Draft environmental impact statement for the proposed Cooke City area mineral withdrawal

258 Pages·1997·73.9 MB·English

by  United States. Bureau of Land Management. Montana State Office

DRAFT
United States Department of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management
Montana State Office
United States Department of Agriculture
Forest Service
Northern Region March 1997
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR THE PROPOSED
COOKE CITY AREA MINERAL WITHDRAWAL
BL.W LIBRARY
BLDG
50, ST-15GA
Q
FEDfcnMAi.8 ^cw -H
*8 A {
SDK
P.O. 25047
The Bureau of Land Management is responsibleforthe stewardshipofourpublic lands. It iscommitted
to manage, protect, and improvethese lands in a mannertoservethe needsofthe American peoplefor
all times. Management is based on the principles of multiple use and sustained yield of our nation's
resourceswithinaframeworkofenvironmental responsibilityandscientifictechnology. Theseresources
includerecreation; rangelands;timber; minerals;watershed;fishandwildlife;wilderness;air;andscenic,
scientific, and cultural values.
TheUnitedStates DepartmentofAgriculture(USDA) ForestServiceisadiverseorganizationcommitted
toequal opportunity in employmentand programdelivery. USDA prohibitsdiscrimination on the basisof
race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political affiliation and familial status. Persons
believing they have been discriminated against should contact the Secretary, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250, or call 202-720-7327 (voice), or 202-720-1127 (TDD).
BLM/MT/PL-97/004+1430
Coverphoto: Republic Mountain, Gallatin NationalForest, with Cooke Cityin the foreground.
DRAFT
.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR THE
PROPOSED COOKE CITY AREA
MINERAL WITHDRAWAL
March 1997
Prepared by
U.S. Department of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management
Montana State Office
and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service
Northern Region
MaAck 1997
Date
MoacU 1997
Hal Salwasser, Regional Forester Date
Forest Service
COOKE CITY AREA MINERAL WITHDRAWAL
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
ABSTRACT
Lead Agencies: Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Department of the Interior; and Forest Service (FS), U.S.
Department ofAgriculture
ProposedAction: Towithdrawfrommineral entryfederal locatable mineralson upto22,000acresnearCooke City in Park
County, Montana. Federal hardrock minerals managed as leaseable minerals, and minerals acquired by the United States
would also be withdrawn. The withdrawal would be subject to review after 20 years.
Abstract: This EIS analyzes the environmental consequences oftwo alternatives, i.e. a proposed mineral withdrawal and
no mineral withdrawal (No Action). The proposed withdrawal of federal locatable minerals would not allow new mining
claimstobefiledonfederallands. Unpatentedminingclaimswithvalidexistingrightsandprivatelandswouldnotbeaffected.
The proposed mineral withdrawal would apply to minerals acquired in the future by the federal government. The proposed
mineral withdrawal would also apply to any leasable hardrock minerals that are acquired by the federal government by
purchase ordonation. The Gallatin and the Custer National Forest Plans would be amended as needed to be consistent with
the terms and conditions ofa mineral withdrawal.
Underthe “No Action” alternative, federal lands would not be withdrawn from mineral location and entry, i.e., federal lands
would be open and available for mineral location and entry under the mining law. This alternative would continue the
managementthatexistedpriortoSeptember 1995 when the study areawasclosedtolocatingnew miningclaimsforatwo-
1,
year study period known as a segregation. The Custer and Gallatin Forest Plans would not be amended regarding mineral
location, entry, or recreational mining.
BLM
Following the publication of the final EIS, the State Director with Concurrence of the Regional Forester, Northern
Region, will submitarecommendation tothe SecretaryoftheInteriorconcerning amineralwithdrawal. TheSecretaryofthe
Interior will decide what lands to withdraw, ifany, and for how long.
A 45 day comment period will be provided for public review ofthis draft EIS. Comments orquestions should be addressed
toJohn Thompson orLarry Timchak, CCAM, P.O. Box 36800, Billings, MT 59107-6800. A phone number where they can
be reached is [phone].
