Attachment 2 - Sinker Creek - Boise Ridge EA.pdf

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Mountain Home Ranger District, Boise National Forest, Mountain Home, Boise County, Idaho December 2019

For More Information Contact:

Stephaney Kerley, Mountain Home District Ranger

3080 Industrial Ave

Mountain Home, ID 83647

Phone: 208-587-7830

Email: Stephaney.Kerley@USDA.gov

Photo: View of the current vegetation conditions within a portion of the project area, November 2018. Josh Newman, Silviculturist

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD- 3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: program.intake@usda.gov. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project i EA / FONSI

Table of Contents

CHAPTER 1 - PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSAL

INTRODUCTION

WHERE IS THE PROPOSED ACTION LOCATED?

WHY HAS THE PROJECT BEEN PROPOSED (PURPOSE AND NEED)?

WHAT IS THE PROPOSED ACTION?

DECISION TO BE MADE

CHAPTER 2 - ISSUES AND ALTERNATIVES

WHAT MAJOR ISSUES WERE IDENTIFIED?

WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES OF TAKING NO ACTION?

WHAT OTHER ACTIONS WERE CONSIDERED?

CHAPTER 3 - EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

EFFECTS RELATIVE TO THE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANCE (FONSI) ELEMENTS ... 19

CHAPTER 4 - AGENCIES AND PERSONS CONSULTED

WHAT AGENCIES AND PERSONS HAVE BEEN CONSULTED?

APPENDIX A - PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES

APPENDIX B - REFERENCES

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project i EA / FONSI

List of Tables

Table 1. Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project Proposed Activities

Table 2. Effects Determinations for Fisheries, Botany and Wildlife species

Table 3. Agencies, Organizations, and Individuals Contacted and/or Consulted

List of Figures

Figure 1. Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project Vicinity Map

Figure 2. Map of Proposed Treatments Across the Project Area

Figure 3. Visual Representation of a Group Selection Treatment

Figure 4. RCA Widths for the SCBR Project

Figure 5. Transportation Map

Figure 6. Road Realignment Inset Map (see Figure 5)

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project ii EA / FONSI

Acronyms Used Within the Document

Below you will find acronyms used in this document. For further information on these acronyms or definitions of technical terms used in this document, please reference the 2010 Boise National Forest Amended Forest Plan Glossary, Acronyms and Scientific Names (USDA USFS 2010a).

BA – basal area

BBRA – Bogus Basin Mountain Recreation Area

BLM – Bureau of Land Management

CFR – Code of Federal Regulations

DBH – diameter at breast height

EA – Environmental Assessment

EIS – Environmental Impact Statement

EO – Executive Order

FEIS – Final Environmental Impact Statement

FONSI – Finding of No Significant Impact

FSH – Forest Service Handbook

FSR – Forest Service Road

HFRA – Healthy Forests Restoration Act

IDT – Interdisciplinary Team

MIS – Management Indicator Species

MPC – Management Prescription Category

MUTCD – Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

MVUM – Motor Vehicle Use Map

NAAQS – National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NEPA – National Environmental Policy Act

NFMA – National Forest Management Act

NFS – National Forest System

RCA – Riparian Conservation Area

SCBR – Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge

SHPO – State Historic Preservation Office

TEPC – Threatened, endangered, proposed/petitioned, and candidate (species)

TI – torching index

TPA – trees per acre

USC – United States Code

USDA – United States Department of Agriculture

USFS – United States Forest Service

USFWS – United States Fish and Wildlife Service

WHWP – white-headed woodpecker

WUI – Wildland Urban Interface http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5394056.pdf

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 1 EA / FONSI

Introduction

The Boise National Forest (Forest) is proposing to implement a variety of mechanical vegetation treatments, including timber harvest, non-commercial thinning, and prescribed fire to promote forest resiliency, address hazardous fuels within the wildland-urban interface and respond to insect and disease outbreaks.

The Forest Service has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), and other relevant federal and State laws and regulations. This EA discloses the environmental effects that would result from the Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Project (SCBR Project) on the Mountain Home Ranger District of the Boise National Forest.

This document is tiered to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and planning record supporting the 2003 Boise National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended in 2010 (Forest Plan; USDA USFS 2010a and 2010b), including monitoring reports. Detailed information supporting the analyses presented in this document is incorporated by reference, including technical reports for each resource. Unless specifically noted otherwise, this information is contained in the project record.

Where is the Proposed Action Located?

The Sinker Creek-Boise Ridge project is located approximately ten miles northeast of Boise, Idaho, via National Forest System Roads 297 (Bogus Basin Road) and 231 (Eighth Street Road).

The project area is an estimated 17,696 acres; however, treatments are currently only proposed on 5,982 acres. About 91% (16,153 acres) of the project area is within the wildland urban interface (WUI) but all the proposed treatments are within WUI.

