DOCSLIB.ORG

NEPA) and Other Relevant Federal and State Laws and Regulations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NEPA) and Other Relevant Federal and State Laws and Regulations United States Department of ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Agriculture Forest Service Shoal Creek Project Potosi/Fredericktown Ranger District Mark Twain National Forest Region 9 Crawford, Iron, and Washington Counties, Missouri PALS #18216 Mark Twain National Forest, June 2007 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Table of Contents Chapter 1. Purpose of and Need for Action ................................................................................. 1 Document Structure .................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose and Need for Action ...................................................................................................... 1 Background (Need for Action) .................................................................................................... 2 Purpose of the Actions ................................................................................................................ 2 Project Location .......................................................................................................................... 3 Background ................................................................................................................................. 3 Forestwide Standards and Guidelines ....................................................................................... 10 Management Area Prescriptions ............................................................................................... 10 Goals ......................................................................................................................................... 11 Desired Conditions .................................................................................................................... 11 Proposed Action ........................................................................................................................ 12 Decision Framework ................................................................................................................. 13 Public Involvement ................................................................................................................... 13 Issues ......................................................................................................................................... 13 Relationship to Other Documents ............................................................................................. 15 Chapter 2. Alternatives, Including the proposed action ........................................................... 16 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 16 Alternatives Considered in Detail ............................................................................................. 16 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study .................................................. 24 Mitigation Common to Action Alternatives.............................................................................. 25 Comparison of Alternatives ...................................................................................................... 28 Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences .................................... 34 Vegetation - Historical Perspective ............................................................................................. 35 Vegetation - Existing Condition of Structure and Composition .............................................. 39 Environmental Effects Common to Alternatives 2 and 3 ......................................................... 41 Vegetation - Direct and Indirect Effects ..................................................................................... 43 Vegetation - Cumulative Effects .................................................................................................. 47 Economics - Existing Condition .................................................................................................. 50 Economics - Environmental Consequences ................................................................................ 50 Economics - Direct and Indirect Effects ..................................................................................... 51 Soils - Existing Condition ............................................................................................................. 54 Soils – Direct and Indirect Effects............................................................................................... 55 Soils - Cumulative Effects ............................................................................................................ 63 Soils – Summary of Effects .......................................................................................................... 66 Water - Existing Condition .......................................................................................................... 68 Water – Direct and Indirect Effects ............................................................................................ 76 Water - Cumulative Effects ......................................................................................................... 84 Water – Summary of effects ........................................................................................................ 89 ii Wildlife - Existing Condition ....................................................................................................... 90 Wildlife – Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects ................................................................ 101 Non-Native Invasive Species (NNIS) ......................................................................................... 147 Fisheries and Aquatics - Existing Condition ............................................................................ 155 Fisheries and Aquatics – Direct and Indirect Effects .............................................................. 158 Fisheries and Aquatics - Cumulative Effects ........................................................................... 160 Air Quality - Existing Condition ............................................................................................... 162 Air Quality - Direct and Indirect Effects ................................................................................. 163 Air Quality - Cumulative Effects .............................................................................................. 166 Recreation Resources - Existing Condition .............................................................................. 166 Recreation Resources - Direct and Indirect Effects ................................................................ 168 Recreation Resources - Cumulative Effects ............................................................................. 170 Visual Resources - Existing Condition ..................................................................................... 171 Visual Resources - Direct and Indirect Effects ........................................................................ 175 Visual Resources - Cumulative Effects ..................................................................................... 176 Heritage Resources - Existing Condition ................................................................................. 178 Heritage Resources – Direct and Indirect Effects ................................................................... 179 Heritage Resources - Cumulative Effects ................................................................................. 181 Transportation System - Existing Condition ........................................................................... 182 Transportation System - Direct and Indirect Effects .............................................................. 184 Transportation System - Cumulative Effects ........................................................................... 187 Social Effects ............................................................................................................................... 189 Chapter 4. Consultation and Coordination.............................................................................. 192 Preparers and Contributors .......................................................................................................192 Chapter 5 Appendices iii CHAPTER 1. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION Document Structure The Forest Service has prepared this Environmental Assessment in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and regulations. This Environmental Assessment discloses the direct, indirect, and cumulative
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Docket No. FWS–HQ–NWRS–2019–0040; FXRS12610900000-190-FF09R20000]
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 09/10/2019 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2019-18054, and on govinfo.gov Billing Code 4333-15 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Parts 26, 32, 36, and 71 [Docket No. FWS–HQ–NWRS–2019–0040; FXRS12610900000-190-FF09R20000] RIN 1018-BD79 2019–2020 Station-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), open seven National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs) that are currently closed to hunting and sport fishing. In addition, we expand hunting and sport fishing at 70 other NWRs, and add pertinent station-specific regulations for other NWRs that pertain to migratory game bird hunting, upland game hunting, big game hunting, and sport fishing for the 2019–2020 season. We also formally open 15 units of the National Fish Hatchery System to hunting and sport fishing. We also add pertinent station- specific regulations that pertain to migratory game bird hunting, upland game hunting, big game hunting, and sport fishing at these 15 National Fish Hatcheries (NFHs) for the 2019–2020 season. This rule includes global administrative updates to every NWR entry in our refuge- specific regulations and the reorganization of general public use regulations. We remove approximately 2,100 regulations that will have no impact on the administration of hunting and sport fishing within the National Wildlife Refuge System. We also simplify over 2,900 refuge- specific regulations to comply with a Presidential mandate to adhere to plain language standards 1 and to reduce the regulatory burden on the public.
