Environmental Assessment United States Department of CLEAR CREEK PROJECT Agriculture Forest Plains/Thompson Falls Ranger District, Lolo National Forest Service Sanders County, Montana September 2014 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 Updates to the Environmental Assessment 1 Regional Forester’s Instructions 1 New Information 2 Minor Changes to the Proposed Action 3 Chapter 1: Purpose and Need for Action 7 1.1 Introduction 7 1.2 Collaborative Restoration Approach to Project Design 7 1.3 Proposed Action 9 1.4 Modified Proposed Action 10 1.5 Treatment Needs 11 1.6 Public Involvement 15 1.7 Issue Resolution 17 Chapter 2: Alternatives 28 2.1 Description of the Alternatives 28 2.2 Resource Protection Measures 36 2.3 Monitoring 42 2.4 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study 43 Chapter 3: Environmental Effects 46 3.1 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions 46 3.2 Vegetation 48 3.3 Fire and Fuels 51 3.4 Air Quality 54 3.5 Weeds 55 3.6 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plants 57 3.7 Hydrology 60 3.8 Fisheries 66 3.9 Soils 75 3.10 Wildlife 79 3.11 Heritage Resources 111 3.12 Transportation 111 3.13 Inventoried Roadless Areas 113 Agencies and Persons Consulted 117 Appendix A –Maps Map 1: Vicinity Map Map 2: Alternative 2: Modified Proposed Action Appendix B - Proposed Detailed Road Treatments Appendix C – Estimated Soil Disturbance Appendix D – Project Consistency with the Montana Forest Restoration Committee’s Restoration Principles Appendix E – Science Basis for Restoration Treatments Appendix F – Project Consistency with the Northern Rockies Lynx Amendment i ii UPDATES TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This Environmental Assessment has been updated to reply to the Regional Forester’s instructions, address new information, incorporate minor changes to the proposed action based on additional field review, respond to public comments received on the original EA and during the Objection period, and incorporate findings by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service based on their review of the project’s effects on threatened species. Regional Forester’s Instructions The Clear Creek Environmental Assessment (EA) was first published in August 2012 and public comments were accepted for 60 days. The draft Decision Notice (DN) was published in December 2013, which was followed by a 45-day Objection period. One objection was received. On March 7, 2014, the Regional Forester determined the project is in compliance with all laws, regulations, policies and the Forest Plan and that most of the Objector’s issues/contentions and suggested remedies did not require further discussion or instructions to the Responsible Official for one or more of the following reasons: 1) The proposed actions are compliant with applicable regional guidelines, the Forest Plan and/or law, regulation and policy as supported by adequate analysis and rationale made available in the EA and draft DN and information in the project file; 2) No actions are proposed in the habitat types alleged by the objector to be affected; 3) The appropriate models, methodology and/or science were applied; 4) Species raised by the objector are not listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act and therefore there is no requirement to consult with U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service; 5) The Forest already provided an adequate and thorough response to the issue in the Response to Comments section in the Draft DN; and 6) The objector failed to raise the issue in comments previously submitted during a public comment period and the issue is not based on new information (36 CFR 218.8(c)). In her determination, the Regional Forester instructed the Forest to address the following items prior to signing a final Decision Notice: 1) better articulate the purpose and need for vegetation treatments; and 1 2) include the wolverine analysis and determination of effect from the wildlife report in a Biological Assessment. (Note that on February 4, 2013, after publication of the original Clear Creek EA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a proposed rule to list the wolverine as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (Federal Register Vol. 78, No. 23 7874-7887). On August 13, 2014, the USFWS withdrew the proposed listing rule.) New Information New information addressed in this EA includes: 1) the proposed rule to list the wolverine as a threatened species (February 2013), which was withdrawn on August 13, 2014 (79 FR 47522); 2) the most recent scientific literature regarding Canada lynx; 3) the most recent fish surveys conducted in