DECISION NOTICE and FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

Upland Island Wilderness Fire Management Initiative

USDA ,Forest Service Angelina National 'Forest Angelina and Jasper Counties, November 2009

Decision and Reasons for Decision

Based upon my review of the proposal, the analysis deseribed in the environmental assessment (EA), public comments, and the project record, I have decided to select Alternative 2, the proposed action, and its associated design criteria for the Fire Management Initiative. Alternative 2 proposes the least amount of impact to Wilderness Character while still meeting the Purpose and Need of the Proposed Aetion. Alternative 2 provides for the following acti vities:

1. Conduct prescribed burns on approximately 11,990 acres in LJpland Island Wilderness to reduce hazardous fuels.

Conduct prescribed burns on approximately 990 of adjacent private property, state lands, and national forest lands for an approximate total of 12,980 acres. The proposed action includes approximately 1,260 acres in a No Burn Area in the vicinity of Graham and Cypress Creeks inside UIW (see Appendix AA.l, Alternative 2).

3. Construct approximately 16.4 miles of fire control lines on the exterior of UIW. These lines will be located on private lands adjacent to UIW. These lines will use existing control lines where they exist on adjacent private property, and be established with mechanical tools (e.g., bulldozer) or hand tools on private property with permission from the land owners.

4. In addition, this proposal includes 14.4 miles of interior control lines within UIW. Approximately 6.3 miles of interior control lines would be established using hand tools on abandoned roads that accessed the area prior to the establishment of the wilderness in 1984. No hand line would be constructed on previously undisturbed surfaces inside UIW. However, there are approximately 4.7 miles of creeks or naturally wet fuel breaks that would be used as control lines where the minimum required hand clearing may be necessary to eliminate fuel bridges. In addition, approximately miles of existing roads on non-wilderness lands would be used as fire breaks to separate burn units or burn blocks. Design Criteria Associated with Alternative 2

In addition to the applicable standards from the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the National Forests and Grasslands in Texas (the Plan), the design criteria described below, as well as monitoring detailed on 21-22 of the EA, are part of my decision.

1. Wet sites, such as bogs and seepage zones would be identified and protected (the Plan p. 83 and 152). No equipment would be allowed in these areas and no stream crossings will be designated in these areas.

Measures to prevent or reduce siltation problems at stream crossings to protect aquatic habitat for the aquatic species will be used. Stream crossings would be kept to a minimum to prevent disturbances within mesic habitats to sensitive flora and fauna.

3. If previously undiscovered archaeological or historical resources are encountered during the implementation of this project, work in that area would cease immediately until the resources can be assessed and evaluated by a member of the Heritage Management Team, and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has been afforded the opportunity to review the findings. The site area would be excluded from all treatments until this review can be completed. Known archaeological and historical sites which are considered eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and those which have not been fully evaluated in order to determine their eligibility for the NRHP, would be removed from the area of potential effect by adjusting the appropriate boundaries of the proposed actions.

4. If previously undocumented RCW activity is discovered during implementation of this project, the project would be stopped. The district wildlife biologist would evaluate the situation and determine appropriate management actions to take that would be consistent with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service guidelines.

5. Prescribed fire would only be applied under an approved burning plan to meet specific resource objectives, and under the supervision of a qualified burning boss. The burning plan would plot the trajectory of the smoke plume, identify smoke-sensitive areas, predict fire behavior, and set parameters for burning conditions to minimize risk of resource damage or fire escape. Burns would be conducted within weather and fucl moisture parameters established for the NFGT.

6. Notify the Forest Supervisor's Office, Texas Forest Service, County Sheriff's Office, Volunteer Fire Departments, and adjacent landowners prior to ignition of any prescribed burn.

7. A void placement of hand-lines on soils occurring on slopes greater than 15% to decrease long-term soil loss.

Reasons for the Decision

DNIFONSI 2 Upland Island Wilderness Fire Management Initiative- November 2009 My decision to implement Alternative 2 is based on its effectiveness to reduce hazardous fuels in UIW, to protect human life and adjacent private property, to increase the safety of wildland firefighters who would have to respond to wildfires within UIW, and to protect the ecosystems in UIW from possible wildfire conflagrations or high severity fires. This project will reduce the hazardous fuels that have developed in UIW as a result of fire suppression during the last 25 years since it was designated as wilderness. It will also result in a wider range of options for responding to unplanned ignitions in the wilderness. I considered the need to take action and the issues identified during scoping in making my decision. I weighed the effects of prescribed burning, constructing firelines, and protecting human life and private property, and the key issues associated with the project, against taking no action. I am not willing to accept the potential effects on human life and private property associated with Alternative 1 - No action or Alternatives 3 and 5 which do not propose the use of a helicopter for lighting interior fire lines. The Proposed Action would have acceptable effects on the environmental components and provide the benefits of reducing hazardous fuels and increasing the safety of wildland firefighters.