All proposed treatments are located entirely on National Forest System (NFS) lands in Township 4 North, Range 3 East, Sections 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 35 & 36; and Township 5 North, Range 3 East, Sections 4, 7, 8, 9, 19, 20, 21, 22, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34 & 35.

Proposed activities are in Management Prescription Category (MPC) 5.1 (Restoration and Maintenance Emphasis within Forested Landscapes) and MPC 4.2 (Roaded Recreation) areas in Management Area 4 (Bogus Front/Bogus Basin), as described in the Forest Plan (USDA USFS 2010a, p. III-141).

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 2 EA / FONSI

Figure 1. Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project Vicinity Map.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 3 EA / FONSI

Why Has the Project Been Proposed (Purpose and Need)?

Background

The Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project has been proposed to improve forest resiliency and respond to uncharacteristic insect and disease disturbance that has occurred throughout the project area, as well as reduce hazardous fuel levels that increase the potential for uncharacteristic wildfire. The project area is within a landscape designated by the Governor of Idaho in May 2014 as a priority treatment landscape due to ongoing insect and disease activities affecting forest health and resilience. The project area meets the requirements as part of the insect and disease treatment program in accordance with Title VI, Section 602, of the Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA), as amended by the Agricultural Improvement Acts of 2014 and 2018 (2014 and 2018 Farm Bills).

Purpose 1

Conduct fuel treatments in the Wildland Urban Interface.

Need

Most of Management Area 4 is within the Warm Dry Douglas-fir/Moist Ponderosa Pine forested vegetation group. Stands in this vegetation group pose a high fire risk for several reasons:

• These stands have relatively high stand densities and fuel loadings that have departed from a non-lethal fire regime;

• Insect and disease outbreaks have increased tree mortality and the risk of uncharacteristic large wildfire;

and

• These stands lack young structural stages and seral ponderosa pine due to missed fire return intervals (USDA USFS 2010a, p. III-144).

The stand density and correlating mortality make them especially at risk for severe wildfires. Much of the project area is in the WUI and there is a need to conduct strategically placed fuels treatments to protect nearby communities.

Such treatments would limit future crown fire, reduce fuel loadings, and aid suppression efforts in the WUI in the event of future wildfires.

High stand densities as seen in this photo are common in the project area and pose a high fire risk. Fuels treatments would reduce that risk, decrease fuel loads, and aid suppression efforts in the event of future wildfire events.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 4 EA / FONSI

Large scale fires have become more common across the Boise National Forest. Examples include the 8th Street Fire (1996), Trinity Ridge (2012), Elk Fire (2013), Pony Fire (2013), Table Rock Fire (2016), and Pioneer Fire (2016). The SCBR Project surrounds numerous private property holdings, such as Bogus Basin Recreational Association and Wilderness Ranch. Some private property owners have treated their acres to reduce hazardous fuels, and earlier projects on Forest Service lands (Bogus Basin Forest Health Project, 2016) were designed to create a more fire resilient landscape. The SCBR Project area is one of the remaining untreated areas on the Boise Front and a fire originating in the lower elevations and rapidly spreading to higher elevations poses a high risk to public safety.

Purpose 2

Manage species composition and forest structure through a mixture of commercial and non-commercial treatments that would create openings to promote early seral species and reduce the risk or extent of, or increase resilience to, insect or disease infestation.

Need

The project area exhibits stand densities that are already experiencing, or are susceptible to, severe declines in stand health, including tree mortality caused by insect and disease. There is a need for targeted treatments to reduce hazards associated with the Douglas-fir beetle, Douglas-fir dwarf mistletoe, western dwarf mistletoe, Ips pine engraver, and western pine beetle.

Dwarf Mistletoe

Dwarf mistletoe has infected both Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine stands in the project area. Spreading generally from larger trees to smaller trees or from upslope/ridge tops to trees lower on the slope, these parasitic plants have spread throughout the project area.

Normally its spread would be checked by regular disturbance, such as wildfire, but a century of active fire suppression has created a favorable environment for this species due to increased stand density. Mistletoe-infected trees exhibit reduced vigor and are more susceptible to insect infestation, such as those described below.

Dwarf mistletoe has infected these Douglas-fir in the project area, as evidenced by dense foliage masses (brooms) and thinning crowns.

Declining in health, these trees are more susceptible to insect infestation.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 5 EA / FONSI

Douglas-fir Beetle

Patches of Douglas-fir in the project area are at risk or have already been killed by Douglas-fir beetle. These beetles are initially attracted to the largest and most stressed trees in a stand, but as the beetle population increases, all sized Douglas-fir become susceptible.

