Juneau Access Improvements Project Final SEIS Affected Environment 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3.1 Social and Economic Environment 3.1.1 Land Use The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) updated the 2004 Land Use and Coastal Management Technical Report, presented as Appendix F in the 2005 Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Supplemental Draft EIS), and its addendum, presented in Appendix W of the 2006 Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS). The Land Use Technical Report, Revised1 Appendix DD of this Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS), presents new information from the 2016 Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan (TLRMP), Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), City and Borough of Juneau (CBJ), Municipality of Skagway Borough, Haines Borough, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, interviews conducted by Northern Economics, Inc., and personal communications with agency representatives. Additional contacts were made with federal, State, and local officials and private parties to update planning, land management, and land use information. The project area includes federal, State, local, and private lands. Most of the federal lands are within the Tongass National Forest and are managed by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). The other federal land in the study area is Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park (NHP) in downtown Skagway, which is administered by the National Park Service (NPS). The principal discussion on Klondike Gold Rush NHP is provided in Section 3.1.1.2. A majority of the State lands in the project area are within the Haines State Forest along West Lynn Canal and are managed by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR) Division of Forestry. Local government lands are managed by the CBJ, Haines Borough, and the Municipality of Skagway Borough. Private lands include Native corporation holdings, Native allotments, private commercial, and private residential properties. Important changes in the project study area since preparation of the 2006 Final EIS are that the City of Skagway is now the Municipality of Skagway Borough, and the Kensington Mine is in production. Figures 3-1 and 3-2 (all Chapter 3 figures are at the end of the chapter) depict land ownership on the northern and southern ends of Lynn Canal, respectively. Primary landowners and managers in the study area are described further in the following subsections. 3.1.1.1 United States Forest Service Most of the lands in the study area are managed by the USFS as part of the Tongass National Forest. Management direction for these lands is set forth in the 2016 TLRMP (USFS, 2016a). The 2016 TLRMP updated the 1997 Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan (USFS, 1997b; referred to as the TLMP in the 2006 Final EIS) and the 2008 TLRMP (USFS 2008b), which was referenced in the 2014 Draft SEIS. It guides natural resource decision making in the Tongass National Forest by establishing management standards and guidelines for a variety of 1 This SEIS is based on the 2014 Draft SEIS and substantive changes have been highlighted in gray for easy identification by the reader. 3-1 Juneau Access Improvements Project Final SEIS Affected Environment activities, based on Land Use Designations (LUDs)2. Figure 3-3 identifies LUDs within the study area. Two main LUD categories were established in the TLRMP: Non-Development (which maintains old-growth forest habitat) and Development. Each LUD category consists of subcategories of LUD designations, which are described below. (Note that not all of these LUDs occur in the Lynn Canal corridor.) Non-Development LUDs • Wilderness LUD Group o Wilderness – Preserve essentially unmodified areas to provide opportunities for solitude and primitive recreation. Roads and trails for motorized access are “not permitted except where authorized by the ANILCA [Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act] and to access surrounded state and private land and valid mining claims subject to stipulations to protect Wilderness resources and values” (USFS, 2016a, p. 3-20). o Wilderness National Monument – Manage monuments to provide opportunities for solitude and primitive recreation. Limit motorized access. o Non-Wilderness National Monument – Facilitate the development of mineral resources in a manner compatible with the National Monument purposes. • Natural Setting LUD Group o LUD II – Maintain the wildland characteristics of these Congressionally designated roadless areas; permit fish and wildlife improvements and primitive recreation facilities; and permit roads for access for transportation needs identified by the State. o Old-Growth Habitat – Maintain old-growth forests in a natural