  affecting  the 
human  environment „   It  is  recommended  that  these  actions  and 
only  these  actions  be  implemented. 

Comment:   "As  the  proposed  project  is  on  the  State  line,  the  environmental 
analysis  should  include  the  affected  area  across  the  boundary. 
Utah  should  have  a  chance  to  review  the  project  and  the  E.A.R." 

Answer:   Utah  should  have  a  chance  to  review  the  HMP  and  E.A.R.   It  is 
particularly  important  to  get  their  opinion  of  the  proposed 
burning  which  is  close  to  the  Utah-Nevada  border.   This  has  been 
added  as  a  recommended  mitigating  measure. 

Comment:  What  is  the  erosion  hazard  of  controlled  burning?  Are  controlled 
and  prescribed  burning  synonymous? 

Answer:   The  proposed  action  does  not  suggest  controlled  or  prescribed 
burning,  which  are  considered  synonymous,  of  the  entire  65,000 
acres.   The  boundary  shown  on  Map  #3  and  the  acreages  in  the  im- 
plementation schedule  merely  identified  the  area  to  be  considered 
by  the  resources  from  which  to  derive  viable  burn  locations  that 
would  not  be  detrimental  in  terms  of  erosion  hazard,  sediment 


Comment 


production,  and  water  quality.   This  would,  out  of  necessity, 
involve  extensive  coordination  efforts  among  soils,  watershed, 
wildlife,  recreation,  visual  aspects,  and  forestry  to  identify  areas 
where  prescribed  burning  would  not  be  detrimental.   Such  identified 
areas  could  not  possibly  involve  acreages  approaching  the  magnitude 
of  65,000  acres. 

What  mitigating  measures  can  be  taken  to  enhance  water  quality? 
Runoff  reduction  will  decrease  sediment  yield  (PPM  of  TDS). 

P-J  chaining  debris  will  aid  in  soil  stabilization  objective. 

P-J  chaining  should  be  complimentary  to  erosion  control  on  the 
shallow  soil  sites. 


Answer:   According  to  Gifford  (1973)  chained-with-windrowing  plots  yield 
from  1-2  to  5  times  more  water  during  a  runoff  event  than  native 
pinyon- juniper o   However,  runoff  from  debris-in-place  plots  was 
not  greater  than  that  measured  from  natural  woodland  and  resulting 
sediment  yields  were  similar  to  those  from  adjacent  unchained 
woodland  areas.   Infiltration  rates  on  chain-with-debris-in-place 
treatment  are  not  as  greatly  affected  due  to  much  less  mechanical 
disturbance  of  surface  soils.   Debris  left  on  the  soil  surface 
(a  mitigating  measure)  acts  as  both  retention  and  detention  storage, 
nearly  eliminating  all  runoff  because  water  is  held  on  the  land- 
scape until  the  soil  can  absorb  it  while  also  reducing  evaporation 
losses  by  reducing  wind. 

Comment:   How  do  soil  micro-organisms  fit  into  the  ecological  interrelationships? 
Do  humans  fit  into  the  ecology? 

Answer:   Soil  micro-organisms  are  responsible  for  organic  matter  de- 
composition whereby  plant  and  animal  residues  are  broken  down 
and  nutrients  are  released  for  assimilation.   During  the  decaying 
process  by  which  humus  is  formed,  soil  aggregate  stability  is 
enhanced  and  CO2  is  given  off  which  ultimately  escapes  to  the 
atmosphere,  where  it  may  again  be  used  by  plants. 

Two  towns  are  located  on  the  western  edge  of  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA 
(for  a  discussion  of  these  communities  refer  to  socio-economic 
section  of  the  E.A.R.).   Though  few  people  live  within  the  boundaries 
of  the  WHA,  man  has  had  an  effect  on  the  ecology.  He  acts  as  a 
predator-hunting  haravests,  road  kills,  etc.  He  has  altered  the 
ecology  by  putting  out  natural  fires  and  allowing  pinyon- juniper 
woodlands  to  expand  and  get  denser.   His  livestock  have  heavily 
grazed  some  areas,  eliminating  palatable  forage  species.   In  some 
areas  he's  replaced  native  vegetation  with  introduced  crested 
wheatgrass0   He's  built  roads,  corrals  and  in  other  ways,  changed 
the  landscape  character  of  the  area. 


