United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

Forest 

Service 

Southwestern 

Region 

2002 Forest Plan 

Monitoring and 

Evaluation Report 

Prescott National Forest 

 

 Indian Fire, May 2002 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and 

activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political 

beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all 

programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program 

information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 

720-2600 (voice and TDD). 

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-

W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call 

(202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 

Printed on recycled paper – September 2003

- i - 

Table of Contents

Section 1 – Resource Monitoring Summary.................................................................1

Introduction .................................................................................................................1

Fire ..............................................................................................................................2

Heritage.......................................................................................................................3

Insects and Disease....................................................................................................3

Lands ..........................................................................................................................4

Noxious Weeds ...........................................................................................................4

Range..........................................................................................................................4

Recreation...................................................................................................................5

Roads..........................................................................................................................6

Soil and Water.............................................................................................................6

Timber .........................................................................................................................7

Wildlife.........................................................................................................................8

Section 2 – Progress Toward Desired Conditions ..................................................... 11

Fire ............................................................................................................................ 11

Heritage..................................................................................................................... 11

Insects and Disease.................................................................................................. 11

Lands ........................................................................................................................12

Noxious Weeds .........................................................................................................12

Range........................................................................................................................12

Recreation.................................................................................................................12

Roads........................................................................................................................13

Soil and Water...........................................................................................................13

Timber .......................................................................................................................14

Wildlife.......................................................................................................................15

Section 3 – Barriers To Effective Monitoring..............................................................17

Heritage.....................................................................................................................17

Noxious Weeds .........................................................................................................17

Wildlife.......................................................................................................................17

Section 4 – Emerging Issues .......................................................................................19

Heritage.....................................................................................................................19

Insects and Disease..................................................................................................19

Noxious Weeds .........................................................................................................19

Range........................................................................................................................19

Recreation.................................................................................................................19

Soil and Water...........................................................................................................20

Timber .......................................................................................................................20

Wildlife.......................................................................................................................20

Section 5 – Recommendations....................................................................................21

Section 6 – Certification of Forest Plan Sufficiency..................................................23

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report 1

Section 1 – Resource Monitoring Summary 

Introduction 

Events of considerable magnitude changed the landscape of the Prescott National Forest 

in 2002. A man-caused wildfire, the Indian Fire burned 1,329 acres of ponderosa pine 

forest and also burned six structures on the edge of Prescott. Foresters and forest 

entomologists discerned the beginning of a bark beetle epidemic that has since killed 

hundreds of thousands of ponderosa pine trees. The Forest was gripped by an ongoing 

drought that elevated fire danger and stressed every ecosystem type on the Forest from 

grassland to shrubland to chaparral to pinyon juniper to ponderosa pine. Forest Plan 

monitoring is an ongoing process to assess the response of the forest environment to 

management activities undertaken to move the forest from an existing condition to a 

desired condition as described in the Forest Plan. Stress on the forest’s natural systems 

by drought and other factors further elevates the importance of monitoring because of the 

need to assess the extent of the response of the ecosystems to the stress and to determine 

appropriate management actions. 

The purpose of monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the 1986 Prescott 

National Forest Land Management Plan ("Forest Plan") is to inform the decision maker 

of the progress toward achieving the goals, objectives, and standards and guidelines. 

This report documents and evaluates the results of the monitoring that occurred during 

fiscal year 2002 and describes the rationale for any changes to the Plan recommended by 

the monitoring team. This report meets the intent of Chapter 5 of the Forest Plan to 

"analyze and evaluate the significance of the results of the monitoring action plan" (p.95). 

It also provides an important communication link with the public and within the agency. 

By disclosing the effectiveness of the Forest Plan, the Forest is able to better identify 

future research needs and to shift monitoring activities to more effectively measure 

overall forest health. 

One of the requirements of the Forest planning process was a commitment to monitor and 

evaluate how well Plans are implemented (36 CFR 219.12(k)). The process includes 

opportunities for modifications to the Plan in response to this monitoring. As stated in 

the Code of Federal Regulations, the purposes for evaluating Forest Plans are 

summarized below: 

¡ To consider the effects of National Forest management on land, resources, and 

communities adjacent to or near the National Forest and the effects of National Forest 

management on nearby lands managed by other government agencies or under the 

jurisdiction of local governments (36 CFR 219.7(f)). 

¡ To determine if budgets have significantly changed the long-term relationships between 

levels of multiple-use goods and services enough to create the need for a significant 

amendment (36 CFR 219.10(e)). 

¡ To determine if conditions or demands in an area covered by a Forest Plan have changed 

significantly enough to require a revision to the Plan (36 CFR 219.10(g)). 

¡ To determine how well the stated objectives of the Forest Plan are being met (36 CFR 

219.12(k)). 

¡ To determine how closely Forest Plan standards and guidelines are being followed (36 

CFR 219.12(k)). 

Forest Plan monitoring requirements are available upon request. For each activity or 

practice, the effect to be monitored, one or more measurement techniques, and the 
Resource Monitoring Summary 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report - 2 - 

expected future condition to be met is specified. A frequency for measuring and 

reporting the monitored item is established, and the expected precision and reliability of 

that measurement is stated. [Precision is the exactness or accuracy with which the data 

will be collected; reliability is the degree to which the monitoring accurately reflects the 

total Forest situation.] In general, monitoring will determine: 

¡ If management prescriptions are applied as directed. 

¡ If standards are being followed. 

¡ If the Forest is achieving its objectives. 

¡ If management prescriptions are responsive to public issues and management concerns. 

¡ If effects of implementing the Forest Plan are as predicted. 

¡ If costs of implementing the Forest Plan are as predicted and are acceptable. 

¡ If management practices on adjacent or intermingled non-Forest lands are affecting 

Forest Plan goals and objectives. 

