{\rtf1\ansi\deflang1024\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman Times Roman;}{\f1\fnil Times;}{\f2\fnil Helvetica-Narrow;}{\f3\fswiss Helvetica;}{\f4\fnil NewCenturySchlbk;}{\f5\fnil AvantGarde;}{\f6\froman Palatino;}{\f7\fnil Caslon 224 Black;}{\f8\fnil 
Caslon 224 Book;}{\f9\fnil Morewingbats;}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;}{\stylesheet{\s1\tx720\tx1440\tx2160 \f1\fs24\cf1 \snext1 axNormal;}{\s2 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon50\snext2+Normal;}{\s3\fi-144\li144 \f2\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon50\snext3 BabyBullet;}{
\s4\qj\fi-360\li360\sa172 \f3\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon30\snext4 Bullet;}{\s5 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon0\snext5 Cell;}{\s6\qc\fi-720\li720\sa144 \b\f4\fs28 \sbasedon8\snext6 Chap Subtitle;}{\s7\qc\fi-720\li720\sa432 \b\i\f4\fs24 \sbasedon8\snext7 Chap Theme;}{
\s8\qc\fi-720\li720\sa43 \b\f4\fs36 \snext8 Chap Title;}{\s9\qj\fi-360\li2520\sa172 \f3\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon48\snext9 Check_box;}{\s10\sa224\tx3225\tx3591\tx3955\tx4320\tx7074\tx8360 \f1\fs20\cf1 \snext10 Default;}{\s11\qj\sa172 \f3\fs20\cf1 
\sbasedon30\snext11 FigureCaption;}{\s12 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon0\snext12 Footnote;}{\s13\tqc\tx5040\tqr\tx10080\tqr\tx13680\brdrt\brdrdb\brdrcf1\brdrw20 \i\f5\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon0\snext13 HdrFtr;}{\s14\sb187\sa144 \b\f1\fs24\cf1 \snext14 Head1;}{\s15
\sb187\sa144 \b\fs20 \sbasedon14\snext15 Head2;}{\s16\sb360\sa288 \f1\fs20\cf1 \snext16 Head3;}{\s17\sb360\sa288 \fs20 \sbasedon16\snext17 Head4;}{\s18\qj\li2160\sa144 \f3\fs20 \sbasedon20\snext18 IntroBullet;}{\s19\qj\li2340\sa144 \f3\fs20 
\sbasedon20\snext19 IntroBulletPara;}{\s20\qj\sa144 \f3\fs20 \snext20 IntroPara;}{\s21 \f1\fs24\cf1 \snext21 Level 1 ( I );}{\s22\fi-720\li1440 \sbasedon21\snext22 Level 2 (A);}{\s23\fi-720\li2160 \sbasedon21\snext23 Level 3 (1);}{\s24 \sbasedon21
\snext24 Level 4 (a);}{\s25 \sbasedon21\snext25 Level 5 (i);}{\s26\qj\li2160\sa172 \f3\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon30\snext26 ListContin;}{\f1\fs24\cf1 \snext0 Normal;}{\s27\qj\fi-360\li2520\sa172 \f3\fs20\cf1 \snext27 NumList;}{\s28\fi-360\li2520 \sbasedon27
\snext28 NumListStart;}{\s29\fi-360\li2520 \sbasedon27\snext29 NumList_indent;}{\s30\qj\sa172 \f3\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon0\snext30 Paragraph;}{\s31\fi-2878\li2878\tx2878\tx3225\tx3591\tx3955\tx4320\tx7074\tx8360 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon0\snext31 Section;}{
\s32\tqr\tldot\tx9360 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon0\snext32 TOC;}{\s33\fi720\tqr\tldot\tx9360 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon32\snext33 TOC-ChapTitle;}{\s34\tqr\tldot\tx9360 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon32\snext34 TOC-Head1;}{\s35\fi360\tqr\tldot\tx9360 \f1\fs24\cf1 
\sbasedon32\snext35 TOC-Head1a;}{\s36\fi1080\tqr\tldot\tx9360 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon32\snext36 TOC-Head2;}{\s37\fi1440\tqr\tldot\tx9360 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon32\snext37 TOC-Head3;}{\s38\fi1800\tqr\tldot\tx9360 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon32\snext38 
TOC-Head4;}{\s39\qj\sa172 \f3\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon30\snext39 TableCaption;}{\s40\qj\sa144\tx3960 \f3\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon30\snext40 TableText;}{\s41\fi-2878\li2878\tx2878\tx3225\tx3591\tx3955\tx4320\tx7074\tx8360 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon0\snext41 
Two columns;}{\s42\sa224 \f1\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon10\snext42 Two columns(1);}{\s43\li190\sa224\tx534\tx900\tx1264\tx1628\tx4383\tx5670 \f1\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon10\snext43 Two columns(2);}{\s44 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon0\snext44 Two columns(3);}{\s45 \f1\fs24
