U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ]

DES 73-78

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT

PROPOSED

HART MOUNTAIN WILDERNESS AREA,

PREPARED BY BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WASHINGTON, D. C.

ACTING Chief, Office of Environmental Quality SUMMARY (X) Draft ( ) Final Environmental Statement Department of the Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife

1. TYPE OF ACTION: Legislative. 2. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION INDICATING WHAT STATES AND COUNTIES PARTICULARLY AFFECTED: This proposal recommends that approximately 16,462 acres, known as Poker Jim Ridge, entirely within the National Antelope Refuge in Lake County, Oregon, be designated as wilderness within the National Wilderness Preservation System and that another 42,829 acres within this same study area be added to wilderness when acquisition of non-Federal lands within the suggested boundaries is comp1etedT~~"~ 3. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: No immediate or long-range environmental change would occur on or off the refuge as a result of the proposed action.~ 4. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: (a) No action; (b) designate a wilderness area with boundaries other than those established in the proposal. 5. FEDERAL AGENCIES FROM WHICH COMMENTS HAVE BEEN REQUESTED: Department of Defense Department of Commerce Department of Transportation Department of Agriculture Department of the Interior Bureau of Outdoor Recreation National Park Service U.S. Geological Survey Bureau of Mines Bureau of Land Management Oregon State Clearinghouse Klamath Lake Planning and Coordinating Council 6. DATE DRAFT STATlMENfnM!4DE0MltM¥:PfiOVl:!)rjiftlL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY TO THE PUBLIC SENT TO FEDERAL REGISTER: December 10, 1973 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Map, Milderness --- — .------_---____ j Map,Location --- — ______a I. Description of the Proposed Action ------i II. Description of the Environment ___ — __ 4 III. Environmental Impact of Proposed Action --- ___ 15 IV. Mitigating Measures in Proposed Action ------19 V. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts -- — ______— _. — 20 VI. Relationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity 20 VII. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources which would be involved in the Proposed Action should it be Implemented ----- — - — __- — — _ _ 21 VIII. Alternatives to the Proposed Action - — -- — ----- 21 IX. Consultation and Coordination with Others ---- — 24

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED HART MOUNTAIN WILDERNESS AREA, OREGON

I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, U. S. Department of the Interior, proposes that a portion of the 276,513-acre Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge be designated as wilderness within the National Wilderness Preservation System. The proposal includes approximately 16,462 acres of terrain, known as Poker Jim Ridge, located in Lake County, Oregon.

The Wilderness Act directed the Secretary of the Interior to review every roadless area of 5,000 acres or more and every roadless island within the National Wildlife Refuge System and report to the President his recommendations as to the suitability or nonsuitability of each such area for designation as wilderness. In fulfilling this responsibility, a thorough and comprehensive study has been made of the Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge.

The Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge has undergone considerable review relative to determining its suitability or nonsuitability for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. Having met the basic criteria of the Act, a field study was completed and a study report submitted, followed by other procedural steps which terminated with a public hearing at Lakeview, Oregon, on April 12, 1967.

1 A wilderness proposal, modified slightly as a result of the public hearings, was introduced in Congress as part of Senate Bill 3014 in October 1969. This proposal called for a wilderness of approximately 47,000 acres in two units--the Fort Warner Unit and the Poker Jim Ridge Unit. Further action on S. 3014 was postoned by the Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs in December of that year, pending a review and re-evaluations of the proposal by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife.

As a result of further field study and additional information from individuals and organizations, both inside and outside government, the Hart Mountain Wilderness proposal was reconsidered. Results of the study and a revision of the proposal are available in the form of a summary of the study report on file in the Bureau's Regional Office, P.O. Box 3737, Portland, Oregon 97208.

The Fort Warner Unit, while a de facto wilderness, was dropped from the proposal at this time due to extensive private and State inholdings scattered throughout the unit. Also, some minor boundary adjustments were made on the Poker Jim Ridge Unit.

The northern boundary of the proposed Poker Jim Wilderness Unit falls along the northern limits of Sections 20, 21 and 30 T33S, R27E, (Williamette Meridian). The entire eastern boundary is formed by a truck trail that parallels Poker Jim Ridge. The southern boundary lies in the bottom of a deep canyon along the road from to the refuge subheadquarters. The western boundary generally follows the refuge boundary, departing from it to exclude small blocks of 2 private lands and a road along the base of the escarpment. Approximately 16,462 acres are included within the proposed wilderness.

