SHASTA-MCCLOUD MANAGEMENT UNIT OVER SNOW VEHICLE TRAIL GROOMING AND SNOWMOBILE FACILITY MAINTENANCE PROPOSAL

Transcription

1 DRAFT DECISION MEMO SHASTA-MCCLOUD MANAGEMENT UNIT OVER SNOW VEHICLE TRAIL GROOMING AND SNOWMOBILE FACILITY MAINTENANCE PROPOSAL U.S. FOREST SERVICE TOWNSHIP 40, 41, 42 AND 43 NORTH, RANGE 1, 2, 3 WEST, & 1, 2, 3 EAST, M.D.M. SHASTA-MCCLOUD MANAGEMENT UNIT SHASTA-TRINITY NATIONAL FOREST SISKIYOU COUNTY, CA BACKGROUND The Shasta-McCloud Management Unit of the Shasta-Trinity National Forest is proposing to continue over snow vehicle (OSV) trail grooming and snowmobile facility maintenance activities associated with the Pilgrim Creek Snowmobile Park (project). The project encompasses the management and maintenance of one developed winter trailhead, the associated snow removal (plowing) of the Pilgrim Creek road (FA 13) and snow grooming and maintenance of approximately 93 miles along existing National Forest System roads. Other operations include facility maintenance, trail signing, resource monitoring, patrolling, and providing public information. These activities have been ongoing since 1990 and no changes are proposed. Direction for the project is provided in the standards and guidelines section of the Shasta-Trinity National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (USDA Forest Service, 1995), which incorporated the Record of Decision on Management for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl (Northwest Forest Plan or NWFP) (USDA Forest Service; USDI Bureau of Land Management, 1994), as amended. The project area is primarily within Management Prescription (MP) 8 (Commercial Wood Products Emphasis), but includes MP 3 (Roaded Recreation), 6 (Wildlife Habitat Management), 7 (Late Successional Reserves), 9 (Riparian Management), and 10 (Special Area Management). The project would manage existing winter recreational use and provide well maintained recreational facilities and trails that minimize potential adverse impacts on forest resources, while providing enhanced recreational opportunities consistent with Forest Plan objectives. DECISION I have decided to implement the OSV trail and facility maintenance program from December 2012 through April , during the winter season. The project includes maintaining the Pilgrim Creek OSV trails and associated trailhead and trailhead facilities by: is the end of the existing grant. Page 1 of 9

2 Snowplowing approximately 8 miles of paved National Forest road FA 13, for accessing the trailhead (Pilgrim Creek Snowmobile Park). Grooming and maintaining the existing OSV trail system, including clearing fallen trees or other vegetation debris off the trails as needed, and maintaining the snow surface of approximately 93 miles of existing National Forest Transportation System (NFTS) roads provided as winter trails. Installing and/or maintaining trail markers, informational and regulatory signs associated with the OSV program. Maintain other facilities such as a warming hut, a maintenance garage, and vault toilets at the trail head to Forest Service standards identified in the 1995 Forest Service Publication "Cleaning Recreation Sites" (Makel & Hoshide, 1995). Periodically removing trash and litter. Visitor information and law enforcement patrols. Monitoring resources (e.g. soils, riparian reserves, sensitive plants). Grooming would occur when snow depth generally exceeds 12 inches on the road surface. Trail grooming is generally conducted at least once per week, up to 3 days per week, depending on snow conditions, trail condition and visitation as needed. Not all 93 miles of trails provide a groomed surface at the same time. Some roads/trails may only be groomed once per season, if at all, depending on visitor demand, trail conditions or snow conditions. This proposal does not increase the scope or complexity of the project beyond the maintenance activities proposed and implemented in previous years. Required resource protection measures include: Grooming trails only when snow depth generally exceeds 12 inches. Implementation of Water Quality Management Best Management Practices (BMP) (USDA Forest Service, 2000). Implement applicable mitigations and monitoring outlined in Over Snow Vehicle Program Draft Environmental Impact Statement Program Years 2010 to 2020 (CA Dept. of Parks & Recreation, Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division, 2010) as updated (CA Dept. of Parks & Recreation, Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division, 2010). An environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS) will not be prepared. I have reviewed the resource conditions pertaining to extraordinary circumstances (see below), including associated records, and have determined that no extraordinary circumstances exist that would preclude use of a categorical exclusion in accordance with Council on Environmental Quality regulations at 40 CFR The project, as designed, will have little to no effect on the natural or human environment. Further, I find that the project meets the requirements found at 36 CFR Categorical exclusions (CE). Specifically, the project meets category 36 CFR (d)(4) - Repair and maintenance of roads, trails, and landline boundaries and 36 CFR 220.6(d)(5) - Repair and maintenance of recreation sites and facilities. This category of action(s) is applicable because these categories of actions encompass the activities included in this decision, described above. While neither category requires a case file or decision memo per 36 CFR 220.6, I am documenting my decision for this project in a decision memo. Page 2 of 9

