Decision Memo Monarch Pass U.S. Forest Service San Isabel National Forest Salida Ranger District Chaffee County, Colorado

Home , Monarch Pass, South Arkansas River

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE & NEED Background: Beginning in the early 2000’s in the Weminuche Wilderness of southern Colorado, a spruce beetle (Dendroctonus rufipennis) epidemic began expanding north. During stand exam field procedures in 2012, within the Monarch Mountain Ski area, active spruce beetle infestation was discovered on several plots. Further reconnaissance discovered scattered spruce beetle populations in the Monarch Mountain Ski area, Old Monarch Pass and Monarch Park areas. Prior to this time no active spruce beetle infestation had been observed in these areas. Since 2012, spruce beetle activity has increased and is now at epidemic levels across the Monarch Pass area. In some stands, mortality of the mature overstory is approaching 75 percent. In Colorado, spruce beetle has affected over 1.7 million acres since 1996.

Figure 1. Example of forest conditions in the Monarch Pass area (early spring 2017). Photo by A. Rudney.

— Decision Memo — Page 1 of 23

Figure 2. Example of trees killed by spruce beetle. Photo by A. Rudney.

Western balsam bark beetle (Dryocoetes confusus) has been affecting stands within the ski area and across the Monarch Pass area since the early 2000’s. Lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) forests in the area are at high risk for mountain pine beetle infestation (Dendroctonus ponderosae) due to mature age, tree size and density. In addition, increased snag (dead standing trees) levels within the ski area have exposed visitors to a higher risk of falling trees. The increase in mortality is leading to increased fuel loading and higher risks for firefighters attempting initial or extended attack on wildland fires within the project area.

Purpose and Need: The purpose of the Monarch Pass project is to reduce the extent of spruce beetle infestation, western balsam bark beetle infestation, improve forest resiliency to insect and disease infestations, improve watershed health and aquatic habitat, reduce fuel loading, protect infrastructure and developed sites (e.g., ski area, campground, trail corridors), and provide for firefighter and public safety in the Monarch Pass area. The need for the project is due to an ongoing insect infestation resulting in significant mortality of Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmanii) and subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) trees as well as highly susceptible forest conditions to insect outbreaks in the area. The need is also to improve the watershed health along the South Arkansas River by reducing the amount of sedimentation reaching the stream.

The Monarch Pass project encompasses approximately 2,809 acres near the crest of Monarch Pass about 20 air miles west of Salida, Colorado. The predominant tree species on the site is Engelmann spruce, with a lesser component of subalpine fir and lodgepole pine and minor amounts of aspen and Douglas-fir.

— Decision Memo — Page 2 of 23

DECISION

Project Activities

I have decided to proceed with the removal of insect infested and susceptible trees in the Monarch Pass area, as well as watershed improvement projects to reduce current sedimentation and erosion issues that are occurring in the project area. My decision incorporates feedback from the collaborative participants, public comments I received during the scoping period, recommendations from Forest Service Regional insect and disease experts, and my resource specialists. Resource concerns identified through the collaborative process and internal meetings with resource specialists were addressed through project design criteria listed below. I believe my decision best addresses the purpose and need for the project while protecting forest resources and meeting Forest Plan standards and other regulatory requirements.

Treatments in spruce/fir stands: Sanitation and salvage will be the primary methods used on approximately 1,676 acres of spruce/fir forests. Sanitation is the removal of trees to improve stand health by stopping or reducing the actual or anticipated spread of insects and disease (Helms, 1998). Salvage is the removal of dead trees. Singletree and group selection treatments will be completed on areas within the project that have little or no insect infestation or mortality. Single tree selection is a method where individual trees of all size classes are removed more or less uniformly throughout the stand, to promote growth of remaining trees and provide space for regeneration (Helms, 1998). Under the group selection method, trees are removed and new age classes established in small groups to regenerate and maintain a multiage structure (Helms, 1998). In this case groups may be as small as 3 – 5 trees or up to ¼ acre (59 feet radius) in size. Singletree and group selection may be used on up to 450 acres (approximately 25 percent) of the spruce/fir acres within the project. For all treatments in spruce/fir, retain 10 percent of the stands in untreated reserves ranging in size from 1/10th to 2 acres. Scatter these reserves in a mosaic throughout the stands but focus on areas used by wildlife (i.e., middens, nest trees, etc.), areas containing large snags and down wood, doghair stands, rocky areas or areas that possess other unique features.

