Crooked River Valley Rehabilitation Project

Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Presentation May 2014

Meeting Objectives

Introductions Public Involvement Process Draft EIS Presentation How to submit comments Questions/Answers

Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests • Rick Brazell – Forest Supervisor & Deciding

Official • Terry Nevius – Red River District Ranger Cooperating Agencies

• Nez Perce Tribe • Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) • US Army Corps of Engineers Interdisciplinary Team Members Coordination with others

Introductions

Public Involvement Process

Past Public Involvement

∗ December 2012. Scoping the Proposed Action and Notice of Intent to prepare EIS in Federal Register.

45-day comment period. ∗ January 2013. Public meetings (Grangeville & Elk City). ∗ June 2013. Field trips with the public and regulatory agencies. ∗ Project information posted to the Forest Service website:

http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/fs-usda-pop.php/?project=40648 ∗ Project information on the Nez Perce Forest, Scheduled of Proposed Actions (SOPA) and website: http://www.fs.fed.us/sopa/forest-level.php?110117

Current Public Involvement

∗ March 28, 2014 • Draft Environmental Impact Statement

(DEIS) distributed. • Notice of Availability published in Federal

Register, Lewiston Tribune and project webpage.

∗ March 28 to May 12, 2014 • 45-day comment period.

∗ May 12, 2014 • Submit specific written comments about the

Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS).

Future Public Involvement

∗ Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Draft Record of Decision distributed to the public.

∗ Objection Process for Non-HFRA Projects described in (36 CFR 218). 45-day objection period.

• Objectors must have provided specific written comments. • Issues raised in objection must be based on previous comments

unless they are based on new information that arose after the opportunity to comment.

∗ Objection Resolution Meetings held by the Reviewing Officer -Regional Forester . ∗ Decision signed. ∗ Implementation .

Draft EIS Presentation

∗ Purpose and Need ∗Alternatives

Considered ∗ Summary of Effects

Draft EIS Presentation Purpose and Need

Historic mining activities have altered the Crooked River valley and have led to degraded fish habitat, causing inadequate densities of fish in Crooked River (a lower density than the stream historically supported).

The Forest Service needs to restore the Crooked River valley to improve fish habitat and water quality in Crooked River.

The proposed action would achieve goals and objectives in the Forest Plan, improve habitat for ESA-listed and sensitive fish species, and respond to objectives of the Nez Perce Tribe.

No Action. Proposed Action.* Leave the 3 miles of Road 233 in the

valley bottom through the narrow canyon, but re-aligning sections to be out of the 2- and 50-year floodplain.

Re-route Access Using Deadwood Road. Relocate road out of the 100-year floodplain. Relocate road onto the near (east) hillside, constructing

4.8 miles of road. Relocate road onto the near (east) hillside, constructing

5.6 miles of road. Relocate road onto hillside across the river.

*Carried in to future foreseeable actions.

Draft EIS Presentation Narrows Alternatives Considered

No Action Alternative.- DEIS – Alternative 1. Proposed Action Alternative. DEIS - Alternative 2. Rehabilitate

the lower 2.0 miles of Crooked River. Reconnect ponds to the river; no floodplain grading.

Reconstruct 11,000 feet of stream channel and 115 acres of floodplain; maintain 1-year bypass channel.

Remove mine tailings from valley and use for road material; maintain river channel and ponds.

Phase the project with four reaches and complete all aspects of an entire reach during one construction season.

Various small fixes to the stream channel to improve fish habitat. Regrade 115 acres of floodplain and reconstruct up to 7,400 feet

of stream channel in other configurations. Administratively withdraw mineral activities in the project area.

Draft EIS Presentation Meanders Alternatives Considered

Draft EIS Presentation Meanders Alternatives

Alternative 1 - No Action – No Treatments. Alternative 2 – Proposed Action.

• Proposes to rehabilitate the lower 2.0 miles of Crooked River, known as the Meanders.

• The valley width includes Road 233 on the east side of the valley to the base of the hillslope on the west side of the valley.

• This alternative would rehabilitate up to 115 acres of floodplain by moving dredge tailings, reconstructing approximately 7,400 feet of stream channel, installing woody bank structures, constructing more than 2,700 feet of side channels, creating conditions for 64 acres of wetlands, and replanting the valley bottom with native plant communities.

• The project would be implemented over approximately 6 years (2015–2021).

Alternative 2

Redistributing tailing piles in floodplain. Channel construction including placement of instream habitat structures, side channels and meanders.

Re-vegetate the floodplain. Maintain campsites in project area. Preserve heritage resource areas identified by SHPO.

Alternative 2 Response to purpose and need

∗ Stream reconstruction – Reconstruct lower 2 mile of Crooked River (new main and side channels).

∗ Floodplain restoration – Regrade, reconnect and roughen floodplain.

∗ Fish habitat complexity – Increase spawning habitat, create higher quality rearing habitat, plant vegetation for long term wood recruitment.

∗ Water quality – Reduced water temperature overtime.

Reconstruct natural stream meanders

Summary of effects

∗ Fish and fish habitat - pool quality and quantity, complexity. ∗ Floodplains and channel shape. ∗ Water quality - temperature. ∗ Wetlands. ∗ Cultural Resources – 1 National Register Site. Proposed forest

plan amendment. ∗ Soil Resources – Proposed forest plan amendment. ∗ Wildlife – Western Toad, Elk, Moose. ∗ Invasive Plants. ∗ Recreation Resources. ∗ Mineral Resources. ∗ Transportation. ∗ Social and Economic Resources.

Effects to cultural resources

∗ Design and mitigation measures 39, 40, 42, 43, and 44 were developed to reduce the effects to the one National Historic Register sites (dredge tailing) (36 CFR 800.16(a))

∗ 39 - Retain a representative sample of dredge piles for public interpretation.

∗ 40 - Construct a three-panel educational kiosk in the Meanders to inform the public of the history of the Crooked River Valley.

∗ 42 - Thoroughly photograph, document, and map historic dredge piles that are proposed for removal.

∗ 43 - Record the historic Gnome village.

∗ 44 - Perform a social business history related to the economic contribution historic dredge mining operations made to the local central Idaho economy.

Effects to recreation opportunities

∗ Short term: • Area closure during

construction activities. • Fishing access from Road

233 and outside of construction zone.

∗ Long term: • Retain existing access to

river. • Retain dispersed

campsites. • Retain developed

campgrounds.

Effects to mineral resources

∗ Short term • Area closure during

construction activities. • Claim corners protected

or re-established. • Movement of material in

project area.

∗ Long term • Increases cost of placer

claim reclamation. • Claim corners re-

established. • Activities under an

approved Plan-of-Operation.

What we need from you now

Specific written comments about the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS). Specific concerns about this project that you feel

should be considered Issues to be addressed Analysis of potential effects that should be

completed in the Final EIS. Submit comments by letter, email, or fax.

Where to send your written comments:

Comments due: May 12, 2014. ∗ Mail to: Jennie Fischer Nez Perce National Forest 104 Airport Road Grangeville, Idaho 83530 ∗ Email; or send .doc, .docx, .rtf or .pdf file types to: comments-northern-nezperce-red-river@fs.fed.us ∗ FAX to: 208-983-4099

More information

Visit our project website as we move through the planning process:

http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/fs-usda-pop.php/?project=40648

Contact: Jennie Fischer in Grangeville, Idaho; at 208-983-4048.

Questions?