Based on the evaluation of the results, the monitoring team makes recommendations to 

the Forest Supervisor. These can include: No Action Needed - monitoring indicates 

goals, objectives, and standards are being reasonably achieved; Refer Recommended 

Action to the appropriate line officer(s) for improvement or application of management 

prescriptions; Modify the Management Prescription or assignment of a prescription as a 

Forest Plan amendment; Revise the Projected Schedule of output; Initiate Revision of the 

Forest Plan; or Identify Research Needs. 

It is important to note this is not a monitoring report on individual projects, which is an ongoing 

Forest activity. However, results of some individual projects have been considered in the 

preparation of this report. This report covers the time period from October 1, 2001 through 

September 30, 2002. 

Fire 

Winter/spring moisture was practically non-existent and all indications pointed to a 

severe fire year. Record dryness prompted the Forest to initiate Fire Restrictions in midMay, the earliest date ever. Continued dry conditions and the 1,329 acre Indian Fire on 

May 15 forced a Forest-wide closure on May 24. The human caused Indian Fire started 

at approximately 2:50 pm on the north side of the Indian Creek Road west of Ponderosa 

Park. Within 1 hour the fire had jumped Highway 89 and by sunset had burned 3 miles to 

the north and destroying 6 homes in the Cathedral Pines area. Fire activity for the 

remainder of the year was light even with below average summer and fall precipitation. 

Fire activity was heavy elsewhere in the Southwest and Pacific Northwest. Crews and 

individuals spent several weeks on other units working on several note-worthy fires such 

as the Bullock (Mt Lemon, AZ), Rodeo/Chediski (eastern AZ) and Biscuit (southern 

Oregon). 

The Forest continued to monitor the cumulative annual treatment of vegetation by 

prescribed fire in order to evaluate trends in vegetation change. The purpose is to keep 

prescriptions in concert with changes in vegetation conditions due to prescribed fire and 

naturally caused fire burning under prescription, and to update prescriptions as needed. 

The use of the fire budget analysis (NFMAS) process also helped determine fire 

management efficiency for wildfire management. 
Resource Monitoring Summary 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report 3

Very dry conditions throughout most of the year prohibited extensive use of prescribed 

fire. Mechanical treatment was also curtailed because environmental analysis had not 

been completed for any mechanical treatment. A non-existent summer rainy season, 

extensive insect attacks and lack of personnel eliminated any possibility of prescribed fire 

in September. 

Table 1: Prescribed Fire History 

YEAR GRASS CHAPARRAL PINE WOODLAND

1987 5,000 11,930 0 0 

1988 3,500 9,358 984 0 

1989 6,000 1,000 910 152 

1990 3,500 0 1,150 270 

1991 2,344 1,800 0 410 

1992 2,500 0 75 1,176 

1993 2,000 1,200 96 0 

1994 1,500 4,800 150 0 

1995 3,200 2,100 110 0 

1996 0 1,200 241 0 

1997 0 3,492 768 0 

1998 0 6,000 0 0 

1999 0 7,500 0 0 

2000 3,000 2,500 1,100 0 

2001 6,000 8,000 100 1,000 

2002 0 300 288 0 

TOTAL 38,544 61,180 5,972 2,008

Heritage 

As in Fiscal Year 2001, listed properties were monitored to assure protection of cultural 

resources and field checks were conducted on selected ground disturbing projects during 

implementation or conclusion of the project. Field and office record surveys of proposed 

project areas were conducted. These surveys and the accompanying reports were used to 

design projects that minimize the potential for damage to cultural resources present. 

Insects and Disease 

The Forest annually monitors insect and disease conditions in order to better predict 

future impacts. The desired condition is that insect and disease problems will not have 

serious adverse effects on the Forest due to an appropriate mix of silvicultural activities, 

treatment of slash, and various other control methods. 

In 2002, mortality from Ips bark beetle increased significantly from the previous year. 

The increased mortality was due to an extended drought and crowded stand conditions. It 

is estimated that as much as 50% of the ponderosa pine stands on the Prescott National 

Forest were killed by the Ips beetle during 2002. Western pine beetle mortality remained 

steady, with only individual trees affected. Mistletoe continues to be a problem in some 

pine stands. Significant mortality in pinyon pines occurred in 2002 due to drought and 

the pinyon pine Ips beetle. 
Resource Monitoring Summary 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report - 4 - 

Lands 

No rights-of-way were acquired in 2002. 

Noxious Weeds 

The Prescott NF remains concerned and extensively involved in efforts to eliminate 

noxious weeds. Weed inventories continued across the Forest with identified populations 

being added to the Northern Arizona weed atlas. The Forest is active in the Western 

Yavapai and Verde Valley Weed Management Areas and in the Southwest Weed 

Management Association. Copies of Arizona Invasive Weeds (Howery and Ramos, 

University of Arizona, Cooperative Extension Service) have been provided to all field 

going employees and to grazing permittees. 

Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for the Three Forest (Kaibab, 

Coconino and Prescott) Noxious Weed analysis is on-going. The Forest has the lead for 

the invasive plant species analysis for the Verde Wild and Scenic River Environmental 

Analysis. 

 The sweet resinbush stand near Cottonwood was partially treated when Verde Valley 

Weed Control mowed most of the plants. The follow-up herbicide application was 

postponed when dry conditions kept the resinbush from greening up when this normally 

occurs in the fall. Hand removal of invasive plants was done by employees and by 

volunteers with activities in the Prescott Basin, Mingus Mountain and the Verde Valley. 

Range 

Increasingly severe drought dictated reductions in livestock grazing in 2002. By the end 

of the year all allotments had reduced stocking and 30 allotments had no livestock 

grazing. Reductions were initiated in 2001 and by late spring of 2002 a lack of forage 

growth and drinking water caused permittees to remove most remaining animals. The 

Forest sent letters to all permittees beginning in February documenting conditions and 

concerns and making management recommendations. 

