Malheur River Range Aquatics Project

Environmental Assessment United States Department of Agriculture

For

Forest Service Malheur River Range Aquatics Project

Malheur National Forest Service Prairie City June 2013 Ranger District

Responsible Official: For Further Information: Teresa Raaf Randy Gould Forest Supervisor District Ranger Malheur National Forest 237 SW Front Street Prairie City, OR 97869 (541) 820-3800 [email protected]

Chapter 1 Page 1

Chapter I - Purpose of and Need for Action

Introduction

The Prairie City Ranger District is proposing the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project to improve livestock management in the Dollar Basin and Star Glade grazing allotments while also maintaining or enhancing the outstandingly remarkable values of the Malheur Wild and Scenic River and improving conditions for bull trout and their habitat.

Portions of these projects are located within the Malheur Wild and Scenic River Corridor. All projects are located within the Malheur River subbasin.

Malheur Forest Plan

This Environmental Assessment (EA) tiers to the Environmental Impact Statement for the Malheur Land and Resource Management Plan (1990) and incorporates by reference the accompanying Land and Resource Plan, as amended.

A Decision Notice (DN) was signed on August 7, 1992 designating a management strategy for the Malheur Wild and Scenic River, amending the Malheur Forest Plan (Forest Plan Amendment #14), and establishing a new Management Area, MA 22b-Wild and Scenic River- Malheur River. The goals of MA 22b are to protect and enhance the scenic, geologic, wildlife habitat and historic values of the river corridor. Preserve the free-flowing conditions of the river. Provide facilities for recreation use and access which do not detract from the planned recreation opportunity settings. Provide for improvements in water quality and native fish habitat.

The proposed projects occur in four Forest Plan Management Areas:

• MA 1&2 – Timber and Rangeland • MA 3A – Non-Anadromous Riparian Areas • MA 14 – Visual Corridor • MA 22B – Wild and Scenic River

Purpose of and Need for Action

The purposes of the proposed action are to: • Improve livestock distribution within the Dollar unit of the Dollar Basin allotment and South Star Glade unit of the Star Glade allotment by providing adequate livestock water sources. • Improve resource conditions for bull trout and critical bull trout habitat in the Malheur River. Specific objectives are to improve riparian hardwood composition (willow and alder) and increase riparian vegetation bank cover to enhance stream shade, water temperature, and streambank stability. • Provide for enhancement of outstanding remarkable scenic, historic, geology, and wildlife habitat values in the Malheur Wild and Scenic River Corridor.

Chapter 1 Page 2

Livestock Distribution and Water Sources

Within specific units of the Dollar Basin and Star Glade Allotments livestock tend to gravitate to the Malheur River due to limited water in the uplands. There is a need to provide alternative water sources in the upland areas to ease livestock herding needs by the grazing permit holder and improve livestock distribution.

The Malheur National Forest Plan gives direction to design and implement structural and nonstructural range improvements to maintain productivity and range condition in addition to benefiting both wildlife and livestock. Locate range structural and nonstructural improvements to encourage livestock movement away from riparian areas (VI-35, #88).

Bull Trout and their Critical Habitat

In 2012 a Proper Functioning Assessment (PFC) was conducted on the Malheur Wild and Scenic River Corridor and the section of river within the Dollar unit of the Dollar Basin Allotment. The assessment identified a need to continue to increase the riparian vegetation cover, specifically willows and alder, to protect stream banks and dissipate energy during high flows. To increase riparian vegetation, there is a need to reduce livestock utilization of this vegetation to accelerate recovery of listed bull trout habitat.

Outstanding Remarkable Values and Resources

The goal of the Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended, is to protect and enhance the outstandingly remarkable values of the Malheur Wild and Scenic River and preserve the free-flowing conditions of the river. Identified values for the river are: scenery, geology, wildlife habitat and history. The Decision Notice that designates the management strategy for the Malheur Wild and Scenic River directs that conflicts between grazing and the outstandingly remarkable scenic and wildlife habitat values would be resolved when identified. In 2011, a 2.5 mile drift fence with two water-gaps was completed in the Dollar unit of the Dollar Basin Allotment. Both constructed water-gaps are located within the interior of the Wild and Scenic River corridor. A conflict has been identified in which one of the water gaps is causing visual and recreational impacts in the Wild and Scenic River corridor, so there is a need to address this conflict with this project.

Chapter 1 Page 3

Proposed Action

This section is an overview of the proposed action. A more detailed description can be found in Chapter 2. See Appendix A, Proposed Action Map.

• Cross Springs Extension Project (T17S, R33.5E, Section 3) The existing water source at Cross Springs located in the Merit unit of the Dollar Basin Allotment would be reconstructed. This would involve replacing the existing headbox at the spring source as well as the existing trough, which was damaged by falling trees. The overflow from this trough would be captured and piped to a second trough located in the South Star Glade unit of the Star Glade Allotment. Figure 1 shows the location of the Cross Springs Extension Project.

Figure 1: Cr oss Spr i n gs E xt en si on P r oj ect

Chapter 1 Page 4

• Dollar Basin Pipeline Project (T17S, R33.5E, Sections 23 and 24) Part of the spring water that feeds the Dollar Basin pond would be captured and piped to a trough located in the Dollar Basin unit approximately 3,500 feet downhill. The overflow from this trough would be piped to a second trough and the overflow from the second trough would be returned to the draw. See Figure 2.

Figure 2: Dollar Basin Pipeline Project

• Malheur River Corridor Fence Project (T17S, R. 33.5E, Section 1, 12, 13 and T17S, R34E, Section 18) One of the water gaps constructed in 2011 in the Malheur Wild and Scenic River corridor would be removed to reduce visual and recreation impacts.

In addition a 2 mile continuation of the Malheur River Corridor fence would be installed in the Dollar Basin allotment. This fence combined with existing fencing would span between the boundary fences of the Dollar Basin and Central Malheur Allotments and would restrict livestock access to about 3.75 miles of the Malheur River except for the water-gap at Frazier Gulch within the Dollar unit of the allotment. Once the fence is completed, livestock would be excluded from the Malheur River for a minimum of 5 years. See Figures 3 and 4. Chapter 1 Page 5

• Forest Plan Amendment

The Proposed Action would require an amendment to the Forest Plan to retain an existing water gap at Frazier Gulch and four small segments of fence within the scenic portion of the Malheur Wild and Scenic River boundary.

Decision Framework

The decision framework refers to the nature of the decision that would be made by the Malheur Forest Supervisor based on the analysis contained in this document and comments submitted during scoping and the objection period for this Environmental Assessment.

At the conclusion of the objection period, the Malheur Forest Supervisor would decide whether to implement the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project as proposed, to implement the project in a modified fashion, or not to implement the project at all. Since the proposal includes one site- specific non-significant Forest Plan amendment, the Forest Supervisor’s decision would also determine whether to amend the Malheur Forest Plan. The Forest Supervisor’s decision would also determine if the project might cause significant environmental effects requiring analysis in an Environmental Impact Statement.

Public Involvement and Consultation

The Malheur Range Aquatics Project has been listed on the Malheur National Forest Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) since April 2011. This SOPA is distributed to a wide array of government agencies, interest groups, and interested individuals. Collaboration: A collaborative process with individuals representing Oregon Natural Desert Association, grazing permittees, and the Forest Service representatives was conducted in 2010. From the collaboration process objectives and concepts for the proposed action were developed. Scoping: On June 22, 2011 the proposed action that was developed through the collaboration process was mailed to the public for comment. One response was received.

In 2012, the proposed action was further modified to address concerns related to the Malheur Wild and Scenic River. On December 19, 2012 the modified proposed action was sent to 29 agencies, organizations, and individuals. The letter invited additional participation in the scoping process. Three written responses were received. In general the respondents expressed opposition to commercial livestock grazing and fencing within the Wild and Scenic River Corridor. Comments also expressed concerns with water developments affecting water quality. Specifically concerns related to the development of Big Bend Spring. Comment letters are available in the project file.

On January 18, 2013 a meeting was held with the Dollar Basin Allotment permittees to discuss public scoping comments. The discussions resulted in additional modifications to the Proposed

Chapter 1 Page 8

Action to address concerns with proposed activities in the Wild and Scenic River Corridor. Modifications included relocating the Malheur Corridor fence extension outside the wild segment of the river corridor and removing the proposed development of Big Bend Spring. Tribal Consultation: Tribal consultation is ongoing with American Indian Tribes with ceded lands or traditional use areas in the project area. The government-to-government consultation is being conducted under the terms and specific agreements with the individual tribes and includes regular contacts and meetings as appropriate. Scoping letters were mailed to all tribal governments. On April 3, 2013 the Prairie City Ranger District met with representatives from the Burns Paiute Tribe to discuss ongoing and future projects, which included the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project.

Issues Issues for the Malheur Range Aquatics Project were identified through public comments and agency information. A summary of public comments and responses is provided in Appendix B. The issues were separated into three groups.

• Key Issues – Those issues directly or indirectly caused by implementing the proposed action, the effects cannot be reduced by normal Best Management Practices or design features (design criteria). Generally an alternative would be developed to address a key issue. Scoping and public comments identified a key issue specific to proposed activities in the Malheur Wild and Scenic River corridor. To address this issue the proposed action was modified to remove the Big Bend Spring project and move the location of the Malheur Corridor Fence outside the wild segment of the Wild and Scenic River corridor. With these modifications the key issue was resolved; therefore no alternatives to the proposed action were developed. • Analysis Issues- Issues directly or indirectly caused by implementing the proposed action; however the effects could be reduced with design of the proposed action. The analysis issues are tracked in the relevant resource area effects analysis in Chapter 3 and in the Comparison of Alternatives section at the end of Chapter 2. • I ssues Eliminated from Detailed Study – those issues: 1) outside the scope of the proposed action; 2) already decided by law, regulation, Forest Plan, or other higher level decision to be made; or 3) conjectural and not supported by scientific or factual evidence.

Chapter 1 Page 9

Table 1: Analysis Issues Analysis Issue Topic Analysis Issue Statement and Issue Indicator Scenery and Outstanding Issue Statement: Proposed activities have the potential to impact the Remarkable Values scenic values and the outstanding remarkable values of the Wild and Scenic River Corridor

The proposed Action addresses this issue by: Several modifications were made to the project design to address public scoping comments regarding impacts to scenery and the outstanding remarkable values of the Wild and Scenic River corridor. Modification include: 1. All proposed new fence construction (Malheur Corridor Fence extension) would be located outside the Wild and Scenic River corridor; 2. Development of Big Bend Spring has been removed from the proposed action; and 3. The Malheur River would be rested from grazing for a minimum of five years to allow vegetation recovery.

Issue Indicators: 1. Miles and location of fence in the Wild and Scenic River Corridor. 2. Impacts to outstanding remarkable values of scenery, geology, wildlife habitat, and history. 3. Impacts to the visual quality objectives (VQOs) in the Malheur River. Cost of Project Issue Statement: Proposed activities are a high cost to the taxpayers and Implementation permittees.

The Proposed Action addresses this issue by: • Modifications made to the proposed action would reduce implementation costs. • Funding for project implementation would be from a variety of sources.

Issue Indicators: 1. Costs of proposed activities (fences and water developments) 2. Miles of Fence Maintenance

Impacts to Bull Trout Issue Statement: Proposed activities have the potential to impact bull trout habitat.

The proposed Action addresses this issue by: • Several design criteria have been identified to reduce the impacts to bull trout and bull trout critical habitat. • The Big Bend Spring development project has been removed from the proposed action. • The Malheur River would be rested from grazing for a minimum of five years to allow vegetation recovery.

Chapter 1 Page 10

Analysis Issue Topic Analysis Issue Statement and Issue Indicator Issue Indicators: 1. Miles of bull trout critical habitat rested from grazing. 2. Extent (feet) of the Malheur River accessible to livestock within the Dollar Pasture.

Chapter 1 Page 11

Chapter 2 - Alternatives

Alternatives Considered but Not Analyzed in Detail

Construction of the South Star Glade Corridor Fence

The original proposal included construction of a corridor fence in the Star Glade allotment (South Star Glade Corridor fence). This project was not brought forward at this time to allow monitoring of the Cross Springs Extension water development project for effectiveness in distributing livestock into the uplands.

Constructing Additional Fences in the Malheur Wild and Scenic River Corridor

Alternatives were considered that would have constructed additional fences within the Malheur Wild and Scenic River corridor. They included construction of fences within the wild segment of the corridor. These alternatives were eliminated to address public comments and reduce impacts to scenery and the outstanding remarkable values in the corridor.

Removing the Frazier Gulch Water Gap

Removing the existing water gap at Frazier Gulch was considered to reduce impacts to the scenic segment of the Wild and Scenic River corridor. This alternative was eliminated because there are no other reasonable options to provide a livestock watering source in this portion of the Dollar Basin Allotment. Retaining the water gap was determined to be the only reasonable option to meet the purpose and need to develop and maintain adequate livestock water sources. Other options considered included trucking water for livestock and drilling an upland well.

Developing Big Bend Spring

Developing Big Bend Spring was part of the original proposed action. Development of the spring was eliminated from detailed study to reduce impacts to the Wild and Scenic River corridor. In January of 2013, the Prairie City District Ranger met with the Dollar Basin allotment grazing operators (permittees) to discuss public scoping comments on the proposed action. The permittees were supportive of removing the Big Bend Spring development project from the proposed action, as long as the Dollar Basin pipeline project was retained as part of the proposal and constructed before the Malheur Corridor Fence Project would be completed. The Dollar Basin pipeline project would maintain adequate livestock water in the uplands and is located outside the Wild and Scenic River corridor.

Proposed Action (Refer to Proposed Action maps figures 1-4 in Chapter 1 and maps in Appendix A)

Cross Springs Extension Project (T17S, R33.5E, Section 3)

The existing water source at Cross Springs would be reconstructed in the Merit unit of the Dollar Basin Allotment. The existing headbox at the spring source would be replaced as well as the

Chapter 2 Page 12

existing trough, which has been damaged by falling trees. The overflow from this trough would be captured and piped to a second trough located approximately 1300 feet away in the South Star Glade unit of the Star Glade Allotment.

A small piece of equipment would be used to install the headbox and trench pipelines. The trough would be leveled and hardened with rocks. The existing wire fence around the spring source would be maintained to prevent livestock access. This extension would help pull livestock away from the Malheur River which is the main water source for this unit.

Dollar Basin Pipeline Project (T17S, R33.5E, Sections 23 and 24).

Some of the spring water that feeds the Dollar Basin pond, located near Forest Service Road 1643-514, would be captured using a headbox placed in the inlet of the pond. The water would be piped to a trough, located in the Dollar Basin unit, approximately 3,500 feet downhill. The overflow from this trough would be piped approximately 3,500 feet to a second trough located in the Dollar unit with the overflow from this trough returned to the draw.

A small piece of equipment would be used to install a head box and trench the pipeline to the troughs. The troughs would be leveled and hardened with rocks. The major spring source is located in an area where no ungulate impacts occur, therefore no protection measures are proposed.

Malheur River Corridor Drift Fence Project (T17S, R. 33.5E, Section 1, 12, 13 and T17S, R34E, Section 18)

In 2011, a 2.5 mile drift fence with two water-gaps was completed in the Dollar unit of the Dollar Basin Allotment. Both constructed water-gaps are located within the interior of the Wild and Scenic River corridor. One of the water-gaps is proposed to be removed to reduce visual and recreation impacts. The second water-gap located at Frazier Gulch would be retained to provide a water source for livestock. The Frazier gulch water-gap provides livestock watering access to a limited section (approximately 137 feet) of the Malheur River. The section of fence that crosses the Malheur River is let-down and pulled back in the fall and put back up in the spring. The site for the water-gap was selected because it was one of the major access points to the river currently being used for livestock watering and it is adjacent to and utilizes the existing fence on the Dollar Basin and Star Glade allotment boundaries as one side of the water-gap corridor. This design reduced additional new fence within the Wild and Scenic River corridor. The west wing of the water gap fence is 643 feet in length measured from the river to the Wild and Scenic River corridor boundary. The existing fence then runs south along the corridor boundary and across four draws with small segments within the scenic river segment of the corridor. A total of 2,204 feet of existing fence are located within the scenic segment of the corridor boundary. All of the fences are located outside of the wild segment of the corridor.

The second part of this proposal is a 2 mile continuation of the existing Malheur River Corridor fence. Combined the fences would span between the boundary fences of the Dollar Basin and Central Malheur Allotments. This would restrict livestock access to about 3.75 miles of the Malheur River except for the water-gap at Frazier Gulch from the Dollar unit of the allotment. The fence would also exclude livestock (for a minimum of 5 years) from the Malheur Ford Chapter 2 Page 13

Campground from the Dollar unit, a project identified in the 1993 Malheur Wild and Scenic River Management Plan. This campground is located on the boundary between the scenic and wild portion of the corridor. The additional 2 miles of fence would not be located within the wild or scenic segments of the river corridor. Approximately 1,880 feet of proposed fence is within the Malheur River Inventoried Roadless Area. The fence right-of-way would be cleared of trees and debris. Upon completion of the fence the Malheur River would be rested from grazing for a minimum of five years.

Forest Plan Amendment

A Decision Notice (DN) was signed on August 7, 1992 designating a management strategy for the Malheur Wild and Scenic River, amending the Malheur Forest Plan (Forest Plan Amendment #14), and establishing a new Management Area, MA 22b – Wild and Scenic River-Malheur River. A modified alternative was selected (Alternative 5 modified) as the management strategy for the Wild and Scenic River Plan. The DN on pages 4 and 5 states the following related to grazing:

“Grazing: Livestock grazing would be allowed as specified in the annual operating plans, which are part of the allotment management plans, and in the term grazing permits. After site specific- specific environmental analysis, new fences and water developments may be constructed along the river corridor boundary, or outside the corridor, in order to facilitate better livestock management within the corridor and adjacent lands”.

The proposed action would amend the Forest Plan, as amended by the Wild and Scenic River Plan Decision Notice (DN pages 4 and 5), to retain the existing water gap at Frazier Gulch and the four small segments of fence within the scenic portion of the Malheur Wild and Scenic River boundary. Approximately 0.4 of a mile of existing fence would be retained within the scenic portion of the corridor boundary.

The amendment is proposed to meet the purpose and need for action. Retaining the existing water-gap at Frazier Gulch combined with water provided from the Cross Springs Extension and Dollar Basin Pipeline projects would maintain adequate livestock water throughout the Dollar pasture. Establishing the Malheur Corridor fence allows Malheur River and most of the Wild and Scenic River corridor to be rested from grazing for a minimum of five years with the objective of improving conditions in bull trout habitat and enhancing outstanding remarkable values in the Malheur Wild and Scenic River Corridor.

Chapter 2 Page 14

Table 2: Summary of Proposed Action by Analysis Issue Issue and Indicator Proposed Action Issue 1: Scenery and Outstanding Remarkable Values Miles of fence located in the Wild and Scenic Segment – .4 of a mile of existing fence. Scenic River Corridor Wild Segment- 0 miles Impacts to Outstanding Remarkable Scenery-The outstanding remarkable value would not be Values impaired. The diversity of vegetation would be enhanced in the river corridor with the proposed rest from livestock grazing. The corridor environment would remain relatively undisturbed as it currently exists. Wildlife Habitat-The proposed action would enhance the quality of this value by preventing access of livestock to the Wild and Scenic River. The quality of habitat available to wildlife may improve by reducing the amount of vegetation affected by grazing practices. Geology- The actions proposed would not impact the outstanding remarkable features the Malheur River Canyon offers. Heritage- No effect on prehistoric and historic sites would occur from project implementation. Impacts to the Visual Quality Wild and Scenic River Corridor (Management Area 22b)- Objectives (VQO) Meets Retention VQO Issue 2: Cost of Project Implementation Costs of proposed activities $54,000 -Malheur River Corridor Drift Fence construction; $42,000-Dollar Basin Pipeline/Cross Springs Extension Water Sources; $5,000 per year fence maintenance, $500 per year water source maintenance

Issue 3: Impacts to Bull Trout Miles of critical habitat rested 3.75 miles (minimum of 5 years) Extent (feet) of the Malheur River 137 feet of the 3.75 miles of the Malheur River in the Dollar accessible to livestock within the pasture would be accessible to livestock for watering for the 5 Dollar Pasture. year period rested.

Integrated Design Elements of the Project The following design elements are built-in features of the project. The Prairie City Ranger District commits to all these requirements by virtue of the decision to approve the project for implementation.

Water Developments (Fisheries, Wildlife, Botany, Watershed): Headbox and Waterlines (All Developments) • Soil moisture or hydrologic pathways from the spring should not be altered, with the objective of maintaining or improving existing riparian vegetation.

Chapter 2 Page 15

• The headbox would not be placed at the spring source, spring orifice or within peaty soils. It would be located at the most downstream portion of the riparian vegetation as possible. With the exception of the headbox location, no trenching would be within the active drainage channels. All trenching would be re-contoured to natural conditions. Compaction would be limited or repaired to allow native herbaceous cover to return within one year after implementation. Native seeding should occur if there is not a natural seed source available on site. • Shrub and hardwood vegetation that contributes to shade within the spring RHCA would be minimally impacted so shade conditions within the spring RHCA is not measurably altered. • Avoid impacting riparian vegetation and creating wheel tracks in wet areas or meadows. Implement projects when sites and access to sites are as dry as possible. Designate access routes to cross areas of higher and drier ground. Any impacts to vegetation would be rehabilitated after project implementation. • The District Hydrologist would be present during installation of headbox’s. • Pipe excess water from trough to overflow to the original drainage network. • Construction work should occur after July 1st and before October 30th to assure that frogs are not present. If construction work is needed outside of this period, a visual survey for juvenile and adult Columbia spotted frog would occur. If frogs are found, then a qualified biologist would have to insure that frogs will be moved out of harm’s way and returned after construction. The tracks/tires of the equipment will be on dry unsaturated soils only.