The southeast corner of the Poker Jim proposal may be reached by con- ventional automobile from the Hart Mountain headquarters road. The road north, along the east boundary of the study area, is very rocky and requires a vehicle with high clearance. This road will remain open to public use. A road along the east side of Warner Valley makes travel by conventional automobile possible along the west boundary of the study area as far north as Bluejoint Lake. The north boundary is accessible to high clearance vehicles by road from the Frenchglen Road. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190) requires the preparation of an environmental statement on any proposal for legislation and other major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Proposals relating to possible wilderness classification of lands within the National Wildlife Refuge System in accordance with the Wilderness Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-577; 78 Stat. 890-896) are believed to qualify under this Act. This state- ment is prepared to fulfill requirements of P.L. 91-190.

This statement describes the environmental effects anticipated if the Poker Jim Ridge Unit of Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge is included in the National Wilderness Preservation System. Maps of the proposal are attached.

Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge was established through Executive Order and purchase in 1936. Its primary purpose was to provide a suitable habitat for the preservation of the pronghorn antelope, which at that time were threatened with extinction. Provisions were also made for the protection of other native wildlife, including mule deer and sage grouse. At the time of settlement of this general area, Hart Mountain was also the home of the California bighorn sheep, a species which was rapidly decimated by the turn of the century. In 1954, big- horn sheep were reintroduced through the efforts of the Bureau and the Oregon State Game Commission.

Designation of a wilderness area is within and supplemental to the purpose for which a national wildlife refuge is established and administered. If implemented, this proposal will result in Congressional classification of Federally owned lands for the use and enjoyment of the American people in an essentially unimpaired state for present and future use as wilderness. The Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge will continue to be managed by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife consistent with the purposes for which the area was established so as to preserve its wilderness character.

II. DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT a. The Study Area - Lake County, in south-central Oregon, borders on California and Nevada. Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge is in southeastern Lake County, the northeast corner of the Refuge bordering the Harney County line. Poker Jim Ridge is in the northwestern part of the Hart Mountain Refuge. Malheur National Wildlife Refuge is about 90 miles northeast of Hart Mountain, and the Sheldon National Antelope Refuge is about 35 airline miles south of the southern boundary of 4 Hart Mountain Refuge. The refuge is administered from a headquarters in Lakeview, Oregon, about 60 miles southwest of Hart Mountain. A subheadquarters is located on the refuge.

Exterior boundaries of the refuge enclose an area of about 276,000 acres, including some 35,000 acres of State, county, and privately owned land, leaving approximately 241,000 acres of refuge land. No distinction is made on non-Federally owned inholdings with respect

to their management--most are unfenced and they are treated the same as the surrounding public lands. The refuge extends from Warner

Valley eastward, for a distance of about 18 miles and includes all of Hart Mountain as well as a considerable area of high desert favored by antelope as summer range. This part of Oregon has a comparatively

short history of settlement, although its record of occupation by

aborigines goes back to some of the earliest dates found in North America. Excavations in caves in the Fort Rock area of northern Lake County have uncovered materials used by Indians which, by radioactive carbon tests, have an age of around 9,000 years. Numerous artifacts and petroglyphs found over the Hart Mountain Refuge, including the proposed wilderness area, and adjacent areas attest to the presence of

Indians of various tribes over a long period of time. No excavations have occurred on the refuge, but surface finds of projectile points, chips and rock etchings are common. Archaeological investigations in adjacent areas have been conducted most recently by Harvard University in cooperation with the Nevada State Museum in Carson City, Nevada. During the heavy immigration of settlers from the East to the Oregon country from the 1840's to the late 1860's, there was increasing difficulty with hostile Indians. To protect wagon trains and other travelers and discourage Indian hostility, several military posts were established along these routes of travel.

Camp Warner, established in 1866 on the east side of Hart Mountain near a natural meadow on the upper part of Guano Creek, is probably the first occupation of the area by modern man. A small relic forest of Ponderosa pine, adjacent to the meadow, influenced the selection of the location. The weather, with deep snow and low temperatures, was considered too severe to maintain the Post at its Hart Mountain loca- tion and it was moved after one season. The faint outlines of cooking ovens are all that remain. This location is not within the proposed area.