Grazing authorizations were issued for 12,434 cattle in December 2001 and January 

2002. By the end of the year 3,650 cattle remained on the Forest. This is a reduction of 

71% of the livestock authorized for the year. 

Monitoring was conducted on 44 of the Forest’s 62 allotments including all priority 

allotments (as identified by permit administrators and including allotments with T&E 

species or other particular resource values or concerns). Specific management direction 

was provided from information collected during inspections and monitoring. Rocky 

Mountain Range and Forest Experimental Station continued monitoring vegetation and 

banks of the Verde River and established ten new plots downstream of Camp Verde. 

Range improvement construction lagged behind other years because of the reduced 

livestock numbers. Maintenance of improvements such as fences continued and three 

trick tanks received new surfaces on their pads. Pipelines from wells were extended to 

provide additional water and some springs and stock tanks were cleaned. Additional 

riparian fencing was done with water piped to troughs. Range improvement information 

was entered into the Forest Service Deferred Maintenance database. 
Resource Monitoring Summary 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report 5

Environmental analysis of grazing effects continued on six Chino Valley Ranger District 

allotments and four allotments on the Verde Ranger District. Data collection was done on 

other allotments on the Chino Valley and Bradshaw Ranger Districts. No decision 

documents for allotment management plans were issued. The Prescott is involved in the 

environmental analysis of the Verde Wild and Scenic River and development of the 

Comprehensive River Management Plan. The Forest has the lead for livestock grazing 

analysis that is an issue in the river corridor. 

Recreation 

Use of developed recreation facilities on the Prescott National Forest has been steady for 

the past several years. Most fluctuations in recreation use result from macroeconomic 

trends affecting tourism and outdoor recreation, such as changes in gasoline prices. In 

2002, there were 241,336 visits to developed sites (37,853 overnight camp visits + 

203,482 day-use visits). This equates to approximately 103,775 Recreation Visitor Days 

(“RVDs”), well below the Forest Plan level of 380,000 and the previous years RVD’s of 

107,302. During 2002, the entire forest was closed due to extreme fire danger for 59 

days during the peak summer season. Developed recreation use continues to be 

concentrated on weekends during the late spring, summer, and early fall. The following 

list shows overall average occupancy in selected campgrounds during their open season: 

¡ Groom Creek horse camp – 18% 

¡ Hilltop Campground – 30% 

¡ Yavapai Campground – 40% 

¡ Lower Wolf Creek – 29% 

¡ Lynx Campground – 60% 

No specific dispersed site monitoring occurred in 2002. Actual use figures for Alto Pit 

and Hayfield developed Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) parks totaled 12,708 visits. The 

National Visitor Use Monitoring Survey (NVUM) report identified, through field 

interviews, the following dispersed activity use as follows: hiking or walking 62%, 

viewing wildlife, birds, etc. 60%, off-highway vehicle travel (4-wheelers, dirt bikes, etc.) 

13%, driving for pleasure on roads 20%, and bicycling/mountain biking 7%. 2001 was 

the last year monitoring was done for dispersed recreation. In 2001 the Forest 

implemented the Prescott Basin II decision regarding dispersed camping around the city 

of Prescott. As decided in the Prescott Basin Plan, 111 designated dispersed campsites 

were established to reduce impacts from unrestricted camping outside of developed 

campgrounds within the 50,000-acre Prescott Basin study area. Dispersed camping was 

only permitted at one of the designated sites during the spring and summer of 2001. 

Enforcement of the new camping policy included documenting actual use at the sites. 

Use from March – September 2001 was 1115 site-nights by 3700 people. The sites were 

at capacity only during the Memorial Day Weekend. The two main site use impacts 

appeared to be soil compaction and some loss of understory vegetation immediately 

around each site. 

In addition, there are 166 concentrated use areas in general forest areas on the Prescott 

National Forest. The Prescott Basin use described above only accounts for dispersed 

camping in about seven of these concentrated use areas. 
Resource Monitoring Summary 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report - 6 - 

The table below displays the approximate number of visitors to six of the Prescott 

Forest’s eight Wilderness areas during 2002. Only those visitors who stopped to register 

at a trailhead recorded Wilderness use, which undoubtedly underestimates actual use 

because 1) not every visitor registers, 2) there is not a register at every trailhead, and 3) 

there are gaps in the data. However, the counts do indicate the relative magnitude of 

Wilderness use on the Forest. A 1992 independent study of Granite Mountain Wilderness 

estimated use at approximately 8,300 visitors per year. Thus, if the trailhead registers 

underestimate use by a factor of 2, annual visitation to the six Wilderness areas is 

probably 15,374. The NVUM survey reported 16,735 total Wilderness visits for the 

Prescott National Forest. There is little visitation to the Apache Creek and Cedar Bench 

Wilderness areas. 

Table 2: Wilderness Visitation 

Due to limited funding, no trails in Wilderness were 

constructed or reconstructed. Trails maintained during 2002 

include 28 miles within Wilderness and 18 miles outside 

Wilderness. 

Roads 

During fiscal year 2002, 5.0 miles of existing Forest roads were reconstructed to improve 

access and 548 miles were maintained. Of these, 245 miles were maintained to the 

desired maintenance standard. Approximately 29% of the total road miles on the Prescott 

National Forest (1,891 miles) were maintained. No miles of system roads were 

decommissioned; 12 miles of “unclassified” roads (usually user-created; not approved; 

not designed) were discovered. 

Soil and Water 

Information for the assessment of the Turkey-Humbug fifth code watershed has been 

collected and is being interpreted. The information collected includes vegetative cover, 

composition and structure (in addition to data already collected in the Ecological 

Inventory), soil stability and drainage function. Also, the effects of roads and other 

development and activities occurring in the watershed are documented. 

