Lava_EA-FONSI-DN.pdf

Intermountain Region, Boise National Forest June 2025

Lava Restoration Project Environmental Assessment, Finding of No Significant Impact, and Decision Notice

For More Information Contact:

David Francomb, Deputy Forest Supervisor Boise National Forest

1249 S Vinnell Way, Suite 200 Boise, ID 83709

Phone: 208-373-4103 Project webpage: https://www.fs.usda.gov/r04/boise/projects/67425

Cover photos: First photo, Channel impacts from post-fire flooding in Chief Eagle Eye Creek. Second photo, high severity burn impacts.

We make every effort to create documents that are accessible to individuals of all abilities; however, limitations with our word processing programs may prevent some parts of this document from being readable by computer-assisted reading devices. If you need assistance with any part of this document, please contact the Boise National Forest at 208-373-4100.

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, 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 State or local Agency that administers the program or contact USDA through the Telecommunications Relay Service at 711 (voice and TTY).

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 How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint 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, Mail Stop 9410, 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.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/r04/boise/projects/67425 https://www.usda.gov/oascr/how-to-file-a-program-discrimination-complaint mailto:program.intake@usda.gov

PROJECT INFORMATION

Project Name: Lava Restoration Project

Project Initiation Date: 11/20/2024

Responsible Official: Brant Petersen Unit: Emmet Ranger District, Boise National Forest Counties: Gem, Valley, Adams, and Washington Counties Anticipated Implementation: June 2025 Project Webpage: https://www.fs.usda.gov/r04/boise/projects/67425 General Location: The project is located along the northwestern boundary of the Boise National Forest and is about 50 miles north of Boise, Idaho, on the west side of the Emmett Ranger District.

Applicable Management Areas: Sage Hen Reservoir (Management Area 16)

Watersheds: Chief Eagle Eye Creek Watershed

Introduction The Boulder Fire, located about 9 miles south of Cascade ID and approximately 1 mile southeast of the Tripod Lookout was ignited during a lightning storm on July 24, 2024. On September 2nd another lightning-event caused the Lava Fire in Lava Gulch (approximately 12 miles southwest of Cascade). On September 9th, the two fires merged and were managed as the Lava Fire forming a combined burn area of 97,515 acres on the Boise and Payette National Forests, BLM lands, State lands, and private lands. The fire was called out on December 18, 2024.

In response to this event, the Boise National Forest is proposing the Lava Restoration Project to mitigate hazard trees, reestablish forested conditions, protect the landscape from unauthorized access, and recover some economic value of fire killed trees. Further rationale is provided below under the Potentially Affected Environment section. These objectives are based on multiple-use management in compliance with the Boise National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan, as amended in 2010).

This environmental assessment has been prepared to determine whether implementation of the project may significantly affect the quality of the human environment and thereby require the preparation of an environmental impact statement. The preparation of this environmental assessment fulfills agency policy and direction to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). These activities will be implemented under an Emergency Situation Determination (ESD) as authorized under 36 CFR § 218.21. Projects authorized under ESDs are not subject to Forest Service Objection Review processes.

Where is the Project Located?

The project is located along the northwestern boundary of the Boise National Forest about 50 miles north of Boise, Idaho (Map 1). The project area is located on the west side of the Emmett Ranger District, Gem, Valley, Adams, and Washington Counties. The project area is part of the Sage Hen Reservoir Management Area 16 and contains a portion of the Snowbank Inventoried Roadless Area. The project area consists of the 39,340 acres of the Lava Fire that burned into the Sage Hen Integrated Restoration Project area on the Emmett Ranger District.

Potentially Affected Environment The project area is entirely within the perimeter of the Lava Fire. The 39,340-acre project area includes 34,380 acres of National Forest System (NFS) lands; all proposed actions are on NFS https://www.fs.usda.gov/r04/boise/projects/67425 lands. The project area spans in elevation from 3,425 to 8,327 feet above sea level. Topography is bisected by multiple drainages, some providing critical habitat for bull trout listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

A Burned Area Emergency Response team completed an assessment of the burn area in October 2024. Geospatial analysis was used to determine soil burn severity and vegetation mortality.

Most of the road network in the project area was created to support timber harvest activities and multiple uses including safe public access. Major public access routes impacted by the fire include NFS Roads 618, 625, and 624. Post fire flooding has already severely altered the Chief Eagle Eye drainage. Forest roads could be subject to increased movement from sediment crossing the roadway from the increased erosion potential of the surrounding landscape, resulting in further road damage and/or impacts to the hydrology of the watershed.

Although portions of the Lava Fire burned in a mosaic of intensity, a substantial portion of the fire burned at a high intensity; overall, the fire resulted in substantial tree mortality. Vegetation burn severity generally correlates to the level of soil burn severity.

The fire has resulted in a change of tree species composition and stand densities. Desired vegetation attributes may no longer be present. Tree mortality associated with fire-injury, drought, and insect and disease infestations will continue for years after the Lava Fire. Due to these fire effects, hazard trees are now present throughout the project area.

