DECISION MEMO. West Fork Blacktail Deer Creek Hardened Crossing

Similar documents
DECISION MEMO. Crow Creek Hardened Crossing

Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest Madison Ranger District

DECISION MEMO Lazyman Repeater Shelter and Tower Replacement

DECISION MEMO. USDA Forest Service. Butte District Silver Bow County T4N, R8W, Section 36

DECISION MEMO Pony Whitebark Pine Planting

DECISION MEMO. Vipond Water Development

DECISION MEMO. East Fork Blacktail Trail Reroute

Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest Madison Ranger District

DECISION MEMO Divide Creek Barrier Enhancement

DECISION MEMO Eureka Fire Whitebark Pine Planting

Background. Purpose and Need. Proposal. Mitigation and Design Features

DECISION MEMO ROSS FORK/BITTERROOT DIVIDE TRAILS REHABILITATION AND RELOCATION

DECISION MEMO. Aurora New Horizons Project

DECISION MEMO SMART CREEK MINERAL EXPLORATION PROJECT

Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest Pintler Ranger District

DECISION MEMO IDAHO DREAM PLAN OF OPERATIONS

DECISION MEMO REBEL CLAIMS EXPLORATION PROJECT

DECISION MEMO CATARACT CREEK-MOUNTAIN MEADOW PLAN OF OPERATIONS

The project will be conducted in partnership with the Nez Perce Tribe.

DECISION MEMO. Griz Thin (Stand )

Decision Memo. Delta A Septic Repair (#33)

DECISION MEMO FOR CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION HOLY JIM CREEK CROSSING REPLACEMENT

DECISION MEMO. Missoula Electric Cooperative Point 118. MEC - Buried Electric Powerline (Along West Fork Butte Access Road #37 to Point 118)

Decision Memo for Pax Ponderosa Pine Planting Project

Draft Decision Memo OHV Trails 22 and 42 Reroute Project

DECISION MEMO OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (ODOT) SAND SHED CINDER PIT EXPLORATION PROJECT

DECISION MEMO Robinhood Creek Helicopter Log Deck June, 2008

DECISION MEMO POT MOUNTAIN TRAIL CONSTRUCTION USDA

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

DECISION MEMO 4-H Tree Farm LLC Driveway Permit

Decision Memo. USDA Forest Service Mountain Home Ranger District, Boise National Forest Boise County, Idaho

DECISION MEMO FOURTH OF JULY PARK 2 USDA Forest Service, Northern Region Red River Ranger District, Nez Perce National Forest Idaho County, Idaho

Preliminary Decision Memo 2017 BPA Utility Corridor Maintenance and Danger Tree Project

Decision Memo. North Fork Calispell Creek Restoration Project

DECISION MEMO FOR USDA FOREST SERVICE DAKOTA PRAIRIE GRASSLANDS LITTLE MISSOURI NATIONAL GRASSLAND MEDORA RANGER DISTRICT SLOPE COUNTY, NORTH DAKOTA

Draft Decision Memo Santiam Junction Maintenance Station Truck Shop Extension

Wildlife Habitat Restoration and Improvements FY 2007 Project

Decision Memo Hungry Creek Watershed Road Maintenance and Stony Quarry Development Project

Meacham Creek Restoration Project

Preliminary Decision Memo Recreation Residence Septic Repairs

FINAL DECISION MEMO. Wizard Falls Fish Hatchery Rearing Pond Replacement

Pinecrest Amphitheater Movies Special Use Permit (40431) Decision Memo

Mokelumne Coast to Crest Trail Mosquito Lakes to Pacific Valley Trail Construction (42414) Decision Memo