The ecological inventory data and plot data from the Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey (TES) 

have been entered into a database to be used for the ecological classification and for 

project resource analysis. Work is progressing on the ecological classification and 

software has been obtained to conduct data runs to determine existing condition and 

similarity to TES potential. Various modeling protocols have been investigated to 

determine their effectiveness at producing desired data. 

Reduction of juniper canopy continues in the upper Verde River watersheds. Adjustments 

in livestock grazing have been made to compensate for drought condition with removal 

of cattle to varying extents across the Forest. The Indian Fire burned 1,329 acres south of 

Prescott and emergency stabilization measures were implemented to stabilize the burned 

area. Among the measures used to stabilize the burned area were gabions and straw bale 

Granite Mountain 2,723 

Pine Mountain 293 

Sycamore 

Canyon 

322 

Juniper Mesa 149 

Castle Creek 670 

Woodchute 2,930 

TOTAL 7,687 
Resource Monitoring Summary 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report 7

check dams to protect drainages, log barriers to reduce overland flow, reseeding, and in 

some areas mulching to complement the reseeding. 

Thirty structures (fences, spring boxes, troughs and/or pipelines) were constructed to 

protect riparian areas and springs while making water available to wildlife and livestock. 

Best management practices are applied for livestock grazing, roads and trails, recreation, 

removal of bug killed dead trees, fire suppression and rehabilitation, and fuels reduction. 

Direction is contained in management plans, contract clauses, handbooks and design 

specifications. 

An instream flow application for the upper Verde River is still pending. Instream flow 

measurements are being collected on six streams and an instream flow certificate has 

been applied for on Turkey Creek. 

The Forest continues to participate in watershed organizations to provide continuity of 

management between federal lands and lands of other ownership and to foster public 

ownership in watersheds. Forest employees were instructors in environmental education 

programs including the Master Watershed Steward Program. The Prescott is privileged to 

have the Forest Hydrologist serve on the National Core Team for Range Protocols, this 

team will develop the protocols for vegetation sampling and monitoring. 

Timber 

Federal regulation requires the Forest to measure and report the amount of sawtimber 

offered annually for sale. The desired conditions is that annual sale offerings will be 

made on a sustained yield basis. The Forest sold approximately 4,200 cords (3,272 CCF) 

of firewood from various personal use and commercial sale areas. 

Monitoring of the acres of intermediate harvest, regeneration harvest, and removal 

harvest is done to measure treatment prescriptions and effects. The desired condition is a 

more balanced age class distribution, appropriate growing stock levels, appropriate 

rotations, and provision for wildlife habitat needs. Acres of harvest treatment, from 1987 

to present, are shown in the tables below: 

Table 3: Harvest History, Pine Type 

YEAR 

REGENERATION

HARVEST

(ACRES) 

INTERMEDIATE

HARVEST

(ACRES) 

1987 0 116 

1988 8 604 

1989 256 931 

1990 42 570 

1991 0 146 

1992 0 304 

1993 12 0 

1994 20 92 

1995 0 0 

1996 0 0 

1997 92 478 
Resource Monitoring Summary 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report - 8 - 

YEAR 

REGENERATION

HARVEST

(ACRES) 

INTERMEDIATE

HARVEST

(ACRES) 

1998 0 0 

1999 0 0 

2000 162 1082 

2001 0 530 

2002 0 0 

TOTAL 592 4,853 

Table 4: Harvest History, Pinyon-Juniper Type 

YEAR 

REGEN. 

HARVEST

(ACRES) 

INTERMEDIATE

HARVEST

(ACRES) 

REMOVAL

HARVEST

(ACRES) 

1987 0 0 

1988 0 0 239 

1989 32 47 211 

1990 0 166 44 

1991 0 0 70 

1992 0 0 202 

1993 0 0 240 

1994 0 0 120 

1995 0 0 212 

1996 0 0 247 

1997 0 0 256 

1998 0 0 256 

1999 0 0 256 

2000 0 0 250 

2001 0 0 255 

2002 0 0 250 

TOTAL 32 213 3,108 

Wildlife 

Bald Eagle 

The Forest cooperated with the Arizona Game and Fish Department Bald Eagle Nest 

Watch Program to monitor nest sites on the Prescott National Forest. Both Towers and 

Ladders sites successfully fledged two young. At Lynx lake and Perkinsville there were 

breeding pairs, but they were unsuccessful. 

Mexican Spotted Owl 

During 2002, the Prescott National Forest conducted informal occupancy and 

reproduction monitoring to standard in all 15 established Protected Activity Centers 
Resource Monitoring Summary 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report 9

(“PAC”). Six of the PACs were occupied; four pairs and three single owls were found. 

No fledged offspring were observed. 

Northern Goshawk 

All eight of the Post Fledging Areas (PFAs) were monitored to standard. One PFA had a 

breeding pair with one or two young successfully fledged. The remainder was 

unoccupied. 

Peregrine Falcon 

Both Granite Mountain and Thumb Butte were monitored for peregrine falcon breeding 

activity. Both were occupied. The birds at Thumb Butte hatched young, but they did not 

fledge. The birds at Granite did not reproduce. The three remote territories on the Chino 

Valley District were not monitored. 

Spikedace 

As part of a program begun with Rocky Mountain Research Station in 1994, seven 

permanent sites on the upper Verde River were monitored in the spring and fall of 2002 

for occurrence of spikedace and information on habitat conditions. Spikedace continued 

to be absent in fish surveys at all seven sites since 1996. Monitoring of livestock river 

crossings at Perkinsville determined effects to the habitat are minimal. 

