United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Big Sugar Project Environmental Assessment

American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest, Placer County, California June 2019

For More Information Contact:

District Trails Officer, Matt Brownlee American River Ranger District 22830 Foresthill Road Foresthill, CA 95631 Phone: (530) 478-6254 Responsible Official, Eli Ilano Tahoe National Forest 631 Coyote Street Nevada City, CA 95959 Phone: (530) 265-4531

Cover photo: mechanized new trail construction. Credit: Devin Erickson, 2017.

In accordance with federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690- 7442; or (3) email: [email protected]. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Contents Contents ...... iii Chapter 1 Need for the Proposal ...... 5 Introduction ...... 5 Proposed Project Location ...... 5 Need for the Proposal ...... 6 Proposed Action ...... 7 Public Involvement and Tribal Consultation ...... 8 Proposal Development...... 8 Chapter 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives ...... 9 Alternative 1 – Proposed Action ...... 9 Implementation Strategy ...... 10 Alternative 2 – No Action ...... 17 Chapter 3 Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives ...... 19 Introduction ...... 19 Effects Relative to the Finding of No Significance (FONSI) Elements ...... 20 Incorporation by Reference ...... 20 Context ...... 21 Intensity ...... 21 Chapter 4 Agencies and Persons Consulted ...... 65 Individuals including: ...... 65 Tribes: ...... 65 Agencies and organizations: ...... 65 Chapter 5 References Cited ...... 66 Appendices ...... 69 Appendix A: Maps of Alternative 1 (8 Maps) ...... 69 Appendix B: Travel Regulation Minimization Criteria Addressing Trail Designated for Motorcycle Use ...... 78 China Wall to Robinsons Flat Connector Trail ...... 78

List of Tables Table 1. Updates to the Proposed Action ...... 8 Table 2: Acres of overlap between proposed project activities and suitable CRLF habitat...... 23 Table 3. Motorized recreation opportunities ...... 38 Table 4. Effects on permitted special use event routes ...... 40 Table 5. Acres of California Wildlife Habitat Relationship1 types larger than 4M, 4D, 5M, 5D, and 6 within 0.25-mile of proposed trail actions...... 45 Table 6. Proposed Removal of Seasonal Closures on Trails that Intersect Spotted Owl PACs .... 46 Table 7. Proposed New Trails or Re-Routed Trails that Intersect Spotted Owl PACs ...... 47 Table 8. Proposed Trail Components in Northern Goshawk PACs ...... 48 Table 9. Existing Road and Trail Mileage in the Inventoried Roadless Areas ...... 54 Table 10. North Fork American River IRA and CIRA Mileage ...... 54 Table 11. North Fork of Middle Fork American River IRA and CIRA Mileage ...... 55 Table 12. Duncan Canyon IRA and CIRA Mileage ...... 55 Table 13. Cumulative Watershed Effects within project 7th field watersheds ...... 60

List of Figures Figure 1. Vicinity and overview map ...... 5

iii Big Sugar Project

4 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

Chapter 1 Need for the Proposal Introduction The Forest Service is proposing motorized trails management actions under the Big Sugar Project. These actions would: remove fixed wet weather seasonal closures and replace them with a wet weather operating plan in the lower elevations of the Big Sugar Project area; construct 24 miles of motorized single track trail; reroute 46 miles and decommission 30 miles of unsustainable motorized trail segments; construct 11 short narrow bridges; install gates, barriers and fencing; and allow for motorized mixed use on 0.25 miles of National Forest System (NFS) road 43. The Forest Service prepared this environmental assessment (EA) to determine whether implementation of the Big Sugar Project may significantly affect the quality of the human environment and thereby require the preparation of an environmental impact statement. By preparing this EA, agency policy and direction are being fulfilled to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). For more details of the proposed action, see the Proposed Action and Alternatives section of this document.

Proposed Project Location These actions are proposed to be implemented on NFS lands located north and east of the community of Foresthill within Tahoe National Forest on American River Ranger District. In addition, Tahoe National Forest (TNF) is working with partners to coordinate trail connections across private lands. Elevations within the Project area range from 3,000 feet to 7,000 feet. An overview map of Big Sugar is displayed in Figure 1. Figure 1. Vicinity and overview map

5 Big Sugar Project

Need for the Proposal The purpose of the Big Sugar Project is to reduce impacts to natural resources, reduce trail maintenance needs, and maintain or enhance recreation opportunities on trails in the project area. Actions are needed due to increased demand on trails, erosion, ongoing trail maintenance requirements, poor trail drainage, fragmented trails, and public safety concerns. Action is needed to increase the variety of motorized recreational opportunities. Public demand for motorized trail recreational opportunities on the American River Ranger District (ARRD) has been steadily increasing. Nearly a decade ago, during planning for Tahoe National Forest’s Motorized Travel Management (MTM) Project (USDA FS 2010), the public expressed interest in having more motorized single track trail riding opportunities on TNF (MTM FEIS, Appendix N). Previous trail projects (Little Sugar Decision Memo 2016) and scoping revealed that technical (difficult) motorized trail opportunities for experienced motorcycle riders are still desired and limited in supply. During prime riding times, staging areas are full to capacity and during optimal riding season (spring, early summer and fall), routine off-highway vehicle (OHV) patrols have observed 500 to 600 riders per week using the Foresthill OHV trail system (OHV Staging Area Construction and Expansion Project EA/DN 2013.) The TNF holds annual Green Sticker open house workshops and public meetings to meet with the motorized community and to hear their requests for OHV recreation. TNF trails staff attend local meetings with local riding clubs to hear concerns and garner support about volunteering opportunities. In addition, annual meetings are held in the fall with non-profit non-motorized groups to hear their concerns regarding motorized portions of the Western States Trail (WST) and Tevis Cup Trail (TCT). Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) framework guides land managers to provide a variety of opportunities for public use and enjoyment. Within the motorized spectrum, where feasible, managers strive to provide a range of legitimate OHV riding opportunities that are sustainable and resilient to degradation over time. Protecting resources and providing for public safety, are considered when designing and constructing a motorized trail system accessible to a variety of users. Increasing the variety of motorized trails rated as Beginner to Most Difficult are needed to foster a constantly learning, challenging experience while also fostering opportunities for families to recreate as a group. Action is needed to change from seasonal closures to weather-based closures on the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System. The Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System is one of the most popular NFS road and motorized trail networks on TNF. Native-surfaced roads and motorized trails, such as those within the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System, are subject to seasonal closure to prevent resource damage from motorized vehicle use during wet weather conditions. The fixed wet weather seasonal closure for NFS roads and trails in the Sugar Pine area, under the Tahoe National Forest Motorized Travel Management Project ROD (USDA FS 2010), was based on predicted wet periods. However, local precipitation patterns can be quite variable, with recent winters having had extended dry periods and other years having wet weather earlier in the fall. During the planning process for the TNF Motorized Travel Management Project (2007 to 2010), the OHV community urged TNF to adopt a more flexible, soil-moisture condition-based approach to determine when OHV trails should be opened or closed. However, TNF did not have sufficient research and monitoring information available at the time to implement a condition-based monitoring system to open and close roads or trails. TNF now has the scientific research and the ability to implement soil-condition-based monitoring, utilizing remote sensing technology, to address the need to open and close native surface roads and trails in the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System.

6 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

Action is needed to increase loop riding opportunities and trail connectivity. The Project area has fragments of motorized trails ending on National Forest System roads; these fragmented trail segments do not connect to other motorized trails, thereby limiting loop riding opportunities and trail connectivity. Actions are needed to connect these existing fragmented motorized trails to provide longer, motorized trail rides and to increase motorized loop opportunities. Under existing conditions, OHV enthusiasts, especially those on non-highway-legal vehicles, are required to frequently return to their staging location, load their vehicles, travel to the next staging location, and unload their vehicles again before returning to the trail. Action is needed to reduce erosion, ongoing trail maintenance requirements and poor trail drainage. Trail condition monitoring and field assessments have identified existing poorly aligned segments of motorized trails in the Big Sugar Project area. The Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System includes logging skid trails and log haul routes that were converted to OHV trails in the 1980s during the original construction of the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System. These skid trail and log haul route footprints were used to reduce impacts of initial trail construction. In addition, certain motorized segments of the historically pioneered Western States Trail and Tevis Cup Trail are experiencing erosion. Some trail segments, specifically in the core Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System, have inadequate drainage where large puddles form. Resource damage and hazardous conditions occur when motorized vehicles travel on these segments and are exacerbated when users ride around the puddles or create new trails. Without frequent and aggressive trail maintenance, adverse environmental impacts, such as accelerated soil erosion, sediment in stream channels and damage to vegetation, could occur. Sustainable trail solutions are needed on problematic segments to reduce trail maintenance frequency. Continued heavy maintenance is unsustainable, costly and time consuming. Finally, the increases in OHV/motorcycle engine size, suspension, and radiator cooling systems allow for enhanced versatility and their recreational use in some cases now exceed sustainable trail standards for specifically identified trail segments. In summary, the combination of bike size changes and the older “outdated” motorized trail construction specifications have led to the resource damage and unsustainability present today without frequent aggressive trail dozer maintenance. Proposed Action The Proposed Action, as described in the Scoping Letter, was updated with corrections based on updated data and map information. These corrections and refinements provide additional resource protection and a more accurate and informed proposed action. Table 1 displays and compares the Proposed Action from Scoping with the updates identified for Alternative 1 (Proposed Action) in this EA. Chapter 2 includes a detailed description of the proposal under Alternative 1 (Proposed Action). The proposed actions described in Chapter 2 are consistent with management direction in the Tahoe National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP)(USDA FS 1990) as amended by the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Record of Decision (SNFPA ROD)(USDA FS 2004).

7 Big Sugar Project

Table 1. Updates to the Proposed Action Proposed Action Alternative 1 (Scoping) (Proposed Action)1 Action 1 Seasonal closure mileage changes: 37.5 31.2 miles of roads, 111.6 miles of trails and 7.5 miles of miles of roads, 111.6 miles of trails and 8.5 miles roads not under seasonal closure. of roads not under seasonal closure. Action 3: Reroute 46 miles of trails Reroute 47.7 miles of trails Action 4: Decommission 30 miles of trails Decommission 30.7 miles of trails Action 5: Harden 70 stream crossings Harden 37 stream crossings Action 6: Barrier fencing on 2 miles Barrier fencing on 1.9 miles Action 10: Change the NFTS on approximately 10 Evaluate approximately 0.25 miles of NFS road 43 to miles of existing ML3 NFS roads by changing allow motorized mix use of highway legal vehicles and vehicle class where that use is currently OHVs. Increase road site distance by regrading cut prohibited or by changing maintenance levels to slopes, realigning short segments and removing allow licensed operators of non-highway legal roadside brush. Add the existing 200-foot (0.04 mile) vehicles to operate on NFTS roads. Additional connector road cut alignment between the northern end field work and specific areas on NFS roads 43 of NFS road 43-08 and NFS road 43 to the National and 44 are being considered to allow for loop Forest Transportation System and MVUM as a potential, especially in the Last Chance, Grouse, maintenance level 2 road to complete the OHV route and Peavine area. between Robinson’s Flat to Mosquito Ridge Road and around the Last Chance/Peavine areas 1 Mileages and crossings are approximate Public Involvement and Tribal Consultation Public participation is important at numerous points during the analysis. The Forest Service seeks information, comments and assistance from federal, state and local agencies and individuals or organizations that may be interested in or affected by the proposed action.

Proposal Development Prior to scoping, the Forest Service met with motorized and non-motorized trail groups to identify core concerns and design parameters. The Forest Service first listed the Big Sugar Project in the published quarterly Tahoe National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) in April 2016. The Forest distributes a hardcopy of the quarterly SOPA to about 80 individuals and entities. The quarterly SOPA is available online at www.fs.fed.us/sopa or on the TNF website at http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/tahoe. The Forest Service conducts scoping according to the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR 1501.7). In addition to other public involvement, scoping initiates an early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed in the EA and for identifying the issues related to a proposed action. The 30-day scoping period for the Big Sugar Project, held from June 11, 2018, through July 11, 2018, was initiated when the Forest Service published a legal notice in Grass Valley’s The Union newspaper and distributed a scoping letter and map to more than 250 individuals, groups and Tribes disclosing information and seeking public comment on the Project. As a result of scoping, written timely comments were received from 20 individuals, organizations and Tribes and two commenters submitted comments after the official scoping period. Fifteen of the 22 commenters were supportive of the proposed project. The comment letters were used to consider issues and refine the proposal described in scoping. In response to scoping comments, details on the effects to the citizen inventoried roadless area were added under FONSI element 3; minimization criteria was addressed in Appendix B for the 24-mile trail Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail; and specific resource effects were addressed.

8 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

The Forest Service consulted with the following individuals, federal, State, tribal, and local agencies during the development of this EA: . Consultation with the United Auburn Indian Community of the Auburn Rancheria, comprised of Miwok and Southern Maidu people, took place on May 14, 2018 and has been ongoing through the planning process. . Consultation with members of the Colfax-Todd’s Valley Consolidated Tribe took place on May 14, and July 11, 2018, and is ongoing through the planning process. . Multiple meetings, attended by the Forest Service, Nevada County Woods Riders, Polka Dots Motorcycle Club, United Auburn Indian Community, Western States Endurance Run Foundation, Western States Trail Foundation and many other motorized and non-motorized trail users have taken place before, during and after scoping to discuss potential routes, the proposed action and project design elements. The Forest reviewed the purpose and need, proposed action and scoping comments in order to identify issues to be considered during the analysis. The scoping summary in the project file helped to focus the resource analysis in the EA. The Forest Service did not identify any issues in public comments that would lead to the development of additional alternatives. When there are no unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources, the EA need only analyze the proposed action and proceed without consideration of additional alternatives. (36 CFR 220.7(b)(2)(i)).

Chapter 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives The proposed action and following alternatives were considered: Alternative 1, the proposed action and Alternative 2, no action. Alternative 1 – Proposed Action To respond to the purpose and need described in Chapter 1, the Forest Service proposes to: 1. Remove fixed wet weather seasonal closure dates for public wheeled motor vehicle travel from approximately 31.2 miles of National Forest System (NFS) roads and 111.6 miles of motorized (ATV-width or single-track) NFS trails in the lower elevations of the Big Sugar Project area (Map 3 and Map 8). Open and close these roads and trails to public wheeled motor vehicle travel based on factors established in the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System Wet Weather Operating Plan. This operating plan would be developed and updated to include soil moisture conditions, timing, and forecasted imminent precipitation. Approximately 7.5 miles of roads, not previously under a seasonal closure, are identified for conditional closures based on the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System Wet Weather Operating Plan. Install nine gates to be used in the wet weather management of these affected routes. 2. Construct and add approximately 24 miles of motorized single track trail (open to motorcycles) to the National Forest Transportation System (NFTS) connecting Robinsons Flat to China Wall (Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail) (Map 5). Trail would be added under the existing season of use for the west side of the Forest, with wet weather seasonal closure running from January 1 to March 31 as displayed on future motor vehicle use maps (MVUM). 3. Reroute a total of approximately 47.7 miles of existing unsustainable motorized single track and ATV-width trails. Proposed re-routed trails would be located in the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System (Map 3), Deadwood Ridge area (Map 4), and on motorized segments of the Western States Trail (16E10) and Tevis Cup Trail (16E04) (Map 7). Several proposed short

9 Big Sugar Project

re-routed segments of the Tevis Cup Trail are located on private land owned by the American River Conservancy (ARC). The Forest Service would work with ARC to obtain the easements required for these re-routed trail segments. 4. Decommission a total of approximately 30.7 miles of existing unsustainable motorized trail segments. These decommissioned trail segments would be replaced by the re-routes described in #3 above. Proposed decommissioning is displayed on Map 3 (Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System), Map 4 (Deadwood Ridge area), and Map 7 (French Meadows area). 5. Construct bridges (ranging 3 to 5 feet wide) at approximately 11 stream crossings along motorized trails (Maps 2, 3, 5, and 7). Follow Region 5 BMP 4.7.3 to maintain and reconstruct approximately 37 stream crossings (17 perennial and 20 intermittent) to prevent or minimize the discharge of sediment into water bodies. 6. To restrict unauthorized motorized travel, construct approximately 1.1 miles of barrier fencing in the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System along NFS road 10-6 and install barricades on NFS (ML1) roads 10-6-4 and 10-6-6 and on the temporary road off of NFS road 10-6. Install approximately 0.5 miles of barrier fencing along NFS road 10-12 and 0.3 miles along NFS road 24 (Map 3). 7. Replace gate on NFS road 10-14 (Map 3). Replace existing gate on the western end of NFS road 44-22 with a motorcycle-accessible gate (Map 4). Gate will be closed year round; however, motorcycles and non-motorized passage will be allowed by gate design. 8. Install a gate and boulders and close NFS road 19-08 to public wheeled motorized vehicle use. Keep as maintenance level (ML) 2 (Map 6) and remove from MVUM. 9. Install boulders at 16E04 (Tevis Trail, Map 7) to discourage trail widening of the existing single track trail and to delineate a small parking area. 10. Evaluate approximately 0.25 miles of NFS road 43 to allow motorized mix use of highway legal vehicles and OHVs. Increase road site distance by regrading cut slopes, realigning short segments and removing roadside brush. Add the existing 200-foot (0.04 mile) connector road cut alignment between the northern end of NFS road 43-08 and NFS road 43 to the NFTS and MVUM as a maintenance level 2 road to complete the OHV route between Robinsons Flat to Mosquito Ridge Road and around the Last Chance/Peavine areas.

Implementation Strategy The proposal includes realigning existing trail segments to provide for a sustainable trail system, addressing erosion concerns, and improving trail user experience and safety. These proposals involve two steps: (1) constructing the new trail alignment and (2) diverting riders to the newly aligned trail segments and discouraging use of the replaced segments by de-compacting soil, installing drainage features, and placing native material on the old segments. Constructing trails involves cutting vegetation and using barriers and signing to encourage use of the re-routed segments and discourage use of the old, unsustainable trail segments. A small trail dozer or mini- excavator would be used to conduct the trail work described here. In addition, Forest Service trail staff and volunteer hand crews would assist with the trail construction work. In less accessible areas, supplies could be brought in with pack animals or helicopter. The specific trail locations would be refined with ground verification of existing conditions. Project implementation would begin in the fall of 2019. The specific trail locations would be refined with ground verification of existing conditions. Additions and changes to motorized trails and roads would be displayed on the Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM), the legal document displaying designated motorized trails and roads. Project implementation could begin after the decision using a combination of the Forest Service trails

10 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

crew, contractors and volunteers. Implementation of the project includes the following Trail Construction Standards and Management Requirements.

Trail Construction Standards General Standards Trail work will occur through the use of hand work or by qualified machine operators approved by USFS. Any trail work other than standard maintenance will be approved by the ARRD Trails Officer prior to commencement. As much as possible, mechanized trail equipment is planned (a small trail dozer/mini-excavator with a 4-foot disturbance for ATV designated trails and a trail dozer/micro excavator with a 2-foot disturbance for motorcycle designated trails, trees would be avoided where possible and cutting would be kept to a minimum.) On routes not used for events, the trails would be given time to settle during the winter season prior to being used. On event routes, reroutes would be constructed over a period of years and then, after construction is completed, the reroutes would be opened and the unsustainable alignments would be closed concurrently. . Average Grade Pitch: 5 percent (within approximately 100 feet or overall segment) grade reversal every 100 to 200 feet . Moderate duration pitches (50 feet): 15 percent max, include grade reversal or out-slope feature . The intent on pitch limiters is to create sustainable trail, volume of usage, soil or surface type; hydrology and user types may affect design standards. Steeper segments may be approved with hardened bench elements. . Bench Width: 24 to 36 inches . Clearance from trail center: 30 inches for general obstructions . Brush removal from trail center: 5 feet . Height clearance: 7 feet Guidelines for preventing Resource Damage . Build on side slopes . Avoid ridge-top or fall line alignments . Stay out of meadows or flatlands where drainage is poor . Favor the upslope of trees to prevent root damage . Build mild, undulating trail alignment that utilizes frequent grade reversals . Out-slope bench when possible . Camber outside of turns to minimize lateral wear . Avoid over-pitch alignments . Create good sight lines . Design intuitive trail alignments Creek or ephemeral drainage crossings . Locate crossings at stable locations . Trail at crossing should always be at least 12 or more inches lower than approach from either side . Harden active crossings with cobbled rock to minimize creek disturbance . If a bridge is used, construct so freeboard is above 100 year mark . If bridge footings are within 100 year mark, embed into embankment 2 feet or more to avoid high water scouring

11 Big Sugar Project

Switchbacks and Rolling Turns . Provide grade reversals within 50 feet of both sides of turn and stage so that lower grade reversals catch upper drainage runoff . Rolling turns have radiuses in excess of 4 feet trail center and occur on slopes which are less than 30 percent . Switchbacks have radiuses of less than 4 feet trail center and occur on slopes greater than 30 percent . Anticipate approaches to turns and design speed reduction to eliminate skid bumps . Keep overall switchback radius bench at 5 to 10 percent max to minimize wear . If cambering turn, leave flat climbing radius towards center . Locate turn in spot that limits short cutting . Separate trails from each other as early as possible Rolling dips, Grade Reversals or Drain Dips . Downhill rise should be 6 to 12 inches above low point . Features should be 10 to 20 feet in length for smooth transitions . Place at all ephemeral (rarely active) or seasonal drainages Bermed Turns . Confirm all turns drain by splitting or tilting the turn on the slope . Leave un-cambered inside space for hiking or uphill riding . Evaluate safety and confirm berm is free of encroaching hazards like trees or rocks

Management Requirements Aquatic Wildlife AW1: Barriers. Ensure that materials used at stream crossings do not create barriers to upstream or downstream passage for aquatic-dependent species. AW2: Riparian. Where possible retain as much riparian vegetation canopy so that activities will not adversely affect water temperatures required for local species. AW3: Hazardous spills. Any hazardous spill event into the water shall be immediately contained and reported to the Forest Service dispatch. AW4: Survey . Survey all proposed water drafting locations for sensitive and listed amphibians and receive approval from a biologist prior to use. Use drafting devices with 2-mm or less screening and place hose intake into bucket in the deepest part of the pool. Use a low velocity water pump and do not pump ponds to low levels beyond which they cannot recover quickly (approximately one hour). . Survey where equipment travels through stream habitat for OHV trail work (such as the trail re-route and bridge construction) these areas shall be surveyed for Western pond turtle (WPT) and Foothill yellow-legged frog (FYLF) by qualified FS personnel just prior to starting work to avoid crushing. AW5: Sightings. If a sensitive or listed amphibian or reptile is sighted within the project area, inform a Forest Service aquatic biologist of the sighting immediately. AW6: Tightly woven fiber netting or similar material shall not be used for erosion control or other purposes within suitable habitat (82-foot buffer) to ensure Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frogs (greater than 4,500 feet in elevation), do not get trapped, injured or killed. Plastic mono-

12 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

filament netting or similar material shall not be used at any of these projects because individuals may become entangled or trapped in it. AW7: Drafting in fish-bearing streams. The water drafting rate should not exceed 350 gallons per minute (gpm) for streamflow greater than or equal to 4 cubic feet per second (cfs) nor exceed 20 percent of surface flows for streamflow less than 4 cfs. For non-fish-bearing streams, the drafting rate should not exceed 350 gpm for streamflow greater than or equal to 2 cfs, nor exceed 50 percent of surface flows. Water drafting should cease when bypass surface flows drop below 1.5 cfs on fish-bearing streams and 10 gpm on non-fish-bearing streams (USFS Region Five BMP 2.5). AW8: California red-legged frog habitat below 4,000 feet . Minimize the risk of activity-related sediment entering aquatic systems and minimize impacts to habitat for aquatic- or riparian-dependent plant and animal species. . In suitable California red-legged frog habitat, routes avoid Riparian Conservation Areas except where necessary to cross streams. Crossing approaches get the riders in and out of the stream channel and riparian area in the shortest distance possible while meeting the gradient and approach length standards. . Routes or areas do not cross any stream or waterbody within 500 feet of known occupied sites of California red-legged frog; and route or area is not within a distance of 500 feet from wetlands (i.e., springs, wet meadows, ponds, marshes). . In habitat occupied by California red-legged frog, routes or areas do not have the potential to capture or divert stream flow. The approaches to stream crossings are down-sloped toward the stream on both sides. . No routes are within Critical Aquatic Refuges for California red-legged frog. . Mechanical work will not occur within 300 feet of suitable habitat for California red-legged frog (e.g., intermittent or perennial streams, ponds, springs, and seeps) during the wet season (defined as starting with the first frontal rain system that deposits a minimum of 0.25 inches of rain after October 15 and ending April 15). Botanical Resources BR1: Hutchinson’s lewisia (Lewisia kelloggii ssp. hutchisonii). Occurrences are known along the Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail and Tevis Cup reroute and decommission. In occurrences plus 30-foot buffer: . Flag these areas in the field and identify on project maps. . Exclude all project activities including trail construction and equipment staging. . Do not clear shrubs within 30 feet of occurrence. . Do not lop and scatter plant material. . Do not regrade or cause other ground disturbance. BR2: Starved daisy (Erigeron miser). Occurrences of starved daisy are known along the Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail. . Flag these areas in the field and identify on project maps. . Botanist must be onsite during ground disturbing activities to assist with trail alignment through occurrences to minimize damage to plants. . No blasting, where feasible, within 30 feet of plants. BR3: Sierra bluegrass (Poa sierrae). Occurrences of Sierra bluegrass are known along the Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail, Tevis Cup Reroute, Dusty Ridge (Loop 7), and Humbug (Loop 5) reroute and decommission. . Flag these areas in the field and identify on project maps.

