Umpqua National Forest
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Travel Management Plan ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Umpqua National Forest Pacific March 2010 Northwest Region The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. TRAVEL MANAGEMENT PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT LEAD AGENCY USDA Forest Service, Umpqua National Forest COOPERATING AGENCY Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL Clifford J. Dils, Forest Supervisor Umpqua National Forest 2900 NW Stewart Parkway Roseburg, OR 97471 Phone: 541-957-3200 FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT Scott Elefritz, Natural Resource Specialist Umpqua National Forest 2900 NW Stewart Parkway Roseburg, OR 97471 Phone: 541-957-3437 email: [email protected] Electronic comments can be mailed to: comments-pacificnorthwest- [email protected] i ABSTRACT On November 9, 2005, the Forest Service published final travel management regulations in the Federal Register (FR Vol. 70, No. 216-Nov. 9, 2005, pp 68264- 68291) (Final Rule). The final rule revised regulations 36 CFR 212, 251, 261 and 295 to require national forests and grasslands to designate a system of roads, trails and areas open to motor vehicle use by class of vehicle and, if appropriate, time of year. These designations are to be clearly displayed on a Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM) and made available to the public free of charge. The MVUM will be reviewed annually and updated as necessary to reflect changes to the designated system. When designations are made and a MVUM published, use of motor vehicles off the designated system, or inconsistent with the designations will be prohibited. In accordance with the 2005 Travel Management Rule, the Umpqua National Forest proposes to designate a system of roads, trails and areas for wheeled motor vehicle use and to non-significantly amend the Umpqua National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan; 1990) to prohibit motor vehicle use off the designated system. These amendments would change travel management direction on the Forest from “motorized use open, unless designated as closed,” to “motorized use closed, unless designated as open.” The purpose of this project is to provide a motor vehicle transportation system to address current and anticipated needs that also offers a variety of recreation access opportunities and balances management considerations with the physical, biological, and social values of the forest. It responds to the need to comply with national direction through the implementation of the Travel Management Rule (36 CFR 212). This project deals with the regulatory activities of designating roads, trails and areas that are open to motor vehicles, rather than project-level, ground disturbing activities such as constructing, opening, closing or decommissioning trails or roads. The Proposed Action would non-significantly amend the Umpqua Forest Plan to allow motor vehicle use only on a designated system of roads and trails and on existing non-system routes in designated corridors for the purpose of dispersed camping. In addition to the Proposed Action, the Forest Service also analyzed an alternative in which the designated system emphasizes non-motorized recreation opportunities and one that emphasizes motorized recreation opportunities. The intent of the Travel Management Rule is to reduce and prevent adverse resource impacts caused by unmanaged motorized use in order to maintain and protect the health of ecosystems and watersheds. Allowing motorized use only on the designated system of routes is expected to reduce the amount of soil erosion and distribution of noxious weeds occurring through cross-country motor vehicle use. It will also reduce motor vehicle impacts to wildlife as well as ii aquatic, botanical and heritage resources. Ecosystem health and watershed function are expected to be improved through the Proposed Action. Due to the steep topography and dense vegetation of the Umpqua National Forest, opportunities for cross-country motorized travel are limited and little currently occurs. Because of current use patterns, the prohibition on cross-country motorized travel is expected to have little practical impact on motorized recreation opportunities or use on the Forest. All alternatives analyzed, excluding the No Action Alternative, would reduce the opportunity for motor vehicle travel on the Umpqua National Forest. While the total miles of routes available for motorized use may be reduced, the quality of opportunities available for off highway vehicle (OHV) use would be increased through improved connectivity of routes open to non-highway legal vehicles. After completion of the Environmental Assessment (EA) and a 30-day public comment period, the Forest Supervisor will select an alternative, or combination of alternatives, based