Dwarf mistletoe-infected trees are more susceptible to Douglas-fir beetle attacks. Recent years of drought and higher-than-normal spring and early summer temperatures have also contributed to the increase in beetle-caused mortality.

Western Pine Beetle and Ips Pine Engraver

Western pine beetle infestations have killed individual and small clumps of ponderosa pines in the lower-elevation portions of the project area over several years. With two or three life cycles per year, multiple generations can spread from tree-to-tree relatively quickly. Much like Douglas-fir beetle infestations, western pine beetles target trees already exhibiting declining health from dwarf mistletoe and high stand densities.

Western pine beetles currently exist at endemic levels, but susceptibility to this insect may increase because of increasing stressors, such as drought and increased stand competition.

Ips pine engravers attack small-diameter pine and can affect the tops of large-diameter pine. With similar life cycles to the western pine beetle, this beetle also exists at endemic levels and may increase because of these same stressors.

What is the Proposed Action?

The Forest proposes to address the purpose and need by conducting a combination of vegetation treatments and prescribed fire to achieve desired conditions.

The proposed action includes approximately 5,982 acres of mechanical vegetation treatments, under a combination of intermediate and regeneration treatments. Some of the harvested material would be sold as forest products, such as sawtimber and fuelwood. Prescribed fire would be implemented to reduce activity and natural fuels, including ladder fuels. Where natural regeneration is not sufficient, artificial regeneration (planting) and associated site preparation

Insect-caused mortality in a ponderosa pine stand as seen here in the project area along Bogus Basin Road (NFS 297). Treatment would reduce stand densities to improve forest health.

Originally weakened by dwarf mistletoe, Douglas-fir beetle took advantage of this stand’s declining health, ultimately killing these trees in the project area.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 6 EA / FONSI would occur. Associated road maintenance, road realignment, temporary road construction, and decommissioning of temporary roads are proposed to facilitate treatments.

Table 1 summarizes the proposed activities for the SCBR Project. Descriptions of the proposed vegetation and fuels treatments and road activities, maps of the proposed treatments (Figure 2) and associated road activities (Figure 5), and associated design features are provided below.

Table 1. Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project Proposed Activities.* Intermediate Treatment Est. Acres*

Non-commercial Thin 66 Commercial Thin with Sanitation 1,639

Regeneration Treatments Group Selection with Reserves and Sanitation 3,400 Shelterwood with Reserves and Sanitation / Salvage 877

Fuels Treatments Est. Acres* Whole Tree Yard, Pile, Broadcast Burn 5,982 Mastication (These acres are included in the Whole Tree Yard, Pile, Broadcast Burn treatment listed above, not in addition to those acres)

2,401

Timber Harvest Method Est. Acres* Ground-Based Yarding 5,982

Transportation Management Est. Miles* Timber Haul** 31.0 Realignment & Haul – New Construction 1.9*** Temporary Road New Construction 7.3 Temporary Road New Construction (on existing template) 10.2

* Estimated acres of treatments and estimated miles of road work are based on modeling. Field-verification of the proposed stands and road work may change the actual acreage and miles during implementation. Distance is rounded to the nearest 1/10th mile.

** Road haul mileage includes those roads on Forest Service and county roads within the project area.

*** 1.4 miles of Realignment would be Decommissioned, and 0.5 miles would be Converted to Other Uses.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 7 EA / FONSI

Figure 2. Map of Proposed Treatments Across the Project Area

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 8 EA / FONSI

Vegetation Management Treatments

Vegetation treatments were designed to ensure the retention of old-growth and large trees is maximized, as appropriate for the forest type, to the extent that the trees promote stands that are resilient to insects and disease – as required by HFRA (Section 602(e)).

Timber Harvesting

The removal of wood products, typically used for lumber, would be completed using ground-based logging systems and both intermediate and regeneration treatments. Skyline logging systems may be used in areas where ground-based systems are less feasible. Timber harvesting removes some trees 8” diameter at breast height (DBH) or greater and is followed with non-commercial tree thinning once harvesting is complete. Following all timber harvesting, activity fuels (slash) would be treated with methods that include lopping and scattering, hand and machine piling, mastication, and/or prescribed fire.

Intermediate Treatment – Non-Commercial Thin

Non-Commercial Thinning includes the thinning of trees less than 10” DBH to an approximate density of 100-150 trees per acre (TPA). The primary objective of Non-Commercial Thinning would be to reduce the density of understory vegetation and high-stocked small trees in stands where pines are diminishing in vigor and numbers because of overcrowded, dense conditions.

Intermediate Treatment – Commercial Thin with Sanitation

Commercial Thin with Sanitation includes thinning trees less than 8” DBH to an approximate density of 10 square feet of basal area (BA) and to thin trees greater than 8” DBH to an approximate density of 60-80 square feet of BA. The primary objective of this treatment is to prioritize the removal of trees with dwarf mistletoe infection (sanitation), as well as the removal of Douglas-fir over ponderosa pine, thereby improving stand health and vigor.

