TRAVEL ANALYSIS PROCESS. For COMPARTMENTS 02, 03. USDA Forest Service. Pisgah National Forest August 2012

Transcription

1 National Forests in North Carolina Derek J.S. Ibarguen, District Ranger Pisgah Ranger District 1001 Pisgah Highway Pisgah Forest, NC TRAVEL ANALYSIS PROCESS For COMPARTMENTS 02, 03 USDA Forest Service Pisgah Ranger District Pisgah National Forest August 2012

2 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION... 3 Step I: Setting up the Analysis Interdisciplinary Team Members Data Needs Scope of Travel Analysis Scale of Travel Analysis Inventory of Roads and Motorized Trails in the Travel Analysis Area Appropriate Depth for this Analysis Opportunities to Integrate this Travel Analysis with any Watershed or Landscape Assessment... 5 STEP II: DESCRIBING THE SITUATIOn Current Land and Travel Management Direction Analysis Area a Map of Analysis Area b Inventory of Roads and Trails used for Motorized Travel c Assessment of Motorized and Non-Motorized Uses d Description of Public and Administrative Needs e Assessment of Motorized Recreation Opportunities f Information about Environmental, Social, and Other Issues g Summary of Existing Travel Management Decisions h Assessment of Available Resources to Maintain and Operate the Forest Transportation System i Summary of Available Applicable Accident and Law Enforcement Data Motor Vehicle Use on the Part of the Forest Transportation System Under Analysis and on the Adjacent or Connecting Authorized Transportation Systems Effects of Motor Vehicle Use on the Portion of the Forest Transportation System Under Analysis General Criteria for Roads, Trails, and Areas Specific Criteria for Trails and Areas Specific Criteria for Roads Identify Key Issues Affecting the Portion of the Forest Transportation System Under Analysis To Identify Key Issues, Determine in the Context of the Analysis a Primary Public Concerns Related to Travel Management b Primary Management Concerns Related to Travel Management c Legal Constraints on Travel Management d Resources and Skill Available to Conduct Analysis Data Needed To Analyze Key Issues STEP IV: ASSESSING BENEFITS, PROBLEMS, AND RISKS Major Uses and Environmental, Social, and Economic Impacts Financial and Economic Values General Criteria for Designating NFS Roads, Trails, and Areas STEP V: DESCRIBING OPPORTUNITIES AND SETTING PRIORITIES Management Opportunities and Proposals Current and Desired Motorized Use Unauthorized Roads and Trails Considered for Designation STEP VI: REPORTING List of Key Issues Prioritized List of the Risks and Benefits Prioritized List of Opportunities for Addressing those Risks and Benefits Prioritized List of Actions or Projects that would Implement the Minimum Road System List of Proposed Changes Including Additions and Deletions Appendix A: Applicable Land and Travel Management Direction Appendix B: Generalized Road Maintenance Costs, Pisgah Ranger District Appendix C: Maps... 25

3 INTRODUCTION Process Pursuant to Forest Service Handbook (FSH) , Chapter 20, the Travel Analysis Process (TAP) is a six-step process. The steps are designed to be sequential with the understanding the process may require feedback and iteration among steps over time as an analysis matures. The amount of time and effort spent on each step differs by project based on specific situations and available information. The process provides a set of possible issues and analysis questions, the answers for which are intended to inform choices about road system management. Decision makers and analysts determine the relevance of each question, incorporating public participation as deemed necessary. Additional information about the Transportation Analysis Process can be found in FSM Travel Analysis Steps: Step 1: Setting up the Analysis Step 2: Describing the Situation Step 3: Identifying Issues Step 4: Assessing Benefits, Problems, and Risks Step 5: Describing Opportunities and Setting Priorities Step 6: Reporting Products The product of a Travel Analysis is a report for decision makers and the public that documents the information and analyses used to identify opportunities and set priorities for the future management of the National Forest Roads System. Included in the report is a map displaying the inventoried road system for the analysis area and the risks and opportunities for each road or road segment, identification of the minimum road system needed for safe and efficient travel and for administration, utilization, and protection of National Forest System (NFS) lands [36 CFR 212.5(b)(1)], and designation of roads, trails and areas for motor vehicle use [36 CFR ]. A report may also include other maps and tables necessary to display specific priorities and changes in a road system, and may be updated as needed. There are two types of TAPs those done at the Forest-level and those done at a smaller level including the sub-watershed and project-level. This Report This report documents the travel analysis for Compartments 02 and 03. Compartments 02 and 03 are on the Pisgah Ranger District of the Pisgah National Forest, and are located in Buncombe County in North Carolina. This report is being completed in support to the Gap-based Approach to Oak Regeneration Project (GAORP). This environmental assessment is being completed concurrently. The GAORP Project Purpose and Need are: To examine an un-tested silvicultural system and continue testing an existing silvicultural system that are both based on natural disturbance patterns for their potential to regenerate oak and hickory species on moderate to high productivity sites in the southern Appalachians. To measure the effects of disturbance-based silvicultural systems on other ecosystem components such as wildlife, understory plants, etc. More information about the GAORP project can be found at (Add SOPA website here) Only National Forest System (NFS) roads and other roads which occur on NFS lands are considered. All road lengths in this analysis are derived from GIS and are approximate. STEP I: SETTING UP THE ANALYSIS The purpose of this step is to: 1. Establish an Interdisciplinary Team (ID team) that includes specialists from relevant disciplines; 2. Develop a list of data needs, and a schedule for completing the analysis; 3. Identify the appropriate scope of analysis. The scope of analysis refers to the range of potential actions to be considered, for example, whether only additions to the existing forest transportation system will be considered, whether only the existing forest transportation system will be analyzed, or whether only motorized trails will be considered for changes; 4. Identify the appropriate scale of analysis; 5. Establish a complete and accurate inventory of NFS roads and NFS trails managed for motor vehicle use in the portion of the forest transportation system under analysis;