REPLIES  TO  NEVADA  DEPARTMENT  OF  FISH  AND  GAME  COMMENTS 


Policy  Considerations 


Comment:   "Page  13  Mention  should  be  made  that  increased  livestock  grazing 
and  trampling  on  vegetation  and  soil  disturbance  will  have  consid- 
erable impact  particularly  during  drought  periods.   The  result 
of  such  impacts  will  directly  affect  all  wildlife  species  either 
directly  through  loss  of  escape  cover,  water  and  food  sources  or 
indirectly  by  lowered  carrying  capacity  through  crucial  winter  and 
spring  survival  periods.   Grazing  in  this  area  by  livestock  and 
"wild"  and  free-roaming  horses  and  burros  will  definitely  impact 
wildlife." 

Answer:   The  Beaver  Dam  HMP,  and  the  Caliente  Management  Framework  (as  well 
as  allotment  management  plans  and  horse/burro  management  plans)  are 
designed  to  minimize  conflicts  between  wildlife  and  livestock,  wild 
horses  and  burros.   Many  of  the  recommendations  in  the  E.A.R. 
(like  segregating  the  seedings  from  livestock  use  for  the  first 
two  seasons,  and  providing  separate  waters)  and  the  MFP  (like 
equipping  all  livestock  troughs  with  bird  ladders)  will  hopefully 
decrease  the  negative  impact  of  grazing  on  wildlife  that  is  de- 
scribed in  this  comment.   Efficient  multiple-use  of  the  Beaver  Dam 
WHA  is  the  goal  of  BLM  planning. 

Comment:   "Wildlife:   This  section  should  present  impacts,  both  direct  and 

indirect,  upon  all  wildlife  species  resulting  from  improper  grazing 
practices  during  all  seasons  of  the  year." 

"Livestock  grazing  during  drought  periods  will  directly  affect 
watershed  values,  ground  water  tables  and  increase  erosion 
potential. " 

Answer:   The  HMP  and  E.A.R.  make  no  recommendations  on  increasing  or  de- 
creasing livestock  grazing  on  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA.   No  livestock 
grazing  proposals  are  presented  and  the  impacts  of  grazing  are  not 
analyzed.   These  types  of  recommendations  are  discussed  in  allot- 
ment management  plans  and  will  be  evaluated  in  the  environmental 
impact  statement  on  grazing  in  Caliente  (scheduled  in  FY  78) .   The 
improvements  suggested  in  these  reports  are  designed  primarily  to 
benefit  wildlife,  not  livestock,  horses  and  burros.   Livestock, 
horses  and  burros  will  be  benefited  indirectly  but  there  will  be 
no  increase  in  the  number  of  allotted  AUM's  as  a  result  of  im- 
plementation of  the  HMP. 

Technical  Considerations 


Comment:   The  suggestion  is  made  that  a  horse  and  burro  management  plan  be 
superimposed  over  the  existing  HMP.   "Priorities  here  should  be 
re-aligned  to  exclude  or  totally  eliminate  horse  populations  from 
such  an  important  wildlife  area." 

"We  do  not  agree  with  the  statement  that  "livestock,  wild  horses 
and  burros  would  benefit  from  water  and  forage  improvements  as 


much  as  wildlife  would."  We  strongly  feel  they  can  and  will 
"out  compete"  all  wildlife  species  for  water,  forage  and  space 
during  critical  periods  such  as  cold  weather  and  drought  periods." 

"Livestock,  horses  and  burros.   Mention  is  made  here  of  mitigating 
measures  involving  total  removal  of  livestock  and  horses  to  elimi- 
nate livestock  competition  with  wildlife  for  water,  forage  and 
living  space.   In  the  same  paragraph  it  is  also  stated:   "but 
this  is  not  compatible  with  multiple  use  objectives  or  with  the 
Wild  Horse  and  Burro  Act  of  1971".   Since  in  many  cases,  live- 
stock and  wild  horses  are  not  compatible  with  wildlife  water, 
forage  and  species  needs,  we  believe  it  logical  that  priorities 
be  established.   A  key  wildlife  seasonal  range  of  water  source 
should  be  protected  from  livestock  and  horse  use." 