The spruce beetle epidemic is evolving each year with new trees and new stands being impacted. In order to meet the purpose and need of the project a flexible implementation strategy will be necessary. Stands and areas selected for the single tree and group selection methods that become infested with spruce beetle affecting 30 percent or more of the basal area of the mature overstory will be converted to sanitation and salvage. Singletree and group selection treatments are generally limited to removing no more than 25 – 30 percent of the pre-treatment basal area of a stand. Allowing sanitation harvest of these acres allows the treatments to meet the purpose and need of the project.

Treatments in lodgepole pine stands: Bark beetles are native to Colorado and do not typically pose a significant threat to healthy trees. Thinning remains the most effective treatment to improve forest health by reducing abiotic stress and thus, reducing the risk of insect infestation (Fettig 2012). Thinning combined with a reduction of accumulated surface fuels and shrubs also effectively reduces susceptibility to stand-replacing fires. Thinning implemented to promote landscape heterogeneity (i.e., age, size, density, and species composition) is most effective at increasing stand resistance to insect infestations (and other natural disturbances) as homogeneous forested landscapes provide large contiguous areas of susceptibility to similar disturbances (Fettig et al. 2007, Fettig and Hilszczanski

— Decision Memo — Page 3 of 23

2015). Insect infestations and outbreaks, for example, tend to occur when favorable host conditions (i.e., stands with little heterogeneity) coincide with favorable environmental conditions (i.e., drought). When these conditions align, the probability of encounters with a suitable host increases (i.e., one in which resistance mechanisms (resin) can be overcome) (Fettig et al. 2007).

Approximately 569 acres of lodgepole pine within the project area will be treated using a combination of thinning, patch cuts (group selection) and reserve. (Thinning is a treatment made to reduce stand density of trees primarily to improve growth or enhance forest health.) The treatments will be designed to reduce susceptibility to insect infestation, regenerate mature lodgepole stands and create age class diversity. Thin 80 percent of the stands generally from below to an average of 80 – 120 BA/A. Thinning should be irregular in character and fall in all BA/A values across the range. When thinning, remove 20 – 40 percent of the existing basal area on any given site. Example, if an area currently contains 240 BA/A, thin to no lower than 145 BA/A by removing 40 percent of the existing BA or thin 80 B/A to 60, removing 25 percent. If thinning will not meet the 80 – 120 BA/A target; this is OK. This target is designed to reduce the probability of blowdown within the residual stand. Thinning will be across diameter ranges. Leaving well-formed disease free trees with better crown ratios and conical shaped crowns (evidence of more rapid growth) is the goal. It is permissible to remove larger slow growing individuals to favor more vigorous, well-formed smaller trees. Leave trees should have greater than 40 percent crown ratios where possible.

Under the patch cut (group selection) method trees are removed and new age classes established in small groups to regenerate and maintain a multiage structure (Helms, 1998). Treat up to 10 percent of the stands with group selection (1/4 to 1 acre in size) openings where all trees are removed. Retain 10 percent of the stands in untreated reserves ranging in size from 1/10th to 2 acres. Scatter these reserves in a mosaic throughout the stands but focus on areas used by wildlife (i.e., middens, nest trees, etc.), areas containing large snags and down wood, doghair stands, rocky areas or areas that possess other unique features.

Additional Information for All Treatments: Treatments will occur on slopes up to 60 percent. On slopes up to 35 percent, conventional logging equipment (i.e., harvesters and skidders) and high floatation equipment (i.e., cut-to-length systems) will be utilized. On sustained slopes between 35 – 60 percent, high floatation equipment (i.e., cut-to-length systems) or aerial yarding techniques (i.e., skyline or helicopter yarding) will be utilized.

In order to increase species diversity and resilience to insect and disease, as well as ensure regeneration of cut over areas, planting of new trees may be necessary. Where appropriate and needed, a mix of tree species will be planted. A mixture of Engelmann spruce, sub-alpine fir, lodgepole pine, bristlecone pine (Pinus aristata), limber pine (Pinus flexilis), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and aspen (Populus tremuloides) may be planted. This diversity of species is present within the project area and planting a variety of species will increase the resilience of the area to insects and disease.

After harvesting is complete, the slash and fuels in the area may be reduced through fuelwood gathering, pile burning, lopping and scattering to lie within 24 inches of the ground, chipping or other means as necessary.

Access to treatment units will be from National Forest System (NFS) Roads, existing administrative roads, roads administered under special use permit, and the establishment of temporary roads.

— Decision Memo — Page 4 of 23

Temporary road use will be restricted to permitted/authorized use. Temporary roads created for the project will be decommissioned no later than three years after the date the project is completed. Necessary reconstruction, maintenance and repair of existing NFS roads, roads administered under special use permit, and temporary roads may occur.