Moderate and high burn severity of vegetation and soils have created conditions for the increased risk of invasive botanical species to outcompete native plants. Low-elevation non-forested habitats are not expected to recover naturally following the fire, specifically, those areas historically supporting drought-adapted bitterbrush, sagebrush, Idaho fescue, and bluebunch wheatgrass.

The Lava Fire affected approximately 34,980 acres of the Payette C&H and OLA-C C&H allotments within the project area and destroyed or damaged range improvements used to manage livestock. Wildfire impacted livestock grazing operations will require modification during recovery and rehabilitation efforts.

The project area contributes to recreation and ecosystem services to nearby communities and agricultural areas. Communities closest to the project area include Cascade, Smiths Ferry, Ola, High Valley, and Sweet. Portions of the project area are popular for recreation. The nearby Sage Hen Reservoir area did not burn. However, the fire affected several designated trails, used for both summer and winter recreation. Fire has resulted in damaged trees near and adjacent to designated trails and trailheads, as well as the Third Fork Cabin. The cabin itself was unharmed.

Unauthorized roads and user-created trails that existed prior to the fire are now visible and accessible due to vegetative cover loss. Fire suppression activities, including repaired dozer

Figure 1. Photo of Third Fork Chief Eagle Eye Creek drainage after the Lava Fire, taken on October 14, 2024. Photo edited for clarity and brightness.

lines, are also visible. Where fire impacts have left these routes visible, there is a need to deter unauthorized access and prevent further damage to the landscape.

Purpose and Need: Why do we need to act?

The purpose of the Lava Restoration Project is to address and mitigate the impacts to the landscape from the 2024 Lava Fire as described above in the Potentially Affected Environment section. The following specific needs exist:

Hazard Tree Mitigation

There is a need to mitigate the risks of hazard trees. Fire-damaged trees, if left standing, pose a hazard to parked or moving vehicles, forest users, and Forest Service personnel. Fire-damaged trees could also fall when vehicles/users are not present, creating hazards in the road or trail, potentially blocking individuals behind or between trees across the roadway, or plugging culverts/drainage ditches in a way that may compromise the road or trail.

Commercial Salvage

There is a need to recover the economic value of fire-damaged trees. Trees damaged by the fire are deteriorating and generally lose marketability within one to two years of mortality, depending on species and condition. Commercial timber harvest is a tool that may be implemented to facilitate hazard tree removal, salvage fire-damaged trees, and contribute to the local economy.

Reforestation

There is a need to restore or manage desired vegetation attributes and re-establish appropriate forest cover to improve post-fire watersheds. Reforestation of early seral species will be prioritized to support the long-term sustainability of native and desired non-native wildlife species.

Revegetation of Non-Forested Areas

There is a need to restore at-risk non-forested habitat in the project area. Low elevation non-forested habitats are not expected to recover naturally following the fire, specifically those areas historically supporting drought-adapted bitterbrush, sagebrush, Idaho fescue, and bluebunch wheatgrass.

Recreation and Access Management

There is a need to provide safe public access on designated NFS roads and trails. There is also a need to protect the fire-damaged landscape from unauthorized access. This may be achieved through maintaining appropriate use on authorized routes as well as reducing the creation and use of unauthorized routes.

Infrastructure Repair

There is a need to improve human safety, maintain administrative and recreational access, improve the overall recreational experience, and protect water quality by repairing damage to forest infrastructure including roads, trails, bridges, culverts, and signs.

Range Management

There is a need to ensure that the allotments have an opportunity for recovery of vegetation, improve water quality and soil stabilization, and allows for other natural recovery processes to occur without additional disturbance from permitted livestock grazing. This can be achieved by working with permittees to rest the affected portions of grazing allotments from livestock presence for a minimum of 2 years. This rest period also allows for the replacement or repair of vital range improvements used for livestock management across the fire-impacted allotments.

There is a need to encourage livestock to graze and congregate away from streams and ponds by repairing stock water developments affected by the fire.

Proposed Action: What are we proposing to do?

The Forest proposes to address the purpose and need by implementing a suite of post-fire restoration activities including hazard tree mitigation, area salvage, reforestation/revegetation, recreation management, range management, and road maintenance and infrastructure repair/replacement.

Table 1. Summary of Proposed Vegetation Treatments.

Activity Approximate Acres Hazard Tree Mitigation1 3,410 Area Salvage 1,560 Reforestation in Hazard Tree Mitigation and Area Salvage Units 4,970 Reforestation Outside Hazard Tree Mitigation and Area Salvage Units 26,920 Revegetation of Non-Forested Areas (shrub planting) 2,920

1 Maximum acres. All roads and trails will be assessed for tree removal.

Vegetation Management

Hazard Tree Mitigation

Hazard tree mitigation is proposed along open National Forest System (NFS) roads. Map 3 displays road segments proposed for hazard tree mitigation. Felling of fire-damaged trees could occur out to a maximum extent of 200 feet on either side of the roadway. Trees will be felled by hand or using ground-based mechanized harvesting equipment. Felled trees may be commercially harvested to recuperate their remaining economic value.

