Forest Service PaCiflC Northwest Region Environmental Assessment Mt. Hood National Forest a: USDA Forest Service nagement White River National Wild and Scenic River Environmental Assessment Deciding Officials: Mike Edrington, Forest Supervisor Mt. Hood National Forest 2955 N.W. Division Gresham, OR 97030 James L. Hancock, District Manager Prineville District: Bureau of Land Management 185 E. 4th Street Prineville, OR 97754 For Further Information: Diana L. Ross Mt. Hood National Forest Bear Springs Ranger District (503) 328-6211 Berry Phelps Bureau of Land Management Prineville District Office (503) 447-4115 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I : Need for the Proposal ....... , ..................... , II l-l Introduction ............................................. 1-I PurposeandNeed ....................................... l-l The Decisions Needed. ................................... l-l Background ............................................. l-l Legislation ........................................... I-l Planning Mandate ..................................... I-2 Summary of the Resource Assessment ..................... I-6 Issues ................................................. l-8 Existing Plans, Policies, and Agreements ...................... l-l 5 US Forest Service ..................................... l-15 Bureau of Land Management ............................ I-l 5 US Fish and Wildlife Service ............................. I-l 5 Conferated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon . I-l 6 Land Conservation and Development and County Comprehensive Planning ............................. I-l 7 Oregon Land Use Planning Act. .......................... I-17 Goal5 .............................................. I-17 Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) ............... I-l 8 Oregon Water Resources Department ..................... I-l 8 Division of State Lands ................................. I-l 8 Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODF&W) ........... l-l 9 Wasco County Comprehensive Planning ................... I-l 9 How this Document is Organized ............................ I-21 Chapter 2: Alternatives. ... .................. , .. =. , .......... 2-l Introduction ............................................. 2-l Process Used to Formulate the Alternatives .................... 2-l Analysis Process. ..................................... 2-l Public Involvement. ................................... 2-l Boundary Process ..................................... 2-2 Alternative Actions Eliminated from Further Study ............... 2-2 Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action .................... 2-3 Alternative A: No Action ................................ 2-3 i Alternative B . 1 . , . , . , , . , . L , , L . , , 2-3 Alternative C ......................................... 2-3 Alternative D ......................................... 2-4 Alternative E ......................................... 2-4 Management Actions Common to All Action Alternatives ....... 2-4 Alternatives ............................................. 2-I 0 Plan Amendments Needed. ................................ 2-43 Chapter 3: Affected Environment. ............. , ........ q ....... 3-I Introduction ............................................. 3-l Existing Condition ........................................ 3-l Segments A and B ..................................... 3-l Segments C and D .................................... 3-8 SegmentsEandF ..................................... 8-14 Desired Future Condition .................................. 3-l 6 All Segments. ........................................ 3-16 Segments A and B ..................................... 3-17 Segments C and D .................................... 3-25 SegmentsEand F ..................................... 3-27 Chapter 4: Environmental Consequences . , .................. n ... 4-I Introduction ............................................. 4-l Management Alternative Effects ............................. 4-l Effects on Issues ...................................... 4-l Issue I: Commodity Production ....................... 4-l Issue 2: Recreation and Scenic Quality. ................ 4-4 Issue 3: Water Quality and Quantity .................... 4-16 Issue 4: Vegetation Management ...................... 4-21 Issue 5: Private/Public Lands Conflicts .................. 4-27 Issue 6: Final Corridor and Designated Viewshed Boundaries 4-28 Social Effects. ........................................ 4-31 Economics ........................................ 4-31 Civil Rights, Women, and Minorities .................... 4-33 Cultural Resources. ................................ 4-33 Land Ownership ................................... 4-36 Wetlands, Floodplains, Prime Farmland, and Rangelands ... 