13 Big Sugar Project

. Botanist must be onsite during ground disturbing activities to assist with trail alignment to minimize damage to plants. . Do not regrade or cause other ground disturbance during decommission of roads and trails. BR4: Serpentine Watchlist Species. VanZuuk’s morning glory (Calystegia vanzuukiae) and Sanborn’s onion (Allium sanbornii var. sanbornii). Occurrences are known along the Serpentine (Loop 4), Tie 3-4, Tie 3-1, Parker Flat (Loop 1), Parker ATV Tie, and Gate 10-14. . Identify these areas on project maps. Due to the large area and extent, these occurrences will not be flagged in the field. See attached map for locations. . Limit ground disturbance to trail prism of 10 feet. . Do not locate staging areas in known occurrences. BR5: Layne’s butterweed (Packera layneae): One occurrence of Layne’s butterweed is known along the Western States Trail near Sage Hill. The existing barriers must be maintained to ensure the protection of Layne’s butterweed. BR6: Survey. Additional surveys are needed if trail adjustments are outside of a 50-foot buffer from the originally proposed route. Cultural Resources CR1: Management of Sites. Protect cultural resource sites designated on the ground with flagging and identified on maps provided by the cultural resource specialist. If any new cultural resources are discovered during project implementation, cease operations in the area of new discovery until adequate protection measures are agreed upon. No tracked equipment shall be operated off of existing Forest System Routes within cultural resource site boundaries. Rubber tired equipment may be allowed within specific areas of sites, only with written approval of the Heritage Program Manager. Cultural resource sites shall not be used for work camps, staging areas or for parking vehicles and equipment. Proposed work camps, staging areas, and off road access routes need to be cleared by the District Archaeologist prior to use. CR2: Management of Linear Features. Designated breaches may be used to cross linear features. New breaches may be designated by the District Archaeologist in accordance with Regional Programmatic Agreement Regarding Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Regional PA 2018). Trees should be directionally felled parallel to or away from linear features. Isolated trees inside of linear features may be felled on a case-by-case basis and with on-the-ground approval of the District Archaeologist, only if removal benefits the feature. CR3: Additional Survey. Prior to implementation, additional surveys for cultural resources may be required for areas of proposed ground disturbance outside of the current area of potential effect (such as landings, staging areas, or trail route adjustments). CR4: System Trail Work within Sites. Routine maintenance and repairs of Forest System Trails may be conducted within cultural resource site boundaries within the existing trail prism. Adjacent or surrounding cultural resource site areas will be flagged for avoidance during trail work implementation. Installation of trail closures, trail obliteration or trail construction outside the existing trail prism may be conducted within cultural resource site boundaries only upon written approval of the District Archaeologist, and only when the proposed work benefits the site. CR5: Non-System Trail Work within Sites. It is preferred that non-system trail work avoids cultural resource sites. Reconstruction or obliteration of non-system trails within cultural resource sites may be conducted only with written approval of the District Archeologist, and only when the proposed work benefits the site. Adjacent cultural resource sites will be flagged for avoidance during non-system trail work implementation.

14 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

Fire and Fuels FF1: Leave access for fire suppression resources along roads and trails. FF2: Excess cut woody material: scatter, chip, remove or pile. FF3: Build piles no larger than 10 feet high by 10 feet wide. Cover at least one 16 square foot segment of each pile with weatherproof sheeting to facilitate ignition during all seasons. Cover must be well secured and accessible. Construct appropriate control line around pile areas to be burned. Invasive Plants IP1: Flag and avoid known invasive plant infestations in the project area. Avoid ground disturbance (including decommissioning), staging, and machinery access. Currently known infestations include: 051754CESTM00003 and 051754CESO300007 on the restoration fencing near Road 10-6; 051754CESTM00017, 051754CHJU000005, 051754CHJU000006 on Codfish (Loop 6) trail; 051754AETR000014, 051754ELCA130015 at the Sugar Pine OHV staging area; and 051754ELCA130011, 051754CHJU000040 on Foresthill Divide Road and Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail. New infestations may be discovered in the project area prior to implementation, check with the botanist prior to implementation for current avoidance areas. IP2: Equipment Cleaning. All equipment and vehicles (Forest Service and contracted) operating off-road must be free of invasive plant material before moving into the project area. Equipment will be considered clean when visual inspection does not reveal soil, seeds, plant material or other such debris. Cleaning shall occur at a vehicle washing station or steam-cleaning facility before the equipment and vehicles enter the project area. IP3: Pre-implementation treatment. Treat all infestations that intersect ground-disturbing activities, at least 30 days prior to implementation, project leader will coordinate invasive plant treatment with the District Botanist or their designated appointee. Currently known infestations with implementation disturbance include: 051754CESTM00003 and 051754CESO300007 on the restoration fencing near Road 10-6; and 051754ELCA130011, 051754CHJU000040 on Foresthill Divide Road and Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail. See TNF Preferred treatment options. IP4: Project-related disturbance. Minimize the amount of ground and vegetation disturbance. As necessary, reestablish vegetation on disturbed bare ground to reduce invasive species establishment; revegetation is especially important in staging areas. IP5: Weed-free construction materials. All gravel, aggregate, fill, mulch, topsoil, erosion control materials and other construction materials are required to be weed-free. When possible, use onsite materials, unless contaminated with invasive species. Otherwise, obtain weed-free materials from sources that have been certified as weed-free. IP6: Early Detection. Any infestations discovered prior to or during project implementation should be flagged and avoided. Report new infestations to District Botanist. IP7: Post Project Monitoring. For projects involving ground disturbance or use of imported materials, notify the District Botanist after the project is completed, so that the project area can be monitored for invasive plants subsequent to project implementation (as funding allows). IP8: Survey. Additional surveys for invasive plants are needed if trail adjustments are outside of a 50-foot buffer from the originally proposed route.

15 Big Sugar Project

Recreation and Visual Resources R1: Construct trail tread by hand, or with small mechanized trail equipment, or a combination of the two. Construct trail tread at a width no greater than 36 inches, most commonly ranging from 18 to 24 inches. R2: Incorporate rolling dips and/or reverse grades into the construction of the trail segments averaging around 100-foot spacing to ensure long-term drainage control. R3: At drainage crossings, move the spoils from trail construction away from the drainage to prevent entry into the waterway. R4: Minimize cut and fill slopes and cover with slash and forest duff to hide contrast of exposed soil. R5: At trailheads and near narrow precipitous segments, increase monitoring of use and install safety signage to educate and inform users. Along the existing motorized WST and TCT install signs to warn wheeled traffic of equestrian use. R6: Utilize native timber and rock materials when additional trail building materials are needed or use materials that match the color and texture of native materials. Terrestrial Wildlife TW1: Northern goshawk and California spotted owl. To protect nesting northern goshawk and California spotted owl, no mechanized trail construction or chainsaw use will occur between February 15 and September 15 in the following general areas containing Protected Activity Centers (PACs): Mitchell Mine, Mumford Bar, Shirttail Creek, and Robinsons Flat, unless surveys determine they are not nesting. TW2: Bats. Report any mine openings identified during project layout or trail construction to a wildlife biologist. Limit trail construction within 500 feet of mine openings whenever possible. TW3: Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive species. Immediately report any detections of threatened, endangered, or sensitive (TES) species during project implementation to the District Wildlife Biologist. Any new detections would be reviewed and considered for additional protective measures. TW4: Large trees and logs. Locate trails to avoid cutting large trees, trees with evidence of wildlife use (e.g., cavities, nests, etc.), large snags, and large downed logs. Watershed, Soils and Aquatic Resources WSA1: Shallow stream fords. When constructing shallow stream fords, locate in shallower portions of the stream. The approaches should climb a short distance above the typical high water line so water is not channeled down the tread. Avoid locations where the stream turns, because the water will undercut approaches on the outside of a turn. The tread in the ford should be level, ideally made of rock or medium sized gravel that provides solid footing. The objective is to even out the waterflow through the ford so the gravel-sized material is not washed away, leaving only cobble or boulders. WSA2: Trail approaches to watercourse crossings. Design watercourse crossings to avoid diversion of flow down the trail should the crossing fail. . Where possible, make crossing approaches short and level, or reverse the grade if possible. . Install cross drainage (cut-off waterbreaks) at crossings to prevent water and sediment from being channeled directly into watercourses. . Locate cut-off waterbreaks as close to the crossing as possible without being hydrologically connected to the watercourse.

16 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

. Armor steep crossing approaches with stable aggregate or trail-hardening materials. . Where possible (for example, at bridges or arch culverts), reverse the grade of the crossing approaches so runoff drains away from the watercourse. WSA3: Trail decommissioning. Administratively close decommissioned trail sections to continued use. . Block access to and obscure the first 100 to 300 feet of the old trail at intersections with the new reroutes and place woody debris (no greater than 12 inches in height) on them to discourage any further use. Utilize regrading, bouldering, and covering regraded area with slash and forest duff as necessary. . Scarify top 2 to 4 inches of soil to promote water infiltration and return of vegetation. Maintain at least 70 percent effective soil cover prior to winter precipitation. If soil cover cannot be recruited on site, use biodegradable geotextile netting or a thick cover of weed free straw. WSA4: Trail drainage. Look for small draws to locate grade reversals. The trail should climb gently for a few feet on each side of the draw. Construct a trail grade that is less than half of the sideslope grade. For example, on a hill with 6-percent sideslope, trail grade should be no more than 3 percent. WSA5: Region 5 Best Management Practices and Trail Construction, Reconstruction and Maintenance standards. Follow the Trail Construction Standards described in the Tahoe NF Trail Design Standards document and BMPs listed in the Region 5 Soil and Water Conservation Handbook, chapter 10, sections 4.7.1 to 4.7.8. Follow BMP 2.13 to effectively limit and mitigate erosion and sedimentation from any ground-disturbing activities. Develop an erosion control plan to include mitigation measures, requirements to meet BMPs, specifications and permits. Alternative 2 – No Action Maintenance would occur on existing trails. Wet weather seasonal closure dates would remain for public wheeled motor vehicle travel on NFS roads and trails in the lower elevations of American River Ranger District. The following activities would not occur as proposed in Alternative 1: wet weather closures, new trail construction, trail reroutes, decommissioning, bridge construction, barrier fencing, gate and boulder placement, road closure, and no motorized mixed use on 0.25 miles of NFS road 43. The effects of taking no action would continue.

Alternatives considered, but not fully developed An alternative was considered, but not fully developed, in response to a public comment that the proposed trail reroutes and the Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail may affect the inventoried roadless area characteristics and the likelihood of these areas be eligible for management as wilderness. A GIS analysis was done to understand the effects of the proposed action along with the proposed citizen inventoried roadless area and to identify mileages. This analysis is documented in Chapter 3, but was not used to develop an additional alternative. Effects of the project in the citizen inventoried roadless area (CIRA) were analyzed in the preliminary EA. Two criteria, used for evaluation of wilderness characteristics, were also considered for the proposed action in the Final EA. A proposed alternative route for the Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail, suggested by the commenter, was considered to avoid the interior of North Fork of the American River CIRA. If implemented, the commenter’s proposed route would not enter the CIRA when compared with 2.23 miles of motorized trail in the CIRA proposed in the Big Sugar Project.

17 Big Sugar Project

The California Vehicle Code (CVC) regulates the use of motor vehicles in California, including motor vehicles used on the national forests. The CVC requires motor vehicles operated on highways be highway-legal and be operated by licensed drivers. The CVC allows the operation of non-highway-legal vehicles operated by unlicensed drivers on roughly graded roads. The Forest Service considers roads maintained for high clearance vehicles (maintenance level 2) as roughly graded and considers operation of OHVs on these roads as consistent with state law. If the commenter's proposed route were to go forward, motorized mixed use would need to be allowed on the Foresthill Divide Road (88 Road) to allow non-highway-legal vehicle operation; however, the Forest Service has no jurisdiction to allow motorized mixed-use on this county road. This section of road is narrow with fast-moving vehicles that would create a public safety issue. The commenter’s proposed route would not provide recreational opportunities to as many people because few off-road bikes are licensed. For the licensed motorcyclists, the challenge, solitude and the narrow, rough and technical nature of this 2.45-mile motorized trail segment would not be available and would be replaced by 2.6 miles of paved county road and 0.45 miles of maintenance level 2 road, reducing the opportunities for extreme difficulty motorcycle riding. Trail opportunities would also be lost for non-motorized users and unlicensed motorcyclists, who would have to re-load and off-load their motorcycle.

18 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

Chapter 3 Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives Introduction This section summarizes the physical, biological, social and economic environments of the affected project area and the potential changes to those environments due to implementation of the alternatives. It presents the scientific and analytical basis for comparison of alternatives presented in Chapter 2. It also describes the factors of significance as described in Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508, section 1508.27, July 1, 1986). The TNF’s Proposed Action would change decisions on roads to meet the intent of what was analyzed in the MTM FEIS and decided upon in the MTM ROD (USDA FS 2010). The Forest considered the criteria listed below in the original analysis. Seasons of use, established to protect Forest resources, remain unchanged. As noted in Chapter 1.05, Title 36 CFR 212.55 of the Travel Management Rule requires that designation (in this case redesignating seasonal closures and redesignating road segments by closing them to public wheeled motor vehicle travel) to NFTS roads and trails consider the following: . natural and cultural resources . public safety . provision of recreational opportunities . access needs . the need for maintenance and administration of roads and trails that would arise if the uses under consideration are designated . the availability of resources for that maintenance and administration When designating trails also include: . minimizing damage to soil, watershed, vegetation and other forest resources . minimizing harassment of wildlife and significant disruption of wildlife habitats The following criteria were considered in the determination to include the road, trail or area into the NFTS and are not affected by the proposed removal of fixed season closures and closure of road segments to public wheeled motor vehicle travel as there will be no change in vehicle class allowable on a road, trail or area (minimization criteria is in Appendix B): . conflicts among uses of NFS lands . minimizing conflicts between motor vehicle use and existing or proposed recreational uses of NFS lands or neighboring federal lands . minimizing conflicts among different classes of motor vehicle uses of NFS lands or neighboring federal lands . compatibility of motor vehicle use with existing conditions in populated areas, taking into account sound, emissions and other factors . speed, volume, composition and distribution of traffic on roads . compatibility of vehicle class with road geometry and road surfacing

19 Big Sugar Project

Effects Relative to the Finding of No Significance (FONSI) Elements This section summarizes the potential impacts of the proposed action and alternatives for each impacted resource. Resources that were not impacted and therefore not further analyzed include: air quality, fire and fuels, range and vegetation. In 1978, the Council on Environmental Quality published regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). These regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508) include a definition of “significant” as used in NEPA. The ten elements of this definition are critical to reducing paperwork through use of a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) when an action would not have a significant effect on the human environment, and is therefore exempt from requirements to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS). Significance as used in NEPA requires consideration of the following ten intensity factors in the appropriate context (or reference area) for that factor. Management requirements designed to reduce the potential for adverse impacts were incorporated into the proposed action and alternatives, including standards and guidelines outlined in the Tahoe Land and Resources Management Plan (USDA FS 1990), as amended by the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (USDA FS 2004), Best Management Practices, and project specific design criteria based on resource specialist knowledge and experience. The management requirements would minimize or eliminate the potential for adverse impacts caused by the proposed project. A discussion of potential effects is summarized below from specialist reports prepared for this project and incorporated by reference. These reports are listed below.

Incorporation by Reference Bridgman, Roy and Dan Teater. 2019. Biological Evaluation for Terrestrial and Aquatic Wildlife, Big Sugar Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. March 2019. Bridgman, Roy and Dan Teater. 2019. Project Management Indicator Species Report, Big Sugar OHV Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. March 2019. Bridgman, Roy. 2018. Migratory Landbird Conservation Report, Big Sugar OHV Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. January 2019. Krautkramer, Jesse. 2018. Cultural Resources Report, Big Sugar Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. December 2018. Rowe, Courtney. 2018a. Biological Assessment and Biological Evaluation of Botanical Species, Big Sugar Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. December 2018. Rowe, Courtney. 2018b. Invasive Plant Risk Assessment, Big Sugar Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. December 2018. Rowe, Courtney. 2018c. Other Botanical Resources Assessment, Big Sugar OHV Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. December 2018. Teater, Dan. 2019. Biological Assessment of Aquatic Species for the Big Sugar Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. January 2019.

20 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

Context For the proposed action and alternatives the context of the environmental effects is based on the environmental analysis in this EA.

Intensity Intensity is a measure of the severity, extent, or quantity of effects, and is based on information from the effects analysis of this EA and the references in the project record. The effects of this project have been appropriately and thoroughly considered with an analysis that is responsive to concerns and issues raised by the public. The agency has taken a hard look at the environmental effects using relevant scientific information and knowledge of site-specific conditions gained from field visits. Finding of no significant impact is based on the context of the project and intensity of effects using the ten factors identified in 40 CFR 1508.27(b). 1) Impacts that may be both beneficial and adverse. A significant effect may exist even if the Federal agency believes that on balance the effect will be beneficial. All analyses prepared in support of this document considered both beneficial and adverse effects, but all effects determinations were made on the basis of only adverse effects. None of the potential adverse effects of the proposed action or alternatives would be significant, even when considered separately from the beneficial effects that occur in conjunction with those adverse effects. Aquatic Wildlife Effects to aquatic wildlife are summarized below and addressed in detail in the Biological Evaluation for Terrestrial and Aquatic Wildlife (Bridgman and Teater 2019), the Project Management Indicator Species Report (Bridgman and Teater 2019), and the Biological Assessment of Aquatic Species for the Big Sugar Project (Teater 2019). The Big Sugar Project would not affect United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) listed threatened or endangered species that do not occur or have no suitable habitat within the analysis area. This includes: Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog, Yosemite toad, Lahontan cutthroat trout, winter run chinook, Sacramento River, Central Valley spring-run chinook, Central Valley steelhead, and Delta smelt. The California red-legged frog is a listed threatened species and effects to this species are summarized below. Species addressed below that are on the USFS R5 Sensitive Species List for TNF and have suitable habitat within the analysis area are foothill yellow-legged frog, western pond turtle and black juga. California red-legged frog In order to determine a relative measure of the direct and indirect effects to California red-legged frog (CRLF) and their habitats, the amount of suitable habitat potentially affected by project activities was quantified. The risk of direct and indirect impacts to individuals and their habitats are greatest when operations occur in close proximity to occupied or suitable habitat. For this reason, the amount and type of actions proposed within suitable habitat, the habitat type affected, and whether or not occupancy has been detected, were used as indicators of risk and in formulating the effects determinations for CRLF. Potential impacts to the streams, including sedimentation, would be short-term and negligible due to application of standards and guidelines, management requirements and BMPs. Lakes or ponds would not be impacted by proposed activities. The scope and magnitude of effects to aquatic habitat from proposed activities are low. Implementation of this project is expected to improve hydrologic function and trail sustainability as new trail construction and trail re-route restoration would facilitate improved water drainage and reduce potential for future erosion.

21 Big Sugar Project

In general, the risks to CRLF increase as the amount of activity within suitable habitat increases. Similarly, where no project activities are proposed to occur within CRLF suitable habitat, there is little to no risk that project activities would result in any direct or indirect effects. The amount of CRLF suitable habitat that may be impacted by the proposed project activities are summarized in Table 2 below. These acreages of suitable CRLF habitat that may be affected were calculated through a GIS analysis by: 1. buffering 25 feet on both sides of the proposed sections of OHV routes 2. overlaying the suitable CRLF habitat occurring within 300 feet of perennial and intermittent stream channels and 3. calculating where 1 and 2 overlap The potential effects the proposed project activities may cause to CRLF and their habitat are described below. Proposed decommission and reroute of trails, and new trail construction The majority (92%) of trail decommissioning work occurs in the Upper Shirttail Canyon Subwatershed (Table 2 below). Trail decommissioning is proposed on 30.7 miles inside the project area. However the majority of decommissioning work will be completed by obliterating the first 100 feet of the old trail at intersections with the new reroutes and place large amounts of woody debris on them to discourage any further use. Under existing conditions there are high rates of tread wear (e.g., trail rutting and puddling of water) and accelerated erosion is occurring on approximately 9.6 miles of these trails because trail gradients are steep and in alignment with the natural flow of runoff. There would be an overall benefit to soil and aquatic habitat by replacing the existing trails with a more sustainable trail system. Following management requirements and BMP 4.7.8 would benefit the soil and water resources by covering bare soil on decommissioned routes to decrease storm water runoff and reducing the potential for erosion and sediment. Proposed decommissioning would promote favorable conditions for the return of vegetation and soil compaction would be expected to decrease over the long term as roots of new vegetation loosen the soil. Of the 4,297 acres of suitable CRLF habitat in the project area, trail decommissioning directly overlaps with 21.7 acres of suitable CRLF upland habitat. This equates to less than 1 percent (0.50%) of the total suitable CRLF habitat within the project footprint. Nonetheless, if CRLF are present along the banks at the stream habitat during implementation they could potentially be disturbed, injured, or killed. Disturbance of CRLF could potentially exhibit an escape/retreat behavior. As crews enter the area, it is expected CRLF would retreat into the nearest aquatic habitat and seek refuge. Implementation of the trail decommissioning work within suitable CRLF habitat would allow for natural recovery and would not likely cause any injury or mortality of individual CRLF. Frogs utilizing the 21.7 acres of upland habitat could be vulnerable to crushing if trail building equipment hits or runs over a habitat being used by the frog. However the pace and speed of mini trail dozers (e.g., Sutter 300 and the Sweco) is very slow and it is expected that individual CRLF could avoid equipment and direct impacts are unlikely to occur. Management requirements would mitigate the risk of disturbing or crushing any CRLF during the trail decommissioning construction. In addition to the risk of direct disturbance, injury, or mortality the action of the decommissioning work may cause a temporary increase in sedimentation to suitable aquatic habitat as a result of ground disturbing activities. The proposed work to decommission existing trail surface will loosen compaction and make more fine sediment available for erosion via dust and rain runoff (Coe 2006) during and immediately after implementation downstream in suitable habitat.

