USDA Forest Service Decision Memo. Mattie V Creek Minesite Rehabilitation Project

Transcription

1 USDA Forest Service Decision Memo Mattie V Creek Minesite Rehabilitation Project Ninemile Ranger District Lolo National Forest Mineral County, Montana I. DECISION TO BE IMPLEMENTED A. Decision Description: I have decided to approve stream channel and riparian area rehabilitation on the lower portion of Mattie V Creek in the Ninemile watershed. This headwater location, Sections 28 and 33, T17N, R24W (Figure 1), is currently well below fish production potential and Forest riparian management objectives because of a legacy of mining disturbance. The site is heavily disturbed, with dredge tailings piles up to 40 feet high, multiple dredge ponds and a man-made ditch that has captured the entire streamflow. The project area covers about 4.5 acres, which includes the channel construction area and the adjacent tailing piles. Mattie V Creek will be re-configured with a step-pool design that outlets to Ninemile Creek. Channel margins and floodplain features will be graded, covered with topsoil and amended as necessary. The dredge ponds will be converted to floodplain and wetland habitat on the margins with the channel disturbance. Riparian, wetland and upland vegetation will be replanted following construction. B. Rationale for Decision: Much of the remaining native fish habitat and population segments on the Lolo NF occur in the upper ends of streams like Ninemile Creek and its tributaries. Mattie V Creek is a headwater tributary to Ninemile Creek and while the lower end of Mattie V Creek has been directly altered by past placer mining activity, it has potential for improved native fish production and protection. Re-configuring Mattie V Creek is anticipated to benefit invertebrates, amphibians, and other native species. Also, stream channel rehabilitation at the Mattie V Creek site will help contribute to improved water quality, which is supported by the Water Quality Restoration Plan for Ninemile Creek (Montana DEQ). II. REASONS FOR CATEGORICALLY EXCLUDING THE DECISION Upon on-the-ground review and discussions with Forest and District resource specialists, I have determined that this decision is categorically excluded from documentation in an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) because it falls within a category of action listed in 36 CFR 220.6(e)(8)(vi), and no resource conditions are present that lead to a finding of extraordinary circumstances that might cause the action to have significant effects. I have examined past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions and have considered the potential for cumulative effects. I have concluded that without notable individual effects from the proposed action, there would be 1

2 no significant cumulative effects. Table 1 provides specific information for these conclusions. TABLE 1. EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES REVIEW [36 CFR (b)] Resource Condition i. Federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for Federal listing or proposed critical habitat or Forest Service sensitive species. ii. Flood plains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds. iii. Congressionally designated areas, such as wilderness, wilderness study areas, or national recreation areas. iv. Inventoried Roadless Areas. Applicability to This Project Direct, indirect and cumulative effects have been analyzed in the Biological Evaluations (BE) or Biological Assessments (BA). WILDLIFE: Findings in the BE show implementation of the project would have No Effect on threatened or endangered species including Gray wolf, Bald eagle, Grizzly bear, Lynx or Peregrine falcon. This project will have No Impact on the Northern goshawk, Flammulated owl, Common loon, Harlequin duck, Black-backed woodpecker, Northern bog lemming, Townsend s big eared bat, Fisher, Wolverine, Coeur d Alene salamander, Boreal toad or Northern leopard frog. FISHERIES: Findings in the BE/BA showed implementation of the project would be no impact on the endangered bull trout and may impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or loss of viability to the population or species for the sensitive westslope cutthroat trout. There should be no impacts to westslope cutthroat trout spawning, and the project will overall result in an improvement to habitat and populations in the long term. Herbicide analysis for the proposed project also concluded to have no effect on fisheries. BOTANY: Findings in the BE show no effect on threatened plants and no impact on sensitive plants. A site visit completed by the Lolo National Forest Botanist confirmed these conclusions. There is no net loss of wetlands or current flood plains. The area is not in a municipal watershed. The area is not located within a wilderness, wilderness study area or national recreation area. The area is not located within any inventoried roadless area. v. Research Natural Areas. The area is not located within any research natural vi. American Indian or Alaska Native religious or cultural sites. area. A site visit and analysis completed by the Lolo National Forest Archeologist concluded there are no known American Indian religious or cultural sites within the project area. 2