\cf1 \sbasedon0\snext45 Two columns(4);}{\s46\qj\sa144\tx3960 \f3\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon30\snext46 VListItem;}{\s47\qj\sa172 \f6\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon30\snext47 VListText;}{\s48\qj\fi-360\li2520\sa172 \f3\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon30\snext48 
check_box_numbered_list;}{\s49\qj\fi-360\li2520\sa172 \f3\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon48\snext49 ck_box_start_numbered_list;}{\s50 \f1\fs24\cf1 \sbasedon1\snext50 normalstyle;}{\s51\qj\li2160\sa172 \f3\fs20\cf1 \sbasedon30\snext51 par2;}{\s52 \f7\fs22\cf1 
\sbasedon50\snext52 subhead;}{\s53\qj\fi360 \f8\fs18\cf1 \sbasedon50\snext53 text;}{\s54\qj \f8\fs18\cf1 \sbasedon50\snext54 text/dropcap;}}
{\info{\title ax9263ad.aw}{\author bfranklin}{\doccomm Created by ApplixWare Release 4.41 (build 1021.220) #17  RTF Export Filter}}
\paperw12240\paperh15840\margl1800\margr1800\margt1440\margb1440\widowctrl\ftnbj\sectd\marglsxn1800\margrsxn1800\margtsxn1440\margbsxn1440\sbknone\headery360\footery360\endnhere{\footer \pard\plain \s1\fi-360\li360\tx720\tx1440\tx2160 \f1\fs24\cf1 {
\b\f6\fs20 Pg. }{\field{\fldinst PAGE}{\fldrslt}}{\b\f6\fs20 \tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab DRAFT}, {\b\f6\fs20 02/07/01}
\par }\pard\plain \s6\qc\fi-720\li720 \b\f4\fs28 {\fs24 R-4 PROTOCOL}
\par {\fs24  FOR}
\par {\fs24 RANGELAND CAPABILITY AND SUITABILITY  DETERMINATIONS}
\par {\fs24  FOR FOREST PLAN REVISION}S
\par \pard\plain \f1\fs24\cf1 
\par {\f6\fs20 This protocol  was developed by an interdisciplinary group using the R-1 Grazing Protocols, a Draft from the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forests, an April 25, 1997 clarification of requirements from theWO, and R-4's Properly Functioning 
Condition Draft of 9/8/97.  It will become an amendment to the R-4 Revision Deskguide after additional external circulation and any necessary revision.  A first draft was circulated for review and comment prior to this revision.  The intent is to keep 
this Regional protocol broad while allowing ample room for local tailoring based on local information and conditions.}
\par 
\par {\f6\fs20 Implementing regulations at 36 CFR \'a7219.20 require a determination of rangeland capability and suitability in forest plans.  Also required is a determination of condition and trend of suitable rangelands.  The following protocol includes 
definition of terms, analysis and information needs, recommended criteria for consistent determinations, and advice for describing rangeland conditions in the planning records.}
\par 
\par {\ul\f6\fs20 Definitions}{\f6\fs20 :  These definitions vary from those traditionally used in Forest Service rangeland management.  Adherence to these definitions (as stated in regulations) is necessary to meet requirements for analysis in forest 
planning.}
\par \pard\plain \fi-360\li360 \f1\fs24\cf1 {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6\fs20  Capability:  "the potential of an area of land to produce resources, supply goods and services, and allow resource uses under an assumed set of management practices and at a 
given level of management intensity.  Capability depends on current conditions and site conditions such as climate, slope, landform, soils and geology, as well as the application of management practices, such as silviculture or protection from fire, 
insects, and disease."}{\f6   }
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Suitability:  "the appropriateness of applying certain resource management practices to a particular area of land as determined by an analysis of the economic and environmental consequences and alternative 
uses foregone.  A unit of land may be suitable for a variety of individual or combined management practices."  }
\par \pard\plain \f1\fs24\cf1 
\par {\ul\f6\fs20 Analysis for Determination}{\f6\fs20 :  The determination of rangeland capability and suitability is a two-step process.  The first step is determination of those lands that are capable of being grazed.  The second step, through the 
forest planning process, identifies which of those capable lands are suitable for grazing under various management scenarios.}
\par 