Regeneration Harvest – Group Selection with Reserves and Sanitation

For units proposed for Group Selection with Reserves and Sanitation, approximately 1/3 of the stand acres would include removal of all Douglas-fir under 8” DBH and the removal of all trees over 8” DBH, while reserving up to 20 square feet of BA. Reserve trees would likely be the largest DBH ponderosa pine on the site and would include several of the large pine as well as any legacy trees. The remainder of the stand (matrix) would thin trees less than 8” DBH to an approximate density of 10 square feet of BA and the removal of trees greater than 8” DBH to an approximate density of 80-100 square feet of BA. Figure 3 (below) displays a visual representation of this treatment.

This treatment would also prioritize the removal of trees with dwarf mistletoe infection and the removal of Douglas-fir over ponderosa pine, improving stand health and vigor.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 9 EA / FONSI

Figure 3. Visual Representation of a Group Selection Treatment. Openings represent the groups where approximately 20 square feet of basal area would be retained, while the remaining part of the stand would be thinned to approximately 80-100 square feet of basal area.

Regeneration Harvest – Shelterwood with Reserves and Sanitation/Salvage

This treatment is prescribed where much of the Douglas-fir overstory has already been killed or is experiencing high levels of dwarf mistletoe and bark beetle activity. This treatment is designed to retain all ponderosa pine while removing all Douglas-fir except for 50 square feet of BA in stands where there is little-to-no pine; the trees that remain on site should be ponderosa pine, where available, or should be Douglas-fir, typically in the larger size classes and relatively free of dwarf mistletoe infection. Retained trees are intended to limit post-fire brush response and aid in establishing the ponderosa pine.

Planting

Planting would occur in units treated with either types of Regeneration Harvest. This activity would prioritize establishing ponderosa pine and would not plant Douglas-fir. Implementation would focus on varying levels of density (approximately 120-150 trees per acre) depending on site characteristics such as elevation, aspect, and brush density. Site preparation, such as scalping (reducing vegetation around seedlings), burning, or mastication (on slopes that allow) would occur as needed.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 10 EA / FONSI

Harvest Systems

Commercial timber removal would be accomplished with ground-based logging systems that include rubber-tired skidders and off-road jammers. On slopes less than approximately 35%, rubber-tired skidders would be utilized to yard material to landings adjacent to the transportation network. On slopes steeper than approximately 35%, off-road jammers would be used to yard material to landings via skid/jammer trails or the transportation network. In large portions of the project area, these skid trails exist from past commercial timber removal activities and would be utilized, where feasible, to limit the creation of new trails. Cable (skyline) logging systems would be considered in areas where ground-based logging systems are less feasible.

Fuels Treatments

Commercial and/or non-commercial vegetation treatments are expected to reduce fuels by felling and/or removing trees throughout most diameter classes. Commercial removal would be accomplished through the means described above, non-commercial treatments would be accomplished with the use of handcrews with chainsaws. After vegetation treatments, fuels at the landings would be piled and burned, and surface fuels would be underburned, jackpot burned, or reduced by mechanical methods, depending on fuel concentrations and topography. Burning would occur in either spring or fall, as prescription parameters, burn windows, and fuel conditions permit.

Underburning would occur where more continuous surface fuels exist, and it would attempt to emulate a low intensity surface fire where shrubs, needle cast, and the upper duff layer is primarily consumed.

Some mortality would be expected, particularly in smaller diameter Douglas-fir.

Additional factors that may increase the likelihood of mortality include tree stress caused by insects, disease or competition. Depending on fuel loads, burning may need to occur in multiple entries.

Underburning helps reduce ladder fuels and raise canopy base heights throughout the stand.

Jackpot burning would occur where surface fuels are concentrated in discrete locations, typically on drier slopes and aspects. Jackpot burning creates a “patchy” burn mosaic; reducing fuel concentrations where they are the heaviest and leaving areas where fuel concentrations are

Underburning would occur after mechanical treatments. Reintroducing fire into the ecosystem in such a way would reduce future fire danger, decrease fuel loading, and increase stand resilience to future insect and disease.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 11 EA / FONSI minimal, largely unburned. Jackpot burning reduces fuels around the residual stand and reduces the likelihood of individual tree torching.

Mechanical methods to reduce fuels include pruning and/or machine cutting with a mulching or mastication head on slopes less than 40%. Surface fuels would be either removed for biomass, mulched, chipped, masticated on site, or piled and burned on site. Piling would be accomplished either by hand or machine, on suitable slopes.