Environmental Assessment

Decision Memo. Cabin #5 Electric, Water, Septic Improvements

DECISION MEMO Chief Joseph Cross Country Ski Area Hazard Tree Project

DECISION MEMO SPECIAL USE AUTHORIZATION FOR GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS

Environmental Assessment Gold Digger Mining Plan of Operations

Decision Memo for Juniper Ridge Opal Mine

Decision Memo Raptor 1 and 9 Prescribed Burns Project

Stream Crossing Reconstruction on the Bog Dam Loop Road (FR15) Scoping Notice. Androscoggin Ranger District

Scoping and 30-Day Notice and Comment Period for. Grassy Knob American Chestnut Planting

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

BACKGROUND DECISION. June 2016 Page 1 of 6

Decision Memo Starkey Elk Handling Facility Water System Improvements

DECISION MEMO USDA FOREST SERVICE

DECISION MEMO LOWER STILLWATER FISHERY ENHANCEMENT U.S. FOREST SERVICE DUCHESNE RANGER DISTRICT ASHLEY NATIONAL FOREST DUCHESNE COUNTY, UTAH

DECISION MEMO. NORTH FORK of NORTH CREEK FISH BARRIER PROJECT

Tenmile and Priest Pass Restoration Project Scoping Notice

DECISION MEMO PROJECT NAME: CLARK CREEK BLOWDOWN USDA FOREST SERVICE IDAHO PANHANDLE NATIONAL FOREST BONNERS FERRY RANGER DISTRICT

DECISION MEMO. Bull Bear 1H-18 Oil and Gas Pipeline

Preliminary Decision Memo

Preliminary Decision Memo 2015 Recreation Residence Projects Odell Lake

Paradise and Watson Creek Headcut Treatment Project (see map on next page)

Forest Plan Amendment to Remove the Layng Creek Municipal Watershed Management Plan

The location of the valve site is displayed on a map in the project file.

Clear Addition Project Decision Memo January 2013 DECISION MEMO. Clear Addition Fuels Reduction and Aspen Enhancement Project

Environmental Assessment White Rock Mining Plan of Operations

Two Med/Pike Oblit/Restoration Project Rocky Mountains

PROPOSED ACTION Cooperative Horse Removal with Fort McDermitt Paiute-Shoshone Tribe

Michigan Wing-Civil Air Patrol

Decision Memo. Programmatic Forest Plan Amendment for Cultural Resource Protection Standards and Guidelines. United States Department of Agriculture

Decision Memo for the City of Detroit Root Rot Timber Sale Project

DECISION MEMORANDUM: Quartz Dreams Minerals Exploration Project, Nogales Ranger District

DECISION MEMO. Special Use Permit for Concession Management of Campgrounds and Other Developed Recreation Sites. Los Padres National Forest

Decision Memo. Agriculture Irrigation & Livestock Watering System Easement Conditions for Tull Reservoir

I. Decision to be Implemented. II. Reasons for Categorically Excluding the Decision. A. Description of Decision - 1 -

Small Project Proposal

XTO Energy Inc. Maranon #H1 and Orinoco #B1 Gas Well

Decision Memo Sawtooth Trail #3634 Reroute

Coronado National Forest Sierra Vista Ranger District

DECISION MEMO For ASL (Allegheny Snowmobile Loop) Marshburg Connector Project

Decision Memo Special Forest Products Sales. USDA Forest Service Detroit Ranger District, Willamette National Forest Marion & Linn County, Oregon

DECISION MEMO WEST RIVER COOPERATIVE TELEPHONE COMPANY BURIED FIBER OPTIC CABLE PROJECT

Programmatic Environmental Assessment Forest-Wide Erosion Abatement USDA Forest Service Shawnee National Forest

DECISION MEMO. Cheat-Potomac Ranger District Multiple Recreation Facilities and Related Granger-Thye Concessions Special Use Permit

Decision Memo. USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region. Green Mountain National Forest

Keefer Pasture Drift Fence Project. Challis-Yankee Fork Ranger District Salmon-Challis National Forest

DECISION MEMO USDA FOREST SERVICE (USFS)