Where opportunities and conditions warrant, hazard tree mitigation will also occur along NFS trails and associated trailheads within the 200-foot maximum extent. Trees identified as hazards will be felled by hand. Table 2 identifies the trails in the project area. Hazard trees in and around designated recreation sites would be mitigated as well.. Hazard trees near range infrastructure such as the Third Fork Riders Cabin and associated corrals and fencing will also be mitigated.

Figure 2 illustrates an example of hazard tree mitigation needs.

Figure 2. Several of these burned trees presenting a hazard to the Third Fork Cabin and the gate will be felled.

Dispersed recreation occurs on the Forest as evidenced by highly impacted sites in some areas.

The Forest does not direct people to these areas, nor does the Forest actively manage these areas. Hazard identification requires identifying the level of risk, or the relative potential that a hazard may cause harm to someone or something of value (i.e., the tree’s proximity to people and property). Fire-damaged trees now exist throughout the fire perimeter. The Forest cannot risk-proof the entire project area.

The Forest has placed signs (Figure 3) along the main travel ways into the fire perimeters warning forest users that the area has been burned and that hazards may be present. Additional signs may be placed as needed.

Figure 3. These warning signs are posted at the Bulltrout Fire area and along NFS Road 380. Similar signs are in place in and near the Lava Fire burn area.

Area Salvage

Area salvage outside the 200-foot roadside corridor is proposed on 1,560 acres. This work will take place where access exists, and the trees are commercially viable, and may also include hazard tree mitigation to facilitate reforestation. Trees designated for commercial salvage will be felled and removed using ground-based mechanical harvesting equipment. See Map 4.

Reforestation of Forested Areas

Reforestation, or tree planting, is proposed following hazard tree mitigation and salvage activities where species composition and/or stocking levels are not expected to meet Forest Plan desired conditions based on potential vegetation group (PVG) (Map 3). This action will mitigate loss of forest cover and maintain forest productivity. Species planted will be based upon PVG but will focus on fire-resilient shade-intolerant species including, but not limited to, ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, or western larch. Whitebark pine may also be planted.

Planting may also occur outside hazard tree mitigation and area salvage units as needs are identified and funding becomes available.

Site preparation before or at time of planting is generally needed to provide seedlings the best chance of survival. All site preparation will be completed by hand methods and consists of scalping (removing existing vegetation and other organic or inorganic material) a small planting area to mineral soil.

Revegetation of Non-Forested Areas

The Forest proposes reseeding and hand transplant of live plugs for fire-affected non-forested habitats in the project area (Map 4). Seeding could occur either aerially or via hand-broadcast depending on site size and feasibility. The Forest has identified approximately 2,920 acres where shrub planting would be beneficial. Final planting units will be determined once the Forest field-verifies existing conditions and planting suitability.

Fuels Treatments Activity and existing fuels in hazard tree mitigation and area salvage units will be disposed of through hand or machine piling, pile burning, jackpot burning, lopping and scattering, mastication, chipping, biochar processing, or biomass removal. Felled trees and branches may be left on site if needed for resource benefit (e.g. providing microsites for planting, assisting with soil amelioration, retaining soil on slopes, reducing compaction on skid trails and temporary roads or to meet Forest Plan coarse woody debris requirements).

Machine piling and mastication (mechanical chipping/grinding/shredding of fuels) will occur in hazard tree mitigation units where slash is too large or dense for hand piling. These are typically areas where the material that is greater than 3 inches diameter, has fuel loadings greater than 4 tons per acre, and the majority of the material is on the ground. Mastication is a treatment that can be used to remove smaller diameter trees or rearrange the ground fuel/slash into a size that will decompose more rapidly.

Recreation and Trail Management Trail drainage stabilization and trail structure stabilization are proposed along NFS trails listed below in Table 2. This work includes repair and stabilization on drainage and structural trail features such as grade dips, water bars, retaining walls, and turnpikes. Trail prisms will also be reestablished. This work will prevent trail tread and structure loss, soil erosion and runoff into streams, and prevent the cost of full reconstruction. See the Vegetation Management section above for information on hazard tree mitigation on trails.

Table 2. Trails in the Project Area.

Trail Name and Number Trail length within the project area (miles) Greenfield Flat (223) 1.8 West Mountain (131) 4.1 Poison Creek (134) 2.2 Wilson Corrals (135) 5.0 Wilson Creek (133) 0.9 Gabe's Peak (136) 2.8 Total Trail Mileage 16.8

Transportation Management The Forest proposes several transportation system-related maintenance activities, repairs, and replacements.

Road Maintenance and Use

Proposed road activities designed to support management objectives include road maintenance on open NFS roads within the project area and timber haul routes. Maintenance may include excavation and embankment work, roadway reconditioning (grading, ditch and drainage system cleaning), aggregate surface placement, ditch armoring, and culvert replacements (ditch relief culverts, intermittent drainages, seeps; not perennials) within the project area on an as-needed basis. All work will be conducted within the existing road limits, will not change the surface type or maintenance level of any roads, and will not include the construction of any new roads. This work would mitigate further sedimentation and resource damage, facilitate treatments in the project area, and improve user safety and comfort.