The Proposed Action was designed to reduce fuel loads through prescribed fire/fuels treatments that would consume or remove the material from the site. Whole tree harvesting with disposal of the tops at the landings is the most effective method of preventing surface fuel increases within the residual stand (Agee and Skinner 2005). At the landings, fuels would be piled and burned, while surface fuels would be underburned, jackpot burned, or reduced by mechanical means.

Under the Proposed Action, fuel loads would be reduced from 23 tons per acre to 15 tons per acre immediately after treatment – an indubitable reduction in fuel loading.

The proposed action would remove ladder fuels, prioritize removal of trees infected with dwarf mistletoe, and reduce fuels through prescribed fire; all of which would change the fuel structure in the treated stands. Fuel structure in treated stands would experience an immediate increase in canopy base height from an average of 17 feet to approximately 38 feet post-harvest.

This would in turn positively affect the torching index1, i.e. the Proposed Action would reduce overall fire behavior. An immediate increase in torching index from 60 to 93 would occur after project activities and would remain high (above 85 through the year 2059).

These fuels reduction treatments would help create stand conditions that would be more resilient to future wildland fire, insect and disease incursions, and other environmental stress agents.

Riparian Conservation Areas

Riparian conversation areas (RCAs) are delineated as part of the Proposed Action to protect and maintain the integrity of riparian communities and their adjacent aquatic ecosystems.

Appropriate buffer widths surrounding the riparian communities ensure riparian function and ecological processes are maintained or restored to fully support beneficial uses, including native and desired non-native fish species and their habitats.

On-the-ground mapping to validate perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral stream types along with sediment and stream shade data provided the project scale information to use Option 3 in the Forest Plan to define RCAs (USDA USFS 2010a, Appendix B, p. B-34). Using project area specific data, the RCA widths were delineated at 75-foot approximate distances for perennial

1 The wind speed at which passive crown fire occurs is called Torching Index (TI). TI is derived from a combination of factors, including surface fuels, canopy base height, crown bulk density, and the presence of ladder fuels. Lower TI indicates that a fire can be carried from the ground to the crown under lower wind speeds, while higher TI indicates that a higher wind speed is needed for torching to occur.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 12 EA / FONSI streams and 30-foot approximate distances for intermittent streams (see Figure 4 below). For further information, the detailed RCA delineation process can be found in the project record.

In general, neither vegetation management activities nor fuels treatments are proposed in RCAs.

One exception for fuels treatments is that fires started outside the established RCA may be allowed to back into RCAs. They will not, however, be initiated in RCAs.

Figure 4. RCA Widths for the SCBR Project.

Road Maintenance and Construction

Proposed road activities designed to support vegetation and prescribed burning treatments include road maintenance, construction, and decommissioning activities (Figure 5). Road maintenance activities to implement mechanical treatments would occur on approximately 60.7 miles of roads, including 31 miles of National Forest System (NFS) roads throughout the project area. Road maintenance may include road prism blading and shaping, roadway vegetation clearing, roadway ditch and culvert cleaning, drainage culvert replacement and installation, water bar removal and installation, road aggregate resurfacing, dust abatement, and surface repair including aggregate placement.

Additionally, approximately 17.5 miles of temporary road on Forest Service lands would be constructed, 10.2 miles of which would be constructed on existing template. These roads would be decommissioned and/or returned to existing uses after completion of project activities and would not be added to the National Forest transportation system. Existing roads on private lands utilized for haul would not be decommissioned after completion of project activities.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 13 EA / FONSI

Figure 5. Transportation Map.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 14 EA / FONSI

Figure 6. Road Realignment Inset Map (see Figure 5).

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 15 EA / FONSI

Culvert Removal

During project development, an opportunity was identified for aquatic habitat improvement. One non-functional culvert on an old logging (non-system) road on Sinker Creek exists in the project area. This culvert acts as a fish barrier and its removal would benefit redband trout movement up and down the creek. This activity was added to the proposed action since the project creates an opportunity to access the culvert and remove it. This would also address a Forest Watershed and Aquatic Recovery Strategy priority for the Cottonwood Creek-Shafer Creek subwatershed.

Existing equipment and personnel would already be on-site during project implementation and using those resources to remove the culvert would save time and effort in future project planning.

The road template where the culvert is located is no longer used or necessary. No other access barriers were found within the project area where fish may be present.

The culvert removal would involve walking an excavator to the culvert, likely along Sinker Creek for approximately 2,000 feet. An existing template that is now a trail occurs along Sinker Creek that the excavator could follow with minimal disturbance needed, though some tree clearing would be necessary. Potential sediment inputs, turbidity increases, and effects to downstream salmonids and their habitat are documented in the Fisheries, Hydrology, and Soils technical reports.