    [Show full text]
  • A Macroinvertebrate Assessment of Ozark Streams Located in Lead–Zinc Mining Areas of the Viburnum Trend in Southeastern Missouri, USA
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Staff -- Published Research US Geological Survey 2010 A macroinvertebrate assessment of Ozark streams located in lead–zinc mining areas of the Viburnum Trend in southeastern Missouri, USA Barry Poulton U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] Ann L. Allert U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] John M. Besser U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] Christopher J. Schmitt U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] William G. Brumbaugh U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub Poulton, Barry; Allert, Ann L.; Besser, John M.; Schmitt, Christopher J.; Brumbaugh, William G.; and Fairchild, James F., "A macroinvertebrate assessment of Ozark streams located in lead–zinc mining areas of the Viburnum Trend in southeastern Missouri, USA" (2010). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 561. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/561 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGS Staff -- Published Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Authors Barry Poulton, Ann L. Allert, John M. Besser, Christopher J. Schmitt, William G. Brumbaugh, and James F. Fairchild This article is available at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ usgsstaffpub/561 Environ Monit Assess (2010) 163:619–641 DOI 10.1007/s10661-009-0864-2 A macroinvertebrate assessment of Ozark streams located in lead–zinc mining areas of the Viburnum Trend in southeastern Missouri, USA Barry C.
    [Show full text]
  • 50 CFR Ch. I (10–1–15 Edition) § 32.44
    § 32.44 50 CFR Ch. I (10–1–15 Edition) 4. Deer check station dates, locations, and the field, including shot shells used for hunt- requirements are designated in the refuge ing wild turkey (see § 32.2(k)). brochure. Prior to leaving the refuge, you B. Upland Game Hunting. We allow upland must check all harvested deer at the nearest game hunting on designated areas of the ref- self-service check station following the post- uge in accordance with State regulations ed instructions. subject to the following conditions: 5. Hunters may possess and hunt from only 1. Condition A3 applies. one stand or blind. Hunters may place a deer 2. We allow upland game hunting on the stand or blind 48 hours prior to a hunt and 131-acre mainland unit of Boone’s Crossing must remove it within 48 hours after each with archery methods only. On Johnson Is- designated hunt with the exception of closed land, we allow hunting of game animals dur- areas where special regulations apply (see ing Statewide seasons using archery methods brochure). or shotguns using shot no larger than BB. 6. During designated muzzleloader hunts, C. Big Game Hunting. We allow hunting of we allow archery equipment and deer and turkey on designated areas of the muzzleloaders loaded with a single ball; we refuge in accordance with State regulations prohibit breech-loading firearms of any type. subject to the following conditions: 7. Limited draw hunts require a Limited 1. We prohibit the construction or use of Hunt Permit (name/address/phone number) permanent blinds, platforms, or ladders at assigned by random computer drawing.
    [Show full text]
  • VGP) Version 2/5/2009
    Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) VESSEL GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OPERATION OF VESSELS (VGP) AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), any owner or operator of a vessel being operated in a capacity as a means of transportation who: • Is eligible for permit coverage under Part 1.2; • If required by Part 1.5.1, submits a complete and accurate Notice of Intent (NOI) is authorized to discharge in accordance with the requirements of this permit. General effluent limits for all eligible vessels are given in Part 2. Further vessel class or type specific requirements are given in Part 5 for select vessels and apply in addition to any general effluent limits in Part 2. Specific requirements that apply in individual States and Indian Country Lands are found in Part 6. Definitions of permit-specific terms used in this permit are provided in Appendix A. This permit becomes effective on December 19, 2008 for all jurisdictions except Alaska and Hawaii. This permit and the authorization to discharge expire at midnight, December 19, 2013 i Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 William K. Honker, Acting Director Robert W. Varney, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1 6 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, Barbara A.