22 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

However, re-grading and adding 70 percent effective soil cover prior to winter precipitation along the route can have long term beneficial effects by reducing the amount of sediment delivered from the route into the nearby suitable CRLF habitat. These indirect risks, however, would not only be short-term, occurring only during the actual implementation period, they would also be highly localized because the overlap between the actions associated with the re-routing of the trail and suitable habitat is exceptionally low (Table 2). Furthermore, once completed, the trail decommissioning is expected to reduce future sediment delivery and improve the stream water quality of potentially suitable habitat thereby indirectly benefitting CRLF and its habitat. A measurable improvement in stream water quality would be expected within one year (season) post-implementation. Trail reroute and new trail construction is proposed on 71.7 miles, however since new trail construction is outside suitable CRLF habitat, only the 47.70 miles of trail reroute are further analyzed. New trail construction does not occur in suitable CRLF habitat, therefore no direct effects to CRLF or indirect effects to their habitat would occur. The majority of trail reroute would occur outside of suitable CRLF habitat. Of the 4,297 acres of suitable CRLF habitat in the project area only 30 acres directly overlaps with the proposed trail reroute. This equates to approximately 0.69% of the impacted suitable CRLF habitat. The 47.7 miles of trail reroute construction will cross 17 intermittent stream channels and 15 perennial stream channels. Approximately 5 bridges will be constructed along the trail reroute, which would reduce the risk of direct impacts to individual CRLFs. Similar to trail decommissioning, if CRLF are present along the banks at the stream habitat during implementation they could be disturbed, injured, or killed. Disturbance of CRLF could also reveal an escape/retreat behavior. As crews enter the area, it is expected CRLF would retreat into the nearest aquatic habitat and seek refuge. Frogs utilizing the 30 acres of upland habitat, could be vulnerable to crushing if trail building equipment hits or runs over habitat being used by the frog. However, the speed of mini trail dozers is very slow and it is expected that individual CRLF could avoid equipment and direct impacts are unlikely to occur. Therefore, the proposed reroutes are expected to have a minimal impact to individual CRLFs. Similar to trail decommissioning work, the risk of disturbance, injury, or mortality the action of the trail reroute work may cause a temporary increase in sedimentation to suitable aquatic habitat as a result of ground disturbing activities. However, reroute trails would be designed to limit steep slopes and provide for natural drainage. Therefore, accelerated erosion is expected to be minimal. Furthermore, once completed, the trail reroute work is expected to reduce future sediment delivery and improve the stream water quality of potentially suitable habitat thereby indirectly benefitting CRLF. A measurable improvement in stream water quality would be expected within one year (season) post-implementation, especially with the construction of new bridges. Table 2: Acres of overlap between proposed project activities and suitable CRLF habitat. Potentially Suitable CRLF Habitat (Acres) By Decommission New Trail Reroute Grand Treatment Type and Watershed (acres) (acres) (acres) Total Eldorado Creek 1.6 0.0 4.3 5.9 North Fork Middle Fork American River 1.6 0.0 4.3 5.9 Humbug Creek-North Fork American River 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.5 Upper North Fork American River 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.5 Lower North Fork American River 20.0 0.0 25.3 45.3 Total 21.7 0.0 30.0 51.7 Proposed trail construction and future trail erosion could result in minor amounts of sediment entering Brimstone Creek, Forbes Creek and Pagge Creek. Following BMPs would limit the slopes and lengths of the stream crossing approaches to decrease the potential for accelerated erosion and sediment entering the channel. Trail construction is likely to result in minor or insignificant impacts to riparian areas and since CRLF have not been documented at this location,

23 Big Sugar Project

direct effects to CRLF from construction activities related to the re-route are not expected to occur. In summary, trail decommissioning and trail reroute activities are not expected to significantly affect CRLF by increasing risk of injury, harassment, and mortality; and decreasing the quality of suitable habitat in the area. There is potential to directly affect CRLF from the proposed actions, but because the nearest detections are over 2.6 miles away from the project area, that potential is low. However, suitable habitat in the area would be directly and indirectly affected by any increase in sedimentation that would occur as a result of newly rerouted trail use. Barrier construction and boulder placement The barrier fencing and boulder placement would be constructed outside suitable CRLF habitat so there would be no direct effects to the stream courses, CRLF, or their suitable habitat. However, the installation proposed would greatly improve or remediate the existing off trail travel and road runoff issues by decreasing sedimentation into hydrologically connected stream channels. Therefore, installation of these features would indirectly improve CRLF habitat through sediment reduction and improved water quality. If no action were taken, the sedimentation into suitable CRLF habitat would continue to occur and could increase over time if the routes continued to degrade. The proposed action to construct barrier fencing in the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System would benefit aquatic species, soil and hydrology resources by decreasing off-trail travel and indirect impacts. Currently, there is a high amount of off-trail travel adjacent to the 24 Road where low productive serpentine soils and rock outcrops have less vegetation to discourage unauthorized traffic. Installing 0.3 miles of barrier fencing along the 24 Road would decrease the amount of off-trail travel and resulting illegal route creation. Likewise, construction of barricades and barrier fencing along NFS roads 10-6, 10-6-4, 10-6-6, and 10-12 would limit illegal OHV traffic in these areas. Bridge construction, maintenance and reconstruction of stream crossings A total of 36 stream crossing improvements are proposed as part of the Big Sugar Project. Proposed bridge construction will take place at approximately 10 stream crossings inside the Big Sugar Project area. However, potentially suitable habitat for the CRLF includes 32 stream crossings and 5 proposed bridge installations. The 5 proposed bridge installations inside CRLF suitable habitat occur along Pagge Creek and Forbes Creek. The work will be done in combination by hand crews, helicopter, trail dozer and a mini excavator. Hand crews and helicopters use will result in a much smaller risk to individuals than use of heavy equipment. Individual CRLF potentially present along the stream banks or near the crossing could be disturbed during implementation. If CRLF are present in the wet crossings, they would likely attempt to avoid stress, injury, or mortality by retreating into aquatic habitat. Often this behavior is successful in preventing an injury or death, but may still have some direct impacts. Additionally, individuals may retreat and seek refuge under cover located directly in the path of the motorized vehicles wet crossing, making it vulnerable to crushing from OHV use. The behavior involved in the escape/retreat response, despite the ultimate outcome, would constitute a disturbance to the frog. Such behaviors could be altered in ways that decrease survival by interfering with foraging or predator avoidance, and by adding stress if individuals are unable find appropriate micro-habitat needed for sustaining overall health (for example, appropriate temperature, dissolved oxygen, and flow). However, in the long term, bank stabilization should result in subsequently less sedimentation and prevent future erosion into the stream directly improving water quality and watershed condition inside the project area.

24 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

The stream crossing is the most critical location for sedimentation. Sediment produced at these sites originates from two primary sources: the stream-crossing structure (bridge or low-water), and the road/trail approaches to the crossing. Proposed bridge construction and channel armoring will reduce sedimentation downstream at existing low water crossings with steep inner gorges because bridges would decrease the length of the approach. The construction of bridges is expected to greatly improve or remediate currently occurring road run-off, which is resulting in some excess sediment into streams adjacent to the project area, improving water quality and aquatic habitat for CRLF. High deposition and fine sediment can clog streams and decrease residual pool depths decreasing potential CRLF habitat for tadpoles. Sedimentation from existing OHV use into both Pagge Creek and Forbes Creek channels is a concern. Overall, constructing bridges over low water crossings would have a major benefit to reducing sedimentation downstream and will improve benthic macroinvertebrate production. In summary, during implementation of corrective actions to the stream crossings, there is a potential for disturbance to CRLF from injury, crushing, or harassment. Additionally, there may be some localized short-term sedimentation affecting portions of the CRLF habitat in the perennial and intermittent stream channel during and soon after implementation, but this proposed activity is expected to improve CRLF habitat in the long-term. If no action were taken, potential direct impacts to individuals through injury or crushing would continue and the sedimentation into suitable CRLF habitat would continue to occur and could increase over time if OHV use continues to grow. Removal of fixed wet weather season closure dates, gate installation The proposed action to remove fixed wet weather seasonal closure dates from 31.2 road miles and 111.6 trail miles would follow Region 5 BMP 4.7.7 by developing a wet weather operating plan. Currently, trails and roads are closed for a core period when soil moisture is expected to be high based on precipitation. This has been ineffective because in recent years trails have been closed during dry periods, OHV users tend to ignore the closure period and use trails when they perceive it to be dry. Therefore, trail damage occurs when soil strength is low. The proposed action would decrease wet season trail damage by closing trails based on actual soil strength data and installing gates to manage trails based on the wet weather operating plan. Most CRLF do not disperse farther than the nearest suitable foraging/sheltering habitat. In rare instances, CRLF have been documented to travel up to a mile from their breeding areas (Fellers and Kleeman 2007). The closest known population of CRLF is approximately 2.6 miles southwest of the project area. Project Design Features will minimize the potential for effects. Therefore, any potential localized short-term affects to CRLF or their habitat are assumed to be either insignificant or discountable. By removing the fixed wet weather seasonal closure there is potential for increased impacts to CRLF dispersal into upland environments. CRLF occupies both aquatic and terrestrial habitats in its adult life stage. According to Bulger 2003, adult migration to and from breeding sites occurred from late October through mid-May (wet season). If the OHV trail system is opened up during this time (wet season) there is potential for increased vulnerability to direct impacts. CRLF potentially occupying the upland habitat are vulnerable to being disturbed, injured, crushed or killed if an OHV hits or runs over a cover object being used by the frog. In addition to the risk of disturbance the removal of the fixed wet weather seasonal closure dates is expected to reduce future sediment delivery and improve water quality thereby indirectly benefitting CRLF. Installing the gates may cause a temporary increase in sedimentation to suitable CRLF habitat as a result of ground disturbing activities. These risks, however, would not only be short-term, occurring only during the actual implementation period, they would also be

25 Big Sugar Project

highly localized because the overlap between the actions associated with the project area and suitable habitat is exceptionally low (Table 2). A measurable improvement in stream water quality would be expected within one year (season) post-implementation. Much of the modeled potential stream breeding habitat within one mile of proposed project (and resulting potential foraging/sheltering and dispersal habitat) activities likely represent poor to marginal breeding habitat due to 1) the lack of ponded habitat generally not found in Sierra Nevada foothill creeks during spring, 2) many flashy reaches in the creeks and small tributaries which do not support backwater areas for breeding during spring, 3) some isolated distribution of low gradient stream habitat, combined with the lack of positive detections, and 4) existence of roads, infrastructure, and heavy recreation use already occurring in the area may already prevent breeding use. The proposal to remove the fixed wet weather season closure is over two miles from any known CRLF occurrences or breeding areas. There are no known CRLF occurrences several miles from the nearest project area and very little potential breeding habitat in the entire Shirttail Creek drainage. The risk of impacts is considered to be discountable because of the low likelihood of frogs to be present in the area, overestimation of habitat and minimal amount of actual disturbance – likely much less than the 51.7 acres – and application of project Design Features, management requirements, and BMPs. Long-term, this habitat would be improved and future disturbance to CRLF would be largely minimized because of the proposal of bridges and the decommissioning of unsustainable trails accessible to OHVs. The risk of direct disturbance, injury, or mortality is greatest in or near the 36 wet crossings by removing the fixed wet weather season closure. CRLF present in the wet crossings would likely attempt to avoid stress, injury, or mortality by retreating into aquatic habitat. Often this behavior is successful in preventing an injury or death, but will still harass. Additionally, individuals may retreat and seek refuge under cover located directly in the path of the motorized vehicles wet crossing, making it vulnerable to crushing from OHV use. The behavior involved in the escape/retreat response, despite the ultimate outcome, would constitute a disturbance to the frog. Such behaviors could be altered in ways that decrease survival by interfering with foraging or predator avoidance, and by adding stress if individuals are unable find appropriate micro-habitat needed for sustaining overall health (for example appropriate temperature, dissolved oxygen, and flow). If the Big Sugar Project were not proposed (i.e., no action taken), the beneficial effects of decreased sedimentation and elimination of harassment/injury/mortality and water contamination (bridge construction) would not occur. Summary The total analysis area for the Big Sugar Project is 62,952 acres. Suitable CRLF habitat present within the 1-mile aquatic analysis area is 12,847 acres with 2,204 acres on non-Forest System Land. Inside the Big Sugar Project area there is a total of 4,297 acres of potentially suitable habitat. Breeding habitat is limited to 1,095 acres, which is approximately 25% of the available habitat. Of those acres, an estimated 51.7 acres of suitable CRLF habitat are affected by proposed actions, which is approximately 1.2% of the available CRLF habitat in the analysis area. The remaining 98.8% of the suitable CRLF habitat in the aquatics analysis area will likely not be affected. Implementation of proposed actions may affect 51.7 acres of suitable CRLF habitat in the short- term, but will be beneficial in the long-term for CRLF habitat. Construction of trail reroutes pose the highest potential impact to CRLF and their habitat, particularly in proximity to perennial breeding habitat. Decommissioning of trails may also lead to some sediment delivery directly into

26 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

streams (at crossing) and increase the risk of disturbance, injury or crushing of the CRLF. The potential impacts are expected to be insignificant given the size of the impact and should not reach the scale where take occurs. Therefore, the Big Sugar Project “may affect but is not likely to adversely affect the California Red-legged Frog.” However, the degree to which the proposed actions may adversely affect the CRLF is minor and small in scale, affecting 1.2% of the suitable habitat within the aquatic analysis area. The actions proposed for this project are 1) routine in practice, 2) have been implemented in the past under similar conditions, 3) would directly overlap with a very small portion of suitable CRLF habitat, 4) would employ standard practices (standards and guidelines and BMPs) and protection measures and 5) have known possible effects. Western pond turtle and Foothill yellow-legged frog Proposed decommission and reroute of trails, and new trail construction Trail decommissioning, new trail construction and trail reroute activities are not expected to significantly affect Western pond turtle (WPT) and Foothill yellow-legged frog (FYLF) by increasing risk of injury, harassment, and mortality; and decreasing the quality of suitable habitat in the area. There is potential to directly affect WPT from the proposed actions, however, because the nearest detections are over 5.4 miles away from the project area that potential is low. In addition there is potential to directly affect FYLF from the proposed actions, however management requirements to survey where equipment travels through stream habitat for OHV trail work should reduce the risk of direct impacts. Suitable habitat in the area will be directly and indirectly affected by any increase in sedimentation that would occur as a result of newly rerouted and constructed trail use. Barrier construction and boulder placement The barrier fencing and boulder placement would be constructed outside suitable WPT and FYLF habitat so there would be no direct effects to the stream courses, WPT and FYLF, or their suitable habitat. However, the installation proposed would greatly improve or remediate the existing off- trail travel and road runoff issues by decreasing sedimentation into hydrologically connected stream channels. Therefore, installation of these features would indirectly improve WPT and FYLF habitat through sediment reduction and improved water quality. If no action were taken, the sedimentation into suitable WPT and FYLF habitat would continue to occur and could increase over time if the routes continued to degrade. The proposed action to construct barrier fencing in the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System would benefit aquatic species, soil and hydrology resources by decreasing off-trail travel and indirect impacts of exposed soil and sediment movement. Bridge construction, maintenance and reconstruction of stream crossings A total of 36 stream crossing improvements are proposed as part of the Big Sugar Project. Proposed bridge construction will take place at approximately 11 stream crossings inside the Big Sugar Project area. However, potentially suitable habitat for the WPT and FYLF includes 36 stream crossings and 11 proposed bridge installations. The 11 proposed bridge installations inside WPT and FYLF suitable habitat occur along Pagge Creek, Forbes Creek, Duncan Creek and 3 unnamed stream channels. The work will be done in combination by hand crews, helicopter, trail dozer and a mini excavator. Hand crews and helicopter use will result in a much smaller risk to individuals than use of heavy equipment. Individual WPT and FYLF potentially present along the stream banks or near the crossing could be disturbed during implementation.

During implementation of corrective actions to stream crossings, a potential exists for disturbance to WPT and FYLF from injury, crushing, or harassment. Additionally, some localized short-term

27 Big Sugar Project

sedimentation may affect portions of the WPT and FYLF habitat in the perennial and intermittent stream channel during and soon after implementation, but this proposed activity is expected to improve WPT and FYLF habitat in the long-term. If no action were taken, potential direct impacts to individuals through injury or crushing would continue and the sedimentation into suitable WPT and FYLF habitat would continue to occur and could increase over time if OHV use continues to grow. Removal of fixed wet weather season closure dates, gate installation The proposed action to remove fixed wet weather seasonal closure dates would follow Region 5 BMP 4.7.7 by developing a wet weather operating plan. No studies have been conducted on the effects of implementing a wet weather operating plan on the WPT and FYLF or their habitat. Studies have been conducted on the effects of roads on other amphibian species in a variety of landscapes, though the majority address areas with substantial vehicle traffic. Of equal importance, the closest known population of WPT is approximately 5.4 miles northeast of the project area. Project Design Features will minimize the potential for effects. Therefore, any potential localized short-term affects to WPT and FYLF or their habitat are assumed to be either insignificant or discountable. However by removing the fixed wet weather seasonal closure there is potential for increased impacts to WPT and FYLF dispersal into upland environments. WPT and FYLF occupy both aquatic and terrestrial habitats in their adult life stages. If the OHV trail system is opened up during this time (wet season) there is potential for increased vulnerability to direct impacts. WPT and FYLF potentially occupying the upland habitat are vulnerable to being disturbed, injured, crushed or killed if an OHV hits or runs over a cover object being used by the frog or traveling to an overwintering nest for the WPT. In addition to the risk of disturbance the removal of the fixed wet weather seasonal closure dates is expected to reduce future sediment delivery and improve water quality, thereby indirectly benefitting WPT and FYLF. Installing the gates may cause a temporary increase in sedimentation to suitable WPT and FYLF habitat as a result of ground disturbing activities. These risks, however, would not only be short-term, occurring only during the actual implementation period, they would also be highly localized because the overlap between the actions associated with the project area and suitable habitat is exceptionally low. A measurable improvement in stream water quality would be expected within one year (season) post-implementation. If the Big Sugar Project were not implemented (i.e., no action taken), the beneficial effects of decreased sedimentation and elimination of harassment/injury/mortality and water contamination (bridge construction) would not occur. Black Juga Proposed decommission and reroute of trails, and new trail construction Trail decommissioning is proposed on 30.7 miles inside the project area and would be an overall benefit to soil and aquatic habitat by replacing the existing trails with a more sustainable trail system. Once in the aquatic riparian habitat, the trail decommissioning work would allow for natural recovery and likely not cause any injury or mortality of individual black juga. Decommissioning work may cause a temporary increase in sedimentation to suitable aquatic habitat as a result of ground disturbing activities. However, re-grading and adding 70 percent effective soil cover prior to winter precipitation along the route can have long term beneficial effects by reducing the amount of sediment delivered from the route into the nearby suitable black juga habitat. These indirect risks, however, would not only be short-term, occurring only during the actual implementation period, they would also be highly localized because the overlap

28 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

between the actions associated with the re-routing of the trail and suitable habitat is exceptionally low. Furthermore, once completed, the trail decommissioning is expected to reduce future sediment delivery and improve the stream water quality of potentially suitable habitat, thereby indirectly benefitting black juga. A measurable improvement in stream water quality would be expected within one year (season) post-implementation. The 71.7 miles of trail reroute and new trail construction will cross 20 intermittent stream channels and 16 perennial stream channels. Approximately 5 bridges will be constructed along the trail reroute and new trail, which will reduce the risk of direct impacts to individual black juga. Similar to trail decommissioning, if black juga are present along the banks at the stream habitat during implementation they could be disturbed, injured, or killed. The proposed reroutes and new trail construction are expected to have a minimal impact to individual black juga. Similar to trail decommissioning, the risk of disturbance, injury, or mortality the action of the trail reroute work may cause a temporary increase in sedimentation to suitable aquatic habitat as a result of ground disturbing activities. Once completed, the trail reroute work is expected to reduce future sediment delivery and improve the stream water quality of potentially suitable habitat thereby indirectly benefitting black juga. Trail construction is unlikely to result in major impacts to riparian areas and since black juga have not been documented inside the project boundary, there is not expected to be direct effects to black juga from construction activities related to the re-route and new trail construction. In summary, trail decommissioning, new trail construction and trail reroute activities are not expected to significantly affect black juga by increasing risk of injury and mortality; and decreasing the quality of suitable habitat in the area. Suitable habitat in the area will be directly and indirectly affected by any increase in sedimentation that would occur as a result of newly rerouted and constructed trail use. Barrier construction and boulder placement The barrier fencing and boulder placement will be constructed outside suitable black juga habitat so there would be no direct affects to the stream courses, black juga, or their suitable habitat. However, the installation proposed would greatly improve or remediate the existing off trail travel and road runoff issues by decreasing sedimentation into hydrologically connected stream channels. Therefore, installation of these features will indirectly improve black juga habitat through sediment reduction and improved water quality. If no action were taken, the sedimentation into suitable black juga habitat would continue to occur and could increase over time if the routes continued to weaken. Bridge construction, maintenance and reconstruction of stream crossings A total of 36 stream crossings are proposed as part of the Big Sugar Project. Proposed bridge construction will take place at approximately 11 stream crossings inside the Big Sugar Project area. However, potentially suitable habitat for the black juga includes 36 stream crossings and 11 proposed bridge installations. The 11 proposed bridge installations inside black juga suitable habitat occur along Pagge Creek, Forbes Creek, Duncan Creek and 3 unnamed stream channels. The work will be done in combination by hand crews, helicopter, trail dozer and a mini excavator. Hand crews and helicopter use will result in a much smaller risk to individuals than use of heavy equipment. Individual black juga present in the stream crossing may be disturbed during implementation. During implementation of corrective actions to stream crossings, a potential exists for disturbance to black juga from injury or crushing. Additionally, some localized short-term sedimentation may affect portions of the black juga habitat in the perennial stream channel during and soon after