Answer:   Again,  the  Bureau's  policy  is  one  of  multiple  use  management.   To 
totally  eliminate  horses  from  this  600,000  acres  is  in  direct 
conflict  with  the  Caliente  Management  Framework  Plan  (refer  to 
appendix  to  the  E.A.R.)  which  states  that  wild  horses  will  be 
managed  in  place  as  one  component  of  the  ecosystem.   A  horse  and 
burro  management  plan  may  determine  and  may  recommend  that  some 
horses  and  burros  be  rounded  up  and  moved  to  another  area  or  given 
up  for  adoption.   But  this  would  have  to  be  accomplished  jointly 
by  the  wildlife  and  wild  horse  and  burro  activities  through  planning 
as  suggested  in  the  MFP. 

Comment:   "Description  of  existing  environment  is  too  brief  and  general." 

Answer:   whether  an  E.A.R.  is  long  enough  or  is  in  enough  detail  will  always 
be  a  subjective  opinion.   The  E.A.R.  summarizes  what  was  con- 
sidered relevant  information  to  describe  the  existing  environment 
of  the  Beaver  Dam  WHA.   The  E.A.R.  refers  the  reader  to  the  Beaver 
Dam  HMP  and  Intensive  Inventory  for  more  detailed  descriptions. 
The  reader  can  also  refer  to  the  Unit  Resource  Analysis  for  existing 
environment  information. 

Comment:   "Method  of  seed  application  shouJd  be  identified.   Aerial  applica- 
tion of  expensive  seed  as  bitterbrush  and  mahogany  is  wasteful 
unless  done  between  chaining  or  had  planted.   On  a  burn  treatment 
these  species  should  be  hand  planted  on  selected  sites." 

"Seeding  mixture  recommended  is  very  good,  but  the  seeding  rate 
of  each  species  should  be  identified." 


"Re:   Sawmill  Range  controlled  burn: 
be  identified." 


Seed  species  and  rate  should 


Answer:   The  same  species  will  be  used  on  the  prescribed  burn  and  on 

chaining  areas.   Drilling  will  be  used  where  possible.   Hand  plant- 
ing and/or  broadcasting  will  be  used  on  areas  where  drilling  is 
impractical.   Suggested  rates  of  seeding  have  been  added  to  the 
proposed  action. 


Comment:   "This  reviewing  office  has  not  received  a  copy  of  the  revised 
Beaver  Dam  HMP  as  referenced  to  on  page  1." 

Answer:   John  Donaldson,  Regional  Supervisor  of  the  Nevada  Department  of 
Fish  and  Game  in  Las  Vegas,  received  a  copy  of  the  revised 
Beaver  Dam  HMP  last  summer  and  signed  it  in  December,  1975. 
Copies  of  the  HMP  will  be  redistributed  with  the  final  copies 
of  this  E.A.R. 


REPLY  TO  STATE  CLEARINGHOUSE  COMMENTS: 


The  full  statement  that  appeared  in  the  draft  E.A.R.  stated  that  the  lands 
described  should  be  obtained  "when  and  if"  acquisition  becomes  the  "only" 
way  of  accomplishing  the  stated  goals.   The  chance  of  the  problem  arising 
is  nil  and  the  chance  of  acquisition  being  the  only  solution  is  even  more 
remote.   Easements  or  other  cooperative  agreements  between  the  Federal 
government  and  private  landowners  are  more  common  methods  of  dealing  with 
access  or  important  wildlife  habitat  problems.   The  main  intent  of  the 
proposal  in  the  E.A.R.  was  to  identify  important  wildlife  habitat  that  exists 
on  private  land.   Anyway,  this  proposal  has  been  modified  in  the  final  E.A.R. 


Bureau  of  Land  Management 
Library 

3ldg.  50,  Denver  Federal  Center 
Denver,  CO  80225 


"jantor 


I 


r 

o  a 

>  > 

Z  H 

PI  PI 
D 


r-i   •      00  /O 


y 

Z  r+ 

t-n  (D 

l  =3 

S  en 

>     < 
I      CD 

H 

K)    H- 

< 
t-»  CD 
<£>  3 
■~J  ri- 
al O 
•       t-j 


o 
o 
7] 
;o 
o 

m 


03.^ 

OH 
•AS 

OO