Aquatic Restoration Environmental Assessment

206 Pages·2014·7.28 MB·English

by  Malheur National Forest

Aquatic Restoration

Environmental Assessment
Malheur National Forest
August 2014
Malheur National Forest Aquatic Restoration Environmental Assessment
For More Information Contact:
Steve Namitz
PO Box 909 / 431 Patterson Bridge Road
John Day, OR 97845
541-575-3000

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the
basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status,
parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply
to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program
information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at [phone]
(voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights,
1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call [phone] (voice) or (202) 720-
6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
Malheur National Forest Aquatic Restoration Environmental Assessment
Table of Contents

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 2
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need for the Proposal ................................................................................ 6
Chapter 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives ............................................................................... 14
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences .......................................... 28
Fisheries and Hydrology ........................................................................................................... 28
Wildlife ..................................................................................................................................... 73
Botany ....................................................................................................................................... 93
Soils ......................................................................................................................................... 108
Fire and Fuels .......................................................................................................................... 113
Heritage Resources ................................................................................................................. 119
Recreation ............................................................................................................................... 122
Climate Change ....................................................................................................................... 127
Range Management ................................................................................................................. 129
Environmental Justice ............................................................................................................. 136
USDA Civil Rights Policy ...................................................................................................... 137
Prime Farmland, Rangeland, and Forest Land ........................................................................ 137
Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources ..................................................... 137
National Forest Management Act ........................................................................................... 137
Finding of No Significant Impact ........................................................................................... 138
Chapter 4 Agencies and Persons Consulted ............................................................................... 142
List of Preparers ...................................................................................................................... 143
Appendix A Project Categories and Project Design Criteria...................................................... 144
Appendix B – Examples .............................................................................................................. 186
Appendix C – References ............................................................................................................ 192
Malheur National Forest Aquatic Restoration Environmental Assessment

1
Malheur National Forest Aquatic Restoration Environmental Assessment
Introduction
We prepared this draft environmental assessment to determine whether effects of the proposed
activities may be significant enough to prepare an environmental impact statement. By preparing
this environmental assessment, we are fulfilling agency policy and direction to comply with the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and
regulations. For more details of the proposed action, see Chapter 2 Proposed Action and
Alternatives.
This Aquatic Restoration Environmental Assessment includes a number of individual actions that,
when grouped together, represent an overall watershed and fish habitat restoration program that
may occur at many individual sites across the Malheur National Forest. The specific restoration
