Environmental Assessment White Rock Mining Plan of Operations

Transcription

1 Environmental Assessment White Rock Mining Plan of Operations April 2015 Figure 1: Grant Lake aerial view Lead Agency Responsible Official For Further Information, Contact: US Forest Service Seward Ranger District Tom Malecek Seward District Ranger P. O. Box 390 Seward, Alaska Karen Kromrey Seward Ranger District P. O. Box 390 Seward, Alaska

2 What action is proposed? Why? What other action would meet the same need? What would it mean to not meet the need? What factors will be used when making the decision between alternatives? Are there any ways to mitigate adverse effects? What monitoring is required? The Proposed Action is the mining plan of operations for the White Rock mining operation submitted by the claimant/operator. The plan of operations proposes lode and placer mining operations near Grant Lake, with access by ATV on the Grant Lake Trail. The Forest Service has a regulatory obligation to analyze proposed plans of operation (36 CFR 228.5). The Forest Service has received a proposed plan of operations. None The Forest Service would not meet their regulatory obligation for plan of operations approvals. The environmental assessment does not identify any significant environmental consequences of the Proposed Action. However, any adverse environmental consequences of the Proposed Action are weighed against the benefit of having a long-term plan for placer exploration in the project area and the reduction in annual environmental analysis and administration. Modifications to the proposed mining plan of operations will be developed to minimize any potential resources affected by the Proposed Action. The entire project area will be reclaimed and will return to natural conditions upon expiration or termination of any resulting authorization. The Forest Service will inspect operations regularly each year to determine if the operator is in compliance with their approved mining plan of operations. The Forest Service will monitor for non-native plant species one year after implementation and periodically thereafter. 2

3 Introduction The Forest Service has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and regulations. This EA discloses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts that would result from the proposed action and any alternatives. It also provides the supporting information for a determination to prepare a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). Additional documentation, including more detailed analyses of project-area resources, can be requested or found in the project planning record located at the Seward Ranger District, Kenai Lake Work Center, Chugach National Forest. Background A request to approve a plan of operations was submitted for the White Rock mining operation, hereafter referred to as White Rock. This proposal requests a five year authorization for lode and placer exploration near Grant Lake. Location The project area is the White Rock mining operation and the associated access route, and is located near Grant Lake. The legal land description is portions of Section 29, Township 5 North, Range 1 East; Seward Meridian. Proposed access to the operation is by ATV on the Grant Lake Trail. Figure 2: White Rock Operation and Access Route 3

4 Forest Plan Management Area Prescription The 2002 Chugach National Forest Revised Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) provides a framework that guides day-to-day resource management operations on the Forest. Part of Forest Plan direction consists of management area prescriptions (MAP) which provide specific direction for managing different geographic areas of the Forest. The project area is located in the 312 Fish, Wildlife and Recreation MAP (see Forest Plan pp through 4-64). The 312 MAP areas are managed to provide a variety of habitats for fish and wildlife species and year-round recreational opportunities. Locatable mineral activities are allowed in this MAP. Legal and Regulatory Framework Mining claim holders on National Forest System lands have certain rights related to their claims. Mining claim holders generally have the right to: (1) occupancy and use necessary for prospecting, mining, and processing; (2) reasonable access for purposes of prospecting, locating, and mining; and, (3) right to use timber from the claims for mining purposes and necessary clearing [FSM (b) and FSM ] Mining claimant rights are subject to applicable Federal and State laws and regulations; including 36 CFR 228 Subpart A and the 1955 Multiple Use Mining Act (30 U.S.C. 612). [All] operations shall be conducted so as, where feasible, to minimize adverse environmental impacts on National Forest surface resources (36 CFR 228.8). The 1955 Multiple Use Mining Act restricts mining operators to using reasonable methods of surface disturbance that are appropriate to the stage of operation (FSH , Section 10.1). Purpose and Need The purpose of this project is to respond to the Forest Service s regulatory obligation to process, and modify and/or approve the operator s proposed plan of operations (36 CFR 228.5). The Forest Service has a responsibility to approve or require modifications to the proposed plan of operations in accordance with federal mining and environmental laws. Proposed Action The Proposed Action is the proposed plan of operations submitted for the White Rock operation. This proposal requests the approval of a five-year mining plan of operations for lode and placer mining along Grant Lake. Decision Framework The Seward District Ranger is the authorized officer for this decision. This decision will determine under what terms and conditions the proposed plan of operations will be approved (36 CFR 228.5). Public Involvement 4