Dust abatement will occur as needed during project operations to mitigate impacts to the environment and provide for public safety. Methods may include, but not be limited to, applying water or aggregates to road surfaces, implementing speed limits, and limited operating periods.

Roads in the project area, including temporary roads, may be snowplowed to allow access for logging or reforestation activities.

Temporary Road Access

To facilitate access to area salvage units, NFS roads currently classified as maintenance level 1 (ML1) will be reopened for project use then restored to their current state of storage upon project completion. In addition, approximately 2 miles of temporary road may be needed. Temporary roads will be decommissioned once harvest activities are complete and would not be added to the Forest Transportation System. No permanent roads will be constructed.

Chief Eagle Eye Creek Bridge Replacement

The Forest proposes replacing the existing bridge at milepost 20.6 on NFS Road 653. This 40-foot long by 16-foot-wide timber multi-girder bridge was constructed in 1963. It was heavily damaged in mid-September 2024 during a post-fire 500-year flood event. Most of the structural backfill behind one of the abutments was eroded and the timber sill on that abutment is now undermined across its entire length, reducing the bridge’s load carrying capacity to virtually zero.

The road is now under a temporary closure order due to the bridge being in a condition state of imminent failure (see Figure 4).

The Forest will remove the bridge in its entirety and install a new bridge measuring approximately 66 feet long by 16 feet wide, likely featuring a steel superstructure, concrete shallow abutment substructure, corrugated metal deck, and aggregate surfacing. The new structure will be designed to accommodate 100-year flows and HL-93 loading. Replacing this bridge will restore access and public safety, prevent further adjacent resource damage, and facilitate other treatments in the project area.

Figure 4. Photo of the Chief Eagle Eye Creek Bridge taken after the post-fire flooding.

Chief Eagle Eye Creek Aquatic Organism Passage Replacement

The Forest proposes replacing the existing aquatic organism passage (AOP) culvert near milepost 11.8 on NFS Road 625. The current AOP measures roughly 18 feet wide by 12 feet high and 80 feet long. This steel multiplate bottomless structural arch was severely damaged in mid- September 2024 during the 500-year equivalent flood event (see Figure 5). The new AOP will be approximately equal in size and type, however it may be slightly larger to accommodate higher post-fire flows and slightly realigned to better match the current stream alignment. The new structure will be designed to accommodate 100-year flows and HL-93 loading. Replacing this AOP will restore access and public safety, prevent further adjacent resource damage, and facilitate other treatments in the project area.

Figure 5. Damaged aquatic organism passage (AOP) culvert near milepost 11.8 on NFS Road 625.

Range Management Replacement and/or repair of all in-kind major range infrastructure that is necessary for livestock management and resource protection is being proposed.

Reconstruction of the Third Fork Gathering Corral

The Third Fork Gathering Corral will be reconstructed. This corral, used for turning out, sorting, and gathering livestock on and off National Forest lands, is located on NFS Road 618 directly across from the Forest Service recreation cabin. It would be re-constructed of wooden posts and rails and include a wooden loading ramp. The approximate footprint of the facility is half an acre.

Reconstruction of the Third Fork Riders Cabin and Horse Corral

The Third Fork Riders Cabin and Horse Corral will be reconstructed. This cabin was a single-story structure that housed the hired rider for the allotment and was adjacent to the Third Fork recreation cabin.

Fence Repair and Replacement

Range fencing will be repaired/replaced throughout the Project Area. All range fences will be constructed using wildlife friendly specifications, as recommended by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. See Table 3 for details:

Table 3. Proposed Fence Management Actions

Fence Name and Location Priority Activity Proposed Action Payette / Ola-C boundary fence, Southwest portion 3 Maintenance Maintain 2.6 miles of 4-strand barbed wire with metal t-posts and wooden braces.

Payette / Ola-C boundary fence, Northeast portion, off NFS Road 653

2 Maintenance Maintain 0.75 miles of 4-strand barbed wire with metal t-posts and wooden braces.

Payette / Ola-C boundary fence, north portion at Forest boundary with the Payette National Forest

1 Replace Rebuild 3 miles of fence along the ridgeline.

Third Fork Ridge Drift Fence, separates two pastures of the Payette Allotment

4 Replace Rebuild 2 miles of fence along the ridgeline.

Water Developments

Stock water development repairs and replacements will occur in several areas. This would require some ground disturbance, such as digging up the head boxes of spring sources, digging shallow trenches for piping, and some small-scale leveling to place the new troughs. Water rights will be verified for correct source location before work is implemented.

Design Features and Riparian Conservation Areas Design features are part of the proposed action and are used to minimize effects of the proposed action. They are used in addition to best management practices, which are not described here as they are part of the Forest Service’s everyday approaches to work and resource management.

See Appendix A – Design Features.

Proposed actions within Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs) will adhere to delineated stream buffer distances as outlined in Appendix B – RCA Buffer Distances and Allowable Actions.

