Final Environmental Impact Statement

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Vestal Final Environmental Impact Statement Chapter 3 The time frame for the cumulative effects discussion is from year 2002 through 2021, ten years before and ten years after. These dates include impacts from recent timber harvesting in the past and extend forward to include the estimated completion of activities proposed in this project. Table 53. Watersheds analyzed for Cumulative Effects HUC 12 Watershed % of Watershed in Number Watershed Name Acres the Project Area 101201090601 Ruby Creek-French Creek 29,291 64% 101201090602 Stockade Lakes-French Creek 19,926 74% 101201090603 Glen Erin Creek-French Creek 17,419 28% 101201090903 Newton Fork-Spring Creek 24,423 15% Past, present and future land uses and events within these watersheds have. Commercial treatments, precommercial thinning, fuelbreaks, pine encroachment, wildfire, prescribe fire, grazing, weed spraying, mining, abandoned mines, mine reclamation, developed recreation, dispersed recreation, dam building (Bismarck and Stockade Lake), City of Custer, private land ownership, private land development and roads are some of the land uses and events that have occurred. All of these activities or events individually have an impact on the watersheds. Sediment There would be a slight increase in potential for sedimentation from the action alternative in the short term (5 years) sediment potential would be reduced by the action alternative as compared to existing conditions because of the repair or fixing of three known CDAs. As a benefit of the activities, three (3) CDAs on Forest roads would be corrected. Any sediment as a result of the Vestal project would be expected to be minimal for Alternative 2. There would be no cumulative effect to aquatic ecosystem from sediment from the No Action alternative. Bed and Bank Stability There would be no cumulative effects to bed and bank stability. This watershed feature would not have direct or indirect effects, as discussed above. Stream Flow Regimes Changes to flow regimes, increased water, would occur with either alternative due to predicted MPB mortality and in Alternative 2, proposed treatments. This would add to other increases in flow, such as MPB caused mortality adjacent to the analysis area and be a positive cumulative effect for both alternatives. Temperature and Oxygen Impacts to the aquatic ecosystem from temperature/oxygen would occur from the Vestal Project. This impact would be a positive effect for both alternatives. Impacts to aquatic ecosystems from temperature/oxygen are expected to be minimal and would not be detectable if temperature were being monitored. 166
Vestal Final Environmental Impact Statement Chapter 3 Water Purity There would be no cumulative effects to water purity. This watershed feature would not have direct or indirect effects, as discussed above. Aquatic Life There would be no cumulative effects to aquatic life. This watershed feature would not have direct or indirect effects, as discussed above. Riparian Ecosystems Impacts to the riparian ecosystem as a result of the Vestal Project would occur. This would add to what has already occurred (roads, private land development, grazing) in the watershed creating a cumulative impact. Impacts to riparian ecosystems are expected to be minimal and temporary for Alternative 2. There would be no cumulative effects to riparian ecosystems resulting from the No Action alternative. Wetlands There would be no cumulative effects to wetlands. This watershed feature would not have direct or indirect effects, as discussed above. Floodplains There would be no cumulative effects to floodplains. This watershed feature would not have direct or indirect effects, as discussed above. Watershed Condition Class There would be no cumulative effects to watershed condition class. The Watershed Condition Class for each watershed would remain unchanged from Class 2 as a result of this project. None of the alternatives proposes enough activities to change the ratings. Best Management Practices (BMP) Effectiveness BMPs by definition are “Common-sense actions required, by law, to keep soil and other pollutants out of streams and lakes. BMPs are designed to protect water quality and to prevent new pollution” (IFPC 2003). BMPs are implemented to control or limit nonpoint source pollution. “BMPs are developed by the State of SD…to ensure compliance with federal and state water-quality standards,” (USDA Forest Service 2006c). They provide good guidance but are fairly general. WCPs are practices to protect soil, aquatic, and riparian systems. USDA Forest Service, Region 2, developed them. They are more specific with design criteria. “If used properly, they meet or exceed State BMPs,” (USDA Forest Service, 2006b). BMPs and WCPs are incorporated into the Forest Plan standards and guidelines and provide more specific direction. The Black Hills National Forest completed a Forest Plan BMP Evaluation (USDA Forest Service 2003a). Two studies done on the Black Hills National Forest by the Black Hills Forest Resource Association, 2001 and Wyoming Timber Industry Association, 2001, reviewed BMP effectiveness. The conclusion is “These results highlight the consistent application and effectiveness of BMPs in the Black Hills and other National Forests” (USDA Forest Service 2003a). The evaluation goes on to review other studies or reports and comes to the conclusion that “These studies highlight the effectiveness of BMPs in 167
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:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138: Vestal Final Environmental Impact S
Page 187: Vestal Final Environmental Impact S
show all

Final Environmental Impact Statement

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

Delete template?

Save as template?