BANFIELD #9 LODE CLAIM (Plan of Operations) Umpqua National Forest Tiller Ranger District June, 2011

Transcription

1 United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region BANFIELD #9 LODE CLAIM (Plan of Operations) Umpqua National Forest Tiller Ranger District June, 2011

2 ii

3

4

5 Introduction and Project Location Roy Cox, member of Solutions for You, LLC, which holds the Banfield #9 Lode Claim (ORMC & ) has submitted a Plan of Operations (POO) to the Umpqua N.F. This 140-acre claim is located on NFS lands in T32S R2W Sections 3 & 4, W.M. It is accessed from Douglas County Road 1 at Drew, Oregon via Forest Service Roads 3201 & The proposed operations site, or work area, encompasses a 315-foot segment of the cutslope and ditchline along Road at MP There are two prospects consisting of exposed bornite with the road segment that are of interest to Mr. Cox. This area is situated within LSR 223 and the Riparian Reserves allocation of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) in the East Fork Drew Creek drainage on the Tiller Ranger District. Bornite (copper-iron-sulfide mineral) samples extracted by hand were found to contain gold and copper. The POO addresses sampling a larger volume of material to determine if these valuable minerals exist in commercial quantities. If this is the case, Mr. Cox would consider developing the claim. The activities proposed under this POO involve conduct additional prospecting and testing, which are reasonable first steps in an ordered sequence of development for lode claims. PURPOSE AND NEED There is a need to respond to the POO for the purposes of implementing the Forest Plan direction (Forest Plan IV 74-76), as well in the NWFP (ROD C-17 for LSR and C-34 & 35 for Riparian Reserves). PROPOSED ACTION Based on the POO, the Proposed Action involves excavating and removing a total of 150 tons of bornite material from the two prospects. This tonnage is approximately 150 cubic yards, or fifteen 10-yard dump truck loads. As measured in the field, the affected area of each prospect is expected to be 50 long by 25 wide by 6 deep. Excavation and loading of material would be accomplished using a backhoe or an excavator. All excavating activities would be conducted from and all equipment would be positioned on Forest Road This material would be transported by 10-yard dump trucks to a mill at Merlin, Oregon for testing. Overburden from excavation would be stored at designated storage sites and would be used, along with additional, imported material to fill the holes created from extracting the bornite. The operation is expected to last 30 days. Operations would proceed in a sequential manner whereby activities at one prospect would be completed in full, including excavation, hauling and replacement of overburden, before commencing work on the other prospect. In order to minimize the effects of disturbances Best Management Practices (BMP), project design features and other mitigations measures are included in this proposal. These practices and measures are shown in Appendix 1. This project would also include a reclamation component (Appendix 2). In addition to filling in holes, the cutslope will be restored to an acceptable configuration, ditchlines and waterbars reshaped to provide adequate drainage and road surface

6 reconditioned to offset wear/tear attributable to equipment/vehicle use. This work would be completed within 60 days of starting the project. A reclamation bond will be required. Connected Actions 1) In order to provide safe working conditions, the following vegetation would be removed: a) South Prospect: 20 DF and 50+ conifer/saplings and hardwoods. b) North Prospect: 36 DF, 8 DF and 40+ conifer saplings and hardwoods. The three commericial-sized conifer trees shall be stored at the old landing on Road MP 0.90 to await disposal, while other vegetation would be stored along the roadway and placed on the disturbed areas during reclamation. 2) The landing at MP 0.90 would be used for parking equipment and vehicles, as well as additional storage if needed. 3) Roads 3201 and will be used for hauling. Road use is conditional on: a) Acquiring a Road Use Permit from the Forest Service. The holder shall perform maintenance on roads or pay the Forest Service a fee in lieu of maintenance. b) The holder is required to post warning signs for hauling on Road c) Use of Road is not expected to interfere with traffic. However, signing is required to inform the public of road status (e.g., road closed, equipment on road, etc.). Decision and Rationale My decision is to implement the Proposed Action. This action will enable the operator to prospect, remove and test a reasonable amount of material to determine commercial feasibility in a manner that is consistent with the Forest Plan, as amended. Findings as Required by Law, Policy and Regulation: Finding of Consistency with Applicable Forest Service Management Direction and the National Forest Management Act Based on my review of the interdisciplinary analysis for this project, I find that the project is consistent with the Standards & Guidelines (S&G) of the Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), as amended by the NWFP; and is therefore consistent with the National Forest Management Act. This finding includes all of the following determinations documented in the land management plan, CFR regulations and specialists reports for this project: The project is consistent with the Standard & Guidelines for Late- Successional Reserves. All NWFP Standards & Guidelines for wildlife, Late- Successional Reserves, snags and downed wood habitat will be met during the implementation of this project (Wildlife BE).