on review of the analysis and public comment received on the analysis. The Forest Supervisors’ decision will be documented in a Decision Notice along with any mitigation measures that may apply. Due to their large size, the maps for this project are located on the Umpqua National Forest website; http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/umpqua/projects/travel/index.shtml. Hardcopies of the maps are available for viewing at all Ranger District offices as well as the Umpqua National Forest Headquarters in Roseburg, Oregon. iii CONTENTS 1. Purpose and Need for Action Introduction 1 Planning Area Location and Environmental Setting 4 Purpose and Need 6 Proposed Action 7 Decision to be Made 8 Relationship to Laws, Regulations, Planning Documents and Analyses 9 Scoping 11 Issues 11 Issues that did not Drive Alternatives 12 Project Implementation 13 2. Comparison of Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action Introduction 15 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study 16 No Action Alternative 17 Alternative A: Proposed Action 17 Alternative B: Motorized Recreation Emphasis 19 Alternative C Non-Motorized Recreation Emphasis 19 Comparison of Alternatives 20 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Effects Introduction 25 Forest Transportation System 25 Recreation 32 Visual Resources 38 Wildlife Resources 43 Aquatic Resources 49 Botanical Resources 61 Heritage Resources 70 Law Enforcement 74 Other Resources 75 National Forest Management Act Determination Of Significance 76 Specifically Required Disclosures 79 4. Consultation with Others Introduction 81 Agency Consultation 81 Interdisciplinary Team 82 References 83 List of Appendices Appendix 1: Current Travel Management Direction 85 Appendix 2: Proposed Amendments to the Forest Plan 99 Appendix 3: Maps 107 Appendix 4: Motorized Mixed Use Analysis 109 Appendix 5: Biological Evaluation: Terrestrial Species 121 Appendix 6: Biological Evaluation: Aquatic Species 141 Appendix 7: Wetlands and Floodplains Declaration 147 Appendix 8: Comparison of Alternatives by Vehicle Type and Season of Use 149 List of Tables Table 1.1 Management Areas Currently Open to Motorized Cross-Country Travel 5 Table 1.2 Management Areas Currently Closed to Motorized Cross-Country Travel 6 Table 2.1 Routes Open to Motorized Use: Existing Condition 17 Table 2.2 Designated Routes Open to Motorized Use: Alternative A 18 Table 2.3 Designated Routes Open to Motorized Use: Alternative B 19 Table 2.4 Designated Routes Open to Motorized Use: Alternative C 20 Table 2.5 Designated Routes Open to Motorized Use by Alternative 20 Table 2.6 Proposed Mixed Use by Alternative 20 Table 2.7 Proposed Corridors for Motorized Access to Dispersed Campsites by Alternative 21 Table 2.8 Season of Use Dates by Alternative 21 Table 2.9 Areas Open and Closed to Motorized Cross Country Travel by Alternative 21 Table 3.1 Road Mileage Summary: No Action Alternative 27 Table 3.2 Road Mileage Summary: Alternative A 28 Table 3.3 Road Mileage Summary: Alternative B 29 Table 3.4 Road Mileage Summary: Alternative C 30 Table 3.5 Sensitivity Levels 1 and 2 by Road 38 Table 3.6 Sensitivity Level 3 by Road 39 Table 3.7 High Visual Sensitivity Corridors by Alternative 40 Table 3.8 Forest Service Sensitive Wildlife Species 43 Table 3.9 Effect of No Action Alternative on Forest Service Sensitive Species and MIS Species 45 Table 3.10 Effect of Action Alternatives on Forest Service Sensitive Species and MIS Species 46 Table 3.11 List of Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Aquatic Species 59 Table 3.12 Botanical TES Effects Summary 64 Table 3.13 Noxious Weed List for the Umpqua National Forest 68 CHAPTER 1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION INTRODUCTION Travel Management Rule: Designated Routes and Areas for Motor Vehicle Use (36 CFR 212) (Final Rule) On November 9, 2005, the Forest Service published final travel management regulations in the Federal Register (FR Vol. 70, No. 216-Nov. 9, 2005, pp 68264- 68291). The final rule revised regulations 36 CFR 212, 251, 261 and 295 to require national forests and grasslands to designate a system of roads, trails and areas open to motor vehicle use by class of vehicle and, if appropriate, time of year. These designations must be clearly displayed on a Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM), and will be reviewed annually and updated as necessary to reflect changes to the designated system. When designations are made and a MVUM published, motorized travel off the designated system will be prohibited. Background: Former Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth identified unmanaged recreation as one of the four threats to National Forest Lands. The increase in the use and capabilities of off-highway vehicles (OHVs) has resulted in route proliferation, resource damage and user conflicts.