    [Show full text]
  • Project Implementation Report
    PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION REPORT Prepared by: The Conservation Fund with contributions from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Project Title Restoring a Legacy at Mingo National Wildlife Refuge V3 (V1 completed October 30, 2014; V2 completed April 8, 2015; V3 Version completed 26 November 2019) Date of Issue 03 2020 Project Location Puxico, Missouri, United States The Conservation Fund Kevin Harnish, Manager, Portfolio Analysis Project Proponent(s) [email protected] | 919.948.6152 77 Vilcom Center, Suite 340, Chapel Hill, NC, 27514 USA www.conservationfund.org Prepared By Kevin Harnish, Manager, Portfolio Analysis, The Conservation Fund Aster Global Environmental Solutions, Inc. Shawn McMahon, Lead Verification Body Verifier 3800 Clermont St. NW, North Lawrence, Ohio 44666 USA 904.626.6011 [email protected] Project Lifetime 01 March 2010 – 31 December 2110; 100 Years GHG Accounting Period 01 March 2010 – 31 December 2110; 100 Years Monitoring Period of 01 Nov 2014– 01 Nov 1 2019 this Report Validated 12 May 2010 History of CCB Status Verified 23 March 2015 The project achieved Gold Level validation by satisfying the Exceptional Biodiversity Benefits criteria set out in GL3.1. One globally threatened Gold Level Criteria species – the Indiana bat –occurs within the Project Zone. An Indiana bat maternity colony was found on the edge of one of the Go Zero Tracts within Mingo NWR. The Go Zero project has increased forest connectivity at Mingo NWR and improved and expanded Indiana bat habitat by increasing the amount of continuous vegetation in riparian zones. Table of Contents The page numbers of the table of contents below shall be updated upon completion of the report.
    [Show full text]
  • Meramec River Watershed Demonstration Project
    MERAMEC RIVER WATERSHED DEMONSTRATION PROJECT Funded by: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency prepared by: Todd J. Blanc Fisheries Biologist Missouri Department of Conservation Sullivan, Missouri and Mark Caldwell and Michelle Hawks Fisheries GIS Specialist and GIS Analyst Missouri Department of Conservation Columbia, Missouri November 1998 Contributors include: Andrew Austin, Ronald Burke, George Kromrey, Kevin Meneau, Michael Smith, John Stanovick, Richard Wehnes Reviewers and other contributors include: Sue Bruenderman, Kenda Flores, Marlyn Miller, Robert Pulliam, Lynn Schrader, William Turner, Kevin Richards, Matt Winston For additional information contact East Central Regional Fisheries Staff P.O. Box 248 Sullivan, MO 63080 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Overview The overall purpose of the Meramec River Watershed Demonstration Project is to bring together relevant information about the Meramec River basin and evaluate the status of the stream, watershed, and wetland resource base. The project has three primary objectives, which have been met. The objectives are: 1) Prepare an inventory of the Meramec River basin to provide background information about past and present conditions. 2) Facilitate the reduction of riparian wetland losses through identification of priority areas for protection and management. 3) Identify potential partners and programs to assist citizens in selecting approaches to the management of the Meramec River system. These objectives are dealt with in the following sections titled Inventory, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Analyses, and Action Plan. Inventory The Meramec River basin is located in east central Missouri in Crawford, Dent, Franklin, Iron, Jefferson, Phelps, Reynolds, St. Louis, Texas, and Washington counties. Found in the northeast corner of the Ozark Highlands, the Meramec River and its tributaries drain 2,149 square miles.