3 REVIEW OF EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES In deciding whether a CE may be used, the responsible official must assure that there are no extraordinary circumstances related to the proposed action that would warrant further analysis and documentation in an EA or an EIS. In accordance with 36 CFR (b), the following resource conditions were considered in determining whether extraordinary circumstances related to the proposed action warrant further analysis and documentation in an EA or an EIS 2,3 : 1. Federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for Federal listing or proposed critical habitat, or Forest Service sensitive species (TES) TES species were reviewed. No TES botanical or aquatic species or critical habitats will be adversely affected by this proposal as the project is outside the species range, not within species habitat, or will not affect these species and/or their habitat. A Biological Assessment (BA) was completed for wildlife 4 and a determination of may affect, but not likely to adversely affect northern spotted owl has been made. The project would have no effect on designated northern spotted owl critical habitat (2008 and draft 2012). Informal consultation was requested of US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) on July 12, A draft BA was provided to the FWS on July 26. Comments received from the FWS on July 31 were incorporated into the final BA. The final BA was submitted to FWS on August 2, The FWS has concurred informally with the determination; a letter of concurrence from the FWS is forthcoming. The project would have no effect on other species considered in the BA as there is no suitable habitat, or the OSV activities lies outside of the known or expected range of these species. A Biological Evaluation was completed for 29 sensitive animal species (including survey and manage mollusks). 5 One species (American marten) may be affected, however the project is unlikely to cause a population level effect that would trigger a greater need for Federal listing. No extraordinary circumstances exist for this resource condition. 2. Flood plains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds Present, however since project activities are limited to the existing roadway and past monitoring has indicated no adverse impacts, floodplains, wetlands, and/or municipal watersheds would not be adversely affected by this proposal. No extraordinary circumstances exist for this resource condition. 3. Congressionally designated areas such as wilderness, wilderness study areas, or national recreation areas 2 Supporting documentation is included in the case file associated with this project. 3 The mere presence of one or more of these resource conditions does not preclude use of a CE. It is the existence of a causeeffect relationship between a proposed action and the potential effect on these resource conditions, and if such a relationship exists, the degree of the potential effect of a proposed action on these resource conditions that determines whether extraordinary circumstances exist (36 CFR (a) (2). 4 Derby, Biological Assessment Shasta-McCloud Management Unit Over Snow Vehicle Trail Grooming and Snowmobile Facility Maintenance Proposal Shasta-Trinity National Forest, August 1, Derby, 2012a. Biological Evaluation Shasta-McCloud Management Unit Over Snow Vehicle Trail Grooming and Snowmobile Facility Maintenance Proposal. Shasta-Trinity National Forest, July 23, Page 3 of 9

4 Not present, therefore no extraordinary circumstances exist for this resource condition. 4. Inventoried roadless areas or potential wilderness areas Not present, therefore no extraordinary circumstances exist for this resource condition. 5. Research natural areas Not present, therefore no extraordinary circumstances exist for this resource condition. 6. American Indians and Alaska Native religious or cultural sites Formal consultation letters were sent to federally recognized Tribes. Letters to other tribes and tribal communities were sent concurrent with the release of the Draft Decision Memo. There are approximately three miles of trail within a large traditional cultural property. In initial consultation, no impacts were identified. 7. Archaeological sites, or historic properties or areas: Historic properties are present adjacent to some of the groomed snowmobile trails, but they would not be adversely effected because the grooming takes place over snow and within existing road prisms in disturbed contexts, which are outside site boundaries. The environmental effects of the project are minimal. Any environmental effects will be limited in terms of duration, intensity and degree of disturbance. All practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental harm have been adopted. Based on the assessment of resource conditions, there are no known extraordinary circumstances that would preclude the use of a CE and therefore, the project is categorically excluded from documentation in an environmental impact statement or an environmental assessment. The proposed action is routine activity, and qualifies as one of the defined categories under 36 CFR 220.6(d)(4) and (d)(5). The project is not one of the classes of actions which require preparation of an environmental impact statement as it does not propose to carry out or to approve aerial application of chemical pesticides and will not alter the undeveloped character of an inventoried roadless area or potential wilderness area. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT This action was listed as a proposal on the Shasta-Trinity National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions, and letters sent to the State Water Board and other interested parties, concurrent with the release of the Draft Decision Memo. While neither CE category requires a case file or decision memo (36 CFR 220.6a), a comment period is being initiated per the March 19, 2012 order issued by the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of California in Case No. CV F11-679LJO DLB. Only those who provide comments during this comment period will be eligible to appeal the decision per 36 CFR 215. Page 4 of 9