5 The Forest Service placed legal notice in the Anchorage Daily News (Alaska Dispatch News) on January 8, 2015, the newspaper of record for the Chugach National Forest, describing the proposed action and initiating the 30-day comment period. This project has been listed on the Chugach National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions. One comment was received during the comment period for this project. Issues No significant issues have been identified by the interdisciplinary team for this proposal. Alternatives This section describes and compares the alternatives considered in this analysis. All alternatives are consistent with the Forest Plan and will not require a Forest Plan amendment. All applicable standards and guidelines, and Best Management Practices (BMP) have been incorporated in the design of these alternatives. Alternative 1 - No Action The No Action alternative is listed here as required by NEPA, the Forest Service has a regulatory obligation to approve or require modifications to a proposed mining plan of operations (36 CFR 228.5). Selecting the No Action would result in a violation of Forest Service responsibilities under 36 CFR and is not discussed further in this document. The Affected Environment section for each resource provides a discussion of the existing condition of the project area and serves for comparison between the Proposed Action and No Action Alternative. Alternative 2 Proposed Action The Proposed Action is the proposed plan of operations submitted for the White Rock operation. The Proposed Action is lode and placer exploration near Grant Lake and includes the following elements: Geological mapping of the claims to explore for quartz outcropping Prospecting using two-inch suction dredge or highbanker, hand tools and sluice box, small electric jackhammer and a small portable rock crusher in ravines throughout the claims Temporary camp with two 8x10 foot temporary, portable breakdown structures Access will consist of: ATV access on the existing Grant Lake trail The following equipment is proposed for use in exploration and access: One suction dredge, up to 2 Small high-banker Small portable generator Small portable rock crusher Small electric jackhammer ATVs 5

6 Applicable Forest Plan Direction and Forest Service Policy The Proposed Action incorporates the following Forest Plan direction, Best Management Practices, and Forest Service Policy Forest Service Handbook (FSH) Soil and Water Conservation Handbook Sections 12 through 18. Forest Plan Standards for Wildlife (Forest Plan 3-28 through 3-33) Forest Plan Standards for Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive Plant Species (Forest Plan 3-27) Forest Plan Standards for Soils (Forest Plan 3-22 through 3-23) Forest Plan Standards for Heritage Resources (Forest Plan 3-34) 312 Fish, Wildlife and Recreation Management Area (Forest Plan 4-63 through 4-64) 512 Minerals Management Area (applied to approved mining plans of operations (Forest Plan 4-84)) Environmental Consequences This section provides a summary of the environmental impacts under each alternative. It discusses the effects relative to applicable physical, biological, and social environments within the project area. To address cumulative effects, the Forest Service examined the environmental impacts of each alternative in conjunction with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. The discussions of resources and potential effects incorporate existing information included in the Forest Plan, project specific resource reports and related information, and other sources as indicated. The planning record for this analysis contains these resource sources of information as well as results of any field investigations. The planning record is located at the Seward Ranger District, Kenai Lake Work Center, Chugach National Forest, in Moose Pass, Alaska, and is available for review during regular business hours. Information from the planning record is also available upon request. Wildlife Resources Affected Environment Habitat The project area was surveyed by a Forest Service wildlife biologist in It lies at approximately 800-2,000 feet in elevation and is composed primarily of alder shrub and patches of large white spruce with a birch understory. Threatened and Endangered Species (TES) No threatened, endangered, candidate, or sensitive species or their habitats occur in the project area. Management Indicator Species The project may cause some disturbance to individual management indicator species due to mining operation noise. Species of Special Interest The project may cause some disturbance to individual management indicator species due to mining operation noise. 6