Management Indicator Species 

Beginnings of large-scale changes to the ponderosa pine, pinyon juniper, chaparral and 

grassland-desert shrub were evident in 2002 due to beetle kill and drought. These 

changes would have long-term effects to Tassel-eared squirrel (Abert) (down), goshawk 

(down), p. nuthatch (down); turkey (down) and Hairy woodpecker (up). 

Table 5: Management Indicator Species, Trends 

SPECIES

HABITAT POPULATION 

TREND

Turkey Ponderosa pine, 

late seral 

Decreasing 

Mule deer Pinyonjuniper/chaparral, 

early seral 

Decreasing 

Pronghorn antelope Grassland, desert 

shrub 

Decreasing 

Macroinvertebrates Riparian, aquatic, 

late seral 

Stable 

Goshawk Ponderosa pine, 

late seral 

Decreasing 

Hairy woodpecker Ponderosa pine, 

snags 

Increasing 

Lucy’s warbler Riparian, late seral Stable 

Juniper (Plain) titmouse Pinyon-juniper 

snags 

Increasing 
Resource Monitoring Summary 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report - 10 - 

SPECIES

HABITAT POPULATION 

TREND

Pygmy nuthatch Ponderosa pine, 

late seral 

Decreasing 

Spotted (Rufous-sided) 

towhee 

Chaparral, late 

seral 

Decreasing 

Tassel-eared squirrel Ponderosa pine, 

early seral 

Decreasing 
2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report 11

Section 2 – Progress Toward Desired 

Conditions

Fire 

"Provide for fire management support services necessary to sustain resource yields while 

protecting improvements, investments, and providing for public safety. In as much as 

possible, return fire to its natural role in the ecosystem.” (Forest Plan, p. 13) 

FY02 funding was adequate to meet Forest Plan goals. Seasonal factors contributed to a 

low level of fire suppression on the Forest. There is no output statement in the Forest 

Plan for prescribed fire. Forest Plan objectives refer to burning in ponderosa pine only as 

a site preparation method that the Forest has not pursued in recent years due to the shift in 

timber stand management. 

The Forest has only been partially successful in returning fire to its natural role in various 

ecosystems due to the complexity of implementing this strategy at a larger scale. Use of 

prescribed fire is expected to continue to increase, with success in fuels reduction and 

vegetation manipulation. 

Heritage 

"Heritage resources represent an opportunity for research, education, understanding and 

enjoyment that enhances their stewardship and protection." (Forest Plan, p. 12) 

In general, budgets and staffing for Heritage Resource management is focused on 

inventory, documentation, and consultation with Indian Tribes and the State Historical 

Preservation Office. Little, if any, research, education, or enhancement activities are 

being conducted. 

Budget constraints prevent comprehensive monitoring of all National Register sites or all 

project prescriptions. The number of sites and projects monitored in 2002 is typical of 

the level of monitoring that has occurred annually on the Prescott National Forest. 

Criteria used to determine which projects will be monitored include the magnitude of the 

action, the significance of the site, and the probability that actions will affect a site. 

Forest Plan monitoring has been more effective at discovering damage to sites from 

project implementation than it has been at preventing damage. 

Many heritage sites on the Forest are visible and available. However, they tend to not be 

“glamorous” sites that attract hordes of visitors or warrant capital investment for 

interpretation and protection. Most Forest sites are remote, small, and susceptible to 

damage and vandalism. The sites that probably deserve further efforts at interpretation 

include the Bradshaw Mountain mining sites, various railroad grades, and the Verde 

Valley Salt Mine. 

Insects and Disease 

“The Forest is managed with a primary emphasis on healthy, robust environments with 

productive soils, clean air and water, and diverse populations of flora and fauna.” (Forest Plan, 

p. 11) 

The agency focus in dealing with the Ips beetle epidemic is to remove dead and dying 

trees to reduce the spread of the beetle and to thin stands to promote healthier and more 
Progress Toward Desired Conditions 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report - 12 - 

insect resistant trees. The absence of a market for timber products from the Prescott 

National Forest limits the Forest’s ability to proceed with thinning projects designed to 

create a more fire and disease resistant forest. 

Lands 

"Conduct landownership adjustment, right-of-way acquisition, landline location and 

special-uses programs to promote efficient management." (Forest Plan, p. 13) 

The Forest has identified needed rights-of-way in an acquisition plan and is proceeding 

through the list.

Noxious Weeds 

“Control noxious weeds on rangelands to prevent significant population buildups.”

(Forest Plan, p. 45) 

Mapping of weed populations is a product of other analyses and data collection efforts 

including the plant surveys of the Forest and NEPA for fuels, grazing and recreation. 

Employees in the course of normal work activities have identified some populations, 

while knowledgeable public and other agencies have provided locations of invasive 

plants. A systematic approach to inventory and management is not yet in place but the 

three-forest Noxious Weed Environmental Impact Statement should accelerate attainment 

of this objective. The widespread distribution of invasives has led to the creation of 

partnerships with members representing State, Federal and local governmental agencies, 

agricultural interests and the public. There is recognition that success can only be 

achieved through management without boundaries. 

Range 

"Provide forage to grazing and browsing animals to the extent benefits are relatively 

commensurate with costs, without impairing land productivity, in accordance with 

Management Area objectives. Cooperate with other agencies and private range 

landowners to reduce impacts of livestock grazing. Identify and manage areas that 

contain threatened and endangered species of plants." (Forest Plan, p. 11) 

Analysis of the effects of livestock grazing slowed in 2002, as the drought demanded 

most of the Forest’s time. Range personnel participated in administering the Forest 

closure for extreme fire danger and were active in fire management in Region 3. Trend 

monitoring was not conducted due to the drought and the associated difficulty in 

obtaining accurate information. The Forest Management Indicator Species report 

addressed the effects of grazing and other activities on MIS habitat. 

