Control Lake timber sales : final environmental impact statement. Vol. I.

474 Pages·1998·29.5 MB·English

by  United States. Forest Service. Alaska Region

Historic, Archive Document
Do not assume content reflects current
scientific knowledge, policies, or practices.

^SDil
^9-3
United States Control Lake
Department of
Agriculture
Timber Sales
Forest Service
Tongass
National
Forest
R10-MB-369a
Final
Cl
May 1998 Environmental Impact Sti^t^ent
-H ct >
rn ZSl
Volume l—EIS rn Cl
O1O Ooi
r" >
O'^r* > r—
ni
m
C-l?
Cl
o
c;r
< r.'D
Foster Wheeler Environmental Corporation
10900 NE 8th Street
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Contract No. 53-0109-3-00369
Control Lake Environmental impact Statement
.
Final Environmental Impact Statement
Control Lake
United States Department of Agriculture
—
Forest Service Alaska Region
Alaska
LeadAgency U.S.D.A. Forest Service
Tongass National Forest
Ketchikan Administrative Office
Responsible Official Forest Supervisor
Ketchikan Administrative Area
Tongass National Forest
Federal Building
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
For Further Information Dave Arrasmith
Planning Staff Officer
Ketchikan Administrative Area
Tongass National Forest
Federal Building
Ketchikan, Alaska99901
[phone]
Abstract
The Forest Serviceproposes to implementthe Tongass LandManagement Plan by harvesting
timberintheControlLakeProjectArea. Timbervolumewouldbeofferedtotimbercompanies
undertheTongassNationalForestTimberSaleProgram. Theactionsanalyzedin thisEIS are
designedtoimplementdirectioncontainedintheTongassLandManagementPlan (TLMP
1997). TheFinalEISdescribesfivealternativeswhichprovidedifferentcombinationsof
resource outputs and spatial locations ofharvest units. The alternatives are: Alternative 1, No
Action, proposes no newharvestfromthe ProjectAreaatthistime; Alternative 10emphasizes
unitsthatcan be mostreadily harvested by small operators and completely avoids harvest in
theHonkerDivide,LogjamCreek,andRioRobertswatersheds, andtheWesternPeninsula;
Alternative 11 avoidsharvestintheHonkerDividearea,upperLogjamCreek,andmostofthe
RioRoberts watershed, limitsharvestin theWestern Peninsula, and allows harvestnearthe
1997ForestPlanRevisionimplementationlevelinmostotherzones;Alternative 12allows
harvestatthefull 1997ForestPlanRevisionimplementationlevelinallzonesthatpermit
harvest; andAlternative 13 was formed in response to public and agency comments and
combineselementsofAlternatives 10and 11
This page left intentionally blank
SUMMARY
Control LakeFinal EIS
Summary
introduction
In compliance with theNational Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and otherrelevant state
and Federal laws and regulations, the Forest Servicehas prepared this Final Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) onthe effects oftimberharvest in the Control Lake ProjectArea on
Prince ofWales Island, Alaska. This Final EIS is designedto inform the public ofthe pro-
posed action and its effects, andto respondto public comments on the Supplemental Draft EIS.
Changes Between
Supplemental Draft EIS and
Final EIS
This Final EIS incorporates several changes from the Supplemental Draft EIS. First, it incor-
porates refined information resulting from additional fieldreconnaissance on many ofthe units.
Second, itresponds topublic and agency inputonthe Supplemental DraftEIS. Finally, it
presents revised analyses ofthe refined harvestunits and alternatives.
Refined information was incorporated into the Final EIS from fieldreconnaissance performed
by Forest Service staffon anumberofunits and roads. This information resulted in refinement
to unitboundaries and road routing and included dropping some units androads and changing
a numberofunitsto helicopter. In addition, unit boundarieswere refinedto fully implement
the bufferwidths defined by the TLMP Revision (1997).
Public and agency inputon the Supplemental Draft EIS included written commentsreceived
and
comments from meetings withthe public, organizations, and state and federal agencies.
Appendix B presentsthe written comments and Forest Service responses. Specific concerns
regardingwildlife, biodiversity. HonkerDivide, the Elevenmile area, subsistence, andother
issues ledtothe development ofanew alternative. Alternative 13, which is amodified version
ofAlternatives 10 and 11. Alternative 13 is analyzed inthe Final EIS. The Final EIS also
incorporates changes in accessmanagement ofthe existing road system based onpublic
comments.
New analysis was requiredto analyzethe effects ofrefinedAlternatives 10, 11, and 12, and
new Alternative 13 in Chapters 2 and4 ofthe Final EIS. Further, because ofthe recent
completion ofthenew Forest Plan, many analyseswere revisedso thatthey tiermore closely
with those inthe ForestPlan Final EIS. Unitand road cardswererevised and are presented in
Appendices D and E, respectively.