Watershed Improvement Projects:

1) Headcut stabilization:

This project proposes laying back a very large headcut, possibly adding large riprap or wood structures to the headcut and along the downcut channel, and adding rip-rap to the culvert outlet at the highway. Access to the site with heavy equipment may be challenging, and may limit the effectiveness of this project. This project is proposed to keep the headcut from migrating up the slope, possibly impacting the highway. There is a smaller headcut below the old road (which will likely be used for the timber sale). It is proposed that this headcut be laid back, rock or wood could be added to the channel, a culvert may be used in this location to allow water to pass under the old road template. When the sale is complete the culvert will be pulled and a low water crossing type structure installed.

Figure 3. Example of a headcut occurring in the project area. Photo by J. Krezelok.

— Decision Memo — Page 5 of 23

Figure 4. Example of a head cut occurring in the project area (note culvert in the upper ½ of the photo). Photo by J. Krezelok.

2) Old Gravel Pit:

This project proposes adding erosion control such as waddles, water bars, erosion matting, slash and felled logs to the area within and downstream of the gravel pit. Planting or seeding may also be done to increase the vegetative growth on the area. The current administrative road accessing the area would be gated.

Figure 5. Current erosion occurring at the old gravel pit location. Photo by J. Krezelok.

— Decision Memo — Page 6 of 23

3) Sediment Control from Highway:

This project proposes adding sediment retention basins in multiple locations (to be determined) to collect sediment coming from the highway before it reaches Monarch Park; adding rip-rap at the base of multiple culverts under the highway to help dissipate energy, removing existing sediment plumes where possible along existing logging roads, and adding filter strips and vegetated swales at the base of slopes to catch sediment.

Figure 6. Proposed location of sediment retention basins. Photo by J. Krezelok.

Figure 7. Proposed location of sediment retention basins. Photo by J. Krezelok.

— Decision Memo — Page 7 of 23

4) Monarch Ponds:

This project proposes dredging the ponds within Monarch Park, which have filled with sediment. This project is necessary to increase fish habitat within these ponds. Sediment would be loaded into trucks and transported off-site.

Figure 8. Monarch Ponds. Photo by J. Krezelok.

Mitigation Measures/Design Features

The following mitigation measures or design features are included in my decision and they provide for consistency with the Forest Plan and other guidance, and/or they minimize potential impacts to the applicable resources.

Forest Vegetation

1. The largest trees, as appropriate for the forest type, will be retained to the extent that the trees promote stands that are resilient to insects and disease.

Fire / Fuels

2. If chipping is used to treat fuel accumulations, chips need to be distributed so that the maximum layer is less than 2 inches in depth. Exceptions will be made if chips are being used for other resource activities (e.g., erosion control).

— Decision Memo — Page 8 of 23

3. If slash is being piled, ensure that correct and appropriate size and spacing of piles is followed. This may vary by area and fuels. Recommended size of piles are: • Hand piles max size: 10 ft X 10 ft X 8 ft (height) • Machine piles max size: 25 ft X 25 ft X 15 ft (height) with use of brush rake or other equipment that minimizes dirt in the piles

Heritage

4. Prior to any implementation activity, the Heritage Resource staff will be contacted to ensure avoidance of all eligible or potentially eligible properties for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). All eligible or potentially eligible properties including a minimum 30 – 50 foot buffer (depending on slope and fuel loading) will be avoided and protected. 5. Hand cutting (non-mechanized) within eligible site boundaries may be permitted with prior consultation with a member of the Heritage Resource staff. 6. If artifacts, features, or other indications of previously unrecorded heritage resources are identified in the course of ground-disturbing activities, all work in the vicinity of those materials will cease and the Heritage Resource staff will be notified immediately. Project activities may resume after proper notification, mitigations, and archeological clearances are obtained.

Public Safety

7. Forest Service will consult with the appropriate utility company (i.e., WAPA, Xcel Energy) prior to any treatments occurring adjacent to electric distribution lines or high voltage power lines.