Maps Map 1. The Lava Restoration Project Area in relation to the Boise National Forest and nearby communities.

Map 2. The Lava Restoration Project in relation to the overall burn area for the Lava Fire.

Map 3. Proposed Hazard Tree Mitigation and Area Salvage.

Map 4. Proposed Reforestation and Revegetation of Non-Forested Areas.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action: Are there other ways to meet the purpose and need?

The proposed action represents the Forest Service’s best proposal to meet the stated purpose and need while balancing potential resource impacts. During public scoping, alternative proposals were suggested; rationale for why they were not analyzed in detail are provided below.

Allow for Natural Recovery

Some commenters suggested we allow for natural recovery of the area with no logging. The purpose and need and proposed action describes the need for active management to support post-fire recovery of forests and habitats and to improve safety for Forest users. The effects of natural recovery of the area are reflected in the Environmental Impacts section for the no action alternative. In addition, the Forest Plan guides us towards active reforestation “in high-priority areas…that restore or maintain vegetation desired attributes” (VEOB06; Forest Plan, p. III-31)).

Increase Recreation Opportunities

Commenters requested that we maintain or increase opportunities for recreation in the analysis area. Suggestions included increasing roads and trails or reopening previously closed areas, such as keeping dozer or other fire suppression lines as permanent access. The purpose and need of the project focuses on addressing restoration of existing recreational opportunities that were degraded by the Lava Fire but does not include expanding or increasing recreation opportunities. Travel management actions are not needed to facilitate restoration activities.

Alteration of Grazing Management

Some commenters asked the Forest to consider grazing rest periods beyond the two years minimum as outlined in the Forest Plan. One commentor suggested the Forest use the Similarity Index method from the Ecological Site Inventory and that an index of 77% be used as the objective, quantitative measure to determine when grazing could resume. While the index of 77% is a feasible measure, the commentor did not identify any particular faults with current USFS Region 4 monitoring guidelines and procedures established in Forest Service Handbook 2209.13, Chapter 40.

Relationship of the Project to the Forest plan This project meets several management goals and objectives as outlined in the Forest Plan (Boise National Forest Land and Resources Management Plan, revised 2010) while addressing the identified purpose and need.

Mitigate the risks of hazard trees:

• FROB03: “Identify safety hazards on Forest classified roads, establish improvement priorities, correct or mitigate the hazard.”

Restore or manage desired vegetation attributes and re-establish native plant communities to improve post-fire watersheds:

• VEOB06: “Determine high-priority areas for vegetation management actions that restore or maintain vegetation desired attributes.”

Protect the fire-damaged landscape from unauthorized access:

• REOB20: “During fine-scale analyses in areas where recreational trails are identified as a potential concern or problem contributing to degradation to other resources, evaluate and document the location of the trail degradation and prioritize opportunities to mitigate effects.”

Repair damage to forest infrastructure:

• FRGO01: “Provide and maintain a safe, efficient Forest transportation system that meets resource management and access needs, while mitigating degrading resource effects,” and

• FRGO02: “Provide and maintain safe and efficient Forest facilities.”

Recover the economic value of fire-damaged trees:

• SEGO03: “Develop sustainable land uses and management strategies that contribute to economic development goals.”

Project Screening Legal and Regulatory Considerations Given the nature of the project, the responsible official is requesting documentation to demonstrate compliance with the following legal and regulatory considerations in addition to

NEPA:

☒ NFMA/Land Management Plan

☒ Endangered Species Act (ESA)

☒ Sensitive Species (FSM 2670)

☒ National Historic Preservation Act

(NHPA)

☒ Tribal Consultation

☒ Clean Air Act (CAA)

☒ Clean Water Act (CWA)

☒ Pertinent Executive Orders

Special Management Areas:

☒ Roadless

Agencies and Persons Consulted The Line Officer/Responsible Official conducted internal scoping with pertinent resource specialists and posted a description of the project proposal on the Boise National Forest web page on November 20, 2024. The Forest included this project in a combined public scoping effort for post-fire restoration across the Boise National Forest. The Forest sent invitations for public comment to 545 email addresses through the GovDelivery system on November 20, 2024. The Forest Public Affairs Officer sent a concurrent news release to 87 recipients. The Forest received 22 comments.

Upon further refinement of the purpose and need and proposed actions, the Forest published a second public scoping notice to 306 email addresses through GovDelivery on March 7th, 2025, ending on March 17, 2025. The forest received 12 additional comments. A summary of the comments and consideration by the Forest Service is documented in the project record.

Upon release of the EA/FONSI on April 9, 2025, the Forest sent invitations for public comment to 307 project subscribers through the GovDelivery system. A legal notice for the 30-day comment period was published in the Idaho Statesman on April 9, 2025. The Forest received five comment letters. A summary of the comments and Forest Service responses are documented in the project record.