5 FINDINGS REQUIRED BY OTHER LAWS AND REGULATIONS 6 This decision is consistent with the Forest Plan and the National Forest Management Act. The project will not result in damage to soils, slopes or other watershed conditions; changes in water temperature; or blockages of water courses. Functioning of forest habitats will continue. No measurable sediment or measurable effects on water conditions or fish habitat will take place. This decision is in compliance with the Endangered Species Act. Threatened and endangered species have been reviewed as discussed under Review of Extraordinary Circumstances item 1. No threatened or endangered species or critical habitats will be adversely affected by this proposal. Consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service was not required as there is no suitable habitat nor designated critical habitat for federally listed fish species within the project area. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, is pending (in process) and either the 106 process will be approved under the National Historic Preservation Act provisions or it will be approved under the First Amended Programmatic Agreement among the Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the California State Historic Preservation Officer, Regarding the Process for Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act for Undertaking on the National Forests of the Pacific Southwest Region (USDA Forest Service, CA State Historic Preservation Officer, and Advisory Council on Historic, 2001) prior to decision. No historic properties (prehistoric, historic, or traditional cultural properties) are expected to be adversely affected (refer also to Review of Extraordinary Circumstances items 6 and 7). This decision is consistent with the Clean Water Act. In accordance with the Clean Water Act, the State and Regional Water Quality Control Board entered into agreements with the Forest Service to control non-point source discharges by implementing control actions certified by the State Water Quality Control Board and the Environmental Protection Agency as BMPs. BMPs are designed to protect and maintain water quality and prevent adverse effects to beneficial uses both on-site and downstream. BMPs will be applied for the project. A hydrological review demonstrates that the project meets Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan and Water Quality Objectives, BMPs, and provides monitoring requirements necessary for implementation of the project. This decision is consistent with the Clean Air Act and the conformity provisions of the Clean Air Act. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW (APPEAL) OPPORTUNITIES When the decision is made, it may be subject to administrative review (appeal) pursuant to the March 19, 2012 order issued by the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of California in Case No. CV F11-679LJO DLB and 36 CFR 215. Please note that only those who provide comments during this comment period will be eligible to appeal this decision pursuant to 36 CFR Supporting documentation is included in the case file associated with this project. Page 5 of 9

6 IMPLEMENTATION DATE If no appeals are filed within the 45-day time period after the decision is made, implementation of the decision may occur on, but not before, five business days from the close of the appeal filing period. If appeals are filed, implementation may occur on, but not before, the 15th business day following the date of the last appeal disposition. CONTACT For additional information, contact: Emelia Barnum, Planning Officer or Kai Allen, Resource Officer, Shasta-McCloud Management Unit, 204 West Alma Street, Mt. Shasta, CA Electronic copies of the Draft Decision Memo and other information are available at: (draft) Carolyn Napper District Ranger; Shasta McCloud Management Unit Date The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual s income is derived from any public assistance program. (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) (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C , or call (800) (voice) or (202) (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. WORKS CITED CA Dept. of Parks & Recreation, Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division. (2010). Over Snow Vehicle Program Draft Environmental Impact Report Program Years State of California (State Clearinghouse # ). CA Dept. of Parks & Recreation, Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division. (2010). Over Snow Vehicle Program Final Environmental Impact Statement Program Years 2010 to Makel, W., & Hoshide, G. (1995). Cleaning Recreation Sites. San Dimas, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, San Dimas Technology and Development Center. USDA Forest Service. (1995). Shasta-Trinity National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. Page 6 of 9

7 USDA Forest Service. (2000). Water Quality Management for Forest System Lands in California, Best Management Practices. Pacific Southwest Region. USDA Forest Service, CA State Historic Preservation Officer, and Advisory Council on Historic. (2001). First Amended Regional Programmatic Agreement Among the U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region California State Historic Preservation Officer, and Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding the Process For Compliance With Section USDA Forest Service; USDI Bureau of Land Management. (1994). Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl. USDA Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. Page 7 of 9

8 Page 9 of 9