7 Migratory Birds The project may have some minor short term impacts on reproduction to individual migratory birds. Cumulative effects are expected to be minor due to the small scale of this project. Environmental Consequences Alternative 2 Proposed Action The Proposed Action will primarily result in seasonal disturbance to wildlife in the project area from noise and mining activities. It is expected that wildlife utilizing habitat near the project area would continue to avoid the use of the project area as potential or existing habitat when mining activity is occurring. The mining activity proposed under Alternative 2 is not expected to be continuous or result in wildlife avoiding the project area permanently. The project area is not considered critical habitat or a travel or migration corridor for any species. Alternative 2 is not expected to cause meaningful effect on any species population viability either generally or locally because of the small size of the project area relative to the size of the existing intact habitat for these species. Alternative 2 Findings for Wildlife Resources The proposed plan of operation is not likely to have an adverse effect on vertebrate endangered, threatened, or endangered species or their habitats. Aquatics Resources Affected Environment White Rock claims are located north of Grant Lake, which is known to have slimy sculpin and three-spine stickleback fish species. The nearest catalogued anadromous stream is Grant Creek, which starts at the lake outlet and flow into the Upper and Lower Trail Lake system. Environmental Consequences Alternative 2 Proposed Action This mining plan of operation will have no direct, indirect or cumulative effects to fish or the aquatic environment. Executive Order (Recreational Fisheries) No recreational fisheries occur near the project area and therefore, no adverse effects will occur. Magnuson Stevens Act The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Act (the Act) requires that all federal agencies consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) when any project "may adversely affect" essential fish habitat (EFH). No essential fish habitat occurs in the project area and therefore, the mining plan of operations will not cause any action that may adversely affect essential fish habitat as defined by the Act. Floodplain Management (E.O ), Protection of Wetlands (E.O

8 This activity is not located within a floodplain as defined by Executive Order 11988, and there are no wetlands in the project area as defined in Executive Order Therefore, there will be no effects to flood plains. Ecology Resources Affected Environment A pre-field review of existing information concerning sensitive plant species was conducted for the project area. This review included the Regional Forester's Sensitive Species List, Alaska Natural Heritage Program data base records, botanical literature, and consultation with the Alaska Regional Botanist and Forest Ecologist. There are no previously documented sightings of sensitive plants in or near the project area. A sensitive plant survey was also conducted in the summer of 2010; no sensitive plants were identified. Environmental Consequences Alternative 2 Proposed Action In the event that sensitive plants are located within an area where mining operations are intensive enough to cause ground disturbance, they may be destroyed. Based on habitat requirements, sensitive plants most likely to occur in the project area are: Aphragmus eschscholtzianus and Papaver alboroseum, known to occur on the Seward Ranger District; and Romanzoffia unalaschcensis, Cypripedium guttatum, Ligusticum caldera, and Piperia unalascensis, which have not been found on the Seward Ranger District to date. Alternative 2: Findings for Ecology Resources The Proposed Action may adversely impact individuals, but is not likely to result in a loss of viability in the Planning Area, nor cause a trend toward federal listing and will not likely result in direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to sensitive plants because they are unlikely to exist in the project area. Heritage Resources Affected Environment All activities proposed for the operation were reviewed along with previous surveys of the operation area and known historic resources in the area. There are no new activities occurring and no known sites within the area of potential effect (APE) of the proposed activities. Environmental Consequences Alternative 2-Proposed Action The Proposed Action is not expected to have any adverse impacts to heritage resources because there are no known historic properties within the APE of the proposed activities. Alternative 2-Findings for Heritage Resources The Proposed Action will not result in direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to historic properties because no known sites exist in the project area. 8