Recreation 

“Recreation users enjoy a full spectrum of experiences and benefits in appropriately 

managed facilities and other Forest settings. All recreation sites are managed at a 

capacity of use level that ensures that natural resources will be maintained at a desirable 

condition over the expected life of the project and/or activity." (Forest Plan, p. 12) 

Based on the Prescott National Visitor Use Monitoring Survey (NVUM), forest visitors 

gave the Prescott Forest high marks for visitor satisfaction in all major categories: 
Progress Toward Desired Conditions 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report 13

Developed Day Use and Overnight Sites, Wilderness, and general Forest areas. On a 

scale of 1 to 5, 5 being very good or very important, the Mean Satisfaction Rating for 

each of the four categories was 4+. 

The NVUM Survey showed the five most used facilities/areas were: non-motorized trails, 

designated OHV areas, Forest Service office/info sites, scenic byways, and developed 

campgrounds. 

Recreation planning efforts seek to provide diverse recreation experiences. This diversity 

was accomplished by providing interpretive and accessible trails. Considerable progress 

has been made in providing interpretation of the Prescott Forest through environmental 

education. A mix of multiple purpose and non-motorized trails will be a primary focus 

for the next few years. Diverse camping opportunities exist throughout the Prescott 

Forest at both dispersed and developed sites. There is a severe backlog of maintenance 

needs on trails and at campgrounds due to lack of funding. 

Roads 

“Maintain a transportation system to support resource goals.” (Forest Plan, p. 13) 

The Prescott National Forest is progressing to the desired road conditions by 

decommissioning roads, maintaining roads, adding newly discovered roads to the 

“unclassified” lists and maps for management decisions, and reconstructing roads to the 

objective maintenance level prescribed by management. 

Soil and Water 

“Protect and improve the soil resource. Provide for long-term water flow needs through 

improved management and technology. Avoid adverse impacts to the public, government 

facilities, and all uses in floodplains and wetlands. Restore all lands to satisfactory 

watershed condition.” (Forest Plan, p. 13)

The Forest continues to refine its Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey derived ecological 

database. The ecological inventory data is being used in environmental analysis and this 

practice will increase as the availability of that information gains recognition. A analysis 

of the juniper stands on the upper Verde River watershed, Chino Valley Ranger District is 

continuing for the purpose of determining protocols for identifying woodlands that would 

benefit from appropriate treatments. Treatments to improve watershed condition are 

being implemented. Management Area 2 (MA2) (woodland) has the majority of the 

Forest’s unsatisfactory condition soils – an on-going assessment of most of MA2 will 

provide a systematic approach to treating priority acres to improve watershed condition 

and wildlife habitat. 

Watershed condition assessments have been scheduled for two fifth code watersheds in 

the Agua Fria drainage. One of these areas includes occupied habitat for the Gila chub, a 

fish proposed for protection under the Endangered Species Act. 

“Riparian dependant resources have preference over other resources. Improve all 

riparian areas and maintain in satisfactory condition.” (Forest Plan, p. 13) 
Progress Toward Desired Conditions 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report - 14 - 

Riparian areas continue to improve through improved livestock management or exclusion 

from grazing and impacting access. Monitoring is conducted regularly to monitor 

riparian conditions.

Timber 

"Provide for non-declining sustained yield of timber. Establish improved balance in age 

class distribution through silvicultural prescribed stand management. Focus on reducing 

constraining components of stand strata. Improve stand productivity through 

management. Provide green and dead fuel wood and other forest products on a sustained 

yield basis. Timber harvest will be used as a tool to accomplish multiple resource 

objectives when it is identified as the optimum method through site-specific 

environmental analyses." (Forest Plan, p. 12-1) 

In general, the Forest is meeting Plan expectations in terms of stand structure and 

productivity although achievement of those expectations is not occurring at the rate 

projected. The Prescott Forest will continue to supply firewood sufficient to meet 

existing demand, although availability of the resource will probably shift from the 

Bradshaw Ranger District to the Chino Ranger District. The Ips beetle epidemic will 

have a large impact on the future of ponderosa pine stands on the Prescott National 

Forest. As the epidemic progresses, the desired condition for this ecosystem will be 

reassessed. 

During the first six years of the Forest Plan, the number of ponderosa pine acres treated 

by intermediate and regeneration harvests was relatively constant. Since 1992, 

treatments have become sporadic; the only large-scale treatments have been the 

Maverick, Schoolhouse, Deering and Goldwater Timber Sales. According to the Forest 

Plan, there are 130,350 acres in the Pine Management Area (Management Area 4 – “MA 

4”) of which 30,653 are considered commercial timberlands. There are also 2,962 acres 

of commercial timberland in the Woodland and Chaparral Management Areas (MA 2 & 

3, respectively). Through fiscal year 2002, approximately 18% of the commercial 

timberland was treated. In 2002, Lynx Timber Sale could not be offered due to the heavy 

Ips beetle mortality within the timber sale affecting the live volume of the sale. If the Ips 

beetle epidemic continues, it may affect the ability of the Forest to providing a nondeclining sustained yield of timber. In 2003, the timber program will focus on salvaging 

dead and dying beetle killed trees. 

Mixed conifer areas on the Forest are also included in MA 4. Since the Forest Plan was 

written, there have been virtually no treatments in mixed conifer or aspen stands to 

improve stand productivity. As a result, conifers are replacing aspen in many locations. 

One of the concerns during the Forest planning process was "Demand is expected to 

exceed the Forest's production capability for sustained yield of pinyon-juniper from 

accessible lands." Only a small percentage (0.5%) of the 454,598 acres of 

juniper/pinyon-juniper in MA 2 (woodland) have been treated since 1986. At a generous 

estimate of 15 cords/acre, this would be 2,820 cords per year sold, roughly equivalent to 

1,410 MBF; the projected harvest in the Forest Plan was 3,401 MBF. There are a number 

of factors for the lesser volume: reduced demand, due to increased availability and 

relatively lower cost of electricity and natural gas; and less desirable stands of smaller 

trees in more remote locations offered for sale. It was also originally envisioned that the 

Chino Ranger District would be the primary provider of green firewood products. 