Troughs (General) • The size of each water trough would not store more water than is needed for livestock consumption. No trough would be greater than 1200 gallons. • Troughs would be maintained and inspected to minimize water loss as per permit terms and conditions. • Wildlife escape ramps would be installed to extend at a shallow angle into the trough and contact the inner edge of the trough to allow animals swimming the perimeter to find the ramp. Avoid cross bracing trough with wire to minimize impact to bats and birds that drink while in flight. Review Water for Wildlife Handbook 2007 for effective escape ramp designs. http://www.batcon.org/pdfs/water/bciwaterforwildlife.pdf. • The new trough and its associated impacts from livestock will be placed outside of all RHCAs. The spring and its associated riparian area will be protected from hoof action in regards to livestock grazing. Protection can be through herding, fencing, or similar measures that are effective.

Chapter 2 Page 16

meadows or dense hardwood concentrations. Avoid impacting riparian vegetation and creating ATV wheel tracks in wet areas. Any impacts to vegetation would be rehabilitated after project implementation. • Impacts from concentration of livestock should not be measurably more than what the present base lines indicate within the Frazier Gulch water gap and the fish bearing portion of Tureman Creek. If the baseline for the water gap and associated corridor is measurably declining, then adaptations would be required such as moving the southern corridor fence out of the drainage or temporarily fencing off the upper corridor to provide temporary rest to the water gap and/or corridor. Portable water tanks would likely have to be used during the temporary rest. If Tureman Creek is measurably declining adaptations such as moving the cross fence out of the wet drainage portion where livestock can be confined and impact wet or saturated soils or temporarily fencing off the impacted area to provide temporary rest and recovery for this area. • Use a greater number of wooden stays or reflective tape and siding or PVC pipes etc. to increase the visibility of fence line to wildlife on the water gap section. The reflective tape, reflectors, or PVC pipes would be natural colors (e.g. green, amber, brown, or blue) to comply with visual quality objectives for the project area. For each 16’ section of fence marking the top wire with two pieces of reflective tape is highly effective in reducing collisions with fence by birds travelling through the river corridor. Use a greater number of wooden stays in other areas of high wildlife use, and along edge habitats to increase fence visibility and reduce injuries or mortalities to big game, greater sage-grouse, and other wildlife. Review “A Landowner’s Guide to Wildlife Friendly Fences”. http://fwp.mt.gov/fwpDoc.html?id=34461 • Three and four-wire barbwire fence construction would consist of smooth wire on the lower wire at a minimum height of 16 inches above the ground. The maximum height of the topmost wire would be 42 inches above the ground. Spacing between the top wire and the next wire down would be a minimum of 12 inches for 3-wire construction, and a minimum of 10 to 12 inches for 4-wire construction. • If heavily used game trails are observed during layout, place gates or use sections of let-down fence in these areas to facilitate big game and other wildlife access to the river corridor and reduce wildlife related damage to the fence when the pasture is not in use. • Locate fences away from the edge of canyon rim to avoid trapping big game at the top of the slope. • Locate fence lines away from large snags and old growth trees where possible, to minimize the loss of nest and roost trees being cut during fence construction. Large nest snags for osprey within ½ mile of the river are to be maintained (See LRMP 54, IV-31).

Chapter 2 Page 18

All Projects (Heritage, Noxious Weeds, Range, Visuals, Wild and Scenic) • A heritage monitor would be on site to monitor the ground disturbing activities for the Cross Springs Extension, Dollar Basin Pipeline, and the Continuation of the Malheur River Drift Corridor Fences. • If during any of the project activities cultural material is encountered, all activities would cease immediately and a Forest heritage specialist would be contacted to evaluate the discovery. • All equipment used (including ATV’s) would be cleaned of debris, soil, or potential seed prior to moving onto USFS land and project sites. • Cleaning would occur off of National Forest System lands and would be inspected and approved by the Forest Officer in charge of administering the project. • Any gravel, fill, sand, and rock used during project implementation would be judged to be weed free by the District weed specialist. • Scheduling and coordination between the equipment operator and the range department would occur prior to any activity in the project area. • Fences would be constructed out of materials that blend with the natural landscape. Steel posts would be green in color and wood material would be used to the extent possible in fence construction. Monitoring

The alternative descriptions also include the following steps to monitor project implementation and effectiveness.

• Implementation monitoring would be completed by the Rangeland Management Specialist to assure that the construction of fences and water sources are completed to specifications and in accordance with the design criteria.

• Photo points would be taken for the first 5 years the water gap is used. A photo point would occur on the ephemeral draw to ensure livestock trails are not creating sediment pathways to the Malheur River. Other photo points would be taken looking at and up/down the water gap. Additional photo points and monitoring are to assure that the potential for measureable downstream effects to critical habitat remains low. Photos taken from 2012 site visits may be used as a baseline.

• Best Management Plan (BMP) monitoring would take place on the Malheur River to ensure riparian recovery is occurring to the ungrazed portion of the unit. Monitoring would occur at the established DMA.

Chapter 2 Page 19

Chapter 3 – Existing Condition and Environmental Consequences

Chapter 3 describes the environment and environmental consequences relevant to this analysis. The chapter begins by describing the past, present, and foreseeable future activities and actions that were considered in the cumulative effects analyses throughout the chapter. The analysis then describes how the proposed action responds to the analysis issues. The following section focuses on resources that are relevant to or affected by the scope of the analysis: recreation, scenery, wildlife, aquatics, botanical, economics, and roadless. The chapter concludes with a discussion of specifically required disclosures. The analysis in this chapter is derived from specialist reports and biological evaluations contained in the analysis file. The specialist reports and biological evaluations are incorporated into this analysis by reference and are summarized in the resource discussions that follow. They are available for review at the Prairie City Ranger Distict office.

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects

Direct environmental effects are those occurring at the same time and place as the initial cause or action. Indirect effects are those that occur later in time or are spatially removed from the activity. Cumulative effects are those effects that result from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present or reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of the agency or person that undertakes such other actions (40 CFR 1508.7). Cumulative effects can result from individually minor, but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time. These related actions may be influencing current conditions. If so, their current (or foreseeable) effects are relevant to considerations of whether the proposed action would add to their effects. The cumulative effects analysis considered the following activities:

Ongoing Activities

• Recreation – Malheur Ford Forest Camp and associated activities (trail hiking, mountain biking, sight-seeing), trail maintenance, hiking, and hunting. • Noxious Weed Management – Canada thistle is controlled at the Malheur Ford Campground. • Transportation - Limited maintenance of the access road. • Livestock Grazing – Dollar Basin and Star Glade Grazing Allotments.

Past Activities

• Historical use of above listed activities. • Vegetation Management – Wildfire suppression and hazard tree removal along the 1651 road has occurred. • Transportation – Construction and limited maintenance of the access road. • Livestock Grazing – Dollar Basin and Star Glade Grazing Allotments.

Chapter 3 Page 20

Future Activities

• Recreational activities listed above. Ongoing trail and road maintenance would continue. Livestock Grazing – Dollar Basin and Star Glade Grazing Allotments.

Recreation Resources Recreational use in the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project area is oriented toward enjoying the area’s natural and historic resources. People visit the project area to view wildlife and birds, to see the spectacular geological features, and just enjoy the scenic beauty of the river corridor. They also hike and horseback ride on the Malheur River - National Scenic Trail. Other visitors enjoy hunting opportunities in the mountains surrounding the valley, camping in the foothills, horseback riding, hiking, and various other outdoor activities. The majority of the recreational use in the project area is concentrated around Malheur Ford Campground, which is also the trailhead for Malheur River Trail 303. Seasonal use varies in a given year, based on weather and the availability of upland birds, fishing and big game. The highest visitation occurs from May through December. The lowest visitation occurs during the winter months, when the temperatures drop and access is limited.

Existing Condition

Malheur Ford Campground

The campground is located within the Malheur Wild and Scenic River Corridor on Forest Service Road 1651 (T.17S, R.35E, Section 18). Malheur Ford campground is in close proximity to Malheur River trailhead. The presence and smell of livestock and manure associated with livestock grazing currently affects visitors to the Malheur Ford Campground and Trailhead. In addition, livestock rub on the signs and tables resulting in increased recreation costs for maintenance, repairs and replacement.

Malheur River Trail 303

The Malheur River trail is 6 miles long and is managed by the Prairie City and Emigrant Creek Ranger Districts. Approximately ¼ of a mile of the trail is within the project area. This is a shared route with hikers, horseback riders, and mountain bikers. Currently the effects of cattle use on Malheur Trail 303 include but are not limited to: widening of trails from the existing standard; breaking down the edges of trails where construction is benched; kicking out constructed water bars; adding to water run-off from the trail; making new trails where cattle leave existing trail treads; knocking down constructed trail markers; and rubbing and knocking down sign posts. Continued grazing would heighten recreational users encountering trampled vegetation and creating “dust bowls” along and adjacent to the trail where livestock salting areas are located.

Chapter 3 Page 21

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect Effects

Malheur Ford Campground Under the Proposed Action livestock would be excluded from the Malheur Ford Campground and Trailhead for at least five years. This would eliminate visitor complaints related to the presence of livestock and their associated smells and nuisances.

Malheur River Trail 303

Livestock grazing would not occur in the Malheur River Corridor for a minimum of 5 years following construction of the Malheur River Corridor fence. This would reduce the incidence of recreational users encountering livestock, high levels of trampled vegetation, “dust bowls” along and adjacent to the trail, fecal material, and livestock induced damage to trail treads and facilities.

Other Recreational Activities

Under the Proposed Action 2 miles of new fence would be constructed and connect to 2.5 miles of fence constructed in the Dollar unit of the Dollar Basin allotment in 2011. The fence would be constructed on the ridge top and may hinder recreationalist ability to directly access the Malheur River. The water gap fence at Frazier Gulch could affect recreationist floating the river or walking the river bank fishing. Recreationists would need to crawl under or climb over the fences on both sides of the water gap. A second water gap that was constructed in 2010 would be removed. Removing the second water gap would improve recreational access along the river. The fence construction proposed in the action alternative could increase the difficulty for recreationalist traveling cross county.

The Cross Springs Extension and Dollar Basin Pipeline Project would have no effect on recreationalist using the project area.

Cumulative Effects

All past, ongoing, and reasonably foreseeable future activities described at the beginning of Chapter 3 have been considered for their cumulative effects on recreation. Although the proposed activities would be evident and could have an impact on recreationalist in the short- term, these activities are not expected to noticeably impede recreational activities.

Consistency with Direction and Regulations

The proposed activities would move towards meeting recreation settings and fence construction and water improvements would in part fit the “Niche” character as identified in the Malheur Recreation Strategy.

The area is consistent with the roaded natural and semi primitive non-motorized ROS classes under which the area is to be managed.

Chapter 3 Page 22

Scenery Resources

Existing Condition

Scenic values for the Malheur River are a combined result of the landforms, water, and vegetative features. The segment of the Malheur River in the proposed project transitions into a canyon with steep timbered hillsides. The canyon provides a secluded setting. Access for recreationists is limited, as there is no trail along this section of the river.

The existing combination of landforms variety and color of vegetation is located in a relatively undisturbed environment. In 2012, a Team from the Prairie City Ranger District walked the Malheur River between the upper Malheur ford crossing near the private land boundary and the lower ford crossing (approximately 5 miles of the river). The existing scenic integrity was very high considering the very limited presence of human alterations and high degree of naturalness.

During the visit no roads, trails or recreation facilities were evident until reaching the lower Malheur crossing. At the crossing the road provides a place to ford the river with vehicles. A small parking area and rustic toilet are present at this site.

At the mid-point of the walk (the beginning of the project area) fences were noted in two locations. An existing allotment boundary fence separating the Star Glade and Dollar Basin allotments crosses the Malheur River. This fence was present prior to development of the Wild and Scenic Management Plan. At this same location a fence was recently constructed that parallels the allotment boundary fence. This fence also crosses the Malheur River. At the Malheur River the two fences come together forming the water gap at Frazier Gulch. The water gap restricts livestock access to only small segment of the river for watering. Approximately ¼ of a mile down river from the Frazier Gulch water gap, a second water gap was recently constructed. This water gap would be removed as part of this proposal.

The 2.5 miles of the Malheur River Corridor Fence that have been constructed on near the boundary of the Wild and Scenic River Corridor were not visible from the Malheur river because of the distance zone that the fence is located from the river. Trees between the Malheur River and the fence provide a barrier that eliminates visibility of the fence.

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect Effects

Management Area 14 (foreground and middleground)

Foreground areas seen from the Malheur River overlap the Malheur Wild and Scenic River corridor with the exception of a few small segments. Where the management areas overlap the effects would be discussed under Wild and Scenic River. The segments where Management Area 14 and 22B do not overlap are located at the outer most edge of the foreground (¼ to ½ mile) distance zone from the river observation point. The Malheur Corridor fence (including

Chapter 3 Page 23

what is existing and proposed for construction) would cross approximately four small segments of Management Area 14 foreground. The existing fence or new construction would not be visually evident from the river because of the small scale of the fence and distance from the river. Fence materials that are natural in color and existing tree vegetation would also obscure the visibility of the fence meeting the Forest Plan visual quality objective of retention for foreground. All other proposed activities are located outside the foreground distance zone and would have no visual impact.

No activities are proposed in middle ground areas seen from the Malheur Wild and Scenic River. Therefore, there would be no impacts to the visual quality objectives or the existing scenic integrity.

Management Area 22B (Wild and Scenic River)

The fences recently constructed across the Malheur River at Frazier Gulch and the four small portions of fence that cross various drainages near the Wild and Scenic boundary are the only range structures that would remain within the Wild and Scenic River corridor. No new activities or structures are proposed in the Wild and Scenic River corridor as part of this project. The existing fences are all located within the scenic segment of the river corridor where the visual quality objective is retention. The definition of retention visual quality objective provides for “management activities which are not visually evident”. Activities may only repeat form, line, color, and texture which are frequently found in the characteristic landscape. Changes in their quality, size, amount, intensity, direction, pattern, etc., should not be visually evident.

The criteria for evaluating scenery as an outstanding remarkable value considered if elements of landform, vegetation, water, color, and related factors resulted in notable or exemplary visual features and/or attractions within the geographic region. Additional factors such as the seasonal variations in vegetation, scale of cultural modifications, and the length of time negative intrusions are viewed were also considered. The evaluation of the present situation did not site evidence of cultural modification even with the Dollar Basin/Star Glade Allotment boundary fence being present in the corridor. The findings states that:

“The combination of water, diverse dramatic landforms, variety and color of vegetation, all in a relatively undisturbed environment, creates beautiful and unusual landscape throughout the year. The scenic value of the river corridor is considered outstanding and remarkable and verifies the identification of this value by Congress.”

The Department of Agriculture, Visual Management System Range Handbook (USDA 1977) states that “ranching is part of our cultural heritage, and range structures have become accepted as necessary parts of the characteristic landscapes”. The recreation analysis for this project discusses the following niche developed for the Malheur National Forest

“Traditional Way of Life: A dispersed recreation destination where local communities share traditions and heritage with new generations and with visitors. Recreation visitors enjoy the freedom to hunt, drive, camp, and hike in a wild place and enjoy the beauty and diversity of forest ecosystems away from major population centers”

Chapter 3 Page 24

The niche statement helps to reinforce that traditional uses, working landscapes (such as ranching) are a component of the broader characteristic landscape, provided they are planned, designed, and managed in a way to be consistent with the established visual quality objectives.

The amount of deviation from the characteristic landscape within the Malheur Wild and Scenic river corridor would be minor with the retention of the Malheur Corridor fence and the Frazier Gulch water gap. The fence would only be visible from the Malheur River at the point of the Frazier Gulch water gap. The Dollar Basin/Star Glade Allotment boundary fence already exists at this observation point along the river, therefore the total amount of the river with visible fence structures would not change. The water gap fences are visible for approximately 200 to 300 feet upstream and downstream from their location. Because of the low degree of change to the exiting landscape character, and that fences are visually considered to be part of the characteristic landscape (Visual Management System Range Handbook), the visual quality objective of retention and existing high scenic integrity level would be maintained with implementation of the proposed actions.

The outstanding remarkable value of scenery would not be impaired through this project. The variety of vegetation would be enhanced along the edge of the river with the proposed rest from livestock grazing. The variety and composition of willow species along the river are expected to increase resulting in enhanced diversity of vegetation and seasonal color displays in the future. The corridor environment would remain relatively undisturbed as it currently exists.

Cumulative Effects

Past, ongoing, and foreseeable activities in Management Areas 14 and 22B were considered. No ongoing or foreseeable activities would impact the state of the landscape or add additional human alterations. Therefore, there are no adverse cumulative impacts to the scenery resource. Resting the Malheur River from grazing for a minimum of five years would have a beneficial impact to the scenery outstanding remarkable value with recovery of vegetation along the Malheur River.

Consistency with Direction and Regulations

Based on the above discussions, proposed activities are consistent with visual quality objectives of the Malheur Forest Plan, as amended by the Malheur Wild and Scenic River Plan. The outstanding remarkable value of scenery would be maintained or improve through implementation of the project.

Wildlife Resources

The following sources of information were reviewed to determine which Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive (TES) species, or their habitats, occur in the project area: • Pacific Northwest Regional Forester’s Special Status Species List, December 1, 2011. This list includes Federal Threatened, Endangered, and Proposed (TEP) species, as well as the Region 6 Regional Forester Sensitive Species List. Candidate species (C) are treated as Sensitive Species in Region 6.

Chapter 3 Page 25

• National Resource Information System (NRIS) Wildlife database, Forest and District sensitive species databases(s) and Graphic Information System (GIS) mapping layer(s) • Oregon Natural Heritage Program, Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants and Animals of Oregon • Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife reports • Project area maps and aerial photo imagery

District wildlife records document nesting osprey along the Malheur River in vicinity of proposed projects. Elk cows and calves, pronghorn antelope, greater sage-grouse, bald eagle, sandhill cranes, and northern goshawk are also documented in vicinity of project areas. The TES species considered in the analysis of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project are displayed in bold in Table 4 below. This table also provides a summary of effects determinations discussed in the narrative that follows. There is no habitat for upland sandpiper, bobolink, grasshopper sparrow, Wallowa rosy finch, or pygmy rabbit in vicinity of the project area. These species would not be discussed.

There is no designated or proposed critical habitat for Canada lynx in vicinity of the project area or surrounding subwatershed. Based on the National Lynx Survey, the Malheur National Forest falls under the designation of “Unoccupied Mapped Lynx Habitat” (USFWS Memo, 2006). The Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy (LCAS) applies to occupied lynx habitat. Compliance with section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act is not required for lynx on national forests determined to be unoccupied by lynx (USFWS 2006). Consequently, there is No Effect (NE) to Canada lynx.

Table 4: PNW Regional Forester Special Status Species List 2011, Malheur National Forest Species Scientific Name Status1 Occurrence2 Effects Determination3 Avian Species Upland Sandpiper Bartramia longicauda S HD/N NI Bufflehead Bucephala albeola S HN/S MIIH Greater Sage-grouse Centrocerucs C HD/D MIIH urophasianus Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus S HN/N NI American Peregrine Falco peregrinus S HN/S MIIH Falcon Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus S HD/D MIIH Lewis’s Woodpecker Melanerpes lewis S HD/S MIIH White-headed Picoides albolarvatus S HD/S MIIH Woodpecker Grasshopper Sparrow Ammodramus savannarum S HN/N NI Wallowa Rosy Finch Leucosticte tephrocotis S HN/N NI wallowa Reptile/Amphibians Columbia Spotted Frog Rana luteiventris S * * Invertebrates Silver-bordered Fritillary Boloria selene S HD/S NI Chapter 3 Page 26

Johnson’s Hairstreak Callophrys johnsoni S HD/S MIIH Columbia Clubtail Gomphus lynnae S HD/S NI Mammals Gray Wolf Canis lupus S HD/S NI Townsend’s Big-eared Bat Coryrhinus townsendi S HD/S MIIH Pallid Bat Antrozous pallidus S HD/S MIIH Fringed Myotis Myotis thysanodes S HD/S MIIH North American Gulo gulo luscus C HD/S NI Wolverine Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis T HD/N NE Pygmy Rabbit Brachylagus idahoensis S HN/N NI *see Aquatics Specialist Report for discussion of Columbia Spotted Frog Status E Federally Endangered T Federally Threatened S Sensitive species from 2011 Regional Forester’s list C Candidate species under Endangered Species Act

2Occurrence HD Habitat Documented or suspected within the project area or near enough to be impacted by project activities HN Habitat Not within the project area or affected by its activities D Species Documented in general vicinity of project activities S Species Suspected in general vicinity of project activities N Species Not documented and not suspected in general vicinity of project activities 3Effects Determinations - Threatened and Endangered Species NE No Effect NLAA May Effect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect LAA May Effect, Likely to Adversely Affect BE Beneficial Effect

3Effects Determinations - Sensitive Species NI No Impact MIIH May Impact Individuals or Habitat, but Would Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species WIFV Would Impact Individuals or Habitat with a Consequence that the Action May Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species BI Beneficial Impact

Effects were analyzed within the immediate vicinity of the project area, unless otherwise noted. For wide-ranging animals such as the gray wolf and wolverine, peregrine falcon, and bald eagle, the effects boundary was expanded to include discussion of remote habitat such as the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness, or in the case of bald eagles, adjacent nesting areas such as Bear Valley. Cumulative effects were analyzed with respect to past, ongoing and foreseeable future activities listed at the beginning of Chapter 3.

