CLEAR CREEK WATERSHED

Transcription

1 CLEAR CREEK WATERSHED Travel Analysis Report Lowman Ranger District Boise National Forest September 2013

2

3 Table of Contents Background Step 1 Setting Up the Analysis Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) Data Analysis Area Location Scale of Analysis Scope of Analysis Step 2 Describing the Current Situation Land Ownership Forest Plan Direction Existing Transportation System Public and Administrative Needs Existing Travel Management Decisions Available Resources to Maintain and Operate the Transportation System Step 3 Issue Identification Issues Identified Public Involvement Step 4 Assessing Benefits, Problems, and Risks Step 5 Describing Opportunities and Setting Priorities Opportunities Recommended Road System Influence of Economic Analysis on Recommended Road System Step 6 Reporting References Appendix A Risk, Benefits, and Recommendation Tables Appendix B Figure 4 (Large Format 11 X 17 ) Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013

4 List of Tables Table 1: Analysis area subwatersheds Table 2: Boise Forest Plan Management Prescription Categories within the Clear Creek watershed Table 3: Management Prescription Category and road management relationship Table 4: Miles of authorized roads, unauthorized roads, and motorized trails in the Clear Creek watershed Table 5: Authorized road miles by Operational Maintenance Level in the Clear Creek watershed. 11 Table 6: Summary of NFS motorized trail system and season of use within the Analysis Area Table 7: Existing lengths, Operational Maintenance Levels, and management status of National Forest System authorized roads and motorized trails in the Clear Creek watershed Table 8: Forest wide annual road maintenance costs by Operational Maintenance Level Table 9: Annual road maintenance costs by Operational Maintenance Level in the Clear Creek watershed Table 10: Route risk/cost indicators and ratings Table 11: Road value/benefit indicators and ratings Table 12: Trail value/benefit indicators and ratings Table 13: Recommended road system compared to the existing road system Table 14: Recommended road system for Clear Creek watershed Table 15: Recommended road system summary List of Figures Figure 1: Clear Creek watershed vicinity map Figure 2: Clear Creek watershed MPCs Figure 3: Clear Creek existing transportation system Figure 4: Clear Creek road and motorized trail recommendations Figure 5: Clear Creek recommended transportation system Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013

5 Clear Creek Watershed Travel Analysis Report Lowman Ranger District Boise National Forest Background The Travel Analysis Process (TAP) is intended to identify opportunities for the national forest transportation system to meet current or future management objectives, and to provide information that allows integration of ecological, social, and economic concerns into future decisions. The TAP is tailored to local situations and landscape and site conditions as identified by forest staffs and coupled with public input. The outcome of the TAP is a set of recommendations for the forest transportation system documented in a Travel Analysis Report (TAR). A thorough travel analysis process and report supports subsequent National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) processes, allowing individual projects to be more site-specific and focused while still addressing cumulative impacts. A Forest-scale roads analysis was completed to support revision of the Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National Forest Plans in The Analysis results and key findings were subsequently used by the Responsible Officials to inform their decisions for Forest Plan revision concerning management of the transportation system. The forest-wide roads analyses generally examine only Maintenance Level 3, 4, and 5 roads and determined that the minimum transportation system within this subset of roads consists of the arterial and collector roads that provide the backbone of the transportation network. The forest-wide roads analyses recognized that the determination of a minimum transportation system will need to be supplemented during watershed and project scale analyses with additional local roads (Maintenance Level 1 and 2) needed for management of the Forests. The roads analysis process used during the 2003 Forest Plan revisions was subsequently replaced with a similar travel analysis process. Unlike the road analysis process, which was specific to roads, the travel analysis process is intended to address the transportation system as a whole, including trails and other areas open to motorized vehicle use. Travel analysis assesses the current forest transportation system, identifying issues, and assessing benefits, problems, and risks related to the current system. The information is used to inform decisions related to identification of the minimum road system per 36 CFR Part (b)(1) and designation of roads, trails and areas for motor vehicle use per 36 CFR Part Travel analysis is not a decision-making process. Rather, travel analysis informs decisions relating to administration of the forest transportation system and helps to identify proposals for changes in travel management direction (FSM 7712). Direction for the TAP comes from Forest Service Travel Planning Handbook ( Chapter 20 Travel Analysis). This handbook direction was amended in January This analysis follows this direction and uses the six step process identified in Forest Service Handbook , Chapter 20 - Travel Analysis. The TAP consists of the following six steps: Step 1 -- Setting Up the Analysis Step 2 Describing the Situation Step 3 Identifying Issues Step 4 Assessing Benefits, Problems, and Risks Step 5 Describing Opportunities and Setting Priorities Step 6 Reporting The travel analysis process results in a TAR and will assist the Lowman Ranger District in addressing issues related to the roads and motorized trails system. It will be used to inform future analyses, decisions, and specific actions. Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 1