A few ranches were established in Warner Valley in the 1860's. Ranchers grazed their cattle on open range all year long. Other ranchers moved in, and by 1900 these ranges were beginning to decline from overuse. Sheep were introduced and the country soon was crowded. By the 1920's, much of this country, including Hart Mountain, showed the effects of overgrazing.

Following the first World War, practically the entire top of Hart Mountain, as well as extensive areas around the base of the mountain, were taken up in homesteads. Wildlife was given little consideration. Rimrock sheep disappeared, mule deer became rare, and antelope herds 6 were reduced to remnants. By 1923, from Hart Mountain to the Steens

Mountain, and south to the Oregon-Nevada line, there were about 1,000

antelope--one of the largest herds remaining in the United States.

Sage grouse were so numerous that during the nesting season, herders gathered eggs by the bucketful. By 1930, sage grouse were rare over

the entire "High Desert." Growing setiment, coupled with difficult times,

culminated in purchase of key ranches and establishment of the refuge

in 1936.

Although preservation of antelope was the reason for refuge establishment, current objectives have been expanded to provide for the increasing

demand on wildlife and wildland resources as follows: 1. Develop and maintain a representative area of original high

desert of southeast Oregon with primary emphasis on optimum native wildlife populations.

2. Protect and maintain natural beauty and preserve some major examples of unique habitat in relatively undisturbed condition.

3. Develop and manage habitat for those high desert wildlife species which are rare, unique or require special protection and

attention for their perpetuation.

4. Provide opportunity for quality wildlife-oriented public enjoy- ment based on natural beauty, unique environment, and compatibility with management objectives.

5. Preserve, protect, and exhibit the many geological and histor- ical features of the area. Substantial grazing programs continue, but under improved management practices. Habitat restoration and associated field studies are prominent activities on portions of the refuge.

The refuge currently provides about 19,200 animal unit months of live- stock grazing. Of this total,about 405 AUM's or 2% are within the wilderness proposal. Three grazing allotments are involved. Cattle are grazed in spring and fall under approved land management programs.

Unlicensed use occurs also since much of the refuge boundary is unfenced; however, the quantity of forage consumed by cattle moving on and off the area is judged unimportant at the present level, considering the cost of fencing and the value of open space uncluttered by man-made disturbances.

Because of the scattering of small private inholdings, livestock manage- ment is facilitated by an exchange of use agreement with the landowners. In most cases, the amount of use is so slight and sporadic that no formal agreement is required.

The total livestock grazing activity on the refuge is important, not only as a boost to the local economy, but also in some cases as a means of manipulating habitat to benefit wildlife. Grazing is compatible with wilderness and no changes in the grazing program are anticipated.

Monetary returns to Lake County under authority of the Refuge Revenue Sharing Act (P.L. 88-523) are based on 25% of the net receipts on with- drawn lands ($2,026 in 1971) and 3/4 of 1% of the adjusted value of acquired lands ($8,069 in 1971). Future returns will continue to be 8 based on 25% of net returns on public domain lands and 25% of net returns or 3/4 of 1% of the adjusted value of purchased lands—whichever is greater.

Public use of the refuge is increasing with some 10,500 visitors recorded in 1971. Hunting attracted 1,300, fishing (reflecting the lack of water) only 275, and wildlife observation nearly 6,600 visitors.

Other wildlife oriented pursuits accounted for the remainder of the public use. On the proposed area, hunting is the only activity of

importance, accounting for approximately 25% of the 1,300 visits recorded for this purpose. Despite a 400% increase in public use in one year, it is small by most standards and increases are expected to be steady, but quite modest.