Chapter 3 Page 27

THREATENED, ENDANGERED, AND SENSITIVE (TES) WILDLIFE SPECIES

Gray Wolf

Existing Condition

Gray wolves are highly adaptable, wide-ranging carnivores that utilize a variety of habitats. They prefer remote areas where sufficient prey resources and low levels of human activity are present. High road densities and corresponding human activity may deter use of an area by wolves (Thurber et al. 1994). In vicinity of the project area, the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness, approximately 13 miles to the north, would best meet these remote and relatively disturbance free requirements preferred by gray wolves. The availability of prey is the most important habitat indicator for this species; survival of the young and population growth depends on the availability of food during the rearing season (Jordan et al., 1967 in Verts, Carraway 1998). In Oregon, gray wolves feed extensively upon large ungulates, including Rocky Mountain elk and mule deer. Seasonally, rodents, such as voles, field mice, and ground squirrels are also important prey sources. The location and distribution of prey often directly influences daily and seasonal movements of gray wolves. Historically, wolves occupied all habitats of the Malheur National Forest (Wisdom et al. 2000). In 1999, a radio-collared gray wolf was captured on the forest on the Middlefork John Day River, and returned to Idaho. Two unconfirmed sightings of single animals in the Logan Valley and along Summit Creek are recorded for the Prairie City Ranger District. Two radio-collared individuals made their way south through Grant County in 2011. While individual animals have been documented, there are currently no known packs or denning pairs documented for the Malheur National Forest. Communication between the Malheur Forest Biologist with USFWS indicates that because of the variety and range of habitat used by gray wolves, from alpine zones, forest habitat, sage steppe, to desert, “…[none] of our forest management activities have any negative impacts on wolves” (Reames, Forest Biologist, personal communication, 2013). When a den site and reproducing animals are documented, USFWS would require a buffer around such sites.

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect Effects

Wolves are limited by prey availability and are threatened by negative interactions with humans. The proposed fences and water developments are limited in size and place, and would readily be avoided by gray wolves, both during layout and construction, and once these developments are in place. Generally, land management activities are compatible with wolf protection and recovery, especially actions that maintain ungulate populations. Elk populations on the Malheur National Forest are stable; within the project area, elk populations are at or slightly above management objectives set by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW 2012).

Chapter 3 Page 28

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative effects were analyzed at the project area level, with respect to past, ongoing and foreseeable future activities listed at the beginning of Chapter 3. Past activities such as timber harvest, road construction, recreation, fire suppression, grazing, and wildfire have combined to create the current condition in the analysis area. Gray wolves are wide ranging carnivores, and as such can readily avoid the area while projects are being implemented. However, some effects to gray wolf big game prey base may occur. Effects of fences near and parallel to roads could be additive when big game becomes startled, by vehicles or hunters or recreationists on foot, and flushed towards fences (Paige, 2012). Wildlife is particularly more susceptible to tangling when alarmed. Ongoing grazing continues to create baseline conditions in meadow, sagebrush, and riparian habitat. Because move triggers would remain the same, removing cattle from the pasture once certain use levels had occurred, fenceline and spring developments would not result in additive grazing impacts to these habitats. While some impacts could occur, overall, the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities would not be expected to adversely affect populations of big game at the Forest level. Gray wolves would not be expected to be adversely impacted. Determination

No wolf populations currently occupy the Malheur National Forest. No denning or rendezvous sites have been identified on the Malheur National Forest. Prey species such as elk are not limiting, and are not expected to decline as a result of the proposed action. Wolves would be able to avoid the area during project implementation, and would not be measurably impacted once structures are in place. Consequently, there would be No Impact (NI) to gray wolves or their habitat as a result of the proposed action.

North American Wolverine

Existing Condition

The wolverine is strongly associated with remote, high elevation alpine and coniferous forest habitats. They depend on “deep persistent snow cover for successful denning, and they concentrate their year-round activities in areas that maintain deep snow cover into spring and cool temperatures throughout summer.” Based on current information, the primary threat to wolverines would be habitat loss due to increasing temperatures and reduced late spring snowpack as a result of climate change (USFWS 2013).

Wolverines are wide ranging carnivores known to travel long distances. Home ranges may vary from approximately 40 to 350 square miles in size, depending upon abundance and distribution of prey or food sources, as well as gender and age of individuals (Banci 1994 in USFWS 2013).

Chapter 3 Page 29

Although areas of high road density, human developments, and activity may be avoided, current wolverine distribution is more likely influenced by the availability of persistent snow habitat requirements described above (McKelvey et al. 2011). As of February 4, 2013, the USFWS has proposed to list the distinct population segment of the North American wolverine as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (Federal Register Vol. 78, No. 23. 2013). Historically, wolverines have been documented on the Malheur National Forest. Denning habitat exists in the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness for wolverine; a partial carcass of a juvenile was found in the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness in 1992, and an incidental sighting of a wolverine is documented in District records for the Bosenberg burn area. Both areas are approximately 10 to 13 miles north of the project area. Currently, the USFWS considers animals in Oregon as dispersing individuals, not contributing as “source” populations (USFWS 2013). Although wolverines are generally not suspected to regularly use the project area due to environmental and human-caused factors, suitable dispersal habitat may exist as animals move between higher elevation areas (listed above) and in search of food.

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect /Cumulative Effects

Animals may move through the project area, using it as dispersal habitat or while searching for food. Given the home range of individual wolverines, animals could detour to avoid areas frequented by people or activity during project implementation. Existing fences do not appear to deter animal movement, and the additional fences or water developments would not be anticipated to impact wolverine movement. No direct impacts to wolverine are anticipated. Prey species such as elk are not limiting, and are not expected to decline as a result of the proposed action. “Wolverines are not thought to be dependent on specific vegetation or habitat features that might be manipulated by land management activities, nor is there evidence to suggest that land management activities are a threat to the conservation of the species”(USFWS 2013

Determination

No denning habitat for wolverine exists within the project area. Animals may transit through the area, either dispersing or in search of food. The proposed fences or spring developments would not impact such movement. Individual wolverines could detour to avoid areas frequented by people or activity. Prey species such as elk are not limiting, and are not expected to decline as a result of the proposed action.

Because of limited potential use of the area by wolverines, no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects are anticipated from the Malheur River Range Aquatics Projects. The determination would be No Impact (NI) for wolverine populations and habitat as a result of the proposed action.

Chapter 3 Page 30

American Peregrine Falcon

Existing Condition

Peregrines are medium-sized raptors with wings designed for swift flight. These falcons commonly occupy habitats with cliffs for nesting and generally open landscapes for foraging. Dispersal can follow rivers as nest sites are often associated with water (White et al., 2002, Marshall 2006). Cliffs used for nest habitat generally range from 75 to 200 or more feet in height (Marshall, 2006).

Peregrine falcons are documented on the Malheur National Forest. The nearest cliff habitat suitable for peregrine nesting is 13 miles north in the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. The Malheur River corridor and surrounding bench lands may provide potential foraging habitat for peregrine falcon. One incidental sighting of a peregrine falcon is recorded near FS Road 16, approximately seven miles north of the project area.

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect Effects

Cliff habitat along the Malheur River corridor generally does not meet height requirements used by peregrines for nesting. However, the river corridor and surrounding area could provide foraging habitat for American peregrine falcon. Placement of the water gap fenceline would pose the highest risk to peregrine falcon in pursuit of prey species along the river. Design Elements increasing the visibility of this fence, and the fact that the watergap fenceline is pulled from the river when the pasture is not used would minimize the potential for birds to hit this fence. In the uplands, the fenceline may pass through openings in between forested areas that are often used as flight corridors for avian species. Increasing visibility with additional wooden stays added to these sections of fence would reduce potential bird strikes and resulting injuries or fatalities (See Design Elements, Chapter 2).

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative effects were analyzed at the project area level, with respect to past, ongoing and foreseeable future activities listed in Chapter 3. Past activities such as timber harvest, road construction, recreation, fire suppression, grazing, and wildfire have combined to create the current condition in the analysis area. Peregrine falcons are a wide ranging bird species, and as such could readily avoid the area while projects are being implemented. Design elements to increase visibility of fence lines would minimize any direct impacts for the falcons, whether flying through the area, or while in pursuit of prey. Additive impacts from the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities are not anticipated for American peregrine falcon populations or habitat at the Forest level.

Chapter 3 Page 31

Determination

No nesting habitat for American peregrine falcon exists in the vicinity of the project area. Peregrines may move through the area, either dispersing or in search of food. Design Elements are in place to increase fence visibility, in particular the water gap fence across the river. These Design Elements would minimize the potential for bird strikes of the fences and resulting injury or fatality of peregrine falcons. Consequently, the determination for American peregrine falcon and their habitat is May Impact Individuals or Habitat, but Would Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species (MIIH).

Columbia Clubtail

Existing Condition

The Columbia clubtail is a medium sized black and yellow clubtail dragonfly. Habitat is found along sandy or muddy, to rocky, slow-flowing rivers. Although it is not documented within the Malheur River drainage, areas of the Malheur River have slower moving sections of water with suitable habitat.. Columbia clubtail eggs are broadcast in the water. Once hatched, clubtail larvae burrow in and overwinter in mud along the banks. Larval river habitat is the most critical element. Adults forage mid-June through mid-August among riparian shrubs (Scheuering 2006).

Proposed Action

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects

Potential habitat for the Columbia clubtail is dispersed and may be found on slower moving sections of the Malheur River corridor. Direct or indirect impacts from fenceline construction at the water gap, and subsequent cattle use is limited. Riparian shrub habitat in the immediate vicinity may provide foraging habitat for adults, however the critical muddy riverbank needed by clubtail larvae is not in this area. The riverbank in vicinity of the watergap consists of cobble substrate (See Bill Wall photo, above). Resting the section of the river for five years after fencing would be beneficial for riparian vegetation along the river corridor. Measurable adverse impacts from implementation of the project are not anticipated. Because there are no direct or indirect effects, there would be no additive cumulative effects to the Columbia clubtail as a result of the proposed action.

Determination

Because habitat for Columbia clubtail is dispersed along the river corridor, and because larval river habitat is not in the area of the watergap section of the fenceline, no measurable adverse impacts from the proposed action are anticipated. Consequently the determination for Columbia clubtail and its habitat is No Impact (NI).

Chapter 3 Page 32

Silver-bordered Fritillary

Existing Condition

Adult silver-bordered fritillaries feed on various plants such as mints and Verbena species and place their eggs on or near violets. The butterflies can be found in bogs, open riparian areas, and marshes containing large amounts of willows and larval food plants (Andrews, 2010b). Potential wet meadow habitat including nectar plants for the silver-bordered fritillary exists primarily along the Malheur River corridor in vicinity of the project area. Though there are no documented occurrences of silver-bordered fritillaries in the project area, these butterflies have been found in the Strawberry Mountains, approximately 13 miles north of the project area (Andrews, 2010b).

Proposed Action

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects

The silver-bordered fritillary depends upon the maintenance of wet meadow habitat and its associated food plants. The highest potential for wet meadow habitat is along wider, more open reaches of the Malheur River corridor. The watergap fenceline and subsequent cattle use of the river is limited in size and place. Habitat in this area consists primarily of cobble and rocky substrate. Resting the section of the river for five years after fencing would be beneficial for riparian vegetation along the river corridor. Measurable adverse impacts from implementation of the project are not anticipated. Because there are no direct or indirect effects, there would be no additive cumulative effects to the silver-bordered fritillary as a result of the proposed action.

Determination

Because habitat for the silver-bordered fritillary consists of wet meadow habitat primarily along the river corridor, and because this habitat would not impacted by the water gap section of the fence, no measurable adverse impacts from the proposed action are anticipated. Consequently the determination for silver-bordered fritillary and its habitat is No Impact (NI).

Johnson’s hairstreak

Existing Condition

Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly is closely associated with late successional or old growth conifer forests. Adults feed on the nectar of a variety of flowering plants and shrubs including Actostophylos, Ceanothus, Cornus, Fragaria, Rorrippa, and Spraguea. Butterfly larvae feed on all exposed plant parts of dwarf mistletoe, and can be found on host leaves April through October (Andrews, 2010a). Butterflies spend the majority of their time in the top of the forest canopy, so are infrequently seen. While no surveys have been conducted to determine species presence, the highest potential habitat are old growth Douglas-fir scattered in the Malheur River corridor, as well as in the dedicated old growth (MA 13) immediately south of the project area.

Chapter 3 Page 33

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect Effects Habitat for Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly in vicinity of the project area is dispersed. While some incidental loss of smaller trees or snags is anticipated, Design Elements to avoid old growth during fence layout would minimize the potential loss of dwarf mistletoe infected conifers important for butterfly larvae.

Design elements restricting equipment use to dry ground would minimize rutting and compaction in wet meadow or spring areas, minimizing impacts to nectar plants used by adults. Cleaning of equipment prior to project work would eliminate the potential introduction of non-native species that could degrade native plant communities, which could impact nectar plants used by adults.

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative effects were analyzed at the project area level, with respect to past, ongoing and foreseeable future activities listed in Chapter 3. Past activities such as timber harvest, road construction, recreation, fire suppression, grazing, and wildfire have combined to create the current condition in the analysis area. Hunters and recreationists cutting firewood would be expected to continue along open roads. Given the size and scope of the Malheur River Range Aquatics project, and Design Elements limiting the loss of snags during fenceline construction, any additive loss of snags or trees as a result of project implementation is expected to be minimal. Vehicle traffic along roads may introduce non-native seed. Should noxious weeds be introduced and outcompete native plants, a gradual loss of habitat could be additive over time as suitable habitat within the project area is converted by the invasive plants. Design Elements requiring cleaning of equipment would minimize this impact during project implementation.

Ongoing grazing continues to create baseline conditions in meadow, sagebrush, and riparian habitat. Because move triggers would remain the same, removing cattle from the pasture once certain use levels had occurred, fenceline and spring developments would not result in additive grazing impacts and loss of adult nectar plants. Overall, the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities would not be expected to adversely affect Johnson’s hairstreak populations or habitat at the Forest level. Determination

Habitat for Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly is dispersed. Design elements are in place to minimize loss of larger conifers that may provide dwarf mistletoe for larvae. Design Elements would also minimize impacts to meadow habitat and potential adult food plants. Consequently, the determination for Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly and its habitat is May Impact Individuals or

Chapter 3 Page 34

Habitat, but Would Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species (MIIH).

Greater Sage-grouse

Existing Condition

Greater sage-grouse are obligate residents of sagebrush-grassland or juniper-sagebrush-grassland plant communities. Optimum habitat during nesting and brood-rearing consists of a healthy sagebrush community including species such as; Artemesia tridentata tridentata, A. tridentata vaseyana, A. tridentata wyomingensis, and A. arbuscula) with a strong herbaceous understory of native grasses and forbs (Hagen 2005).

Sagebrush habitat for greater sage-grouse exists in and around the vicinity of the project area. In 1998, a lek was documented at the Hog Flat area 4.5 miles south of the project area. In the fall of 2009, greater sage-grouse were documented 1.5 miles south of the project area. The birds have also been observed during the fall in Logan Valley, approximately five miles to the north, indicating sage-grouse may use the project area during post-breeding seasonal movements. Surveys for leks in the vicinity of the project area have not been conducted.

Fences with resulting bird strikes as birds take flight may have an adverse impact to greater sage- grouse. Making fences in areas of high sage grouse use more visible may reduce these impacts.

Sage-grouse are most susceptible to collisions with fences: • within 1.2 miles of leks and wintering grounds • where topography is flat • in areas where fence density exceeds 1.5 miles of fence per square mile (Paige, 2012, Stevens et al, 2012).

Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

Disturbance from project implementation during layout and construction of fences, and spring developments would be limited to the immediate vicinity of the project area, and short-term in nature. Once constructed, increasing visibility of the fences, by increasing the number of wooden stays (upland sections of fence line) or placing markers on the wires (water gap fence crossing the river), would reduce potential greater sage-grouse collisions with fences. For upland sections of fence, this would be more critical where fences cross openings through sagebrush and meadow habitat between timber stands, as these openings tend to funnel wildlife movement.

Design elements restricting equipment use to dry ground would minimize rutting and compaction in wet meadow or spring areas. Cleaning of equipment prior to project work would eliminate

Chapter 3 Page 35

potential introduction of non-native species that could degrade native forb, grass, and sagebrush vegetation, important for greater sage-grouse foraging habitat.

Installation of wildlife ramps aid in minimizing bird fatalities in troughs.

Cumulative Effects

Vehicle traffic along roads may introduce non-native seed. Should noxious weeds be introduced and outcompete native plants, a gradual loss of habitat could be additive over time as suitable habitat within the project area is converted by the invasive plants. Design Elements requiring cleaning of equipment would minimize this impact during project implementation.

While some some individuals in vicinity of the project area may be impacted, the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Projects with the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities would not be expected to impact greater-sage grouse populations or habitat at the Forest level.

Determination

Known leks and wintering areas occur to the south of the project area. Greater sage-grouse may use the project area primarily during post-breeding seasonal movements Design Elements are in place to increase fence visibility to minimize potential bird strikes on fences. Design Elements are in place to limit potential impacts to meadow and foraging habitat from equipment use, and to minimize potential introduction of non-native seed. Consequently, the determination for greater sage-grouse and its habitat is May Impact Individuals or Habitat, but Would Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species (MIIH).

Chapter 3 Page 36

Bald Eagle

Existing Condition

In Oregon, bald eagles generally nest near coastlines, rivers, large lakes or streams that support an adequate food supply. Nest trees are mature or old-growth trees, with a large and open branch structure that can support a nest. Fish and waterfowl make up the majority of their diet. Currently there are no known bald eagle nests in Logan Valley or within the Malheur River corridor. One adult eagle was seen on the Malheur River in vicinity of Frazier Gulch during the summer of 2012. A new eagle nest was discovered in Bear Valley, approximately 15 miles north and west of the project area, in 2012. Large snags or large conifers in the area provide sites that bald eagles could use for roosting, or to build nests. Bald eagles may also move through the area between the Silvies River, the Malheur River, and the North Fork of the Malheur during spring and fall migration.

Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

The Malheur River corridor could provide roosting, foraging, and potentially nesting habitat for bald eagles. Bald eagles could readily avoid the area while projects are being implemented. Placement of the water gap fence would pose the highest risk to bald eagles in pursuit of prey species along the river. Design Elements increasing the visibility of this fence, and the fact that the water gap fence is pulled from the river when the pasture is not used would minimize the potential for birds to hit this fence. For other sections of fence, layout and construction may result in some incidental loss of snags or trees cleared for the fence right of way. Design Elements requiring fences to be routed to avoid larger snags and large green trees would minimize this impact, retaining roosting and potential nest habitat along the Malheur River corridor. Should a bald eagle nest be discovered, buffers and timing restrictions are in place to reduce short-term disturbance from fence layout or construction. This would also limit disturbance during annual maintenance (See Design Elements, Chapter 2).

Cumulative Effects

Chapter 3 Page 37 limiting the loss of snags during fence construction, any additive loss of snags or trees as a result of project implementation is expected to be minimal. Overall, the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities would not be expected to adversely affect bald eagle populations or habitat at the Forest level.

Determination

No known nests for bald eagles currently exist in the vicinity of the project area. Bald eagles may roost or may move through the area in search of food. The water gap fence poses the greatest risk to bald eagles; Design Elements are in place to increase fence visibility, to minimize the potential for collisions with this fence by bald eagles. Design Elements also require that large snags or trees be avoided during fence layout and construction. Some incidental loss of trees or snags due to fence clearing may occur. Consequently, the determination for bald eagles and their habitat is May Impact Individuals or Habitat, but Would Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species (MIIH).

Bufflehead

Existing Condition

The Bufflehead is North America’s smallest diving duck. It is also a cavity nester, using abandoned northern flicker cavities for nest sites (Marshall 2006). They typically occupy ponds, lakes, and can be observed on slow moving sections of rivers.

Swift fliers, bufflehead may use the Malheur River to access available habitat during seasonal movements. These ducks fly low over water and risk being caught in fences strung across waterways (Gauthier, 1993). Bufflehead ducks are documented on the Malheur National Forest. They have been observed at Bates pond, Magone Lake, and on slow sections of the Middlefork John Day River. While there are no documented sightings of bufflehead on the Malheur River, side channels with slower moving water and suitable habitat exist.

Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

Placement of the water gap fence across the Malheur River would pose the highest risk to bufflehead flying up or down the river. Design Elements increasing the visibility of this fence, and the fact that the water gap fence is pulled from the river when the pasture is not used would minimize the potential for birds to hit this fence. Design Elements minimizing loss of snags during fence layout and construction near the river would maintain potential habitat for nest cavities and roosting.

Chapter 3 Page 38

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative effects were analyzed at the project area level, with respect to past, ongoing and foreseeable future activities listed in Chapter 3. Past activities such as timber harvest, road construction, recreation, fire suppression, grazing, and wildfire have combined to create the current condition in the analysis area. Hunters and recreationists cutting firewood would be expected to continue along open roads. Given the size and scope of the Malheur River Range Aquatics project, and Design elements limiting the loss of snags during fence construction, any additive loss of snags or trees as a result of project implementation is expected to be minimal. There is low probability of loss of snags along the river from firewood cutting, due to lack of road access. Overall, the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities would not be expected to adversely affect bufflehead populations or habitat at the Forest level.

