United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Moose-Gypsum Bridger-Teton National Forest Pinedale Ranger Distr ict Final Environmental Impact Statement May 2006 and Record of Decision United States Forest Bridger-Teton 340 N. Cache Department of Service National Forest PO Box 1888 Agriculture Jackson, WY 83001-1888 File Code: 1950 Date:May 2, 2006 Dear Planning Participant, Enclosed is the Moose-Gypsum Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record Of Decision (ROD). The Moose-Gypsum Project is located on the Pinedale Ranger District, Bridger-Teton National Forest. The FEIS identifies the Proposed Action with two additional alternatives, including the No-Action alternative. The selected alternative in the ROD is the FEIS Proposed Action as modified. Under the FEIS Proposed Action, management actions could impact approximately 34,219 acres (31 percent) of the 110,397 acres within the project area. Activities include vegetation and fuels management (including timber harvest), travel management, and recreation resource management. A modification to the Proposed Action was completed between Draft and FEIS removing a portion of the Dollar Lake and Little Sheep fuels reduction treatment units. This was done in order to better meet the criteria for the Canada Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy. The analysis for all resources has been modified in the FEIS. There was an additional 43 acre reduction in timber harvest acres between the FEIS Proposed Action and that described in the Record of Decision (ROD). This change was made to better meet visual quality standards. The change was minor and had no impact on the conclusions reached in the environmental effects section of Chapter 3 in the FEIS. Copies of the ROD and FEIS are being mailed to those who commented on the DEIS, and are available to those who request it. The FEIS and ROD may also be viewed on the Bridger-Teton National Forest website at: www.fs.fed.us/r4/btnf/projects, and at libraries close to the Forest. The administrative review and appeal procedures regarding decisions made by the deciding officer in the ROD are discussed in detail in the ROD. To request further information or if you have questions, please contact Craig Trulock, District Ranger at the Pinedale Ranger District, P.O. Box 220, Pinedale Wyoming 82941 or phone 307-367-4326. Sincerely, /s/ Kniffy Hamilton CAROLE ‘KNIFFY’ HAMILTON Forest Supervisor Moose-Gypsum Final Environmental Impact Statement Prepared by: Pinedale Ranger District Bridger-Teton National Forest Pinedale, WY With the assistance of: Bionomics Environmental, Inc. Boise, ID May 2006 Moose-Gypsum Project Final Environmental Impact Statement Sublette County, Wyoming Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service Bridger-Teton National Forest Responsible Official: Forest Supervisor Carole ’Kniffy’ Hamilton Bridger Teton National Forest P.O. Box 1888 Jackson, WY 83001 For Information Contact: Craig Trulock Pinedale Ranger District 307-367-4326 Abstract: The Moose-Gypsum Project is located in the Pinedale Ranger District of the Bridger- Teton National Forest. The project is proposed to address the goals and objectives of the 1990 Bridger-Teton National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan and to help move the project area toward the desired conditions described in that plan and in the 1999 Upper Green Landscape Assessment. The project area includes one Management Area established in the Forest Plan and a portion of the Bridger Wilderness, and has eight Desired Future Conditions (DFCs) associated with them. Each DFC has its own unique management direction. The BTNF proposes a series of management actions that would impact approximately 34,219 acres (31 percent) of the 110,397 acres within the Moose-Gypsum project area. The project would be implemented over a 10-year period. Activities include vegetation and fuels management (including timber harvest), travel management, and recreation resource management including dispersed campsite closure and rehabilitation. The project is designed to be compatible with other resource values including recreation, wildlife, range, and wilderness objectives and is in compliance with the Forest Plan, Federal laws, policies, and regulations. This Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) discusses the purpose and need for the Proposed Action, alternatives to the Proposed Action, potential direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of implementing each alternative, mitigation measures, and a monitoring plan. Public review of the initial proposal during the scoping period in 2004 identified several key issues that led to the development of the Proposed Action as described in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and two alternatives. The DEIS Proposed Action was further modified, since it was released to the public, reducing the amount of fuels treatment acres in order to better meet the Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy (LCAS). The FEIS Proposed Action would impact approximately 34,219 acres vs. 34,862 acres in the DEIS Proposed Action. It includes 1,797 acres of timber harvest, 5,034 acres of fuels reduction, 6,168 acres of aspen management, 21,220 acres of sagebrush-grassland-aspen management, an addition of 22.5 miles of designated travel routes, 9.5 miles of road closure, and the closure and rehabilitation of 29 dispersed campsites. Alternative 1 (no action) would result in no active management. It serves as a comparison alternative for analyzing the effects of the Proposed Action and Alternative 2. Alternative 2 (modified action) would impact a total of approximately 28,755 acres. It would have less active vegetation management than under the Proposed Action. It includes 1,225 acres of timber harvest, 2,608 acres of fuels reduction, 6,168 acres of aspen management, 18,754 acres of sagebrush-grassland-aspen management, an addition of 16.75 miles of designated travel routes, 12.5 miles of road closure, and the closure and rehabilitation of 29 dispersed campsites. The alternative selected in the Record of Decision (ROD) is a slightly modified version of the identified in this FEIS. Public comments received during the review period of the DEIS were analyzed by the Forest Service and responded to in Appendix E of the FEIS and resulted in modifications to the FEIS where appropriate. Reviewers had an obligation to structure their participation in the National Environmental Policy Act process so that it is meaningful and alerts the agency to the reviewers’ position and contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,553 (1978). Environmental objections that could have been raised at the draft stage may be waived if raised after completion of the FEIS. City of Angoon v. Hodel (9th Circuit, 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Comments on the DEIS should be specific and should address the adequacy of the statement and the merits of the alternatives discussed (40 CFR 1503.3) Moose-Gypsum Final Environmental Impact Statement TABLE OF CONTENTS ______________________________ Cover Sheet Dear Reader Letter Title Page Abstract TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................................................................... i List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... v List of Figures..................................................................................................................viii List of Acronyms ................................................................................................................x Record of Decision ......................................................................................................... R-1 Summary..........................................................................................................................S-1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................I-1 CHAPTER 1. PURPOSE AND NEED......................................................................1-1 1.1. PROJECT LOCATION ...................................................................................1-1 1.2. PURPOSE AND NEED...................................................................................1-1 1.3. PROPOSED ACTION...................................................................................1-10 1.4. DECISIONS TO BE MADE .........................................................................1-10 1.5. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ...........................................................................1-11 1.6. ISSUES ..........................................................................................................1-11 1.6.1. Fire Management and Ecosystem Sustainability ...................................1-12 1.6.2. Vegetation Management ........................................................................1-12 1.6.3. Travel Plan and Access Management....................................................1-12 1.6.4. Watershed Health...................................................................................1-12 1.6.5. Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species and Wildlife Habitat...1-13 1.7. OTHER CONCERNS....................................................................................1-13 1.7.1. Visual Impacts .......................................................................................1-13 1.7.2. Prescribed Fire Risk...............................................................................1-13