OHV-Sand Camping Project Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact Siuslaw National Forest South Zone District Lane, Douglas, and Coos Counties, Oregon January 2005 Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service Responsible Official: Jose Linares, Forest Supervisor Siuslaw National Forest 4077 Research Way Corvallis, OR 97333 (P.O. Box 1148, 97339) For Information Contact:Paul Thomas, South Zone Planning Mgr. South Zone District 4480 Hwy. 101, Building G Florence, OR 97439 (541) 902-6985 or (541) 563-8426 E-mail address: [email protected] The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audio tape, etc.) should contact the 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, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Decision Notice OHV Sand Camping Project Project Background, Area, and Needs The Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Sand-Camping Project (the Project) was proposed to designate dispersed sand camping locations and build a staging area at the Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area (ODNRA) of the Siuslaw National Forest. This project implements direction contained in the Management Plan for the ODNRA (1994). The Project area is located on the ODNRA between Florence and North Bend, Oregon and is about 55 air miles southwest of Eugene, Oregon (map 1). It involves about 12,440 acres of land managed by U.S. Forest Service. The project area is located in portions of Township 19 South, Range 12 West, sections 3-5, 7-10, 15, 16, 20-22, 27-29, 32, and 33; Township 22 South, Range 12 West, sections 24-26, 28, 35, and 36; Township 23 South, Range 13 West, sections 22, 23, 26, 27, 33, and 34; and Township 24 South, Range 13 West, sections 3, 4, 9, 10, 15-17, 20-22, and 27-29; Lane, Douglas, and Coos Counties, Oregon. Five needs requiring actions in the Project area were identified in chapter 1 of the Project environmental assessment (EA): ! The need to restore the semi-primitive motorized recreation experience; ! The need to address the shortage of developed day-use staging capacity for OHV recreation in the southern riding area and to reallocate developed day-use capacity with a non-significant amendment to the Dunes Plan; ! The need to address unsafe working conditions for agency personnel and law enforcement officers; ! The need to address unsafe conditions for campers and riders; and ! The need to prevent violations and enforce regulations. The decision to be made is whether to implement actions designed to meet the Project needs by selecting one of the action alternatives (Alternative 2, 3, or 4), or to postpone these actions by selecting no action (Alternative 1). My Decision I have decided to implement all the actions described under Alternative 2 (number of campsites based on current high-use periods) of the Project EA. In making this decision, I have reviewed the Project EA, its appendices, other project-file documents, and the comments received during the 30-day public comment period. Based on public comments on the OHV-Sand Camping Preliminary Analysis regarding the need for additional sand-camping sites, seven (7) additional campsites were added to Alternative 2— four (4) in the north riding area and three (3) in the Umpqua riding area. All sites were analyzed as part of Alternative 4 in the preliminary analysis. Based on public comments, five (5) sites would be designated as group sites that can accommodate up to 40 people and 10 vehicles. Three (3) of the sites were analyzed under Alternative 2 and 4 of the preliminary analysis. Two (2) of the sites were analyzed as part of Alternative 4 in the preliminary analysis. Based on additional review, four sites have been moved away from vegetated areas onto open sand or near to designated routes. 1 Decision Notice OHV-Sand Camping Project The following activities under Alternative 2 will address the needs identified in chapter 1 of the Project EA: ! Designate 138 dispersed campsites—133 sites, each accommodating up to five primary vehicles and up to 20 people; and 5 group sites, each accommodating up to 10 primary vehicles and 40 people; ! Prohibit camping outside of designated sites; ! Campers will be required to register for their sand-camping site, thereby creating a record of use, including who is responsible for activities or damage that occurs at the site; ! Implement a non-significant amendment to the Dunes Plan to authorize an increase in the capacity of the Horsfall staging area from 42 to 70 sites; ! Build a new Horsfall staging area north of the Horsfall Road, in the area currently accessed by the Bark Sand Road. Similar in size to Umpqua Beach #3, the new staging area will include 70 parking spaces, each 35 feet long. These parking spaces will be configured such that many will be back-to-back to accommodate vehicles (including trailers) up to 70 feet long. Restroom capacity will be based on the staging area’s designed capacity. The staging area, including the restroom and drain field, will be about 5.5 acres in size; and ! Incorporate the existing Horsfall staging area (21 spaces) into the Horsfall campground as a group or overflow site. Activities, such as service contract preparation and solicitation of bids would begin in January 2005. Most project work will be completed in five years. Project design criteria, including mitigation and monitoring requirements (EA, appendix A), will be incorporated to ensure protection of natural resources. Reasons for the Decision My decision was based on meeting the project needs (EA, pages 3, 4, and 5), including providing a quality semi-primitive motorized recreation experience for those recreating at the ODNRA. I believe that the 138 designated sand-camping sites under Alternative 2 is at a level that meets the project needs, provides a quality recreation experience for users, and can be managed by Forest administrative and law enforcement personnel. In response to public comments on the preliminary analysis, seven (7) sites—that were included and analyzed as part of Alternative 4—were added to Alternative 2 in the environmental assessment. Alternative 2 also responds to public comments that requested group sites or sites that can accommodate more than 20 people. The proposed designated sand-camping sites were reviewed to determine if it would be feasible to use any of the sites for group sites while meeting the project needs. The reviews indicated that five (5) group sites of up to 40 people each (two in the northern area, one in the Umpqua area, and two in the southern area) could be designated on the ground with adequate separation between neighboring campsites. The locations and size of these sites are not expected to compromise meeting the project needs and will benefit users who traditionally have enjoyed larger gatherings. 2 Decision Notice OHV-Sand Camping Project Project actions under Alternative 2 are designed to improve protection for the affected resources compared to current conditions (EA, appendix A). By designating sites and requiring campers to register for the sites, a level of accountability for use and resource protection will exist that does not currently. In addition, sites will be designated at locations that will protect the various resources. Under Alternative 2, no unacceptable cumulative effects to any resource are expected. Many beneficial effects will accrue from implementing the Project, and the risk associated with any potential negative effects, discussed in chapter 3 of the Project EA, is acceptably low. In my review of the Project EA, its appendices, and other project-file documents, I believe the information provided to me is adequate for a reasoned choice of action. I am fully aware that the selected alternative will have some unavoidable adverse environmental effects such as disturbance to wildlife habitat (EA, page 69), irreversible resource commitments such as removal of native vegetation for staging area development (EA, page 69), and irretrievable commitment of resources such as the loss of some dispersed campsites due to the construction of the staging area facility (EA, page 69). I have determined, however, that these adverse effects will be outweighed by the benefits of meeting the project needs identified on page 1. In making this selection, I have also reviewed information in the administrative record, including but not limited to the Siuslaw Forest Plan (1990), as amended by the Northwest Forest Plan (1994); the Management Plan for the Oregon Dunes NRA (1994), the Oregon Dunes Management Plan Watershed Analysis (1995); the Coastal Lakes Watershed Analysis (1999); consultation files and records involving the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries); public and other agency comments; and applicable laws and regulations. Reasons for Not Selecting the Other Alternatives Alternative 1, no-action—By maintaining the current practice of unrestricted sand camping and not building the staging area, none of the problems will be addressed or the Project needs met (EA, pages 2, 3, 4, and 5). The recreation experience for users would continue to degrade. Unsafe conditions for agency personnel, law enforcement officers, camper and riders would likely become worse over time. The ability to prevent violations and enforce regulations would decline due to lack of available resources.