Aquatics (Water, Fish and Amphibians) & Soils

8. Keep slash out of perennial and intermittent stream courses, and all riparian areas and wetlands. Do not accumulate slash greater than 24 inches high in ephemeral stream courses. Fell trees away from streambanks, shorelines, and other waterbody edges. 9. Landings should be located in upland areas, where practicable, to minimize the potential for slash piles and burning of slash to affect protected stream courses. 10. Avoid soil disturbing actions during periods of heavy rain or wet soils. Do not operate equipment when conditions will result in rutting of soils (4 inches deep or longer than 10 feet). Winter operations can occur with a minimum of 1 foot of packed snow or 2 inches of frozen soil. 11. Locate vehicle service and fuel areas, chemical storage and use areas, and waste dumps on gentle upland sites. Mix, load and clean on gentle upland sites. Dispose of chemicals and containers in State-certified disposal areas. 12. Within units, no heavy equipment will be allowed to drive within 25 feet of wet depressional areas, springs, or riparian/wetland areas. If the equipment can reach into these areas without tracking the trees may be cut and removed. All heavy equipment will also be kept at least 100 feet from all live streams, unless approved by the Forest Service. Keep skid trails out of these areas, as well as swales and ephemeral draws, except to cross at designated locations. 13. Temporary road construction will follow the following criteria: • Outslope roads with rolling dips and/or waterbars to maintain hillslope hydrology to the extent possible and ensure adequate road drainage for all conditions.

— Decision Memo — Page 9 of 23

• Road widths should not exceed 12 feet unless needed to meet curve radius or intersection needs. • Temporary roads should not exceed 15 percent grade, unless agreed to by Hydrology, Soils or Engineering personnel. • Temporary roads will cross perennial or intermittent stream courses, wetlands, or riparian areas at designated locations. Where possible use hardened fords rather than culverts for these crossings. 14. Restore all temporary roads to a hydrologically self-maintaining state and natural state to the extent feasible. • This will require waterbarring, removal of culverts at stream crossings, eliminating ditches, installing permanent drainages, establishing protective vegetative cover, and may require subsoiling or scattering of slash. • On temporary roads that cross slopes of 25 percent or more, recontouring may also be required. • Scarify and reseed old roadbed to reduce visual impact and to blend with the surrounding landscape, as necessary. 15. Skid trails and landings shall be ripped, seeded, and/or have slash scattered to prevent erosion and reduce compaction. Reshaping (i.e., waterbars) of the area may be necessary to promote dispersed drainage. Scattering of slash may be in lieu of constructing water bars. Scattering of slash shall cover approximately 30 – 50 percent of the skid trail or landing. Heavily used trails and landings identified by the Forest Service will require ripping to reduce compaction instead of scattering slash. These trails will be ripped to a depth of 4 – 6 inches and seeded with an approved seed mix. When ripping skid trails, the ripper teeth shall be lifted every 150 feet on slopes less than 15 percent, every 100 feet on slopes 15 – 30 percent, and every 50 feet on slopes greater than 30 percent to prevent concentration of water and development of rills and gullies. 16. During implementation, pre-existing (legacy) skid trails, temporary roads and landings shall be re-used to the extent practicable; so as to minimize additional ground impacts (detrimental soil conditions). 17. Plan pile burning operations for when litter, duff, and soil moistures are high enough to minimize consumption of soil organic matter and minimize soil heating. Distribute piles to reduce severe burn impacts from concentrated fuel. 18. For units on steep slopes (between 35 and 60 percent): • Operate machinery on a slash bed of ground cover or limbs and tops as thick and continuous as practicable to minimize soil displacement and compaction. • All skyline logging will be done with equipment capable of suspending one end of the log; up to 150 foot lateral yarding required to skyline corridors. Whenever feasible, parallel yarding corridors are preferred over ‘fan’ settings in order to minimize soil/vegetation disturbance immediately below the yarder. Yarding corridors shall target a spacing of no closer than 150 feet as much as possible. An effective slash cover in skyline corridors and skid trails will be installed following the completion of operations for erosion control, if necessary. Fully suspend logs to the extent practicable over riparian areas and streams.

— Decision Memo — Page 10 of 23

Weeds

19. To reduce risk of spreading noxious weeds, all heavy equipment and vehicles will be cleaned and inspected prior to entering the National Forest and all mud, dirt, and plant parts will be removed according to Region 2, Guide to Noxious Weed Prevention Practices (USDA Forest Service 2001). 20. If noxious weeds are found, they will be treated. 21. Only certified weed-free Forest Service approved native grass/forb seed mixes will be used for re-vegetation efforts.