Design Features included in the Proposed Action

The SCBR Project has been designed to avoid or minimize undesirable effects to resources, to the maximum extent practicable, and would comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and policy. The interdisciplinary team (IDT) developed project design features found in Appendix A below to minimize or avoid potential adverse effects or to achieve a desired outcome when implementing the proposed activities. The design features are based on Forest Plan direction, best available science, and site-specific evaluations and would be applied (except where specifically stated) as an integral part of project implementation.

Decision to be Made

The Responsible Official for this project is the Forest Supervisor. The Responsible Official will consider public comments, an internal analysis of this project, and the consequences of similar projects. The Responsible Official will assess the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects, along with current policy, law, and regulation and will determine the appropriate level of environmental analysis and documentation needed for this project.

After such consideration, the Responsible Official may choose to:

• Select the Proposed Action and adopt the project as written;

• Modify the Proposed Action and/or adopt a modified version of the project; or

• Decide to take no action.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 16 EA / FONSI

In making this decision, the Responsible Official will consider the following questions:

• How well does the Proposed Action meet the Purpose and Need described in this

EA/FONSI?

• How well does the Proposed Action progress the project area toward the desired conditions which would contribute to accomplishing Forest Plan objectives?

• Does the Proposed Action mitigate potential adverse effects identified in the analysis as needed to support a finding of no-significant impacts (FONSI)?

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 17 EA / FONSI

What Major Issues were Identified?

The National Environmental Policy Act directs the Forest Service to focus on a full and fair discussion of issues and identify and eliminate from detailed study the non-significant issues.

The IDT was able to address public concerns through design of the project, and no issues were identified as significant or presented unresolved conflict with the Proposed Action. Other concerns were either not relevant or site-specific, outside the scope of the project, or had been addressed in previous site-specific analyses. A complete description of the public comments and concerns and how the IDT resolved them can be found in the project record.

What are the Consequences of Taking No Action?

Taking no action means the Forest Service would not implement the activities described in the Proposed Action, although all other ongoing authorized activities such as hunting, skiing, other recreational uses, and motorized travel would continue. Current fire management strategies in the analysis area would be expected to continue. Consequently, the existing conditions would perpetuate, including hazardous fuel conditions, and the vegetation conditions with associated wildfire hazards would continue to trend away from desired conditions. Insect and disease mortality would continue to exacerbate conditions on the landscape.

What Other Actions were Considered?

Alternative Considered but Not Analyzed in Detail

No additional alternatives were identified during internal or external scoping.

Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

HFRA Title I, Section 104 (this section also applies to projects under HFRA Title VI, Section 602), allows for projects in the WUI and no farther than 1.5 miles from the boundary of at-risk communities to describe the proposed agency action only, unless the at-risk community has adopted a community wildfire protection plan and the agency doesn’t implement the recommendations in the plan. This project has no treatment units farther than 1.5 miles from the boundary of at-risk communities and none of these communities have adopted community wildfire protection plans. Boise County has implemented a “County Wildfire Protection Plan” that analyzed several local factors, such as fuels, fire regimes, weather, and topography and identified “WUI watersheds”; however, no WUI analysis was conducted at a finer scale.

The forest documented consistency with Section 104 in its WUI Stepdown & Preliminary Risk Assessment, completed for the Clear Creek / Robie Creek Farm Bill Designated Landscape in 2016. The SCBR Project area is within this Landscape. The Assessment documented that communities within this landscape are considered urban wildland interface communities in the vicinity of federal lands that are at high risk from wildfire. Boundaries of the at-risk community were delineated and the WUI zone was mapped as required in the Assessment (Newman 2016).

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 18 EA / FONSI

Accordingly, the Proposed Action alternative was analyzed in detail. Because the IDT was able to address public concerns through project design, no issues were identified as significant or presented unresolved conflict with the Proposed Action. This project fits the requirements for using HFRA as described above; therefore, no additional action alternatives were developed.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 19 EA / FONSI

This section contains a summary of the environmental impacts of the proposed activity in relation to environmental effects considered for significance, as described at 40 CFR 1508.27.

Addressing environmental effects this way focuses this assessment on pertinent effects necessary to decision-making, allowing for a concise document as directed by the Council of Environmental Quality’s regulations for implementing NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500 - 1508). The resource technical reports used to evaluate the effects of the Proposed Action are incorporated by reference and are available in the project record.

Effects Relative to the Finding of No Significance (FONSI) Elements

The ten elements in determining “significance,” as defined by NEPA, are critical to reducing paperwork through use of a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) when an action would not have a significant effect on the human environment and is therefore exempt from requirements to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS). Significance, as used in NEPA, requires consideration of the following ten intensity factors in the appropriate context for that factor.

Context

For the proposed alternative (Project), the context of the environmental effects is based on the spatial and temporal bounds of the activities proposed in the Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Project.