29 Big Sugar Project

implementation, but this proposed activity is expected to improve black juga habitat in the long- term. If no action were taken, potential direct impacts to individuals through injury or crushing would continue and the sedimentation into suitable black juga habitat would continue to occur and could increase over time if OHV use continues to grow. Removal of fixed wet weather season closure dates, gate installation The proposed action to remove fixed wet weather seasonal closure dates from 31.2 miles road and 111.6 miles trail would follow Region 5 BMP 4.7.7 by developing a wet weather operating plan. The removal of the fixed wet weather seasonal closure dates is expected to reduce future sediment delivery and improve water quality thereby indirectly benefitting black juga. Installing the gates may cause a temporary increase in sedimentation to suitable black juga habitat as a result of ground disturbing activities. These risks, however, would not only be short-term, occurring only during the actual implementation period, they would also be highly localized because the overlap between the actions associated with the project area and suitable habitat is exceptionally low. A measurable improvement in stream water quality would be expected within one year (season) post-implementation. Long-term, this habitat would be improved and future disturbance to black juga would be largely minimized because of the proposal of bridges and the decommissioning of unsustainable trails accessible to OHVs. The risk of direct disturbance, injury, or mortality is greatest in or near the 36 wet crossings by removing the fixed wet weather season closure. Black juga present in the wet crossings would be vulnerable to direct impacts. If the Big Sugar Project were not proposed (i.e., no action taken), the beneficial effects of decreased sedimentation and elimination of harassment/injury/mortality and water contamination (bridge construction) would not occur. Botanical Resources The Biological Evaluation and Biological Assessment of Botanical Species (BE/BA) prepared for the Big Sugar Project (Patterson 2018) provides an analysis of the activities proposed under the Big Sugar Trail Project to determine whether they have the potential to affect any Federally Endangered, Threatened, Proposed and Candidate, and Forest Service Region 5 Sensitive plant, lichen, and fungi species and their habitats (referred to collectively as TEPCS botanical species or TESP). The BE/BA is located in the project file and impacts to potentially affected TEPCS species are summarized here. Other reports used in this analysis and in the project file include: the Other Botanical Resource Assessment (for watch-list botanical species – plants, lichen, and fungi – that are of conservation concern. The botanical analysis area used for consideration of direct, indirect and cumulative effects includes the botanical project area plus a 100-foot buffer around trail segments that connect reroute sections (5,303 acres). Surveys have been conducted with a 50-foot buffer on all 104.4 miles (approximately 577 acres) where ground disturbing activities were proposed. Field surveys are not needed in areas without ground disturbance, because there is no anticipated direct effects to botanical resources. Of the 770 miles of trail and roads in the analysis area, 429 miles (55.7%) have been surveyed. Survey reports are included in the FS database of record (NRIS) and on file electronically at the TNF supervisor’s office. Two federally threatened botanical species are known to occur or with known suitable habitat within Tahoe National Forest (TNF): Ivesia webberi (Webber’s ivesia) and Packera layneae (Layne’s butterweed). There is one candidate species known to occur on TNF—Pinus albicaulis (whitebark pine). Webber’s ivesia is only known to occur east of the Pacific crest in alluvial fans

30 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

and the project area is below the elevational range of whitebark pine. One occurrence of Layne’s butterweed occurs in the project area along the Western States trail at Sage Hill. No impacts are anticipated during this project. The Regional Forester identifies species for which population viability is a concern because of (1) downward population trends and/or (2) diminished habitat capacity that would reduce species distribution (FSM 2672.11, USDA 2005). The R5 Sensitive list was last revised in 2013 (USDA Forest Service 2013). All Forest Service Region 5 Sensitive botanical species that are known or have suitable habitat on TNF were considered. There are 22 sensitive species and one federally threatened species with suitable habitat in the project area. They can be aggregated into five broad categories based upon habitat type: Serpentine habitat There may be slight positive permanent effects to serpentine habitat in the Sugar Pine OHV area (817.4 acre) because the proposed trail re-alignments through serpentine habitat are designed to address ongoing issues of erosion and help better delineate trails away from exposed skid trails, thereby reducing use on user-created, non-system trails. There may be slight negative effects to serpentine habitat in the short-term from ground disturbing activities associated with trail construction and decommission. Layne’s butterweed (federally listed as threatened) No direct effects are anticipated because no proposed ground disturbance would go through the occurrence of Layne’s butterweed. In addition to the effects stated under serpentine habitat, proposed activities are limited to a change in the season of use for the adjacent trail from a fixed closed time period each year to a wet weather dependent operating plan. In dry years, the section of trail that intersects the Layne’s butterweed occurrence may experience a longer season of use. In wetter years, this section may experience a shorter season of use. No indirect impacts are anticipated from the proposed season of use change. The Big Sugar proposed action will not affect Layne’s butterweed due to the presence of existing barriers along the Western States Trail through the occurrence at Sage Hill and the density of forest surrounding the occurrence that acts as a natural barrier. Management requirements will be in place to continue to maintain the existing barriers surrounding the occurrence of Layne’s butterweed at Sage Hill. Impacts to suitable habitat from ground disturbing activities near the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System are expected to have a slight positive effect as project design addresses travel management issues (i.e., erosion and off-trail use). Wet habitats There will be small negative permanent impacts to wet habitat (0.6 ac) associated with trail construction on Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail and reroutes of the Western States Trail were the trail crosses riparian areas. Design features include the addition of bridges and other design features to minimize the impact to perennial zones. Wet habitat species: Upswept moonwort (Botrychium ascendens), scalloped moonwort (Botrychium crenulatum), common moonwort (Botrychium lunaria), mingan’s moonwort (Botrychium minganense), western goblin (Botrychium montanum), and Bolander’s bruchia (Bruchia bolanderi). Rocky, open habitats There will be both negative and positive permanent effects to rocky, open habitat associated with trail construction and reroute. The proposed Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail will be constructed through 141.2 acres of rocky, open habitat, rendering it permanently unsuitable habitat for TES species. To minimize impacts, trail design was aligned in shrubby or forested

31 Big Sugar Project

habitat wherever possible. The Tevis Cup and Western States reroute sections will permanently positively impact 17.7 acres of rocky habitat by realigning the existing trail out of suitable habitat. During project implementation, there may also be slight negative short-term effects to rocky habitats as a result of ground disturbance associated with transportation of building material and staging of equipment and material. Rocky habitat species: Donner Pass buckwheat (Eriogonum umbellatum var. torreyanum), Hutchison’s lewisia (Lewisia kelloggii ssp. hutchisonii), Kellogg’s lewisia (Lewisia kelloggii ssp. kelloggii), whitebark pine, Howell’s tauschia (Tauschia howellii), starved daisy (Erigeron miser), Stebbins phacelia (Phacelia stebbinsii), and saw-toothed lewisia (Lewisia serrata). Starved daisy Three occurrences of starved daisy, consisting of five sub-occurrences, are in the project area. Occurrences total 260 plants over 0.67 acres. One sub-occurrence directly intersects the proposed trail alignment, all others are within the 100-foot buffered project area. There is potential for lethal impacts to individuals (removal of plants) during the construction of the Robinsons-China Wall Connector trail within one sub-occurrence. Direct impacts are estimated to be limited to approximately seven plants. Where ever possible, the new trail construction was routed to avoid starved daisy. Nonetheless, some lethal impacts are anticipated because no feasible reroute alternative exists around due to the steep, large rock outcrops and the large extent of suitable habitat above and below the sub-occurrence. Lethal impacts are limited through the project design, which incorporates measures to limit blasting near occurrences and require an on-site botanist during construction to assist with trail alignment. The impacts to rocky habitat described above apply to starved daisy No additional impacts are anticipated. The Big Sugar proposed action may affect individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability for starved daisy. This is based on the following: direct lethal impacts to one sub-occurrence; negative permanent impacts to suitable habitat at a moderate scale; project design and management measures that reduce but do not eliminate direct impacts. Saw-toothed lewisia One occurrence of saw-toothed lewisia occurs in the project area on the Western States Trail, consisting of 326 plants over 0.07 acres. The project activities are not expected to have direct effects to saw-toothed lewisia because there will be no ground disturbing activities in the occurrence. The impacts to rocky habitat described above apply to saw-toothed lewisia. No additional impacts are anticipated. The proposed action near the occurrence is to remove the fixed season of use. Due to the cliff habitat saw-toothed lewisia grows on, and the lack of proposed ground disturbing activities in suitable habitat, the proposed activities are not expected to have any indirect effects to saw-toothed lewisia. The Big Sugar proposed action will not affect saw-toothed lewisia. This is based on the absence of ground disturbing activities in known occurrences and negligible impact to suitable habitat as a result in the change of fixed seasonal use. Hutchison’s lewisia Thirteen occurrences, consisting of 14 sub-occurrences, occur in the project area. An additional six sub-occurrences are in the analysis area. Occurrences in the analysis area total 15,000 plants over 20 acres. None of the 14 sub-Element Occurrence (an area of land and/or water in which a species is or was present) in the project area directly intersect proposed trail alignments, but all of them are within 100 feet. Despite the presence of 13 occurrences in project area, no direct impacts to Hutchison’s lewisia are anticipated during project implementation. This is because the project has been designed to

32 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest avoid occurrences by routing proposed trails away from occurrences, requiring avoidance of staging and causing ground disturbance in or nearby occurrences, and prohibiting ground disturbance in occurrences during decommissioning. Negative direct impacts will continue to the occurrences along the Western States Trail and Tevis Cup, but the proposed action of removing the fixed seasonal use to a wet weather operating plan and other proposed actions are expected to have negligible changes to the usage of the trail due to the difficulty of these trails (Brownlee, pers. comm. 2018). Four occurrences on the Tevis Cup trail will likely have permanent positive effects from the proposed action when trails are rerouted out of these occurrences. Currently, evidence of trampled and crushed plants exists in these occurrences. Rerouting the trail away from occurrences will reduce vehicle traffic in occurrences and reduce such impacts. At Big Valley Bluff, current OHV use is directly negatively impacting individual plants. In 2017, there was evidence of crushing associated with OHV tire tracks as well as trampling from dispersed campers. The proposed action will change Road 19-8 from public use to administrative use only, effectively eliminating vehicle use from the road and likely reducing dispersed camping. This will reduce the likelihood of crushing and trampling and result in a long-term positive effect by providing additional protection to the largest known occurrence of Hutchison’s lewisia known on TNF. This is considered a substantial benefit to the viability of Hutchison’s lewisia on TNF. The impacts to rocky habitat described above apply to Hutchison’s lewisia. No additional impacts are anticipated. The Big Sugar proposed action may affect individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of Hutchison’s lewisia. This is based on the positive indirect impacts to the species as a result of rerouting the Tevis Cup trail out of known occurrences and closing the Big Valley Bluff Road, included management measures that mitigate direct negative impacts and negligible impacts to suitable habitat. Stebbins phacelia Two occurrences of Stebbins’ phacelia occur in the project area and one additional occurrence, consisting of 2 sub-occurrences, occurs in the analysis area. The project activities are not expected to have direct effects to Stebbins’ phacelia because there will be no ground disturbing activities in the occurrence of Stebbins’ phacelia. The proposed actions in the known occurrences is a change in fixed seasonal use of the trail, which is expected to have negligible impact. The impacts to rocky habitat described above apply to Stebbins phacelia. No additional impacts are anticipated. The Big Sugar Project Will Not Affect Stebbins’ phacelia. This is based on the absence of ground disturbing activities in the occurrences and negligible impacts to occurrences and suitable habitat as a result in the change of fixed seasonal use. Forest opening habitats There may be slight negative effects to forest opening habitat (564.8 ac) in the short-term from ground disturbance associated with trail construction and decommission. Due to the limited scale of trail construction, there will be negligible effects in the long-term to forest opening habitat. Forest opening habitat species: Sierra bluegrass: Sierra bluegrass (Poa sierrae) and Butte County fritillary (Fritillaria eastwoodiae). Sierra bluegrass Seven occurrences of Sierra bluegrass, consisting of 12 sub-occurrences, occur in the project area. There is an estimated 30,000 Sierra bluegrass plants over 10.7 acres in the project area. One

33 Big Sugar Project

occurrence may not be extant, as no plants were found in 2018; it occurs in a high intensity burn, which is generally not considered suitable habitat, so it may be mapped incorrectly. There is potential for lethal and sub-lethal impacts to Sierra bluegrass individuals during trail construction of the Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail and Humbug (Loop 5) Trail. Where possible, the trail was rerouted to avoid Sierra bluegrass occurrences; however, in some areas, this was not possible due to the steep habitat type and extent to the occurrences. Management requirements are in place to minimize loss of individuals; however, some mortality as well as sub-lethal impacts (i.e., trampling, crushing) is expected. Destruction of plants will occur in six sub-occurrences. Of the 7.7 acres these occurrences cover, only 6.5 acres are in the project area (a 100-foot buffer of the proposed trail). It is hard to know how many plants will actually be affected, as there is an estimated 22,000 plants in these occurrences; however, only a fraction of these plants will actually experience impacts. In the long-term, occurrences are expected to recover because Sierra bluegrass is rhizomatous and plants that are merely injured are expected to regrow and repopulate areas of plant death. In general, the species is considered tolerant to a moderate degree of disturbance. In addition, there are over 111 acres of Sierra bluegrass known on TNF. The proposed scale of lethal impacts is not expected to exceed 6.5 acres or 5.8% of the total acres on the forest. Four occurrences intersect decommission sections of Humbug (Loop 6) trail and Dusty Ridge (Loop 7) trail. The trail through these occurrences will be decommissioned; however, ground disturbance in Sierra bluegrass occurrences will be prohibited, limiting potential for direct impact. In addition, in these occurrences, no plants have been observed directly in the trail prism and adjacent plants do not currently exhibit signs of damage, indicating that even the potential for impact is low. One occurrence occurs on a section of the Western States Trail that will not have ground disturbing project activities. The proposed project is not expected to have any effects to this occurrence. One occurrence had no observable plants in 2018 and crews determined that the mapped habitat is not suitable habitat for Sierra bluegrass, thus, there will be no direct impacts to this occurrence. The impacts to forest opening habitat described above apply to Sierra bluegrass No additional impacts are anticipated. The Big Sugar proposed action may affect individuals, but is not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of Sierra Bluegrass. This is based on the following: 1) there will be mortality and sub-lethal impacts at six occurrences, but the scope and scale is not considered significant in the context of the large acreage of known TNF occurrences and the species high potential for regrowth and repopulation; 2) there will be indirect impacts to suitable habitat via new permanent trails; and 3) management measures are included in the project design that reduce but do not eliminated impacts to the species. Old-growth forest habitats For old growth forest habitat (211.5 ac), the scope of impacts will be similar to forest opening habitat, but the scale is smaller. Old-growth forest habitat species: Large Cudonia (Cudonia monticola), branched collybia (Dendrocollybia racemosa), olive phaeocollybia (Phaeocollybia olivacea), stalked orange peel-fungus (Sowerbyella rhenana), clustered lady’s slipper (Cypripedium fasciculatum), and mountain lady’s slipper (Cypripedium montanum). Species with Suitable Habitat, but no Occurrences in Project Area During surveys of the project area, suitable habitat was identified, but no occurrences were found for 17 species. The Big Sugar project will not affect: upswept moonwort (Botrychium ascendens), scalloped moonwort (Botrychium crenulatum), common moonwort (Botrychium lunaria), Mingan’s moonwort (Botrychium minganense), western goblin (Botrychium montanum),

34 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

Bolander’s bruchia (Bruchia bolanderi), large Cudonia (Cudonia monticola), clustered lady’s slipper (Cypripedium fasciculatum), mountain lady’s slipper (Cypripedium montanum), branched collybia (Dendrocollybia racemosa), Donner Pass buckwheat (Eriogonum umbellatum var. torreyanum), Butte County frittilary (Fritillaria eastwoodiae), Kellogg’s lewisia (Lewisia kelloggii ssp. kelloggii), olive phaeocollybia (Phaeocollybia olivacea), whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis), stalked orange peel-fungus (Sowerbyella rhenana), and Howell’s tauschia (Tauschia howellii). This is based on the lack of occurrences and the negligible impacts to suitable habitat within the project area. Cultural Resources Refer to FONSI element three below. Invasive Plants Surveys have been conducted on all 104.4 miles (approximately 577 acres) where ground disturbing activities were proposed. Areas where no ground disturbance was proposed were not surveyed and are not anticipated to increase invasive plant risk. Habitat alteration expected as a result of the project Overall habitat alteration is expected to be localized to the trail prism in the 24.1 miles of new trail construction, 30.7 miles of decommission trail, 47.7 of re-routed trail, and 1.8 miles of restoration fencing. There will be habitat alteration on a total of 104.4 miles or approximately 577 acres. Due to the habitat alteration associated with new trail construction, rerouted trail construction, decommissioning trail, there is a low risk of habitat alteration. Increased vectors as a result of project implementation The proposed project would temporarily increase potential weed vectors due to the increase in project related vehicle and equipment use. Potential introduction of invasive species may also occur when equipment is first brought into the project area or if equipment travels or is used within existing infestations in the project area. Another potential vector for invasive species is the importation of materials such as fill, gravel, and rock during trail reconstruction. Erosion control material such as straw and seeds can also introduce new noxious weeds into the project area. Project activities will create 71.8 miles of new permanent invasive plant vectors. Project activities will reduce 30.7 miles of invasive plant vectors through the decommissioning of trail and eliminate 1 mile of road vectors through the closing of a road. The 1.8 miles of restoration fencing will help prevent off trail travel, reducing the potential for invasive plant vectors beyond the trail & road prism. Management requirements have been incorporated into the project to reduce or eliminate the likelihood of most vector opportunities related to the project implementation. Due to management requirements to reduce invasive plant vectors during project implementation, the addition of 71.8 miles of new vectors, the reduction of 30.7 miles of vectors, and the 1.8 miles of restoration fencing, there is a moderate risk of vectors. Additional details on this project are in the Invasive Plant Risk Assessment for Big Sugar in the project file. Recreation In 1960, the 44,000 acre Volcano Fire occurred within the Volcano Creek drainage and beyond to Humbug Canyon northeast of the town of Foresthill. Haul routes and skid trails were created to remove timber and plantations were established. OHV use slowly began increasing in that footprint area due to proximity to Sacramento and the open areas post-fire. Due to use uptick and new state grant funding (green sticker program), an Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) system – Sugar

35 Big Sugar Project

Pine Motorized Trail System – was constructed in the early 1980s. This system connected to steep haul routes and skid trails that existed post Volcano Fire. In the 1980s, OHV engine design and poor suspension limited versatility of machines accessing the forest and visitor use numbers aligned with the trail mileage in the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System. Trail maintenance with specialized equipment (trail dozers, mini-excavators) occurred annually during appropriate soil moisture windows and maintenance intervals were maintained by Forest Service personnel and volunteers. In the early 1990s, OHV use began increasing with enhanced motorcycle and All-Terrain Vehicle (ATV) design became more capable. Recreational Vehicle (RV) travel trailers became popular for individual and family outings. Motorized recreational use began increasing and trail maintenance frequencies using specialized trail equipment increased. Use was accommodated through drainage work repair and wet weather closure periods. Today, these older design parameters require frequent trail maintenance intervals (i.e., constructing and repairing drainage features) and these intervals must be completed during acceptable soil moistures windows to properly achieve soil compaction. The limited soil moisture window in the foothills of California creates maintenance hurdles when trying to repair a trail network to be more resilient to visitor use and weather when proper design elements are not taken into consideration. Motorized trail Green-Yellow-Red (GYR) monitoring has occurred on the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System, motorized portions of the Western States Trail and the Tevis Cup Trail. Trail monitoring has identified problematic trail alignment concerns which include both soil erosion and visitor user safety and experience. Sustainability: Maintenance, administration and availability of resources A sustainable trail has constant flow and roll. Tangents are minimized and grade reversals force water off the trail at regular intervals. Flow is the rhythm of the trail, which is usually created by a very curvilinear horizontal alignment. Roll is the vertical rise and fall of the trail grade. Roll also contributes to the rhythm of the trail, but its key role is providing natural drainage points through grade reversals, which significantly reduce the potential for soil movement (Dufourd 2015). Since the inception of Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System, trail construction and maintenance has been paid for through utilizing the State of California Green Sticker grant program. Motorized trails would continue to be maintained through this grant program by funding Forest Service personnel, contractors and non-profit organizations. Volunteer organizations would also be relied upon to monitor ground conditions and assist with construction and maintenance needs. The proposed new construction and reroute design parameters would reduce resource impacts and intensive annual maintenance intervals. The new and rerouted trail approaches to stream course channels would be more gradual to reduce soil sediment into stream course channels. Locations, where bridges are installed at larger creek intersections with the trail, would also have a more gradual trail alignment with grade reversals incorporated into construction to reduce sediment entering stream course channels. Where proposed, bridge installation would eliminate motorcycles and ATV’s from entering stream course channels. The changes in seasonal designation along with the gates and barriers (including boulders and fences) would allow better administration of the motorized trail system and of the 19-8 road. Instead of physically constructed rolling grade dips, the proposed resource friendly trail construction methodology would reduce soil erosion due to milder trail grades and undulating trails with grade reversals constructed into the trail design. By implementing a soil saturation based model (instead of hard closure period) to open and close the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System, Forest Service managers would be able to more effectively respond to ground conditions. The soil saturation model, as opposed to the hard closure period, would potentially lead to more

36 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

opportunities to open the trails for public use and enjoyment during dry winter seasons, therefore providing for increased recreation opportunities. Rerouting these overly steep and heavily eroded segments of existing trail to sustainable grades (5 to 10 percent) with frequent grade reversals (75 feet to 100 feet apart) incorporated into the alignment would dramatically reduce erosion and trail maintenance frequency/intensity. By constructing and re-aligning motorized trails using more current trail construction methodology, more miles would be maintained effectively over a larger area during a limited soil moisture window. Essentially reroutes and new construction would allow trails staff to maintain a larger area during a limited time period based upon the soil moisture window that guides mechanized trail maintenance protocols. Alternative 1 benefits the American River Ranger District trails network due to reduced soil erosion, maintenance costs and frequency. Public Safety The proposed action would provide for increased public safety within the existing Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System, WST and TCT due to new updated design parameters (See TNF trail construction designs). These trail construction design parameters would provide a slower traffic type due to the undulating design of drainage features incorporated into the realignments. There would be fewer straight alignments where users could pick up speed. Reduction of user speed (down to 10 to 15 mph), would result in the improvement of safety within the Sugar Pine OHV system, WST and TCT by replacing the relatively straight segment with one that continually meanders. Sight distances would be increased in areas so other riders can witness oncoming traffic. The replaced trail segments would be restored to natural conditions through closure and obliteration. The existing relatively straight segments allow for fast motorcycle speeds (20 to 25 mph) and would remain under the no action alternative. Where these segments also have sections of brush that limit sight distance, the potential for serious head-on collisions between motorcyclists and other trail users is increased. In narrow precipitous segments, especially along existing motorized WST and TCT, increased signage and monitoring of use would aid in alerting trail users on these two trails that two way traffic exists and that other user groups use these trail frequently. District OHV program staff would actively monitor for conflicting use and actively mitigate issues with education, safety signage and barrier protection measures. The proposed action would provide for increased safety within motorized portions of WST through construction of bridges (Volcano and Duncan Creeks). In addition to the OHV community, the entire recreating public would benefit from bridge construction in proposed locations during periods of high water. Crossing a bridge is much easier than crossing, or fording, a stream even during normal water flows as rocks can be slippery and wet for all users. Within the Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail proposal, frequent signage would help notify and alert motorcycle riders, hikers, equestrians and mountain bikers of hazardous sections and multiple-use and two-way traffic. Trail design with good sight lines along the trail would promote safety; users would be able observe other groups from further distances. As with other advanced riding opportunities, such as the Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail, the difficulty of the routes is expected to limit motorized use and public interactions. Provision of recreational opportunities Trails that are straight lack a connection to landscapes and topography. A sustainable trail would flow between trees and use control points or vistas where the public can enjoy the stunning landscapes of public lands. A straight trail that abruptly ascends a hill just to go back down lacks sinuosity and a connection to nature. A trail that flows and undulates through the forest is more