4 6. Identify the appropriate depth for travel analysis based on the skills and resources available and the complexity and scope of the issues prompting the analysis; 7. Consider opportunities to integrate travel analysis with any watershed analysis or landscape assessments. 1.1 Interdisciplinary Team Members The Travel Analysis was conducted by an Interdisciplinary Team (ID Team). The ID Team consisted of the following members: Core Team: Jason A. Rodrigue (Forest Silviculturist IDT co-leader/ Vegetation) Tara L. Keyser (Research Forester IDT co-leader/vegetation) Cathryn H. Greenberg (Research Ecologist Wildlife and Fisheries) W. Henry McNab (Research Forester Soils and Hydrology) Tracy Roof (Lead Forestry Technician Botany) Extended Team: Heather Luczak Sheryl Bryan Brady Dodd Gary Kauffman Stacy Clark Dana Mitchell Rodney Snedeker (Assistant Forest Planner NEPA Support) (Forest Biologist BE/BA Support) (Forest Hydrologist Hydrology Support) (Forest Botanist/Ecologist BE/BA Support) (Research Forester Vegetation Effects) (SRS Research Logging Engineer - Transportation System Design) (Forest Archeologist Archeology Support) 1.2 Data Needs Data needed for the analysis include: Forest Plan Direction for roads and motorized trails in C02/03; Inventory of all National Forest System Roads (NFSRs) and motorized use National Forest System Trails (NFSTs) within C02/03; Determinations and locations of unauthorized or temporary roads where opportunities to improve compliance with the Forest Plan exist; Determination of future needs for access to the area. 1.3 Scope of Travel Analysis Pursuant to FSH , Chapter 20, the objective of this travel analysis is to conduct travel analysis to inform decisions related to: a. Identification of the minimum road system needed for safe and efficient travel and for administration, utilization, and protection of NFS lands per 36 CFR 212.5(b)(1); b. Designation of roads, trails and areas for motor vehicle use per 36 CFR It is not within the scope of this analysis to produce a comprehensive list of every unauthorized or temporary road within the two compartments. Only authorized roads and those roads which present an opportunity for management action are included. The scope of this analysis includes: Identification of authorized roads, trails, and areas designated for motorized use Identification of the risks and benefits associated with the current authorized Forest transportation system Identification of areas of special sensitivity or unique resource value that may require specific road management. Identification of opportunities to improve compliance of the Forest transportation system with the Forest Plan, including: o Opportunities to add existing temporary and unauthorized roads to the Forest transportation system; o Opportunities to decommission existing authorized, unauthorized, and temporary roads; o o Opportunities to change Road Maintenance objectives, access levels, and seasonal access restrictions; and Opportunities to add, improve, or remove Forest transportation facilities (gates, parking lots, bridges, culverts, etc.); and Prioritization of recommended changes, based on available resources, existing management direction, and reasonably foreseeable activities within the Analysis Area. 1.4 Scale of Travel Analysis Pursuant to FSH , Chapter 21.1, the responsible official must Determine the appropriate scale [for the TAP] based on the issues to be addressed. In order to thoroughly analyze the GAORP Project Area and provide detailed information about the existing transportation system to facilitate future management decisions, it was determined that a Travel Analysis on a sub-

5 watershed scale was appropriate. By focusing on Compartments 02 and 03, a XXXXX acre area, the TAP can provide more detailed and specific data than a watershed- district- or Forest-wide analysis. This information in this TAP is tiered to two other transportation analyses. The Baldwin Gap RAP which covered Compartment 01 was completed in Compartment 01 lays Northeast of Compartments 02 and 03 but contains portions of the road system described in the GAORP Analysis. The Compartment 128 Projects RAP which covered Compartment 128 was completed in 2003.Compartment 128 lays to the East of Compartments 02 and 03. This compartment is also known as Bent Creek Experimental Forest. This RAP also contains portions of the road system described in the GAORP Analysis. 1.5 Inventory of Roads and Motorized Trails in the Travel Analysis Area See Table 1.1: Inventory of Roads and Motorized Trails within Analysis Area 03, Section 2.2b: Inventory of Roads and Trails Used for Motorized Travel, and Appendix B: Maps. There are no motorized trails in the Analysis Area. Table 1.1: Inventory of System Roads in AA03 Road ID Name Begin End RMO Access Maint. Level Surface * Lanes Length (Miles) Total System Roads * Nat=native, Agg=aggregate, Pav=Paved Table 1.2: Inventory of Non-system Roads in AA03 Road ID Name Begin End RMO Access Maint Level Surface * Lanes Length (Miles) A B C D Total Nonsystem Roads 9.40 * Nat=native, Agg=aggregate, Pav=Paved 1.6 Appropriate Depth for this Analysis The TAP is conducted at a sufficient depth to adequately identify the minimum road system needed for safe and efficient travel and for administration, utilization, and protection of National Forest System (NFS) lands [36 CFR 212.5(b)(1)], and designation of roads, trails and areas for motor vehicle use [36 CFR ]. According to FSH , Chapter 21.1, the Responsible Official will: Identify the appropriate depth for travel analysis based on the skills and resources available and the complexity and scope of the issues prompting the analysis. For less complex and comprehensive questions, analysis may consist of no more than a judgment by the interdisciplinary team on the issues presented. At other times, the complexity, scope, and scale of the issues or the potential severity of effects may be sufficient to justify using the latest analytical tools. Interdisciplinary teams should conduct travel analysis that is as simple and cost-effective as possible and still produces sufficient information for decision-making. For this TAP, analysis consists of a GIS analysis of previously mapped roads, trails, streams, administrative boundaries, topography, and Forest Service management units (Management Areas, Compartments, and Stands). Previously unmapped temporary and unauthorized roads, and roads whose locations the ID team believed were not accurately represented in the spatial dataset, were verified by GPS. The current and potential future uses, risks, and benefits of each system and non-system road were analyzed by the ID team to find opportunities to improve compliance with the Forest Plan. 1.7 Opportunities to Integrate this Travel Analysis with any Watershed or Landscape Assessment As mentioned above, the TAP can be integrated with the GAORP Project Analysis. Compartments 02 and 03 were included in the Pisgah and Nantahala National Forest Roads Analysis Process Report, 2003, and that report is incorporated by reference. Another TAP conducted in the local vicinity (South) is C02/03 03 TAP and the Brushy Ridge EA. The Baldwin Gap EA and RAP are located to the Northeast and the Bent Creek Complex EA and Compartment 128 RAP are to the East. STEP II: DESCRIBING THE SITUATION