or near-natural condition for wildlife and fish habitat. “New road construction is generally inconsistent with Old- growth Habitat LUD objectives, but new roads may be constructed if no feasible alternative is available.” (USFS, 2016a, p. 3-62) o Research Natural Areas – Manage areas for research and education and/or to maintain natural diversity of National Forest System lands. o Remote Recreation – Provide for recreation in remote natural settings outside Wilderness, where opportunities for solitude and self-reliance are high. o Semi-Remote Recreation – Provide for recreation and tourism in natural-appearing settings, where opportunities for solitude and self-reliance are moderate to high. o Enacted Municipal Watersheds – Manage municipal watersheds to meet State water quality standards for domestic water supply. o Special Interest Areas – Preserve areas with unique archaeological, historical, scenic, geological, botanical, or zoological values. o Wild, Scenic, and Recreational Rivers – Maintain and enhance the outstandingly remarkable values of river segments, which qualify a river to be classified as a Wild, Scenic, or Recreational River. 2 An LUD is a management prescription allocated to specific areas of National Forest System land. 3-2 Juneau Access Improvements Project Final SEIS Affected Environment Development LUDs • Modified Landscapes – Provide for natural-appearing landscapes while allowing timber harvest and a mix of resource activities, including mineral development. • Scenic Viewsheds – Maintain scenic quality in areas viewed from popular land and marine travel routes and recreation areas, while permitting timber harvest. • Experimental Forest – Provide opportunities for forest practices research and demonstration. • Timber Production – Manage the area for industrial wood production. Promote conditions favorable for timber resources and for maximum long-term timber production. In addition to the LUDs, the 2016 TLRMP provided Standards and Guidelines for Transportation Systems Corridors (TSCs). The plan direction for TSCs is to facilitate the availability of National Forest land for the development of existing and future TSCs, such as those identified by the State of Alaska in the Southeast Alaska Transportation Plan (2004) and in applicable laws (e.g., Section 4407 of Public Law 109-59, and Title XI of ANILCA, Public Law 96-487) (USFS, 2016a, p. 5-11). See also Section 3.1.1.3 regarding Section 4407 easements. The TSC concept of the 2016 TLRMP replaced the Transportation Utility System (TUS) Overlay LUD concept of the 2008 TLRMP. According to the 2016 TLRMP, the Standards and Guidelines for TSCs are management prescriptions that take precedence within any LUD where a TSC has been identified (either an existing major transportation development, or one proposed). Note: In awareness and anticipation of the Juneau Access Improvements (JAI) Project, the 2008 TLRMP, which was referenced in the JAI 2014 Draft SEIS, and its predecessor, the 1997 TLMP, which is referenced in the 2006 Final EIS, designated the two possible road corridors (one on the east side and one on the west side of Lynn Canal) as TUS LUDs (USFS, 2008b, p. 3-128). These corridors were formally granted to the State by law and are represented in the 2016 TLRMP Land Use Designations map as “State of Alaska ROW (PL 109-59) and Final Southeast Alaska Transportation Plan (2004).” As noted in Section 1.1 of this Final SEIS, the 2006 lawsuit against the JAI Project alleged the USFS violated the National Forest Management Act by approving a right-of-way (ROW) crossing designated old-growth habitat without determining that no feasible alternative existed. The lawsuit was based on TUS LUD and Old-Growth Habitat LUD Standards and Guidelines in the 2008 TLRMP. Detailed information is provided in the paragraphs below to clarify the purpose of old-growth habitat within the Tongass National Forest, which was an important element of the 2008 TLRMP and remains important in the 2016 TLRMP. These paragraphs clarify why no analysis regarding other feasible alternatives is required. The 2016 TLRMP preserves a large acreage of old-growth forest habitat by designation of Non- Development LUDs. These LUDs function as medium or large old-growth reserves (OGRs). Smaller amounts of old-growth forest habitat that meet specific criteria for size, spacing, and composition3 are preserved in the form of small reserves designated as Old-Growth Habitat LUDs. The Old-Growth Habitat LUD management prescription states that “new road construction is generally inconsistent with Old-Growth Habitat LUD objectives, but new roads may be constructed if no feasible alternative is available” (USFS, 2016a, p. 3-62). The prescription 3 Specific requirements are discussed in Appendix D to the 2016 TLRMP Final EIS (USFS, 2016b, p. D-8) and