Farnsworth Project. Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impacts. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service

Transcription

1 United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Farnsworth Project Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impacts Bradford Ranger District, Allegheny National Forest, Warren County, Pennsylvania September 2017

2 For More Information Contact: Rich Hatfield, Bradford District Ranger Allegheny National Forest 29 Forest Service Drive Bradford, PA DR USDA Equal Opportunity Public Notification Policy (June 2, 2015) In accordance with federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA s TARGET Center at (202) (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C ; (2) fax: (202) ; or (3) program.intake@usda.gov. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender. Draft Decision Notice Page i

3 Table of Contents Decision Notice... 1 Introduction... 1 Project Area... 1 Objection Process... 1 Purpose and Need... 2 Draft decision... 2 Reasons for the decision... 3 Environmental Consequences... 3 Other alternatives considered... 4 No Action... 4 Public Involvement and Tribal Consultation... 4 Findings required by other laws and regulations... 5 Administrative review and objections process... 6 Final decision... 6 Finding of No Significant Impact... 8 Context... 8 Intensity... 8 Appendix A. Project Maps Draft Decision Notice Page ii

4 Decision Notice Introduction In July 2017, an interdisciplinary team at the Bradford Ranger District of the Allegheny National Forest (ANF) completed the Farnsworth Environmental Assessment in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and regulations. The environmental assessment was made available for review and public comment for 30 days. The team conducted the environmental assessment according to Council on Environmental Quality regulations which state: "Briefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement or a finding of no significant impact." This decision notice describes my decision to proceed with the proposed action for the Farnsworth Project, background information about the project, which alternative I selected, and the rationale supporting my decision. This document also includes my "Finding of No Significant Impact" (FONSI) to the human environment, which means no further environmental analysis is necessary in order to proceed with this project. This Draft Decision Notice incorporates by reference the Farnsworth Environmental Assessment (EA) and describes my rationale for selecting the project s proposed action. This project would implement the Allegheny National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (also referred to as the ANF Forest Plan), and includes proposed management activities that are designed to contribute to achieving the desired condition outlined in that plan. Project Area The project area lies within the Allegheny National Forest, on the Bradford Ranger District, in the vicinity of Clarendon and Cherry Grove, Warren County, Pennsylvania (see Appendix A). It includes lands located in warrants 3238, 3239, 3240, 3241, 4794, 4795, 4798, 4799, 4800, 4829, 4830 and 4831 of Cherry Grove Township, warrants 4748, 4802, 4803, 4804 and 4808 of Mead Township, warrants 4797, 4801, 4805, 4806 and 4807 of Pleasant Township, warrants 4733, 4736, 4738, 4739 and 4750 of Sheffield Township, and warrants 4805 and 4819 of Watson Township. The project is located in the West Branch Tionesta subwatershed. National Forest System (NFS) lands within the project area include the following management areas: 3.0 Even-aged Management, 19,688 acres; 6.1 Late Structural Habitat, 1,184 acres; 7.2 Remote Recreation Area, 2,636 acres; and 8.3-Scenic Area, 115 acres. A total of 21,788 acres of non-nfs lands are also within the project area. Total project area is 45,411 acres. Objection Process Regulations (36 CFR 218) require that a Draft Decision Notice be prepared for review as part of the predecisional, administrative review process required for environmental assessments. This new process became effective on March 27, 2013, as part of the Department of Agriculture s final rule for replacing the Forest Service s appeals process (36 CFR 215) with an objections process as outlined in 36 CFR 218 (Federal Register, Volume 73, No. 59, pp to 18504). One primary tenet of the objections process is that eligible parties are able to seek resolution of their unresolved concerns based on the actions outlined in this Draft Decision Notice, through filing an objection, prior to a final decision being made. A legal notice must be published to announce the release Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Page 1