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION
I 1
INTRODUCTION
1
BACKGROUND
1
GENERAL LOCATION AND GEOGRAPHIC SETTING
: 1
PROPOSED ACTION
3
PURPOSE AND NEED
3
NWM
Relationship of Mineral Withdrawal to the Agreement 3
SCOPE OF THE ANALYSIS
5
DECISIONS TO BE MADE
5
Decisions Beyond the Scope ofthis Analysis 5
ISSUES AND CONCERNS 6
Public Involvement 6
Issues 6
chapter: alternatives
9
INTRODUCTION
9
ALTERNATIVES STUDIED IN DETAIL 9
Alternative A: No Mineral Withdrawal (No Action) 9
Alternative B: Proposed Mineral Withdrawal 14
Management Common to All Alternatives 17
Comparison ofAlternatives 17
Preferred Alternative 17
ALTERNATIVES ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED STUDY
17
CHAPTER 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS 29
SURFACE AND GROUND WATER, WETLANDS, AND FLOODPLAINS 30
Water Quantity 32
Affected Environment 32
Environmental Effects 33
Legal Availability ofWater 34
Affected Environment 34
Environmental Effects 35
Surface Water Quality 37
Affected Environment 37
Environmental Effects 40
Wetlands and Floodplains 44
Affected Environment 44
Environmental Effects 45
Conclusion 47
AQUATIC RESOURCES 48
Affected Environment 48
Environmental Effects 56
Conclusion 63
RECREATION, SCENIC, AND SPECIAL AREAS INCLUDING YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK 64
Recreation 65
Affected Environment 66
Environmental Effects 70
Conclusion 75
i
8
Scenic Integrity 75
Affected Environment 76
Environmental Effects 76
Conclusion 83
Yellowstone National Park 84
Affected Environment 84
Environmental Effects 86
Conclusion 89
Wilderness 89
Affected Environment 90
Environmental Effects 90
Conclusion 92
Inventoried Roadless Areas 92
Affected Environment 93
Environmental Effects 95
Conclusion 97
Wild and Scenic Rivers 98
Affected Environment 98
Environmental Effects 100
Conclusion 103
Air Quality 104
Affected Environment 104
Environmental Effects 104
Conclusion 105
LAND USE
105
Geological Resources 106
Affected Environment 106
Environmental Effects Ill
Private Lands and Unpatented Mining Claims 16
1
Affected Environment 16
1
Environmental Effects
1 1
Forest Plan Consistency 121
Affected Environment 121
Environmental Effects 123
ECONOMICS
124
Employment and Income 126
Affected Environment 126
Environmental Effects 126
Economic Resiliency 128
Affected Environment 128
Environmental Effects 129
Government Finances 131
Affected Environment 131
Environmental Effects 132
Mitigation ofEffects 136
SOCIAL 137
Population 138
Affected Environment 138
Environmental Effects 139
:
Quality ofLife 140
Affected Environment 140
Environmental Effects 143
ii
11111
Community Services and Infrastructure 145
Affected Environment 145
Environmental Effects 147
Housing 148
Affected Environment 148
Environmental Effects 148
Conclusion 149
CULTURAL RESOURCES 150
Affected Environment 150
Environmental Effects 155
Conclusion 158
WILDLIFE AND SENSITIVE PLANTS 159
USFS Management Indicator Species 159
Threatened and Endangered Species 159
Grizzly Bear 160
Gray Wolf 165
Bald Eagle 166
Peregrine Falcon 167
USFS Northern Region R- Sensitive Species 167
( 1)
Wolverine 167
Lynx 168
USFS Northern Region Sensitive Plants 169
Other USFS Management Indicator Species or Identified Sub-Issues 171
Moose 7
1
Mule Deer, Elk 173
Bighorn Sheep 174
Mountain Goat 76
1
Bison 178
Conclusion 178
REQUIRED DISCLOSURES 179
CHAPTER 4 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION 8
1
EXTERNAL- GENERAL PUBLIC 181
EXTERNAL- ELECTED OFFICIALS, AMERICAN INDIAN TRIBES 183
INTERNAL- CO-LEAD AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES 84
1
CHRONOLOGY OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES (AGENCIES AND GENERAL PUBLIC) 85
.... 1
DISTRIBUTION AND REVIEW OF THIS DRAFT EIS 187
APPENDICES
A FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES A-l
B FORECAST FOR FUTURE MINERAL ACTIVITY B-
C SUMMARY OF ASSUMPTIONS C-l
D LANDSCAPE, SOILS, AND VEGETATION D-l
E BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT E-
F USFS MANAGEMENT INDICATOR SPECIES F-
GLOSSARY
G-l
REFERENCES
R-l
2
11
LIST OF MAPS
Map 1-1 General Vicinity ofthe Proposed Cooke City Area Mineral Withdrawal 2
Map 1-2 National Forest Lands Proposed for Mineral Withdrawal 4
NWM
Map 2-1 Alternative A: No Mineral Withdrawal, Scenario A- Agreement Not Implemented
1: NWM 1
Map 2-2 Alternative A: No Mineral Withdrawal, Scenario A-2: Agreement Implemented 15