DECISION MEMO Cloud Cap RAWS Project July 2011

Wetland Creation Project. Decision Memo

DECISION MEMO WILLOW CREEK RECREATION AREA FACILITY RESTORATION U.S. FOREST SERVICE WILLOW CREEK RESERVE RANGER DISTRICT CATRON COUNTY, NEW MEXICO

MANTI-LA SAL NATIONAL FOREST

DECISION MEMO. Wildlife Habitat Improvement Project Wildlife Opening Construction, Rehabilitation and Expansion FY

Decision Memo Cow Pen Project. USDA Forest Service Talladega National Forest - Oakmulgee District Bibb and Tuscaloosa Counties, Alabama

3-13 Other Required Findings and Regulatory Compliance

I. DECISION. A. Description of Decision

Red Mountain OHV Restoration

KENTUCKY UTILITIES SPECIAL USE AUTHORIZATION AMENDMENT: MOUNT VICTORY TRANSMISSION TOWER REPLACEMENT DECISION MEMO

Suss ATV Access Special Use Authorization

Transcription:

Page 1 of 6 Background DECISION MEMO USDA Forest Service Madison Ranger District Madison County T12S, R4W, Section 30 The project is in the Gravelly Landscape, Snowcrest Recommended Wilderness Management Area in the Southwest Corner C&H Allotment. Livestock use the crossing on West Fork Blacktail Deer Creek, southwest of Antone Cabin, which is a 303d listed stream. It is highly eroded and introduces excessive fine sediment into the perennial stream channel. Decision I have decided to authorize work to harden the stream crossing by installing in-channel grade control structures immediately up and downstream of the crossing and lowering the streambank approaches to a 1:4 grade. This decision also includes placing and compacting gravel over cobble sized rock material on both approaches to stabilize the crossing and accommodate livestock as well as installing a short jackleg fence at each approach to keep livestock from moving up or down the stream when crossing. Mitigation and Design Features Required by This Decision: Aquatics The aquatic resource specialist will accompany range staff during installation to insure the crossing compliments stream morphology. A 124 Stream Protection Act permit from Montana Fish Wildlife & Parks (MTFWP) will be acquired for this action. Hydrology To ensure proper design and implementation a hydrology or fisheries representative will be onsite during implementation. Additional sediment mitigations may be necessary if feasible to limit sediment production during implementation on this 303 listed stream. The project may include dewatering the channel to complete work and use of fabric and/or filter strips to catch increased sediment.

Page 2 of 6 Heritage The South Zone Archaeologist should be notified if any historic or prehistoric cultural resources are identified during the course of project implementation. Scenery Soils Minimize amount of disturbed area to that necessary to construct the crossing, and construct crossing to encourage/allow revegetation as soon as possible. Minimize the amount of fencing required to guide cattle into the crossing. Construction of the crossing would occur when soils are dry to avoid compaction due to machinery driving in areas not immediately affected by the crossing. Noxious Weeds Noxious weeds will be controlled following procedures in the Noxious Weed Control Program ROD (2002) for the. Wildlife Protect all migratory and non-migratory bird nests within project areas. If raptor nests are observed in the project areas, notify Wildlife Biologist. If threatened or sensitive species are observed at or within ½ mile of the project area, notify the Wildlife Biologist within 24 hours.. Reasons for Categorically Excluding the Proposed Action An action may be categorically excluded from further analysis and documentation in an environmental impact statement (EIS) or environmental assessment (EA) if it is within one of the categories identified by the USDA in 7 CFR part 1b.3 or 7 CFR part 1b.3 or 36 CFR 220.6(d) or (e), and there are no extraordinary circumstances related to the decision that may result in a significant individual or cumulative effect on the quality of the human environment. This project has been reviewed in accordance with FSH 1909.15 Chapter 30. I have determined the project fits the following category: 36 CFR 220.6(e)(7): Modification or maintenance of stream or lake aquatic habitat improvement structures using native materials or normal practices. My decision is based on a review of the project record that shows a thorough review of relevant scientific information, a consideration of responsible opposing views, and the acknowledgement of incomplete or unavailable information. The record includes the following resource specialist reports: Biological Assessments and Evaluations for Aquatics, Botany, and Wildlife Tribal and Heritage Resource findings Soils Report Hydrology Report Recreation Report Scenery Report