5 of this Draft Decision Notice, which initiates a 45 day objection period. Individuals who submitted a specific written comment regarding the proposed project during any designated opportunity for public comment are eligible to file an objection for this project. Instructions for filing an objection are outlined on page 7 of this document and in the legal notice published in the Bradford Era. Purpose and Need The purpose and need for the project is to: Respond to declining forest health conditions in the project area. Similar to other areas on the Forest, the Farnsworth Project area is experiencing several concurrent insect and disease issues. These include black cherry crown die-back and mortality, beech bark disease, and the emerald ash borer. Improve wildlife habitat in Management Area (MA) 6.1 in the Project Area. Address the non-native invasive plant species (NNIP) that have become established within the project area. Provide a safe and efficient transportation system and implement recommendations from the Forest s Travel Management Process. Restore and enhance stream processes and aquatic habitat diversity for brook trout and other headwater stream fishes. A secondary benefit of the project is the recovery of timber value for disease-related damaged or killed trees. Draft decision After reviewing the environmental analysis, supporting documents and public response, I propose to implement the Proposed Action (Alternative 1) and connected actions as described on pages 7 13 of the EA, which are further described in detail in figures 1, 2, and 3 of that document. My decision would implement the Proposed Action with no modifications or changes. My decision and findings are based on the Farnsworth Environmental Assessment (EA), including the biological assessment, biological evaluation and other resource analyses prepared to support the EA (available in the project record), and the 2007 Allegheny National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (ANF Forest Plan). My decision will result in 3,070 acres of vegetation management; Up to 2,977 acres of herbicide, manual site preparation and release; Up to 2,977 acres of fencing; Up to 502 acres of fertilization; Up to 2,977 acres of planting; Large wood recruitment on up to 38 miles of streams in the project area; and Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Page 2

6 Road management changes as described in the EA on page 9. Non-native invasive plant treatments will be applied on up to 1,200 acres within the project area through a combination of manual, mechanical, and herbicide treatments (EA page 12). Herbicide treatment will include the use of formulations of glyphosate, sulfometuron methyl, or both according to ANF Forest Plan standards and guidelines (pages 54-59). A combination of treatments may occur several times during a growing season, and over a period of several years. My decision authorizes the following connected actions as described in Table 4 of the EA: Add 7.9 miles of existing non-system road corridors to the National Forest Road System. Reasons for the decision For vegetation management activities, the proposed action was developed to address the forest health issues of stands included in this project. Based on my review of the Proposed Action, the affected environment and guidance contained in the ANF Forest Plan, I have made the following determinations: The Proposed Action contributes to achieving specific objectives for management areas as described in the ANF Forest Plan; The Proposed Action is consistent with strategies described in the ANF Forest Plan which are relevant and specific to the affected resources and resource concerns; The Proposed Action is consistent with the rationale for choice of vegetation management practices (described in terms of appropriateness and optimality) as defined in appendix A of the ANF Forest Plan; The Proposed Action incorporates all relevant design criteria that are consistent with standards and guidelines from the ANF Forest Plan, and; The Proposed Action is typical of other multiple-use management projects on the Bradford Ranger District, based on the size of the project area, size of individual treatment areas, scope of activities, duration of implementation, and prescribed methods. In addition, the proposed action includes a number of additional activities that will improve the conditions in the project area. This includes wildlife habitat improvement activities, non-native invasive plant treatments, road management changes and large wood recruitment for streams in the project area. Considering all of these factors, I am confident that the Proposed Action is well-grounded in the ANF Forest Plan as a guiding document, current and consistent with recommendations from the FY2008- FY2013 Monitoring Report, and all elements of the Proposed Action are responsive to the purpose and need for action. Environmental Consequences I have carefully reviewed the environmental consequences for each issue identified for analysis and I am confident that resource specialists on the interdisciplinary team have experience with analyzing potential effects. To manage the forest health issues within the project area, this project includes openings greater than 40 acres. These openings were disclosed and analyzed in the EA prepared for the project. Prior to signing Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Page 3

7 the final decision, the Forest Service s Region 9 Regional Forester will need to concur with the need for these larger than 40-acre openings. The effects of the various elements of the proposed action have been studied (from past projects) for at least a decade. Monitoring information concerning effects and mitigation efficacy was a key part of the analysis for this proposal. The interdisciplinary team considered the best available scientific information, as well as opposing viewpoints to complete all components of the environmental analysis and support a Finding of No Significant Impact. Other alternatives considered One other alternative (discussed below) was fully analyzed in the EA. The EA includes a discussion (pp ) of other alternatives considered but eliminated from detailed study. I have determined this range of alternatives is adequate and follows Forest Service environmental analysis regulations at 36 CFR for consideration of alternatives. No Action The No Action alternative provides a baseline for comparison of potential effects from the Proposed Action. In this alternative, the activities described in the Proposed Action would not take place. Existing road uses and recreational activities would continue. I chose the Proposed Action because the No Action alternative would not be responsive to the purpose and need for the project. Public Involvement and Tribal Consultation This proposal was first listed in the Allegheny National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions in October, This quarterly publication is available on the ANF website. On December 12, 2016, a scoping proposal explaining the purpose and need for action, as well as the locations and types of proposed activities, was mailed to adjacent land owners, local governments, and individuals and organizations who have expressed a desire to be notified about current projects. The Allegheny National Forest consulted with tribal representatives from 14 Tribes during the public scoping period for the Farnsworth Project. Comments were received from two Tribes (Seneca-Cayuga Nation and the Delaware Tribe) during this scoping period. The Forest Service has consulted with the State Historic Preservation Office, in accordance with section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended in 1980 and 1992, and the regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800) of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. All proposed management activities in this project are being reviewed by this agency for potential effects to cultural resources. In addition to the Tribal comments, scoping comments were received from a member of the public, an adjoining landowner, Chapman State Park, and Pennsylvania Fish and Game. Comment were reviewed for issues that might drive an alternative means to accomplish the project s purpose and need or the development of an analysis statement. Comments and Forest Service responses are summarized in the EA s Appendix A. I have reviewed comments received as a result of public scoping. I appreciate the time and effort taken by members of the public to share their thoughts and concerns regarding this action. Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Page 4