NWM
Map 2-3 Alternative B: Mineral Withdrawal Implemented, Scenario B-l: Agreement Not Implemented 16
NWM
Map 2-4 Alternative B: Mineral Withdrawal Implemented, Scenario B-2: Agreement Implemented 18
Map 3-1 Wetlands and Waters of the U.S 31
Map 3-2 PH Levels in Area Streams 39
Map 3-3 Fish Habitat Conditions 49
Map 3-4 Conditions ofBiotic Community 54
Map 3-5 Recreation Features 68
Map 3-6 Highways and Access Roads 73
Map 3-7 Recreation Opportunity Settings and Scenic Integrity Levels 79
Map 3-8 Visual Quality Objectives 80
Map 3-9 Roadless Areas 94
Map 3-10 Wild and Scenic Rivers in Vicinity 99
Map 3-1 Mineral Development Potential 109
1
Map 3-12 Reclamation Potential 12
1
Map 3-13 Land Status 117
Map 3-14 Effects of Proposed Mineral Withdrawal on New World Mine Tailings Impoundment Options 120
Map 3-15 Forest Plan Management Areas 122
Map 3-16 Sites Important to the Integrity ofthe New World Historic District 151
Map 3-17 Grizzly Bear Core Areas In Study Area 162
Map 3-18 Elk and Moose Winter Range 172
Map 3-19 Mountain Sheep Range and Migration Routes 175
Map 3-20 Mountain Goat Range 177
Map B- Occurrence Potential for Skarn-Replacement Deposits B-9
1
Map B-2 Occurrence Potential for Porphyry Copper-Gold-Molybdenum B-10
Map B-3 Occurrence Potential for Polymetallic Veins B-1
Map B-4 Occurrence Potential for Alkaline Gabbro-Syenite- Hosted Copper-Gold-Silver- PGE Deposits B-l
Map D-l Landscapes D-4
Map D-2 Soil Properties D-5
Map D-3 Vegetation D-6
rv
LIST OF ACRONYMS USED IN THIS DOCUMENT
Ag Gold
AIRFA American Indian Religious Freedom Act
ARD Acid Rock Drainage
ARPA Archaeological Resources Protection Act
Au Silver
BLM Bureau ofLand Management
CCAMW
Cooke City Area Mineral Withdrawal
CEQ Council on Environmental Quality
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980
CERCLIS CERCLA Information Systen (potential Superfund sites list)
cfs Cubic Feet per Second
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CNF
Custer National Forest
Cu Copper
CWA
Clean Water Act
DEQ Department ofEnvironmental Quality
DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement
DNRC
Department ofNatural Resources and Conservation
DSL Department ofState Lands
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EPT Ephemeroptera Plecoptera Trichoptera
ESA Endangered Species Act
FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement
FLPMA Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976
FP Forest Plan
FS Forest Service
GIS Geographic Information System
GNFFP Gallatin National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan
GYA Greater Yellowstone Area
HD
Hunting District
IDT Interdisciplinary Team
km Kilometer
kV Kilovolt
KOP Key Observation Point
LRMP Land and Resource Management Plan
MA
Management Area
MABF Mean Annual Base Flow
MDEQ
Montana Department of Environmental Quality
MDFWP
Montana Department ofFish, Wildlife and Parks
MIIH May impact individuals, but is not likely to cause a trend to federal listing or loss ofviability
MIS Management Indicator Species
MO
Molybednum
MPDES Montana Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
MSL Mean Sea Level
MU
Multiple Use
NAGPRA
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NFMA
National Forest Management Act
NFS National Forest System (lands)
NHP National Heritage Program
NHPA
National Historic Preservation Act
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
v
NPS National Park Service
NRHP
National Register of Historic Places
NWM
New World Mine
NWMD
New World Mining District
NWP New World Project
NYWR
Northern Yellowstone Winter Range
OHV
OffHighway Vehicle
Pb Paladium
PDEIS Preliminary Draft Environmental Impact Statement
PGE Copper-gold-platinum group element
PLO Public Land Order
PSD Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration
RA Roadless Area
RPA Resource Planning Act
RPA Resource Protection Act
RVD Recreation Visitor Day
SHPO
State Historic Preservation Office
SIL Scenic Integrity Level
T&E
Threatened and Endangered Species (federal)
TDS Total Disolved Solids
TMDL’s Total Maximum Daily Loads
UNESCO
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization
use United States Code
USDA
United States Department ofAgriculture
USDI United States Department ofthe Interior
USFS United States Forest Service
USFWS
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
VER
Valid Existing Rights
VQO
Visual Quality Objective
VI