6 The purpose of this step is to: 1. Summarize current land management and travel management direction; 2. For the portion of the forest transportation system under analysis, produce: a. A map; b. An inventory of NFS roads and NFS trails and areas on NFS lands managed for motor vehicle use; c. An assessment of motorized and non-motorized uses; d. A description of public and administrative access needs; e. An assessment of motorized recreation opportunities; f. Information about environmental, social and other issues; g. A summary of existing travel management decisions; h. An assessment of available resources to maintain and operate the forest transportation system; i. A summary of available applicable accident and law enforcement data; 3. Consider motor vehicle use both on the part of the forest transportation system under analysis and on adjacent or connecting authorized transportation systems; 4. Consider the effects of motor vehicle use on the portion of the transportation system under analysis, using the general and specific criteria for designating NFS roads, trails, and areas on NFS lands for motor vehicle use (36 CFR ; FSM ). 2.1 Current Land and Travel Management Direction Current land management and travel management direction includes the Land and Resource Management Plan; Amendment 5; Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests Management Areas (MAs), Road Maintenance Levels, and Road Maintenance Objectives (RMOs). See Appendix A: Applicable Land and Travel Management Direction for details, road management definitions, and Management Area standards. The following table displays current road densities in the TAP with Forest Plan direction (Total distance here is less than the total mileage of Forest roads in the TAP because some road segments are not in a management area): Table 2.1: Comparison of Current Road Density and Forest Plan Direction within AA** MA* Area Forest Plan Standard for Open Open NFSRs All NFSRs (mi^2) Road Density (mi/mi^2) mi mi/mi^2 mi mi/mi^2 2a b a c d * For MAs 3 and 4, the Forest Plan states: Where existing open road densities exceed [Forest Plan standard] miles per square mile, and, if closure of existing roads is prohibitive for administrative or legal reasons, then document these exceptions to the standard and investigate strategies to reduce the open road density (Forest Plan, page III-76 and III 87). ** Some standards are stated as approximations or desired densities However, some latitude is given to allow for on the ground decisions necessary to implement the standard in an economically and environmentally sound manner (Forest Plan, p. III- 8) 2.2 Analysis Area The boundaries of C02/03 are described in section 1.4, above. See Figure 2.1: C02/03 Travel Analysis Area Vicinity Map, below, and Appendix C: Maps. 2.2a Map of Analysis Area See Appendix C: Maps for detailed maps of the Analysis Area. Figure 2.1: C02/03 Travel Analysis Vicinity Map with Compartments 2.2b Inventory of Roads and Trails used for Motorized Travel See Appendix A for the definitions of each type of road. These road types are established by 36 CFR This section discloses information about current road conditions; recommended changes are disclosed in Steps 5 and 6 of the TAP. National Forest System Roads (NFSRs) These roads are part of the Forest Transportation System, and receive regular maintenance according to their assigned RMO. Yellow Gap (NFSR 1206): This 13.2 mile road between State Route (SR) 1345 (North Mills River Road) and US 276 is a major access route within the Forest. In C02/03, it accesses the North Mills Recreation Area and several roads and trails. Outside C02/03, it accesses additional roads, trails, and parking areas as well as the Cradle of Forestry. The road has an RMO of A1 and is open to