Determination

Bufflehead ducks may move through the area using the Malheur River corridor. Design Elements are in place to increase visibility of the water gap fence across the river, to minimize potential collisions with this fence by these birds. Design Elements also require that larger snags or trees be avoided during fence layout and construction. Some incidental loss of trees or snags due to fence clearing may occur. Consequently, the determination for bufflehead ducks and their habitat is May Impact Individuals or Habitat, but Would Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species (MIIH).

White-headed Woodpecker and Lewis’s Woodpecker

Existing Condition

White-headed woodpeckers and Lewis’s woodpeckers are both associated with open, mature ponderosa pine forests. White-headed woodpeckers prefer large ponderosa pine snags for nesting. Lewis’s woodpeckers can utilize burned old forest ponderosa pine, open canopied old forest ponderosa pine, or riparian areas with large cottonwoods or large diameter aspen. Both species of woodpecker are documented within the vicinity of the project area and use snags in the area.

Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

Loss of larger diameter snags or trees during clearing for the proposed fences would be the greatest impact to Lewis’s or white-headed woodpeckers. Design Elements avoiding these types of trees during fence layout would minimize these losses. Short-term disturbances would be minimal, as the birds could avoid areas of human activity during project implementation. Should

Chapter 3 Page 39

a nest for either species be found during project layout or construction, the District wildlife biologist would determine if buffers or timing restrictions are needed to eliminate disturbances to nesting birds (See Design Elements, Chapter 2).

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative effects were analyzed at the project area level, with respect to past, ongoing and foreseeable future activities listed in Chapter 3. Past activities such as timber harvest, road construction, recreation, fire suppression, grazing, and wildfire have combined to create the current condition in the analysis area. Hunters and recreationists cutting firewood would be expected to continue along open roads. Given the size and scope of the Malheur River Range Aquatics project, and Design elements limiting the loss of snags for fence construction, any additive loss of snags or trees as a result of project implementation is expected to be minimal. Overall, the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities would not be expected to adversely affect Lewis’s or white-headed woodpecker populations or habitat at the Forest level.

Determination

Nesting and foraging habitat for Lewis’s and white-headed woodpeckers is found throughout the Malheur River corridor and potentially in vicinity of the project area. If active nests for either species are discovered during project implementation, nest buffers or timing restrictions would be used as needed, to limit disturbance to nesting birds. Design Elements require that larger snags or trees be avoided during fence layout and construction to minimize loss of potential nesting habitat. Some incidental loss of trees or snags due to fence clearing may occur. Consequently, the determination for Lewis’s or white-headed woodpeckers and their habitat is May Impact Individuals or Habitat, but Would Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species (MIIH).

Townsend’s Big-eared Bat, Pallid Bat, Fringed Myotis

Existing Condition

Townsend’ big-eared bats, pallid bats, and fringed myotis may forage in the forest, meadow, and riparian corridors in and around the project area. Pallid and fringed bats are associated with large snags and old growth, and may use these in vicinity of the project area for roosting and rearing their offspring. Ponderosa pine, mixed conifer forest, and riparian-wetland habitat is used by Townsend’s big-eared bats. Roost habitat includes caves, mines, and hollow trees.

Large old growth trees, snags, and cliff habitat within the Malheur River corridor potentially provide roost habitat for all three species. No surveys have been done to determine the abundance or distribution of each bat species in the project area.

Chapter 3 Page 40

Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

Large old growth trees, snags, and cliff habitat within the Malheur River corridor potentially provide roost habitat for Townsend’s big-eared bat, pallid bat, and fringed myotis. Foraging habitat for all three species is found in the forest, dry upland and sagebrush meadows, and riparian wetlands along the river corridor. Placement of the water gap fence could pose the highest risk to these bats in pursuit of prey species up and down the river. Design Elements increasing the “visibility” of this fence (echolocating bats would avoid wooden stays, or metal tags making wire more “visible”). Pulling the water gap fence from the river when the pasture is not used would also reduce the potential for bats to hit wires or become impaled by barbs on this fence. In the uplands, the fence may pass through openings in between forested areas that are often used as flight corridors for insects as well as bat species. Increasing “visibility” for echolocating bats by using additional wooden stays added to these sections of fence would reduce potential bat strikes on wire and resulting injuries or fatalities (See Design Elements).

Design elements to minimize loss of larger trees or snags during fence layout and clearing would retain roost habitat for bats in vicinity of the project. Design Elements also restrict equipment use and avoid damage to wet meadows or spring areas, require cleaning of equipment to prevent introduction of non-native seed, and provide wildlife escape ramps in water troughs to allow animals a means of escape should they fall in tanks.

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative effects were analyzed at the project area level, with respect to past, ongoing and foreseeable future activities listed in Chapter 3. Past activities such as timber harvest, road construction, recreation, fire suppression, grazing, and wildfire have combined to create the current condition in the analysis area. Hunters and recreationists cutting firewood would be expected to continue along open roads. Given the size and scope of the Malheur River Range Aquatics project, and Design elements limiting the loss of snags for fenceline construction, any additive loss of snags or trees as a result of project implementation is expected to be minimal. Vehicle traffic along roads may introduce non-native seed. Should noxious weeds be introduced and outcompete native plants, a gradual loss of habitat could be additive over time as suitable habitat within the project area is converted by the invasive plants. Changes in species composition within the plant community could in turn impact the insect prey base important to bats. Design Elements requiring cleaning of equipment would minimize the introduction of non- native seed during project implementation.

Chapter 3 Page 41

Overall, the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities would not be expected to adversely affect Townsend’s big eared bat, pallid bat, or fringed myotis populations or habitat at the Forest level.

Determination

Townsend’s big eared bat, pallid bat, or fringed myotis may use the Malheur River corridor and area in vicinity of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Projects for foraging, roosting, and rearing of young. Design Elements are in place to increase fence visibility, in particular the water gap fence across the river. These Design Elements would minimize the potential for bats hitting or impaling themselves on fence wire, with resulting injury or fatalities. Cleaning of equipment to reduce introduction of non-native weed seed and minimizing impacts to wet meadow or spring habitat from equipment would retain foraging habitat for the insect prey base important to these species. Design elements are also in place to minimize loss of larger snags or trees important for roosting bats. Consequently, the determination for Townsend’s big eared bat, pallid bat, or fringed myotis and their habitat is May Impact Individuals or Habitat, but Would Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species (MIIH).

NON-TES WILDLIFE SPECIES

Management Indicator Species (MIS)

Rock Mountain Elk

Existing Condition

Rocky Mountain elk were selected as a Management Indicator Species for the Malheur National Forest due to their economic and social value. Elk winter range is found to the south of the project area and elk use the river corridor and project area during seasonal movements between winter and summer ranges. Calves are frequently observed in and around the project area. Elk populations in the area have remained stable, currently meeting or exceeding Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) management objectives.

Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

While fences are generally easily negotiated by big game species, they can negatively impact animal movement during late season snow, when poorly placed on hillsides, or when animals are panicked by predators or humans. Animals may become entangled or injured on improperly designed or hard to see fences (e.g., fences at forest edge). Spooked herds of elk may tear completely through a fence rather than go over it. Antelope panicked along roadways may hit a fence multiple times before finally locating a hole to squeeze through. Pregnant elk or deer may

Chapter 3 Page 42

not navigate fences well. Poorly placed fences mid-slope, or near the top of cut-banks have the ability to entrap animals at any time. Poorly maintained fences and loose wire also become hazards for big game animals (Paige, 2012). To reduce the impact of fences to big game, Design Elements are in place requiring a smooth bottom wire at least 16 inches above the ground to facilitate fawn movement, with a maximum top wire height of 42 inches, and spacing of 10 to 12 inches between the top and next lower wire to reduce the potential of back legs being caught when animals jump the fence. Properly maintained fences also minimize the possibility of animals becoming caught in loose or tangled wires. Let-down fences used in areas of heavy snow-pack benefit wildlife because they are laid flat on the ground during the non-grazing season, removing the barrier to movement by big game and non-game species. Gates in vicinity of heavily used game trails could be left open during periods when pastures are not being used, reducing impacts to the fence and to wildlife. Several other modifications to fences that reduce impacts to wildlife are illustrated in “A Landowner’s Guide to Wildlife Friendly Fences: How to Build Fence with Wildlife in Mind” (Paige 2012) Design elements including timing restrictions for vehicle use in fawning areas would also minimize disturbance to elk using meadow and riparian areas in vicinity of the project area. Resting the section of the river for five years after fencing would be beneficial for riparian vegetation along the river corridor, and potentially benefit big game. Water developments in the form of troughs or stock ponds provide additional water for big game and non-game wildlife use. Elk may use these developments early spring or late season, but generally avoid them when cattle are present. Evaporation and lowered water tables of late summer, trampling, and manure make some ponds less useable by wildlife.

Cumulative Effects

Ongoing grazing continues to create baseline conditions in meadow, sagebrush, and riparian habitat. Because move triggers would remain the same, removing cattle from the pasture once certain use levels had occurred, fenceline and spring developments would not result in additive grazing impacts to these habitats. Forage use by big game is included when determining use levels in a given pasture. Overall, the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities would not be expected to adversely affect elk populations or habitat on the Forest.

Chapter 3 Page 43

Conclusion

The area surrounding the project is sufficiently large enough to provide for existing populations of big game. Elk populations have remained stable, meeting or exceeding ODFW management objectives. Elk distribution may shift depending where cattle are grazing at any given time and place within the project area. However, the proposed projects would not be expected to affect elk populations at the Forest level.

Primary Cavity Excavators

Existing Condition

Primary Cavity Excavators (most woodpeckers) depend on standing and downed wood for foraging, nesting, and roosting. These species create cavities in dead and live trees. Secondary cavity users (mountain bluebirds, wrens, chickadees, nuthatches, small owls, flying squirrels, bats, and many others) depend on and use cavities excavated by these woodpecker species for their nesting and reproductive needs. In forest environments, approximately 93 wildlife species utilize snags, and about 86 wildlife species utilize down wood for all or parts of their life cycle (Rose et al. 2001). The Forest Plan identifies 11 Primary Cavity Excavators as MIS for the availability and quality of dead and defective wood habitat: black-backed woodpecker, three-toed woodpecker, Lewis’s woodpecker, white-headed woodpecker, pileated woodpecker, downy woodpecker, hairy woodpecker, northern flicker, Wouldiamson’s sapsucker, and red-naped sapsucker (formerly listed in the Forest Plan as the red-breasted sapsucker and yellow-bellied sapsucker). Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

Direct impacts to woodpeckers would be loss of snags and old growth trees. Design Elements to avoid snags and old growth during fence layout would minimize disturbance to active or potential nest sites. Design Elements provide wildlife escape ramps in water troughs to allow birds a means of escape should they fall in tanks.

Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects were analyzed at the project area level, with respect to past, ongoing and foreseeable future activities listed in Chapter 3. Past activities such as timber harvest, road construction, recreation, fire suppression, grazing, and wildfire have combined to create the current condition in the analysis area. Hunters and recreationists cutting firewood would be expected to continue along open roads. Given the size and scope of the Malheur River Range Aquatics project, and Design Elements limiting the loss of snags during fence construction, any additive loss of snags or trees as a result of project implementation is expected to be minimal.

Chapter 3 Page 44

Overall, the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities would not be expected to adversely affect primary cavity excavator populations or habitat at the Forest level.

Conclusion

While there may be impacts to individuals or habitat, populations of primary cavity excavators and other species associated with dead wood habitats within conifer stands would be expected to be maintained at the Forest level.

Featured Species

Pronghorn Antelope

Existing Condition

Pronghorns occur primarily in grasslands and open shrub-grasslands with gently rolling topography. In Oregon, habitat includes sagebrush steppe, as well as areas occupied by widely spaced juniper or ponderosa pine. Water is essential, animals are seldom found far from available sources. Described as “dainty foragers” pronghorns browse on shrubs and a variety of forbs. During fawning, females often isolate themselves just prior to giving birth. Groups of pronghorn antelope are documented within the vicinity of the project area and 6 miles north, in Logan Valley. Pronghorn likely use the river corridor during movements between suitable habitat.

Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

Fences impact pronghorn migration routes, and access to forage and water. Animals may become entangled or injured on improperly designed or hard to see fences (e.g. built only with metal t- posts). Indirect effects of introducting non-native plants may alter native plant communities and forage availability for pronghorn in the project vicinity.

Cleaning of equipment to reduce the potential for introduction of non-native seed, and restricting off-road equipment use in wet meadow or spring habitat would reduce impacts of weeds, rutting, or compaction in these habitats. Design elements including timing restrictions for vehicle use in fawning areas and fence designs to facilitate antelope movement, would minimize disturbance to antelope using meadow and open sagebrush areas within the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project area.

Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects were analyzed at the project area level, with respect to past, ongoing and foreseeable future activities listed in Chapter 3.

Chapter 3 Page 45

Past activities such as timber harvest, road construction, recreation, fire suppression, grazing, and wildfire have combined to create the current condition in the analysis area. Vehicle traffic along roads may introduce non-native seed. Should noxious weeds be introduced and outcompete native plants, a gradual loss of quality foraging habitat could be additive over time as suitable habitat within the project area is converted by the invasive plants. Design Elements requiring cleaning of equipment would minimize this impact during project implementation.

Ongoing grazing continues to create baseline conditions in meadow, sagebrush, and riparian habitat. Because move triggers would remain the same, removing cattle from the pasture once certain use levels had occurred, fenceline and spring developments would not result in additive grazing impacts to these habitats. Overall, the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities would not be expected to adversely affect pronghorn populations or habitat at the Forest level.

Conclusion Cumulatively and with Design Elements in place, the proposed activities would not be expected to adversely impact pronghorn populations at the Forest level.

Osprey

Existing Condition

Osprey build nests in large old growth trees with dead tops, or in the tops of large snags, usually in vicinity of large streams, rivers or lakes with adequate fish populations. Osprey have historically nested in the Dollar Basin unit. There was an active nest on Big Creek in Logan Valley, approximately six miles north of the project area, in 2012. Large nest snags (≥30inches) and green replacement trees within ½ mile of streams, lakes or reservoirs that are currently being used for feeding osprey are to be maintatined (Malheur LRMP 54, IV- 31). Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects There may be some incidental loss of smaller snags during layout and construction of the proposed fence or water developments. Any layout design should avoid impacting large snags, particularly if within 1/2 mile of the Malheur River. In addition, the District wildlife biologist would be contacted if new raptor nests or roost trees are discovered during project layout of fences or water developments. To reduce disturbance to nesting birds, appropriate buffers and timing restrictions would be implemented (See Design Elements, Chapter 2). Osprey foraging on the Malheur River may also collide with the water gap fence. Making the water gap fence highly visible by using additional wooden stays or metal tags on wires would reduce this potential (See Design Elements, Chapter 2).

Chapter 3 Page 46

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative effects were analyzed at the project area level, with respect to past, ongoing and foreseeable future activities listed in Chapter 2. Past activities such as timber harvest, road construction, recreation, fire suppression, grazing, and wildfire have combined to create the current condition in the analysis area. Hunters and recreationists cutting firewood would be expected to continue along open roads. Given the size and scope of the Malheur River Range Aquatics project, and Design Elements limiting the loss of snags during fenceline construction, any additive loss of snags or trees as a result of project implementation is expected to be minimal. Overall, the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities would not be expected to adversely affect osprey populations or habitat at the Forest level.

Conclusion

With Design Elements to increase fence visibility, maintain potential nest snags, and buffers and timing restrictions to reduce disturbance nesting birds, any impacts to osprey or their habitat from the proposed action is expected to be minimal. The proposed activities would not be expected to adversely impact osprey populations at the Forest level.

Landbirds Including Neotropical Migratory Birds

Existing Condition Neotropical migratory birds (NTMB) breed in temperate North America and spend the winter primarily south of the United States-Mexico border. Of the 225 neotropical migrants that are known to occur in the western hemisphere, about 102 are known to breed in Oregon and about 82 are known to breed on the Malheur National Forest. They include a large group of species, including many raptors, cavity excavators, warblers and other songbirds, with diverse habitat needs spanning nearly all plant community types and successional stages. Various cavities were observed in snags along the river, indicating use by primary and secondary cavity nesters.

Proposed Action

Direct and Indirect Effects

Fences impact song birds as well as other non-game wildlife, including bats, and flying squirrels, all of which can become impaled on barbs. Raptors, in particular owls, can fly into fences while pursuing prey species (Paige, 2012). These interactions have potential to injure or kill individual animals. Water gap fences may impact avian species flying along the river. Design Elements to increase wire visibility, by using metal reflectors or increasing the number of wooden stays, would reduce the potential of low flying bird species colliding with the water gap fence. Ducks, geese, swans, cranes, and osprey are especially vulnerable to these collisions (Paige, 2012). The use of two Chapter 3 Page 47

fence markers (vinyl siding strips with reflective tape, flagging, etc.) for every 16 feet section of fence increases detection by avian wildlife even in low light conditions. These Design Elements would reduce injury and mortality of avian wildlife. Upland spring sources with adequate water flow to maintain existing riparian vegetation, seep characteristics, and surface water are important for a variety of birds, as well as other small wildlife, insect, and other invertebrate species. Birds, as well as small mammals, amphibians, reptiles, etc. depend on these dispersed sites, and may or may not be able to utilize water contained in a trough or tank. In undeveloped spring areas, elk often create wallows, small pools used by a variety of wildlife species. These wallows may provide breeding habitat for Pacific chorus frogs, long-toed salamanders, or provide habitat for small mollusk species or other invertebrates. Healthy robust riparian vegetation at the spring site, with dense spongy root mass, may help hold water for late season flow. Springs to be developed are expected to have adequate water flow to maintain existing riparian vegetation, as well as provide sufficient flow for the desired trough(s). Wildlife escape ramps would be installed in any trough or tank, to minimize drowning fatalities, should birds or small mammals fall into the tank. Eliminating cross-wire bracing also makes water troughs more wildlife friendly for birds or bats that drink while in flight. Design Elements requiring equipment cleaning prior to project implementation, to reduce introduction of non-native seed, and restricting equipment use in wet meadows or spring areas helps maintain native plant communities and healthy meadow and riparian habitat used by many landbirds as well as neotropical migrants.

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative effects were analyzed at the project area level, with respect to past, ongoing and foreseeable future activities listed in Chapter 3. Past activities such as timber harvest, road construction, recreation, fire suppression, grazing, and wildfire have combined to create the current condition in the analysis area. Hunters and recreationists cutting firewood would be expected to continue along open roads. Given the size and scope of the Malheur River Range Aquatics project, and Design Elements limiting the loss of snags during fenceline construction, any additive loss of snags or trees important for roosting or nesting songbirds as a result of project implementation is expected to be minimal. Vehicle traffic along roads may introduce non-native seed. Should noxious weeds be introduced and outcompete native plants, a gradual loss of habitat could be additive over time as suitable habitat within the project area is converted by the invasive plants. Design Elements requiring cleaning of equipment would minimize this impact during project implementation, retaining native plant communities and foraging habitat for landbirds and NTMB.

Chapter 3 Page 48

Overall, the combined effects of the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project with the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities would not be expected to adversely affect landbirds or neotropical migrants or habitat on the Forest.

Conclusion While there may some impacts to individuals or habitat, the proposed actions are not expected to adversely impact NTMB species, landbird, and other small wildlife populations at the Forest level.

CONSISTENCY WITH DIRECTION AND REGULATIONS

Outstanding Remarkable Values

The Malheur River Wild and Scenic River Management Plan identifies wildlife habitat as an oustanding remarkable value in the river corridor. The corridor is generally unaltered by land management disturbances and due to its isolation, habitat quality, and diversity has potential to support almost all of the wildlife species found on the Malheur National Forest. The Wild and Scenic corridor also provides a link between the Blue Mountains and Great Basin physiographic provinces, allowing connectivity between the canyon rim, large old growth habitats, and sage brush dominated landscapes. The diversity and quality of exceptional habitat found within the Malheur River corridor result in the designation of wildlife habitat as an outstanding remarkable value.

The proposed action would enhance the quality of this value by preventing access of livestock to a significant area of the Scenic portion of the river. The proposed fence would close access of livestock to 4.5 miles (2.5 miles retained + 2 miles proposed) of the river, and the corridor rested a minimum of five years from grazing. The fence installation may improve the quality of habitat available to wildlife by reducing the amount of vegetation affected by grazing practices. Resting the section from grazing could also reduce competition for forage that occurs between livestock and wildlife. The fence design criteria would help minimize the impacts to wildlife from the proposed action.

Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species

A Biological Evaluation (BE) and Wildlife Specialist Report evaluate the potential effects of water developments and the construction of a corridor fence on wildlife species and their associated habitat within the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project. The Proposed Action is consistent with the Endangered Species Act. The proposed action would be expected to have No Effect (NE) to threatened Canada lynx and No Impact (NI) to the sensitive gray wolf, North American wolverine, and American peregrine falcon. Contingent on the implementation of design criteria, there would be No Impact (NI) to Columbia clubtail, Johnson’s hairstreak, and silver-bordered fritillary. The Proposed Action May Impact Individuals or Habitat (MIIH) of sensitive greater sage- grouse, bald eagle, bufflehead, white-headed woodpecker, Lewis’s woodpecker, Townsend’s

Chapter 3 Page 49

big-eared bats, pallid bats, and fringed myotis, but would not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing. Management Indicator Species

Big Game – Rocky Mountain elk • Design criteria including timing restrictions in fawning areas and fence designs to facilitate antelope movement, would minimize disturbance to elk using meadow and open pine areas within the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project area. These measures meet Forest Plan direction.