\par {\f6\fs20 Rangeland capability represents the biophysical determination of those areas that can sustain grazing.  Capability is determined by assessing biophysical characteristics conducive to livestock grazing.  Lands capable of being grazed will 
be the same in all forest plan alternatives.  Rangeland capability for revision of forest plans can be determined either through an aggregation of planning unit determinations or applying capability criteria at the forest scale, or a combination of the 
two.  Determine the appropriateness of the use of larger scale assessments; and, if not used explain why.  The capability analysis and determination in Forest Plans is not a decision to graze livestock on any specific area of land nor is it a decision 
on livestock grazing capacity.  }
\par 
\par {\f6\fs20 Once capability is determined, the next step in the planning process is to determine rangeland suitability.  Rangeland suitability is a forest plan decision and represents the integration of capability and the appropriateness of grazing 
livestock on a particular area of land considering  such things as economics, social concerns, and grazing compatibility with other land uses.  Suitability analysis and determination may lead to a decision to graze livestock on a specific area in the 
Forest Plan.  Together, they can provide management direction for project level analysis of allotment(s) and subsequent NEPA decisions.}
\par 
\par {\ul\f6\fs20 Criteria for Rangeland Capability}{\f6\fs20 :  Forest planning records should contain a description of the criteria used in the analysis to identify capable rangelands. As a minimum, the capability criteria listed below should be addressed. 
 However, Forests may change these criteria if they have documented data which indicates changes are warranted; or, additional criteria may be developed if local conditions warrant.  The determination of capability should be made considering the whole 
of the criteria rather than any one criterion alone.}
\par \pard\plain \fi-360\li360 \f1\fs24\cf1 
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Areas with less than 30% slopes for cattle and less than 45% slopes for sheep.}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Areas producing more than or having the potential to produce an average of 200 lbs. of forage/acre on an air dry basis over the planning period}{\f6 .}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Areas with naturally resilient soils (not unstable or highly erodible soils)}{\f6 .}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Areas where ground cover (vegetation, litter, rock > \'be in.) is sufficient to protect soil from eroise.  The minimum percentage cover will be 60% unless local data is available for use in setting more specific 
ground cover requirements}{\f6 .}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Areas accessible to livestock (without such factors as dense timber, rock, or other physical barriers).}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Areas  within 1 mile of  water or where the ability to provide water exists}{\f6 .  }
\par \pard\plain \f1\fs24\cf1 
\par {\f6\fs20 National Forest System lands that meet the above criteria will be considered capable of being grazed by domestic animals.  The acreage of capable lands will remain constant for all alternatives for the planning area and will be displayed.}
\par 
\par {\ul\f6\fs20 Criteria for Rangeland Suitability}{\f6\fs20 :  Once capability is determined, an assessment of suitability, by alternative, is conducted to address whether livestock grazing is compatible with management direction for a management 
area's other uses and values, and which, if any, other uses would be foregone with livestock grazing.  Forest planning records should contain a description of the criteria used in the analysis to identify suitable rangelands.  Advice for suitability 
criteria are listed below.  Additional criteria may be developed if local conditions warrant.  Situations listed below may or may not be suitable for livestock grazing depending on an overall evaluation of potential effects and opportunities to mitigate 
adverse effects:}