Instead, most of the green firewood volume has come from Sycamore Mesa on the 
Progress Toward Desired Conditions 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report 15

Bradshaw Ranger District. In FY03, the emphasis in firewood products is expected to 

shift to the Chino RD as most woodland stands on the Bradshaw District have now been 

treated. 

The significant change from harvesting timber to produce a commodity to harvesting 

timber for the purpose of restoring or improving forest health is a factor in the protection 

and recruitment of old growth. This shift has resulted in increased sales of nontraditionally sized trees and subsequent declines in market. Beginning in 2002, oldgrowth ponderosa pine stands became more susceptible to mortality from the Ips beetle 

epidemic. 

Wildlife 

"Manage for a diverse, well distributed pattern of habitats for wildlife populations and 

fish species in cooperation with states and other agencies. Cooperate with Arizona 

Game and Fish Department to meet or exceed the management goals and objectives in 

Arizona Cold Water Fisheries Strategic Plan. Maintain and/or improve habitat for 

threatened or endangered species and work toward the eventual recovery and de-listing 

of species through recovery plan implementation. Integrate wildlife habitat management 

activities into all resource practices through intensive coordination. Support the goals 

and objectives of the Arizona Wildlife and Fisheries Comprehensive Plan as approved by 

the Southwestern Regional Forester and the Director of the Arizona Game and Fish 

Department." (Forest Plan, p. 12-1) 

In 2002, habitat management was largely out of our control as drought and an 

unprecedented bark beetle outbreak killed thousands of acres of ponderosa pine. The 

drought also killed many pinyon and some junipers. The drought curtailed growth in the 

grasslands and chaparral. Wildlife populations will shift accordingly, to reflect these 

changed habitat conditions; the species composition will shift toward those species that 

favor open forests. Habitats in ponderosa pine, and pinyon-juniper vegetation 

communities will become more patchy and diverse than previously, with open areas on 

ridges and pockets of dense forest remaining in protected canyons. 

Wildlife personnel have been closely involved with all vegetation manipulation projects, 

from grazing allotments to fuels reduction. 

Progress toward improving habitat for threatened and endangered fish species is 

uncertain. Habitat for threatened spikedace, and other native fish, in the Verde River has 

been protected for several years from impacting activities, specifically livestock grazing 

and OHV recreation. In addition, there has been a lack of flood disturbance events since 

1995. As a result, aquatic habitats have become narrower, deeper, and reduced in size 

because of encroaching riparian vegetation and streambanks becoming more stable. 

Monitoring data indicate spikedace in the Verde River have apparently been eliminated 

by non-native predator fish. The USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research 

Station continues to investigate relationships between native fish and nonnative fish, 

flood disturbance events, and Forest management practices. This partnership is helping 

to develop crucial information about management of native fish habitat on Prescott 

National Forest Lands. 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report 17

Section 3 – Barriers To Effective Monitoring 

Heritage 

Forest resources are focused on planning and record keeping rather than on 

implementation. For example, management of Heritage Resources involves an excessive 

amount of record keeping. Each day in the field generates approximately one day of 

paperwork. This intensity of record keeping inhibits broader field investigations. 

Although the importance of monitoring is recognized Forest-wide, this importance is not 

reflected in terms of budget, staff, or work plans. Invariably, this hinders or prevents 

monitoring accomplishment. 

Noxious Weeds 

Education of employees and forest users to the effects of invasive plant species on native 

ecosystems needs to continue. This education needs to include identification of invasive 

species so they can be recognized. The local impact of invasives is not great and neither 

are concerns about the ramifications of increased populations of noxious weeds. 

Wildlife 

As in previous years, it is evident that items monitored are not always relevant to 

determining progress in meeting Forest Plan goals. Monitoring non-game birds as a 

measure of riparian health is probably not useful in measuring accomplishment of Forest 

goals. Reporting acres treated and volume of wood sold does not provide a means to 

measure and evaluate forest health. To make monitoring useful, more needs to be done to 

accurately determine what is important, relevant, and meaningful to measure. Other 

items are not practical or are difficult to measure. Wildlife population monitoring is an 

enormous undertaking – cause and effect relationships are hard to determine because of 

extrinsic factors (e.g. neo-tropical migratory bird populations). Such an undertaking 

needs to be closely coordinated with State and other agencies. To be effective, 

monitoring needs to be simple and easily implemented while providing a true picture of 

progress toward an objective. There is a need to adapt monitoring so changes can be 

made in on-going programs/projects as soon as potential problems are identified. 

All of these needs will be addressed in future Forest Plan amendments, Forest Plan 

revision, and other changes. 

According to Forest biologists, the greatest impediment to achieving wildlife goals is the 

amount of time they spend addressing litigation issues and preparing environmental 

analyses and environmental analyses-related documentation in support to other programs’ 

projects. The requirements for environmental documentation have become very complex, 

and are changing frequently. In addition, litigation-inspired legal interpretations of MIS 

analysis requirements and Migratory Bird analysis requirements added by Executive 

Order in 2001 continue to add to the environmental analysis workload. It is estimated 

that more than 50% of wildlife staff time is now spent participating in litigation-driven 

issues instead of implementing field projects that directly benefit wildlife. 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report 19

Section 4 – Emerging Issues 

Heritage 

Native American consultation procedures have changed under new Federal regulations 

implementing Section 106 of the Heritage Resources Protection Act. Identification and 

management of traditional cultural properties will become increasingly important. 