7 public vehicle access for the first 1.0 miles (starting from SR 1345), and has an RMO of B1 and is open to public vehicle access from 1.0 miles to 13.2 miles. Only the first 4.09 miles are within AA03. It provides access for recreation and management activities. Yellow Gap Spur (NFSR 1206A): This 0.38 mile road has an RMO of D1, and is closed with a tank trap and managed as a linear wildlife opening. It provides access for dispersed recreation, future timber harvest, and management activities. Unauthorized and Temporary Roads As part of the Transportation Analysis Process, unauthorized and temporary roads with recommended changes were assigned temporary identifying letters/numbers for use during the analysis. These designations are not permanent, and roads which are later incorporated into the Forest transportation system will be assigned permanent names and road numbers. Road A (Bog Road): This 0.54 mile road originating from FSR 5026 provides access for recreation and management activities, and is expected to be used for future timber harvest. Road B (Rush Branch Road): This 0.21 mile road originating from FSR 294 provides access for recreation and management activities, and is expected to be used for future timber harvest. Road C (Dog Ridge Road): This 0.19 mile road originating from FSR 5000A provides access for recreation and management activities, and is expected to be used for future timber harvest. Road D (Bear Ridge Road): This 0.54 mile road originating from FSR 5000C provides access for recreation and management activities, and is expected to be used for future timber harvest. Road P: This 0.69 mile road originating from road L provides access for recreation and management activities. Road Q: This 0.21 mile road originating from road L provides access for recreation and management activities. Road R: This 0.15 mile road originating from road M provides access for recreation and management activities. Other Forest Roads This section discloses public or private roads which legally cross National Forest Service lands by way of an easement, permit, or other method. Road Y (Humphrey s Road): This 0.79 mile road accesses private land from FSR 5026.

8 2.2c Assessment of Motorized and Non-Motorized Uses Motorized: The following motorized uses are present in the C02/03: Public access to trails and facilities within C02/03, particularly Wash Creek Horse Camp and North Mills River recreation area; Access to public property (non-usfs) and private property located adjacent to or within C02/02; Administrative access for management activities, including timber, wildlife, and fire protection; Access for commercial timber sales; Public access to recreation opportunities throughout C02/03; Access to the Blue Ridge Parkway and Bent Creek Experimental Forest; and Commercial use by outfitters and guides. Non-Motorized: The following non-motorized uses are present in the C02/03: Hiking, biking, and equestrian use; Dispersed recreation activities, including hunting, fishing, and camping; Gathering firewood and permitted forest products; and Commercial use by outfitters and guides. 2.2d Description of Public and Administrative Needs Public Needs The following public access needs are present in C02/03: Access to recreation opportunities on NFS lands, including trails, campgrounds, parking, day use, and dispersed recreation areas; Access to Wash Creek Horse camp and North Mills River Recreation Area; Access to adjacent private property; and Access to the Blue Ridge Parkway and Bent Creek Experimental Forest. Administrative needs: The following administrative access needs are present in C02/03: NC Wildlife Resource Commission access to Federal/State Game Lands for enforcement and wildlife habitat management; Forest Service access for resource management activities, which may include: o Commercial timber harvest or non-commercial vegetation management; o Maintenance of roads, structures, wildlife openings, or other facilities; o Management of wildlife, fish, plant, or bird populations or habitat; o Identification or inventory of resources; o Wildfire prevention or prescription burning; o o Law enforcement; Other management activities consistent with the Forest Plan, Forest Service directives, and applicable laws and regulations. 2.2e Assessment of Motorized Recreation Opportunities There are no trails or areas designated for motorized recreation use within C02/ f Information about Environmental, Social, and Other Issues Environmental, social, and other issues in C02/03 include: The Forest Transportation System provides access to the Wash Creek Horse Camp, a popular location for equestrian users; C02/03 is used for hunting and fishing by local residents; Horseback riding is common throughout C02/03 and many National Forest System and non-system roads are currently used; Roads and trails in C02/03 are used for hiking, biking, and horse riding; Roads and trails are used to access opportunities for dispersed use, including hunting, fishing, camping, and gathering of firewood and other permitted forest products.

9 2.2g Summary of Existing Travel Management Decisions January 13, 2003, Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests Road Process Report evaluated all 424 open roads in the current Forest System for the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests. January 01, 2008, Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM) shows the National Forest System roads, National Forest System trails, and the areas on NFS lands in the Pisgah National Forest that are designated for motor vehicle use pursuant to 36 CFR The MVUM also contains a list of those designated roads, trails, and areas and enumerates the types of vehicles that are allowed on each route and in each area, and any seasonal restrictions that apply on those routes and in those areas. 2.2h Assessment of Available Resources to Maintain and Operate the Forest Transportation System There are several methods for performing road maintenance and operation on roads within C02/03: Annual Road Maintenance Funds: Annual maintenance funding (CMRD) is used to maintain roads with maintenance level 3-5. Funds are used for road grading, aggregate replacement, culvert replacement, ditching, mowing, brushing, gate installation and maintenance, signage and to fund program staffing for the Pisgah District. Coop Roads Funds from Timber Sale receipts: These funds are generated from timber sales receipts to cover maintenance of Nation Forest System Roads not included to be maintained in the timber sale contract. Funds are used for aggregate replacement, road blading, culverts replacement, mowing and signage. Coop Wildlife Funds: Funds generated from the sale of Federal Game Lands tags and are used to enhance wildlife habitat including maintaining roads with Road Management Objective of D5 (permanent grass/forb opening). Funds are used on roads closed to public vehicle traffic, bicycles and horse use. In addition to the above resources the Pisgah Ranger District has staff and equipment capable of doing light road maintenance such as dozer grading, aggregate spreading, ditch cleaning, culvert cleaning, gate installation, and signage. Road surfacing is not done for entire road lengths each year; road is spot graveled where needed as surfacing costs exceed yearly road maintenance budget. See Section 4.1, Table 5.4, and Appendix B for additional information regarding road maintenance costs. 2.2i Summary of Available Applicable Accident and Law Enforcement Data Law Enforcement data for the Brushy Ridge Area by Road and Year Yellow Gap Road (FSR 1206) 2007: 11 cases of alcohol related violations, 4 traffic related violations, 2 drug offenses 2008: 1 case alcohol, 5 traffic, 1 drug offense 2009: 1 case alcohol, 1 traffic, 3 drug offenses 2010: 1 drug offense, 25 incidents of campsite theft 2.3 Motor Vehicle Use on the Part of the Forest Transportation System Under Analysis and on the Adjacent or Connecting Authorized Transportation Systems The following motor vehicles uses occur on the Forest Transportation system: Access between the Blue Ridge Parkway and state, local, and other federal roads; Access to private property adjacent to C02/03; Access to Bent Creek Experimental Forest; Open system roads throughout C02/03 are used by the public for recreation and access to private property; Many closed roads within C02/03 are used as trails and/or wildlife openings; Open and closed roads within C02/03 are used by the Forest Service to provide access for management actions; Access to improved sites, such as North Mills River Rec. Area and Wash Creek Horse Camp; and Access for commercial timber sales. 2.4 Effects of Motor Vehicle Use on the Portion of the Forest Transportation System Under Analysis In designating NFS roads, NFS trails, and areas on NFS lands for motor vehicle use, consider, as applicable, both the general and specific criteria in 36 CFR (a) through (c). The general criteria in 36 CFR (a) apply to roads, trails, and areas. The specific criteria in 36 CFR (b) apply to trails and areas. The specific criteria in 36 CFR (c) apply to roads (FSM ). See Appendix A: General Criteria for Roads, Trails, and Areas a: In designating NFS roads, NFS trails, and areas on NFS lands for motor vehicle use, consider effects on NFS natural and cultural resources, public safety, provision of recreation opportunities, access needs, conflicts among uses of NFS lands, the need

