Draft Clear Creek management area plan/RMP amendment and environmental impact statement

159 Pages·1993·25 MB·English

by  United States. Bureau of Land Management. Hollister Planning Area

BLM LIBRARY
Draft
United States Department of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management
Bakersfield District
Hollister Resource Area September 1993
Clear Creek Management Area
Resource Management Plan
and
Environmental Impact Statement
BLM Mission Statement
The Bureau of Land Management is responsible for the balanced management of Public Lands
and resources and their various values so that they are considered in a combination that will best
serve the needs of the American people. Management is based upon the principles of multiple
use and sustained yield; a combination of uses that takes into account the long-term needs of
future generations for renewable and nonrenewable resources. These resources include
recreation, range, timber, minerals, watershed, fish and wildlife, wilderness, and natural, scenic,
scientific and cultural values.
BLM/CA/PL-93/017+1611
^
o
Printedon recycledpaper
^
%^
Jb2?0'&7^ cz far*- 3 Q.A"2-
t
DRAFT
CLEAR CREEK MANAGEMENT AREA
PLAN/RMP AMENDMENT AND
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
United States Department of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management
/y^^n
<t*/
'
State Director
California ^

INREPLY REFERTO:
United States Department of the Interior
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
CALIFORNIA STATE OFFICE
2800 Cottage Way
Sacramento, California 95825
1703
Dear Reviewer:
Enclosed for your review and comment is the Bureau of Land
Management's Draft Resource Management Plan Amendment and Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for the Clear Creek Management
Area in the Hollister Resource Area. These alternatives
address management issues identified during public meetings and
agency scoping conducted early in the planning process. The
selected alternative will guide natural resource management on
approximately 50,000 acres of public lands in San Benito and
Fresno Counties.
Comments concerning the Draft Plan Amendment/EIS will be
considered in preparing the Final Plan and EIS. Public
meetings (times, dates and places will be announced at a later
date) will be held in December to explain draft decisions and
to receive comments. For additional information please contact
the Hollister Resource Area at the address below or at (408)
637-8183.
All comments must be received by February 15, 1994.
Please send your comments to:
Hollister Area Manager
Bureau of Land Management
20 Hamilton Court
Hollister, CA 95023
Sincerely,
Edward L. Hastey
State Director
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SUMMARY
v
CHAPTER INTRODUCTION
1 - 1
Purpose and Need 3
Description of the Planning Area 4
Planning Process 5
Steps in Planning 5
Issues Selected for Analysis 7
Relation to Other Plans and Programs 9
CHAPTER 2 - ALTERNATIVES 11
Introduction 11
Management Guidance and Determinations Common to All Alternatives 11
Alternative 1 - No Action 13
Alternative 2 - Continued Implementation of Existing Management Plan 15
Alternative 3 - Dispersed OHV Use 18
Alternative 4 - Restricted OHV Use 21
Alternative 5 - OHV Closure 24
Alternative 6 - Enhancement of Natural Values 26
Selection of the Preferred Alternative 28
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts (Preferred Alternative) 29
CHAPTER 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 35
-
Clear Creek Management Area 35
Topography and Climate 35
Air Quality and Human Health 36
Vegetation 42
Special Status Plant Species 45
Special Status Animal Species 51
Watershed Resources 53
Geology and Minerals 62
Recreation/Social Setting 63
Overview 63
OHV use 65
Hunting 67
Hobby Gem and Mineral Collection 67
Economic Setting 68
CHAPTER 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 70
-
Introduction 70
Analysis Assumptions 70
Impact Topics Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis 70
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Common to All Alternatives 71
Alternative 1 - No Action 72
Impacts to Air Quality and Human Health 72
Impacts to Vegetation 73
Impacts to Special Status Animal Species 75
Impacts to Watershed Resources 75
Impacts to Recreation Resources 76
Economic Impacts 77
Alternative 2 - Continued Implementation of Existing Management Plans 77
Impacts to Air Quality and Human Health 77
Impacts to Vegetation 78
Impacts to Special Status Animal Species 80
Impacts to Watershed Resources 80
Impacts to Recreation Resources 82
Economic Impacts 82
Alternative 3 - Dispersed OHV Use 83
Impacts to Air Quality and Human Health 83
Impacts to Vegetation 84
Impacts to Special Status Animal Species 86
Impacts to Watershed Resources 86
Impacts to Recreation Resources 87
Economic Impacts 89
Alternative 4 - Restricted OHV Use 90
Impacts to Air Quality and Human Health 90
Impacts to Vegetation 91
Impacts to Special Status Animal Species 92
Impacts to Watershed Resources 92
Impacts to Recreation Resources 94
Economic Impacts 97
Alternative 5 - OHV Closure 97
Impacts to Air Quality and Human Health 97
Impacts to Vegetation, Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species 98
Impacts to Special Status Animal Species 99
Impacts to Watershed Resources 99
Impacts to Recreation Resources 100
Economic Impacts 101
Alternative 6 - Enhancement of Natural Values 102
Impacts to Air Quality and Human Health 102
Impacts to Vegetation, Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species 102
Impacts to Special Status Animal Species 103
Impacts to Watershed Resources 104
Impacts to Recreation Resources 105
Economic Impacts 106
in
Relationship Between Local Short-Term Uses of Man's Environment and the
Maintenance/Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity 106
Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources 107
Cumulative Impacts (Preferred Alternative) 107
CHAPTER 5 - CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION 109
Introduction 109
Public Participation 109
Consistency 110
Consultation and Coordination 110
List of Preparers 112
List of TRT Members 113
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 . General Location of Clear Creek Management Area 2
Figure 2. California Air Basins 37