Identifying and managing these cultural properties will require adequate ethnographic 

investigation, including origin stories and oral tradition. 

Insects and Disease 

The most critical resource issue facing the Forest is the extensive insect attack in 

ponderosa pine. All of the pine stands are affected to some degree with areas within the 

wildland urban interface having the heaviest impact. 

There is an urgent need to cut dead and dying trees infected by the Ips beetle epidemic to 

protect the residual stand, protect private homes and landscapes adjacent to forest lands, 

and for public safety issues regarding the potential of dead trees falling. Limits to our 

ability to remove these dead and dying trees include steep slopes, no road access and no 

existing timber industry infrastructure to purchase, remove and utilize the wood. The 

ongoing drought situation in the Southwest will enhance and continue the Ips beetle 

epidemic and associated pine mortality. The 2002 aerial photo inventory for insect and 

disease monitoring revealed a serious increase in ponderosa pine mortality. It is 

estimated that as much as 50% of the ponderosa pine stands on the Prescott National 

Forest were killed during 2002. 

Noxious Weeds 

Treatment of noxious weeds in areas with special designation will be contentious; these 

areas include Wilderness and the Verde Wild and Scenic River. There is a concern about 

manipulating the environment in locales that may be perceived as sacrosanct. Another 

area of contention is the riparian community where invasives are most abundant. 

Currently there is interagency disagreement on management of salt cedar. Salt cedar 

displaces native shrubs and trees but provides habitat for birds including the southwestern 

willow flycatcher. 

Range 

Potential conflicts between livestock grazing and antelope fawning cover and forage were 

identified in Game Management Unit 21 on the east side of the Forest. An interagency 

group (AGFD and Prescott NF) was formed to address this issue. 

Recreation 

Population increases in the north Williamson Valley area are creating additional 

recreation use and a need for more developed recreation opportunities in the Walnut 

Creek/Campwood area. Similarly, rapid population growth in the Paulden and Chino 

Valley communities is impacting the Upper Verde River ecosystem through increasing 

dispersed recreation activities in this area including camping, picnicking and off-highway 

vehicle use. The Chino Valley District Ranger requested that an analysis of the impacts 

of dispersed recreation on the upper Verde River be undertaken. 
Emerging Issues 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report - 20 - 

Large trees in developed recreation sites are succumbing to the Ips beetle epidemic. 

Treatment options should be considered as soon as possible. 

An Environmental Impact Statement is being completed to analyze the impacts of crosscountry travel by off-highway vehicles on five Arizona forests including the Prescott.

Soil and Water 

The effect of insect and drought mortality on trees and shrubs in both the short term 

(open canopies and potentially extreme wildfires) and long term (ecosystem alteration) 

may affect resource management focus on the Forest. Competition between invasive and 

native plant species is an issue that has to be addressed particularly in riparian 

ecosystems. 

Timber 

The need to salvage trees burned by the Indian Fire was identified for fuel reduction, 

public safety, visual quality and forest health concerns. 

Wildlife 

There is continuing debate and research on the restoration of the Verde River system and 

what constitutes “good” aquatic habitat for spikedace and other native fish in the 

presence of non-native fish species. The restoration to a more stable aquatic system may 

favor established populations of non-native, predatory fish over native species. Better 

understanding of the interactions of native and nonnative fish, natural disturbance events 

i.e. flooding, livestock grazing, and aquatic habitat changes would greatly aid the Forest’s 

ability to manage for multiple use of the land. Furthermore, if there were to be 

widespread abandonment or substantial alteration of ranching on allotments, there would 

be a cumulative effect on wildlife. In addition, increased population and urbanization 

around the Forest has led to increasing public pressure (e.g. recreation) on threatened and 

endangered habitats, especially in and along the Verde River. 

Other emerging wildlife issues: 

¡ Change in forest habitat due to bug kill. 

¡ Noxious weeds are expanding and could eventually impact wildlife habitat. 

¡ Housing developments and new roads are fragmenting grassland habitat and pushing 

pronghorn into lower quality habitat on National Forest land. Herds may lose resilience 

as they become isolated. 

¡ Drought impacts on habitat. 

¡ The pumping of groundwater on private lands may begin reducing flows in the Verde 

River on the forest. 

¡ Increase in off-highway vehicle use on some areas of the forest threatens wildlife and fish 

species and their habitats.
2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report 21

Section 5 – Recommendations

¡ Develop a five-year plan that defines strategic goals and specific treatments that 

minimize the risk of catastrophic fire to natural resources and private property. Continue 

planning fuel reduction/forest health projects to promote wildland urban interface safety 

and to reduce the risk of insect and disease outbreaks. 

¡ Emphasis should be placed on maintaining open savanna-like juniper stands through 

mechanical treatment and burning. 

¡ Continue monitoring noxious weed populations and actively pursue an integrated noxious 

weed eradication program. 

2002 Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report 23

Section 6 – Certification of Forest Plan 

Sufficiency 

I have reviewed this annual Forest Plan Monitoring and Evaluation Report for Fiscal Year 

2002 and determined that: 

¡ While management activities on the forest continue to lead toward desired 

conditions, the ongoing drought compounded with the recent ponderosa pine Ips 

beetle epidemic will require new management strategies and urgent action. 

¡ The report is responsive to monitoring information as identified in Chapter 5 of 

the Prescott National Forest Plan. The monitoring plan and monitoring activities 

conducted by the Forest are based on National Forest Management Act 

regulations and Forest Service Manual guidance. 

¡ An amendment addressing wildland fire use, fuelwood management and Forest 

Plan monitoring is currently underway on the Forest. 

Therefore, I have determined that the Forest Plan as currently amended remains sufficient 

(although in need of further change) to guide the Prescott National Forest implementation 

activities over the next fiscal year. 

 _____________

/s/ Michael R. King, Forest Supervisor Date