10 for maintenance and administration of roads, trails, and areas that would arise if the uses under consideration are designated, and availability of resources for maintenance and administration. Natural and Cultural Resources: All National Forest Service system roads are assigned an RMO which corresponds to management direction in the Forest Plan for the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests. To protect cultural resources, Heritage Resource inventories are conducted before any major reconstruction or realignment of system roads takes place. This is done by an Archeologist and reviewed by the NC State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Public Safety: All NFSRs in the NFs-NC are maintained under Federal Highway Administration regulations, which provide standards for road design and signage. Roads are designated with RMOs which allow for them to be maintained in a manner consistent with their intended use. Provision of Recreation Opportunities: Several NFSRs within C02/03 are maintained as open to the public for access to the North Mills River Recreation Area and other recreation opportunities (see section 2.2b, above). Various roads within C02/03 provide access for hiking, biking, and equestrian use, and dispersed recreation in accordance with management area direction from the Forest Plan. Access Needs: The Forest transportation system in C02/03 provides access to adjacent private land, adjacent areas of the Pisgah National Forest, and access for recreation and management within C02/03. Conflicts among Users of National Forest System Lands: The transportation system within C02/03 are designed to meet management objectives spelled out in the Forest Plan with open road management for recreation areas and closed road management for resource areas. Conflict between different user types (i.e. equestrian and hiking users on the same trail) is minimized by the appropriate use of RMOs to meet the intended uses of the transportation system. The need for Maintenance and Administration of Roads, Trails, and Areas that would arise if the uses under consideration are designated: Each Forest system road is currently maintained for the use designated by the assigned RMO in accordance with the Forest Plan. For recommended RMO changes and RMOs for roads recommended to be added to the system, see Tables 5.1 through 5.5. For generalized maintenance cost estimates, see Appendix B: Generalized Road Maintenance Costs, Pisgah Ranger District b: Consider combinations of uses (such as motorized and non-motorized, different vehicle classes, and highway-legal and non-highway-legal vehicles) on NFS roads and NFS trails. The best way to minimize conflicts among uses may be to provide separate routes for each use. A decision to allow motorized mixed use on an NFS road must be informed by engineering analysis (FSH , ch. 30). The Forest transportation system in C02/03 contains both roads that are open to public vehicle use, and roads that are closed to public vehicle use. Each road is assigned an RMO consistent with its intended use. There are no roads, trails, or areas designated for Off Road Vehicle (ORV) use within C02/03. All NFS roads in C02/03 allow hiking use, and many allow other non-motorized uses, including biking and horse riding c: While important, the scarcity or abundance of resources to maintain and administer designated roads, trails, and areas should not be the only consideration in developing travel management proposals. In accordance with FSM and 36 CFR 212.5(b)(1), this TAP [Identifies the] minimum road system needed for safe and efficient travel and for administration, utilization, and protection of National Forest System (NFS) lands. For information regarding maintenance costs and funding, see Tables 5.4 and 5.5, and Appendix B: Generalized Road Maintenance Costs, Pisgah Ranger District Specific Criteria for Trails and Areas In addition to the general criteria in FSM , paragraph 1, when analyzing motor vehicle use on NFS trails and areas on NFS lands, consider the effects on the following, with the objective of minimizing: a. Damage to soil, watershed, vegetation, and other forest resources. Consider best management practices (BMPs) established by states as a standard for considering effects on these resources; b. Harassment of wildlife and significant disruption of wildlife habitats; c. Conflicts between motor vehicle use and existing or proposed recreational uses on NFS lands or neighboring federal lands; d. Conflicts among different classes of motor vehicle uses on NFS lands or neighboring federal lands. e. Compatibility of motor vehicle use with existing conditions in populated areas, taking into account sound, emissions, and other factors, such as traffic-generated dust and the proximity of residences, parks, and schools.