Wildlife

22. Avoid hauling during the first weekends of archery and muzzleloading seasons. 23. Harvest activities will not occur from April 15 – June 30 to minimize potential disturbance to lynx kittens when most vulnerable. Exceptions to these activities and timeframe may occur depending upon site conditions, within the ski area and after discussions and approval from the District Ranger in consultation with the District Biologist. This Design Feature will also protect big game young when most vulnerable (i.e., mule deer, elk, bighorn sheep). 24. Retain seedlings and saplings trees whenever possible across the project area. 25. Retain 40 snags/10 acres across the area. Monarch Ski area would be exempt from this requirement due to public safety concerns. 26. Retain a minimum of 200 linear feet per acre of downed woody debris (woody material greater than three inches in diameter) to help retain moisture, trap soil movement, provide microsites for plant establishment, maintain small mammal habitat and cycling of nutrients in the ecosystem. 27. Retain trees which are currently providing wildlife habitat such as cavities and nests. 28. If threatened, endangered, or sensitive species are discovered during project implementation, they will be protected and consultation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service will occur when necessary. 29. Recommended Raptor Buffer Guidelines (Colorado Parks and Wildlife) will be reviewed for guidance in the instance an occupied raptor nest is discovered during implementation. 30. If impacts to wildlife and/or regeneration become a concern after harvest activities take place, a Forest Order closure may be put in place that would prohibit over-the-snow motorized vehicles from traveling inside portions of or all of the project area. Areas that would be excluded from this closure include: the Monarch Park area currently being utilized by a commercial outfitter and guide (Monarch Park Snowmobile Outfitters) and the Old Monarch Pass Road (NFSR 237). Current, special use permitted activities would be allowed to continue if a closure was put in place.

Recreation and Trails

31. Timing of timber removal operations will be timed as to not impact winter operations of special use permit holders currently operating within the project boundary. This currently includes: Monarch Ski Area, Monarch Snowcat Skiing, Monarch Dog Sled Rides, Monarch Snowmobile Tours, Erwin Backcountry Guides, Colorado Mountain Club, Colorado Mountain College and Pikes Peak Alpine School. Exceptions to these activities and timeframe may occur after

— Decision Memo — Page 11 of 23

discussions and approval from the District Ranger in consultation with the Recreation staff. 32. To avoid conflicts with current Outfitter and Guide operations, no snow plowing will take place on FSR 231 (Monarch Park road) from November 1 thru April 30th. Exceptions to these activities and timeframe may occur after discussions and approval from the District Ranger in consultation with the Recreation staff.

DECISION RATIONALE

Considerations Based on Collaborative Input, Interdisciplinary Project Development and/or Scoping

Issues/concerns were raised during collaborative input, interdisciplinary project development and public scoping. All issues/concerns raised were documented in meeting notes and letters received. Issues/concerns were reviewed and discussed by the interdisciplinary team and responsible official. A full list of issues/concerns and how they were considered and addressed is located in the Consideration of Comments documents (see Appendix B).

Pertinent issues raised include: Canada lynx, habitat for lynx, Continental Divide National Scenic Trail (CDNST), visual quality objectives associated with the CDNST, current sedimentation and erosion that is occurring in the area, how treatments will impact sedimentation and erosion issues, large number of dead trees from spruce beetle epidemic, wildfire suppression concerns associated with dead/weaken trees, protection of infrastructure (e.g., powerlines, Monarch Mountain Ski area, Highway 50) from both hazard trees and potential wildland fire, maintaining or promoting regeneration, and expansion of the project to include additional acres.

Extraordinary Circumstances

I find there are no extraordinary circumstances that would warrant further analysis and documentation in an EA or EIS. I took into account resource conditions identified in agency procedures that should be considered in determining whether extraordinary circumstances might exist:

Federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for Federal listing or proposed critical habitat, or Forest Service sensitive species

Federally Listed Threatened or Endangered Species Wildlife Canada lynx is the only species listed as a Threatened or Endangered species with the potential to occur within the project area. A biological assessment was completed for Canada lynx. Based on the analysis, the Forest Service determined that the project “May affect, not likely to adversely affect” the Canada lynx. The Forest Service received concurrence from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on January 5, 2018.

— Decision Memo — Page 12 of 23

Aquatics / Plants There are no Federally Listed Threatened or Endangered aquatic or plant species/habitat within or adjacent to the project area.

Designated Critical Habitat Wildlife Though Canada lynx are present in the project area, no critical habitat has been designated within the project area. Aquatics / Plants There are no Federally Listed Threatened or Endangered aquatic or plant species/habitat within or adjacent to the project area.

Species Proposed for Listing Wildlife / Aquatics / Plants There are no wildlife, aquatic or plant species, including habitat, proposed for listing within the project area.

Sensitive Species Wildlife Eight species (mammals, birds, and invertebrates) listed on the Regional Forester’s Sensitive species list were identified as having the potential to occur within the project area. Information on each species and evaluation of effects is available in the biological evaluation for the project. Design criteria listed above will reduce potential impacts to these species. Aquatics Two species (reptiles and amphibians) listed on the Regional Forester’s Sensitive species list were identified as having the potential to occur within the project area. Information on each species and evaluation of effects is available in the biological evaluation for the project. Design criteria listed above will reduce potential impacts to these species. Plants There are no records of Regional Forester Sensitive Species plants within the project area.