The major portion of the refuge not recommended as wilderness is either traversed by roads and fences, or interspersed with private and State lands, or else it supports developments not compatible with wilderness, or is needed to achieve refuge objectives through activities and developments not consistent with wilderness. Other portions of the refuge are undisturbed and are at present de facto wilderness. This is especially true of the Warner Peak (Fort Warner) area and along the western limits of the Poker Jim Ridge Unit. However, these areas are not recommended as wilderness at this time due to extensive and scat- tered private and State inholdings. The Warner Peak area does, however, encompass the more picturesque and highest portion of Hart Mountain fault block. It is about 16 miles long and from 4 to 6 miles wide and includes about 39,741 acres. The mountain rises cliff-like from the Warner Valley to elevations over 8,000 feet above sea level, forming a

rugged escarpment on the west face, a mesa on top, and a moderately

steep eastward slope. Several deep and rugged canyons thrust from the high mesa, providing excellent mule deer and bighorn sheep habitat. This area is separated from the wilderness proposal by a valley through which the main Plush-Frenchglen Road passes. This road provides access to the Hart Mountain Refuge headquarters located northeast of the Warner Peak.

b. Wilderness Area

Travel within the proposed wilderness is by foot or horseback. This picturesque region of rimrocks, tilted mesas and deep canyons was

formed by block-faulting, characteristic of the intermountain west,

and widespread volcanic activity. Successive lava flows over a long

duration covered the region with a basalt mantle that may exceed a

depth of 3,000 feet in places. Poker Jim Ridge is a northward exten-

sion of the fault-block mass which is Hart Mountain. The west side of the ridge is a near vertical escarpment rising 2,500 feet from the floor of Warner Valley to an elevation of about 7,000 feet above sea level. The east side is a long, gentle slope towards .

Soils on the ridge are thin and rocky and were largely derived from weathered basalts. Because of high elevation and clear, dry atmosphere, temperatures fluctuate drastically and frosts may occur in all months of the year. Temperatures ranging from a maximum of 97° to a minimum of -28° were recorded in recent years. Annual precipitation varies

10 and will total from 6 to 10 inches per year. Prevailing winds are from the northwest. Poker Jim Ridge lies in the rain shadow of Hart Mountain and receives less rain and snow than the main mountain mass.

The west scarp is primarily cliffs and steep talus slopes with little vegetation. A scattering of sagebrush and rabbitbrush persists on these slopes, but the general aspect of the scarp is barren rock colored with crustose lichens. The higher elevations are vegetated with short sage and associated phlox, low-growing buckwheats, small asters, locoweeds and a number of grasses and annual forbs. When adequate moisture is present in the spring, small flowering plants color the drab slopes with a variety of blossoms.

Farther down the east slope and along the base of the ridge is an open forest of western juniper. Although seldom exceeding 30 feet in height, some of these old trees have basal diameters exceeding three feet. Juniper reproduction in this area is good. Many of the birds and mammals find food, shelter from the elements, and escape cover from their enemies in this forest. At present, this forest occupies about 3,000 acres and is one of the most interesting and scenic parts of Poker Jim Ridge.

A frequently used truck trail follows the eastern edge of Poker Jim study area. Starting at refuge subheadquarters, it proceeds northeast to Poker Jim Spring, beyond which it is mostly impassable by conven- tional vehicles.

There are no developments on the proposed wilderness that would preclude wilderness classification. A necessary allotment fence and an 11 unobtrusive stock dam north of Snyder Canyon are the only significant intrusions on the area. An old trail leading from Blue Joint Lake to a spring is just barely discernible and is no longer used, and another hunter-made trail penetrates about 200 yards from the east boundary, but it is also closed to all vehicle use and is reverting to a natural condition.

About 200 yards of drift fence leading from Poker Jim Springs is neces- sary for better livestock distribution. Construction will be accomplished without machinery in order to minimize disturbance to the area.

There is need for additional water developments on the refuge to achieve both a better distribution of livestock and improve the summer carrying capacity for antelope. Development of springs, stock dams and dugouts (charcos) in the playa lakes are scheduled to achieve these objectives. Only one of these, a stock dam, was scheduled for develop- ment on the proposed wilderness unit. It was of low priority and was dropped from the schedule since any further water development on this key winter range, while providing for a greater area of livestock activity during the summer, could result in a corresponding loss of carrying capacity for mule deer in the winter.