11 There are no motorized National Forest System trails or areas within C02/03, nor does the TAP recommend any for future designation Specific Criteria for Roads In addition to the general criteria in FSM , paragraph 1, consider the following for NFS roads: a: Speed, volume, composition, and distribution of traffic on roads Speed, volume, composition, and distribution of traffic on NFS roads within C02/03 are managed by each road s RMO. Open roads are provided with signage in compliance with Federal Highway Administration regulations. Closed roads are used by USDA Forest Service and North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission personnel for management and law enforcement. Contractors also use closed roads for resource work such as timber hauling, reforestation, and timber stand improvement activities. These users must have current driver licenses; vehicles must meet contract specifications; and they are required to post signage along the section of road impacted by their work b: Compatibility of vehicle class with road geometry and road surfacing. Consider existing road management objectives before making designations that would add vehicle classes. NFS arterial and collector roads (at Operational Maintenance Level 3, 4, or 5) may provide primary access to NFS lands for passenger cars and commercial haulers. It may not be appropriate to make some of these roads part of an NFS road or NFS trail loop that has off-highway vehicle recreation as a primary objective (FSH , ch. 30). All system roads within C02/03 are assigned RMOs consistent with their intended uses and Forest Plan direction. All roads which are being considered for designation or changes in access or maintenance in this TAP would also be assigned RMOs consistent with their new intended uses.

12 STEP III: IDENTIFYING ISSUES The purpose of this step is to: 1. Identify key issues affecting the portion of the Forest Transportation System under analysis. Use appropriate public involvement to identify these issues. 2. To identify key issues, determine in the context of the analysis: a. The primary public concerns related to travel management; b. The primary management concerns related to travel management; c. The primary legal constraints on travel management; d. The amount of resources and skills available to conduct the analysis; 3. Determine the data needed to analyze the key issues and whether the data are available or must be obtained. 3.1 Identify Key Issues Affecting the Portion of the Forest Transportation System Under Analysis Issues identified by public and ID team involvement are disclosed in Sections 3.2a and 3.2b below. Public scoping for the GAORP Project is scheduled for fall of 2012, and the project was listed in the Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) beginning in July All responses will be considered in formulating issues for the Transportation Analysis. 3.2 To Identify Key Issues, Determine in the Context of the Analysis Individuals of the ID Team participated in gathering information and in developing draft and final reports. Required information was gathered through field visits, collective knowledge of ID Team members, review of GIS data, individual Road and Trail Management Plans, and past Road and Trail Assessments. Road management issues that surfaced during public scoping for the Brushy Ridge Proposal are considered in this analysis. Scoping for the project resulted in the following issues related to motorized use in C02/03: 3.2a Primary Public Concerns Related to Travel Management A. Concern about maintenance costs for system roads. B. Concern that system and non-system roads contribute to sedimentation and non-native invasive plant dispersal. C. Concern that constructing additional roads may be detrimental to plant and animal species. D. Concern about adequate access for recreational activities and to private property. 3.2b Primary Management Concerns Related to Travel Management E. Concern that the Forest transportation system does not provide adequate access for current and future management activities, including timber harvest. F. Concern that existing system and non-system roads do not meet Forest Plan standards for road density. G. Concern that non-system roads do not sufficiently protect soil, water, and other resources. H. Concern that existing non-system roads allow opportunities for unauthorized access. I. Concern that some roads in C02/03 currently have RMOs which are inconsistent with their use. 3.2c Legal Constraints on Travel Management J. Applicable laws and regulations. K. Existing agreements with private landowners, including rights-of-way and easements. L. Lack of authorized access through the Avery Creek community to the Avery Creek area. 3.2d Resources and Skill Available to Conduct Analysis Resources available to conduct the analysis include: The ID team for the TAP is identified in section 1.1, above; NFs-NC INFRA reports, to provide needed information on National Forest system roads, including: o RMO; o Maintenance Level; o Mileage; o Beginning and ending points to determine connectivity with other transportation systems; o Current road condition (open or closed); An ArcGIS specialist capable of producing maps and performing geospatial analysis of C02/03 transportation system; Field technicians on the Pisgah Ranger District with GPS skills who are available to field check non-system roads within C02/03; Pisgah Zone Special Uses Specialist to provide needed information on permits, easements, and rights-of-way within C02/03.