Page 3 of 6 By definition, categorical exclusions do not individually or cumulatively have significant effects on the human environment (40 CFR 1508.4). Resource specialists considered direct and indirect effects from the proposed action coupled with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions. I have examined the proposed action and the effects analyses disclosed in the resource specialist reports listed above and have concluded that without notable individual effects from the proposed action, there would be no discernable cumulative effects. The interdisciplinary team reviewed the resource conditions listed in FSH 1909.15 Chapter 30 (31.2) and other concerns applicable to this project to determine whether any extraordinary circumstances exist. The mere presence of one or more of the resource conditions listed below does not preclude the use of a categorical exclusion. It is the existence of a cause-effect relationship between a proposed action and the potential effect on these resource conditions and if such a relationship exists, the degree of potential effect of a proposed action on these resource conditions that determine whether extraordinary circumstances exist. The resource specialist reports have provided the necessary information to make a determination on the cause-effect relationship between the proposed action and the potential effect on the resource conditions listed below and thus the presence of extraordinary circumstances, as summarized below: RESOURCE CONDITION Federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for Federal listing or proposed critical habitat, or Forest Service sensitive species. Floodplains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds Congressionally designated areas, such as wilderness, wilderness study areas, or national recreation areas. Inventoried Roadless Areas Research Natural Areas American Indians and Alaska Native religious or cultural sites. Archaeological sites, or historic properties or areas. POTENTIAL EFFECT Threatened or Endangered Species: There would be no effect to the threatened grizzly bear. Sensitive Species: No Impact all other sensitive terrestrial, aquatic, and plant species. There is no municipal watershed in the area therefor negative impacts are not predicted. Short term erosion may contribute sediment to the stream but will be far outweighed by long term benefits to floodplains and wetlands associated with the stream. No congressionally designated areas occur in or near the project; therefore no negative impacts to any congressionally designated areas are projected. There are no inventoried roadless areas within or adjacent to the project area. Therefore, no negative impacts to any research natural areas are projected. There are no research natural areas within the project area. Therefore, no negative impacts to any research natural areas are projected. The project has been inventoried for cultural resources with negative results. It is recommended that the project proceed in accordance with the Region 1 Forest Service Programmatic Agreement with the Montana State Historic Preservation Office.