Featured Species Antelope • Design criteria including timing restrictions in fawning areas and fence designs to facilitate antelope movement, would minimize disturbance to antelope using meadow and open areas within the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project area. These measures meet Forest Plan direction.

Osprey • The Proposed Action includes design criteria to maintain osprey nest trees and snags on the landscape and minimize disturbance to nesting birds. These measures meet Forest Plan direction.

Landbirds and Other Wildlife – including neotropical migrants • The Proposed Action is consistent with the 1918 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Migratory Bird Executive Order 13186. The Proposed Action was designed under current Forest Service policy for landbirds. The Northern Rocky Mountains Bird Conservation Plan (Altman 2000) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Birds of Conservation Concern (USFWS 2008) were reviewed for effects disclosure. The Design elements were developed to protect or enhance priority habitats for landbird species, including neotropical migratory species, and other wildlife

Hydrology

Existing Condition

The project area lies within the Lake Creek and Bosenberg Creek Subwatersheds (SWS) of the Headwaters Malheur River Watershed that is located in the Upper Malheur Subbasin. The project area has defined channels and floodplains that drain snowmelt ephemerally into the Malheur River. During low flow conditions, the springs proposed for development infiltrate directly through the stream bed to groundwater within 100 feet of the spring source. Wetlands occur at the spring source.

Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) inventory assessment was conducted on the Malheur River during 2012. The river was observed to be functioning at risk, with needs to improve riparian vegetation cover. Willow and alder riparian plant communities were identified as being arrested.

Chapter 3 Page 50

Water temperatures for the Malheur River through the project areas were 303 (d) listed for water temperature. They were de-listed with the development of the Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) and 2010 Integrated Report.

This analysis for hydrology focuses on the effects from off-site water developments and fence construction.

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect Effects

The effects of implementing proposed spring developments would be a slight decrease in the volume of water infiltrating to groundwater. Slight decrease is defined as less than a gallon per minute. The slight decrease would be from water being heated and lost to evaporation or water being consumed by livestock. The indirect effect of a decrease in volume of water would include a decrease in shallow aquifer storage. A decrease in water tables would not be measureable against annual climate trends, timber treatments, wildlife, etc. This slight effect would be minimized through piping the water back into the original drainages and be permitted to infiltrate back to groundwater through the course substrate. Fencing off the spring source would improve the condition of the ground cover and stabilizing plant community and should allow for more water storage. Wetlands will not be affected because the water being conveyed to the trough will be on the most downstream outlet of the spring source.

The direct effect of constructing a new fence and trench for a pipeline would include a localized disturbance of ground cover. ATV’s would be used to move material for fence construction. The indirect effect of localized disturbance of ground cover would be the decrease of infiltration following snowmelt or a precipitation event. The effect would be very short lived (i.e. 1 year) following colonization of native vegetation the following spring.

Without the corridor fence, livestock would continue to drift into the Malheur River Canyon and stay where water is abundant and forage has higher moisture contents. This would result in the riparian herbaceous and woody vegetation being grazed multiple times throughout the grazing season. Livestock would continue to trample the stream banks as they prefer to stay in the Malheur River Corridor. Riparian recovery would occur with implementation of the corridor fence and resting the Malheur River from grazing for a minimum of 5 years. Recovery is defined as an improvement in stabilizing plant species on the streambank and across the floodplain and an improvement in woody vegetation age classes and distribution throughout this reach.

Cumulative Effects

The area considered for cumulative effects includes the Merit and Dollar units of Dollar Basin Allotment and South Star Glade unit of the Star Glade Allotment. Past activities of range management, vegetation management, and transportation related activities have contributed to the current conditions present in the project area. Ongoing actions and foreseeable future actions of range management were considered. Range management was considered because it has the Chapter 3 Page 51 ability to affect the condition of the ground cover and soil stability that affect water quality. Considering the current effects along with past projects, ongoing and reasonably foreseeable future projects, the proposed actions would improve grazing utilization and distribution of these units and the additive effects would improve the water quality conditions on the Malheur River for approximately 3.7 miles. More water would be stored at the spring sources to provide wildlife with continued habitat into drought conditions.

CONSISTENCY WITH DIRECTION AND REGULATIONS This project is consistent with Forest Plan direction and with service-wide regulation for water resource protection and direction for improvement of watershed conditions. The project is consistent with the Clean Water Act, Executive Orders addressing floodplains and wetlands (E. O. Nos. 11988 and 11990, respectively), other applicable laws and related regulations and with the Malheur National Forest Plan, as amended, because it would not measurably increase watershed impacts over the existing condition. The proposed action complies with the Clean Water Act, since it would not raise stream temperatures, and since all follow Best Management Practices as specified in “Forest Service R6 General Water Quality Best Management Practices” (1988). This project would help provide more shade and improve water temperatures towards compliance with the Clean Water Act. The Forest Service’s responsibilities under the Clean Water Act are described in a May 2002 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality and the Forest Service. The Forest Service is directed to comply with State requirements in accordance with the Clean Water Act for protection of waters of the State Of Oregon (OAR chapter 34041) through planning, application, and monitoring of Best Management Practices (BMPs), which are recognized as the primary means to control non-point source pollution on National Forest lands. The MOU also directs that the Forest Service cannot further degrade water quality impaired streams. As shown in the Effects section, the proposed action would not accelerate sediment nor raise temperatures in the Malheur River.

Aquatic Resources – Fisheries

The analysis area encompasses all fish habitats that have the potential for effects from the proposed project. Based on topography, drainage patterns and the effects analysis, the project analysis area (action area) includes the following drainages: Tureman Creek, unnamed drainage to the water gap next to the Star Glade Allotment boundary, Diamond Dot Gulch, and the Malheur River are within the Bosenberg Creek subwatershed. Dollar Basin Creek and the Malheur River are within the Cliff Creek subwatershed. Potential effects to ephemeral portions were identified in the Watershed report for this project (See the Watershed Specialist report in the project record) and used to address indirect and cumulative effects.

Analysis information that was available included 2005 USFS Stream surveys of the Malheur River (USFS 2005), Aquatic Species (Bull Trout) Biological Assessment for the Blue Bucket, Logan Valley, Summit, McCoy, and Dollar Basin/Star Glade Allotments BA (USFS 2012), 2003 and 2012 BLM Proper Functioning Condition assessment (PFC), 2011 (draft) Range End of Year Report (EOYR), 2012 (draft) Range EOYR, and field visits during 2008 through 2012. Also,

Chapter 3 Page 52

included were discussions with personnel from the ODFW Malheur Watershed District Office in Hines, Oregon and the Burns Paiute Tribal Office in Hines, Oregon.

Fish Habitat

For the most part, stream reaches in the project area, which serve as fish habitat, are generally warmer than desired, with temperatures ranging from about 52 to 65oF. In many of these stream reaches, stream banks lack adequate hardwoods that provide shade, bank stability and the potential to store large wood, which contributes to channel complexity. Sedimentation is also a concern in some areas. It appears that forested stream reaches, such as in the South Star Glade Pature, generally have adequate cover of hardwoods, good bank stability and width:depth ratios.

Fish Species Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) is the only federally listed threatened, endangered or proposed aquatic species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) within the area that may be affected by the proposed action. In inland redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss gairdneri), Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris), western ridged mussel (Gonidea angulate), and are sensitive species either known or suspected to occur within the project area. These species are listed as sensitive within the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List. Bull trout and redband trout are also a Forest Plan Management Indicator species chosen to indicate effects of activities on populations of non- anadromous riparian species.

Those species identified in Table 5 are carried forward in the analysis of the proposed actions to determine the impacts from the actions on these species. This table also provides a summary of effects determinations discussed in the narrative that follows. Other species considered but not carried forward in the analysis are listed in Appendix A of the Aquatic Specialist Report and Biological Evaluation with the reasoning as why the species are not present within the project or action area. Table: 5 TES & MIS Aquatic Dependent Species Present Effects Determination Species Status Occurrence Proposed Action

1 2 3 4 Columbia River bull trout T /MIS HD /SD NLAA7

5 3 Columbia R. bull trout CH HD NLAA7 2 3 4 Inland redband trout S/MIS HD /SD MIIH8

6 3 4 Columbia Spotted Frog S HD /SD MIIH8

Western ridged mussel S6 S6 MIIH8 1. Threatened under ESA. 2. Forest Plan Management Indicator Species. 3. Habitat Documented or suspected within the project area or near enough to be impacted by project activities. 4. Species Documented in general vicinity of project activities. 5. Critical Habitat. 6. Species Suspected in general vicinity of project activities. 7. May affect, but Not Likely to Adversely Affect the species or its designated critical habitat. 8. May Impact

Chapter 3 Page 53

Individuals or Habitat, but Would Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species

THREATENED, ENDANGERED, AND SENSITIVE (TES) AQUATIC SPECIES

Columbia River Bull Trout

Existing Condition

All of the Malheur River within the project areas of South Star Glade and Dollar pastures are occupied by bull trout (StreamNet 2013) and also contain bull trout Critical Habitat. Estimated population numbers within the occupied drainages are presently poorly understood. Annual redd surveys within the upper Malheur River have occurred since 1998 and consistently in Big Creek, Snowshoe Creek, Meadow Fork of Big Creek, and Lake Creek. Recent sampling indicate individuals are present throughout the upper Malheur River tributaries but in low numbers as indicated in the 5-year recovery review (USFWS 2008). There have been no bull trout spawning surveys within the mainstem Malheur River. Resident or spawning bull trout are not expected within the project or action area (Star Glade and Dollar pastures).

The biology and life history of bull trout, Salvelinus confluentus can be found on the following US Fish and Wildlife’s website: http://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/Species/Data/BullTrout/default.asp

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect Effects

Bull Trout

The likelihood of bull trout presence within the water gap during the grazing season is relatively low. Spawning adults, young of the year, fry, or eggs are not likely to be in this area due to stream temperatures above 59oF during this time period. Juvenile or adult bull trout would most likely be in deep, cooler pools with associated cover, which are not present within the water gap. Therefore the potential for harassment from livestock using the water gap is discountable. Bull trout are not known to be within the fish-bearing reaches of Tureman Creek. In 2012, ODFW electroshocked Tureman Creek and did not find any bull trout. Therefore the potential for bull trout to be within Tureman Creek is not likely.

Bull Trout Critical Habitat

Based on the baseline conditions within the water gap, there would be localized impacts to the following primary constituent element of critical habitat:

Chapter 3 Page 54

(1) Springs, seeps, groundwater sources, and subsurface water connectivity (hyporehic flows) to contribute to water quality and quantity and provide thermal refugia. According to the hydrology section of this document, it is estimated that proposed spring developments would result in < 1 gallon per minute decrease in water infiltrating to groundwater, however a decrease in water tables would not be measurable. This would be minimized through piping the water back into the original drainages allowing it to infiltrate back to groundwater through the course substrate. In addition, fencing off the spring source would improve the condition of the ground cover and stabilize the plant community which should allow for more water storage. Reducing storage on the one hand and increasing in on the other, would result in unmeasureable changes to water storage. So ground water sources and subsurface water connectivity that contribute to water quality and quantity and provide thermal refugia for bull trout critical habitat would not be perceptabily affected by any of the proposed actions.

(2) An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage fish. The food base would be limited in the 137 foot-wide proposed water gap because of the potential for livestock to contribute fine sediments to the stream channel through erosion caused by hoof action within the stream channel or adjacent stream banks. On the other hand, the placement of the water gap is expected to improve the food base in approximately 3.75 river miles by not allowing livestock access to the river in this area. Therefore the overall effects on food base would be counteracted or improved within the Dollar Pasture. (3) Complex river, stream, lake, reservoir, and marine shoreline aquatic environments and processes with features such as large wood, side channels, pools, undercut banks and substrates, to provide a variety of depths, gradients, velocities, and structure. Complex river environments and processes could be negatively affected in the 137 foot section of the water gap as a result of grazing and hoof action which results in vegetation losses and sedimentation to the stream channel. Implementation of aquatic design criteria would assure that these impacts would be minimal and not meaningfully measurable downstream of the water gap. Removal of one of the two existing water gaps, would cut in half the potential impacts of livestock use of the water gap on bull trout that result from harassment and sedimentation. Through the rest of the 3.75 river miles, where livestock access is restricted, channel complexity would improve over time as alder and willow plant communities develop. These plant communities would allow the capture of large wood substrate that would benefit complex river environments and processes. The negative effects to bull trout critical habitat may be measurable within the water gap, however these effects would be compensated or improved at the reach level within the Dollar Pasture. As such, at the most, effects to bull trout critical habitat are considered insignificant.

Chapter 3 Page 55

Cumulative Effects

Bull Trout The area considered for cumulative effects on bull trout includes the Bosenberg and Cliff Creeks subwatersheds. Activities identified in the beginning of Chapter 3 that have potential for cumulative effects related to the proposed action include recreation activities associated with the Malheur Ford Camp, maintenance and vehicle use of stream crossings, and livestock grazing. Use of the proposed water gap by livestock, in combination with maintenance and vehicle use of the stream crossing at Malheur Ford Camp, and livestock grazing have the potential to harass both juvenile and adult bull trout. The existing ford is about 20 feet wide and 550 feet across the river. Use of the ford plus the occasional maintenance of the ford contributes to the existing potential for bull trout harassment. This is somewhat minimized because it is done during the designated instream work window (July15 to August 15) when the potential for harassment is lowest. The area already affected by the ford and it’s maintenance plus the 137 foot-long water gap would slightly increase the area where there is potential for bull trout harassment could occur. Harassment potential only affects juvenile and adult bull trout since livestock use in this area is restricted from August 15th until about the end of May and vehicle crossings are not at potential spawning and rearing sites.

However, fencing would prohibit access to approximately 3.75 stream miles in the allotment with no planned livestock use for five years. With the addition of the water gap and the fencing, the overall bull trout harassment potential would be reduced over current conditions in this area.

Determination

Bull Trout Because use of the proposed water gap potentially could cause harassment to an occasional individual bull trout and the area of potential harassment is small (137 feet), the impact is discountable. Therefore the water gap portion of the proposed action may affect but is not likely to adversely affect (NLAA) Columbia River bull trout individuals or the Upper Malheur River population. The proposed fencing project combined with the existing fence is considered to reduce the potential of harassment to bull trout from livestock within the Dollar Basin Allotment, as 3.75 river miles of the allotment would be fenced out, with no livestock use within this section for at least five years. In addition, removal of one of the existing water gaps would improve bull trout harassment potential. There would be no effect from fencing, spring developments, or removal of one of the existing water gaps on Bull Trout.

Bull Trout Critical Habitat Effects from hoof action, browsing, and herbaceous grazing to designated critical habitat may be measurable within the water gap, however these negative impacts would be counteracted or improved at the reach level within the Dollar Pasture. Also the aquatic design criteria would assure that the impacts from potential increases in sediment transport from the water gap, its corridor, and Tureman Creek would be minimal and not meaningfully measurable (insignificant) downstream of the water gap and Tureman Creek. As such, the effects of the existing water gap

Chapter 3 Page 56

may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect (NLAA) Columbia River bull trout designated Critical Habitat. The proposed removal of one of the two existing water gaps plus the fencing project is considered to reduce the potential of negative effects to bull trout Critical Habitat from livestock within the Dollar Basin Allotment, as 3.75 river miles of the allotment would be fenced out, with no livestock use within this section for at least five years. In addition, there would be one less place where livestock could access the river by removal of the water gap. There would be no effect from fencing, removal of an existing water gap, or spring developments on bull trout Critical Habitat.

Bull trout as a Management Indicator Species The Malheur National Forest contains approximately 203 miles of bull trout habitat (Malheur Forest GIS data) and this project includes about 137 feet of suitable bull trout habitat. The Malheur River sub-basin contains approximately 108 miles of bull trout habitat. Fencing off access to 3.75 miles of stream by livestock and closing an existing water gap would contribute to improved bull trout habitat in this area. While other project impacts, such as use of a water gap, would have some negatives impacts to bull trout habitat as described above. Due to the limited area impacted compared to the available habitat across the Forest and the negligible adverse overall direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to bull trout and their habitat at the project level scale; the Malheur River Corridor fence Project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability within the Malheur National Forest for bull trout.

Columbia Spotted Frog

Existing Condition

It is assumed that spotted frogs are widely distributed in the Upper Malheur subbasin, so they are considered to be present in all subbasins on the Malheur National Forest. Therefore spotted frogs are assumed to be within all mid to low gradient reaches (>6%) within the action area. It can also be assumed that all the drainages such as Tureman Creek, Diamond Dot Gulch, Dollar Basin Creek, Frazier Creek, etc., are travel corridors for the species during wetter periods (Hall 2003). Habitat surveys for Columbia spotted frog were conducted at Cross Springs and Dollar Basin during the spring by the forest botanist. These surveys indicated that the habitat was, at best, transitory habitat for adults and juveniles but did not provide adequate emergent vegetation for successful breeding. No frogs were found during the surveys (personal communication, Joe Rausch, 2013). Fish surveys, on the other hand, record incidental sightings of spotted frogs within the Malheur River.

Direct/Indirect Effects

Cross Springs Extension Project and Dollar Basin Pipeline Project:

Generally direct or indirect effects of spring developments to spotted frogs are limited to the drainage of the springs. Spotted frogs can travel short distances overland (about 0.5 miles) and Chapter 3 Page 57 somewhat further (about 2 miles) through drainages when they migrate. Therefore, it is possible that juvenile and adult spotted frogs could migrate into the project areas from nearby areas.

By meeting the aquatic design criteria: eggs, tadpoles, and breeding adults should not be impacted from the implementation of this project, as they are not likely to be present during construction and the spring Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) would be protected from livestock or avoided by livestock. If juvenile are adult frogs are present, but not found during construction, individuals may be harmed or harassed during this time period. However the likelihood is low and should not impact the viability of the local population. Malheur River Corridor Fence Project:

The water gap provides potential breeding and rearing habitat for the spotted frog. Breeding occurs in this area between late April and early June. Since planned livestock use does not usually occur in this pasture until bout mi-June, the potential for harassment of breeding adults or harm to eggs is low. If tadpoles are present within the water gap during livestock use, they may be stepped on or trapped in holes created by livestock hooves.

Harassment of juveniles and adults within the water gap and Tureman Creek (above the fence line) would likely occur, especially during times of concentrated livestock use.

The quality of spotted frog habitat within the 137-foot water gap would be considerably lower than what is expected outside of the gap. Livestock browse, herbaceous grazing, and hoof action would reduce cover and backwater habitat while increasing sedimentation within these micro- habitats. Implementation of aquatic design criteria would assure that impacts from potential increases in sediment transport from the water gap and its corridor would be minimal and not meaningfully measurable downstream of the water gap or Tureman Creek. The impacts to spotted frogs and there habitat may be measurable within the water gap, however these negative impacts would be compensated or improved at the reach level within the Dollar Pasture by completion of the fence and closure of the second water gap. Fence construction would have no effects to the species. Impacts to spotted frogs and their habitat are considered to be minimal and would not adversely impact the local population. The proposed new fence extension would not be located in frog habitat and would have no effect on frogs.

Cumulative Effects

There are no cumulative effects to spotted frogs associated with the proposed spring developments or fencing.

The negative impacts to spotted frogs from water gap project are countered by the benefits of 3.75 miles of fencing that restricts livestock access to the river as well as design criteria to protect aquatic resources. The net effect is that the combined level of impacts would not result in greater negative impacts than were considered for the independent actions. So no cumulative effects are associated with the Malheur River water gap. In Summary, there are no cumulative effects to the spotted frog associated with the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project.

Chapter 3 Page 58

Determination

The potential impacts to Columbia spotted frogs and their habitat related to the water gap and Tureman Creek, above the fence line, would be minimal and isolated to the few individuals that are present within the mainstem of the Malheur River and the fish-bearing portion of Tureman Creek. Also the potential impacts to the frogs during construction activities for the spring development projects would also be minimal to a few individuals that may be harassed during construction activities. All other proposed activities, including the completion of the fence, would not impact the species. As such the projects may impact individuals or habitat, but would not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species.

Western ridge mussel

Existing Condition

There were no western ridged mussels found during a mussel survey of the Malheur River within the project area in the summer of 2012 (Malheur National Forest – draft - 2013) and there have been no documented findings of this species within the Malheur River (Xerces 2010b). However, there have been insufficient surveys within the Malheur system to state their absence. Also, a similar species, the western pearlshell mussel with similar habitat has been found within the project/action area during the 2012 mussel survey. Continued surveys in 2013 and potentially some follow up in 2014 should provide adequate confidence of presence or absence of this species within the Malheur Basin. The Malheur River does not appear to have ideal habitat for this species, as much of the river is embedded and armored with large cobble. It is a plane bed system without many sand and gravel bars. Its tributaries are first and second order, relatively steep systems

Direct/Indirect Effects

Malheur River Corridor Fence Project

Individual western ridge mussels, if present, could be trampled by livestock or affected by livestock-induced sedimentation within the water gap, although the likelihood is small. Removal of one water gap and installation of fencing that excludes livestock from the river for 3.75 miles, would reduce the potential for trampling and sedimentation produced by livestock outside of the 137-foot water gap. Aquatic design criteria would assure that the impacts from potential increases in sediment transport from the water gap and its corridor would be minimal and not meaningfully measurable downstream of the water gap. This would also include habitat adjacent to the confluence of Tureman Creek in regards to sediment. Therefore impacts to western ridged mussels and their habitat are considered to be minimal and would not adversely impact the local population, if present. All other proposed activities would not impact the species.