37 Big Sugar Project

desirable than a rocky eroded hill climb that requires maintenance every year. Direct effects of the proposed action include more “smiles for miles” when rerouting a steep and eroded one-mile trail into a “flow” trail. These flow trails use less steep design parameters and topography that result in more trail miles. Newer design, in trail construction theory, has shown that an undulating trail with curvilinear design has less tire spin and less throttle wear as the speed of the OHV is slower. As more miles of sustainable reroutes are constructed, riders are distributed more across the district. Doing so spreads out OHV use on the trails and increases visitor opportunities for whomever may be seeking challenge and solitude on their rides. Rerouting existing trails in the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System and motorized segments of the WST and TCT would foster trail use disbursement over the available motorized trail network. This would result in reduced congestion and improved trail safety system-wide, especially at the ingress/egress points near staging areas. OHV enthusiasts (especially motorcyclists) value the narrow, rough, and technical nature of these motorized trails. They also value the scenic beauty, remote character, and the rareness of these combined qualities and opportunities. During and after the 2018 fires on the Mendocino National Forest, motorized trail use has increased on American River Ranger District as motorized trail users had to find opportunities in other areas. This trend is expected to continue for several years. Direct effects of the proposed action includes increasing opportunities to meet the demand of experienced motorcyclists. Currently, there are few opportunities for extreme difficulty motorcycle riding on the Tahoe National Forest (USDA FS 2010 ROD). Adding this Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail segment to the NFTS would provide a valuable opportunity for highly experienced motorcycle riders – an opportunity that is currently quite limited on American River Ranger District. As displayed in Table 3, the existing system of “most difficult” trails is 17 percent of the District’s motorized trail mileage. The “easiest” and “more difficult” categories have 42 and 40 percent, respectively, of the District’s motorized trail mileage. The Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail would provide advanced, highly skilled riders an opportunity to challenge their skills and abilities in the higher elevations of American River Ranger District. Design parameters incorporated into construction would keep rider challenge high. This 24-mile trail would be challenging and rated as Most Difficult and use is expected to be minimal due to the challenging degree of difficulty and riding distance. Slower travel speeds necessary to navigate the Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail would minimize noise from motorcycles. The motorized use of this trail is consistent with semi-primitive motorized standards in the Forest Plan. Table 3. Motorized recreation opportunities Trail Degree Of Difficulty (miles) Easiest More Most Grand Total Difficult Difficult Existing System (includes motorized portions of WST and TCT) 58.5 55.4 24.3 138.2 Big Sugar Project Reroutes and New Construction 22.7 17 31.6 71.3 Big Sugar Project Decommissioning -15.1 -11.1 -4.4 -30.6 Future System 66.1 61.3 51.5 178.9 Percent Increase 13% 10.6% 111.9% 29.5% Existing trails are not expected to have an increase in motorized use due to the reroutes. The design criteria during construction would match the existing rating of the trail. The new Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail would link the lower and higher elevation existing trail systems. Use is expected to increase to a minor extent at Robinsons Flat Campground; however, the existing infrastructure can accommodate the increase in use. The installation of educational multiple-use cautionary signage and barrier protection measures would deter OHV use of non- motorized trails in that area (Little Bald Mountain and Duncan Trails). As there is a historic

38 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

ranger station at Robinsons Flat, an interpretive signage plan would increase educational awareness and inform the public of Tahoe National Forest’s rich history. An increase in motorized use on the WST and TCT may occur, but increased use is expected to be minor in scope due to the technical difficulty on these narrow trails along precipitous terrain. These trails are designed for advanced users, including equestrians, pedestrians, mountain bikers, and motorcyclists. The project design includes improved sight distances and gentler grades which would reduce speed of motorized users in turn improving safety for all trail users. The project management requirements include monitoring use before and after implementation to better understand frequency and concentration of motorized use on the WST and TCT. Increased signage and education by the Forest Service and event holders would also be planned for project implementation. The WST/TCT are largely motorized trails, with a few exceptions including Granite Chief Wilderness. Changing existing trail alignments can help other user groups enjoy the same trail used by OHV riders. For example, mountain biking or hiking on Loop 2 is too difficult based upon the existing steepness of the trail grade. By realigning hill climbs to sustainable grades with drainage features incorporated into the design, allowing for reduced soil erosion and reduced trail maintenance frequencies, a more enjoyable trail experience for motorized and non-motorized trail users is provided. Implementation of Alternative 1 (proposed action) would provide more satisfactory riding experiences for motorcyclists. The improved trail conditions would also provide motorcyclists, equestrians, mountain bikers and hikers safer, less confusing trail conditions when compared to Alternative 2. There would be improved safety and reduced confusion from not needing to use steep, poorly aligned hill climbs requiring aggressive annual trail maintenance. Enhanced trail experiences from the development of additional trail loop options and additional single-track trail mileage would be available to all user groups. Economics, tourism and community development OHV riding on system routes is a rapidly expanding legitimate recreational pursuit on NFS lands. Successful planning for seasonality of use and classification of use on trails allows for resilient trails that have minimal resource impacts while at the same time challenging the OHV user to further their abilities. An indirect benefit of the proposed action is a potential increase of non-motorized use on motorized system routes as new and rerouted trails would contain less aggressive hill climbs and, as a result, more of the public would enjoy connection to the land. The proposed trail project would not only benefit OHV users, but also the local communities and economy. Trails of varying difficulty draw local and out-of-town visitors and their families. Recreation users spend money at local businesses such as gas stations, equipment shops, restaurants, lodges and campgrounds. The benefits are expected to affect the communities of Foresthill and Auburn and bring tax revenue to Placer County. The Foresthill Forum, a Municipal Advisory Committee, has a Parks and Trails Subcommittee that has expressed interest and support of the project. There is also a local economic development committee through Placer County. During scoping, positive comments from mountain biking and running organizations were expressed. This green-sticker-funded opportunity would provide for increased trail connectivity across the district for all user groups. The expected users on the new Robinsons to China Wall trail are not only motorcyclists, but also mountain bikers looking for long distance trails, and hikers and equestrians looking for new opportunities. Most of the current trails located along the Foresthill Divide Road are non-motorized, steep and descend into the North Fork of the American

39 Big Sugar Project

River canyon. The new trail would provide a gentler option for non-motorized users and potential loop or shuttle options. Linear trail miles would be added to current permitted event routes for the Western States Endurance Run and Western States Endurance Ride event routes as displayed in Table 4. The Forest Service is actively working with event holders to seek other mileage savings and route options both on and off NFS lands. The delayed opening of the reroutes would allow the trails to settle and harden before they are used and for both organizations to better manage event miles and records. Table 4. Effects on permitted special use event routes Current Big Sugar Big Sugar Big Sugar GIS Reroute Decom. Net Mileage Event Route Mileage Mileage Mileage Change Western States Endurance Run Route on motorized portions of WST/TCT 68.5 10.2 6.8 +3.4 Western States Endurance Ride Route (Tevis Cup Equestrian Event) on motorized portions of WST/TCT 65.5 5.8 4 +1.8 Annual permitted competitive events on American River Ranger District utilize the WST and TCT and more specifically Robinsons Flat campground during their events. A coordinated effort would be made by the Forest Service and both respective organizations to educate and inform other recreationists during events to reduce congestion and maintain safety. This would be accomplished by education and outreach by the Forest Service, OHV partners and special use permitted event holders, as well as incorporation into permitted event operating plans. The Forest Service and partners are committed to improving efforts to actively educate various users to “share the trail”. Conflicts among uses of NFS lands and quiet recreation American River Ranger District has non-motorized trail networks within the District that provide opportunities for quiet recreation. Areas such as the North Fork American River Wild and Scenic River and Granite Chief Wilderness provide outstanding non-motorized recreation opportunities. There are concerns the Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail would permit motorized use in close proximity to the non-motorized North Fork American Wild and Scenic River System. Although the new trail proposal crosses both Mumford and Beacroft trails, barrier designs and increased signage would be in place so that motorized use would not occur in the North Fork American Wild and Scenic River System. No OHV staging would be permitted at Mumford Bar Trailhead but would be permitted at Beacroft and Robinsons Flat as long as barrier protection measures and signage are in place. The District would closely monitor the Wild and Scenic River corridor and also the Robinsons Flat meadow for any impacts from OHV use and mitigate any issues. Motorcycles create noise that is unpleasant to some recreationists. The creation of a motorized trail in a new location, as proposed in Alternative 1, could negatively impact non-motorized recreationists in proximity to the new trail location. However, because the new trail location is proposed along or near existing motorized trails and roads, including the busy and paved Foresthill Divide county road, the increase in noise to recreationists from the proposed action is expected to be minor. The additional trail mileage of the proposed action is expected to have very little effect on air quality. The amount of emissions from motorized trail vehicles in the open air environment of the project area is insignificant when compared to the amount of pollutants produced by motorized vehicles in the Sacramento Valley and other areas and brought to the project area via prevailing winds. Placer County as a whole is known to be in non-attainment for several pollutants that are

40 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

by-products of motorized use in lower elevations such as the Sacramento Valley. Because greenhouse gases from vehicle emissions mix readily into the global pool of greenhouse gases, it is not currently possible to discern the effects of this project from the effects of all other greenhouse gas sources worldwide, nor is it expected that attempting to do so would provide a practical or meaningful analysis of project effects. Potential regional and local variability in climate change effects add to the uncertainty regarding the actual intensity of this project’s effects on global climate change. Signage on the new trail proposal and existing trails would minimize trail user conflict. Existing specific targeted signage on the WST and TCT currently warn all users of its multiple use designation and to share the trail. Based upon concerns raised during scoping, increased educational signage would occur to ensure safety for all user groups. Construction parameters would be in place along those areas to undulate the trail frequently so that grade reversals would be part of the trail. This would keep speeds down and lower throttle use. The District is interested in implementing a Volunteer OHV Trail Ranger Program on District motorized trails to better inform and educate all user groups on multiple use trails to mitigate conflicts. Soils and Hydrology For the soil resource assessment, the analysis area is bounded by the trails where the potential ground disturbing activities are proposed and for the hydrology resource it is bound by the 7th field sub-watersheds which contain these areas. The effects are bounded in time with the proposed action and the past and existing condition. Future actions are those that would affect the soil and hydrology condition following implementation. Proposed decommission and reroute of trails and new trail construction Trail decommissioning is proposed on 30.7 miles under Alternative 1. High rates of tread wear and accelerated erosion have occurred on 9.6 miles of these trails because trail gradients are steep and in alignment with the natural flow of runoff. Alternative 1 would be an overall benefit to soil and water resources by replacing these with more sustainable trails when compared to Alternative 2, no action. Following management requirements and BMP 4.7.8 would benefit the soil and water resources by covering bare soil on decommissioned routes to decrease storm water runoff and the potential for erosion and sediment. Proposed decommissioning would promote favorable conditions for the return of vegetation and soil compaction would be expected to decrease over the long term as roots of new vegetation loosen the soil. Reroutes and new trail construction are proposed on 71.7 miles and, by design, soil desired conditions would not be met because trail construction would remove the top few inches of soil and compact the trail tread surface. Trail tread would consist of the more resilient subsurface horizons. Trail construction would directly decrease soil productivity over the long term because continued maintenance would remove encroaching vegetation and soil would remain compacted as trail use continues. To predict the future impacts of constructing new trails, 2.5 miles of the recently rerouted Tevis Cup Trail were monitored using the Green Yellow Red (GYR) OHV Trail Condition monitoring form (Poff 2013). This section of trail was recently constructed using the same construction methods and BMPs as the proposed Big Sugar project. Over the 2.5 mile of trail, excessive erosion and tread wear were negligible and 99 percent of the route was recorded as Green condition. Overall, the 2.5 miles of trail are in good condition because the half hillslope rule was followed during trail design and layout. This means that the slope of the trail does not exceed more than half of the hill slope gradient. Therefore, although some tread loosening occurs especially during race events, the trail is aligned so that runoff does not follow and transport loosened soil. Instead, it continues down the hillslope and soil tread remains in place.

41 Big Sugar Project

The monitored 2.5-mile portion of the Tevis Cup Trail has approximately 12 low-water stream crossings, two of which were perennial. GYR monitoring recorded all of these to be a Green condition indicating that the approaches are short and gradual and minimal amounts of sediment are reaching the stream channel. The same BMPs followed during Tevis Cup Trail reroute design and construction are also proposed for the Big Sugar Project trail construction. Therefore, the proposed reroutes and new trails are expected to have a minimal impact to water quality and stream hydrology. Trail construction would increase the potential for soil erosion once soil cover is removed. New and rerouted trails would be designed to limit steep slopes and provide for natural drainage. Therefore, accelerated erosion is expected to be minimal. The highest potential for tread wear and accelerated erosion would occur on switchbacks constructed on greater than 30 percent slopes on the Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail. On these switchbacks the constructed grade reversals would catch upper drainage runoff. In addition, overall switchback radius bench would be constructed to less than 10 percent slope. These design standards would minimize tread wear and potential soil erosion. On newly constructed trails and rerouted trails, the potential for tread wear, erosion and sediment would be reduced by following the trail design standards described in the proposed action, soil and hydrology management requirements, and BMP 4.7.4. Ongoing soil impacts could include tread wear and soil erosion. Proposed trail construction and future trail erosion could result in minor amounts of sediment entering Brimstone Creek, Duncan Creek, Forbes Creek, Little Duncan Creek, McBride Creek, Mountain Chief Creek, Pagge Creek, Sellier Creek, and Tadpole Creek. Following BMPs would limit the slopes and lengths of the stream crossing approaches to decrease the potential for accelerated erosion and sediment entering the channel. Trail construction is unlikely to result in major impacts to riparian areas. No major impacts to riparian areas were observed on the recently constructed Tevis Cup Trail. Under Alternative 2, existing poorly aligned trail segments proposed for decommissioning and rerouting would continue to experience accelerated erosion. Proposed barrier construction, boulder placement and mixed use The proposed action to construct barrier fencing in the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System would benefit soil and hydrology resources by decreasing off-trail travel. Currently, there is a high amount of off-trail travel adjacent to the 24 road where low productive serpentine soils and rock outcrops have less vegetation to discourage unauthorized traffic. Installing 0.3 miles of barrier fencing along the 24 road under Alternative 1 would decrease the amount of off-trail travel and the resulting illegal route creation that is probable with the no action alternative. Likewise, construction of barricades and barrier fencing along NFS roads 10-6, 10-6-4, 10-6-6, and 10-12 would limit illegal OHV traffic in these areas. Installing boulders at 16E04 Tevis Trail would benefit the soil resource by discourage widening of the existing single track. Allowing motorized mixed use on 0.3 miles of NFS road 43 and the associated reconstruction actions would follow BMP 2.3 and would result in minimal erosion and sediment delivery. Proposed bridge construction, maintenance and reconstruction of stream crossings Stream crossings are the most critical locations for sedimentation. Sediment produced at these sites originates from two primary sources: the stream-crossing structure (bridge or low-water), and the road/trail approaches to the crossing. Proposed bridge construction under Alternative 1 could reduce sediment at existing low water crossings with steep inner gorges, such as those found on the proposed Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail, because bridges would decrease the length of the approach. Existing motorized

42 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest traffic through low water crossings produces sediment by the processes of waves from vehicles eroding banks, ruts concentrating surface runoff during storms and water washing off vehicles (as they emerge from the water) eroding the approach as it runs back into the stream (Brown 1994). Bridge construction would increase sediment downstream during active construction and occasionally during a subsequent rainfall (Taylor 1999) and longer-term effects on water quality depend on factors such as type of surface on the ford and its approaches, vehicle type and use level. Overall, constructing bridges over low water crossings in Alternative 1 would have a minor benefit to water quality when compared to Alternative 2 where the stream crossing approach is not changed. Proposed removal of fixed wet weather season closure dates, gate installation The proposed action to remove fixed wet weather seasonal closure dates from 31.2 road miles and 111.6 trail miles would follow Region 5 BMP 4.7.7 by developing a wet weather operating plan. Data collected at lower and upper Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System indicate levels of soil strength and moisture at which OHV trail damage begins to occur for typical traffic (Poff 2016). As specified in the wet weather operating plan, the proposed action would use this data to close trails when measurements of soil strength predict a high risk of damage to drainage structures and trail treads. Currently, under Alternative 2, trails and roads are closed for a core period when soil moisture is expected to be high based on precipitation. This has been ineffective because in recent years trails have been closed during dry periods, OHV users tend to ignore the closure period and use trails when they perceive it to be dry. Therefore, trail damage occurs when soil strength is low. Alternative 1 would decrease wet-season trail damage by closing trails based on actual soil strength data and installing gates to manage trails based on the wet weather operating plan. Visual Resources The proposed activities are all located within various Management Areas (MAs) with various forest management emphasis. The MAs that generally have some concern for visual quality or some emphasis on preserving or retaining visual quality are areas near the Granite Chief Wilderness, near the North Fork American Wild and Scenic River, along the Foresthill Divide Road and along the Western States and Tevis Cup trails. Visual effects and intensity of visual effects will vary with this project since project actions would occur in many various locations on the districts across various landscape character types with different Visual Quality Objectives (VQOs). Although visual effects will vary, none of the visual effects would be significant, and all of the visual effects would be compliant with the Forest Plan VQOs. Proposed actions would be minimally evident (since they consist of trail building or existing trail improvements), would be very small and would be lightly and sustainably placed upon the landscape. Views of proposed actions would primarily be in the immediate foreground by users recreating on existing trails or the trail features being proposed. Some of the proposed actions could be visible for very short periods of time from highly used travelways in immediate foreground views but would be minimally evident to nonexistent in middleground and background views. The most visually affected parts of this project would be where trail improvements would occur in areas with a VQO of Retention, as well as along the Western States Trail and Tevis Cup Trail. The only parts of this project located in a VQO of Retention are the trail improvements in the Duncan Canyon and Little Duncan Canyon areas. This VQO does not allow for project activities to be visually evident but trail building techniques in this area would result in trail improvements blending into the surrounding characteristic landscape. Trail building materials would be utilized from on site or would be chosen to blend into the natural surroundings and the trail alignment would be placed to take advantage of the natural terrain. Although the effects of these trail

43 Big Sugar Project

improvements would be evident to users, the recreational experience and scenic values of the area would be enhanced. Proposed trail improvements on the Western States and Tevis Cup Trails outside of the Duncan Canyon area would occur in areas with a VQO of Partial Retention or Modification but management areas with these trails running through them emphasize maintaining the integrity of scenic values along them. Trail building techniques in these areas would also be similar to those used in more restrictive areas of VQO so these lesser restrictive VQOs would be in compliance. Although proposed actions would occur in areas of sensitive visual quality, none of the impacts would be out of compliance with Forest Plan VQOs. The most negative visual effects would occur when trail building or improvements take place. Small trail building equipment, dozers and excavators, construction signage, and increased dust and noise would be evident in the immediate foreground but only for short periods of time (days to weeks at a time.) Evidence of trail grading, cut and fill slopes, rock placing, and decommissioned old trails may be visible in the short term (less than 5 years) and would sufficiently blend into natural surroundings in a few years. Any short term negative impacts would be reduced by implementing recommended Visual Resource BMPs. Overall the actions of this project would result in minimal negative visual impacts and some positive visual impacts. Small amounts of visual contrast impacts result in evidence of project activities but reduced evidence of those impacts over the short term (less than 5 years) and implementing recommended project BMPs would result in reduced negative visual impacts and the project would result in compliance with all affected Forest Plan VQOs. Terrestrial Wildlife Western bumble bee Direct effects to western bumble bees may occur and could include disturbance to foraging bumble bees or damage to nest colonies due to the removal of flowering shrubs and wildflowers during project implementation and long-term recreational use. Disturbance-type effects are expected to be short term and limited as preferred habitat (meadows and riparian areas) would not be treated under the proposed action. Disturbance would also be limited due to the narrow trail corridor and timing of project implementation being spread over several years, which would reduce the amount of disturbance on any given year. Preferred habitat that contains a concentration of flowering plants, such as riparian areas, would be limited to short crossings. Bald eagle The proposed action has the potential to cause direct, disturbance-type effects (e.g., flushing a perched individual) if bald eagles are passing through, or foraging in the vicinity of Sugar Pine or Big Reservoir. Disturbance would be in association with project activities such as clearing brush and small trees or the operation of heavy equipment as well as long-term recreational use. There are no known nesting bald eagles in the analysis area. Disturbance-type effects, if they occur, are expected to be brief and slight. If bald eagles are discovered nesting during project implementation, project activities would be limited during the breeding season at a distance determined by a wildlife biologist necessary to minimize disturbance. The proposed decommissioning of approximately 3 miles of trail near Sugar Pine and Big Reservoirs would reduce potential disturbance from recreational use to wintering or breeding eagles if they occur in the area. The proposed action is not expected to affect the availability of large trees, aside from adjacent hazard trees, which could be suitably large snags. The potential effect of the loss of large trees or snags is very low, based on the intent to retain trees and the lack of known bald eagle occurrences or nests.

44 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

California spotted owl Because the Big Sugar OHV Project would affect a very small, linear area in a very large project area, with very little effect on overstory vegetation, the effects to habitat structure are generally discountable. For this reason, the analysis area is a buffer within 0.25-mile of the proposed trail alignments, which represents the extent of potential disturbance based on the best available science and the Forest Plan. The assumption is that use would consist of typical, weekend- intensive recreational users; if a large event such as an enduro race or a large group occurred, their permit may require more specific analysis and management requirements. Roads and trails may affect adjacent habitats by facilitating human and vehicle disturbance, introducing non-native vegetation, and fragmenting habitat. The trail proposal was analyzed for the potential to fragment adjacent habitats by buffering them on either side for 0.25-mile and the resulting acreage is shown in Table 5. This table shows the California Wildlife Habitat Relationship (CWHR) types larger than 4M, 4D, 5M, 5D, and 6 and are the suitable habitat types for California spotted owl, northern goshawk and Pacific marten. Table 5. Acres of California Wildlife Habitat Relationship1 types larger than 4M, 4D, 5M, 5D, and 6 within 0.25-mile of proposed trail actions. Habitat Type Acres (within 0.25-mile) Sierran mixed conifer 4M 6,287 Sierran mixed conifer 4D 9,858 Sierran mixed conifer 5M 1,071 Sierran mixed conifer 5D, 6 4,631 Total Mid- to late-successional, closed-canopy forests ( > 4M) 21,847 Total Analysis Area 35,120 Total Project Area 170,982 1 Definitions of Timber Strata and CWHR Types: • Size Class 4=12-24” dbh, 5=24-40” dbh, Class 6 is defined as size class 5 trees over a distinct layer of size class 4 or 3 trees; total tree canopy exceeds 60% closure. • Canopy Cover Class M= 40-69%, D=70% or more The highest quality old-forest habitat in these areas are contained in the designated Protected Activity Centers (PACs) and Home Range Core Areas (HRCAs). The concentrated trails in the Sugar Pine Reservoir area contain the majority of the 4M and 4D habitat, due to the older plantations of pine associated with the 1960 Volcano Fire; these stands are in fact at the smaller end of the range for this habitat type, are lacking in structural and species diversity, and are also sparse in important components such as oaks, logs, and snags. These areas were surveyed recently as part of the Sunny South Project and no new owl nests were detected. Elsewhere in the project area the mature forest habitat tends to be very small and greatly fragmented by wildfire, reducing the likelihood of occupancy. Regardless, the habitat affected by the trails would not be measurably fragmented by the small footprint in the much larger analysis area and project area, so effects to habitat are largely discountable. The project as a whole would increase the number of miles of trail in the network, but would retain important habitat characteristics such as overstory, large trees, and complex, mature forest ecosystems. The dense network of trails is largely in open, shrub habitat near Sugar Pine, whereas the trails in forested areas tend to be linear, narrow, and receive less use. Where a network of trails occurred in the productive spotted owl PAC near Sugar Pine Reservoir, these trails are proposed for removal in favor of more sustainable, less impactful trail locations. Because the trails are narrow and do not remove overstory, they do not substantially fragment suitable forested habitat, allowing for contiguous forest stands and movement of birds between forested areas.