actions can occur on a routine basis or sporadically and over an extended period, starting in 2014.
A general plan for implementation would tier to the national priority subwatersheds and regional
focus watersheds that have been identified on the Malheur National Forest utilizing the Regional
Aquatic Restoration Strategy (USDA 2007) and the Watershed Condition Framework (USDA
2011) as well as the schedule listed on the Malheur National Forest Accelerated Vegetation
Restoration Priority Watershed Map (see Figure 10)
On January 28, 2013 the U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Bureau of Land
Management (Oregon State Office) and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, submitted the Fish Habitat
Restoration Activities Affecting ESA-Listed Animal and Plant Species and their Designated or
Proposed Critical Habitat and Designated Essential Fish Habitat under MSA found in Oregon,
Washington and parts of California, Idaho and Nevada (ARBA II) to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries
Service on the effects of funding or carrying out restoration activities in Oregon and Washington.
The 2013 Aquatic Restoration Biological Assessment is based on the Aquatic Restoration
Biological Assessment (USDA et al. 2006), and the Biological Opinions (NMFS 2007 and
USFWS 2007). The 2007 Biological Opinions expired in 2012 and triggered re-initiation. Some
examples of projects completed on the Forest under the former biological assessment and
biological opinion include riparian planting, stream restoration augmenting with large wood,
culvert replacement for fish passage, livestock exclosures, juniper removal, and installation of
fish screens on diversion ditches.
National Marine Fisheries Service issued the Endangered Species Act – Section 7 Programmatic
Consultation Conference and Biological Opinion And Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Response for Reinitiation of Aquatic Restoration
Activities in States of Oregon and Washington (ARBO II) on April 25, 2013 and the US Fish and
Wildlife Service issued the Endangered Species Act – Section 7 Consultation Programmatic
Biological Opinion for Aquatic Restoration Activities in the States of Oregon, Washington and
portions of California, Idaho and Nevada (ARBO II) on July 1, 2013.
When projects are implemented on the Malheur National Forest within the categories of activities
described in the Aquatic Restoration Biological Assessment II, and the standards of the biological
assessment and the terms and conditions of these biological opinions are followed, further
consultation for threatened endangered and sensitive species is not required.
The categories of activities and their site-specific project design criteria approach are the basis of
this Environmental Assessment which provides each Malheur National Forest administrative unit
with a consistent methodology to design, implement, monitor, and document watershed and
aquatic restoration activities.
2
Malheur National Forest Aquatic Restoration Environmental Assessment
Location of the Proposed Action
This analysis covers aquatic restoration projects that would occur within the administrative
boundaries of the Forest and adjacent lands where restoration activities would aid in the recovery
of threatened and endangered species and impaired water bodies, and achieve Forest Service
aquatic restoration goals. Contained within the geographic area, site-specific action areas are
located in fish and non-fish bearing streams, riparian areas, and uplands that have a direct link to
restoration of aquatic habitat and watershed function. The project area includes all areas to be
affected directly or indirectly by the aquatic restoration activities and not merely the immediate
project area.
The 1,459,422-acre Malheur National Forest (Forest or Malheur) and 240,000 acres of the
Ochoco National Forest that are managed by the Malheur National Forest, Emigrant Creek
Ranger District, for a total of nearly 1.7 million acres in eastern Oregon comprise the project area
(see Figure 1). These 1.7 million acres are the acreage considered as the Malheur National Forest
for purposes of this Environmental Assessment.
Between the inception of the project and the release of the preliminary environmental assessment,
approximately 13,080 acres of private lands were acquired by the Malheur National Forest in the
headwaters of the John Day River. These acquired lands automatically become part of the
management areas within which they are located (36 CFR 254.3 (f)) which includes portions of
general forest (MA 1); rangeland (MA 2); riparian areas (MA 3); big game winter range (MA 4A);
semi-primitive motorized recreation (MA 11); visual corridor (MA (14); and wildlife emphasis
area (MA 15). At this time this area will be managed as the surrounding lands, with the exception
of adjacent wilderness.
3
Malheur National Forest Aquatic Restoration Environmental Assessment
The