Chapter 3 Page 59

Cumulative Effects

The area considered for cumulative effects includes the Bosenberg and Cliff creeks subwatershed. Activities with potential for cumulative effects related to the proposed action include recreation activities associated with the Malheur Ford Camp as described under bull trout above, livestock grazing and related hoof action and vegetation removal, transportation use and maintenance of roads, and livestock grazing activities related to hoof action and vegetation removal. The potential for harassment to the mussel or impacts to its habitat from the ford crossing at Malheur Ford Camp plus the water gap are similar to those described above for bull trout. Livestock have the potential to harm or harass mussels within the Malheur River and low gradient sections of tributaries to the Malheur River. Adequate distribution of livestock through water development and management is expected to limit the potential for livestock interaction with the species, if they are present. If present, livestock may harm or harass individual Westen ridged mussels but not at the level of interactions that may impact the viability of the population within these two subwatersheds (if indeed they are present). Impacts to mussel habitat would be from hoof action to stream banks and shallows. The construction of the water gap and the fence would exclude 3.72 miles of stream from planned livestock use, allowing only 137 ft of access within the Dollar Basin Allotment. Also the confluence of Tureman Creek that has potential habitat would be fenced out from livestock use. The combined level of impacts would not result in greater negative impacts than were considered for the independent actions. Road densities within Bosenberg and Cliff Creek subwatersheds are high road with high levels of roads within 200 ft of streams (MNF 2004). Given high road densities and their proximity to streams, the potential for chronic inputs of fine sediments into mussel habitat is high, although a 2005 stream survey indicated that the percent of fine sediments and bank stability in this area were within Forest Plan standards. Therefore sediment impacts to mussels from roads are considered to be likely, but not meaningfully measurable. The combined level of impacts would not result in greater negative impacts than were considered for the independent actions. Determination

The impacts to Western ridged mussels (if present) and their habitat may be measurable within the water gap, however these negative impacts would be compensated or improved at the reach level within the Dollar Pasture by the fencing project and removal of the second water gap. Also the aquatic design criteria would assure that the impacts from potential increases in sediment transport from the water gap and its corridor would be minimal and not meaningfully measurable downstream of the water gap. As such the projects may impact individuals or habitat, but would not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species.

All other proposed projects would have no impact of Western ridged mussles.

Chapter 3 Page 60

Inland Redband Trout

Existing Condition

Redband trout are known to occupy the Malheur River within the action area (Dollar and South Star Glade pastures). They were also recently found in Tureman Creek (Perkins, 2013).

Redband Trout are a subspecies of rainbow trout and steelhead, and are adapted to the arid conditions east of the Cascades. Historically, they were found throughout Eastern Oregon in waters connected to the John Day and Malheur Rivers. Redband trout within the Malheur River have been reproductively isolated from steelhead since the construction of Nevada Diversion Dam (Warm Springs Reservoir) in 1881 on the lower Malheur River at river mile 19.3 (ODFW 2008).

Direct/Indirect Effects

Spawning adults, eggs and fry of Inland Redband Trout would not be present within the Malheur River and not likely present within the grazing portion of Tureman Creek during the authorized grazing period. Also, most, if not all, of the spawning habitat in Tureman Creek is below the grazing portion. It is possible for livestock to harass juveniles or small adult redband trout downstream below the fence line where livestock access is not blocked, especially if concentrated livestock remain with the drainage corridor for long periods of time.

Habitat within Tureman Creek, within the Dollar Pasture is minimal. There is likely to be about 200 feet of cool, flowing water with holding areas (pools) during the authorized grazing period. Impacts to the habitat within this 200 feet would be minimized through the aquatic design criterion, which assures that future impact would not measurably exceed the present baseline as identified during the site visit in December of 2012. This would also be true for the water gap and its associated livestock corridor. Therefore the potential impacts to redband trout related to the water gap and Tureman Creek would be minimal and isolated to the few individuals that are present within the mainstem of the Malheur River and the fish-bearing portion of Tureman Creek. These impacts would not affect the viability of the species within the Malheur River population or to the species within the Forest due to the very localized effects (about 137 feet within the Malheur River and less than 200 feet within Tureman Creek).

Cumulative Effects

The area considered for cumulative effects includes the Bosenberg and Cliff creeks subwatershed. Activities identified at the beginning of Chapter 3 that have potential for cumulative effects related to the proposed action include recreation activities associated with the Malheur Ford Camp (as described under bull trout above), transportation use and maintenance of roads and crossings within the two subwatersheds, and livestock grazing activities related to hoof action and vegetation removal. The potential for harassment to the Inland Redband Trout or impacts to its habitat from the ford crossing at Malheur Ford Camp plus the water gap are similar to those described above for bull trout. As with bull trout, crossings are not at potential spawning or rearing sites so there would

Chapter 3 Page 61

not be impacts from vehicle use during the immobile or poorly mobile life stages. In addition, the water gap impacts related to harassment and habitat are confined within approximately 137 ft of stream. The rest of the riparian area including spawning habitat in Tureman Creek would fenced out with no planned livestock use for five years on 3.72 miles of streambank. This would reduce potential harassment of redband trout or its habitat by planned livestock use. The combined level of impacts would not result in greater negative impacts than were considered for the independent actions. As stated above for Western ridged mussel, road densities are high and their proximity to streams increases potential for chronic inputs of fine sediments into trout habitat, although stream surveys indicated that the percent of fine sediments and bank stability in this area were within Forest Plan standards. Therefore sediment impacts to these trout from roads are considered to be likely, but not meaningfully measurable. Livestock grazing does provide the potential for harm or harass individual young, redband trout within Tureman Creek, an eastern unnamed tributary, Skookum Creek, and Cliff Creek during the immobile or poorly mobile life stages up to the end of July within these tributaries of the Malheur River. These are the only known or potential redband spawning habitat in the area. Adequate distribution of livestock through water development and is expected to limit the potential for livestock interaction with the species. Potential for harm or harassment by livestock may impact individuals, but not at the level of interactions that may impact the viability of the population within these two subwatersheds. The more mobile juvenile and adult redband individuals throughout the fish-bearing portions of the two subwatersheds, including the Malheur River, may be harassed from these livestock interactions, but are not likely be harmed. Impacts to redband habitat would be considered equivalent to the impacts to bull trout habitat as previously mentioned. The construction of the water gap would allow only 137 feet of access to the Malheur River within the Dollar Basin Allotment. Removal of a second water gap and the fence would exclude 3.75 miles of stream from planned livestock use in this allotment. Also the lower reach of Tureman Creek that has spawning habitat would be fenced out from livestock use. The combined level of impacts would not result in greater negative impacts than were considered for the independent actions.

Determination

Inland redband trout The potential impacts to redband trout and their habitat related to the water gap and Tureman Creek would be minimal and isolated to the few individuals that are present within the mainstem of the Malheur River and the fish-bearing portion of Tureman Creek. As such the projects may impact individuals or habitat, but would not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or species. All other proposed projects would have no impact of the redband trout.

Inland redband trout as a Management Indicator Species The Malheur National Forest contains approximately 840 miles of redband trout habitat (Malheur Forest GIS data) . This project includes less than 0.3 miles of this suitable redband trout habitat. Fencing off access to 3.75 miles of stream to livestock and closing an existing water gap would contribute to improved redband trout habitat in this area. While other project

Chapter 3 Page 62 impacts, such as use of a water gap, would have some negatives impacts to redband trout habitat as described above. Due to the limited area impacted compared to the available habitat across the Forest and the negligible adverse overall direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts to redband trout and their habitat at the project level scale; the Malheur River Corridor Fence Project would not contribute to a negative trend in viability within the Malheur National Forest for redband trout.

Consistency with Direction and Regulations Endangered Species Act Bull trout is a threatened, ESA listed aquatic species in the project area. There is also designated critical habitat for this species. The potential for harassment is discountable and the effects to the species habitat is not meaningfully measurable (insignificant). The proposed actions are consistent with the Endangered Species Act. Consistency with the Forest Plan The proposed action is consistent with Management Area 3A standards, Amendment 29, and INFISH. The following items discuss how the actions meet key standards. • MA 3A Standard 10 and 19: The corridor fence would protect and enhance the Malheur River and improve the rate of recovery of this riparian area within the Dollar Pasture. • INFISH GM-1: The corridor fence would provide a minimum of five years of rest within the Malheur River RHCA and provide for improved range management in order to meet the RMOs and reduce potential adverse effects to inland native fish. • Amendment 29 3A Elements: The fencing and upland water developments would improve riparian areas management to achieve desired conditions for sediment/substrate, large woody debris, replacement of large woody debris, pool frequency, bank stability, width to depth ratio, stream bank vegetation, and shade/canopy closure.

Botanical

Existing Condition

TES plant surveys resulted in no new TES plant occurrences being located within or adjacent to the general project area. However, potential habitat exists for several sensitive groundwater- dependent and wetland TES species that reside in the Malheur Wild and Scenic River corridor. If no action is taken, continued negative effects, due to past, present, and future livestock grazing and trampling would likely occur in potential TES plant habitats.

Chapter 3 Page 63

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect Effects

While no new TES plant species were discovered, suitable habitat exists for several species (e.g. Botrychium sp., Carex sp., Tomentypnum nites, Helodium blandowii, Meesia uliginosa, Listera borealis) within the Malheur Wild and Scenic River corridor. Under the Proposed Action livestock grazing would be eliminated from the Malheur Wild and Scenic River corridor for a period of 5 years. During this period trampling impacts from domestic livestock grazing would not occur. After 5 years the Malheur River Corridor fence would improve livestock distribution and reduce potential impacts to TES plant habitats within the corridor. Therefore, the proposed actions would have a beneficial impact to potential TES plant habitats within the Malheur River corridor. Similarly, repair and maintenance of the Cross Springs exclosure fence would also have a beneficial impact to potential TES plant habitats.

The Dollar Basin Pipeline project would have no impact to TES plant species and there habitat, because there are no documented TES species or habitat within or immediately adjacent to this project.

Cumulative Effects

The proposed actions, along with ongoing, past, and foreseeable future actions are not expected to result in any cumulative effects to TES plant species. There is no evidence which suggests that any ongoing or foreseeable future actions would have any beneficial or detrimental effects to TES plant species within the project area.

CONSISTENCY WITH DIRECTION AND REGULATIONS The proposed actions are consistent with direction on TES plant species as provided by the Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended.

Rangeland Resources

Existing Condition

The project area lies within the Bosenberg and Cliff Creek Subwatersheds in the Headwaters Malheur River Watershed that is located in the Upper Malheur Subbasin. In 2011, a 2.5 mile drift fence with two water-gaps was completed in the Dollar unit of the Dollar Basin Allotment. The completed portion of the fence has already been paid for and the maintenance has been assigned to the permittee. The carrying capacity of the unit was not affected by construction of the drift fence. However, the 2 miles of the river corridor that was not fenced out would be an area where livestock concentrate. The permittee would be required to spend additional time riding to ensure livestock stay in the uplands to reduce grazing use along the Malheur River. Additional riding would increase management costs.

Chapter 3 Page 64

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect Effects

Skovin (1984) found that exclusion of livestock had produced improved riparian and aquatic habitat following 4 to 7 years of rest, woody plant (shrub) recovery following 5 to 8 years of rest. A study on Big Creek in northern Utah concluded a minimum of 6 to 8 years of rest was necessary to restore a deteriorated streamside riparian area to the point where livestock grazing would be allowed at reduced levels (Duff 1983). However, substantial recovery of streambanks and vegetation was observed following 4 years of rest from grazing.

Under the Proposed Action 2 miles of fence would be constructed and connect to the drift fence constructed in 2011. Combined the fences would span between the boundary fences of the Dollar Basin and Central Malheur Allotments. The proposed fence would restrict livestock access to the Malheur River from the Dollar unit of the Dollar Basin Allotment, except at the water-gap at Frazier Gulch. Following completion of the fence livestock would be excluded from the Malheur River corridor and Malheur Ford Campground for a minimum of 5 years. This would reduce livestock concentrations in Malheur River riparian area allowing recovery of vegetation and aquatic habitat. The Frazier gulch water-gap would provide livestock watering access to a limited section (approximately 137 feet) of the Malheur River. The water gap would limit access to the Malheur River while providing access to water from upland units and minimizing stream bank impacts.

Two water developments, the Dollar Basin Pipeline and the Cross Springs Extension Projects, would also occur under the Proposed Action. These projects would provide water in units that currently lack distributed water sources. These water developments would improve livestock distribution and allow more uniform utilization in the uplands. The availability of livestock water has been a problem, limiting the opportunity to vary the season of grazing. Improving livestock watering availability in the Dollar unit of the Dollar Basin Allotment and the South Star Glade unit of the Star Glade Allotment would provide greater flexibility in grazing and the ability to adapt to resource needs in the future.

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative effects were analyzed at the project area level. All of the activities described at the beginning of Chapter 3 were considered for their cumulative effects on rangeland vegetation and rangeland management. The construction of the Malheur Corridor fence, excluding grazing from the Malheur River Corridor, and construction of the water developments would allow riparian area recovery while still allowing the uplands to be grazed. Improving livestock water availability would provide greater flexibility in grazing management and the ability to adapt to resource needs in the future.

CONSISTENCY WITH DIRECTION AND REGULATIONS

The proposed actions are consistent with direction in the Malheur National Forest Plan which gives direction to design and implement structural and nonstructural range improvements to maintain productivity and range condition in addition to benefiting both wildlife and livestock. Chapter 3 Page 65

Locate range structural and nonstructural improvements to encourage livestock movement away from riparian areas (VI-35, #88). The Malheur Forest Plan as amended by INFISH directs that livestock watering areas be limited to area that would not prevent attainment of Riparian Management Objectives (INFISH A-9, GM-3).

The proposed action is consistent the Forest-wide standards for rangeland resources. Range permittees were contacted during collaboration and the scoping period to solicit comments and incorporate comments into the analysis process for this project.

Invasive Species

Existing Conditions

The Cross Springs Extension project is located within the Merit unit of the Dollar Basin Allotment and would be piped to the South Star Glade unit of the Star Glade Allotment. There were no invasive species identified within a 2 mile radius of this project. The Dollar Basin Pipeline and Malheur River Corridor fence projects are all located within the Dollar unit of the Dollar Basin Allotment. The only invasive species found within a 2 mile radius of these projects are associated with the Dollar Basin Pipeline. The species identified were Canada thistle and gypsy flower.

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect Effects

The Proposed Action includes the Malheur Corridor fence and water source developments. These projects are designed to enhance the outstandingly remarkable values in the Malheur River Corridor, improve resource conditions for bull trout and critical bull trout habitat, and properly distribute livestock on the allotments. The goal of these actions is to increase upland forage use and distribution, while decreasing the shrub use and stream bank impacts along the Malheur River which is the major water source for the South Star Glade and Dollar units. Implementing the Proposed Action would improve upland and riparian vegetation recovery. Noxious weeds can alter riparian habitat and affect resources such as sensitive plants, fish, and wildlife. In addition, the Proposed Action would rest the Malheur River Corridor for a minimum of 5 years to allow riparian vegetation to recover. Riparian vegetation vigor and species composition would be improved increasing their ability to resist the introduction of invasive plants.

The Proposed Action would cause localized ground disturbance associated with building the corridor fence and using ATV’s to move material for fence construction. Ground disturbing activities would create risk for noxious weed introduction. The risk would be reduced by following the design criteria to reduce the risk of introducing noxious weeds described in Chapter 2 of the EA. The applicable design criteria include but are not limited to: any gravel, fill, sand and rock used in the construction, reconstruction or maintenance of water developments would be judged to be weed free by district weed specialists. Native materials are to be used for revegetation unless accepted extenuating circumstances are identified; all equipment used

Chapter 3 Page 66

(including ATVs) would be cleaned in a manner sufficient to prevent noxious weed from being carried into the planning area. Cleaning would occur off of National Forest System lands and approved by the Forest Officer in charge of administering the project

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative effects are those that are expected from implementing the Proposed Action, when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions. Road reconstruction and maintenance of the 1651 road (access to the Malheur River corridor and Malheur Ford Campground), hazard tree removal, cattle grazing, wildlife, recreational activities, and wildfire and suppression activities have and would continue to provide environments for noxious weed species establishment and vectors for noxious weed dispersal. The proposed actions, along with ongoing, past, and foreseeable future actions are not expected to increase noxious weed species introduction and spread because few noxious weeds are located with a 2 mile radius of project activities and the design criteria discussed above.

CONSISTENCY WITH DIRECTION AND REGULATIONS

The Proposed Action is consistent the Forest-wide standards for noxious weeds, including Forest Plan modifications made by the Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program FEIS.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMICS

Existing Condition

Lands within the planning area generally became ready for livestock use in mid-May or early June depending on the weather, aspect, and amount of snow pack. Livestock remain until late summer or until the end of October depending on when use criteria (triggers) are met or when the permitted grazing season ends. Annual adjustments in the timing, intensity or duration of livestock grazing may be necessary if resource conditions are not trending towards or achieving objectives. Flexibility is needed to address resource concerns. Thus, herd numbers may change up or down, and pastures may be rested in the following year.

Existing conditions may require the permittee to increase their active livestock management efforts and distribution techniques in order to meet utilization standards and avoid a reduction in permitted AUMs. For example, the permittee could incur the cost associated with increased riding that would be required to ensure livestock stay in the uplands, reducing grazing use along the Malheur River Wild and Scenic River Corridor. The Malheur National Forest would continue to receive one quarter of the grazing fees collected annually, for on the ground range improvements.

Chapter 3 Page 67

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect Effects

The proposed action was developed, in part, to improve resource conditions for bull trout and bull trout habitat in the Malheur Wild and Scenic River Corridor and to improve livestock distribution within the Dollar unit of the Dollar Basin Allotment and the South Star Glade unit of the Star Glade Allotment. The Malheur River Corridor Fence Project would exclude livestock grazing from the portion of river corridor within the project area as well as Malheur Ford Campground for a minimum of 5 years. The Cross Springs Extension and Dollar Basin Pipeline Projects would develop additional water sources in upland areas to draw livestock away from the Malheur River Corridor. The cost to the tax payers to complete these projects would be: $54,000 for the Malheur River Corridor Fence, $36,000 for the Dollar Basin Pipeline Project, and $ 5,000 for the Cross Springs Extension Project. Materials for construction of improvements may be purchased locally and local seasonal workers may be hired to complete the projects. Implementing these projects could benefit local businesses that supply materials, equipment, and services. Additionally, jobs and personal income could be created for local seasonal workers hired to these projects benefitting the local economy. All projects would be paid for by Title II and Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration (CFLR) funding.

The permittee would be responsible for the cost of maintaining the Malheur Corridor Fence, the Cross Springs Extension Project, and the Dollar Basin Pipeline Project. The annual maintenance cost to the permittee is estimated to $5,000 for the Malheur Corridor Fence, $500 for the Cross Springs Extension, and $500 for Dollar Basin Pipeline. Once these projects are completed the permittee could see a decrease in the cost associated with riding to ensure livestock stay in the uplands, reducing grazing use along the Malheur River Wild and Scenic River Corridor. All cost estimates were derived from personal conversations with Shannon Britt.

Cumulative Effects

Recent Forest Service range management practices, policies and procedures require more active involvement by the permittees in the form of planning participation, multiple resource management, monitoring, active livestock management, and cost-share of rangeland improvement projects. A special report published in 1992 by the Oregon State University Extension Service concluded that: “changes in federal grazing policies and regulations may have led to relative asset devaluation in the federal land dependent sector of the western livestock industry in Eastern Oregon” (Obermiller, 1992).

The Proposed Action would add to the permittee cost of doing bussiness, including implementation and operational. Resting the Malheur River Wild and Scenic River Corridor for a minimum of 5 years and constructing additional fences and water developments, can increase permittee costs, reduce avilable forage, impact livestock movement, and increase annual maintenance costs.

The Proposed Action could have some minimal cumulative effects on social and economic resources. It is difficult to project what the cumulative effects would be since it is unknown how the permittees would adjust to the new requirements.

Chapter 3 Page 68

Consistency with Direction and Regulations

Proposed activities are consistent with range management objectives of the Malheur Forest Plan, as amended by the Malheur Wild and Scenic River Plan.

Geology

Existing Condition

The geologic value of the Malheur River Corridor was determined to be an outstandingly remarkable value in the resource assessment completed in January 1992. The river corridor is generally characterized by a rugged and steep canyon ranging from 300 to 1000 feet deep. The canyon geology is evident in the various rock outcrops, talus slopes, and cliffs created by erosion as the river cut through many layers of volcanic material, the Strawberry Formation, deposited between 12 and 15 million years ago. The geologic formations of the corridor contribute to the scenic diversity of the landscape.

Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect/Cumulative Effects

The actions proposed in the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project would not have any direct, indirect, or cumulative effects on the outstanding remarkable features that the Malheur River Canyon offers. None of the proposed activities would have an impact on the geology of the area.

Cultural Resources

Existing Condition

In the Malheur Wild and Scenic River Plan which amended the Forest Plan, historic and prehistoric is identified as an outstanding remarkable value. The cultural resources inventory has been completed for the river corridor. Several historic and prehistoric sites have been located and recorded; some are considered eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places.