8 During the 30-day comment period on the EA, one comment was received. Responses to this comment were appended to the actual comment and are posted on the Farnsworth web page. Findings required by other laws and regulations My decision implements vegetation management activities and connected actions intended to develop desired conditions in the ANF Forest Plan. As required by the National Forest Management Act section 1604(i), I find this project to be consistent with the Allegheny National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (2007). This decision is also in full compliance with the laws and regulations cited below, with reference to relevant page numbers in the EA. Archaeological Resources Protection Act Eligible and Unevaluated cultural resources for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be protected by following the compliance process mandated by Section 106 of the NHPA and recommendations outlined in the cultural resource reports. The regulations governing Section 106 review are contained in 36 CFR Part 800, which describes the compliance process. All Eligible and Unevaluated sites would be protected by avoidance or other sitespecific mitigations identified by the Forest Heritage Program Manager or District Archaeologist. Clean Air Act Response to the public scoping request did not identify any issues related to the Clean Air Act. My decision is not expected to adversely impact air quality. Clean Water Act EA pages Endangered Species Act/ Regional Forester Sensitive Species (Forest Service Manual 2670): To comply with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, and Forest Service Manual 2670 direction for Regional Forester Sensitive Species (RFSS), a Biological Evaluation/Biological Assessment for Birds, Mammals, Amphibians, Reptiles, Fish, and Invertebrates was completed and is summarized in the EA (pages 27-36). Consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service will be completed prior to a final decision. The RFSS list is currently being updated, and the Allegheny National Forest has proposed to add 12 new species to the list while removing 23 species. When the RFSS list will be updated, and what species will be added or removed, is uncertain. Depending on the timing of the final RFSS decision, the final decision may include the updated RFSS list. Environmental Justice (Executive Order 12898) Response to the public scoping request did not identify any adversely impacted local minority or low-income populations. My decision is not expected to adversely impact minority or low-income populations. Federal Cave Resources Protection Act No known cave resources would be affected by my decision. Floodplains (Executive Order 11988) The project area includes floodplains, but no activities would be implemented within floodplains. National Environmental Policy Act - This act requires public involvement and consideration of potential environmental effects. The entirety of documentation for this decision supports compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act. National Historic Preservation Act Eligible and Unevaluated cultural resources for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be protected by following the compliance process mandated by Section 106 of the NHPA and recommendations outlined in the cultural resource reports. The regulations governing Section 106 review are contained in 36 CFR Part 800, which describes the Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Page 5