7 This project will not prevent attainment of the goals and objectives of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy. The small scale of this project (approximately 0.03 acres of Riparian Reserves) and its location along an established road reduce the effects on connectivity and habitat composition to negligible on the 5 th Field watershed scale. Localized effects on plants and animals within the Riparian Reserves would result from the ground disturbance and permanent destruction of the bedrock outcrop community. There would be no effects on the streambank or bed configuration or the flow regime. The primary potential effect would be on water quality due to unlikely, but potential, chemical contamination. No wetlands, floodplains or municipal watershed would be affected (Hydrology Report). The potential for mobilization and delivery of heavy metal contaminants into the aquatic ecosystem in conjunction with the proposed action is deemed to be very low. A field investigation, including testing with a calibrated handheld ph and conductivity meter at the lowest and abandoned adit on the Banfield mine property, reveals that acid mine drainage (AMD) conditions that are sometimes associated with sulfide deposits are not taking place. A review of geologic literature indicates that sulfide mineralization on the Banfield is considerably less abundant than that at the Formosa mine, where AMD conditions are exceptionally severe and disruptive to the aquatic environment (Geologist Report). This project is consistent with the Standards & Guidelines for minerals and general riparian area management in Riparian Reserves. A reclamation plan and bond, as well as an approved POO will be required (POO & Appendix 2). No structures, support facilities or new road construction are planned (POO). Solid and sanitary waste facilities will be prohibited in the Riparian Reserves (Appendix 1). Inspections, monitoring and adjustments of operations will be implemented (Appendix 1). Felled trees will be retained onsite when needed to meet coarse woody debris objectives (Appendix 1). This project is consistent with the Standards and Guidelines in the 1990 Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended. Forest Plan Standards & Guidelines to provide claimants with reasonable access to their mining claims; provisions for reclamation, as well as mitigation measures and reasonable operating requirements to protect other resources while still meeting mining objectives will be implemented (POO & Appendix 1). With the onsite retention of the three conifers to be felled for safety reasons and no disturbance to existing large wood component, the Forest Plan Standards & Guidelines for wildlife, snags and downed wood will be met during the implementation of this project (Wildlife BE). Therefore, I find that the Banfield #9 project is consistent with all applicable Forest Service management direction. Finding of Consistency with State Historic Preservation Office Policies A cultural resource inventory and report have been completed for the proposed action. This report discloses that no cultural resources were discovered during the