Prospect and Clear Creeks (Moran and Storaasli 2013); 4) authorization and implementation of the road realignment work on the Clear Creek Road #153, which was proposed and analyzed in the original Clear Creek EA. To take advantage of a partnership agreement and available funding, and to expedite the most important road/stream restoration work of the project, a separate Decision Notice (Clear Creek Road/Stream Interface Rehabilitation Decision Notice) was signed on September 13, 2013 to authorize realignment of four segments (about 1200 feet) of National Forest System Road (NFSR) #153 adjacent to Clear Creek. In scoping and comment, the public made no adverse comments to these actions. Activities included moving and elevating the road further away from the creek, constructing a vegetated floodplain that separates the road from the creek, and planting riparian vegetation. Gravel surfacing was applied to these and other road segments to reduce sediment delivery potential and improve the driving surface. The Decision Notice considered the potential effects of these activities as evaluated in the original Clear Creek EA. Minor Changes to the Proposed Action Several minor changes to the Proposed Action (as first scoped) were discussed in the draft Decision Notice published and made available for public comment in December 2013. This EA includes these changes as the Modified Proposed Action – Alternative 2 (see Chapter 2) as follows: 1) Minor modifications were made to the vegetation treatment unit boundaries and treatment types to better fit on-site conditions. These modifications reduced vegetation treatments by approximately 24 acres (see Table 1). 2 Table 1: Comparison of Vegetation Treatment Acres between Original EA and this Updated EA Proposed Treatments Original EA Updated EA (acres) (acres) Commercial Thin 886 904 Shelterwood Cut followed by prescribed burning 258 247 Non-commercial Thin 68 68 Prescribed Burning 710 679 Watershed Improvement 198 198 TOTAL 2120 2096 2) After additional field review, minor modifications were made to the road management proposals. Although the overall miles of road decommissioning and storage remain about the same, specific treatments for some individual roads have been modified to better fit long-term management objectives (see Tables 2 and 3). There would be no net change in the miles of road that can be legally and physically driven by the public (see the Transportation section in Chapter 3 for more information). Table 2: Comparison of Road Treatments between Original EA and this Updated EA Original EA Updated EA (Miles) (miles) New Construction Long-term Specified; store following use for this project 0.25 0.25 Temporary (multiple segments) 2.5 3 Road Treatments Road Maintenance 33 33 Decommission 32 31 Long-term Storage 43 43 Reconstruction (Road #35230) 0.5 0.5 Table 3: Comparison of Proposed Road Closure Treatments between Original EA and this Updated EA Road Closure Treatment Type Original EA Updated EA (Miles) (miles) Decommission Physical Treatment 6 5 Administrative Closure – No treatment1 26 26 TOTAL 32 31 Long-term Storage Physical treatment 25 23 Administrative Closure – No treatment1 18 20 TOTAL 43 43 1Roads are naturally revegetated and stabilized. No physical treatment is needed and roads would be administratively closed. 3) Approximately 0.5 miles of temporary road was added to the proposal presented in the original EA. This additional temporary road would be needed to access vegetation treatment unit 16C (see Map 2 in Appendix A). Slope analysis conducted on the ground indicated that skyline yarding Unit 16C from Road 17084 was not 3 feasible due to a break in the topography. All temporary roads would be recontoured following use. The additional temporary road would be located at mid-slope and would not cross any water. Forest Service resource specialists reviewed the potential effects of these project modifications and determined they are within the scope of effects documented in the original Clear Creek Environmental Assessment and specialist reports in the Project File. Their effects analysis is documented in Chapter 3. Addition of a gravel stockpile site The original EA identified the Quail Gulch gravel pit as being depleted (original EA, page 65). However, further investigation by engineering consultants has indicated a considerable amount of gravel material remains at the site. Therefore, this pit would be used as a gravel source for the proposed authorized heavy maintenance work on the Clear Creek Road #153. Removal and processing of gravel from this pit on National Forest System lands would be nearly half the cost of buying and hauling gravel from a commercial source.