\par \pard\plain \fi-360\li360 \f1\fs24\cf1 {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Developed recreation sites or special use sites}{\f6 .}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Special area designations such as Research Natural Areas}{\f6 .}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Administrative sites and research facilities or study sites}{\f6 .}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6\fs20  Key wildlife habitat areas (such as winter ranges).  }
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  I}{\f6\fs20 mportant habitats for TES species (viability considerations).}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Noxious weed infestations where forage is not used by livestock or use would contribute to increase of the infestation.}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Unique habitats such as bogs, fens, jurisdictional wetlands, or rare plant communities}{\f6 .}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Areas where livestock grazing is impracticable due to economic considerations, either from a permittee or agency standpoint}{\f6 .}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Transitory range created by timber harvest activities where the associated mitigation costs to protect timber resource values is excessive.}
\par {\f6 \tab}{\f9\fs20 l}{\f6  }{\f6\fs20 Areas where the social consequences and values foregone are not acceptable.}
\par \pard\plain \f1\fs24\cf1 
\par {\f6\fs20 The number of acres suitable for livestock grazing, by alternative, shall be displayed.  The number of acres suitable may vary by alternative.}
\par 
\par {\ul\f6\fs20 Determination of Condition and Tren}{\f6\fs20 d:  The terms "condition" and "trend" have been used to describe different concepts over the years as learning about ecological systems has evolved.  Given the variety of possible interpretations 
of these terms today, the following advice is based on our assessment of the intent of the 36 CFR \'a7219.20 requirements.  "Most recent" inventories, assessments and analyses of rangelands cover the spectrum in terms of scale, level of detail, application 
of evolving ecological principles, and variations in classification and mapping techniques.  Condition and trend ideally would be derived as part of a multi-scale (including landscape pattern and process) assessment with some comparison to historical 
ranges of variation.  Condition and trend as measures of "healthy" or properly functioning landscapes would be based on the relationship between land use, ecosystem health, and species divesity with inherent disturbance processes and biophysical capability.}
\par 
\par {\f6\fs20 Current Forest Service annual reporting requirements include the "Allotment and Vegetation Management Report" which places all acres of  rangeland vegetation into one of three categories:  1) meeting Forest Plan objectives; 2) moving towards 
Forest Plan objectives; or 3) not meeting or moving towards Forest Plan objectives.  Reports are modified each year to reflect the results of the previous year's monitoring.  This report can be used to determine condition and trend as related to current 
Forest Plan objectives.  However, where Plan objectives for rangeland management are identified as "needs for change" in revision, other measures of condition and trend will be needed for revision assessment work.}
\par 
\par {\f6\fs20 Other sources of information for this determination during Plan Revision include:  Level II or III Riparian Inventories following methodolgies in the Integrated Riparian Evaluation Guide; Allotment Management Plan Revisions; Nested Frequency 
Monitoring; Properly Functioning Condition (riparian and/or upland) Assessments Ecosystem Analyses at the Watershed Scale; Sub-Basin Reviews; etc.  Use the best information available for any given area even if other areas may have less current information. 
 This approach is consistent with the Region's continuous assessment and planning and will allow for future analyses to fill gaps and gain more current coverage as Forest Plans are amended and updates of Allotment Management Plans are completed. }
\par }