I have considered the best available science in making this decision. The project record demonstrates a thorough review of relevant scientific information, consideration of responsible opposing views, and the acknowledgment of incomplete or unavailable information, scientific uncertainty, and risk. I considered the need to take action and the issues identified during scoping in making my decision. I weighed the effects of thinning, road improvements, prescribed burning, NNIPS control, and erosion control work on the vegetation, soil and water, air, wildlife, and recreational use of the area, and the key issues associated with the project, against taking no action. I am not willing to accept the potential effects associated with the no action alternative. The Selected Alternative will have acceptable effects on the environmental components and provide the benefits of reducing fuel loadings and SPB hazard.

I have considered the effect of this project on climate change, as well as the effect of climate change on this project. Any resulting greenhouse gas emission would not be measurable on a global scale.

Other Alternatives Considered

The following alternatives were considered in detail. They are fully described on pages 14-19 of the EA and a description summary in table form is also given on pages 19-20 in the EA.

Alternative 1- No Action.

This alternative was not selected because: 1. It does not meet the purpose and need and is not supported by the analysis contained within the EA.

Alternative 2 - Proposed Alternative

This alternative will be implemented. See above discussion regarding my decision to implement Alternative 2.

DN/FONSI - 3 Upland Island Wilderness Fire Management Initiative- November 2009 Alternative 3

This alternative was not selected because: 1. It would construct over 44 miles of interior firelines. 2. It would not provide the safety of firefighters since it excludes using the helicopter to light interior fire lines. 3. The magnitude and duration of the proposed activities would adversely affect Wilderness Character.

Alternative 4

This alternative was not selected because: 1. It does not meet the purpose and need. Hazardous fuel reduction would only occur on 6,610 acres within Cpland Island Wilderness.

Alternative 5

This alternative was not selected because: 1. It does not meet the purpose and need. Hazardous fuel reduction would only occur on 6,610 acres within C pI and Island Wilderness. 2. It would construct over 30 miles of interior fireline. 3. It would not provide for the safety of firefighters since it excludes using the helicopter to light interior fire lines. 4. The magnitude and duration of the proposed activities would adversely affect Wilderness Character.

Public Involvement

This project was developed with input received through several public collaboration efforts including a Limits of Acceptable Change analysis for Cpland Island Wilderness that was completed in 1994, the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan (1996), and a collaborative meeting concerning this proposal held on March 7,2007 at Zavalla City Hall that included a field trip to UIW. Presentations were made to Sierra Club chapters on May 1, 2007 in Beaumont and on August 8, 2007 in Houston. A Minimum Requirements analysis of the mechanized and non-mechanized tools to be used in CIW was held on May 14, 2007 with participation from state and federal agencies, environmental groups, a sportsmen's group, Stephen F. Austin State University's College of Forestry, and the Interdisciplinary Team. In addition, a cooperative project between Stephen Austin State University's College of Forestry (SFASU-CF) and the NFGT produced valuable information on the historic vegetation and current fuel conditions of the wilderness based on extensive field data.

Numerous meetings with adjacent private landowners have taken place resulting in agreements to locate approximately 75% of the exterior fire control lines for this project on private property outside of UIW. An agreement with SF ASU -CF has been established to provide monitoring data on vegetation and fuels in UIW.

DNIFONSI 4 Upland Island Wilderness Fire Management lnitiative- November 2009 The 30-day Notice and Comment Period began on August 9, 2009 after the publication of the legal notice in the Lufkin Daily News.

:Finding of No Significant Impact

After thorough consideration of the EA, appendices, the Forest Plan, specialist reports, and comments received, I have determined that these actions are not a major federal action, significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. In a local context, the short and long term effects of the site-specific actions of the selected alternative (Alternative 2) are not significant. Therefore, an environmental impact statement is not needed. This determination is based on the following intensity factors.

1. Both beneficial and adverse effects have been considered and this action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the environment (EA, pages 23-88).

2. Public health and safety should not be adversely affected by the proposed action. No herbicide use is proposed. Standard Forest Service operating procedures (which ineludes safety) will be implemented during the prescribed burning operations (EA, page 60).

3. No direct, indirect, or cumulative effects are expected on wetlands or floodplains. (Executive Orders 11990 and 11988).

4. The effects of the proposed actions on the quality of the human environment are not controversial in a scientific context.

5. The selected alternative does not involve highly uncertain, unique, or unknown environmental risks. The Angelina Ranger District has successfully carried out the prescribed activities in similar situations in the past.

6. This decision does not set precedent for future action with significant effects or represent a decision in principle about a future consideration.

7. These actions do not individually, nor with other activities taken cumulatively within the affected area, reach a level of significance (EA, 23-88). Where appropriate, design features are proposed which are known to keep effects to vegetation, soils, wildlife, and other resources below a threshold level of significance (EA, pages 20-21). Cumulative effects of the Selected Alternative actions and other foreseeable actions have been evaluated and summarized in the EA.

8. No known sites listed or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places will be affected by the proposed activities. If heritage resource sites are discovered during actual operations, activities will be stopped until the sites can be protected or evaluated for significance. Prescribed activities will not cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historic resources (EA, 54-55). In compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act, Archaeological Resources Protection Act, and Native American Graves

DNIFONSI - 5 Upland Island Wilderness Fire Management Initiative- November 2009 Protection and Repatriation Act the project was shared with all cooperating Native American tribes at the time of scoping.