Figure 1 Aquatic Restoration Project Area – Malheur National Forest
4
Malheur National Forest Aquatic Restoration Environmental Assessment

5
Malheur National Forest Aquatic Restoration Environmental Assessment
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need for the Proposal
The purpose of this project is to maintain or enhance watershed health, species recovery and
diversity as required by the Land and Resource Management Plans (Forest Plans) for the Malheur
and Ochoco National Forests (1990 and 1989 respectively).
The proposed project categories and activities, with their specific project design criteria
(appendix A), as defined in ARBA II and ARBO II, are predictable as to their effects to
Endangered Species Act and Magnuson Stevens Act listed aquatic species. This incorporation by
reference to ARBA II and ARBO II, includes program administration and general aquatic
conservation measures, in addition to the project design criteria. Seventeen project categories are
covered by this environmental assessment, with the omission of ‘nutrient enhancement’, ‘invasive
plant treatments’, and ‘sudden oak death treatments’, which are not applicable to the Malheur
National Forest. ARBA II and ARBO II provide the basis for consistent implementation and
effects analysis for the project categories and activities at the forest and site specific scale, and the
agreement between the Forest Service and the US Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine
Fisheries Service on their effects provides an efficient approach to environmental analysis and
future implementation for those projects that meet the design criteria on the Malheur National
Forest and on adjacent private lands with willing partners that benefit public lands. The need of
this forest wide project is based on providing a more efficient process to increase implementation
of projects that would aid in the recovery of threatened and sensitive fish species located on the
forest, their associated habitats, watershed health, and water quality.
 The Watershed Condition Framework (USDA Forest Service 2011) identified 63 percent of
the subwatersheds across the Forest as impaired or functioning at risk. Impaired or
functioning at risk subwatersheds receive ratings based on reduced conditions for water
quality, aquatic habitat, riparian vegetation, and roads and trails indicators.
 The Environmental Baseline for Matrix of Pathways and Indicators (National Marine
Fisheries Service Environmental and Technical Services Division Habitat Conservation
Branch August 1996) further reinforced these condition assessments showing diminished fish
habitat conditions for steelhead, bull trout, and redband trout – the majority of fish habitat
indicators evaluated were found to be functioning at risk or functioning at unacceptable risk
for aquatic habitats and water quality (see Figure 18).
 The State of Oregon, National Marine Fisheries Service, and Northwest Power and
Conservation Council developed large-scale recovery plans that include areas of the Forest.
These plans identified elements that are impeding the recovery of watershed function, water
quality, species and or their designated critical habitats to help guide restoration actions in
identified watersheds. (See Table 3)
o The Middle Columbia River Steelhead Recovery Plan (Carmichael 2007) identified
limiting factors for steelhead in the John Day Subbasin. Examples included altered
hydrology and sediment routing, along with degraded floodplains, riparian communities,
stream channel structure, and water quality (temperature).
o The Columbia River Bull Trout Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002),
identified limiting factors for bull trout in both the John Day and Malheur Subbasins.
Examples include altered hydrology and sediment routing, aquatic passage, degraded
floodplains, riparian communities, stream channel structure, water quality (temperature),
and introduction of non-native species.
 The Malheur River Subbasin Assessment and Management Plan for Fish and Wildlife
Mitigation (Malheur Watershed Council and Burns Paiute Tribe 2004) identified aquatic focal
species (Chinook salmon, redband trout, and bull trout). The Malheur Subbasin Coalition
selected these species based on their cultural, biological, and esthetic value. The primary
6
Malheur National Forest Aquatic Restoration Environmental Assessment
limiting habitat attributes are channel conditions, riparian conditions, flow conditions
(emphasis on low flows), and obstructions (habitat connectivity, aquatic passage).
 The John Day Subbasin Plan (Columbia-Blue Mountain Resource Conservation and
Development Area and Northwest Power and Conservation Council 2005) identified aquatic
focal species (summer steelhead, Chinook salmon, bull trout, westslope cutthroat trout and
redband trout) and identified limiting factors that were having effects to those species. Those
limiting factors include habitat diversity, sediment load, aquatic passage, stream
temperatures, and key habitat quality and quantity. Flow was an additional limiting factor
specifically identified for spring Chinook salmon, primarily in the mainstem Middle Fork
John Day River.
The previous plans listed aid in directing the need for action and help prioritize restoration
projects on the Forest and on adjacent lands that benefit public values.
Proposed aquatic restoration activities would be consistent with the Forest Plans. Restoration
actions would be implemented through the use of project specific design criteria using a
consistent methodology to design, implement, monitor, and provide documentation as outlined in
the Aquatic Restoration Biological Opinion (ARBO II 2013).
Public Involvement
The proposal was listed in the Malheur National Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) in
January, 2014. On January 17, 2014, a summary of the project proposal was mailed to 131
individuals and groups. This included Federal, State and local agencies, Grant County Court,
Tribes, nearby property owners, advocacy groups and the general public. Considerations of
comments brought up during public involvement are included in the project record.
The proposed action and summary of environmental consequences was mailed to 127 individuals
and groups for review during the 30-day comment period. The information was also posted on
the forest web site. A legal notice for this comment period was published in Grant County,
Oregon’s Blue Mountain Eagle on June 25, 2014.
The Forest received 4 comment letters during the 30 day comment period. During the 30 day
comment period the Forest staff met with various individuals and groups to discuss the project
and answer questions. All comments received related to this project were reviewed, discussed by
the interdisciplinary team and the line officer, and responses to each of these comments were
recorded. The response to these comments is available upon request and will remain in the project
record.
This analysis and a draft decision notice are now made available for review, objection, resolution
meetings, and pre-decisional administrative review pursuant to 36 CFR 218 subparts A and B.
Issues
Issues for the Aquatic Restoration Project were identified through public scoping and internal
input from project resource specialists. Similar items were combined into one statement where
appropriate.
Key issues are defined as those directly or indirectly caused by implementing the proposed
action; however, the effects cannot be reduced by normal best management practices or project
design criteria. Usually an alternative is developed to address key issues.
7