Flood plains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds

Portions of the project area contains floodplains and wetlands. The main floodplain is along the South Fork Arkansas River. There are multiple wetlands within the project area both along stream channels and as isolated areas. These areas will be avoided during project implementation. Keeping equipment 100 feet from live streams and outside wetlands and riparian areas will protect these resources.

The South Fork Arkansas River is not within a designated municipal watershed. However, it is considered a source water area by the Colorado Department of Health and Environment (CDHPE). The Forest Service and CDPHE have a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in place that recognizes CDPHE- delineated source water areas as a “municipal supply watershed” as defined in Forest Service Manual

— Decision Memo — Page 13 of 23

2542. There will be no impacts to water quality or water supply associated with this project; therefore, there will be no impact to the municipal water supply.

Congressionally designated areas such as wilderness, wilderness study areas, or National recreation areas

The project is not located in any congressionally designated areas such as wilderness, wilderness study areas or national recreation areas.

Inventoried roadless areas or potential wilderness areas

The project is not located in a Colorado Roadless area or potential wilderness area.

Research natural areas

The project is not located within a research natural area.

American Indians and Alaska Native religious or cultural sites

Cultural resources surveys were conducted as part of the project analysis. All eligible sites or sites determined to need more data will be avoided with an appropriate buffer placed around the sites (see design criteria listed above).

Archaeological sites, or historic properties or areas

COLLABORATION, SCOPING AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

Collaboration

The Salida Ranger District does not have an active collaborative group within the local geographic area. As a result, the District decided to use a collaborative process that included multiple persons and groups representing diverse interests and was transparent and nonexclusive. Notes on meetings are available in the project record.

Scoping & Public Involvement

This action was originally listed as a proposal on the San Isabel National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) and updated periodically during the analysis. The scoping period was initiated on May 8, 2017. Comments were requested to be submitted by June 9, 2017.

Scoping letters were mailed to fourteen organizations and individuals who have previously requested notification about this type of project or were thought to be interested in this project, including nearby

— Decision Memo — Page 14 of 23

landowners. The scoping letter was also posted on the website associated with the Monarch Pass project. Nine comment letters were received. All, but one, expressed support for the project. The opposing comment disagrees with the use of a categorical exclusion for the analysis and the need to treat vegetation in the subalpine zone. Some comments expressed concerns, which are addressed in the Decision Rationale section. These concerns did not indicate extraordinary circumstances or significant effects that preclude use of a categorical exclusion.

APPLICABLE CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

Background

Section 8204 of the Agriculture Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-79) (also referred to as Farm Bill) amended Title VI of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (HFRA) (16 U.S.C. 6591 et seq.) to add Sections 602 and 603 to address qualifying insect and disease infestations on National Forest System lands. The Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture delegated authority to implement the provisions of the Farm Bill to the Chief of the Forest Service on March 6, 2014.

Section 602 provides, in part, the opportunity for Governors to request designation to areas in their State that are experiencing, or at risk of, an insect or disease epidemic. The Forest Service received letters from 35 states requesting designations. These requests were reviewed to ensure they met at least one of the following eligibility criteria outlined in the Farm Bill: experiencing forest health decline based on annual forest health surveys; at risk of experiencing substantially increased tree mortality based on the most recent Forest Health Protection Insect and Disease Risk Map; or contains hazard trees that pose an imminent risk to public infrastructure, health, or safety.

Upon reviewing the States’ requests, the Chief designated approximately 45.6 million acres of National Forest System lands across 94 national forests in 35 States. Additional forests, not included in the original designation, have requested and received designation under Section 602; this includes the San Isabel National Forest. On June 27, 2016 the Chief designated 827,400 acres of the San Isabel National Forest as a landscape-scale insect and disease area under Section 602(d). These areas will be further evaluated to identify potential projects that reduce the risk or extent of, or increase resilience to, insect and disease infestations. Information on the request and designation process, by state, can be found at http://www.fs.fed.us/farmbill/areadesignations.shtml.

— Decision Memo — Page 15 of 23

Figure 9. Map of National Forest System Lands Designated Under Section 602 of the Healthy Forest Restoration Act in Colorado.

Section 603 establishes a categorical exclusion for qualifying insect and disease projects in designated areas on National Forest System lands. An insect and disease project that may be categorically excluded under this authority is a project that is designed to reduce the risk or extent of, or increase the resilience to, insect or disease infestation in the areas (HFRA, Sections 602(d) and 603(a)).

