Description: This overlay was created by buffering half a mile on either side of the centerline of Scenic and Historic Byways in and around the GMUG National Forest and then clipping it to the Forest Boundary. Within this corridor management will reflect both Scenic Byway management and the underlying Management Area.
Description: This overlay was created by buffering half a mile on either side of the centerline of nationally designated trails. Within this corridor management will reflect both Designated Trail management and the underlying Management Area.
Description: This layer contains buffers of utility lines on the GMUG National Forest, comined with areas which have been designated (per the requirements of Section 368 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005) as West-wide energy corridors in Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service Records of Decision in connection with the final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Designation of Energy Corridors on Federal Land in the 11 Western States, November 2008. After designation of the corridors a lawsuit occurred, followed by a settlement agreement. The July 23, 2012 settlement agreeement (see http://corridoreis.anl.gov/documents/docs/Settlement_Agreement_Package.pdf) identified some of the designated corridors as "corridors of concern", listing them by corridor identifier and state along with a short description of the concerns. This layer depicts all of the designated corridors with a flag indicating whether they were identified as a corridor of concern. For corridors of concern, the text from the settlement agreement describing the concern has been added
Description: Conservation Watershed Network - History and PurposeUnder the 2012 Planning Rule (FSH 1909.12 CH 23.13) a framework is laid out for plan components of the Revised Land Management Plan (RLMP) “… to provide for ecological conditions necessary to maintain the persistence or contribute to the recovery of native species within the plan area, including at-risk species identified in assessment.” If the Responsible Official determines that additional species specific plan components are needed to maintain the persistence or contribute to the recovery of at risk species, these specific plan components will be included in the RLMP. The Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forest has therefore designated Conservation Watershed Networks (CWN). Conservation Watershed Networks are a specific subset of sub-watersheds (12-14 digit Hydrologic Unit Codes) where prioritization for long-term conservation and preservation of At Risk aquatic species occurs. These sub-watersheds were selected based upon the presence, conservation status or viability, and likely continued persistence for either native green lineage Colorado River cutthroat trout (green lineage CRCT) or boreal toad (BOR). In the absence of hybridization and competition with non-native fishes, habitat quality and connectivity is the most important factor for the persistence of native cutthroat trout. Consequently, during the selection of CWN for cutthroat trout, sub-watersheds were designated based on two criteria:Conservation status designated by the CRCT Conservation Team (2006).Cutthroat trout populations which have greater than 90% genetic integrity are termed Conservation Populations.ANDThe inhabited stream length is at least 8km (~5 miles, Hilderbrand and Kershner 2000) OR the supporting watershed is at least 14.7 km2 (~3,600 ac, Harig and Fausch 2002). Selection of boreal toad Conservation Watershed Networks is based on the BOR Recovery Teams criteria for population viability (Loeffler 2001). In order for the population to be considered viable: There must be documented breeding activity andrecruitment to the population in at least four (4) out of the past ten (10) years. ORThere has been an average observed total of at least, twenty (20) breeding adults at the breeding locality, producing an average of at least four (4) viable egg masses per year, with a stable number of breeding adultsANDThe population faces no known, significant and imminent threat to its habitat, health, and environmental conditions.Although there are many documented observations of boreal toad across the GMUG NF, in the face of Chytridiomycosis, the amphibian fungal disease caused by Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis(Bd), the species has suffered severe declines in Colorado. Disease vectors are not well understood and many once robust populations have become extirpated after the detection of Bd.Of the documented observances of boreal toad across the GMUG, only three currently support successful breeding. Two of these populations (Texas Creek and Upper East River sub-watersheds) are at high altitude sites within wilderness. It is thought that the remoteness of these sites has helped to prevent the intrusion of the invasive chytrid fungus. Unfortunately in the past two years Texas Creek has become positive for Bd. Currently it is unknown if the Texas Creek population has lost its viability due to Bd. To-date the other site, located in the Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness, remains free of Bd. Every effort should be made to not only protect and conserve the Upper East River population but also keep it free of chytrid. Similarly the final sub-watershed, Headwaters Buzzard Creek, is unique because even with the presence of chytrid, boreal toads are undergoing successful reproduction. Although the factors effecting this occurrence are not fully understood, it is possible that these toads have an innate resilience to chytrid. It remains, that management approaches and allowable activities within this sub-watershed should make every effect to maintain and protect the essential habitat supporting this unique population. ReferencesCRCT Conservation Team. 2006. Conservation agreement for Colorado River cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii pleuriticus) in the States of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins. 10p. Harig, A. L., & Fausch, K. D. (2002). Minimum habitat requirements for establishing translocated cutthroat trout populations. Ecological Applications, 12(2), 535-551.Hilderbrand, R. H., & Kershner, J. L. (2000). Movement patterns of stream-resident cutthroat trout in Beaver Creek, Idaho–Utah. Transactions of the american Fisheries Society, 129(5), 1160-1170.Forest Service Handbook 1909.12 Land Management Handbook. https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/planningrule/home/?cid=stelprd3828310Loeffler, C. (ed.), 2001. Conservation plan and agreement for the management and recovery of the Southern Rocky Mountain population of the boreal toad (Bufo boreas boreas), Boreal Toad Recovery Team. 76 pp. + appendices.Watershed and Subwatershed Description:This data set is a complete digital hydrologic unit boundary layer to the Subwatershed (12-digit) 6th level for the entire United States. This data set consists of geo-referenced digital data and associated attributes created in accordance with the "Federal Guidelines, Requirements, and Procedures for the National Watershed Boundary Dataset; Chapter 3 of Section A, Federal Standards, Book 11, Collection and Delineation of Spatial Data; Techniques and Methods 11-A3" (04/01/2009). http://www.ncgc.nrcs.usda.gov/products/datasets/watershed/index.html . Polygons are attributed with hydrologic unit codes for 1st(Region), 2nd(Sub-Region), 3rd(Basin), and 4th(Sub-Basin) Hydrologic Unit Level codes, names, Sub-Basin acres and square miles. This data set was obtained from the source in July 2010.
Copyright Text: Funding and support for the Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) were provided by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the United States Geological Survey. Representatives from the U.S. Geological Survey and Environmental Protection Agency contributed a substantial amount of time and salary towards quality review and updating of the dataset in order to meet the Federal Standards for Delineation of Hydrologic Unit Boundaries.
Description: This feature consists of Management Areas proposed under the Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison (GMUG) National Forest plan revision effort undertaken under the 2012 Forest Planning Rule. Management Areas are current as of April 4, 2019 and were last updated on March 21, 2019. Feature is to be released to the public along with the preliminary draft plan.
Description: This feature consists of Management Areas proposed under the Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison (GMUG) National Forest plan revision effort undertaken under the 2012 Forest Planning Rule. Management Areas are current as of April 4, 2019 and were last updated on March 21, 2019. Feature is to be released to the public along with the preliminary draft plan.
{"renderer":{"type":"uniqueValue","field1":"Legend_OverlapMA_Description","field2":null,"field3":null,"defaultSymbol":null,"defaultLabel":null,"uniqueValueInfos":[{"symbol":{"type":"esriSFS","style":"esriSFSForwardDiagonal","color":[0,0,0,255],"outline":{"type":"esriSLS","style":"esriSLSSolid","color":[0,0,0,255],"width":0.4}},"value":"3.1 - CO Roadless Area","label":"3.1 - CO Roadless Area","description":""}],"fieldDelimiter":","},"transparency":0,"labelingInfo":null}
HasZ: true
HasM: true
Has Attachments: false
Has Geometry Properties: true
HTML Popup Type: esriServerHTMLPopupTypeAsHTMLText