Wildlife use of Poker Jim Ridge is largely regulated by the seasons. Springs or other water sources are few and many birds and mammals leave the ridge during the dry summer period. When winter snows blanket Hart Mountain, snow depths on Poker Jim are light and the upper part of the ridge is frequently swept free of snow by the wind, providing an ideal wintering area for wildlife. 12 At the time of settlement, California bighorn sheep were still numerous on Hart Mountain, but they soon disappeared. In 1954, the Oregon State Game Commission obtained a stock of these sheep from British Columbia and with cooperation of the Bureau, placed them in a fenced pasture on the refuge in an effort to re-establish them. Their reintroduction has been successful, and in 1972, about 80 sheep were present on the Refuge.

Mule deer favor the juniper forest and adjacent sagebrush slopes as winter range. Antelope range the east slope of the ridge in summer and fall, but move to lower elevations for winter. Coyotes and bobcats are year-long residents, finding prey among the cottontails, white-tailed jackrabbits, mormots, ground squirrels and other small rodents.

Eagles and the endangered peregrine and prairie falcons are among the 321 species of birds known to occur on the refuge. Sage grouse and horned larks find winter subsistence on the wind-swept sage slopes, and flocks of robins can be found in the junipers throughout the winter.

The small stream in Synder Canyon may flow intermittently during spring break-up or after heavy rains. Two or three other small canyons may also contain small intermittent streams under these conditions. Poker Jim Spring on the east boundary of the area is a permanent spring, although the flow from it is small and disappears in a hundred yards or less. It is an important water source for wildlife and livestock on

Poker Jim Ridge. Run-off waters from the south end of Poker Jim Ridge flow into a small depression, forming a 20-acre pond shown on maps as 13 Petroglyph Lake. It has no outlet. Commonly it receives just enough water to offset evaporation loss and usually retains water through the year. In years of deficient precipitation, the lake may go dry. It is also an important watering place for wildlife. Petroglyphs on the basalt rimrocks on the west and south sides of the depression are remnants of early man in the region.

The juniper trees are not valued for wood products, but they do add considerably to aesthetic appeal of the area. Stumps left by early cutting for fuel and fence posts are gradually being obscured. Continued protection will permit further regeneration and the natural expansion of the forest into suitable sites.

Pure grasslands are not represented on the area, but grasses do constitute an important resource and are liberally mixed into all vegetative types. It is likely that prior to settlement, grass was considerably more abundant in some areas than it is now. Where soils are shallower and less productive, however, it is probable that grass was never very abundant. Most of the Poker Jim Ridge Unit must be categorized as a poor site for grass. The general vegetational aspect of the Ridge is today probably much as it was a hundred years ago.

The principal vegetation type on the ridge is dominated by short sage. Other low-growing desert shrubs and herbs along with grass are secondary associates. In the past, this area was used extensively as sheep, cattle and horse range. Since establishment of the refuge, range condi- tions have improved, but have not fully recovered from topsoil erosion 14 and range depletion resulting from overuse. High desert ranges tend to decline rapidly when overgrazed and recovery is very slow even under little or no grazing. Shrub types provide much of the winter forage for mule deer and summer and fall forage for antelope using Poker Jim Ridge. Use of the range will be the same under wilderness status.

The search for gold and other valuable minerals was a great motivating force in the exploration and development of the western States. Prospectors searched this area in early days, but no evidence of valuable minerals was found. No economic mineral deposits are known on the refuge and recent studies by the U.S. Geological Survey have not revealed anything of significance.

Recreational use of Poker Jim Ridge has been limited principally to hunters, but the refuge will attract a more broad-based public use in the future. Although open to deer hunting, normally there are few deer in the area until winter or after the hunting season. The west scarp is also open to hunting of chukar, partridge and quail, and during good bird years, the lower slopes are intensively hunted. The upper three-fourths of the scarp is very steep and rocky, making it too difficult and unproductive for bird hunters to explore.

Ecologically, the ridge and its escarpment have considerable interest and value. As a comparatively undisturbed "island" of the high desert, surrounded by lands that are gradually, and sometimes rapidly, being modified by herbicide spraying, seeding to introduced species, road

15 construction and other human disturbance, its ultimate scientific value may be substantial.

Wilderness designation, as proposed, would not significantly alter

the course of management on the refuge. The area proposed as suit-

able for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System is

already managed for its highest use capability—those uses associated

with its natural values.

III. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF PROPOSED ACTION Wildlife

A minor increase in the amount of wildlife production would be foregone under wilderness constraints due to limitations on habitat manipulations which could benefit one or several species—most likely at the cost of others. The planned stock dam could be constructed and improve the

summer carrying capacity of antelope but reduce the capacity for mule

deer in the winter. Partly for this reason, the objectives of the

refuge emphasize the natural values of the area proposed as wilderness

rather than an artificial increase of one species over another. The

objectives incorporate a wilderness concept but are independent from

it; therefore, management in the proposed wilderness areas would be

unchanged by wilderness and there would be no impact on wildlife pro- duction generated by wilderness. Land Use Other than emergency situations, wilderness classification does impose limitations on land use and treatment; however, the potential for such activities on the proposal are quite marginal and none are planned.

16 Developments including range improvement practices are desirable on other portions of the refuge, but none are planned on Poker Jim Ridge that conflict with wilderness.

There is question that additional water development for wildlife would be compatible with wilderness. Interpretations of the Wilderness Act

thus far indicate that runoff catchments would be consistent if they were essential to management for refuge's primary purpose, and if they were unobtrusive and did not compromise the area's future value as wilderness. One such project is planned, but it is of low priority since additional water development is not essential to meet the objectives of the refuge. As wilderness, this development would be foregone and it could, therefore, be considered a minor adverse impact. Refuge administration would not be hampered. Refuge personnel presently enter this area on foot or on horseback and have no need to enter with motorized equipment.

Economy The same principal applies to the limited timber resource on the refuge.

The juniper may have some commercial value as fence posts, but regard- less of wilderness considerations, it would not be harvested because this would conflict with the refuge objectives. The timber is more valuable aesthetically and as protective wildlife cover than it would be if harvested.

Livestock grazing would continue at the present level of 405 AUM's, or 2% of the total refuge grazing program. Grazing permittees do not

17 presently use motorized vehicles within the proposed wilderness. Increased livestock production, as a result of artificial range manipulations and other intensive management techniques, would not be possible under wilderness constraints. The rugged and rocky nature of the proposed wilderness, however, makes its rehabilitation potential marginal. Much greater potential exists on other refuge lands and on range lands surrounding the refuge. Wilderness would not adversely affect either the present or future grazing economics. Scientific Use Use of the area for study purposes would be made more restrictive, costly and inconvenient by the prohibition of motorized equipment. Archeological investigations would be most affected by this prohibi- tion; the lack of motorized transport would be a definite handicap in explorating and defining areas of potential cultural and historical values. Permanent research facilities could not be permitted. The full scope of this impact is unknown, but archeological investigations in adjacent areas indicate a strong possibility of significant historical remains in the proposal. Public Use It is conceivable that someday public use on the refuge may increase to undesirable levels, thereby damaging the natural values for which the Wilderness Act was enacted to protect. Designation as wilderness could attract additional users through increased publicity and result- ant knowledge of the area's natural features. Existing administrative authorities under the Code of Federal Regulations and management

18 techniques compatible with wilderness are sufficient to cope with this eventuality. Should it become necessary to institute visitor controls this would be done. Some littering, vandalism, and general disturbance on the area would be inescapable. Present use activities would be allowed to continue. The remoteness of the area makes access difficult for even the most hardy; the impact of foregoing the management option of allowing motorized entry to the aged and physically handicapped would be insignificant. There would also be a minor adverse impact to wilder- ness users created by automobile noise and air pollution on roads and trails adjacent to the proposal. The magnitude of vehicular traffic is light, however, averaging less than 10 vehicles per hour on an annual basis. In Summary There will be no major immediate or long-range change in condition of the environment as a result of this proposal, except as provided by the natural processes of ecological succession which will be allowed to continue. Present management on these lands is already stressing open space, aesthetic, and natural area values that wilderness designa- tion would preserve. Designating 16,462 acres of Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge as wilderness would provide added protection against human exploitation and development which could occur under refuge administration.

IV. MITIGATING MEASURES IN PROPOSED ACTION There will be little change in management as a result of the proposed action. The advent of wilderness would not result in any loss by the 19 public of any privileges currently enjoyed. Therefore, no mitigation measures are appropriate or planned.

V. UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS The option to attain a slight increase in species production, primarily pronghorn antelope, through development of additional watering facili- ties, will be foregone.