Insect & Disease Infestation Categorical Exclusion

This categorical exclusion may be used to carry out a collaborative restoration project in an insect and disease treatment area designated by the Chief under section 602. The applicable category of actions is identified in agency procedures Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Chapter 30, Section 32.3 (Categories Established by Statute), #3. Insect and Disease Infestation.

The actions proposed for this project are categorically excluded from documentation in an environmental impact statement (EIS) or an environmental assessment (EA). The Insect and Disease Infestation category is applicable for this project because: 1. The project is in an area designated in accordance with section 602(b) and (c) of the Healthy Forest Restoration Act. 2. The entire project is in the Wildland Urban Interface. 3. The project is not located: in congressionally designated Wilderness and Wilderness Study Areas; in areas where the removal of vegetation is restricted or prohibited by statute or by

— Decision Memo — Page 16 of 23

Presidential proclamation; or in areas where the activities described above would be inconsistent with the applicable Land and Resource Management Plan. 4. The project’s number of acres treated does not exceed 3,000 acres. 5. The project does not include the establishment of permanent roads. Additionally: a. Temporary roads will be constructed but will be removed no later than three years after the project is completed. b. Maintenance or repairs will be conducted on permanent roads that are already established in the project area. 6. Public notice and scoping was conducted. 7. The project was developed through a collaborative process that includes multiple interested persons representing diverse interests and is transparent and non-exclusive. a. The best available scientific information is considered to maintain or restore ecological integrity, including maintaining or restoring the structure, function, composition and connectivity. b. The project maximizes the retention of old growth and large trees, as appropriate for the forest type, to the extent that the trees promote stands that are resilient to insect and disease. See additional discussions on the collaborative process under the Collaboration and Public Involvement section.

FINDINGS RELATED TO OTHER LAWS AND REGULATIONS

National Forest Management Act (NFMA)

The project was reviewed to ensure the project is compliant with NFMA. That review is available in the project record.

Pike and San Isabel National Forests; Comanche and Cimarron National Grasslands Land and resource Management Plan

The project was reviewed to ensure the project is compliant with the Forest Plan. Pertinent information is listed below. The full review is available in the project record.

1. Timber harvest would occur on lands suited for timber production or would occur in areas where timber harvest is permitted and is necessary to help achieve other resource management objectives as outlined in Pike and San Isabel Land and Resource Management Plan (L&RMP 1984)

The majority of the project is located within the following management areas:

• 1B-1 Provides for existing winter sports sites (Forest Plan, pgs. III-89 thru III-95). • 2B Emphasis is on rural and roaded-natural recreation opportunities (Forest Plan, pgs. III-116 thru III-124)

— Decision Memo — Page 17 of 23

Small sections of the project are located in management areas: • 7D Emphasis is on wood fiber production and utilization for products other than sawtimber (Forest Plan, pgs. III-179 thru III-188) • 9B Emphasis is on increased water yield through vegetation manipulation (Forest Plan, pgs. III- 216 thru III-223)

2. Silvicultural treatments are consistent with the Forest Plan. • The Monarch CE is consistent with the following Forest Direction Goals (L&RMP Pg. III-3-6) • Implement an integrated pest management program emphasizing silvicultural management of timber stands to prevent and control insect infestation and disease. • Improve age class and species distribution of tree stands forest-wide. • Improve the health and vigor of all vegetation types. The Forest Plan allows for use of high floatation equipment on slopes up to 60 percent or cable or aerial systems on any slope (Forest Plan pg. III-45)

Endangered Species Act

A biological assessment (BA) was completed for the project and submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The BA addressed the following species: Canada lynx. Based on the analysis, the Forest Service determined that the project “May affect, not likely to adversely affect” the Canada lynx. The Forest received concurrence on the project on January 5, 2018.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) was established in 1918 and signed into law under a treaty (convention) with Great Britain to protect migratory birds. Subsequently, additional treaties were also made with Mexico (1936), Japan (1972), and the Soviet Union (1976). Today, over 1,000 bird species are protected under the MBTA. This act prohibits anyone to “pursue, hunt, take, attempt to take, capture, kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to purchase, deliver for shipment… or export…any migratory bird, included in the terms of this Convention...or any part, nest, or egg of any such bird…” Executive Order (EO) 13186 of January 19, 2001 directs the federal government to take a lead role in protecting migratory birds, incorporate bird conservation into agency programs, activities and planning, evaluate the effects of agency actions on migratory birds, minimize take of species of concern, and address habitat conservation.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has identified 27 species of concern for the Bird Conservation Region (Southern Rockies) in which the Monarch Pass Project lies (U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2008). Many of these species have already been analyzed or excluded from analysis under the sensitive species section while several others would not be expected in the project area.