45 Big Sugar Project

Soil moisture based opening and closing of trails The flexibility of trail use based on soil moisture would increase use during extended dry periods between fall and spring; this would result in increased potential for disturbance to sensitive terrestrial species between December 31 to April 1, when trails are currently closed, however, limited studies conducted on road-associated disturbance has not been shown to result in reduction or loss of reproductive success. The actual risk of disturbance varies with habitat and proximity to occupied areas. As displayed in Table 6, three trails intersecting PACs are greater than 0.25-mile away from the known nest/roost sites (PLA0082, PLA0116, and PLA0134) and one does not have a recent known activity center. Any disturbance associated with motorized vehicle use on these trails during this period may affect foraging or roosting owls, but would not likely affect nesting owls. Regardless, increased use during dry periods of the winter season would not constitute a substantial adverse effect because the birds are not breeding, and the activity centers (nest/roost sites) are greater than 0.25-mile away, a distance thought to be sufficient to reduce loud mechanical disturbance to nesting spotted owls. In addition, two of the trail segments consist of very short segments on the periphery of PACs (PLA0088 and PLA0134), which, when in operation, would result in very brief disturbance. It should be noted that the trails in PLA0116 are proposed for eventual decommission. Table 6. Proposed Removal of Seasonal Closures on Trails that Intersect Spotted Owl PACs Length in PAC Nearest Road Distance from Activity PAC ID (miles) Center (nest site/roost stand, in miles) PLA0017 2.3 0.01 PLA0025 0.44 0.08 PLA0082 1.68 0.26 PLA0088 0.21 Unknown PLA0116 2.29 0.35 PLA0134 0.05 0.53 PLA0136 0.92 0.24 PLA0138 2.78 0.04 Total 10.67 -- The other five PACs contain longer segments that are closer to known activity centers. These territories would likely be subject to slightly less disturbance during wet periods in the spring and fall and more disturbance between fall and spring in extended dry periods. The changed timing of use based on soil moisture is not expected to affect nesting, as these trails are already open during the breeding season. Because the activity centers provide high quality roosts, the project may result in greater disturbance during the fall through spring, although the level of recreational use during this period is not expected to be as great as the summer use. Close approximately 1 mile of road and decommission 31 miles of existing trail Closing or decommissioning trail would result in some project-related disturbance to block or rip existing trail, although the narrow trails would generally be reduced rapidly and activities would be conducted under a limited operating period outside of nearby nest stands. The long-term effect of trail removal would be to reduce human disturbance and risk of mortality, thus these closures generally benefit spotted owls. Opportunities to remove trails in other PACs was explored, particularly in PLA0017, but because of a steep canyon and a large existing bridge, alternative routes were not included in the project design. A total of 2.41 miles of trail in PACs would be removed, reducing disturbance in occupied habitat; most of the trail proposed for removal is in PAC PLA0116 (2.33 miles), which is expected to greatly benefit this territory. The other segments are relatively short and would only have a minor beneficial effect.

46 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

Create approximately 24 miles of new trail and 48 miles of rerouted replacement trail Building new trail creates temporary construction disturbance, long-term disturbance associated with recreational use, and some risk of injury or mortality, thus new trails create an adverse effect for spotted owls. Construction would occur under limited operating periods, preventing disturbance near activity centers during the breeding season. A total of 2.91 miles of new trails would be constructed in six different PACs under the proposed action, as shown in Table 7. The specific effects of new trails to individual PACs is worth considering because they vary. Spotted owl PAC PLA0096 is largely red fir, and has been losing habitat value for several years due to a root fungus killing many trees. In addition, PLA0096 has some tree die-off from both the American Complex in 2008 and the American fire of 2013, so it may no longer support breeding spotted owls. Owls were not detected in the territory in 2017 or 2018. Similarly, PLA0060 is within the boundary of the recent American Complex fire (2008) and, while the territory did not burn at high intensity, it was left more open and less contiguous than before the fire. The other PACs only contain small segments of new or rerouted trail. While the effect of new trail construction and long-term recreational use of trails is adverse for spotted owls, the limited length of segments in most territories, along with the lack of known breeding activity or distance of nest sites from the proposed trails is expected to limit adverse effects. The actual use of the new trail from China Wall to Robinson Flat is expected to be limited because of difficulty, and it would disperse advanced riders from some of the more concentrated trails in the central Sugar Pine OHV use area. The re-routes, because they are avoiding problematic segments on existing trails, are expected to result in reduced long-term disturbance associated with maintenance and use, although they may receive increased use simply because they will be better trails. Table 7. Proposed New Trails or Re-Routed Trails that Intersect Spotted Owl PACs Length in PAC Nearest Road Distance from Activity PAC ID (miles) Center (nest site/roost stand, in miles) PLA0017 0.47 0.68 PLA0026 0.18 1.25 PLA0060 1.74 None PLA0088 0.17 None PLA0096 0.28 None PLA0097 0.07 None Total 2.91 -- Changes to about 1 mile of trail management (other than season of use), installation of almost 2 miles of restoration fencing, and installation of 10 gates, two sites with boulders and 11 bridges. Although a number of new improvements are proposed as part of the project, only two, bridges, are in existing PACs; one in PLA0116 and one in PLA0136. Like the rest of the trail construction, these improvements would be subject to a limited operating period within 0.25-mile of activity centers during the breeding season, but would contribute to long-term recreational use when the trails are sufficiently dry, including during the breeding season. Both bridges are at the far end of the PACs from the known activity centers- : 0.85-mile from the activity center at PLA0116 and 0.92 from the one at PLA0136. The bridges are expected to reduce impacts to the drainages and reduce the length of time for recreational disturbance in the PACs. Most of the bridges, gates, and boulder locations are located in moderate to high quality habitat, but would not result in more than a minor loss of habitat in the small footprint of these site improvements. Great gray owl The analysis area for great gray owl extends 0.7 miles from the project area in correlation with the spatial extent of great gray owl home ranges. Great gray owls are not known to occur in or near the analysis area. The nearest known detections of this species are approximately 18 miles northwest of the project area. There are no designated PACs for great gray owls in the area.

47 Big Sugar Project

Because they forage in open habitats sometimes during the day, and because they respond to spotted owl calls during surveys, they tend to be visible and documented; no great gray owls have been documented on the American River Ranger District. Nonetheless, because great gray owls forage in open areas for small mammals, there is some potential for them to occur in parts of the project area, such as the Forest Service Seed Orchard, in wildfire areas, or at Robinson Flat, although they have not been observed in these areas. These open areas may support occasional dispersing individuals or juveniles while moving to better habitat areas. These areas already receive disturbance in the form of vegetation management and recreation, so trail work and recreational use are not expected to greatly increase disturbance. Slight direct effects to great gray owls are possible, but unlikely since this species has not been documented in the area and would be limited to temporary disturbance if they moved through the area. Like spotted owls, an LOP can be applied to reduce disturbance to nesting birds, but is not necessary for this project without known breeding activity or highly suitable, large meadow habitat. Indirect effects to this species are not expected because of the very limited effects to vegetation over a very large project area. Project implementation will have a slight to moderate, long-term beneficial effect on potential great gray owl habitat as vehicular access is better managed and unsustainable trails are closed. Project implementation will not affect medium and large snag densities, future snag recruitment, or large woody debris within the analysis area. Past vegetation management projects generally have been slightly beneficial (e.g., understory benefits from underburning) to slightly detrimental (e.g., reductions in canopy closure) in the short-term and neutral to slightly beneficial to great gray owl habitats over the long-term as stands continue to develop, resiliency is increased, and mature forest habitat components such as large trees, canopy cover, snags, and logs are retained. Northern goshawk Several portions of the proposed project occur within designated PACs for northern goshawks; Table 8, below describes what component of the projects occurs in which territory and proximity to activity centers. Where the distance to activity centers is unknown, no goshawks were detected in 2017 and 2018. No trails proposed for removal are located in PACs. Table 8. Proposed Trail Components in Northern Goshawk PACs Length in Change in New Nearest Road Distance from Activity PAC ID PAC (miles) Seasonal Use Trails Center (nest site/roost stand, in miles) Mumford Bar 0.66 -- 0.66 0.40 Robinson Flat 0.49 -- 0.49 None Tadpole 0.28 -- 0.28 None Mitchell Mine 0.74 0.74 -- None Total 2.17 0.74 1.43 -- Human disturbances along roads and trails may affect adjacent habitats by causing human/ vehicle disturbance, introducing non-native vegetation, and fragmenting habitat. The trail proposal was analyzed for the potential to fragment adjacent habitats by buffering them on either side for 0.25-mile and is shown in Table 5 (CWHR). Although only a few segments would occur in goshawk PACs, the project would occur within about 22,000 acres of suitable habitat within 0.25-mile of trails (Table 5). The proposed continued management of existing and additional trails is expected to create long-term disturbance that would reduce habitat quality. While these areas would still contain habitat values such as overstory canopy, logs, and large trees, snags may be somewhat reduced for rider safety. The highest quality old-forest habitat in these areas are contained in the designated goshawk PACs, as well as spotted owl PACs and HRCAs. The concentrated trails in the Sugar Pine Reservoir area contain the majority of the 4M and 4D habitat, due to the older plantations of pine associated with

48 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

the 1960 Volcano Fire; these stands are in fact at the smaller end of the range for this habitat type, are lacking in structural and species diversity, and also sparse in important components such as oaks, logs, and snags. These areas were surveyed recently as part of the Sunny South Project and no new goshawk nests were detected. The project as a whole would increase the number of miles of trail in the network, but would retain important habitat characteristics such as overstory, large trees, and complex, mature forest ecosystems. The dense network of trails is largely in open, shrub habitat near Sugar Pine, whereas the trails in forested areas tend to be more difficult, narrow, and receive less use. Because the trails are narrow and do not remove overstory, they do not substantially fragment suitable forested habitat, allowing for contiguous forest stands and movement of birds between forested areas. The habitat affected by the trails would not be measurably fragmented by the small footprint within the very large analysis area and larger project area, so effects to habitat are largely discountable. Because habitat effects are minor, the focus of the remaining analysis is on disturbance to birds. Soil moisture based opening and closing of trails Proposed monitoring would reduce the amount of time these roads and trails are used during wet weather as compared to the current fixed season of use, especially during spring or fall rainstorms. The flexibility of trail use based on soil moisture would also increase trail use during extended dry periods between fall and spring; this would result in increased potential for disturbance to sensitive terrestrial species in the winter. The actual risk of disturbance varies with habitat and proximity to occupied areas. The trail where season of use restrictions would be made more flexible affects the Mitchell Mine PAC. Changing use restrictions has a slight potential to increase disturbance to this territory between December 31 to April 1, when trails are currently closed, however, limited studies conducted on road-associated disturbance has not been shown to result in reduced occupancy or loss of reproductive success. The Mitchell Mine territory does not have a recent known activity center; nesting activity was last documented in 2003, and is located less than 100 feet from the existing trail. This trail is very advanced, dropping into Eldorado Canyon, and receives far less use than the core Sugar Pine OHV area. Opportunities to move the trail out of the PAC were considered, but because of the steepness of the area and a large existing bridge, it was decided to keep the trail in place. Any disturbance associated with motorized vehicle use on this trail during this period may affect foraging goshawks, as well as the ongoing disturbance during the summer breeding season. Regardless, increased use during dry periods of the winter season would not constitute a substantial adverse effect since goshawks would not be tied to a nest. Nonetheless, additional potential use near an activity center constitutes an adverse effect. Close approximately 1 mile of road and decommission 31 miles of existing trail None of the trails proposed for closure are in or near PACs, so this aspect of the project is not expected to affect northern goshawks. Create approximately 24 miles of new trail and 48 miles of rerouted replacement trail Building new trail creates temporary construction disturbance and long-term disturbance associated with recreational use, thus new trails create an adverse effect for northern goshawks. Construction would occur under limited operating periods, preventing disturbance near activity centers during the breeding season. As shown in Table 8, a total of 1.43 miles of new trails would be constructed in three PACs under the proposed action. These new segments of trails in PACs are all along the new trail from China Wall to Robinson Flat; this trail is expected to receive

49 Big Sugar Project

limited use because of length and difficulty, and it would disperse advanced riders from some of the more concentrated trails in the central Sugar Pine OHV use area. The specific effects of new trails to individual PACs is worth considering. The Tadpole PAC was greatly affected by the American Complex fire of 2008, however, the nest tree remained. The PAC was burned again in the 2013 American Fire and the nest tree was lost. The Robinson Flat PAC was burned in the 2013 American Fire and was surveyed for this project without detections. The territory at Robinsons Flat is largely red fir, and has been losing habitat value for several years due to a root fungus killing many trees. In addition, some tree die-off from the American Fire of 2013, that opened the canopy and fragmented habitat, may no longer support breeding goshawks; a goshawk suitability model shows both PACs as limited in suitability and severely fragmented. Although neither territory has a known nest, the two historic nests were more than 0.25-mile from proposed trail construction. The limited length of segments in the two territories, along with the lack of known breeding activity and distance of nest sites from the proposed trails is expected to limit adverse effects. The Mumford Bar territory was also burned in the 2008 American Complex, but goshawks were active in 2017 and 2018 and the nest was found in 2018. The current Mumford Bar nest is more than 0.25-mile from proposed trail construction, so is not likely to suffer from disturbance during nesting. The new trail construction and long-term recreational use of trails would nonetheless result in an adverse additional disturbance in the PAC. The disturbance may result in distraction and flushing if they are foraging nearby, but is not expected to affect nesting birds. Changes to about 1 mile of trail management (other than season of use), installation of almost 2 miles of restoration fencing, and installation of 10 gates, two sites with boulders and 11 bridges. Although a number of new improvements are proposed as part of the project, only two are in existing PACs: two proposed bridges in the Mumford Bar PAC. Like the rest of the trail construction, these improvements would be constructed subject to a limited operating period within 0.25-mile of activity centers during the breeding season. These bridge improvements would contribute to long-term recreational use when the trails are sufficiently dry, including during the breeding season. Both bridges are over 0.45 miles from the activity center, but would nonetheless contribute to the proposed long-term disturbance associated with the trail through the PAC. The bridges are expected to prevent impacts to the drainages and result in relatively brief recreational disturbance, so would prevent the potential for trail disturbance in the PAC. Most of the bridges, gates, and boulder locations are located in moderate to high quality habitat, but would not result in more than a minor loss of habitat in the small footprint of these site improvements. Pacific marten The Sugar Pine OHV area and much of the trail system included in the Big Sugar project are too low in elevation for marten. The proposed Big Sugar OHV project would include the following in areas likely occupied by marten: . Constructing almost 14 miles of new trail . Removing 6.76 miles of trail, resulting in a net gain of 7.08 miles of trail . 1.76 miles of trail removed from fixed seasonal use . None of the site improvements such as bridges are located in suitable habitat for marten Noise during trail construction and decommissioning could directly disturb individual martens, and temporarily displace them from the vicinity of trails. Human use along new trail segments would occur seasonally, approximately from June through November, when snow is absent from the trails. Although the proposed flexible season of use would be applied throughout the trail system, the higher elevation areas in marten habitat would be limited by snow cover as well. These areas receive some snowmobile use.

50 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

There is some potential for construction and long-term use of new trails as well as removal of fixed seasonal use in suitable habitat to disrupt marten activity. The majority of studies conducted on road-related effects to marten concluded that roads do not appear to affect marten presence or abundance. In particular, two study sites in California (Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit and Sierra National Forest), Zielinski et al. 2008 found that off-highway vehicle and over-the-snow vehicle use (at least up to 1 vehicle per 2-hour time period) had no effect to marten occurrence, circadian activity, or sex ratio. Therefore, although the proposed action may affect marten behavior and activity level immediately adjacent to roads/trails proposed for removal of fixed season of use, it is likely that the proposed action would result in only minor adverse effects to marten presence or abundance. Wolverine The Sugar Pine OHV area and much of the trail system included in the Big Sugar project are too low in elevation for wolverine, but parts of the project area occur above 6,000 feet in elevation; these areas include the following miles of treatment in areas of suitable persistent snow cover: . Removing 4.08 miles of trail, resulting in a net gain of 7.08 miles of trail . Constructing 5.72 miles of rerouted trails and 3.96 miles of new trail, resulting in a net gain of 5.6 miles of new trails . 0.43 miles of trail removed from fixed seasonal use . None of the site improvements such as bridges and gates are located in persistent snow areas Because wolverine have not been detected or observed on the American River Ranger District in recent years, and the single documented wolverine on the Tahoe National Forest is north of Interstate 80, this species is unlikely to occur in the project area. Nonetheless, wolverine are wide-ranging and may occur in the area. If present, noise during trail construction and decommissioning could directly disturb individual wolverines, and temporarily displace them from the vicinity of trails. Human use along new trail segments would occur seasonally, approximately from June through November, when snow is absent from the trails; while the season of use would not be fixed, motorized vehicle use is limited by snow cover. Although the proposed reroutes may cause some temporary disturbance during construction and subsequent use, the overall effect would be minimal, as the current trails would be decomissioned and would recover over time. Recreational snowmobile use may occur in the area, although it appears to be relatively light, because the staging area at China Wall is far from the higher elevation areas. The new replacement trails proposed would replace less sustainable existing trails, which is expected to reduce ongoing, long-term maintenance. The new trail proposed is near Robinsons Flat, which only had one year of persistent spring snow over the course of the 7-year period; climate change is expected to reduce persistent snow cover and likely contract suitable habitat to those areas with more consistent late spring snow cover (USFWS 2011). The project is not expected to affect suitable habitat for wolverine. Transportation The effects of the proposed action are addressed in terms of changes in public safety and affordability. Actions 6, 7, 8 and 9 have minor beneficial effects on public safety and affordability. Action 1: Open and close Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System to public wheeled motor vehicle travel based on factors established in the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System Wet Weather Operating Plan. Action 1 would base the season of use of the Sugar Pine Motorized Trail System on monitored soil moisture threshold, timing, and forecasted imminent precipitation. This would open the

51 Big Sugar Project

system when soil moisture data is within tested and acceptable ranges that reduce damage to the road and trail surface. Soil moisture will be tested and confirmed in the field to be at an acceptable range to prevent road damage. The result could reduce or lengthen the season of use on the OHV system. Opening trails and roads only when moisture levels are within a tested and acceptable range will reduce hazards to the public by restricting use when soil moisture levels drastically reduce the strength of the trail and road prisms causing slipping and skidding. Action 1 would restrict use based on soil moisture levels rather than a fixed season of use. Damage could occur prior to proper calibration of the remote field monitoring device; however, the monitoring device has been used for four years. Additional field testing and monitoring would minimize damage to the roads. This action would help keep traffic off the roads and trails when they are too wet and help prevent damage to the road and trail surface. This action would not affect the cost of road repairs. Adding a trail to the NFS trail system (Action 2), reroutes and associated decommissioning (Actions 3 and 4), constructing bridges (Action 5) and adding mixed use on 0.25 miles and the associated adding a 200-foot road segment to the National Forest Transportation System (Action 10). Actions 2, 3, 4, and 5 would have a minor effect on public safety by slowing down vehicles for trail undulations, turns and bridge approaches. Action 10 would expose the public to 0.25 miles of mixed use on NFS Road 43. Current unauthorized use of this road segment and an adjacent road is occurring by off-highway vehicles. The proposed actions include a mixed use analysis to determine if the road is safe for mixed use. If mixed use is approved by regional engineers, the proposed action of regrading cut slopes, realigning short segments and removing roadside brush would increase sight distance which will improve public safety during mixed use. Actions 3 and 4 would reduce the need for frequent maintenance allowing maintenance to occur on other motorized trails during the most effective time. Removal of hazards such as fallen trees and rocks will continue to take place on these trails. These actions should have a positive effect on affordability and the cost of trail repairs by decommissioning the segments that need frequent maintenance and using sustainable design standards for the reroutes. Action 2 would have a minimal effect on the need for frequent maintenance because the trail would be constructed using sustainable design standards. Action 5 would be costly to install but would decrease maintenance requirements and costs on these trails by removing segments that channel water and sediment into creeks. Action 10 would have a slight increase in the initial cost for the actions to improve sight distance and it would slightly add to the cost maintenance for the 200-foot spur. 2) The degree to which the proposed action affects public health or safety. The Big Sugar Project is designed to reduce risks to public health and safety by rerouting and improving trails. Advanced motorized dirt bikes coexist with mountain bikers, equestrians and hikers. Existing signage advises the recreationist about trail difficulty and the multiple trail uses to reduce the risk of accidents. The number of OHV users would increase over time; however, public safety for trail users would improve through increased trail mileage and the resulting reduced density of users. Trail guidelines used for building sustainable trails and preventing resource damage limit steep grades and fall-line alignments. The new alignments would increase sight distances; users would be able to see other groups from further distances. The sustainable alignments that use turns and switchbacks slow the motorized use and reduce the likelihood of collisions, while providing a technical, challenging trail. Treatments that improve trail conditions would improve safety for the public.

52 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

The bridges over Volcano Canyon and Duncan Canyon would help to provide a gentler grade with a sustainable alignment. In addition, safety would be increased for all users who travel across the creeks during high water flows. The proposed action would improve signage and education for public safety, including additional signage to alert users of multiple use on the trail, as well as increased signage and monitoring in precipitous and steep sections of the trails. Forest Service roads, trails and areas are designed to allow motorized use in a safe manner. Chief safety concerns include conflicts between passenger cars and non-highway legal vehicles. Under the Proposed Action, additional periods of time would be available for motor vehicle opportunities when resource conditions allow. Safety is one of the considered criteria in determining if a trail or road should be closed within the season of use. By allowing motorized use during a potentially extended time period, additional conflicts beyond those accepted under the MTM ROD (USDA FS 2010) would not occur. Public safety would not be affected by closing trail or road segments. Public safety is also addressed under the recreation and transportation effects in this chapter. 3) Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as the proximity to historical or cultural resources, parklands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas. No parklands, prime farmlands, research natural areas, special interest areas, or other ecologically critical areas are within or nearby the Big Sugar Project. The North Fork American Wild and Scenic River is over one-half mile away from the nearest proposed action and the proposed action does not enter the wild and scenic boundary. Due to the steepness of the terrain, noise and views from the river of the proposed trail would be minor. These resources would not be affected by the proposed action. Cultural The Project Area has been surveyed and analyzed for h istorical and cultural resources. Historic features unique to the area are primarily associated with historic mining, logging and grazing. Historic cultural resources found in the area include road grades, trails, ditches, structure remains, refuse dumps, tailings, and mining excavations. Prehistoric cultural resources include bedrock milling stations, flaked stone scatters, and petroglyphs. Project activities planned within the project area are designed protect cultural resources, while adhering to the provisions of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and Regional Programmatic Agreement (Regional PA 2018). Results of the cultural resource analysis indicate that the proposed action would not adversely affect any historical or cultural resource eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, nor would it cause the loss or destruction of any significant cultural or historical resources. Inventoried Roadless Areas and Citizen Inventoried Roadless Areas The 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule and Forest Service policy guide and restrict management activities within inventoried roadless areas (IRAs). Within the three IRAs identified to have proposed actions, existing road and trail mileages are displayed in Table 9. In 2001, the California Wilderness Coalition (CWC) completed its own inventory of potential wilderness areas on California public lands. For the purpose of this analysis, these areas will be referred to as citizen inventoried roadless areas (CIRAs). Restrictions on road construction and reconstruction specified in the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule apply only to those areas within agency-identified IRAs. A separate analysis has been conducted to compare the effects of

53 Big Sugar Project

the proposed actions on CIRAs outside of agency-identified IRAs. The effects on IRAs and CIRAs are disclosed by using the roadless characteristics identified below. Table 9. Existing Road and Trail Mileage in the Inventoried Roadless Areas Road and Trail Category North Fork North Fork of Middle Duncan American River Fork American River Canyon IRA Miles IRA Miles IRA Miles NFS Roads Open to Highway Legal Vehicles Only 0 0.04 0.04 NFS Roads Open to All Vehicles 1.12 1.26 0.21 NFS Trails Open to Motorcycles 2.1a 15.7b 13.75c NFS Trails Open to Hikers and Equestrians Only 41.43 0.6 4.8 a This 2.1 miles is Loop 5 b Of this 15.7 miles, 5.8 miles is Loop 6 c 7.9 miles is Tevis Cup trail; 5.85 miles is Western States trail North Fork American River As displayed in Table 10 below, no new motorized trail is proposed within the North Fork American River IRA. A short segment of the Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail navigates the sloping land between the IRA and private land and draws close to the southern boundary of the IRA; however, this segment was adjusted to stay out of the IRA boundary and therefore does not affect the roadless area characteristics. A net change of approximately 0.15 miles—more rerouted than decommissioned—would occur for the Loop 5 area within the 44,523-acre IRA to make a more sustainable trail. As shown in Table 10 and on Map 5, approximately 14.5 miles of new motorized trail out of the approximately 24.1-mile proposed Robinsons Flat to China Wall new trail and a net addition of 0.28 miles of reroutes is within the proposed CIRA. The miles of new trail located within the CIRA are largely adjacent to the paved Foresthill Divide County Road. The addition of this trail to the NFTS would have a minor negative effect on the overall natural appearing landscape and high scenic quality of the area. Although it does not show in the table below, since it does not change the footprint on the ground, approximately one mile of road is proposed to be closed to public motorized wheeled vehicle use in the proposed CIRA (Map 6). Table 10. North Fork American River IRA and CIRA Mileage Big Sugar Trail Enhancement Trail Miles in IRA Miles in CIRA (outside of IRA) New Trail Robinson - China Wall Connector 0 14.3 Reroute Humbug (Loop 5) 1 0.81 Decommission Humbug (Loop 5) 0.85 0.53 NET CHANGE + 0.15 + 14.58 North Fork of Middle Fork American River As displayed in Table 11, no new trail is proposed within the 11,259-acre North Fork of Middle Fork American River IRA. The trail proposals on Loop 6 are within this IRA (Map 4). A net change of approximately 0.6 miles—more rerouted than decommissioned—would occur for the Loop 6 area within the IRA to make a more sustainable trail. A net change of approximately -0.38 miles—more decommissioned than rerouted—would occur for the Loop 6 area in the proposed CIRA.