3 vii. Archeological sites, or historic properties or areas. A site visit and analysis completed by the Lolo National Forest Archeologist determined that the tailing piles present at the project site do not warrant recordation (no direct association with significant cultural resources) (CFR 800.4(d)(1). 3

4 III. SCOPING AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT This proposal was brought to the East Zone Small Project NEPA Interdisciplinary Team for internal scoping in January Forest Service specialists reviewed the resource conditions applicable to their field of expertise and determined if further analysis was warranted. In addition to internal scoping by the interdisciplinary team, public scoping was also conducted. A legal notice soliciting comments was published in the Missoulian newspaper on May 5, Also, the project was published within the Lolo National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions. The project proposal was sent to 182 individuals, organizations, and agencies on May 4, 2010 for an official 30-day comment period. Four comments were received, all in support of the project. IV. FINDINGS REQUIRED BY AND/OR RELATED TO OTHER LAWS AND REGULATIONS This decision is in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. Some applicable ones are summarized as follows: Federal Land Policy and Management Act - This Act allows the granting of easements across National Forest System Lands. No easements will be granted with this decision so this decision is consistent with the Act. Forest Plan Consistency (National Forest Management Act) - This project is consistent with the forest-wide goals, objectives and standards given in the 1986 Lolo National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (pages II-1 through II-20), and as amended by the 1995 Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH) Decision Notice. Endangered Species Act and Sensitive Species (Forest Manual 2670) Project resource specialists evaluated the proposed action for compliance with the Endangered Species Act. On July 10, 1998 the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) listed the bull trout as a threatened species in the Columbia River basin. The Canada lynx was listed as a threatened species on April 24, Biological Evaluations/Biological Assessments for threatened, endangered and sensitive plants and animals and their proposed or designated critical habitat are contained within the project file and the findings are summarized in Table 1 of this document. Clean Water Act The intent of the Act is to restore and maintain the integrity of waters. The Forest Service complies with this Act to ensure protection of soil and water resources and to meet State water quality standards. Clean Air Act Under this Act, areas of the country were designated as Class I, II or III airsheds for Prevention of Significant Deterioration purposes. For this project, impacts to air quality are not anticipated. The National Historic Preservation Act This project does include ground-disturbing activities associated with rehabilitation riparian area. However, no impacts to cultural resources are expected. The proposed action would be consistent with Forest Plan direction and Section 106 of the National Historic 4

5 Preservation Act. Environmental Justice In accordance with Executive Order 12898, the proposed action has been assessed to determine whether it would disproportionately impact minority or low-income populations. No impacts to minority or low-income populations were identified during scoping or effects analysis. Migratory Bird Treaty Act There will be no known substantial losses of migratory bird habitat expected from the implementation of this proposal. Federal Cave Resources Protection Act This Act is to secure, protect, preserve and maintain significant caves to the extent practical. There are no caves in the general area of the project that would be affected. Wetlands (Executive Order 11990), Floodplains (Executive Order 11988) National Historic Preservation Act, Archaeological Resources Protection Act, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (see Table 1). 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 this Act. Other Laws or Requirements The proposed action is consistent with all other Federal, State, and/or local laws or requirements for the protection of the environmental and cultural resources. V. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OR APPEAL OPPORTUNITIES Review and Appeal Opportunities: Because of categorical exclusion, this project is not subject to appeal in accordance with 36 CFR (f). 5

6 VI. IMPLEMENTATION DATE This decision will be implemented upon my approval and as dated below. VII. CONTACT PERSON Further information about this decision can be obtained from Traci Sylte (weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.) at the Lolo National Forest Supervisor s Office (Address: Fort Missoula, Building 24, Missoula, MT 59804; Phone/voic (406) ). /s/chad Benson 06/15/2010 CHAD W. BENSON District Ranger 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 USDAs 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. 6

7 Figure 1. Ninemile Watershed and Mattie V Creek mine site rehabilitation location. Ninemile Watershed 7