The Proposed Action

Direct/Indirect/Cumulative Effects

No effect on prehistoric and historic sites would occur from implementing any of the activities included in the Proposed Action.. Surveys for prehistoric and historic sites have been conducted, and the Proposed Action would be designed to avoid sites during ground-disturbing activities. Any sites detected during project implementation would be noted, and further disturbance of that area would be halted. The splash dam site and early logging activities which occur downstream Chapter 3 Page 69

are of particular significance. The actions proposed in the Malheur River Range Aquatics Project would have no effect on these remarkable values since the splash dam is located downstream from the proposed project, outside the project area. A finding of 'no effect' on heritage resources was made under the Programmatic Agreement with the State Historic Preservation Office. Refer to the analysis file for further information.

Specifically Required Disclosures

This section contains disclosures of effects that are required by federal law, regulation, policy, or Executive Order.

Wild and Scenic River Act

The project is consistent with the Wild and Scenic River Act. A Decision Notice (DN) was signed on August 7, 1992 designating a management strategy for the Malheur Wild and Scenic River, amending the Malheur Forest Plan (Forest Plan Amendment #14), and establishing a new Management Area, MA 22b -Wild and Scenic River-Malheur River. The goals of MA 22b are to protect and enhance the scenic, geologic, wildlife habitat and historic values of the river corridor. Preserve the free-flowing conditions of the river. Proposed activities would have a beneficial impact to the scenery and wildlife outstanding remarkable values; and no impact to geology and historic values. See the Geology, Scenery, Cultural Resources, and Wildlife sections for specific details.

Proposed actions would not impact the free-flowing conditions of the river corridor. No actions that would impact the flow of water or the river channel are proposed.

A Forest Plan amendment is proposed to retain the existing water gap at Frazier Gulch and the four small segments of fence within the scenic portion of the Malheur Wild and Scenic River boundary. Maintaining the existing fence within the corridor would not alter the goals and objectives of the Malheur Forest Plan. All outstanding remarkable values would be maintained or enhanced with implementation of the proposed action. The Wild and Scenic River corridor boundary would not change. Forest Plan standards and guidelines related to the Wild and Scenic River corridor would not change or be amended.

Conflicts with Plans, Policies, or Other Jurisdictions

Implementation of the Proposed Action would not result in conflicts between the provisions of the proposed activities and any goals or objectives developed for other government entities.

Tribal Treaty Rights

This proposal would not conflict with any inherent rights or treaty provisions of any Tribal Group.

Prime Farmland, Rangeland, and Forestland

Chapter 3 Page 70

Adverse effects on prime farmland, rangeland and forestland not already identified in the FEIS for the Forest Plan are not expected from implementing the Proposed Action.

Energy Requirements

With relation to national and global petroleum reserves, the energy consumption associated with the Proposed Action would not be substantial. Energy consumption associated with this project would be not be substantial at the local, regional or national scale. Fossil fuel needed for operations and transportation associated with this project would be irreversibly lost, but this is inconsequential in the context of regional, national or global use.

Threatened or Endangered Species

Effects on Threatened and Endangered species were determined through the preparation of Biological Assessments/Evaluations. For species with potential or known habitat within the analysis area, except the bull trout, a determination of no effect was made for the proposed actions.

The water gap project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect (NLAA) Columbia River bull trout and their designated Critical Habitat. Fencing, spring development projects and removal of one of the excisting water gaps would have no effect on bull trout or their designated Critical Habitat.

Wetlands and Floodplains

During low flow conditions, the springs proposed for development infiltrate directly through the stream bed to groundwater within 100 feet of the spring sources. Wetlands occur at the spring sources. Wetlands will not be affected because the water being conveyed to the troughs will be on the most downstream outlet of the spring sources.

Two water gaps currently exist withn the floodplain of the Malheur River. One of these gaps will be removed, thus reducing current floodplain inpacts (for more information on wetlands and floodplains refer to hydrology and fisheries reports on file at the Prairie City Ranger District.

Environmental Justice (Executive Order 12898) Executive Order 12898 on environmental justice requires federal agencies to identify and address any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and low-income populations.

The population of the area is predominately white (96% Grant County, 92% Harney County). The region is sparsely populated, and contains low populations of minorities (4% of the Grant County population, 8% of Harney County). The largest component in this group is Native American. Under the terms of the Treaty of 1855, the Confederated Tribes reserve the rights to hunt, fish, gather plant crops, and pasture livestock within these ceded lands. These reserved treaty rights are important in the maintenance of traditional economic strategies (Treaty with the Tribes of Middle Oregon).

Chapter 3 Page 71

Poverty rates provide some indication of the percentage of the population in surrounding communities with low-incomes. Poverty rates for both Grant and Harney counties are 16% and 14% respectively. The Oregon statewide average rate of persons living below poverty level is 13% (NAF).

Data regarding minorities or people with disabilities employed in the region in the timber, mining, ranching, road construction, forestry services, and recreation sectors is unavailable. Some firms contracted by the Forest Service for reforestation work have traditionally hired Hispanic workers that comprise a migratory workforce in the area. Asian and Pacific Islanders uses of the area include commercial mushroom harvesting and developed camping associated with this activity. Some contracts are reserved for award to minority businesses under the USDA Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization and the Small Business Administration, although overall contract amounts to these groups has declined since 1998 (Kohrman 2003).

Inventoried Roadless and Potential Wilderness

There is approximately 1,880 feet of proposed fence within the Malheur River Roadless Area (IRA) and the Malheur River Potential Wilderness Area (PWA). All proposed activities are consistent with the Roadless Area Conservation Rule.

Chapter 3 Page 72

Chapter 4 – Agencies and Persons Consulted

Scoping Participants

The following list contains names of participants during the scoping period, who also received a copy of the Environmental Assessment for review and comment.

Federal, State, and Local Government

Grant County Public Forest Commission

Organizations

Blue Mountain Biodiversity Project (Karen Coulter) Grant County Conservationist (Linda Driskill) Oregon Natural Desert Association (Dan Morse)

Preparers

The following agency personnel participated in the preparation of the Environmental Assessment:

Sue Burton Interdisciplinary Team Lead Bill Wall Fisheries Biologist Bob Hassmiller Hydrologist Cindy Kranich Wildlife Biologist Hugo Cobos Wildlife Biologist Joe Rausch Botanist Kay Shelnutt Archaeologist Shannon Britt Rangeland Management Specialist and Invasive Species Shannon Winegar Recreation Specialist Randy Gould Prairie City District Ranger, Geologist Christy Cheyne Acting Prairie City District Ranger

Chapter 4 Page 73

Chapter 5 – References

Aquatic Fisheries Resource Bangs, Brian, Stephanie Gunckel and Steve Jacobs. 2008. Distribution and Abundance of Redband Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss in the Malheur River Basin, 2007. Native Fish Investigations Project, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Corvallis, OR. http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ODFW/NativeFish/pdf files/MalheurRiverRT2007.pdf. Accessed March 18, 2013. Behnke, Robert J. 2002. Redband Trout of the Northern Great Basin in Trout and Salmon of North America. The Free Press. New York, NY. Britt, Shannon 2012. Personal Communication on Diamond Dot Gulch and Dollar Basin Creek. October 2012. Malheur National Forest, Prairie City Ranger District; Prairie City, OR. Britt, Shannon 2013. Personal Communication on Dollar Pasture Water Gap. January 2013. Malheur National Forest, Prairie City Ranger District; Prairie City, OR. Bull, Evelyn L. and Marc P. Hayes. 2001. Post-Breeding Season Movements Of Columbia Spotted Frogs (Rana Luteiventris) In Northeastern Oregon. Western North American Naturalist 61(1), © 2001, pp. 119–123 Bull, Evelyn L. 2005. Ecology of the Columbia spotted frog in northeastern Oregon. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-640. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, OR. DeHaan, Patrick W., Lawarence T. Schwabe, and Wouldiam R. Arden. 2010. Spatial patterns of hybridization between bull trout, Salvelinus confluentus, and brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis in an Oregon stream network. Conserv Genet (2010) 11:935-949. http://www.springerlink.com/content/10nm40726327t571/. Accessed 03/18/2013. Federal Geographic Data Committee [FGDC]. 2008. What is Riparian? (taken from "A System for Mapping Riparian Areas in the Western United States," U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, December 1997). Federal Geographic Data Committee. Reston, VA. Accessed 03/18/2013. http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/riparian-mapping Frest, T.J., and E.J. Johannes. 2009. Mollusk survey of southwestern Oregon, with emphasis on Rogue and Umpqua River drainages. Prepared for Oregon Natural Heritage Program. Seattle, Washington. Hayes, Marc P., C. J. Rombough, and C. B. Hayes. 2007. Rana Aurora (Northern Red-legged Frog). Movement. Herpetological Review 38(2), 2007. Pp. 192-193. Lovelace, John K., 2009. Method for estimating water withdrawals for livestock in the United States, 2005: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5041, 7 p. Accessed 03/18/2003. http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5041/pdf/sir2009-5041.pdf Malaney, Colleen. 2013. Upper Malheur River Sub-basin Mussel and Snail Surveys (2012). Draft Document. Malheur National Forest, Prairie City Ranger District, Prairie City, OR. Nedeau, E.J., A.K. Smith, J. Stone and S. Jepsen. 2009. Freshwater Mussels of the Pacific Northwest Second Edition. The Xerces Society fro Invertebrate Conservation. 51 pp. Neitzel, Duane A. and Terrence J. Frest, 1990. Survey of Columbia River Basin Streams for Columbia Pebblesnail and Shortface Lanx. Fisheries 15(2). 1990: pp. 2-3. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife [ODFW]. 2005. 2005 Oregon Native Fish Status Report. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Fish Division. 3406 Cherry Avenue N.E. Salem, OR. http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/ONFSR/. Accessed March 118, 2013. Perkins, Ray 2013. Personal Communication on redband trout in Tureman Creek. January 2013. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Ontario Field Office, Ontario, OR. Pilliod David S., C. R. Peterson, and P. I. Ritson. 2002. Seasonal migration of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris) among complementary resources in a high mountain basin. Can. J. Zool. 80: 1849–1862 (2002).

Chapter 5 Page 74

Rieman, Bruce E. and John D. McIntyre. 1993. Demographic and habitat requirements for conservation of bull trout. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-302. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 38 p. http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/29778. Accessed 03/18/2013. Rausch, Joe. 2013. Personal communication on Columbia spotted frog at Dollar Basin Springs and Cross Springs. Malheur National Forest, 431 Patterson Rd, John Day, OR. Rieman, Bruce E. and F. W. Allendorf. 2001. Effective Population Size and Genetic Conservation Criteria for Bull Trout, North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 21:4, 756-764. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1577/1548- 8675%282001%29021%3C0756%3AEPSAGC%3E2.0.CO%3B2. Accessed 03/18/2013. StreamNet. 2013. StreamNet Fish Data for bull trout within the Malheur River Sub- basin. http://q.streamnet.org/Request.cfm?cmd=BuildCriteria&NewQuery=BuildCriteria&Requi red=Species,HUC4&Species=14&HUC4=17050116&DataCategory=23. StreamNet Database (Version 98.3) Portland, OR. Accessed 03/18/2013. United States Department of Interior [USDI]. 1998. Consultation Handbook: Procedures for conducting consultation and conference activities under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. USFWS and NMFS. United States Forest Service [USFS]. 1990. Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. U.S. Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, John Day OR. ______. 1994. Decision Notice Finding of No Significant Impact and Forest Plan Amendment [29] for Incorporation of the Columbia River Basin Anadromous Fish Habitat Management Policy and Implementation Guide into the Malheur National Forest Land and resource Management Plan. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Malheur National Forest, John Day, Oregon. ______. 1995. Environment Assessment for the Inland Native Fish Strategy; Interim Strategies for Managing Fish-producing Watersheds in Eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho, Western Montana, and Portions of Nevada. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Intermountain, Northern, and Pacific Northwest Regions. Portland, OR. ______. 2005. Malheur River Stream Survey Report 2005. U.S. Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, Prairie City Ranger District, Prairie City OR. ______. 2007. Pacific Northwest Fish, Redband Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp.). Pacific Northwest Fisheries Program. USDA Forest Service. Portland, OR. Accessed 11 Mar 2013. http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/fishing/regional/fishresources/coldwater.html#redband ______. 2012. Aquatic Species Biological Assessment for the Bluebucket, Logan Valley, Summit, McCoy, and Dollar Basin/Star Glade Allotments. U.S. Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, Prairie City Ranger District, Prairie City OR. ______. 2013. National Resource Information System (NRIS) Aquatic database. Pacific Northwest Region, Malheur National Forest, John Day, Oregon. United States Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS]. 2002. Bull Trout Draft Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1. Portland, OR. ______. 2005. Bull Trout Core Are Templates (Complete Core Area by Core Area Analysis). Compiled by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Chapter 14 – Malheur River Management Unit. Primary Editors: Wade Fredenberg and Jeff Chan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Portland, OR. http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/References/BTTemplatesFinal.pdf. Accessed 03/18/2013. ______. 2008. Bull Trout 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1. Portland, OR. ______. 2010a. Species Fact Sheet, Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office. Portland, OR. Accessed 18 Mar 2013. http://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/Species/Data/ColumbiaSpottedFrog/default.asp ______. 2010b. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for Bull Trout in the Coterminous United States; Final Rule. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 50

Chapter 5 Page 75

CFR 17, Rules and Regulations, Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010. Fed. Reg. 75:2270- 2431. United States Geological Survey [USGS]. 2005. Bankfull Characteristics of Ohio Streams and Their Relation to Peak Streamflows. By James M. Sherwood and Carrie A. Huitger. Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5153. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2005. Xerces Society. 2010a. Freshwater mussels: western ridged mussel (Gonidea angulata) The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation. The Xerces Society • 628 NE Broadway Ste 200, Portland OR 97232 USA. http://www.xerces.org/western-ridged-mussel/. Accessed 03/18/2013. Xerces Society. 2010b. Database of Freshwater Mussel Records. The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation. The Xerces Society • 628 NE Broadway Ste 200, Portland OR 97232 USA.

Wildlife Resource Altman, Robert. 2000. Conservation strategy for land birds in the northern Rocky Mountains of Eastern Oregon and Washington. Oregon-Washington Partners in Flight. 86 pp. Andrews, H. 2010a. Johnson’s Hairstreak (Callophrys johnsoni) (butterfly) species fact sheet. Interagency Special Status/Sensitive Species Program (ISSSS) webpage. USDA Forest Service/USDI Bureau of Land Management. Oregon and Washington. Available Online http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/documents/planning-docs/sfs-iile-callophrys-johnsoni-2011- 08.doc. Accessed February 28, 2013. Andrews, H. 2010b. Silver-bordered Fritillary (Bolaria selene) (butterfly) species fact sheet. Interagency Special Status/Sensitive Species Program (ISSSS) webpage. USDA Forest Service/USDI Bureau of Land Management. Oregon and Washington. Available Online http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/documents/planning-docs/sfs-iile-boloria-selene-2010- 10.doc. Accessed February 28, 2013 Gauthier, G. 1993. Bufflehead (Bucephala albeola), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/067. Accessed March 5, 2013. Hagen, C. 2011. Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Assessment and Strategy for Oregon: A Plan to Maintain and Enhance Populations and Habitat. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Bend, OR. 221 pp. Marshall, D. B., M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. 2003. Birds of Oregon, a General Reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. Paige, C. 2012. A Landowner’s Guide to Wildlife Friendly Fences. Second Edition. Private Land Technical Assistance Program. Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks. Helena, MT. 56pp. Rose, C. L., B. G. Marcot, T. K. Mellen, J. L. Ohmann, K. L. Waddell, D. L. Lindley, B. Schreiber. 2001. Decaying Wood in Pacific Northwest Forests: Concepts and Tools for Habitat Management. Pg. 580-623 in Wildlife Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington, eds. D. H. Johnson and T. A. O’Neill. Corvalis, Oregon State University Press. Scheuering, E. 2006. Columbia Clubtail (Gomphus lynnae) (dragonfly) species fact sheet. Interagency Special Status/ Sensitive Species Program (ISSSSP) webpage. USDA Forest Service/ USDI Bureau of Land Management, Oregon and Washington. Available Online (http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/species-index/fauna-invertebrates.shtml). Accessed February 28, 2013. Stevens, B.S., J.W. Connelly, and K.P. Reese. 2012. Multi-scale assessment of greater sage-grouse fence collision as a function of site and broad scale factors. J. Wildlife Management. 11pp. doi: 10.1002/jwmg.397. Taylor, D. A. R., and M. D. Tuttle. 2007. Water for Wildlife: A Handbook for Ranchers and Range Managers. Bat Conservation International. Austin, TX. 20 pp. USDA Forest Service. 1990. Land and Resource Management Plan. Malheur National Forest, John Day, Oregon.

Chapter 5 Page 76

USDA Forest Service. 1993. Malheur River Wild and Scenic Management Plan. Malheur National Forest. John Day, Oregon. USDA Forest Service. 2011. Pacific Northwest Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. Memorandum: Canada Lynx Conservation Agreement with the Forest Service. Portland, Oregon. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Birds of Conservation Concern 2008. United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. 85 pp. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Proposed Rule. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Status for the Distinct Population Segment of the North American Wolverine Occurring in the Contiguous United States. Helena, MT. Verts, B. J. and L. Carraway. 1998. Land Mammals of Oregon. University of California Press, Berkley, CA. 668 pp. White, C. M., N. J. Clum, T. J. Cade and W. G. Hunt. 2002. Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/660. Accessed March 4, 2013.

SPECIES INFORMATION LINKS ONLINE

A Landowners Guide to Wildlife Friendly Fences 2012: http://fwp.mt.gov/fwpDoc.html?id=34461

Interagency Special Status/Sensitive Species Region 6 Fact sheets: http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/species-index/

Oregon Biodiversity Information Center (ORBIC): http://orbic.pdx.edu/rte-species.html

USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern 2008: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewReportsPublications/SpecialTopics/BCC2008/BCC2008.pdf

Western Bat Working Group (WBSG): http://www.wbwg.org/speciesinfo/species accounts/species accounts.html

Water for Wildlife Handbook 2007: http://www.batcon.org/pdfs/water/bciwaterforwildlife.pdf

Scenery Resource USDA Forest Service. 1995. Landscape Aesthetics- A Handbook for Scenery Management, Agriculture , Agriculture Handbook No. 701. USDA Forest Service. 1993. Malheur River Wild and Scenic Management Plan. Malheur National Forest. John Day, Oregon. United States Forest Service [USFS]. 1990. Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. U.S. Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, John Day OR.

Chapter 5 Page 77

USDA Forest Service [USFS]. 1977. National Forest Landscape Management, Handbook No. 484, Volume 2, Chapter 3, Range.

Recreation Resources United States Forest Service [USFS]. 1990. Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. U.S. Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, John Day OR. USDA. 1990. ROS Primer and Field Guide. USDA Forest Service. 1993. Malheur River Wild and Scenic Management Plan. Malheur National Forest. John Day, Oregon.

Rangeland Resources USDA Forest Service. 1990. Malheur National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Malheur National Forest, John Day OR. USDA Forest Service. 1995. Inland Native Fish Strategy USDA Forest Service, 1992. Plant Associations of the Blue and Ochoco Mountains, Charles G. Johnson Jr., Roderick R. Clausnitzer. R6-ERW-TP-036-92. Clary W.P. and B.F. Webster. 1989. Managing Grazing of Riparian Areas in the Intermountain Region. Gen. Tech. Report Int.-263. USDA Forest Service, Ogden. UT.

Invasive Species USDA Forest Service. 1988. Record of Decision for Managing Competing and Unwanted Vegetation (1988 ROD) and the 1989 Mediated Agreement. USDA Forest Service. 2005. Pacific Northwest Region Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Invasive Plant Program.

Heritage Resource Burney, Michael S., 1986 - The Results of Cultural Resource Surveys of the Dollar Basin and Stink Timber Sales Southeast of the Strawberry Wilderness Area, Prairie City Ranger District, Grant County, Oregon. Report prepared for the USDA-Forest Service, Malheur National Forest, John Day. Burtchard, Greg C., 1998 - Environment, Prehistory, and Archaeology of John Day Fossil Beds National Monument, Blue Mountain Region, North Central Oregon. Report for USDI National Park Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Seattle. International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc. Honolulu. King, Thomas F. 1978 - The Archaeological Survey: Methods and Uses. Washington: Heritage Conservation and Recreation Services, U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Cultural Resource Management Studies. Mosgrove, Jerry L. 1980 - The Malheur National Forest: An Ethnographic History. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, OR. Parker, Patricia L. and Thomas E. King 1998 - National Register Bulletin 38: Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. Rotell, Don 2000 - Crawford Vegetation Management Analysis Area Cultural Resource Inventory Survey report #645-97/218. Report on file Blue Mountain Ranger District, John Day, Oregon. Suphan, Robert J. 1974 - Ethnological Report on the Umatilla, Walla Walla, and Cayuse Indians. In Oregon Indians II, pp. 88-182. Garland, New York and London. Thomas, Suzanne 1991 - Malheur National Forest Cultural Resource Inventory Plan. USDA, Malheur National Forest, John Day, Oregon Tonsfeldt, Ward 1986 -National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination

Chapter 5 Page 78

Form for the Sumpter Valley Railway Historic District. On file State Historic Preservation Office, Salem. United States Congress 1855 - Treaty with the Tribes of Middle Oregon. USDA Forest Service, Northwestern Region, Malheur National Forest 2006 Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Middle Fork John Day Range Planning Area. On file at Malheur National Forest Supervisor’s Office, John Day, Oregon. Whiting, Beatrice B. 1950 - Paiute Sorcery. New York: Viking Fund Publication in Anthropology #15.