Lava EA/FONSI/DN 16

Supporting Project Documentation

Table 4. Applicable project files documentation to support analysis Documentation Type File Name

Combined Scoping Letter, Map, News Release, and GovDelivery Notification Report – November 2024

20241120_FireImpacts_ScopingLetter 20241120_FireImpacts_ScopingMap 20241121_FireImpacts_ScopingNewsRelease 20241120_FireImpacts_GovDNoticeReport

Scoping Notice, Proposed Action Report, and GovDelivery Notification Report – March 2025

20250306_Lava_Scoping_GovDNoticeReport.pdf 20250305_Lava_Scoping_PAR.pdf 20250306_Lava_Scoping_GovDeliveryNotification.pdf

EA/FONSI Legal Notice and Gov Delivery Notification Report for the notice of availability and invitation to comment – April 2025

20250409_Lava_LegalNoticeEAComments 20250409_Lava_EA_GovDNoticeReport

Project Comment Consideration documentation 20250409_Lava_ScopingCommentConsideration 20250409_FireImpacts_ScopingCommentConsideration 20250603_Lava_EAFONSICommentConsideration

Consultation with Federally Recognized Tribes Consultation with federally recognized tribes has been conducted according to established protocols.

Table 5. Applicable project file documentation to support analysis Documentation Type File Name

Consultation records with Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of the Duck Valley Reservation, 20241017_ShoshonePaiute-ConsultationBriefingPapers_WithNotes.docx 20241202_ShoshonePaiuteConsultationLetter_2024FireImpacts_SIGNED.pdf 20250305_ShoshonePaiuteConsultationLetter_Lava-SnagNellie_SIGNED

Consultation records with Shoshone-Bannock Tribes

20241010_ShoshoneBannock-Staff-to-Staff_BriefingPapersNOTES.pdf 20241202_ShoshoneBannockConsultationLetter_2024FireImpacts_SIGNED.pdf 20250305_ShoshoneBannockConsultationLetter_Lava-SnagNellie_SIGNED

Consultation records with the Nez Perce Tribe

20241202_NezPerceConsultationLetter_2024FireImpacts_SIGNED.pdf 20241202_NezPerceConsultationForm-LavaRestorationProject.pdf 20241120_NezPerce-StafftoStaffBriefingPapers.pdf (not formal consultation) 20250305_NezPerceConsultationLetter_Lava-SnagNellie_SIGNED 20250305_NezPerceConsultationForm-Lava 20250319_NezPerce_StaffToStaffMeeting_Notes

Environmental Impacts:

How would our management actions affect the environment?

The following sections describe how the project complies with the relevant laws, regulations, policies, and the Forest Plan, which provide the basis for thresholds for significance. Consistency with relevant laws, regulations, policies, and Forest Plan standards ensures that the proposed action does not exceed thresholds for significance and supporting analysis and rationale for consistency are provided to reach a finding of no significant impact (FONSI). The NEPA: Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) section includes further analysis prepared to discuss additional effects and address potential issues raised by the public and resource specialists.

Lava EA/FONSI/DN 17

Issues Considered for Analysis 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 interdisciplinary team (IDT) was able to address public concerns through design of the project. To warrant detailed analysis, an issue must be within the scope of the analysis, must not already be decided by law, regulation, or previous decision; must be open to scientific analysis; and must require analysis for making a reasoned choice from among the range of alternatives. The Forest Service has not identified any issues that drove an alternative, modified an alternative, or resulted in significant effects nor presented unresolved conflict with the Proposed Action.

Consideration of No Action: What would happen if we take no action?

Taking no action means the Forest Service would not implement portions of this proposed action that involve commercial removal of hazard trees and fire-damaged trees (salvage) and subsequent reforestation and revegetation of those fire-impacted areas. Hazard tree mitigation would still occur;

however, this work would be completed on a slower implementation timeline due to internal capacity limitations. Road maintenance, infrastructure repairs, and trail maintenance and repair would occur as part of the Forest program of work as funding and capacity allows. Removing area salvage from the project would reduce opportunities for local economic contributions and would likely delay implementation of reforestation actions in those areas.

There is considerable variability and uncertainty around the anticipated results of natural recovery throughout the fire area. No action would not allow for artificial regeneration (planting) or revegetation of non-forested areas.

All ongoing authorized activities and current management strategies in the analysis area would be expected to continue. The analysis below uses the consideration of no action to provide context for the effects analysis and findings.

Consideration of the Proposed Action: What would happen if we implemented the proposal?

If the full proposed action is authorized, hazard tree mitigations along NFS roads will be conducted sooner, reducing public risk. Associated reforestation/revegetation will trend stands towards desired Forest Plan conditions for both vegetation and wildlife. Reforestation will also benefit soil stability and enhance soil retention in the long-term, aiding the natural watershed recovery. Some short-term negative effects will occur as described below and in appliable technical reports, but overall, no significant effects will occur, and the project area will trend towards Forest Plan desired conditions.

National Forest Management Act (NFMA) – Land Management Plan Consistency This project was developed to be consistent with Forest-wide, resource area, and Management Area 16 standards and guidelines. Applicable Standards and Guidelines:

• informed areas that were/would be considered for certain management activities;

• informed areas that have been/would be eliminated from certain management activities; and/or

• informed types of management activities proposed and/or were incorporated as design criteria to guide implementation of applicable management activities (see Appendix A – Design Features).