These impacts are well known, as the proposed activities have all previously occurred on the Boise National Forest. The potential environmental effects would be localized to the project area and would not be measurable at a regional or larger scale.

Intensity

Intensity is a measure of the severity, extent, or quantity of effects, and is based on information from the effects analysis of this EA and any references in the project record. The effects of this project have been appropriately and thoroughly considered with an analysis that is responsive to concerns and issues raised by the public. The agency has taken a hard look at the environmental effects using relevant scientific information and knowledge of site-specific conditions gained from field visits. A finding of no significant impact is based on the context of the project and intensity of effects using the ten factors identified in 40 CFR 1508.27(b).

Issues Analyzed in Detail

Issues identified during internal (USFS) and external (public) scoping were used to guide the effects analysis in Chapter 3. To warrant detailed analysis, an issue must be within the scope of analysis; must not already be decided by law, regulation, policy, or previous decision; must be open to scientific analysis; and must require analysis for making a reasoned choice from among the alternatives (e.g., there is a measurable difference between the alternatives with respect to the issues). Additionally, public interest may dictate that effects should be displayed in more detail for the issue.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 20 EA / FONSI

This document and the effects analysis tier to the FEIS and planning record supporting the Boise National Forest Land and Resource Plan, as amended in 2010. Tiering refers to using the coverage of general matters in broader NEPA documents in subsequent narrower NEPA documents. Tiering allows agencies to narrow the range of alternatives, narrow the scope of analysis, and reach a FONSI for an action that may otherwise potentially have significant impacts. Where issue has already been sufficiently addressed by the analysis in the FEIS and Forest Plan, the issue is generally not addressed in detail in this EA, or if it is, the EA analysis is generally a site-specific extension of the FEIS analysis.

The following issues were identified for detailed analysis under the Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge EA/FONSI. The issues are posed as questions:

Issue 1: How would management activities affect public access and recreation in the project area? (addressed below under Intensity Factors 2 and 7).

Issue 2: How would proposed forest management activities, including timber harvest and prescribed fuels treatments, affect flammulated owls, white-headed woodpeckers and goshawks?

(addressed below under Intensity Factor 9)

Issue 3: How would proposed forest management activities, including timber harvest and prescribed fuels treatments, affect fuel loading, fuel structure, fire behavior and fire hazard2?

(addressed above in Chapter 1.4.2).

1) The actions would not result in any significant beneficial or adverse effects [40 CFR 1508.27(b)(1)].

The IDT did not identify any significant adverse effects associated with implementing the proposed action. While the overall effect of implementing the project is expected to be beneficial, the specific direct, indirect and cumulative effects would be within standards set forth by the Boise National Forest Plan, and consistent with applicable environmental laws.

2) The project would not result in substantive effects on public health or safety [40 CFR 1508.27(b)(2)].

The project has been designed to minimize the potential impacts on public health and safety during and after implementation, including safety on roads and trails open to public access.

Specifically, traffic control measures would be deployed per the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards.

To limit the potential impacts to air quality, proposed fuels treatments would be designed to comply with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) issued by the Environmental

2 Fuel loading is a term describing the amount of available fuel in a stand measured in tons per acre including live and dead vegetation. Fuel structure refers to the arrangement and size of the vegetative fuels within a stand. Fire behavior describes how a wildland fire burns based on environmental characteristics such as surface fuels, vegetation, canopy base height, density or closure, slope, aspect, weather, and elevation.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 21 EA / FONSI

Protection Agency. All prescribed burning would comply with the Montana/Idaho State Airshed Group, which approves burn permits. This Group works with the Idaho and Montana Departments of Environmental Quality to coordinate all prescribed burning activities, provide smoke forecasting, and establish air quality restrictions for Group members.

The RCA delineations included in the project design comply with applicable Forest Plan standards and guidelines, as well as Executive Order (EO) 11988, Floodplain Management, which is intended to reduce the risk of flood loss; to minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health, and welfare; and to restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values served by floodplains when conducting federal activities affecting land use, including but not limited to, water and related land resources planning, regulation, and licensing activities. EO 11988 requires federal agencies to avoid, to the extent possible, the long- and short-term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of floodplains and to avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development wherever there is a practicable alternative.

Municipal water sources in the project area include Daggett Creek and Robie Creek drainages.

Management actions are not expected to have a negative effect on these municipal water sources or their infrastructure.

Design features would also minimize the potential impacts on public health and safety during and after implementation, including safety on roads and trails open to public access. Specifically, Design Features RE-1, RE-2, RE-4, RE-5, and RE-6 have been developed to mitigate conflicts between public use and project-related implementation activities.

