Final Environmental Impact Statement

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Vestal Final Environmental Impact Statement Chapter 3 94 Mountain Goat (Oreamnos americanus) Summary of Effects to SOLC Summary Neither of the alternatives is expected to cause detrimental impacts to riparian areas within the project area. The proposed action proposes timber treatments to enhance hardwoods and meadows next to riparian streams, which is expected to benefit this species. Therefore, the proposed action would move the riparian areas to better condition overall in the project area. The proposed action would meet Forest Plan standards and guidelines. Therefore, the alternatives would contribute toward meeting Forest Objective 221. This species is likely to persist on the Forest. Alternative 1 No Action Due to expected MPB activity pine stands would become more open increasing forage habitat, travel corridors and cover. The increased forage and decrease in dense pine sites, especially on Buckhorn Mountain, may improve habitat enough to provide the opportunity for a population increase. Direct and Indirect Effects Alternative 2 Proposed Action No direct effects are expected to occur due to project activities. However, vegetation treatments may disturb individuals in the short-term. The increased forage and decrease in dense pine sites, especially on Buckhorn Mountain, may improve habitat enough to provide the opportunity for a population increase. Cumulative Effects Treatment activities are expected to temporarily produce disturbance impacts to this species in addition to those from recreation activities, but the impacts are expected to lessen once the project is complete; however, recreational disturbance is expected to continue. The proposed action could incrementally lead to additional invasive weeds, but include control activities to mitigate these impacts. Both alternatives are expected to increase forage (grasses/forbs and browse) for these species, which may incrementally reduce conflicts and competition with grazing livestock. However, the proposed action includes vegetation treatments that are expected to further enhance forage. Although there could be short-term adverse indirect effects to this species from the proposed action, adverse cumulative effects are not expected. Because of current MPB activity, spruce stands and dense stands of pine are expected to be greatly reduced. This is expected to benefit this species. Summary Both alternatives increase foraging habitat. However, the proposed action also includes prescribed burning to maintain clearcuts created for mountain goat forage. The proposed action would meet Forest Plan standards and guidelines. Therefore, this project would be consistent with Forest Plan Objective 221 for mountain goat. This species is likely to persist on the Forest. Threatened and Endangered Species This project would have ‘no effect’ on Threatened or Endangered species. Refer to the BA/BE in the project record and Appendix G which contains a summary of the BA/BE completed for this project.
Vestal Final Environmental Impact Statement Chapter 3 Region 2 (R2) Sensitive Species Summary of Effects on Sensitive Species The following is a summary of effects to wildlife Sensitive Species. A detailed analysis can be found in the Wildlife and Fisheries Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation in the project record. Region 2 has implemented a closure order, as of July 2010, for all caves and abandoned mines in an attempt to prevent spread of white-nosed syndrome, a fungal disease that has caused the death of over one million bats in the northeastern United States. This is not a concern in the Vestal project area because there is only one known abandoned mine, which had a bat gate installed in 2008 to inhibit unauthorized entry. The proposed action for this project is not expected to influence spread in the area. Table 38. Summary of Effects on R2 Sensitive Species Summary of Effects on R2 Sensitive Species Alternative 1 Alternative 2 No Action Proposed Action Direct and Indirect Effects Fringed Myotis Fire hazard and MPB risk would Increase in snag roosting habitat, but less (Myotis remain high. Short-term increase in than in Alternative 1. Reduced MPB risk thysanodes) snags used for roosting, but substantial decrease in mature pine as roosting habitat. Potential increase in foraging habitat (riparian areas, meadows). and fire hazard increases potential for maintaining roosting habitat long-term. Foraging habitat is expected to improve. Potential for disturbance of roosting bats. Incremental impacts to roosting Cumulative Effects The proposed action for this project is not habitat are expected as MPB expected to influence spread of white-nosed continues to reduce mature habitat, syndrome. There is only one known but create snags, on both National abandoned mine, which is gated to prohibit Forest and private lands. unauthorized entry. Incremental impacts to habitat quantity are expected to be minimal because direct and indirect impacts are expected to be minimal. The incremental impacts of disturbance are expected to be minimal because bats are normally active during the night when project activities would be minimal. Summary The alternatives ‘may adversely impact individuals, but not likely to result in a loss of viability in the Planning Area, nor cause a trend toward federal listing’. The proposed alternative would be consistent with these standards and guidelines. The Forest is conserving and enhancing habitat (Objective 221) for this species through cave, mine and snag management. This species is likely to persist on the Forest. Alternative 1 Alternative 2 No Action Proposed Action Townsend’s big- Direct and Indirect Effects 95
Page 1 and 2:
VESTAL PROJECT United States Depart
Page 3 and 4:
Vestal Final Environmental Impact S
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17:
OHV Off Highway Vehicle POL Product
Page 20 and 21:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66: Vestal Final Environmental Impact S
Page 115: Vestal Final Environmental Impact S
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
show all

Final Environmental Impact Statement

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?