The management prerogative to open the area to motorized entry will be removed. This would continue to limit use of the area by the aged and handicapped. It would also impact on archeological and other scientific studies, by eliminating the prime mode of transportation. The opportunity to discover historical relics and artifacts of man's past would become more costly and inconvenient.

A minor degree of littering and vandalism could be expected. Audio and visual impacts from vehicular traffic on nearby roads and trails would be distractive.

VI. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY The relationship between the local short-term use of the environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, should not change. The area will remain open to hiking, photography, wild- life observation, hunting, nature study, and research. The habitat, climate and wildlife are not expected to change beyond that brought about by natural succession. Wilderness designation will help protect the area from development, pollution, and human encroachment. Grazing

20 will continue in much its present form and the forage resources should remain at about their present level.

VII. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES WHICH WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROPOSED ACTION SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED" There are no known irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented. Indeed, wilderness should retain land use options for future genera- tions. Wilderness designation will be within and supplemental to the purposes for which the refuge was established and is administered. The refuge will continue to be managed in a manner to insure protection of the wildlife and environment.

VIII. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION Alternatives to the proposed wilderness would be: (a) No action; (b) A wilderness area or areas with boundaries other than those proposed. Alternative (a) There are no plans for intensification of management techniques which are not available under normal refuge operational guidelines. The area would continue to be managed essentially as it is at present, with the primary focus aimed at preserving the natural habitat conditions as found within the proposal.

While the need for wildlife developments or changes in existing manage- ment practices are presently not foreseen, the Bureau will be surren- dering options which could prove favorable to stewardship of the proposed area and the refuge in forthcoming years. Management prerogatives to improve habitat conditions through range renovation could prove to be 21 an important tool in the future. Roads, trails, parking areas, inter- pretive centers, other public use facilities could be constructed, and the use of motorized equipment would permit easier access for the visiting public, particularly the aged and the handicapped. Archeo- logical investigations and scientific studies could be conducted without the restrictions imposed by the ban of motorized equipment.

Aesthetic impact of the roads, power lines, and exterior fencing could receive less emphasis without wilderness, and further developments on the refuge lands adjacent to the proposed area could be carried out without fear of creating an adverse aesthetic experience for the wilder- ness user. However, for all practical purposes, management of the refuge would remain unchanged and objectives for the area could continue to be met without wilderness. Without wilderness, the legislative protection connotated by wilderness designation would be lost and uses contrary to preservation of the area in its natural state would be possible. Refuge objectives aimed at perpetuating this habitat would be more difficult to meet.

Alternative (b): The entire refuge was considered in the preliminary wilderness study. Two areas were found roadless, undeveloped, and on the surface, physically wilderness in character. They are Poker Jim Ridge area and the Fort Warner area. The publicly owned lands portion of Poker Jim Ridge constitutes the wilderness proposal.

The Fort Warner area, while de facto wilderness, encompasses sub- stantial private and State inholdings. Until these scattered tracts 22 are acquired, the Fort Warner Unit will not be recommended for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. However, management will continue to stress wilderness values to meet refuge objectives. Since these primitive undeveloped lands are best suited for sustaining wild and domestic animals, and this is compatible with wilderness, no change would result from eventual wilderness classification and no impact resulting from that action would be anticipated.

Boundaries of the proposed wilderness on Poker Jim Ridge were located to exclude private lands and areas that had potential needed to achieve other refuge objectives. About 35,000 acres within the boundaries of the refuge are private or State inholdings. Expansion of the proposed wilderness boundary would necessitate inclusion of some inholdings as well as developments inconsistent with wilderness and lands needed to attain other objectives of the refuge. However, expanding the proposal to include 2,608 acres of private land, 480 acres of State land (map de facto wilderness), and about 260 acres of additional public lands, would encompass the entire topographical unit of Poker Jim Ridge, making a more viable unit of wilderness, free from potential conflicting land uses. This area, too, is used primarily as grazing land. The topog- raphy is severe and little change in land use would result from wilder- ness; however, what little potential that presently exists for development or speculation sale would be lost to the present owners if the lands were acquired.