Consistency of the proposed activities with Forest Plan direction has been documented in the Forest Plan Consistency Checklist in the project record.

Lava EA/FONSI/DN 18

Table 6. Additional project file documentation that supports analysis for the Lava Restoration Project.

Documentation Type File Name Botanical Biological Evaluation 20250408_Lava_BotanyReport Wildlife Biological Evaluation 20250408_Lava_WildlifeReport Biological Assessment for the USFWS 20250416_Lava_BA Biological Opinion and Letter of Concurrence from the USFWS 20250604_Lava_BO-LOC_SIGNED USFWS ECOS-IPaC online species list 20250123_Lava_IPAC_SpeciesList Fisheries Letter to the File – Westslope Cutthroat Trout 20250227_Lava_FisheriesReport_WCT Hydrology and Soils Report 20250408_Lava_HydroSoilsReport Invasive Species Report 20250408_Lava_WeedsReport Silviculture Report 20250408_Lava_SilvicultureReport Recreation / Visual Quality Report 20250408_Lava_RecVisualReport Notice of Intent to Phase NHPA Section 106 for the Lava Restoration Project 20250403_Lava_SHPOConsultationRecord

Notification of SHPO Response 20250403_Lava_CliftonEmailSHPO Clean Water Act Checklist 20250223_Lava_CWA_Checklist

Other Law, Regulation, and Policy Consistency The Forest considered all relevant Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, Candidate, Sensitive (TEPC/S), management indicator species (MIS), Forest Watch species, and other species of concern for this analysis. The proposed activities will not impact many of these species for various reasons, such as the project area does not provide source habitat or special habitat features, or it is not within the species’ range. See Table 6 above for documented rationale.

Endangered Species Act (Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species and Critical Habitat) The Boise National Forest has consulted with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) about the project and effects consistent with Section 7 of the ESA. The project will be implemented to be consistent with the ESA and Biological Opinion and Letter of Concurrence, which was issued by the USFWS on June 4, 2025.

Boise National Forest specialists reviewed the proposal and made the following determinations for threatened and proposed species and critical habitat that occur or have the potential to occur within the project area. The rationale for the determinations is provided in the Biological Assessment, the Wildlife Biological Evaluation, the Botany Biological Evaluation, and the Fisheries letter to the file. At present no endangered species are known to occur within the project area. The Forest Service would reinitiate consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service per 50 CFR 402.16 if such a need is identified at any point in the project. Rationale supporting the determination of effect for species that are addressed in the Biological Opinion from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) are briefly summarized below and are available in the Biological Assessment. Determinations for these and other relevant threatened, endangered, proposed, and/or candidate species are provided in Table 7.

Bull Trout and Bull Trout Critical Habitat

The project was designed to minimize impacts to ESA-listed bull trout and their Critical Habitat that exists in the project area. For area salvage, this includes a 280-foot no treatment buffer around ESA-listed designated/occupied streams. This distance was developed to protect streams from potential effects and represents more than two site potential tree heights in area salvage proposed units. As a result, any tree

Lava EA/FONSI/DN 19 removal outside the 280-foot buffer would not directly or indirectly impact bull trout individuals and/or designated critical habitat. See the Biological Assessment for further details on effects to bull trout and their critical habitat.

Hazard Tree Mitigation will occur within RCAs of ESA-listed bull trout and their Critical Habitat; however, this activity will only occur within small portions of the RCAs. Due to the limited treatment areas and the fact that tree canopies already burned, only a slight reduction in stream shading is likely. Project activities will cause increase in sediment delivery, but in most cases, this increase is expected to be localized, immeasurable, and insignificant to bull trout and its critical habitat.

Within Woody Creek (considered potentially occupied), roadside hazard tree mitigation could affect bull trout individuals residing near the treatment unit during project implementation and could also affect streambank condition. Of the 58 total project miles only two road segments parallel the stream for 211 feet and 160 feet, respectively (371 feet total) and are located 25 feet and 15 feet away from the stream.

Additionally, log trucks traveling over 13 pre-existing stream crossings (e.g., culverts or bridges at Chief Eagle Eye, Woody, Mesa, and Third Fork Creeks) could affect bull trout individuals through disturbance and displacement and could also impact streambank condition. This temporary effect is anticipated for a short duration (hours), would be localized to the sites being treated, and would occur over current background levels of regular public use. Because of the existence of the uncertainty of this disturbance potential, the Forest has determined that this project is likely to adversely affect bull trout and its designated Critical Habitat. See the Biological Assessment for further details on effects to bull trout and their Critical Habitat.

The proposed actions also have the potential to impact the streambank condition along the same two road segments (Woody Creek) during implementation. The extent of this effect is limited (371 total feet) and localized to the sites being treated.

During analysis one section of potential bull trout spawning and rearing habitat near NFS Road 625G was found to be very close to proposed hazard tree mitigation activities. To avoid the risk to spawning and rearing habitat, the Forest Service developed mitigation. See the Mitigation section below for details.