9. The Selected Alternative will not adversely affect any endangered or threatened species and it has been determined that there is no critical habitat for any endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. The Forest Service consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and determined that the actions (1) are not likely to adversely affect any federally listed endangered or threatened species and (2) may impact individuals but is not likely to cause a trend to federal listing or loss of viability of regionally listed sensitive species. (Biological Evaluation, Appendix B).

10. None of the prescribed actions threaten or lead to violations of federal, state, or local environmental laws or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment. This will be ensured by carrying out the selected actions in a way that is consistent with thc standards and guidelines, management requirements and mitigation measures established in the Plan. For water quality management, state-approved Best Management Practices will be used for this project. The project will be monitored to ensure BMPs are implemented and appropriate corrective measures will take place, if implementing the BMPs on a specific site results in effects significantly higher than anticipated, because of unforeseen site factors or events. This project will fully comply with state approved BMPs and the Clean Water Act.

Findings Required by Other Laws and Regulations

Alternative 2 is consistent with the Plan, including the Plan's Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines. The actions detailed in Alternative 2 are consistent with the Management Objectives, Standards, and Guidelines for Management Area (MA-7), Wilderness.

Alternative 2 includes measures to avoid or mitigate negative impacts (40 CFR 150S.2(c» (EA, pages 20-21). The project is feasible and reasonable, and it conforms to the Plan's overall direction to manage the forest.

The Upland Island Management Initiative is consistent with National Forest Management Act (NFMA) requirements [36 CFR 219.27(b») regarding resource protection, vegetative manipulation, silvicultural practices, riparian areas, soil and water, and diversity.

This alternative meets the requirements of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the National Historic Preservation Act, the Archeological Resources Protection Act, and the Clean Water Act.

In accordance with the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Executive Order 13007, the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, and others, an archaeological inventory report will be prepared prior to project implementation to evaluate the effects of this project on heritage resources. The State Historic Preservation Office concurred with this determination on October 8,2007. In addition, consultation with the Caddo Nation of Oklahoma and the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas has been conducted. Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas raised an issue about a traditional property of cultural significance, , primarily green needles in longleaf pine regeneration areas. The

DN/FONSI - 6 Upland Island Wilderness Fire Management Initiative- November 2009 04/30/2010 11:57 4043472835 USDA FA PAGE 02/02

continues to work with the AJabama~Coushatta to identify longleaf pine regeneration areas suitable f()r green necelle collecllon.

Implementation Date

If no appeal is received, implementation of this decision may occur on, but not. before, five business days after the close of the appeal period. If an appeal is received, iniplementation may occur on but not before the 15th business day following the date of the appeal disposition (36 CFR 215.9).

Administrative Review or Appeal Opportunities

Based on the April 2006 Federal court decision in The Wilderness Society y. Re,y, individuals or organizations who stlbmitted comments, or otherwise expressed j'nterest in this action, by the close of the comment period specified in 36 CFR 215.6, have lhe right to appeal this decision. Appeals must meet content requirements of 36 CPR 215.14. A written appeal must be postmarked OJ:" received within 45 days after the date this notice is published in the Lufkin Daily News, Lufkin, Texas. The appeal shall be sent to eSDA Forest Service~ Ecosystem Managern.ent Coordination, ATTN: Appeals, Yates BuBd.lng, 3CEN, 201 14111 Street SW, Washington, D.C 20250. Appeals may be faxed to (202) 205~lOl2. Hand delivered appeals must be received withb normal business hours of 8:00 an} to 5:00 pm. ElectJ:"onic appeals must be submitted in a format as an email message, plain text (.txt), rich text format (.rf1:), OJ:" Word (.doc) to(t,J2pe~ds­ chiel]Lfs.fed.Lls

All tirne period are computed using calendar days, including Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays. However, when the time period expires on a Satllrday, Sunday, or Federal holid~y, the time is extended to the end of [he next Federal working day (II :59 pm). The day after publication of the legal notice of the decision in the newspaper of record (36 CPR 215.7) is the first day of the appeal~filling period. The publication date of the legal not.ice of the: decision in the newspaper 0 f recQJ:"d is the exclusive means for calculating the time to file an appeal. Appellants shOUld not rely on date or time from information provided hy any othet' source.

Contact

For further information conceming this decision, contact tile National Forests and Gr-asslancls in Tents' Forest Planner Lynn Jackson at the Supervisor'S Office, 415 SOlrth First Street, Lufkin, Texas 75901, or phone 936-639w 8581.

Responsible Official;

~ ~ ,2.JI'j. .)4,/ (j LtZAGPAOA Date Regional Forester

DNIFONSI -7 Upland Island Wildernc!)!) FirrC) Management Inhjaliv~- Novem])cr 2009 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (CSDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic infonnation, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a pmt of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination write tOo USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.,Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

DNIFONSI 8 Upland Island Wilderness Fire Management Initiative- November 2009