9 compliance process. All Eligible and Unevaluated sites would be protected by avoidance or other sitespecific mitigations identified by the Forest Heritage Program Manager or District Archaeologist. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act No Native American Graves sites are known, nor were an identified as a result of public scoping or consultation with tribal representatives. Wetlands (Executive Order 11990) Standards and guidelines and BMPs (USDA Forest Service, 2016) will also be implemented to protect wetlands. Activities will exclude wetlands direct impacts and will avoid indirect impacts using buffers. Wetlands, springs and seeps will be protected with a 25-foot no activity buffer and a 25 to 100 foot zone from these resources where 50 percent canopy cover will be maintained. (EA page 43). Administrative review and objections process This decision is subject to an objection process pursuant to 36 CFR 218, subparts A and B. These regulations are available at: Objections will only be accepted from those who submitted timely and specific written comments about this project during scoping or the 30 day public comment period in accordance with 36 CFR 218.5(a). Issues raised in objections must be based on previously submitted timely, specific written comments regarding the proposed project unless based on new information arising after the designated comment opportunities. A legal notice regarding the availability of this draft decision notice will be published in the newspaper of record, which is the Bradford Era for this project. A written objection, including any associated attachments must be submitted within 45 calendar days after publication of the legal notice in the Bradford Era. However, when the 45-day filing period would end on a Saturday, Sunday, or federal holiday, the filing time is extended to the end of the next federal working day. The date of the publication of this notice is the only means for calculating the date by which objections must be received; do not rely upon any other source for this information. The notice of objection must be sent to: Forest Supervisor Sherry A. Tune, Region 9, Attn: Administrative Review Staff, USDA Forest Service, 626 E. Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, WI The notice of objection may be faxed to: , Attn: Administrative Review Staff, Region 9, USDA Forest Service, Eastern Regional Office. Objections may be submitted by to: objections-easternregion@fs.fed.us. Acceptable formats for ed objections include plain text (.txt), rich text format (.rtf), portable document format (.pdf), Word (.doc or.docx), or any other format supported by Microsoft Office applications. Hand-delivered objections may be submitted at the above address between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on federal holidays. Final decision If no objections are filed within the 45-day time period for this draft decision, then a final decision may occur on, but not before, the 5th business day following the end of the objection filing period. If an objection is filed, a final decision will not be signed until all concerns and instructions (identified by the Reviewing Officer) have been addressed (36 CFR [b]). For additional information concerning this decision, please refer to the Allegheny National Forest website for the project: You may also contact me at the Bradford Ranger Station, 29 Forest Service Drive, Bradford, PA 16701, or by phone ((814) ) or (rhatfield@fs.fed.us). Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Page 6

10 DECIDING OFFICER: /s/ Rich Hatfield September 22, 2017 Rich Hatfield Date Bradford District Ranger Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Page 7

11 Finding of No Significant Impact I have reviewed the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for significance (40 CFR ) and have determined that this decision is not a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment, either individually or cumulatively. Preparation of an environmental impact statement pursuant to Section 102 (2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 is not required. This determination is based on the following factors as outlined in 40 CFR Context For the action alternative and the no action alternative, the context of the environmental effects is based on the environmental analysis in the EA. The Farnsworth project was proposed to achieve long-term desired conditions identified in Allegheny National Forest Record of Decision for the Final Environmental Impact Statement and the Land and Resource Management Plan (ANF Forest Plan). The proposed action would achieve ANF Forest Plan goals and meet specific objectives for forest health and non-native invasive plant reduction and control. All applicable ANF Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines were applied to project design. The project area includes approximately 5 percent of federal land within the Allegheny National Forest proclamation boundary. The total area proposed for timber harvest comprises 13 percent of Forest Service land within the project area, and.006 percent of all Forest Service land within the Allegheny National Forest (including water). Intensity Intensity is a measure of the severity, extent, or quantity of effects, and is based on information from the effects analysis of this EA and the references in the Project Record. I have determined that the interdisciplinary team considered the effects of this project appropriately and thoroughly with an analysis that is responsive to concerns and issues raised by the public. They took a hard look at the environmental effects (both beneficial and adverse) using relevant scientific information and their knowledge of sitespecific conditions gained from field visits. Benefits of this project were not used to offset adverse impacts, and adverse impacts of this project are not significant even when separated from benefits (EA, pages 15-53). My finding of no significant impact is based on the intensity of effects using the ten factors identified in 40 CFR (b). 1. Impacts that may be both beneficial and adverse. A significant effect may exist even if the federal agency believes that on balance the effect will be beneficial. The interdisciplinary team analyzed effects of the Proposed Action by addressing five analysis issues. The analyses documented in the Environmental Effects section of the EA (pages 15 56) state that some direct and indirect effects are expected in the context of the analysis area. The interdisciplinary team has applied design features to the Proposed Action to ensure that even direct and indirect effects to these resources will not be significant. None of the direct and indirect effects are expected to add significant cumulative effect to any resource or measurement indicators. The EA, appendices, and project record also includes detailed analyses of the effects of the alternatives to vegetation and forest health, wildlife and sensitive plants, non-native invasive plants, water resources, and recreation opportunities. These analyses contribute to my understanding of the effects of the alternatives and confirm that there will be no significant effects to those resources. Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Page 8