9 Recommended Modifications to Mining Plan of Operations The following modifications to the proposed plan of operations are recommended to minimize adverse environmental consequences associated with the Proposed Action. Food, fuel, and garbage should be stored in bear proof containers. All garbage should be removed regularly (weekly) from the site. If any new historic features or artifacts are discovered during operations, they must be left in place and the Minerals Administrator will be contacted for further instruction. If any eagle or goshawk nests are discoved near the operation area, the Minerals Administrator will be contacted for further instruction. To reduce impacts to migratory birds and raptors and comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, avoid vegetation clearing or access route brushing during the breeding season of migratory birds, May 1 July 15, when practicable. Wash ATVs and other mining equipment prior to bringing them onto National Forest System lands to avoid introduction of non-native plants. Compliance with Other Laws and Regulations National Forest Management Act The proposed action is consistent with the Forest Plan, and all proposed activities are allowable under the 312 Fish, Wildlife and Recreation MAP (see Forest Plan pp through 4-64). Endangered Species Act Biological evaluations were completed for threatened and endangered species. No threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat would be affected by the Proposed Action. Bald Eagle Protection Act Management activities within bald eagle habitat will be in accordance to a Memorandum of Understanding between the Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. No bald eagle nests are known in the project area. ANILCA Section 810, Subsistence Evaluation and Finding There is no documented or reported subsistence use of wildlife, fish, or other foods that would be restricted by the Proposed Action. National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires that all federal undertakings follow the regulations found at 36 CFR 800 to identify and protect cultural resources that are within the project area and which may be effected by the project. The Programmatic Agreement between the Chugach National Forest, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the Alaska State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding management of the project area will be followed. The Proposed Action will cause no effect to historic properties, which will be included in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement Annual Report to SHPO. Executive Order Environmental Justice Implementation of this project is not anticipated to cause disproportionate adverse human health or environmental effect to minority or low-income populations because the proposed activities are not expected to cause any affects to human health or result in meaningful adverse environmental consequences. 9

10 Clean Air Act Emissions anticipated from the implementation of the Proposed Action would be of short duration and would not be expected to exceed State of Alaska ambient air quality standards (18 AAC 50). Executive Order Invasive Species Invasive species populations have the potential to spread in the project area; mitigation and monitoring will be required to reduce this potential and to determine effectiveness. Executive Order Floodplain Management and Executive Order Protection of Wetlands The project area is not located within a floodplain as defined by Executive Order and there will be no effect to wetlands as defined in Executive Order Inventoried Roadless Areas This project is located within an inventoried roadless area. Secretary's Memorandum reserves to the Secretary of Agriculture decision making authority over the construction and reconstruction of roads and the cutting, sale, or removal of timber in inventoried roadless areas. This proposal was reviewed by the Regional Forester for consistency with Secretary's Memorandum The Regional Forester determined that this decision is consistent with Secretary's Memorandum because this decision does not authorize any construction or reconstruction of roads or tree cutting, sale, or removal within the inventoried roadless area. Executive Order Recreational Fisheries - Federal agencies are required, to the extent permitted by law and where practicable, and in cooperation with States and Tribes, to improve the quantity, function, sustainable productivity, and distribution of U. S. aquatic resources for increased recreational fishing opportunities. As required by this Order, the effects of this action on aquatic systems and recreational fisheries have been evaluated and the effects relative to the purpose of this order have been documented. No impact to recreational fisheries is expected from the proposed project. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, Public Law This project is not expected to result in any adverse effects to essential fisheries habitat as defined in the Magnuson-Stevens Act because it has been determined that this activity, individually, will not cause any action that may adversely affect essential fish habitat as defined by the Act. Agencies and Persons Consulted The Forest Service consulted an interdisciplinary team of resource specialists in the development of this environmental analysis. The Forest Service has also placed a legal notice describing the proposed action and soliciting comments in the Anchorage Daily News (Alaska Dispatch News) on January 8, This project has been listed on the Chugach National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions. One comment was received during the comment period for this project. 10