Following implementation, the Proposed Action would reduce the probability of extreme wildfire behavior within the WUI and associated private lands and improve the safety and effectiveness of wildfire management. Furthermore, hazard trees would be greatly reduced, contributing to public safety along roadways and trails.

3) The project would not result in any significant effects on any unique characteristics of the geographic area, historic or cultural resources, park lands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas [40 CFR 1508.27(b)(3)].

No unique characteristics of the geographic area would be adversely affected by implementation of the proposed action. No roadless or wilderness areas, parklands, prime farmlands, wild and scenic rivers, or research natural areas exist within the project area. The activities proposed are not expected to result in modifications of the floodplain that would negatively affect the ability of the watershed to moderate flood flows.

The Idaho State-designated Ponderosa Pine Scenic Byway (Highway 21) lies partly within the same Management Area. Some timber haul would occur along approximately 29 miles of this highway, but this would not cause any effects to the Byway’s viewshed.

The Boise National Forest is still in the process of consulting with the Idaho State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to determine effects to historic and cultural resources. The Forest Service will not finalize the decision until consultation with the SHPO is completed. While

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 22 EA / FONSI consultation with SHPO is ongoing, no significant effects are expected. If concurrence from SHPO is received, current design features (CR-1, CR-2, and CR-3) would ensure that no significant effects would occur. If SHPO issues a letter of non-concurrence, decisions on final mitigations would be made to limit effects.

4) The selected alternative would not result in any effects that are likely to be highly controversial [40 CFR 1508.27(b)(4)].

Controversy in this context refers to situations where there is substantial dispute as to the size, nature, or effect of the federal action, rather than opposition to its implementation. The scientific basis for the analysis is contained in the project record and summarized in the technical reports.

The IDT used standard analysis techniques and models and limitations of those models are summarized in resource technical reports contained in the project record. Literature supporting the use of these models, as used in this analysis, is contained in the project record.

5) The effects associated with the proposed action would not result in any highly uncertain, unique, or unknown risks [40 CFR 1508.27(b)(5)].

The proposed action would not involve any highly uncertain or unknown risks, as supported by resource technical reports and Biological Assessments and Evaluations contained in the project record. The management activities associated with the proposed action are typical of those successfully implemented in the past on NFS lands.

6) The Project does not establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects nor does it represent a decision in principle about a future consideration [40 CFR 1508.27(b)(6)].

The activities in the proposed action are consistent with direction found in the Forest Plan as amended in 2010, as documented in the Forest Plan Consistency Table in the project record.

Implementation of the proposed action would not establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects nor does it represent a decision in principle about a future consideration.

7) The proposed project actions would not result in any significant short-term, long-term, or cumulative effects [40 CFR 1508.27(b)(7)].

No significant short term, long term, or cumulative effects were identified in consideration of potential impacts to threatened, endangered, or sensitive species; hydrologic resources; cultural resources; or other permitted land uses.

The analysis of the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects and the Analysis Areas for actions proposed under this project vary by resource and is described under the Methodology section of individual resource reports. Existing conditions that formed the baseline for analysis generally include but are not limited to past and current developed and dispersed recreation, authorized and unauthorized trail use, livestock grazing, past timber harvest, and past wildfire events.

Sinker Creek – Boise Ridge Forest Health Project 23 EA / FONSI

Recreation Resources and the Scenic Environment

The Proposed Action would not substantially affect recreation resources or users because recreational experiences would be maintained within the project area. Although recreationists may be temporarily affected by dust, smoke, noise, or public safety closures, each of these effects would be localized and temporary. Design features have been developed to mitigate conflicts between project-related implementation activities and public use (RE-1 through RE-6).

Effects of the Proposed Action would be visually subordinate to the characteristic landscape. The project area would continue to meet Visual Quality Objectives as visual impacts would be minor, temporary, and localized. In the immediate foreground, evidence of stumps, temporary roads, skid trails, slash piles and other project-related activities would either be diminished as vegetation recovers (stumps), be rehabilitated (temporary roads, skid trails), or removed through prescribed fire (slash piles). Design Features RE-7 and RE-8 would help limit visible evidence of project activities in the immediate foreground. Over time, effects to the scenic environment from project activities would become less and less apparent.

8) Project Activities would not adversely affect sites or objects listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, nor would it cause the loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historic resources [40 CFR 1508.27(b)(8)].

The Forest Archeologist completed a cultural resources review for this project pursuant to the regulations (36 CFR 800) implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 USC 470f). Previous cultural resources surveys were considered sufficient to determine the potential for effects to historic properties in part of the project area. Additional surveys were conducted where needed. The Boise National Forest is still in the process of consulting with the Idaho State Historic Preservation Office. The Forest Service will not finalize the decision until consultation with the SHPO is completed.

9) The proposed action would not adversely affect threatened or endangered species or their habitats [40 CFR…