    [Show full text]
  • William Devol Dobkins Photograph Collection (R1279)
    William Devol Dobkins Photograph Collection (R1279) Collection Number: R1279 Collection Title: William Devol Dobkins Photograph Collection Dates: circa 1892-1968, bulk circa 1892-1920 Creator: Dobkins, William Devol, 1879-1968 Abstract: The William Devol Dobkins Photograph Collection contains ninety-two photographs, consisting primarily of contact prints from the original glass-plate negatives. Of these, at least eighty are attributed to William “Will” Devol Dobkins. The majority of these images were shot between 1892 and 1920. They show outdoor views of life in and around Crawford County, Missouri. Collection Size: 0.5 cubic foot (6 folders, 92 photographs) Language: Collection materials are in English. Repository: The State Historical Society of Missouri Restrictions on Access: Collection is open for research. This collection is available at The State Historical Society of Missouri Research Center-Rolla. If you would like more information, please contact us at [email protected]. Collections may be viewed at any research center. Restrictions on Use: The Donor has given and assigned to the Society all rights of copyright, which the Donor has in the Materials and in such of the Donor’s works as may be found among any collections of Materials received by the University from others. Preferred Citation: [Specific item; box number; folder number] William Devol Dobkins Photograph Collection (R1279); The State Historical Society of Missouri Research Center-Rolla [after first mention may be abbreviated to SHSMO-Rolla]. Donor Information: The photographs were loaned for copying to the State Historical Society of Missouri by J.L. Dobkins on December 1, 1992 (Accession No. RA0555). An addition was loaned on December 15, 2010 by Beth Dobkins Garrison (Accession No.
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial Distribution, Geochemistry, and Storage of Mining Sediment In
    STATEMENT OF WORK Spatial distribution, geochemistry, and storage of mining sediment in channel and floodplain deposits of streams draining the Viburnum Trend Mining District of Southeast Missouri, USA Prepared by: Dr. Robert T. Pavlowsky, Ph.D., Principle Investigator Ozarks Environmental and Water Resources Institute Missouri State University 901 South National Avenue Springfield, MO 65897 [email protected] Co‐Principle Investigators Dr. Scott Lecce, Ph.D., East Carolina University Marc R. Owen, M.S., Ozarks Environmental and Water Resources Institute Submitted to: John Weber U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 101 Park DeVille, Suite A Columbia, MO 65203 573‐234‐2132 x 177 [email protected] July 16, 2012 1 INTRODUCTION The New Lead Belt in southeastern Missouri has been a major producer of lead (Pb) and other metals since 1960 when the first mine opened in Viburnum, Missouri (Seeger, 2008). To date, 10 mines have operated along a north‐south line extending for almost 100 kilometers (km) from from Viburnum to south of Bunker, Missouri. This subdistrict of the Southeast Missouri Lead Mining District is referred to as the Viburnum Trend (VT). Seven mines are presently in operation in the VT: (i) Viburnum #29 Mine in Washington County which uses the Buick Mill; (ii) Casteel or Viburnum #35 Mine in Iron County which uses the Buick and Brushy Creek Mills; (iii) Buick Mine and Mill in Iron and Reynolds Counties; (iv) Fletcher Mine and Mill in Reynolds County which sometimes uses the Brushy Creek Mill; (v) Brushy Creek mine and mill in Reynolds County; (vi) West Fork Mine and Mill in Reynolds County; and (vii) Sweetwater Mine and Mill in Reynolds County (Seeger, 2008).
    [Show full text]
  • Return of Private Foundation OMB No 1545-0052 Form 990 -PF Or Section 4947 ( A)(1) Trust Treated As Private Foundation This Form Be Made Public
    Return of Private Foundation OMB No 1545-0052 Form 990 -PF or Section 4947 ( a)(1) Trust Treated as Private Foundation this form be made public. 2013 ► Do not enter Social Security numbers on as it may Revenuethe Treasury InternalInte Revenue Service ► Information about Form 990-PF and its separate instructions is at www. irs. gov/form990(^ f. For calendar y ear 2013 or tax y ear be g innin g , 2013 , and endin g 20 Name of foundation A Employer identification number Mon.Gantn Fund 43-6044736 Number and street (or P 0 box number tf mail is not delivered to street address) Room/suite B Telephone number (see instructions) 800 North Lindber g h Blvd. 314-694-4391 City or town, state or province , country, and ZIP or foreign postal code q C If exemption application is ► pending , check here • • • • • • St. Louis, Mo. 63167 G Check all that apply Initial return Initial return of a former public charity D 1 Foreign organizations , check here . ► Final return Amended return 2 Foreign organizations meeting the 85% test, check here and attach Address chang e Name chang e computation ► H Check type of organization X Section 501(c 3 exempt private foundation E If private foundation status was terminated Section 4947 (a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust Other taxable p rivate foundation under section 507 (b)(1)(A), check here . ► I Fair market value of all assets at J Accountin g method X Cash Accrual F If the foundation is in a 60-month termination under section 507(b )(1)(B), check here end of year (from Part ll, col (c), line Other ( specify) .