Control Lake Final EIS SUMMARY
iii
The ROD forthe 1997 TLMP identified Control Lake as a Category 3 timbersale project.
Projects in Category 3 needtobe consistentwith all the applicable management direction of
the revisedplan, except fornew standards and guidelines forwildlife, which address landscape
connectivity, endemic terrestrial mammals, northern goshawk, andmarten. These new
standards and guidelines were implemented in amannerthatwas least disruptiveto the design
and implementation ofthe project. Specific modifications were madeto units in VCU 597.2 to
maintain high value marten habitat.
Proposed Action
The Forest Service proposes to harvest upto an estimated 86 million board feet (MMBF) of
timber, constructorreconstructan estimated 84 miles ofroads, anduse existing logtransfer
facilities (LTFs) atNaukati, WinterHarbor, and other locationsto implementthe action
alternatives. Timbersale offerings from this harvestwill be made available tothe Tongass
National Forest Timber Sale Program. Based on this environmental study and analysis, the
Forest Supervisorwill decide whetherand how to make timberavailable irom the Control Lake
Project Area. Forest Supervisordecisions will include:
• The volume to make available from this Project Area in multiple timber sales;
• The location and design oftimberharvest units;
• The location and design ofroad systems;
• Road management objectives including closures forresource protection and economics;
• Necessary mitigation measures and monitoring;
• Whethertheremay be a significantrestriction on subsistence use, and ifso, related findings
and measures to minimize impacts on subsistence users; and
• Whetherto adjustthe boundaries ofsmall Old-growth Habitat Reserves, which would
require a non-significant Forest Plan Amendment.
Purpose and Need
The purpose and need forthis project isto implement direction contained in the 1997 Tongass
Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), to help provide asustained level oftimber
supplyto meet annual and Forest Plan planning cycle marketdemand, andto provide diverse
opportunities fornaturalresource employment, consistentwith providing forthe multiple use
and sustained yield ofall renewable forestresources. Anotherobjective isto provide timber
volume thatwill contributetothe Ketchikan AreaTimber Sale Program. The alternatives and
actions considered are possible approaches to meeting this purpose and need. The EIS study
process was designed to help ensure that, in meetingthis purpose and need, the Forest Service
makesthe most informed decision possible forthis projectarea specifically, and forthe
TongassNational Forestgenerally. The Control Lake TimberSales Projectcould provide up to
maximum ofapproximately 86 MMBF oftimber, given the guidance ofthe Forest Plan.
Underthe Forest Plan, approximately 45 percent ofthe ProjectArea is included in Land Use
Designations (LUDs)that allowprogrammedtimberharvest. The majority ofthe project is in
LUDs which do notallow programmed timberharvest. Thisprimarily includesthe Semi-
Remote Recreation LUD that covers the Elevenmile shore and mostofthe Western Peninsula
portion ofthe ProjectArea; the HonkerOld Growth HabitatReserve (OGHR) in the eastern
iv SUMMARY Control Lake Final EIS
portion ofthe ProjectArea; and, small OGHRs in the Rush Peak, Logjam, Steelhead and
Election Creekareas. A comparison ofthe desired future condition forthe TimberProduction,
Modified Landscape and Scenic Viewshed LUDs in the ProjectArea with the existing condi-
tion shows an opportunity to harvest suitable stands ofold growth and to produce managed
productive stands capable oflong-term timberproduction. Approximately 22,800 acres of
mature and overmature timberare suitable and available forprogrammed timberharvestwithin
those LUDswhich allow timberharvest.
Section 101 ofthe Tongass TimberReform Actof1990 (TTRA) directs the USDA Forest
Service“... tothe extentconsistentwith providing forthe multiple use and sustained yield of
all renewable forestresources, seekto provide a supply oftimberfrom the Tongass National
Forestwhich (1) meets the annual market demand fortimberfrom such forest and (2) meets the
market demand from such forest foreach planning cycle.” Section 101 ofthe TTRA specifies
thatForest Service effortsto seekto meetmarketdemand are subjectto appropriations.
National Forest ManagementAct (NFMA) requirements, and otherapplicable laws.
There is demonstrated mill capacity in theregiontoprocess the logs, ifthe supply oftimber is
available. There is also aprojected need forthetimbervolume being considered from this
projectarea(seeAppendix A, Final EIS) forthe Forest Service to come closertomeeting an
objective ofprovidingtimberundercontracttothe existing dependent industry, as ameans of
providing forstability in relation to fluctuatingmarket demand (Morse, 1995). There is a
substantial componentofthe economy ofSoutheast Alaskathat is dependenton aviable timber
industry. There is also aneed on Prince ofWales and Southeast Alaska fortimbersales to
supportagrowingnumberofsmall and medium sized operators and mills. Based on these
factors, the need forthe project is clearly indicated.