54 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

Table 11. North Fork of Middle Fork American River IRA and CIRA Mileage Big Sugar Trail Enhancement Trail Miles in IRA Miles in CIRA (outside of IRA) New Trail Robinson - China Wall Connector 0 0 Reroute Codfish (Loop 6) 1.25 0.02 Decommission Codfish (Loop 6) 0.65 0.4 NET CHANGE + 0.6 - 0.38 Duncan Canyon As displayed in Table 12, no new trail is proposed within the 9,253-acre Duncan Canyon IRA. A net change of approximately 1.4 miles—more rerouted than decommissioned—would occur for the TCT and WST area in the IRA (Map 7). A net change of approximately 0.28 miles—more rerouted than decommissioned—would occur for the TCT and WST area in the proposed CIRA. Table 12. Duncan Canyon IRA and CIRA Mileage Big Sugar Trail Enhancement Trail Miles in IRA Miles in CIRA (outside of IRA) New Trail Robinson - China Wall Connector 0 0.12 Reroute Tevis Cup 1.82 0.17 Decommission Tevis Cup 1.5 0 Reroute Western States 2.37 0.03 Decommission Western States 1.3 0.04 NET CHANGE + 1.4 + 0.28 Roadless area characteristics The following roadless area characteristics would not be affected by proposed trail actions: 2) Sources of public drinking water; 3) Diversity of plant and animal communities; 6) Reference landscapes; 8) Traditional cultural properties and sacred sites; and 9) Other locally identified unique characteristics. The proposed trail actions would result in minimal effects on the following roadless area characteristics identified in the regulations and as described in this Chapter for the specific resources: 1) High quality or undisturbed soil, water, and air; 4) Habitat for threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species and for those species dependent on large, undisturbed areas of land; 5) Primitive, semi-primitive non-motorized and semi-primitive motorized classes of dispersed recreation; and 7) Natural appearing landscapes with high scenic quality. Addition of the proposed Robinsons-China Wall Connector Trail would be within a roaded natural area identified in the Forest Plan and would have a beneficial effect on dispersed recreation because it provides access to a popular dispersed recreation site and is consistent with roaded natural and semi-primitive motorized standards as identified in the Forest Plan. Short segments of two motorized trails currently exist at the edges of three semi-primitive non- motorized areas. The proposed action would consolidate the trails at the boundaries of these areas, Loop 5 would have 0.24 miles decommissioned and replaced with 0.46 miles of reroute in a consolidated edge of the semi-primitive non-motorized area and is not within an IRA. The Western States Trail (WST) would have 0.5 mile decommissioned and replaced with 0.47 miles of reroute, also on a consolidated edge of semi-primitive non-motorized area. The proposed sustainable alignment and less steep grade would slow motorists speed, reducing the engine RPM (rotation per minute) and reducing ambient sound that may affect other users. This section of the WST has had motorized use since the 1960s, prior to adoption of the Forest Plan, and is within the Duncan Canyon IRA.

55 Big Sugar Project

On the newly constructed trail and rerouted trails, the potential for tread wear, erosion and sediment transport would be reduced by following the trail design standards described in the proposed action, soil and hydrology management requirements and BMP 4.7.4. Ongoing soil impacts could include tread wear and soil erosion. Accelerated erosion is expected to be minimal from the proposed reroutes and new trails are expected to have a minimal impact to water quality and stream hydrology. The proposed trail actions are designed to reduce erosion while also providing semi-primitive motorized—and by association non-motorized—classes of dispersed recreation. The newly constructed trails and rerouted trails would have a minor negative effect on the overall natural appearing landscape and high scenic quality of the area. Decommissioning would have a long term minor beneficial effect on characteristic natural appearing landscapes. The effects on roadless characteristics are minimal given the minimal amount of vegetation removal associated with trail building. For effects related to these characteristics, please refer to the analyses of direct, indirect and cumulative effects for each resource throughout this Chapter. The effects on resources do not change based on a land-use allocation. For example, erosion could still occur if the road is in an IRA or not. The effects of erosion were addressed for the specific roads and for the overall effect on the watershed (soils and hydrology section of Chapter 3). The larger blocks of old-forest habitat for wildlife and plants were addressed in aquatic and botanical species and terrestrial wildlife in Chapter 3 wherever those blocks occurred. The other resources that may be affected by the proposed actions occurring in the IRAs and CIRAs are addressed under that specific resource. The trail proposals that would be undertaken within the three IRAs under Alternative 1 are consistent with the intent of the 2001 Roadless Rule (USDA 2001) to protect inventoried roadless areas within the National Forest System (36 CFR 294.10). Wilderness and Wild and Scenic River No motorized trail actions are proposed within Granite Chief Wilderness area or North Fork American Wild and Scenic River corridor. The proposed reroutes on the Tevis Cup Trail are proposed as an action to address erosion caused by unsustainable trail placement. The rerouted trail is not expected to increase use or noise levels in the wilderness because it is a technical trail that is suitable only for advanced riders and the trail is outside of the wilderness boundary. Trail reroutes of the unsustainable motorized trails are necessary regardless of the type of motorized or non-motorized use. The trail sections proposed for reroutes on Map 7 have steep sections channeling water that require annual maintenance regardless of the type of use. By installing undulating grades and switchbacks, water would be directed off of the trail, reducing erosion and reducing the need for extensive maintenance. These motorized trails existed prior to designation of Granite Chief Wilderness. The two criteria used for evaluation of wilderness characteristics to determine potential suitability of areas for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System are as follows: (1) the degree to which an area generally appears to be affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprints of man’s work substantially unnoticeable (apparent naturalness), and (2) the degree to which an area has outstanding opportunities for solitude or for a primitive and unconfined type of recreation. Using these two criteria, the proposed new trail and rerouted sections would not preclude the IRA and CIRA portions of the project area from future analysis for potential inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System during Forest Plan Revision. 4) The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly controversial. Scoping did not reveal scientific controversy regarding the magnitude or nature of effects of this project’s proposed action.

56 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

5) The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. The proposed action is similar in type and scope to other motorized trail and road projects on the Tahoe National Forest and American River Ranger District. Effects of the proposed activities are predictable, based on experience with similar past practices and scientific research. Professional expertise in implementation of these types of projects minimizes the chance of highly uncertain effects, which involve unique or unknown risks. Proposed activities are routine in nature, employing standard practices and design criteria rooted in policy and professional knowledge, and their risks and effects are generally well known. The project proposes use of NFS motorized trails and roads under similar circumstances of use during other times of the year and under circumstances where motorized vehicle use has been successfully allowed for many years. 6) The degree to which the action may establish precedent for future actions with significant effects or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration. Although it is acknowledged that the project area would not remain static, and may need future trail maintenance, this decision would not set a precedent for future actions with significant effects, nor does Alternative 1 influence any decision in principle about any future considerations. Any future decisions would require an environmental analysis and public involvement to consider relevant scientific and site-specific information available at that time. 7) Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts. Significance exists if it is reasonable to anticipate a cumulatively significant impact on the environment. Significance cannot be avoided by terming an action temporary or by breaking it down into small component parts. As this Proposed Action is an alternative mechanism of achieving the same effect as was analyzed in the MTM FEIS (USDA FS 2010) that document is adopted by reference and the effects of that document are summarized below for key resources. This factor contains specific information about the cumulative effects of resources that may potentially be affected by the Proposed Action. Past, on-going and foreseeable future events in the project area include forest stand thinning, fuel reduction projects, fire suppression, and recreational uses such as camping, hiking, mountain biking, and OHV use among others. Aquatic Wildlife California red-legged frog Over time, direct and indirect human activities combine to collectively impact the environment. These effects may differ from the original, individual activities. The cumulative effects analysis area for California red-legged frog is defined spatially as the area (12,847 acres) within 1 mile of proposed project activities at or below 4,000 feet elevation in correlation with the dispersal range given in the Recovery Plan (USFWS 2002) and the elevation range for this species. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions occurring within the Project Area include several large wildfires in the last 50 years that greatly affected the current conditions including: the landscape, canopy cover reduction and shade to streams, increased sediment and fragmentation of forested habitat, and increased human-related disturbance associated with fire suppression, emergency rehabilitation, and subsequent restoration activities. While OHV use contributes to the effects of these fires, the larger effect of habitat conversion dwarfs this use in comparison. The proposed project is not expected to contribute to the vegetation projects (French Meadows, Sunny South, Biggie, Deadwood and Last Chance projects), because this project and those include mitigation measures and ongoing monitoring, and because the more open habitat conditions tend to benefit more widespread species found near humans.

57 Big Sugar Project

The future state, private and federal actions identified that are reasonably certain to occur within the aquatic analysis area of the Big Sugar project include: continued recreational use, state fish stocking, land exchange, commercial harvest and grazing. The OHV trail improvements proposed, long term, would be expected to reduce erosion and sediment delivery, and improve habitat conditions for CRLF from what currently exist. Therefore, in the long term the project is expected to reduce the adverse cumulative effects that are currently occurring from combined private and public land management impacts and current OHV trail conditions. Western pond turtle and Foothill yellow-legged frog Past actions have had slightly beneficial to slightly detrimental effects to potentially suitable habitat in the analysis area. With the possible exception of wildland fire suppression, current actions are not expected to affect potentially suitable WPT and FYLF habitat. Reasonably foreseeable future actions are not expected to affect or are expected to result in effects similar to the proposed action. The hydropower project on the Middle Fork American River has likely affected connectivity of WPT and FYLF in the watersheds. Dams affect movement and connectivity on river systems and tributary streams. Neither species were observed in the peaking reach of the Middle Fork American River. Black juga There are no documented records of black juga within the Big Sugar Project boundary. If black juga existed in the area in the past, effects from OHV use would not have eliminated their presence. A combination of cumulative effects such as high flow events, lack of connectivity between stream habitat in the watershed within the project area are more likely to have restricted their existence in the area. In the event that habitat becomes occupied by black juga, with application of the proposed bridge crossings improvements at aquatic features, decommissioning unsustainable trail routes and monitoring for streambank disturbance, it is unlikely that black juga would be adversely affected by OHV use under this management plan. Botanical Resources Past, present, and future actions have and would continue to alter botanical species population and their habitats to various degrees. Threatened plants This project is anticipated to have no direct or negligible indirect impacts to the threatened Layne’s butterweed. As such, it is not anticipated to contribute cumulatively to impacts to the species. Sensitive plants The analysis area includes 15% (3 of 20) of the known occurrences on TNF and 8.8% (3 of 34) of the known occurrences of starved daisy across its range (CDF&W 2018). Starved daisy has most likely lost individuals and suitable habitat over the past 100 years due to construction of trails and roads and recreational activities, such as rock climbing. The analysis area includes 20% of known TNF occurrences and 9% of the known occurrences across the range (CDF&W 2018). Saw-toothed lewisia has most likely lost individuals and suitable habitat over the past 100 years due to construction of trails and roads and poaching. The project area contains 27% of the known TNF occurrences of Hutchison’s Lewisia. Range wide number of occurrences of Hutchison’s lewisia is not tracked in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Hutchison’s lewisia has most likely lost individuals and suitable

58 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

habitat over the past 100 years due to construction of trails and roads, OHV use, and ground disturbance as a result of fire suppression and vegetation management projects. The analysis area includes 15% (3 of 20) of the known TNF occurrences and 3.8% (3 of 79) of the known occurrences of Stebbins phacelia across its range (CDF&W 2018). Stebbins’ phacelia has most likely lost individuals and suitable habitat over the past 100 years due to construction of trails and roads, and ground disturbance as a result of fire suppression and vegetation management projects. The analysis area includes 21.6% (8 of 37) of the known TNF occurrences and 13.1% (8 of 61) of the known occurrences of Sierra bluegrass in its range (CDF&W 2018). Of the eight occurrences in the analysis area, only two (5.4%) occurrences are expected to have lethal or sub-lethal impacts, all other occurrences will be avoided per management requirements (Section 8). The project is not expected to have impacts to the other six occurrences. There are likely more occurrences of Sierra bluegrass on the American River Ranger District that have not been identified or mapped. Sierra bluegrass has most likely lost individuals and suitable habitat over the past 100 years due fire suppression and vegetation management projects. When considered in the context of the effects of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, the project is not expected to contribute significantly to a loss of species viability for the five sensitive species listed here. Cultural Resources Past events, both natural and human caused, have had varying levels of cumulative effects on the archaeological resources in the project area. These effects, ranging from moderate to extensive, have resulted from logging, road construction, wildfires, erosion, and exposure to the elements. No predicted future management activities will affect heritage resources. Invasive Plants Overall, the risks of invasive plant introduction and spread associated with the Big Sugar Project are considered moderate. There are relatively few infestations in the project area. OHV and equestrian use create substantial risks for invasive plant vectors. Because treatment and avoidance of all known infestations within the project is feasible and required through the project’s management measures, the risk of spread is greatly reduced. Recreation Overall, the proposed action would improve trail construction safety and enhance recreational experiences. In the vicinity of the Big Sugar Project, Forest interdisciplinary staff would be coordinating vegetation projects and activities including trail construction, prescribed fire and vegetation management to minimize effects to the recreating public. A cumulative effect of the proposed action would be an increase in use at Robinsons Flat Campground. The current campground can accommodate increased use. With the project management requirements in place to protect resources and public safety, no adverse cumulative effects are expected. Soils and Hydrology Ongoing trail tread wear and soil erosion from recreational use or cattle grazing could occur. It is expected these would be minor, localized cumulative impacts. Ongoing trail monitoring would identify any major soil issues so that maintenance can repair future trail problem areas. A Cumulative Watershed Effects (CWE) analysis was conducted to assess cumulative effects for the twenty 7th field subwatersheds within the activity area (Table 13). Permanent features include hydraulic mines and forest activities such as clearcuts that have resulted in soil cover being

59 Big Sugar Project removed over large areas. This cumulative watershed effects analysis compares (a) the existing level of land disturbance across all ownerships within a watershed with (b) an estimate of the upper limit of watershed tolerance to disturbance, referred to as the Threshold of Concern (TOC). The level of land disturbance is measured using Equivalent Roaded Acres (ERAs), whereby all disturbances are equated to an acre of road. The CWE analysis then recovers these disturbances over 10 years following a specified recovery curve. Using this analysis, the calculated ERA of a watershed is compared to the TOC to provide an assessment of the potential for cumulative watershed effects. The TOC is not an exact point at which effects will occur. It is an indicator that a watershed is more susceptible to impacts. As ERA approaches or exceeds the TOC, additional measures are employed to protect and monitor watershed conditions. Table 13. Cumulative Watershed Effects within project 7th field watersheds Total ERA ERA/ HU14 (Drainage) Name HU14 Code Acres acres ERA TOC East Branch El Dorado Canyon 18020128040201 6,740 614 0.09 0.76 French Meadows Reservoir 18020128030205 6,965 137 0.02 0.16 Humbug Canyon 18020128010602 6,095 196 0.03 0.27 Lower Duncan 18020128030102 7,825 181 0.02 0.19 Lower North Shirttail Canyon 18020128060102 6,053 695 0.11 0.96 Middle Fork American River-Chipmunk Creek 18020128030206 7,364 160 0.02 0.18 Middle Fork American River-Dolly Creek 18020128030204 4,984 83 0.02 0.14 Middle Fork American River-Rice Creek 18020128030203 7,553 671 0.09 0.74 Middle Fork American River-Talbot Creek 18020128030202 4,932 48 0.01 0.08 North Fork American River-Big Valley Canyon 18020128010303 7,242 107 0.01 0.12 North Fork American River-Cedar Canyon 18020128010102 5,746 19 0.00 0.03 North Fork American River-Humbug Bar 18020128010603 8,064 44 0.01 0.05 North Fork American River-Sailor Canyon 18020128010302 7,339 56 0.01 0.06 North Fork American River-Tadpole Creek 18020128010601 9,143 98 0.01 0.09 North Fork American River-Wabena Creek 18020128010105 8,409 863 0.10 0.86 Screwauger Canyon 18020128040101 8,533 119 0.01 0.12 Secret Canyon 18020128040103 6,540 378 0.06 0.48 Upper Duncan Canyon 18020128030101 7,277 102 0.01 0.12 Upper North Shirttail Canyon 18020128060101 5,912 245 0.04 0.34 West Branch El Dorado Canyon 18020128040202 6,413 134 0.02 0.17 The ratio of ERA to TOC is less than 1 for all project 7th field watersheds. At these levels, adverse cumulative watershed effects are unlikely. Visual Resources Past and present actions have only contributed favorably to a scenic visual character and a quality recreational experience. The actions of this project and any other project like it in the future, although evident, would not be significant and would result in continued maintenance of high quality visual character and recreational experience. No reasonably foreseeable action would add to the visual impacts of this project or would cause noncompliance with the assigned VQO. Terrestrial Wildlife Western bumble bee When combined with the effects resulting from ongoing and reasonably foreseeable actions on lands within the area of analysis, Alternative 1 would have a negligible risk for additional, incremental negative disturbance effects to western bumble bees and their habitat.

60 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

Bald eagle To assess how the effects of the proposed action could incrementally add to the effects of past, present, and future actions, bald eagle habitat was assessed within 0.5-mile of the treatment units. Recent activities have mainly retained large trees that provide preferred nesting and roosting sites. Although the project area includes several large recent wildfires, none of these fires were within 0.5-mile of Sugar Pine Reservoir or Big Reservoir. These past treatments have slightly reduced habitat quality but would not reduce habitat suitability. Fires reduce habitat suitability depending on severity. Currently the local utility district is proposing to increase the size of Sugar Pine Reservoir, which would increase aquatic and fish habitat, improving forage for bald eagles, although it would require the removal of a number of large trees along the existing shoreline. Foreseeable future projects would have similar effects to the proposed action of continued vegetation management, conservation of snags, and allowances for nesting eagles. The Big Sugar Project, when considered cumulatively with other projects and ongoing management, is not expected to reduce habitat quality for bald eagles. California spotted owl Planned projects attempt to balance uses and, under the Forest Plan, retain important characteristics of mature forest that are important to spotted owls. Wildfires vary in their severity, but often result in the conversion of mature forest to snags and dense shrubs. Wildfires greatly fragment suitable habitat and may have rendered some territories unsuitable. Because the Big Sugar project is a relatively small footprint on a large landscape and is not expected to substantially increase recreational disturbance in occupied habitats, it is not expected to substantially contribute to cumulative effects. Great gray owl Ongoing OHV projects, recent shrub and small tree mastication projects, and timber thinning projects contribute to beneficial effects to habitat for this species by opening canopy cover and understory vegetation, while maintaining large trees. Overall, current and reasonably foreseeable future actions will have minor effects to habitat for this species. The slight chance of disturbance to individual great gray owls during implementation and slight effects to great gray owl habitat, combined with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, will not result in adverse cumulative effects to great grey owl habitat. Northern goshawk Planned projects attempt to balance uses and, under the Forest Plan, retain important characteristics of mature forest that are important to goshawks. Because the Big Sugar project consists of a relatively small footprint on a large landscape and is not expected to substantially increase recreational disturbance in occupied habitats, it is not expected to substantially contribute to cumulative effects. Pacific marten The Big Sugar OHV project would contribute to cumulative adverse effects of human activities in suitable habitats, such as existing roads and snowmobile and OHV use along trails in the higher elevations. Timber harvesting and wildfires tend to be limited at the higher elevation forested habitats on the American River Ranger District, but did reduce cover and large trees after some wildfires on the lower edge of suitable habitat. Over 3,000 acres of former commercial timberlands recently purchased by the American River Conservancy were treated and added to the Granite Chief Wilderness, while another 7,000 acres are being restored for continued conservation; these areas are expected to continue to develop and contribute important habitat for marten. The higher elevation portions of the French Meadows Project also provides suitable habitat for marten, and would be managed for continued growth and resilience to stressors,

61 Big Sugar Project

including wildfire, while maintaining important habitat components such as overstory canopy, large trees, snags, and logs. The spotted owl and goshawk PACs in the French Meadows area would provide high quality refugia during implementation. The protection and maintenance of these two large areas is expected to offset any adverse effects of new trail construction. Wolverine The Big Sugar OHV project would contribute to cumulative adverse effects of human activities in suitable habitats, such as existing roads and snowmobile and OHV use along trails in the higher elevations. Timber harvesting and wildfires tend to be limited at the higher elevation forested habitats on the American River Ranger District. The 10,000 acres of former commercial timberlands purchased and restored for continued conservation by the American River Conservancy includes some high elevation areas near the Granite Chief Wilderness that will contribute core habitat for wolverine, including 3,000 acres that are roadless and were added to the wilderness. These lands and habitat benefits would offset the proposed additional trails at lower elevation in the proposed project. The higher elevation portions of the planned French Meadows project also provide suitable habitat for wolverine, and would be managed for continued growth and resilience to stressors, including wildfire, while maintaining important habitat components such as overstory canopy, large trees, snags, and logs that may be important for prey species. Because the French Meadows project is intended to reduce overstocking of canopy and fuels in the area to prevent large high intensity fires, it is expected to provide stability and a buffer from fires coming from lower elevations. The French Meadows basin is also within a state game refuge that does not allow hunting. The refuge also contains critical summer range for the Blue Canyon deer herd, so may help maintain higher numbers of deer and fawn, which would provide important ungulate game for wolverine. In general, it is not expected that proposed activities under the Big Sugar project, including removal of fixed season of use, would have any substantial or measurable effects to the wolverine, because this species is not known to occur in the area, because the wolverine has a very large home range, and studies on road-related effects to the wolverine are either inclusive or suggest that wolverines tend to inhabit areas that are less roaded and tend to occur at remote locations in higher elevation environments (i.e., un-roaded areas and wilderness), particularly during the winter months between December 31 through April 1, when the fixed season of use could potentially be removed. The proposed action would not alter or change the quantity or quality of wolverine habitat or result in increased habitat fragmentation. Since no habitat changes would occur, there would be no indirect effects that would be added to existing cumulative effects from the proposed action for the wolverine. Transportation Since the actions proposed in this EA would maintain and improve public safety, and since closing road 19-08 to the public would not affect public safety, there are no cumulative effects to public safety. Because actions would not increase maintenance requirements or costs on these roads for the removing the fixed seasonal closures and because costs would be minimal with the other proposed actions, there are no cumulative effects on affordability. 8) The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or may cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources. A record search, intensive resource inventory and cultural resource report (R2017051700027 Big Sugar Trail Project, C. Brokenshire, 2018) have been completed for the proposed Big Sugar Trail

62 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

Project under provisions of the Regional Programmatic Agreement (Regional PA 2018) with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the California State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), which complies with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The inventory documents a total of 24 archaeological sites within the project area. Seven prehistoric, fifteen historic and two multicomponent sites were inventoried. Historic sites include five historic mining ditches, one historic road and one historic trail. Assessment of historical and cultural resources within the project area indicates implementation of the proposed action would not adversely affect any cultural resources eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, nor would it cause loss or destruction of any cultural resources. Potential effects on heritage resources would be avoided by implementation of the cultural resource management requirements and by following standard procedure as outlined in the RPA (Regional PA 2018). In the event that historic properties are discovered during project implementation, operations will cease in the area until the district archaeologist and/or heritage program manager have visited the area and determined an appropriate course of action following Stipulation 7.10 of the RPA. 9) The degree to which the action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened species or its habitat that has been determined to be critical under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. This section is summarized from the project’s Biological Assessment for Aquatic Wildlife, Biological Evaluation and Assessment for Terrestrial and Aquatic Wildlife, and Biological Assessment/Evaluation for botanical species. The only federally-listed species with the potential to be affected by this project is the California red-legged frog. Effects on CRLF are addressed under item one above and in the project Biological Assessment. The EA analysis supports the finding that the Big Sugar Project will not have significant impacts on the CRLF or its critical habitat. The project biologist determined that Alternative 1 may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the CRLF (Teater 2019). Direct effects are not expected to occur in the analysis area because riparian buffers and management requirements for CRLF would be implemented. Indirect effects are limited to erosion and sedimentation or changes in hydrology, canopy cover, or water temperature. These risks are mitigated by the management requirements and are negligible. The degree to which the proposed actions may adversely affect the CRLF is minor and small in scale, affecting 1.2 percent of the suitable habitat within the aquatic analysis area. The Biological Assessment for Aquatic Wildlife completed for this project for the federally- threatened California red-legged frog (CRLF) (Teater 2019) was submitted to the USFWS for consultation. Consultation regarding this species was completed upon receipt of the USFWS letter of concurrence dated April 5, 2019. After reviewing all available information, the Service concurred with the determination that the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the California red-legged frog. The USFWS determination is based on the following reasons: (1) site specific surveys resulted in no CRLF observations; (2) the proposed conservation measures will reduce the potential for adverse impacts to the species and suitable habitat; and (3) there is a limited amount of suitable CRLF habitat available within the action area. There are no federally listed endangered or threatened terrestrial wildlife species or their respective habitats within the project area. One occurrence of a federally-listed threatened botanical species, Packera layneae (Layne’s Butterweed), exists in the project area. This population trend is stable and has existing barriers and fences that delineate the trail through the occurrence. As such, no direct or indirect impacts are anticipated from the proposed season of use change.