13 3.3 Data Needed To Analyze Key Issues Data needed to analyze key issues include: An inventory of existing system roads and their uses within C02/03; Obtainable from INFRA and existing GIS data; An inventory of existing temporary and unauthorized roads within C02/03, their condition, and suitability for future management and recreation access; Obtainable from GIS data, specialist knowledge, and satellite/aerial imagery; Cost of maintenance of current NFS roads within C02/03; Annual maintenance costs estimated from NFs-NC Engineering generalized road work data and specialist knowledge; Knowledge and location of any wildlife or plant species that may be affected by new road construction and/or reconstruction; Obtained from field surveys for the GAORP Project Biological Evaluation by wildlife, aquatic, and botanical specialists; Impacts to possible Historic sites; Obtained from an assessment completed by an archeology contractor. STEP IV: ASSESSING BENEFITS, PROBLEMS, AND RISKS The purpose of this step is to: 1. Examine the major uses and environmental, social, and economic effects of the portion of the Forest transportation system under analysis. Analyze the risks and benefits associated with the current situation. 2. Consider the general criteria for designating NFS roads, NFS trails, and areas on NFS lands (36 CFR (a); FSM , para. 1). Consider, with the objective of minimizing, the effects of motor vehicle use on the specific criteria for designating NFS trails and areas on NFS lands (36 CFR (b); FSM , para. 2), and consider the specific criteria for designating roads (36 CFR (c); FSM , para. 3). 4.1 Major Uses and Environmental, Social, and Economic Impacts Table 4.2 summarizes the major uses, social and economic effects, and risks and benefits of each road in C02/03. Economic effects are described in more detail below Financial and Economic Values Expenses Table 4.1, below, shows the estimated annual maintenance funding per mile needed to maintain Forest system roads, based on cost estimates in the Forest Service publication Administrative National Forest System Roads; Annual Maintenance (2001). Total annual funding requirements for the Forest road system in C02/03 are displayed in Table 5.4, in section 5 below. The Pisgah and Nantahala National Forest Roads Analysis Process Report (2003) found that the Forest receives only 21% of the funding needed to meet its annual road maintenance needs. Unfunded maintenance obligations accrue as Deferred Maintenance. Table 4.1: Average Annual Road Maintenance Costs by Maintenance Level* Maintenance Level Cost/Mile $500 $1,000 $4,500 $7,700 $9,400 Given that the Forest does not receive sufficient funding each year to meet its maintenance obligations, several methods to reduce maintenance needs are available: Decommissioning roads; Converting roads to trails; and Decreasing maintenance levels on roads. Decommissioning roads Decreasing the total number of system road miles will reduce annual maintenance costs. Decommissioning roads often involves an up-front cost to block access and stabilize the road to prevent erosion or other ongoing resource damage. Conversion of Roads to Trails The conversion of roads to trails would reduce the number of miles of roads within the forest and minimize maintenance needs. Converting roads to trails maintains non-motorized access and the associated recreational values, while reducing costs and limiting resource impacts.

14 Decrease Maintenance Levels Maintenance levels (ML) are determined by considering a variety of factors including; resource program needs (recreation, timber, etc), environmental and resource protection requirements, user safety, composition of traffic (volume, type, class), surface type, and user comfort and convenience. The higher the maintenance level the higher the user comfort and required costs for upkeep. Reducing maintenance levels is one way to reduce the cost of the current system of roads. The greatest cost savings per mile are achieved by reducing ML 3 and 4 roads to 2 and 3, respectively. Annual maintenance does not include the cost of responding to emergencies or one-time events, such as storm damage. Revenues Timber Analysis Area 03 contains 5,840 acres of Forest land managed for timber production, which is the Forest s main source of revenue in C02/03. The road system provides access to this timber, and additional timber in adjacent AAs. Timber sale revenues are generally disclosed in the project NEPA documents. North Mills River Recreation Area The road system provides access to the North Mills River Recreation Area, a fee-use developed campsite. The North Mills River Recreation Area has 16 campsites, with a fee of $17/night. Other Economic Benefits Forest Service roads support activities including logging, harvesting forest products, recreation, fishing, hunting, firefighting and other land management practices, which often benefit the local economy by providing jobs and attracting visitors who will patronize local businesses. These benefits are difficult to quantify at a project scale because they occur over large areas, and are more properly addressed in a District or Forest level TAP Table 4.2: Risks and Benefits of Current System and Unauthorized roads, AA03 Road ID 1206 Road Name Yellow Gap Road Major Use Yellow Gap Road is the main access route in the analysis area, and to adjacent Forest land. It also accesses the North Mills River Recreation Area. Social Effects This road provides access to Forest land for a variety of uses, including developed and undeveloped camping, hunting, fishing and dispersed recreation, timber harvest, and other management opportunities. Economic Effects Provides income to regional economy from tourism, timber and permitted forest products, hunting, and fishing. Risks High risk of resource damage, high maintenance, law enforcement, and emergency response costs due to public access. Benefits Administrative access for management activities. Access for a wide variety of recreational opportunities. Road ID 1206A Road Name Yellow Gap Spur Major Use Non-motorized trail. Access for hunting, fishing, and dispersed recreation opportunities. Access for management activities. Linear Wildlife Opening Social Effects Multiple use non-motorized trail (hiking, biking, equestrian). Provides public access for hunting and fishing, and dispersed recreation opportunities. Economic Effects Provides income to regional economy from tourism, hunting, fishing, gathering of permitted forest products, and timber harvest. Risks Low risk, low maintenance Benefits Administrative access for management activities. Recreational access. Wildlife opening. 4.3 General Criteria for Designating NFS Roads, Trails, and Areas General and specific criteria for designating roads, trails, and areas are disclosed in section 2.4. See Table 4.3: General Criteria for Designating Roads, below. Table 4.3: General Criteria for Designating Current System and Unauthorized Roads, AA03 Road ID 1206 Road Name Yellow Gap Road