Chapter 5 Page 79

Appendix A – Maps

Appendix A - Maps

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Malheur River Range Aquatics Projects Summary of Scoping Letter Comments SUMMARY OF SCOPING COMMENTS

Comments were received from:

Date Comment Received Name Abbreviated as: January 1, 2013 Grant County Conservationist GCC January 17, 2013 Karen Coulter Blue Mountain Biodiversity BMBD Project January 16, 2013 Oregon Natural Desert Association ONDA

The issues were separated into three groups.

• Analysis Issues- Issues caused by directly or indirectly caused by implementing the proposed action; however the effects could be reduced with design of the proposed action. The analysis issues are tracked in the relevant resource area effects analysis in Chapter 3. And in the Comparison of Alternatives section at the end of Chapter 2.

• Issues Eliminated from Detailed Study – those issues: 1)outside the scope of the proposed action; 2) already decided by law, regulation, Forest Plan, or other higher level decision to be made; or 4) conjectural and not supported by scientific or factual evidence.

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Comment Comment Disposition of Issue Rationale: Submitted By GCC The fencing of the Wild and Scenic Corridor is Analysis Issue Several modifications were made to address likewise an appalling idea for those of us who Proposed activities have the public scoping comments on the proposed cherish the few acres protected for their potential to impact the scenic action. Modification include: 1) All proposed remarkable scenic, historic, geologic and wildlife values and the outstanding new fence construction (Malheur Corridor habitat values. remarkable values of the Wild Fence extension) would be located outside the and Scenic River Corridor Wild and Scenic River corridor; 2) The proposed development of Big Bend Spring Analysis Indicators: which was located in the Wild and Scenic River • Miles and location of fence corridor has been removed from the proposed located in the Wild and action; 3) the area between the constructed Scenic River Corridor. fence and the Malheur River would be rested • Impacts to outstanding from grazing for a minimum of five years to remarkable values of allow vegetation recovery along the river This scenery, geology, wildlife area contains much of the Malheur Wild and habitat, and history. Scenic River corridor. We feel that making • Impacts to the visual quality these modifications would resolve many of your objectives (VQOs) in the concerns. Malheur River. The effects to the Wild and Scenic River corridor would be an analysis issue with the effects summarized in the environmental assessment (EA).

GCC We oppose the use by any commercial livestock Issue Eliminated From Detailed In order to construct the proposed corridor fence operation on national forest land which does not Study and rest the Malheur River from grazing for a have sufficient water for such large animals. minimum of five years, water sources need to be maintained or developed in upland areas as stated in the purpose and need. GCC In this allotment the cattle’s only water source is Issue Eliminated From Detailed See previous response. the River. Or as stated in the letter (File Code Study 1950/2240)”…this portion of the Dollar unit lacks sufficient upland water to maintain adequate livestock distribution.” If there is no water, there should be no grazing.

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Comment Comment Disposition of Issue Rationale: Submitted By GCC Likewise your proposed “development” of springs Comment addressed by We reviewed your scoping comments and (especially the beautiful spring now known as Big modifying the proposed action. discussed modifications to the proposed action Bend Spring) is highly objectionable as it Issue is eliminated from detail with the Dollar Basin Allotment permittees. deprives Bull Trout of important source of cool study because the proposed Based on these discussions development of Big water within the critical habitat of the River. action was modified. Bend Spring has been removed from the proposed action. Development of Big Bend Spring would be identified as an alternative considered but eliminated from detailed study in the Environmental Assessment (EA). GCC Hiking the trail along the River is an amazing and The Interdisciplinary walked the Malheur River memorable experience. from the upper river crossing to the lower river crossing last summer. This portion of the river contains the project area. This portion of the Malheur River does not have a trail. We agree with you, it is a memorable experience.

GCC Once upon a time we heard that if livestock of the Issue is addressed by the The Decision Notice for the Malheur Wild and permittee of this section were found on the River, Malheur Forest Plan, as amended Scenic River Plan, which amended the Forest the permit would automatically be revoked. by the Wild and Scenic River Plan states the following regarding grazing: Plan and is therefore Eliminated From Detailed Study Grazing: Livestock grazing would be allowed as specified in the annual operating plans, which are part of the allotment management plans, and in the term grazing permits. Grazing by livestock would be conducted at levels which meet Forest Plan utilization standards. Intensive grazing strategies would be allowed as allotment management plans are revised or developed. After site-specific environmental analysis, new fences and water developments may be constructed along the river corridor boundary, or outside the corridor, to facilitate better livestock management within the corridor and adjacent lands.

Conflicts between grazing and the protection of

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Comment Comment Disposition of Issue Rationale: Submitted By the outstanding remarkable scenic and wildlife habitat values would be resolved when identified. When Conflicts between recreation and livestock need to be resolved, mitigation measures would be implemented to reduce the impacts on recreation. GCC That seemed to work very well (although we See previous responses. found some there once on a hike). Apparently this is no longer considered a reasonable management option? BMBD How are cattle (or other livestock) considered Issue is addressed by the See previous responses. congruent with or complimentary to the Wild and Malheur Forest Plan, as amended Scenic values of the Malheur River Wild and by the Wild and Scenic River Scenic River Corridor? Plan and is therefore Eliminated From Detailed Study BMBD These projects entail a lot of human-made Analysis Issue Several modifications to the proposed action to unnatural developments and fencing that are Proposed activities have the address public comment received during neither in balance with wilderness or scenic potential to impact the scenic scoping. Modification include: 1) All of the values and require a lot of economic cost and values and the outstanding proposed new fence (Malheur Corridor Fence visual degradation to benefit only a few remarkable values of the Wild extension) would be located outside the wild permittees. and Scenic River Corridor segment of the river corridor. 2) The proposed Big Bend Spring development which was Analysis Indicators: located in the Wild and Scenic River corridor • Miles and location of fence has been removed from the proposed action; 3) located in the Wild and area between the constructed fence and the Scenic River Corridor. Malheur River would be rested from grazing for • Impacts to outstanding a minimum of five years to enhance the ORVs; remarkable values of and 4) an existing water gap would be removed. scenery, geology, wildlife habitat, and history. With the above modifications, no new actions • Impacts to the visual quality are proposed within the Malheur Wild and objectives (VQOs) in the Scenic River corridor. The existing water gap Malheur River. fence at Frazier Gulch would be retained. We looked at other options to provide livestock water that would allow removal of the water gap fence. We could not find any reasonable

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Comment Comment Disposition of Issue Rationale: Submitted By options, therefore removal of the Frazier Gulch water gap fence would be documented as an alternative considered but eliminated from detailed study in the analysis.

BMBD We are in favor of keeping livestock out of the See previous response. river and out of all riparian areas but at what cost? BMBD When do the taxpayer subsidies end for Analysis Issue The proposed action (as modified) is intended to supporting livestock degradation of public lands? Proposed activities area a high improve grazing management in the Malheur cost to the taxpayer and River corridor to improve habitat for threatened permitee. bull trout and provide for enhancement of outstanding remarkable values of the wild and Analysis Indicators: scenic river corridor. In the analysis we would • Costs of proposed activities analyze the cost of constructing proposed (fences and water activities (fences and water developments). developments) Modifications to the proposed action would • Miles of Fence Maintenance reduce implementation costs. Funding for project implementation would come from a variety of sources. BMBD The Forest Service admits in the Summit/Logan Analysis Issue We have tried to address your concern through Valley grazing management plan recently Proposed activities have the design criteria that reduce the impacts to bull released for comment that piping spring water to potential to impact bull trout trout and bull trout critical habitat. The Big troughs and then piping overflow from the trough habitat. Bend Spring development project has been back to the river and stream system can increase removed from the proposed action. The water temperature in the stream (and cumulatively Analysis Indicators: Malheur River would be rested from grazing for in the river) to the detriment of bull trout, other • Miles of bull trout critical a minimum of five years to allow vegetation fish, other aquatic species, and water quality in recovery.

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Comment Comment Disposition of Issue Rationale: Submitted By general, yet such piping is proposed again with habitat rested from grazing. these projects in order to allow for continued high • Extent (feet) of the Malheur livestock water consumption. River accessible to livestock within the Dollar Pasture.

BMBD Why is there no alternative proposed to cancel Eliminated From Detailed Study Outside the scope of the project. A separate portions of allotments with no sufficient upland environmental analysis to establish a water sources? management plan for the Dollar Basin allotment would occur in the near future. BMBD Why should standards and guidelines for wild and Analysis Issue See previous responses regarding wild and scenic river corridors, bull trout, and riparian Proposed activities have the scenic river. management objectives be sacrificed to perpetuate potential to impact bull trout a rancher privilege in the wrong place? habitat. The purpose of the project is to improve resource conditions for bull trout and critical Analysis Indicators: bull trout habitat. Several design criteria have • Miles of bull trout critical been identified to reduce the impacts to bull habitat rested from grazing. trout and bull trout critical habitat. • Extent (feet) of the Malheur River accessible to livestock within the Dollar Pasture. Bull trout habitat has been identified as an analysis issue that would be tracked through the analysis. BMBD Once again in the Forest Service is leaning over See previous responses. backwards to support private profit off public lands at taxpayers and ecological expense and by violating Forest Plan standards? BMBD The Forest Service needs to stop managing the Analysis Issue The proposed action was modified so no new Forest through Forest Plan amendments, which Proposed activities have the actions are proposed within the Malheur Wild cumulatively moot the Forest Plan-the only site potential to impact the scenic and Scenic River corridor (see previous specific source of standards and guidelines for the values and the outstanding responses). A non-significant Forest Plan Forest. Proposing Forest Plan amendments remarkable values of the Wild amendment is proposed to retain the existing admits that building fences and water and Scenic River Corridor water gap at Frazier Gulch and the four small developments within the wild and scenic river segments of existing fence within the scenic boundary are violations of the Forest Plan. portion of the Malheur Wild and Scenic River boundary. The amendment is being proposed to

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Comment Comment Disposition of Issue Rationale: Submitted By accelerate recovery of bull trout habitat. With completion of the Malheur Corridor fence it would provide the opportunity to rest the Malheur River and most of the Wild and Scenic River corridor from grazing for a minimum of five years. BMBD Site specific environmental impacts analysis is Eliminated From Detailed Study The proposed action was modified to include needed and a range of alternatives must be resting (for a minimum of 5 years) the pasture developed, including one of restoration only with created by building the corridor fence to address no further livestock use of the wild and scenic the purpose and need. The pasture rested would river corridor and bull trout critical habitat. include 4.5 miles of the Malheur River and a large portion of the Malheur Wild and Scenic River corridor.

No further livestock use of the wild and scenic river is outside the scope of this analysis. BMBD Regarding visual corridor scenery objectives: Are Issue is addressed by the The Decision Notice for the Malheur Wild and cattle necessary to the area, to allow for fences Malheur Forest Plan, as amended Scenic River Plan, which amended the Forest and water development being considered by the Wild and Scenic River Plan states the following regarding grazing: “necessary facilities”? Plan and is therefore Eliminated From Detailed Study Grazing: Livestock grazing would be allowed as specified in the annual operating plans, which are part of the allotment management plans, and in the term grazing permits. Grazing by livestock would be conducted at levels which meet Forest Plan utilization standards. Intensive grazing strategies would be allowed as allotment management plans are revised or developed. After site-specific environmental analysis, new fences and water developments may be constructed along the river corridor boundary, or outside the corridor, to facilitate better livestock management within the corridor and adjacent lands.

Conflicts between grazing and the protection of

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Comment Comment Disposition of Issue Rationale: Submitted By the outstanding remarkable scenic and wildlife habitat values would be resolved when identified. When Conflicts between recreation and livestock need to be resolved, mitigation measures would be implemented to reduce the impacts on recreation. BMBD Obviously not. Why then are Forest Plan See previous responses regarding amendments needed- unless there is more to the amendments and wild and scenic story than described in the Decision Notice river. exemptions? (see last par., p. 2 scoping letter) BMBD Why is there no disclosure of potential Eliminated From Detailed Study The environmental impacts of resources you environmental impacts of these projects to bull have identified would be disclosed in the trout, other fish aquatic species, terrestrial environmental analysis. The intent of scoping is wildlife, recreationist, water quality, visual to ask for comments on the proposed action. quality, and hydrology in this scoping letter? BMBD The project is essentially proposing to continue Analysis Issue See previous responses regarding wild and livestock grazing to the detriment of all these Proposed activities area a high scenic river and project costs. values by altering the landscape within the wild cost to the taxpayer and and scenic river corridor at taxpayer expense, but permitee. the projects and issues involved are not posed that way. BMBD What are the ongoing impacts of livestock in Eliminated From Detailed Study The purpose and need (why actions are being these allotments? proposed) states the following: In 2012 a Proper Functioning Assessment was conducted on the Malheur Wild and Scenic River Corridor and the assessment identified that this section of river within the Dollar unit of the Dollar Basin allotment was rated at the upper end Functional- At-Risk with an upward trend. There is a need to continue to increase riparian vegetation cover to protect banks and dissipate energy during high flows. There is need to reduce browsing of hardwoods (willow and alder) to accelerate stream shade and cover habitat for bull trout.

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Comment Comment Disposition of Issue Rationale: Submitted By Additional existing condition information would be provided in the environmental effects analysis for bull trout and other aquatic species, terrestrial wildlife, recreationist, water quality, visual quality, and hydrology.

BMBD Is livestock use meeting standards for forage Consistency with INFISH Riparian allocation and meeting riparian management Management Objectives would be addressed in objectives for riparian areas? the environmental analysis. BMBD Are INFISH/PACFISH requirements being met? See previous responses. BMBD Are any streams in the projects area listed 303 (d) This information would be provided in the for temperature or other water quality indicator environmental analysis. impairment? BMBD What are the ecological impacts of water gaps and See previous responses. Bull trout and Wild spring development to bull trout, other fish and Scenic River and Scenic Values are species, other aquatic species, water quality identified as analysis issues. The effects of meeting RMOs, scenic values, wilderness values these issues would disclosed in the analysis. and recreationists in those areas? BMBD What are the impacts of more fence construction The impacts of proposed activities to wildlife for wildlife, recreationists and scenic values? would be disclosed in the analysis. Several design criteria have been identified to reduce impacts to wildlife. The effects to recreationists would also be disclosed in the analysis. See previous responses regarding scenic values. BMBD What are the ecological impacts of water See previous responses withdrawals from springs for livestock to wildlife, native plant biodiversity, neotropical songbirds, and the scenic values of the spring itself? BMBD How would piping overflow water from troughs See previous responses regarding water to drainage, streams and ultimately the river affect development and water quality and bull trout stream water temperature, bull trout, and other habitat. aquatic species? BMBD How are tributaries to the Malheur River being Eliminated From Detailed Study The proposed action was modified to include protected from livestock use? resting (for a minimum of 5 years) the pasture

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Comment Comment Disposition of Issue Rationale: Submitted By created by building the corridor fence to address the purpose and need. The pasture rested would include 4.5 miles of the Malheur River and a large portion of the Malheur Wild and Scenic River corridor.

BMBD Is this a good time and opportunity to protect See previous responses. these tributaries more? ONDA ONDA offers conditional support for the Thank you for your conditional The conditions outlined are outside the scope of proposed range aquatics projects if, and only if, support. the project. ONDA, the Forest Service and the relevant permittees can successfully conclude our agreement to place certain WSR corridor pastures, or portions of pastures, into administrative non- use resulting in the removal and exclosure of livestock from the WSR corridors. ONDA Without a successful conclusion to the WSR Eliminated from Detailed Study Outside the scope of the project. A separate settlement negotiations ONDA suggests any environmental analysis to establish a analysis of the fence, spring and pipeline projects management plan for the Dollar Basin allotment must include concurrent and comprehensive would occur in the near future. evaluation of the current levels of grazing and planning for future grazing on the allotments at issue. Failure to evaluate grazing levels in conjunction with the fence, spring and pipeline projects would improperly segment the required analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and fail to evaluate the cumulative effects of the projects when added to the past, present and reasonably foreseeable future effects of grazing. ONDA Without the assurances provided by the proposed Analysis Issue Several modifications to the proposed action to settlement agreement or an evaluation of Proposed activities have the address public comment received during alternatives and potential mitigation contained in potential to impact the scenic scoping. Modification include: 1) All of the a comprehensive NEPA analysis of proposed values and the outstanding proposed new fence (Malheur Corridor Fence grazing in combination with the proposed remarkable values of the Wild extension) would be located outside the wild

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Comment Comment Disposition of Issue Rationale: Submitted By projects, the Range Aquatics Projects would and Scenic River Corridor segment of the river corridor. 2) The proposed impact the outstandingly remarkable values of the Big Bend Spring development which was corridor while failing to effectively reduce or Analysis Indicators: located in the Wild and Scenic River corridor redistribute grazing use in the corridor. Such an • Miles and location of fence has been removed from the proposed action; 3) outcome would not provide sufficient protections located in the Wild and area between the constructed fence and the for the WSR corridor and would not be justifiable. Scenic River Corridor. Malheur River would be rested from grazing for If a settlement agreement can’t be reached the a minimum of five years to enhance the ORVs; Forest Service should instead propose and analyze • Impacts to outstanding and 4) an existing water gap constructed without other management approaches for the WSR remarkable values of adequate environmental analysis would be corridor allotments to ensure protection of bull scenery, geology, wildlife removed. trout and other WSR values. habitat, and history. • Impacts to the visual quality With the above modifications, no new actions objectives (VQOs) in the are proposed within the Malheur Wild and Malheur River. Scenic River corridor. The existing water gap fence at Frazier Gulch would be retained. We looked at other options to provide livestock water that would allow removal of the water gap fence. We could not find any reasonable options, therefore removal of the Frazier Gulch water gap fence would be documented as an alternative considered but eliminated from detailed study in the analysis.

With the above modifications we feel that we addressed most of your concerns regarding human made structures in the Wild and Scenic River corridor. The effects to the Wild and Scenic River corridor would be an analysis issue with the effects summarized in the environmental assessment (EA). ONDA If a settlement agreement can’t be reached the Analysis Issue See previous responses regarding wild and Forest Service should instead propose and analyze Proposed activities have the scenic river. other management approaches for the WSR potential to impact bull trout corridor allotments to ensure protection of bull habitat. The purpose of the project is to improve trout and other WSR values. resource conditions for bull trout and critical Analysis Indicators: bull trout habitat. Several design criteria have

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Comment Comment Disposition of Issue Rationale: Submitted By • Miles of bull trout critical been identified to reduce the impacts to bull habitat rested from grazing. trout and bull trout critical habitat. • Extent (feet) of the Malheur River accessible to livestock within the Dollar Pasture. Bull trout habitat has been identified as an analysis issue that would be tracked through the analysis. ONDA The proposed facilities are justified only in See previous responses regarding wild and conjunction with the broader settlement scenic river. agreement and only if they result in effective exclosure of the WSR corridor and improvements The effects to the Wild and Scenic River in riparian health and bull trout habitat. The extent corridor would be an analysis issue with the of the spring improvements and pipelines would effects summarized in the environmental result in negative impacts to the outstandingly assessment (EA). remarkable values of scenery and high-quality wildlife habitat in the wild and scenic segments of the WSR corridor. The proposed projects should be designed to minimize impacts to WSR values and the effects analysis should thoroughly document and disclose any impacts that can’t be avoided. Efforts should be made to minimize impacts to recreation use in the area of the proposed facilities and likely impacts to recreation uses should be detailed in the EA. ONDA The Forest Plan amendments proposed for the See previous responses regarding structures in construction of the Malheur River Corridor Fence the wild and scenic river. and Big Bend Spring projects are overly broad and need to be narrowed to apply only to the projects contemplated in this proposal. Amending The project proposal includes only one site- the Forest Plan to allow all fence construction and specific non-significant Forest Plan amendment. water developments in wild segments of the WSR corridor is unnecessary and inadvisable because such a change could facilitate additional, inappropriate facilities in other areas of the WSR corridor. Because a Forest Plan amendment authorizing potentially unlimited construction of

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments

Comment Comment Disposition of Issue Rationale: Submitted By fence and water developments within the WSR corridors would involve significant effects to the corridors and to bull trout habitat within the corridors, the Malheur National Forest would be required to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before adopting such a broad Forest Plan amendment. Instead, the Forest Service may only develop a more specific revision to this aspect of the Forest Plan to accommodate only the specific facilities contemplated in this proposal if it intends to proceed with this proposal without preparing an EIS. ONDA In addition, the proposed amendments to the See previous responses regarding structures in visual quality objectives for the scenic and wild the wild and scenic river segments of the Wild and Scenic River corridor do not provide sufficient detail for the public to With the above modifications we feel that we understand and comment on and require further addressed most of your concerns regarding clarification. Except for the limited number and human made structures in the Wild and Scenic extent of developments contemplated by this River corridor. The effects to the Wild and proposal facilities such as fences and water Scenic River corridor would be an analysis issue developments should not be permitted to degrade with the effects summarized in the the aesthetic qualities of the landscape in the environmental assessment (EA). WSR corridor. ONDA asks that the Forest Service refine this proposed visual quality Forest Plan amendment to be more protective of WSR values.

Appendix B – Summary of Scoping Comments