Clean Water Act

The Clean Water Act (33 USC 1251 etc.), as amended, intends to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. Required are 1) compliance with State and other federal pollution control rules, 2) no degradation of in-stream water quality needed to support

— Decision Memo — Page 18 of 23

designated uses, 3) control of non-point source water pollution by using conservation or best management practices, 4) federal agency leadership in controlling non-point pollution from managed lands, and 5) rigorous criteria for controlling discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States. With implementation of design criteria listed above the project is in compliance with the Clean Water Act.

National Historic Preservation Act

Cultural resource surveys were completed for the project area. Identified eligible sites or sites determined to need more data by the Colorado State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) will be buffered and avoided.

2005 Travel Management Rule (TM)

The 2005 TM Rule requires that in designating National Forest System roads, trails, and areas, responsible officials consider the provision of recreational opportunities; public access needs; conflicts among uses of National Forest System lands, including other recreation uses; and the compatibility of motor vehicle use with existing conditions in populated areas.

National Trails System Act (1968)

(a)In order to provide for the ever-increasing outdoor recreational needs of an expanding population and in order to promote public access to, travel within, and enjoyment and appreciation of the open-air, outdoor areas of the Nation, trails should be established (i) primarily, near urban areas of the Nation, and (ii) secondarily, within established scenic areas more remotely located. (b) the purpose of this act is to provide the means for attaining these objectives by instituting a national system of recreation and scenic trails, by designating the Appalachian Trail and the Pacific Crest Trail as the initial components of that system, and by prescribing the methods by which, and standards according to which, additional components may be added to the system.

National Forest Ski Area permit Act of 1986

The Ski Area Permit Act of 1986 authorizes the Forest Supervisor to issue long-term permits for the purposes of alpine skiing development.

Ski Area Recreational Opportunity Act of 2010

The Ski Area Recreational Opportunity Act of 2010 amended the Ski Area Permit Act of 1986 (1) to enable snow-sports (other than nordic and alpine skiing) to be permitted on National Forest System land, subject to ski area permits issued by the Secretary of Agriculture under section 3 of the National Forest Ski Area Permit Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. 497b); and (2) to clarify the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture to permit appropriate additional seasonal or year-round recreational activities and facilities on National Forest System land, subject to ski area permits issued by the Secretary of Agriculture under section 3 of the National Forest Ski Area Permit Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. 497b).

— Decision Memo — Page 19 of 23

Environmental Justice Executive Order

Environmental Justice provides that, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, all populations are provided the opportunity to comment before decisions are rendered, are allowed to share in the benefits of, are not excluded from, and are not affected in a disproportionately high and adverse manner, by government programs and activities affecting human health or the environment.

Civil Rights would not be affected by the Monarch Pass Project. The project includes purchaser work, Forest Service contracted work, and Forest Service employee accomplished work (Force Account). Under Executive Order 11246 companies with Federal contracts or subcontracts are prohibited from job discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, gender or national origin. The U. S. Department of Agriculture prohibits discrimination in its employment practices based on race, color, National origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation and marital and family status.

Executive Order 12898 (59 Fed, Reg. 7629, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address, as appropriate, any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations and low-income populations. Low-income communities near to the project area include those located in the Poncha Springs and Salida areas. Low-income populations in the area hold lower paying jobs in the service and ski industries.

The effects of the proposed action on civil rights and low-income or minority communities would be minimal. Employment would be created through both timber sale and service contracts, and contractors/subcontractors are prohibited from discrimination based on race, color, religion, gender, or national origin. Some contracts for this project may be offered under Small Business Administration authorities, which could result in positive employment benefits to minority populations.

This project does not have the potential to disproportionately adversely affect minority or low income populations and would not affect civil liberties.

The proposed action would not have any disparate effects on any consumers, minority groups, women, civil rights, or social/ethnic groups. All contracts would meet Equal Employment Opportunity requirements. The United States Department of Agriculture prohibits discrimination in its programs based on race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, and marital or familial status.

ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OPPORTUNITIES Decisions that are categorically excluded from documentation in an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) are not subject to an administrative review process (pre- decisional objection process) (Agriculture Act of 2014, Subtitle A, Sec. 8006).

IMPLEMENTATION DATE The project is expected to be implemented starting the summer 2018.

— Decision Memo — Page 20 of 23

APPENDIX A – PROJECT MAP

— Decision Memo — Page 22 of 23

APPENDIX B – CONSIDERATION OF COMMENTS/ISSUES

— Decision Memo — Page 23 of 23