15 Effects on Natural And Cultural Resources Public Safety Recreation Opportunities Access Needs Conflicts Among Users Road ID Road Name Effects on Natural And Cultural Resources Public Safety Recreation Opportunities Access Needs Conflicts Among Users Potential for erosion, non-native invasive species dispersal, and impacts to local plants and wildlife. Access for management activities. Access to the North Mills River Rec. Area and other recreation opportunities. Open gravel/paved road with turnouts, signed to FHA standards Driving, biking, hiking, horse riding, hunting, fishing, designated camping, other dispersed recreation. Access to private property, Hendersonville Reservoir, North Mills River Recreation Area. Local access for management and recreation. Potential for conflict between different recreational uses, or between recreational use and resource management. 1206A Yellow Gap Spur Potential for erosion, non-native invasive species dispersal, and impacts to local plants and wildlife. Provides access management activities, including future timber harvest. Maintained as a linear wildlife opening to provide a source of permanent grass/forbs for wildlife. No public vehicle access. Potential access for administrative vehicles in an emergency. Hiking, hunting, fishing, equestrian, biking, dispersed recreation. Local recreation and management access. Potential for conflict between different recreational uses, or between recreational use and resource management. STEP V: DESCRIBING OPPORTUNITIES AND SETTING PRIORITIES The purpose of this step is to: 1. Identify management opportunities and priorities, and formulate proposals for changes to the forest transportation system that respond to the issues, risks, and benefits identified in the preceding steps; 2. Compare motor vehicle use of the portion of the forest transportation system under analysis with desired conditions established in the applicable land management plan, and describe options for modifying the forest transportation system that would achieve desired conditions; 3. Identify any unauthorized roads and trails that should be considered for designation based on the analysis in paragraph 2. Issues identified in Step III, above: A. Concern about maintenance costs for system roads B. Concern that system and non-system roads contribute to sedimentation and non-native invasive plant dispersal. C. Concern that constructing additional roads may be detrimental to plant and animal species. D. Concern about adequate access for recreational activities and to private property. E. Concern that Forest transportation system does not provide adequate access for current and future management activities, including timber harvest. F. Concern that existing roads do not meet Forest Plan standards for road density. G. Concern that unauthorized roads do not sufficiently protect soil, water, and other resources. H. Concern that existing unauthorized roads allow opportunities for unauthorized access. I. Concern that some roads in C02/03 currently have RMOs which are inconsistent with their use. J. Applicable laws and regulations. K. Existing agreements with private landowners, including Rights-of-Way and Easements. L. Lack of access through the Avery Creek community to the Avery Creek area. 5.1 Management Opportunities and Proposals Inventory of AA03 using ArcGIS and field reconnaissance shows that the following unauthorized roads (Table 5.1) exist within C02/03. These unauthorized roads present opportunities for changes to the Forest Transportation System to improve compliance with the Forest Plan and Forest Service management directives, and respond to the issues, risks, and benefits identified in the preceding steps. All NFS roads for which no changes are recommended would stay on the Forest Transportation System at their current RMOs (see section 2.2b, above). Recommended changes to the transportation system are assigned a priority from 3, lowest, to 1, highest, based on its importance for resource protection and upcoming projects within C02/03. Table 5.1: Inventory of Existing Unauthorized and Private Roads, with Recommended Changes, and Recommended New Road Construction Road ID Proposed RMO Road Name Priority Issues Addressed Length (Miles)

16 A D1 Closed Bog Road 1 E, G, H 0.54 Action: Add road to system as NFSR 5027 (Bog Road) to provide access for future management activities. This road would be used to access suitable stands in the Brushy Ridge Project. Risk Adding roads to the Forest Transportation System increases maintenance costs. Importance Moderate; an RMO of D1 requires a low standard of maintenance. Benefit Provides access to the public for a variety of non-motorized uses. Importance Low; many alternative non-motorized recreation opportunities already exist in C02/03. Benefit Provides access for future management activities, including timber harvest. Importance High; Forest Plan requires that the road system be planned to progressively access all lands suitable for timber production. Table 5.2: Inventory of Existing Authorized Roads with Recommended Changes Road ID Proposed RMO Road Name Priority Issues Addressed Length (Miles) 1206 A2, B1 Open Yellow Gap 2 I 4.09 Action: Change the RMO of the paved part of this road from A1 to A2, consistent with being open year round. Leave the rest of the road in C02/03 as B1. Risk RMO no longer supports seasonal closure of the road. Importance Low; Road is intended for year round use. Benefit RMO is consistent with current year round use. Importance Moderate; Maintaining roads at the proper RMO help ensure proper distribution of road maintenance funds and that the road is maintained to appropriate standards to protect resources and public safety. Road ID Proposed RMO Road Name Priority Issues Addressed Length (Miles) 1206A D1 Closed Yellow Gap Spur 2 E 0.38 Action: Replace the tank trap blocking access to this road with a gate. Benefit Gate provides improved accessibility for management actions compared to a tank trap. Importance High; access to this area is necessary to complete actions proposed in the Brushy Ridge Proposal, and well as to meet Forest Plan standards for accessing suitable timber. Road ID Proposed RMO Road Name Priority Issues Addressed Length (Miles) 1206B D1 Closed Allan Cove n/a E 1.10 Action: No changes are recommended to this road. Road ID Proposed RMO Road Name Priority Issues Addressed Length (Miles) 1206C D1 Closed Mince Cove n/a E 0.33 Action: No changes are recommended to this road. Table 5.3, below, shows the total miles of road which are recommended for addition to the Forest transportation system, decommissioning, construction, or other changes. Table 5.3: Summary of Recommended Changes, AA03 Miles of existing road recommended to add to system 7.74 Miles of recommended new road construction 1.05 Miles of system road recommended to decommission 0.00 Miles of non-system road recommended to decommission 1.66 Miles of system road recommended for RMO changes 8.53 Table 5.4, below, shows the estimated annual maintenance needs of the current and recommended transportation systems. Table 5.5 shows the estimated cost of new road construction to meet the recommended road system. Table 5.4: Estimated Road Maintenance Costs on Current and Recommended Forest Transportation System, AA03 Current Recommended Road # RMO Mtnc. Level Annual Mtnc. Cost/Mile Miles Total Cost RMO Mtnc. Level Annual Mtnc. Cost/Mile Miles Total Cost 1206 A1 5 $9, $8,644 A2 5 $9, $8, B1 4 $7, $24,433 B1 4 $7, $24, A D1 1 $ $189 D1 1 $ $189