Page 4 of 6 A categorical exclusion is appropriate in this situation because the proposed action fits within the category described above and there are no extraordinary circumstances present. Scoping and Public Involvement The project was published on the SOPA and provided to 72 interested members of the public and other agencies for comment during initial scoping period on March 8, 2012 to April 6, 2012. Two letters of support, one with a request for monitoring results and updates as to the success of the West Fork Blacktail Deer Creek were received. An example of the type of photo monitoring we do was included in the proposed action published for a 30-day comment period from April 22 to May 22, 2013. No further comments were received. Forest Plan Direction The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) requires the development of long-range land and resource management plans. The Plan was approved in 2009 and provides guidance for all natural resource management activities on the. NFMA also requires that all projects and activities be consistent with the plans. The decision is consistent with Forest Plan direction including all applicable standards. Forestwide Goals for Aquatic Resources: Stream Channels: Stream channel attributes and processes are maintained and restored to sustain natural desired riparian, wetland, and aquatic habitats and keep sediment regimes as close as possible to those with which riparian and aquatic ecosystems developed (IN 2), (FP pg. 13). Riparian Habitat: Habitat to support viable, well distributed populations of native and desired non-native plant, invertebrate, and vertebrate aquatic- and riparian-dependent species are maintained or restored. Movement corridors within and between watersheds, where desired, are maintained or restored to provide aquatic-dependent species habitat needs and maintenance of metapopulations, (IN 8). Riparian and aquatic habitats necessary to foster the unique genetic fish stocks that evolved within the specific geo-climatic region are maintained or restored (IN 7) (FP pg. 14). Channel Integrity: Stream channel function and water quality are maintained or restored to support designated beneficial uses on all reaches through management decisions, restoration projects or Best Management Practices as outlined in the Soil & Water Conservation Practices Handbook (FP pg. 14). Stream Crossings: Culverts, bridges, and other stream crossings can accommodate a 100-year flood, including associated bedload and debris (RF 4). (FP pg. 16) Findings Required by Law National Forest Management Act - The Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) was approved in 2009, as required by this Act. The Forest Plan has been reviewed in consideration of this project and the project meets all applicable management direction found in the 2009 Beaverhead-Deerlodge Forest Plan including consistency with all applicable standards. On April 9, 2012 the Department of Agriculture issued a final planning rule for National Forest System land management planning (2012 Rule) 77 FR 68 [21162-21276]). None of the requirements of the 2012 Rule apply to projects and activities on the, as the 2009 Beaverhead- Deerlodge Forest Plan was developed under a prior planning rule (36 CFR 219.17(c)). Furthermore, the

Page 5 of 6 2012 Rule explains, [The 2012 Rule] supersedes any prior planning regulation. No obligations remain from any prior planning regulation, except those that are specifically included in a unit s existing plan. Existing plans will remain in effect until revised (36 CFR 219.17). Endangered Species Act - See the Reasons for Categorically Excluding the Proposed Action Section of this document for a summary of the effects of this project to Endangered, Threatened, or Candidate Species. The summary is based on a more thorough analysis available in the project record. This project is consistent with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act. Sensitive Species (Forest Service Manual 2670) - This direction requires analysis of potential impacts to sensitive species and the Regional Forester approved the sensitive species list on January 4, 2011. Our review of the potential effects of this decision upon the sensitive species has been completed and the analysis documented in the project file and Resource Condition Table above. Environmental Justice (Executive Order 12898) - This Order requires consideration of whether projects would disproportionately affect minority or low-income populations in or around the project area. Based on internal review and public scoping, the proposed action did not identify any adversely impacted local minority or low-income populations. Clean Water Act The intent of the Act is to restore and maintain the integrity of waters. The Forest Service complies with this Act through the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs). This decision incorporates Best Management Practices to ensure protection of soil and water resources and complies with the Clean Water Act and 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. There will be no air quality impacts as a result of this decision. The National Historic Preservation Act As discussed earlier in this document and in detail in the project file, impacts to cultural resources are not expected. Migratory Bird Treaty Act There will be no known substantial losses of migratory bird habitat expected from the implementation of this proposal. National Environmental Policy Act - This Act requires public involvement and consideration of potential environmental effects. This document and the project record provide documentation for this decision which supports compliance with this Act (See Section II of this document). Other Laws or Requirements The proposed action is consistent with all other Federal, State, and/or local laws or requirements. Administrative Review or Appeal Opportunities This decision is not subject to appeal pursuant to 36 CFR 215. Implementation Date Consistent with 36 CFR 215, implementation may begin immediately, and is expected to commence in the spring of 2014.

Page 6 of 6 Contact Person Supporting documentation for this decision is available for public review at the Madison Ranger District, 5 Forest Service Road, Ennis, MT 59729 Further information about the decision can be obtained from the Madison Ranger District during normal office hours (weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.) in Ennis, Montana, by calling 406-682-4253 406; by mail at (5 Forest Service Road, Ennis, MT 59729, or by sending an e-mail to me, Ken Harris at kenharris@fs.fed.us. Responsible Official Ken Harris January 13, 2014 KEN HARRIS District Ranger Madison Ranger District Date