4-36 Transportation and Access ........................... 4-36 Biological Effects. ....................................... 4-37 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species .......... 4-37 Other Management Indicator Species ................... 4-41 Fish and Fish Habitat. ............................... 4-42 Old Growth. ....................................... 4-44 Biological Diversity. ................................. 4-44 Ecosystem Health .................................. 447 Fuels and Wildfire Risk. ............................. 4-47 Physical Effects. ...................................... 4-50 Air Quality. ....................................... 4-50 Geology .......................................... 4-52 Required Disclosures ..................................... 4-53 Chapter 5: Consultation with Others ............................ 5-I Appendix A: White River Fafls. ......................... f ..... - . A-l Appendix 6: Integrated Landscape Analysis , .. l . , . , . , ..... , ...... B-l Appendix C: Scenic Resources Management ............. , .. , . , .. C-l Appendix D: Mt. Hood Meadows Expansion.................. , .... D-l Appendix E: Glossary. ............... -. ...................... E-l Appendix F: References ............ , ......................... F-l List of Tables Table 1 .I, Summary of White River values and issues. c z . l-3 Table 2. I. Effects of GIS mapping and river length reductions on allowable corridor acres 2-2 Table 2,2. Alternatives,. , . , . , . , . 2-10 Table 2.3. Corridor boundary alternatives. , . , . 2-34 Table 2.4. Designated Viewshed boundary alternatives.. I . L . * . , . 2-39 Table 3.1. Outstandingly Remarkable Values for each segment pair of the White River. , . 3-2 Table 3.2. Existing stand structure for selected landscape units, . 3-5 Table 3.3. Existing scenic condition and VQOs for selected viewpoints along White River. 3-9 Table 3.4. Trails within the White River analysis area.. , . , . , . , . 3-10 Table 3.5. Campgrounds and camping areas within White River analysis area. , . 3-10 Table 3.6. Range of desired residue profiles by landscape unit and major plant association series on federal iands.. 3-20 . III Table 3.7. Range of acceptable exposed mineral soil levels by landscape unit and plant association series on federaf lands...................................... 3-20 Table 3.8. Range of desired percentages of each landscape unit in each stand structure category .......................................................... 3-21 Table 3.9. Target tree sizes for old growth stands by forest zone. ................... 3-23 Table 3.10. Desired VQOs for the river corridor by management alternative, boundary aitemative, and designated viewshed alternative. ......................... 3-24 Table 3.11. Desired Recreational Opportunity Spectrum class for each river segment by management alternative. ............................................ 3-25 Table 4.1. Mix of recreation opportunities and alternative effects (Alternative A) 4-7 Table 4.2. Mix of recreation opportunities and alternative effects (Alternative B). ....... 4-l 0 Table 4.3. Mix of recreation opportunities and alternative effects (Alternative C). ....... 4-11 Table 4.4. Mix of recreation opportunities and alternative effects (Alternative D). ....... 4-14 Table 4.5. IWix of recreation opportunities and alternative effects (Alternative E). ....... 4-16 Table 4.6. Percent disturbance expected in critical river associated viewsheds--Alternative A and Viewshed Attemative I. ...................... 4-22 Table 4.7. Percent disturbance expected in critical river associated viewsheds-Alternative B............................................ 4-24 Table 4.8. Percent disturbance expected in critical river associated viewsheds--Alternative C ............................................ 4-25 Table 4.9. Percent disturbance expected in critical river associated viewsheds--Alternatives D and E. ..................................... 4-26 Table 4.10. Expected biomass consumption under two different burning conditions L j L 4-51 Table 4.11. Representative fuel loadings for various fuelbeds representative of White River and expected fuel consumption under spring and summer conditions. ..... 4-51 Comparison Table l--Commodity production from federal lands. .................. 4-54 Comparison Table 2--Recreation. ............................................ 4-55 Comparison Table 2b--Scenic Quality. ........................................ 4-58 Comparison Table 3--Water Quality and Quantity, .............................. 4-60 Comparison Table 4--Vegetation Management. ................................. 4-61 Comparison Table $-Private/Public Lands Conflicts ............................. 4-62 Comparison Table Gb-Final Corridor Boundary ................................