12 2. The degree to which the proposed action affects public health or safety. Implementation of the proposed action will not result in any significant increased risks to public health and safety. The proposed action would avoid adverse impacts to public health and safety through implementation of ANF Forest Plan standards and guidelines, Pennsylvania Best Management Practices (also known as BMPs), project design features, timber sale contract requirements, Office of Safety and Health Administration requirements, and standard operating safety procedures. 3. Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as the proximity to historical or cultural resources, parklands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers or ecologically critical areas The interdisciplinary team considered potential effects to unique characteristics of the landscape in the environmental analysis: There are no federal wild and scenic rivers, designated wilderness areas or wilderness study areas within the project area. Farm use is not a designated activity for any prime farmland within the Allegheny National Forest; therefore, this is not a significant effect. Wetlands are discussed earlier in this DN. No ecologically critical areas are within or adjacent to the project area. 4. The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly controversial. The effects on the quality of the human environment are not likely to be highly controversial. Proposed treatments are based on well-established methods applied throughout the region on private and public forest lands. The rationale for choice of vegetation management practices to be applied is welldescribed in the ANF Forest Plan. 5. The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. The effects of the various elements of the proposed action have been studied (from past projects) for at least a decade. Monitoring information concerning effects and mitigation efficacy was a key part of the analysis for this proposal. The interdisciplinary team considered the best available scientific information as well as opposing viewpoints. The conclusions of these local resource experts are described in the EA effects discussion. Much is known regarding the outcomes when using even-aged management on the Allegheny National Forest. 6. The degree to which the action may establish precedent for future actions with significant effects or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration. The proposed action does not establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects, nor does it represent a decision in principle about a future consideration. The size of the project area, size of individual treatment areas, scope of activities, duration of implementation, and prescribed methods are typical of other multiple-use management projects on the Bradford Ranger District. All management activities are consistent with ANF Forest Plan direction for affected management areas and resources, and are intended to directly address and achieve ANF Forest Plan objectives. Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Page 9

13 7. Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts. Significance exists if it is reasonable to anticipate a cumulatively significant impact on the environment. Significance cannot be avoided by terming an action temporary or by breaking it down into small component parts. No cumulatively significant impact on the environment is anticipated based on environmental analysis. The proposed action is related to other actions with individually insignificant effects in the context of past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions on both federal and private land within the project area. Past actions and present actions are reflected in the description of the existing condition (EA page 17). Reasonably foreseeable actions are described as those approved in previous NEPA decisions that have not been implemented, as well as projected future oil and gas development of the private mineral estates. The interdisciplinary team considered the potential for the proposed action to contribute to potentially significant cumulative effects to each of the measurement indicators based on an analysis area and time frame unique to each affected resource. The environmental analysis found that the proposed action was not likely to contribute to any significant effect to any resource based on this relationship. 8. The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or may cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources. The proposed action would not adversely affect any districts, sites, highways, structures, or objects listed, eligible for listing, or unevaluated for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Heritage resources that have been determined to be not eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places, or heritage resources have been buffered and placed in reserve areas. 9. The degree to which the action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened species or its habitat that has been determined to be critical under the Endangered Species Act of Threatened, endangered, and sensitive plant and animal species were considered in the botany and terrestrial wildlife and aquatic resource reports and summarized in the EA (pp and 21-25). The selected alternative will not adversely affect the viability of any threatened or endangered wildlife, fish, or plant species that may occur in the area. Based on the biological assessment prepared for the EA (project record), a "no effect" determination was reached for the small-whorled pogonia, northeastern bulrush, and the following mussel species: clubshell, northern riffleshell, rabbitsfoot, rayed-bean, sheepnose, and snuffbox. A may affect, likely to adversely affect determination was reached for the northern long-eared bat. There is no designated critical habitat for any federally threatened or endangered species on the Allegheny National Forest. On January 14, 2016, the US Fish and Wildlife Service finalized the listing of the northern long-eared bat as threatened under section 4(d) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), as amended (81 FR ). White-nose syndrome was deemed to be the main threat to the species. The project biological assessment has determined that activities may affect, likely to adversely affect the northern long-eared bat. Project activities are consistent with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service programmatic biological opinion on implementing the final 4(d) rule as well as activities that do not require special exemption from taking prohibitions applicable to the northern long-eared bat (USDI-FWS 2016a). Therefore, any taking that may occur incidental to project activities is not prohibited under the final 4(d) rule (50 CFR 17.40(o); USDI-FWS 2016b) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service programmatic biological opinion satisfies the Forest Service s responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act section 7(a)(2) relative to the northern long-eared bat for this project. Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Page 10

14 Potential effects to threatened or endangered species and their habitat are anticipated to be non-significant with implementation of Forest Plan standards and guidelines. 10. Whether the action threatens a violation of federal, state, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment. The proposed action complies with federal, state, and local laws and requirements imposed for the protection of the environment. These include the Clean Water Act, Wetlands and Floodplains Executive Orders, the Endangered Species Act, The National Historic Preservation Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the National Forest Management Act. The proposed action complies with all ANF Forest Plan desired conditions, objectives, standards, and guidelines. Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Page 11

15 Appendix A. Project Maps Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Page 12