63 Big Sugar Project

10) Whether the action threatens a violation of federal, State, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment. The project does not threaten to violate any federal, State or local laws or requirements for the protection of the environment (e.g., Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, National Historic Preservation Act, National Forest Management Act (NFMA), and the Endangered Species Act). The actions proposed under Alternative 1 are consistent with the Tahoe National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) (USDA FS 1990) as amended by the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Record of Decision (SNFPA ROD) (USDA FS 2004). The Forest Plan provides direction for maintaining water quality and quantity; protecting streams, lakes, wetlands, and riparian conservation areas; and to prevent excessive, cumulative watershed impacts. The proposed action follows Riparian Conservation Objectives and is consistent with the Aquatic Management Strategy for the Sierra Forests, as required by the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (SNFPA 2004) Record of Decision. In addition, based on the conclusion that the 20 subwatersheds would not contribute to adverse cumulative watershed effects and the conclusion that the riparian objectives would be met, the proposed action is consistent with the Clean Water Act. Activities associated with the alternatives will comply with the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended and it’s implementing regulations 36 CFR 800. As previously described, a records search and cultural resource inventory have been completed for the proposed Big Sugar Project under provisions of Amendment 1 to the Programmatic Agreement Among the U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5), California State Historic Preservation Officer, Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding The Process for Compliance With Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act for Management of Historic Properties by the National Forests of the Pacific Southwest Region (Regional PA 2018). In addition, reports documenting compliance with the following laws and direction have been incorporated by reference and are available for review as part of the project record: In compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940, as amended, the Biological Evaluation for Terrestrial and Aquatic Wildlife (Bridgman and Teater 2019) documents that project activities may affect individuals, but are not likely to result in a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability for the bald eagle. Several reports were prepared in compliance with the NFMA of 1976. A Management Indicator Species (MIS) Report (Bridgman and Teater 2019) was prepared which evaluates the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of proposed project activities upon selected MIS habitat types, and associated wildlife species, and assesses the potential impact of anticipated changes upon bioregional trends in population numbers and habitat. The report concluded that implementation of Alternative 1 activities would not alter current trends in these MIS habitat types, nor lead to a change in the distribution of MIS species across the Sierra Nevada bioregion. In addition, a Migratory Landbird Conservation Report (Bridgman 2019) was prepared in accordance with NFMA and the Memorandum of Understanding between the USDA Forest Service and the US Fish and Wildlife Service to Promote the Conservation of Migratory Birds to disclose the possible effects of the action alternatives on migratory landbirds. The report concluded the effects to migratory landbird habitats are minor. The proposed action is not expected to substantially contribute to existing cumulative effects to migratory landbirds associated with ongoing recreation, habitat management, mining, and other activities. The largest cumulative impacts currently are associated with wildfire, which rapidly changes habitat types,

64 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

shifting from generally forested stands to habitats more associated with snags, herbaceous, and brush habitats. Also as part of NFMA compliance, two separate biological evaluations were completed to assess the effects of the proposed action on aquatic and terrestrial wildlife species, and botanical species (Bridgman and Teater 2019 and Rowe 2018) currently identified as Region 5 Forest Service Sensitive species. Direct, indirect, and cumulative effects on these species are discussed previously. Cumulatively, these evaluations determined the following: . Alternative 1 would have no effect on greater sandhill crane, willow flycatcher, fisher, pallid bat, Townsend’s big-eared bat, fringed myotis, Lahontan Lake tui chub, hardhead, California floater, or Great Basin rams-horn snail nor the federal candidate species, whitebark pine and sensitive botanical species as described above under the botanical resources sections and in the botanical BE/BA. . Alternative 1 of the Big Sugar Project may affect individuals but are unlikely to result in a trend toward federal listing for western bumblebee, bald eagle, California spotted owl, great grey owl, northern goshawk, Pacific marten, wolverine, western pond turtle, foothill yellow- legged frog, black juga, Starved daisy, Hutchison’s lewisia, and Sierra bluegrass.

Chapter 4 Agencies and Persons Consulted The Forest Service consulted with federal, State and local agencies, Tribes, Non-Forest Service Organizations during the development of this environmental assessment as listed below. Additional individuals are listed in the planning file. . Mike and Tee Individuals including: . Scott Link . Adam Batchelder . Scott Rabeneau . Bob Terwilliger . Shaun Clin . Bob Tomlinson . Steven Davis . Bruce Hendrickson . Tim and Sue Crum . Bruce Littlefield . Tyler Harkness . Dave Kostelny . Wes Kennedy . David Durand . Landowners . David Wood . Miners . Elke Reimer . Special use permittees . Erio Brown . Gene Leslie Tribes: . George MacDougall . Neil Mortimer, Tribal Chairperson, . Heath Cantrell Washoe Tribe of Nevada & CA . Jack Kotovsky . Gene Whitehouse, Tribal Chairperson, . Jim Northey United Auburn Indian Community of . Jim Pope the Auburn Rancheria . Joe Cubbler . Colfax-Todd’s Valley Consolidated . Josh Hammari Tribe . Josh Souza . Kate Kirsh . Keith Collins and Stephanie Williams Agencies and . Kevin Greene organizations: . Kyle Sherman . American Motorcyclist Association . Lisa Carnahan . American River Conservancy . Pam Cubbler

65 Big Sugar Project

. Bicycles of Nevada County . Hayward Motorcycle Club . Blue Ribbon Coalition, Inc. . High Sierra Motorcycle Club . CA Association of 4 Wheel Drive Clubs . Merced Dirt Riders . Cal Fire . Moto Maverix . California Department Of Highway . Nevada County Woods Riders Patrol . NorCal Motorcycle Club . California Enduro Riders Association . OHV Grant Administrator . California Trail Users Coalition . Placer County Parks Administrator . California Wilderness Coalition . Placer County Roads . Canyons and Overlook Endurance Runs . Placer County Sheriff's Office Race Director . Placer County Water Agency . CVRWQCB Central Valley Regional . Placer County, Department Of Public Water Quality Control Boards Works . Diablo 4 Wheelers . Polka Dots Motorcycle Club . Dirt Diggers/ District 36 congressional . Public Employees for Environmental board Responsibility . Epic Endurance Events . Redding Dirt Riders . FATRAC . Salinas Ramblers Motorcycle Club . Forest Issues Group . Sebastian/Foresthill Telephone Co . Forest Trails Alliance . Sierra Buttes Trail Stewardship . Foresthill Fire Protection . Sierra Club . Foresthill Four-Wheelers . Sierra Foothills Audubon Society . Foresthill Public Utility District . Sierra Pacific Industries . Foresthill Racing Company . Tahoe Donner Four Wheelers . Friends of Foresthill OHV Trails . The Nature Conservancy . Friends of Greenhorn . The Wilderness Society . Friends of Tahoe Forest Access . Union Pacific Railroad Company . Garrahan Off-Road Racing . USDI, Bureau of Reclamation . Ghost Riders MC . Western States Endurance Run . Gold Country Trails Council Foundation . Golden State Dual Sport Riders . Western States Trail Foundation . Grass Valley 4 Wheelers Chapter 5 References Cited Banci, Vivian. 1994. Chapter 5: Wolverine. In: Ruggiero, Leonard F.; Aubry, Keith B.; Buskirk, Steven W.; Lyon, L. Jack; Zielinski, William J., tech. eds. The scientific basis for conserving forest carnivores: American marten, fisher, lynx, and wolverine in the western United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-254. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. p. 99-127 Bridgman, Roy and Dan Teater. 2019. Biological Evaluation for Terrestrial and Aquatic Wildlife, Big Sugar Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. March 2019. Bridgman, Roy and Dan Teater. 2019. Project Management Indicator Species Report, Big Sugar OHV Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. March 2019. Bridgman, Roy. 2019. Migratory Landbird Conservation Report, Big Sugar OHV Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. January 2019.

66 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

Brown, Katherine J. 1994. River-bed Sedimentation Caused by Off-road Vehicles at River Fords in the Victorian Highlands, Australia In Journal of the American Water Resources Association, Volume 30, No. 2, April 1994. Pages 239-250. CDF&W 2018. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2018. California Natural Diversity Database, RareFind Version 5. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/mapsanddata.asp. (12/3/2018). CDFG (California Department of Fish and Game). 2005. California Department of Fish and Game and California Interagency Wildlife Task Group. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) version 8.1. Personal computer program. Sacramento, California. On-Line version. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cwhr/cawildlife.asp. (Accessed: January 3, 2008). Coe, D. B. R. 2006. Sediment production and delivery from forest roads in the Sierra Nevada, California. M. S. Thesis. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. 110p. Dufourd, Dick. 2015. Great Trails: Providing High Quality OHV Trails and Experiences. In association with the National Off-Highway Vehicle Conservation Council (NOHVCC). Chapter 2. Fellers, G., and P. Kleeman. 2007. California Red-legged Frog (Rana draytonii) movement and habitat use: Implications for conservation. Journal of Herpetology 41:271-281. Krautkramer, Jesse. 2018. Cultural Resources Species Report, Big Sugar Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. December 2018. Poff. 2013. Green Yellow Red (GYR) OHV Trail Condition monitoring. Poff. 2016. Poff, Roger J. 2016. OHV Trafficability Assessment for Five Remotely Sensed Monitoring Stations on the Tahoe and Sierra National Forests in California. Regional PA 2018. Regional Programmatic Agreement Regarding Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Rowe, Courtney. 2018a. Biological Assessment / Biological Evaluation of Botanical Species, Big Sugar Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. December 2018. Rowe, Courtney. 2018b. Invasive Plant Risk Assessment, Big Sugar Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. December 2018. Rowe, Courtney. 2018c. Other Botanical Resources Assessment, Big Sugar OHV Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. December 2018. Taylor, Steven E., Robert B. Rummer, Kyung H. Yoo, Richard A. Welch, and Jason D. Thompson. 1999. What We Know –and Don’t Know – about Water Quality at Stream Crossings In Journal of Forestry, Volume 97, Issue 8, August 1999, pp. 12-17. Teater, Dan. 2019. Biological Assessment of Aquatic Species for the Big Sugar Project, American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest. January 2019. USDA Forest Service. 1990. Tahoe National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Tahoe National Forest, Nevada City, CA. USDA Forest Service. 2001. Special Areas; Roadless Area Conservation. January 12, 2001. Federal Register. 66(9):3244-3273. USDA Forest Service. 2004. Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Record of Decision. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. Vallejo, California. 72p.

67 Big Sugar Project

USDA Forest Service. 2008. Sierra Nevada Forests Bioregional Management Indicator Species (MIS) Report: Life history and analysis of Management Indicator Species of the 10 Sierra Nevada National Forests: Eldorado, Inyo, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Sequoia, Sierra, Stanislaus, and Tahoe National Forests and the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit. Pacific Southwest Region, Vallejo, CA. January 2008. http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/snfmisa/pdfs/2008_Sierra_Nevada_Forests_MIS_Report_January _2008.pdf USDA Forest Service. 2010. Motorized Travel Management FEIS, ROD and Appendices. USDA Forest Service. 2017. “National Strategy for a Sustainable Trail System” (FS-1095b), November 2017. https://www.fs.fed.us/managing-land/trails/national-strategy. USDA Forest Service. 2018. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plant and Invasive Species (TESP-IS) Data for Tahoe National Forest, Natural Resource Information System (NRIS). USFWS (USDI Fish and Wildlife Service). 2002. Recovery Plan for the California Red-legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. viii + 173 pp. USFWS (USDI Fish and Wildlife Service). 2011. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Native Species That Are Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notice of Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description of Progress on Listing Actions. Federal Register 76(207):66390. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Species assessment form, wolverine.

68 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

Appendices Appendix A: Maps of Alternative 1 (8 Maps) Map 1: Overview Map 2: Michigan Bluff Area Map 3: Sugar Pine Area Map 4: Deadwood Ridge Area Map 5: Robinsons Flat Area Map 6: Big Valley Bluff Road Area Map 7: French Meadows Area Map 8: Changes in Seasonal Designation

69 Big Sugar Project

70 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

71 Big Sugar Project

72 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

73 Big Sugar Project

74 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

75 Big Sugar Project

76 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

77 Big Sugar Project

Appendix B: Travel Regulation Minimization Criteria Addressing Trail Designated for Motorcycle Use

China Wall to Robinsons Flat Connector Trail This approximately 24-mile long trail lies directly south of the North Fork American River and west of Granite Chief Wilderness. No designated OHV trails are located within this area. This trail, open to motorcycles only, can be used to connect two areas on the American River Ranger District with staging at Robinsons Flat and Beacroft and China Wall. Specific Criteria for Designation of Trails and Areas (36 CFR 212.55(b)) POTENTIAL EFFECT If yes, would use of the trail cause If the trail is designated, what measures will be CRITERIA INDICATORS adverse effects? If so, how? taken to manage use to minimize these effects? (b) Specific criteria for designation of trails: (b)(1) Minimize damage to soil, watershed, vegetation, and other forest resources. Minimize damage to soil and Are there potential impacts to soil Yes. Soil moisture can vary Soil and water resources will be protected by water quality. and water from motorcycle use? considerably, especially in the spring following region BMPs 4.7.1 to 4.7.9 and Is there potential for soil and fall. Motorcycle use can cause Management Requirements in this EA. disturbance associated with rutting on the trail and tread wear on motorcycle use? climbing turns. Soil disturbance could occur to streambanks at crossings. Approximately 4 crossing locations could require bridge construction which could result in minor, short term impacts to water quality. Minimize damage to soil and Does the trail or area contain No. There are no mapped meadows or N/A water quality. sensitive riparian areas, for wetlands designated by the U.S. Fish example wet meadows, fens, and Wildlife Service National Wetlands etc.? Inventory. Minimize damage to soil and Does the trail or area drain into a Yes. This area drains into North Fork N/A water quality. 303(d)-listed waterbody? American River which is listed as not meeting water quality standards for Mercury. The motorcycle use will not contribute to this pollutant. Minimize damage to soil and Does the area have a hydraulic No N/A water quality. mine site or sites?

78 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

POTENTIAL EFFECT If yes, would use of the trail cause If the trail is designated, what measures will be CRITERIA INDICATORS adverse effects? If so, how? taken to manage use to minimize these effects? Minimize damage to soil and Could motorcycle use affect a No N/A water quality. municipal water system comprised of a small reservoir that goes directly into a local community water supply? Minimize damage to vegetation Are TES plants known to occur in Yes. Trail construct intersects known Project design and management requirements are and other forest resources. or around the trail that could occurrences. Lethal and sub-lethal in place to minimize impacts. potentially be affected by impacts are expected in 1 occurrence motorcycle use? of starved daisy and 6 occurrences of Sierra bluegrass. Impacts may effect but are not likely to trend towards listing. Minimize damage to vegetation Does the trail or area include No N/A and other forest resources. designated botanical areas (SIA, RNA)? (b)(2) Minimize harassment of wildlife and significant disruption of wildlife habitats. Minimize harassment of wildlife. Does the trail or area encompass Yes, the new trail would cross 3 SNFPA ROD S&G 82 (pg. 61): Mitigate impacts California spotted owl, and/or spotted owl PACs and 2 goshawk where there is documented evidence of disturbance goshawk nest sites? PACs. There is some risk of to the nest site from existing recreation, off-highway disturbance to nesting or foraging vehicle route, trail and road uses (including road birds. maintenance). Evaluate developments for their potential to disturb nest site.

Areas near the trail system were surveyed during planning and no activity centers were near the proposed trail alignment; disturbance to foraging birds is expected to be temporary. In addition, the trail is largely an advanced connector to areas at higher elevation, and is expected to receive relatively low use.

To protect nesting northern goshawk and California spotted owl, no mechanized trail construction or chainsaw use will occur between February 15 and September 15th in the following general areas containing PACs: Mitchell Mine, Mumford Bar, Shirttail Creek, and Robinsons Flat, unless surveys determine they are not nesting. Trail alignment will avoid cutting large trees, trees with evidence of

79 Big Sugar Project

POTENTIAL EFFECT If yes, would use of the trail cause If the trail is designated, what measures will be CRITERIA INDICATORS adverse effects? If so, how? taken to manage use to minimize these effects? wildlife use (e.g., cavities, nests), large snags, and large downed logs. Minimize harassment of wildlife. Does the trail or area encompass No. N/A known bald eagle nest sites? Minimize harassment of wildlife. Does the trail or area contain key No. N/A deer winter range? Minimize significant disruption of Does the trail or area contain Yes. Suitable habitat for marten occurs Recent surveys in the area have detected marten in wildlife habitats. habitat for marten, wolverine, or in the eastern 3 miles of the trail, from dense red fir forest, not in the more open, fire- other sensitive forest carnivores? Canada Hill to Robinsons Flat; marten damaged areas affected by the trail. Marten are have been detected nearby. already subjected to disturbance from recreational campers, horse, foot, and bicycle races in the area. Low quality wolverine denning habitat exists at the highest elevation area, No wolverine have been detected in the area. where late spring deep snow Wolverine Detections (SNFPA ROD S&G 32, pg. persistence typically only occurs once 54): When verified (wolverine) sightings occur, out of every seven years. conduct an analysis to determine if activities within 5 miles of a detection have a potential to affect the There is some risk of disturbance. species. If necessary, apply a limited operating period from January 1 to June 30 to avoid adverse impacts to potential breeding. Evaluate activities for a 2-year period for detections not associated with a den site.

Trail alignment will avoid cutting large trees, trees with evidence of wildlife use (eg. cavities, nests), large snags, and large downed logs. Motorcycle use is allowed only when the soil moisture is low enough to avoid damaging resources Minimize significant disruption of Does the trail or area contain No N/A wildlife habitats. TES aquatic habitat and/or designated critical habitat? (b)(3) Minimize conflicts between motor vehicle use and existing or proposed recreational uses of National Forest System lands or neighboring federal lands. Conflicts between motor vehicle Does the trail abut a wilderness No (Granite Chief Wilderness managed N/A use and existing or proposed area or National Park managed by Tahoe National Forest). recreational uses of neighboring by other agencies? federal lands.

80 American River Ranger District, Tahoe National Forest

POTENTIAL EFFECT If yes, would use of the trail cause If the trail is designated, what measures will be CRITERIA INDICATORS adverse effects? If so, how? taken to manage use to minimize these effects? Conflicts between motor vehicle Does the trail abut a non- No N/A use and existing or proposed motorized area or a developed recreational uses of neighboring recreation site on adjacent federal lands. national forest or other federal lands? Conflicts between motor vehicle Would motorcycle use of this trail No. There are no potential for conflicts Motorized use is not permitted in Granite Chief use and existing or proposed cause conflicts with non- between motorized and non-motorized Wilderness, the North Fork of the American River recreational uses of NFS lands motorized visitors’ desire for recreationists near the Pacific Crest Wild and Scenic River, nor on the PCT. Barriers, solitude and quiet recreation? Trail, Granite Chief Wilderness and the signing, patrolling and education would be used to Wild and Scenic Rivers. No adverse mitigate motorcycle incursions into these areas as effects are expected for users of the well as non-motorized trails near Robinsons Flat, North Fork of the American River Wild therefore avoiding potential conflict with any users. and Scenic River, and the non- motorized trails near Robinsons Flat. (b)(4) Minimize conflicts among different classes of motor vehicle uses of NFS lands or neighboring federal lands. Minimize conflicts among Does this trail allow wheeled No N/A different classes of motor motor vehicle use for other than vehicle uses of NFS lands or single track riders? If so, does other neighboring federal lands. this affect safety and management of this area? Minimize conflicts among Does this area cross or contain No N/A different classes of motor roads allowing vehicle use? Are vehicle uses of NFS lands or road crossings allowed by dirt other neighboring federal lands. bike riders? Minimize conflicts among Does this trail receive use by This trail would be for motorcycles only. N/A different classes of motor motorcycle or street legal No conflicts are expected between vehicle uses of other vehicles? Is this potentially motorcycles and OHVs or street legal neighboring federal lands. creating conflicts? vehicles. (b)(5) Consider compatibility of motor vehicle use with existing conditions in populated areas, taking into account sound, emissions, and other factors. Consider compatibility of motor Is the area adjacent to The trail is not in a populated area. N/A vehicle use with existing neighborhoods and communities? Trail location avoids private property to conditions in populated areas, minimize noise to residents. No taking into account sound, neighborhoods, communities or emissions, and other factors. recreation residences occur nearby.

81