Public Participation
Public involvement inthe Control Lake Projectdecision-making process began formally on
September27, 1993 with the mailing ofthe scoping package, which invited comment on the
scope ofthe issues and areas ofmajorconcern to be addressed in the environmental analysis.
A news release was also issued and newspaperadvertisementswere also placed aboutthattime
containingmuch ofthe same information and inviting comments. A Notice ofIntent(NOl)to
prepare an EIS was published in the Federal Registeron October6, 1993. Public scoping
meetingswere held in Klawock, Thome Bay, and Ketchikan. Individual consultations also
tookplace between Control Lake projectteam members and communityrepresentatives,
environmental organizations, timber industry representatives, agency representatives, and other
interestedparties.
TheDraftEIS wasreleased in October 1995 and subsistence hearings andpublic open houses
were held in Klawock, Thome Bay, CoffmanCove, andKetchikan in December 1995. Many
commentswerereceived and reviewed and analyzed; responses areprovided in Appendix B of
the Supplemental Draft;EIS.
A NOI to preparea Supplemental DraftEIS was published in the Federal Registeron August
14, 1997. A newsrelease, announcingthe availability ofthis Supplemental Draft EIS was
issued. Public meetingswere held in Thome Bay, Klawock, andNaukati. Many other
meetingswereheldwith organizationsand agencies. Again, many commentswere received
and analyzed; responses areprovided inAppendix B ofthis Final EIS.
Control LakeFinal EIS SUMMARY V
1
Issues
Based on consultationwiththe public and government agencies,the scoping comments and
DraftEIS commentsreceived, the subsistencehearings, and internal scoping, seven issues were
identified thatwere determinedto be significant andwithinthe scope ofthis.EIS. These issues
have been addressedby alternative development(e.g., atotal of 12 different alternatives have
been developed and analyzed forthe project), with mitigation, orby analyzingthe effects in
terms ofthe issues. The seven significant issue areas are: (1) HonkerDivide; (2) Recreation
and Visual Quality; (3) Subsistence; (4) Wildlife Habitat and Biodiversity; (5) Fish Habitatand
WaterQuality; (6) Timber; and (7) Karst and Cave Resources.
Alternatives Considered
in
Detail
Fouralternatives are considered in detail in the Supplemental Draft EIS. These includetheNo
Action Alternative (Alternative 1) andthree action alternatives (Alternatives 10, 11, and 12).
Alternatives 3 and 5 were previously considered, butnotanalyzed in detail. Alternatives2, 4,
6, 7, 8, and 9 were previously analyzed in detail and presented in the DraftEIS (including
appendices), butareno longerbeing considered.
Alternative 1 The No Action alternative. Alternative 1, wouldresult in no additional timberharvestorroad
construction inthe Control Lake ProjectArea. This alternative serves as abaseline, against
which the three action alternatives are measured.
Alternative 10 Alternative 10 results in the harvest of964 acres in 31 harvest units producing26 MMBF of
net sawlog and utility volume. To implementthis harvest, approximately21 miles ofroad
would be constructed orreconstructed. This alternative does notscheduleharvest inthe
Honker Divide (“ridge-to-ridge”)north ofForest Road 30, in the UpperLogjam Creek area, in
Rio Roberts Watershed, orin the Western Peninsula. It attemptsto emphasize community-
based, value-added products by choosingunitsthat wouldbe more easilyharvestedby inde-
pendent and small operators. Units inthis alternative minimize road construction, are smaller,
and use conventional logging systems. This alternative was independently developed by a
group consisting ofenvironmental organization representatives, independenttimbercontrac-
tors, Alaskanatives, educators, business owners, and fishermen, most ofwhich are residentsof
Prince ofWales Island.
Alternative 1 IfAlternative 11 is implemented, itwould result in the harvestof2,980 acres in 91 harvest
units producing approximately 71 MMBF ofnew sawlogandutility volume. To implement
this harvest, approximately 62 miles ofroadwouldbe constructed orreconstructed. This
alternative was designedto be completely consistentwiththe 1997 Forest Plan Revision. It
avoids harvestwithin all ofthe Old-Growth Habitatand Semi-Remote Recreation LUD’s
includingthe HonkerDivide area, Rio Roberts Watershed, most ofthe Western Peninsula, and
otherareas. Alternative 11 reflects collaborative efforts betweenthe Forest Service and other
federal and state agencies.
Alternative 12 IfAlternative 12 were implemented, it wouldresultinthe harvestof3,769 acres in 112 harvest
units producing approximately 86 MMBF ofnew sawlog and utility volume. To implement
thisharvest, approximately 84 miles ofroadwouldbe constructedorreconstructed. This
Vi SUMMARY Control LakeFinal EIS