23 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION WITH OTHERS A. Consultation and Coordination in the Development of the Proposal and in the Preparation of the Draft Environmental Statement. Informal coordination has been conducted with local civic groups and private conservation agencies of the area since the early stages of the Hart Mountain wilderness area proposal.

A public hearing was held on the original Hart Mountain Wilderness Proposal in Lakeview, Oregon, April 21, 1967; 41 persons attended.

Ten organizations and two individuals presented statements. Three representatives of organizations favored wilderness status for portions of the refuge, three tendered qualified approval, and four were opposed to any Hart Mountain wilderness. Of the two individuals presenting testimony, both spoke against wilderness classification. Several speakers requested another public hearing when the proposed boundaries and regulations for the proposed wilderness areas are definitely defined.

Oregon State University presented general information on range land grazing, but took no stand either for or against wilderness. The Lake County Land Use Committee opposed the proposal stating that the

24 enjoyment and use of the area may be limited to a very small segment of the public. They preferred that the refuge remained unchanged. The Lake County Chamber of Commerce expressed opposition to the proposal and especially to any revision that would enlarge the wilder- ness study areas. Their main concern was the continued multiple use for livestock, because Lakeview and the county are dependent upon the livestock industry.

1. Major points of those opposed: (a) Hart Mountain needs more, rather than less, development if people are to use and enjoy resources. (b) Wilderness status might interfere with necessary wildlife habitat management and cattle grazing. (c) Lake County has not completed its basic resource survey, so the best use of Hart Mountain is not known.

2. Major points of those favoring wilderness: (a) Portions of Hart Mountain Refuge are de facto wilderness, and the refuge is one of the few "high desert" areas scheduled for wilderness evaluation. (b) Wilderness status will strengthen the refuge, adding further protection to land and wildlife.

25 (c) Wilderness designation need not hurt Lake County; it will help economically and socially by attracting new visitors.

The Sierra Club and Wilderness Society asked for more Hart Mountain wilderness than is included within the Bureau's proposal. Two organi- zations tentatively approving wilderness designation opposed the expanded proposal of the above organizations.

Seventy-two individuals wrote favoring wilderness status for portions of the Hart Mountain Refuge. Most stated that the wilderness study areas are "wilderness", that the refuge is one of the few "high desert" areas being evaluated for possible wilderness designation, and that wilderness status would give extra protection to refuge lands and wildlife. Many urged that more of the refuge be included.

Communications were received from two persons who opposed wilderness status at the Hart Mountain Refuge. They contended that public lands serve more people and serve them better under the multiple use concept. They felt that wilderness classification "locks up the lands" for a single use and for a limited number of people.

26 Five organizations wrote favoring wilderness designation for portions of Hart Mountain Refuge. The Mazamas wished to see as wilderness all Hart Mountain lands that are not already altered by roads or other development. The Oregon Audubon Society favored a Poker Jim Ridge wilderness, but wants a Fort Warner wilderness which excludes some of the private lands. The North Dakota Wilderness Society supported the expanded wilderness plan advocated by the Wilderness Society and Sierra Club. The Kenai Chapter, Alaska Conservation Society, and the Wilderness Club of Eastern Montana College supported the proposal and asked that more of the refuge be included.

No written comments were received from elected officials.

The Oregon State Land Board had no objections to wilderness classifica- tion, but pointed out that State lands are included within the Fort Warner study area. The board would be receptive to land exchange.

The Geological Survey and Bureau of Mines conducted a mineral resources study of the units. They found no record of mineral production from either of the areas nor are any mineral commodities known to occur within them that can be mined economically at the present time. The complexly faulted volcanic areas are geologically unfavorable for accumulation of petroleum.

The Bureau of Outdoor Recreation submitted a letter for the record supporting inclusion of these areas in the wilderness system in order to preserve a significant example of high desert country.

27 B. Consultation in the Review of the Draft Environmental Statement for Official Comment: Department of Defense Department of Commerce Department of Transportation Department of Agriculture Department of the Interior Bureau of Outdoor Recreation National Park Service U.S. Geological Survey Bureau of Mines Bureau of Land Management Oregon State Clearinghouse Klamath Lake Planning and Coordinating Council Lake County Board of Supervisors For Information Only Administrator of Highways State Highway Building Salem, Oregon 97310

28