8 surveys. Based on my review of the heritage resource report, I find that the project is consistent with the National Historic Preservation Act. Finding of Non-Jeopardy to Endangered, Threatened or Sensitive Species and No Adverse Effect to Species Covered Under the Fisheries Conservation and Management Act According to the Plant BE, there are no known sites for Sensitive plants, bryophytes, lichens or fungi in the project area; and no habitat for threatened or endangered species. No Sensitive Species were observed at the project site. Consequently, the District Botanists has determined that the proposed action would have No Effect on threatened or endangered species; and No Impact on Sensitive Species. Surveys were not conducted for Survey & Manage species because the project area is not situated in old-growth or late seral habitat. With respect to noxious weeds, the standard BMP are recommended; and will be implemented (Appendix 1). The Wildlife BE discloses that there is habitat for the northern spotted owl, an ESA Threatened species. However, the proposed action will not affect nesting or roosting habitat and is beyond one mile from the nearest owl pair site. Consequently, the Forest Wildlife Biologist has determined that the proposed action would have No Effect on northern spotted owls or their critical habitat unit (OR-14; and, seasonal restrictions for blasting and other quarry-related activities will not be required. The Forest Wildlife Biologist has also determined that there would be No Impact on Sensitive Species or Umpqua NF Management Indicator Species because of the small area of disturbance on the edge of the road prism that is associated with the proposed action. With respect to Survey and Manage species, surveys were completed for those species for which habitat is present in the project area, including red tree voles, Chace sideband, Oregon shoulderband and Klamath sideband. No red tree voles were detected in the project area and the trees to be felled did not contain nests. Similarly, none of the aforementioned mollusks species were found. The Fisheries BE discloses that anadromous fish use by both adult and juvenile steelhead, cutthroat trout and OC coho salmon is known to occur within Drew Creek, approximately four miles downstream and downslope of the project. The only known resident fish occurrence is OC cutthroat trout, which is found approximately 1.5 miles downstream in mainstem Drew Creek. There is no known aquatic bivalve or gastropod use within the project area. OC coho is the only ESA-listed species know to occur near the project area. In addition, the BE assesses the Southern DPS North American green sturgeon, which is also listed, because it may occur in the Umpqua Basin. The District Fisheries Biologist has determined that the proposed action will have No Effect on OC coho because the proposed action would not take place within channels, or would directly affect channels, of any stream reaches which may be inhabited by the species. Likewise, the proposed action will not adversely modify or destroy critical habitat for the recovery of OC coho. There would be No Effect to the sturgeon because the closest known observation of this species is over 200 miles downstream from the project area. For Sensitive Species, including the Pacific Coast Chum, SONCC spring Chinook, OC steelhead, Umpqua Oregon chub, Rotund Lanx and Western ridged mussel, the determination is No Impact. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) determinations are No Effect for OC coho and No Impact for SONCC spring Chinook; therefore, consultation is not required under the Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA).

9 Finding of the Absence of Adverse Effects to Extraordinary Circumstances The proposed action was first published in the Umpqua National Forest s January 2011 Schedule of Proposed Actions. No public comments have been received. Based on my review of the interdisciplinary analysis, I find that this project does not adversely affect any of the extraordinary circumstances listed in FSH , Chapter Specifically, I find that this project does not adversely affect: (a) Federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for Federal listing or proposed critical habitat, or Forest Service sensitive species; (b) floodplains, wetlands or municipal watersheds; (c) Congressionally designated areas, such as wilderness, wilderness study areas or national recreation areas; (d) inventoried roadless areas or potential wilderness areas; (e) Research Natural Areas; (f) American Indians and Alaska Native religious or cultural sites; and g) archaeological sites or historic properties or areas. Finding of Consistency with All Applicable Federal Laws and Regulations Based on my review of the actions associated with this project and all applicable specialists reports, I find that the project is consistent with the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, National Forest Management Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act. Therefore, I find that the Banfield #9 project is consistent with applicable Federal laws and regulations. Finding of Exclusion from Further National Environmental Policy Act Analysis Based on my review of (1) the actions associated with this project; (2) the environmental consequences documented in the interdisciplinary analysis; (3) the consistency of this project with applicable laws, regulations, and management direction; (4) the non-jeopardy to endangered or threatened species or heritage resources; and (5) the absence of adverse effects to extraordinary circumstances; I find that this project is not significant in either context or intensity (40 CFR ) and that no extraordinary circumstances are associated with these projects (FSH ). I also find that this project will produce no adverse environmental effects, individually or cumulatively, on the physical, biological, or social components of the human environment. Therefore, I find that the Banfield #9 project is categorically excluded from analysis in an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement (40 CFR and FSH , Chapter 30.3), because the proposed action falls under 31.2(8): Short-term (1 year or less) mineral, energy or geophysical investigations and their incidental support activities that may require cross-country travel by vehicles and equipment, construction of less than 1 mile of low standard road, or use and minor repair of existing roads. Trenching to obtain evidence of mineralization is an activity specifically identified under this category. Appeals In accordance with 36 CFR (f), this decision is not subject to appeal. Additional information on appeal regulations can be obtained from Donni Vogel, Environmental Coordinator for the Umpqua National Forest. Implementation Implementation of my decision will begin on or after July 31, 2011.

10 Contact Person For additional information concerning this decision, contact Wes Yamamoto; phone number ; address /s/ DONNA L. OWENS 08/01/2011 Donna L. Owens Date Signed District Ranger