Figure 3. Location of Clear Creek Watershed 54
Figure 4. Serpentine Soil Chemistry 56
Figure 5. Photographs of Landscapes Showing Soil Erosion 59
Figure 6. Estimated Erosion Rates for Clear Creek Watershed 61
Figure 7. Breakdown of Visitor Use in the CCMA 1985-1992 64
Figure 8. Visitor Use Days in Clear Creek 1985-1992 65
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 . Comparison of all Alternatives 30
Table 2. Monitoring Plan 32
Table 3. Estimated Health Risks From Asbestos Exposure 41
Table 4. Special Status Plant Species Within the Clear Creek Management Area 46
. .
Table 5. Other Sensitive Plant Species in the Clear Creek Management Area .... 52
Table 6. List of Preparers 112
Table 7. List of TRT members 113
BIBLIOGRAPHY 114
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Planning Criteria A1
Appendix B - Human Health Risk Assessment for the CCMA B1
IV
SUMMARY
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is responsible for the balanced
management of public lands, and the agency develops Resource Management
Plans (RMPs) to help guide decisions on how best to achieve this balanced
management. Resource Management Plans are based upon the principles of
multiple-use and sustained yield, and take into account the long-term needs of
future generations for renewable and non-renewable resources. In 1984, the
Hollister RMP was completed. Since that time, new issues and concerns have
surfaced regarding use in the Clear Creek Management Area, which falls under the
Hollister RMP guidance, and which is located in both San Benito and Fresno
Counties. This joint RMP Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
reviews six alternatives for management in the Clear Creek Management Area, and
addresses these new issues and concerns. This new EIS proposes to amend only
those portions of the 1984 RMP which affect the Clear Creek Management Area
(CCMA).
The CCMA encompasses approximately 50,000 acres of public land, of which
about 30,000 acres are within an existing Serpentine Area of Critical
Environmental Concern (ACEC), so designated because of the high concentrations
of naturally occurring asbestos in its serpentine soils. There are health concerns
regarding the public use of this area, as vehicles on unpaved roads, trails and
barren slopes generate asbestos fibers, which can be inhaled by visitors. In
addition, the CCMA is home to a unique assemblage of plants, one of which, the
San Benito evening primrose, is a federally protected species. Vehicles traveling
off-road can impact these sensitive plant populations, either directly by running
over plants, or indirectly, by increasing erosion and sedimentation, thus degrading
watershed values and the plant habitat.
Management of the CCMA is greatly influenced by a wide variety of environmental
regulations, and the challenge is to balance legislative constraints with high
recreational demands such as off-highway vehicle (OHV) use. The scope of this
document is to review and amend where necessary, the Hollister RMP for the
portions of that document which cover public use in the CCMA. This RMP
Amendment will guide management in Clear Creek for the next 15 years.
New resource information is incorporated in this RMP Amendment. In 1983, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) listed the Atlas Mine site, which is located
within the CCMA, on the National Priorities List, a list which identifies the nation's
worst hazardous waste sites. This listing resulted in the EPA conducting additional
studies under its Superfund program. Meanwhile, the BLM was continuing to
further study the public health risks from asbestos exposure, as well as the
watershed erosion and sedimentation problems for the Serpentine ACEC. In
addition, the BLM contracted for a four-year study on the ecology of the federally
protected San Benito evening primrose. Completed in 1990, the study resulted in
the discovery of several new populations of the species and identified potential,
but currently unoccupied, habitat areas. One of the conclusions of the study was
that the current management for this area was insufficient to meet the mandates
of the Endangered Species Act, possibly resulting in reclassifying plant's status
from "Threatened" to "Endangered".
Management Area Alternatives
The alternatives selected for analysis were developed with public involvement, and
CCMA
with consideration for both the current uses of the and the existing
resource conditions. The alternatives range from a continuation of present
management policy to a closure of the Serpentine ACEC to off-road vehicle travel
in conjunction with an emphasis on enhancing natural values. The environmental
impacts resulting from each alternative were assessed in light of the issues
identified issues. These issues include: 1) asbestos hazards (including dust
emissions, public health risks, and sediment production and transport); 2) unique
and/or rare, threatened or endangered (RTE) species; 3) watershed and riparian
zone management; and 4) existing authorized multiple uses of the area (OHVs,
mining operations, rockhounding, and other uses). The following summarizes the
proposed alternatives.
Alternative # 1 - No Action (Existing Management)
This alternative would allow recreational vehicle use (including OHV) to continue.
There would be no change in OHV designations, with the exception of the closure
of the road through the abandoned Atlas Asbestos Mine Superfund site.
Recreation would continue to be the management emphasis, with mitigation to
protect other resource values. Current management requires compliance with the
existing Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) asbestos exposure
action level standards for BLM OHV special use permits. Adherence to these
standards would continue, and additionally these standards would be enforced for
all OHV use not under special permit. The OSHA asbestos action level typically
can be reached during the dry summer months. During these dry summer months,
all dust generating activities would only be allowed when dust levels were below
OSHA
the action level.
No new recreational facilities would be constructed under this alternative. No new
mitigation measures would be implemented to minimize existing environmental
VI