Bear Valley Mountain Resort United States Expansion (7910) Department of Agriculture Forest Service Environmental Assessment Stanislaus National Forest Stanislaus National Forest Calaveras Ranger District Alpine County, CA September 2012 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (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 to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C.-20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................1 1.1 Background ............................................................................................................1 1.2 Forest Plan Direction ..............................................................................................4 1.3 Purpose and Need for Action .................................................................................. 4 1.4 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................7 1.5 Decision Framework ...............................................................................................7 1.6 Public Involvement ..................................................................................................7 1.7 Issues .....................................................................................................................9 2. Alternatives .................................................................................................................. 11 2.1 Alternatives Considered in Detail .......................................................................... 11 2.2 Management and Other Requirements Common to All Action Alternatives ........... 20 2.3 Alternatives Considered But Eliminated from Detailed Study ................................ 25 2.4 Comparison of Alternatives ................................................................................... 28 3. Environmental Consequences ................................................................................... 33 3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 33 3.2 Effects Relative to Issues ...................................................................................... 36 3.3 Effects Relative to Significance Factors ................................................................ 74 4. Consultation and Coordination .................................................................................. 79 References ......................................................................................................................... 81 A. Bear Valley Mountain Environmental Management Plan .......................................... 83 B. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................. 87 List of Figures Figure 1 Vicinity Map..................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2 Alternative 1 (No Action) .............................................................. map package Figure 3 Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) .................................................... map package Figure 4 Alternative 3 (Improved Skier Circulation) .................................... map package Figure 5 Existing Vegetation Communities ................................................. map package i List of Tables Table 1-1: BVM Annual and Average Visitation 1980/81 – 2009/10 .................................. 2 Table 2-1: Terrain Acreage and Distribution by Ability Level – Existing Conditions ......... 12 Table 2-2: Terrain Breakdown – Alternative 2 Compared to Alternative 1 ....................... 14 Table 2-3: Terrain Breakdown – Alternative 3 Compared to Alternative 1 ....................... 18 Table 2-4: Project Specific Clearing and Grading (in acres) ............................................ 28 Table 2-5: Comparison of Key Elements of Each Alternative .......................................... 29 Table 2-6: Summary Comparision of Environmental Consequences by Issue ................ 30 Table 3-1: Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, Candidate Terrestrial and Aquatic Species that were Considered Outside the Geographic or Elevation Range of the Project Area ............................................................................................. 37 Table 3-2: Vegetation Types in the BVM Project Area .................................................... 38 Table 3-3: Estimated Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects for the No Action and Action Alternatives .................................................................................................... 40 Table 3-4: Forest Service Management Indicator Species selected for Consideration in the BVM Project Area .................................................................................... 41 Table 3-5: Summary of Impacts to Vegetation Types under Alternatives 2 and 3 ........... 41 Table 3-6: Changes in Spotted Owl and Northern Goshawk Suitable Habitat under Alternative 2 ................................................................................................... 42 Table 3-7: Summary of Effect to Management Indicator Species – All Alternatives ......... 45 iTable 3-8: Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Projects on Public Lands Within the CEAAs for Terrestrial Wildlife, Amphibians and Plants .................. 48 Table 3-9: Existing Soils within the BVM Project Area .................................................... 52 Table 3-10: Major Soil Cover Classes in the BVM project area – Existing Conditions ....... 53 Table 3-11: Existing Erosion Rates within the BVM Project Area ...................................... 53 Table 3-12: Comparison of Detrimental Soil Conditions by Alternative.............................. 54 Table 3-13: Comparison of Total Erosion by Alternative ................................................... 55 Table 3-14: Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) Adjacent to Aquatic Features .............. 59 Table 3-15: Sub-7th Field Mattley Creek Watershed ......................................................... 63 Table 3-16: 7th Field Mattley Creek Watershed ................................................................ 63 Table 3-17: Sub-7th Field Blood’s Creek Watershed ........................................................ 64 Table 3-18: 7th Field Blood’s Creek Watershed ................................................................ 64 Table 3-19: Lift Specifications – Existing Conditions ......................................................... 65 Table 3-20: Existing Parking at BVM ................................................................................ 67 Table 3-21: Terrain Breakdown – Alternative 2 Compared to Existing Conditions ............. 69 Table 3-22: Terrain Breakdown – Alternative 3 Compared to Existing Conditions ............. 72 Table B-1: National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants ....................... 88 Table B-2: NAAQS for California ..................................................................................... 90 Table B-3: Alpine County Estimated Annual Average Emissions (metric tons) ................ 91 Table B-4: GHG Emissions Summary – Alternatives 1, 2 and 3 ...................................... 94 Table B-5: Projects Identified for Consideration in Cumulative Effects ............................ 96 ii Bear Valley Mountain Resort Expansion (7910) Bear Valley Mountain Resort Expansion (7910) Environmental Assessment Stanislaus National Forest Calaveras Ranger District Alpine County, California 1. Introduction The Forest Service prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) cooperatively with the Bear Valley Mountain Resort (BVM) in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and regulations. This EA discloses potential direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts that would result from the proposed action and alternatives. The Action Alternatives respond to goals and objectives outlined in the Stanislaus National Forest Plan Direction (USDA 2010) and the Record of Decision for the Bear Valley Expansion (USDA 1995). Additional documentation, including more detailed analyses of project-area resources, may be found in the project planning record located at the Calaveras Ranger District Office in Hathaway Pines, California. This Bear Valley Mountain Resort Expansion (BVM Expansion) EA updates and replaces the previous EA released for public comment in June 2011. It now includes changes and clarifications based on public comments (1.6 Public Involvement). 1.1 BACKGROUND BVM is located adjacent to Bear Valley Village, California