    [Show full text]
  • Refuge Update – November/December 2007, Volume 4, Number 6
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln RefugeUpdate (USFWS-NWRS) US Fish & Wildlife Service 11-2007 Refuge Update – November/December 2007, Volume 4, Number 6 Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/refugeupdate Part of the Environmental Health and Protection Commons "Refuge Update – November/December 2007, Volume 4, Number 6" (2007). RefugeUpdate (USFWS- NWRS). 36. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/refugeupdate/36 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Fish & Wildlife Service at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in RefugeUpdate (USFWS- NWRS) by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge System Inside RefugeUpdate November/December 2007 Vol 4, No 6 Celebrating 20 Years of Science on the M/ V Tiglax, page 5 Kevin Bell is honored as Captain National Wildlife Refuges Return Economic of the largest ship operated by the National Wildlife Refuge System. Benefit Along with Wildlife Values Focus on…A River Runs Through It, pages 8-15 Rivers on refuges are managed for recreation, habitat restoration, water rights and sheer beauty. The Fight Against Giant Salvinia, page 18 Caddo Lake National Wildlife Refuge in Texas is fighting a weed that can travel three-quarters of a mile in 24 hours. Awards, page 21 From protecting the land to going “green,” awards recognize excellence. Ten New Refuge Friends Groups: • Columbia Gorge Refuge Stewards (Washington) • Friends of Deer Flat National The Refuge System generated almost $1.7 billion in economic return for regional economies in 2006, Wildlife Refuge (Idaho) including money spent on wildlife observation, birding and photography.
    [Show full text]
  • Mingo, Pilot Knob and Ozark Cavefish National Wildlve Refuges Comprehensive Conservation Plan Approval
    Mingo, Pilot Knob and Ozark Cavefish National Wildlve Refuges Comprehensive conservation Plan Approval Submitted by: I Date Refuge Manager Concur: #/a/? / Date hefuge Supervisor, Area 2 Lt.ol~20d7 Nita M. Fuller Date Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System Approve: ylljhYicn.m~ APR 1 7 2007 Robyn ~horson~ Date Regional Director Mingo, Pilot Knob and Ozark Cavefish National Wildlife Refuges Comprehensive Conservation Plan Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction and Background ..................................................................................................................1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................1 Mingo National Wildlife Refuge ..........................................................................................................1 Pilot Knob National Wildlife Refuge ....................................................................................................1 Ozark Cavefish National Wildlife Refuge .............................................................................................3 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service .......................................................................................................3 The National Wildlife Refuge System ...........................................................................................3 Refuge Purposes ...........................................................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix G - Roadless Area/Wilderness Evaluations and Wild and Scenic Rivers
    Appendix G - Roadless Area/Wilderness Evaluations and Wild and Scenic Rivers In accordance with 36 CFR 219.17, a new inventory of roadless areas was completed for this plan revision, and areas of the Ouachita National Forest that met the criteria for inclusion in the roadless area inventory (Chapter 7 of Forest Service Handbook 1909.12) were further evaluated for recommendation as potential wilderness areas. The reinventory of roadless areas included previously recognized roadless areas considered during development of the 1986 Forest Plan and the 1990 Amended Forest Plan. These areas were: Beech Creek, Rich Mountain, Blue Mountain, Brush Heap, Bear Mountain, and Little Blakely. Also, two areas near Broken Bow Lake in Southeastern Oklahoma, Bee Mountain and Ashford Peak, were identified in the January 2002 FEIS for Acquired Lands in Southeastern Oklahoma. Possible additions to existing wilderness areas were also considered. The roadless inventory for the Ouachita National Forest was updated for this iteration of plan revision using Geographic Information System (GIS) technology. Evaluation of the Forest for areas meeting the criterion of one-half mile of improved [National Forest System] road or less per 1,000 acres yielded a significant number of candidate polygons and all polygons over 1,000 acres in size were considered to determine if there were any possibility of expanding the area to a suitable size to warrant consideration as possible wilderness. Polygons meeting the initial criteria were further analyzed using criteria found in FSH 1909.12 (Chapter 7.11) to produce the inventoried roadless areas described in this appendix. The planning team determined that, of the former RARE II areas, the only ones that meet the criteria for inclusion in the roadless area inventory are portions of Blue Mountain and Brush Heap.
    [Show full text]