Whitebark Pine

Direct negative effects to whitebark pine are possible. This includes accidental damage or destruction of whitebark pine individuals and disturbance of seed banks, during hazard tree mitigation, area salvage, fuels treatments, road and trail maintenance, and reforestation. Dead and dying whitebark pine may be intentionally removed if they are deemed an immanent hazard to human safety.

This project is expected to result in ground disturbance from heavy equipment use within whitebark pine habitat. However, applicable design features will reduce, although not entirely eliminate negative impacts to whitebark pine. Over the long term, the project is expected to benefit whitebark pine through restoration and reforestation efforts, including planting of disease-resistant whitebark pine seedlings.

Lava EA/FONSI/DN 20

Table 7. Threatened, endangered, proposed or candidate species and critical habitat effect determinations

Species/Habitat Status Proposed or Designated

Critical Habitat Present?

Determi-nation

Brief Rationale (or refer to other project documentation)

Bull Trout Threatened Yes LAA See rationale above and the Biological Assessment.

Whitebark pine Threatened No LAA See rationale above and the Biological Assessment.

Slickspot peppergrass Threatened No NE Species doesn’t exist in the analysis area.

Canada Lynx Threatened No NLAA

Very little suitable habitat occurs in the project area and no lynx have been observed.

Remaining habitat would remain suitable. See the Biological Assessment.

Wolverine Threatened No NLAA

Very little suitable habitat occurs in the project area and no wolverine have been observed.

Remaining habitat would remain suitable. See the Biological Assessment.

Northern Idaho ground squirrel Threatened No NE

The project area lacks the sage, bunchgrass, and forb habitats preferred by this species.

Project is outside historical and current range of species.

Monarch Butterfly

Proposed Threatened No NLJ/LAA

Limited milkweed habitat occurs within the fire perimeter. Design features and RCAs will protect milkweed or monarchs if found. Potential for effects area low. See the Biological Assessment.

NE – no effect; NLAA – may affect, not likely to adversely affect; LAA – may affect, likely to adversely affect; NLJ - not likely to jeopardize the continued existence or adversely modify critical habitat

Sensitive Species (FSM 2670) Boise National Forest specialists reviewed the proposal and made the following determinations (Table 8) for Forest Service Region 4 Sensitive Species (Forest Service Manual 2670) that occur or have the potential to occur or for which there is source habitat within the analysis area. The rationale for the determinations is provided in the supporting project documentation (Wildlife and Botany Biological Evaluations and Fisheries letter to the file).

Table 8. Sensitive species impact determinations Species Determination

White-headed woodpecker, American goshawk, American three-toed woodpecker, boreal owl, fisher, flammulated owl, great gray owl, mountain quail, gray wolf, bald eagle, Columbia spotted frog, Sevendevils onion, small phacelia

May impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend towards federal listing or loss of viability to the population or species

Peregrine falcon, Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep, spotted bat, Townsend’s big-eared bat, greater sage grouse, Columbian sharp-tailed grouse, Southern Idaho ground squirrel, common loon, Suckley’s cuckoo bumble bee, Sacajawea’s bitterroot, bryum moss

No Impact

Lava EA/FONSI/DN 21

National Historic Preservation Act – Section 106 Review The pertinent specialist has reviewed the proposed action and made the following determination regarding Section 106 compliance:

No adverse effects to historic properties - 36 CFR 800.5(b). Section 106 Review has been completed and National Register eligible cultural sites are located within the project area. Modifications can avoid/protect cultural resources.

On March 25, 2025, the Forest formally notified the Idaho State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) that it proposed to use a phased approach to complete the identification and evaluation of historic properties in the project area. On April 3, 2025, SHPO concurred with the Forest’s proposal.

Phasing is consistent with the federal regulations, “Protection of Historic Properties” (36 CFR Part 800), implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470), as amended.

The Forest Service Intermountain Region’s NHPA Section 106 and NEPA Compliance letter dated May 6, 2020, also provides direction on the use of phasing for large, multi-year projects to improve forest health.

Under the phased approach the Forest will complete additional consultation with the Idaho SHPO on proposed management activities associated with the Lava Restoration Project. Consultation will be completed prior to implementation of proposed management activities and include as appropriate the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and potentially affected Indian tribes. Forest standard operating procedures are to avoid and protect sites, including inadvertent discoveries.

Special Management Areas A portion of the Snowbank Idaho Roadless Area (IRA) is in the project area. The only proposed actions within the IRA are reforestation and hazard tree mitigation along existing trails. This project is consistent with the Idaho Roadless Rule as it does not include road construction/reconstruction or minerals activities, nor does hazard tree mitigation meet the definition of timber cutting, sale, or removal, which is prohibited except for personal or administrative use (36 CFR §223); or when incidental to the implementation of a management activity not otherwise prohibited (e.g., trail clearing).

Clean Air Act The project is consistent with the Clean Air Act. Pile burning and jackpot burning associated with activity fuels includes careful planning (prescription development) to minimize impacts on air quality by restricting such activities to conditions when smoke dispersal would be optimal.