6 1.0 Step 1 - Setting Up the Analysis The travel analysis area is the Clear Creek watershed (36,546 acres) located within the South Fork Payette River basin and managed by the Boise National Forest. 1.1 Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) The interdisciplinary team selected to complete this analysis, and their role, consists of the following Lowman Ranger District personnel: 1.2 Data D. John Kidd District Ranger, Responsible Official Kari Grover Wier Hydrologist/Team Leader (pre-july 2012) Nadine Hergenrider Wildlife Biologist/Team Leader (post-july 2012) Christopher Wagner Silviculturist Dave Erwin Recreation Planner Devon Green Fish Biologist Doug Brown GIS/ Lead Analyst Pete Wier Silviculturist Rebecca Swenson Fuels Specialist Rex Miller Assistant Fire Management Officer The IDT utilized existing data and data specifically collected for the proposed Clear Creek Integrated Project. Key sources of information include: The Forest transportation database. A 2004 Geomorphic Roads Analysis and Inventory Package (GRAIP). A survey of unauthorized roads conducted in IDT member field observations in the analysis area. Professional knowledge and experience of Forest and District personnel. The team utilized ArcMap GIS as a principal analysis tool. ArcMap helped analyze and display important spatial relationships, such as the road densities, motorized trail densities, and the overall spatial arrangement of existing roads and motorized trails. 1.3 Analysis Area Location This travel analysis is being completed in support of a project-level NEPA decision implementing the Forest Plan within the Clear Creek 5 th Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) on the Lowman Ranger District, Boise National Forest. The geographic scale of the analysis is the Clear Creek 5 th Hydrologic Unit, which is 36,546 acres (Figure 1). 1.4 Scale of Analysis The scale of analysis is the 36,546-acre Clear Creek watershed (# ) and includes two sixth field subwatersheds: Lower Clear Creek and Upper Clear Creek (Table 1). Table 1: Analysis area subwatersheds. Subwatershed Name Subwatershed Number Acres Lower Clear Creek ,633 Upper Clear Creek ,913 Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 2

7 1.5 Scope of Analysis The District Ranger directed the IDT to develop recommendations for all existing or potential roads and motorized trails within the Clear Creek watershed and to differentiate between those roads that will potentially remain and those roads that may be removed or changed. 1 The Forest previously completed a roads analysis for all maintenance level 3, 4, and 5 roads which identified them as part of the minimum road system. Because these roads had previously been identified as part of the minimum road system, the IDT was limited to identifying recommendations that reduce or alleviate resource concerns or that change the maintenance level of these roads. For maintenance level 1 and 2 roads, the IDT was directed to identify recommendations for whether roads should remain as part of the transportation system or be removed from the system. The IDT also considered whether changes in location or management were desirable for roads recommended for retention. Unauthorized routes with future potential as a road or trail were to be included in the analysis. Two motorized trails (#159 Miller Mountain and #144 Kirkham Ridge) travel along the ridgeline forming the eastern watershed boundary and pass in out of the watershed at several points. The portion of the trails located in the adjacent watershed was considered during the identification of benefits, problems, risks, issues, and opportunities for the trails due to their connectedness with analysis area trail segments. 1 This analysis did not assess non-motorized trails, oversnow vehicles, or off-road motorized vehicle travel associated with dispersed camping or fuelwood program. Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 3

8 Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 4

9 2.0 Step 2 - Describing the Current Situation 2.1 Land Ownership Land ownership within the analysis area is primarily National Forest System (36,503 acres). A small block of private land (43 acres) is present at the southern end of the watershed. 2.2 Forest Plan Direction Clear Creek watershed is located in Management Area 10, Upper South Fork Payette River. Direction for the management area is described on pages III-221 through III-238 of the Forest Plan (USDA Forest Service 2010a). Clear Creek watershed includes the following Management Prescription Categories (MPCs): MPC 5.1 (Restoration and Maintenance Emphasis within Forested Landscapes), MPC 3.2 (Active Restoration and Maintenance of Aquatic, Terrestrial, and Hydrologic Resources), MPC 1.2 ( Recommended Wilderness), and MPC 4.1c (Undeveloped Recreation: Maintain Unroaded Character with Allowance for Restoration Activities). See Figure 2. Table 2: Boise Forest Plan Management Prescription Categories within the Clear Creek watershed. Management Prescription Category Area (acres) Percent of Analysis Area 5.1 Restoration & Maintenance Emphasis within Forested Landscapes 21,039 58% 4.1c Undeveloped Recreation: Maintain Unroaded Character with Allowance for Restoration Activities 6,966 19% 1.2 Recommended Wilderness 5,229 14% 3.2 Active Restoration & Maintenance of Aquatic, Terrestrial, and Hydrologic Resources 3,269 9% Non-Forest Service (private land) % Total 36, % MPC 5.1 applies to lands that are predominantly (>50 percent) forested. Emphasis is on restoring or maintaining vegetation within desired conditions in order to provide a diversity of habitats, reduced risk from disturbance events, and sustainable resources for human use. Commodity production is an outcome of restoring or maintaining the resilience/resistance of forested vegetation to disturbance events; achievement of timber growth and yield is not the primary purpose. The full range of treatment activities may be used. Restoration occurs through management activities and succession. Combinations of mechanical and fire treatments are used to restore forested areas while maintaining or improving resources such as soils, water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, and recreation settings. The risk of temporary and short-term degradation to the environment is minimized, but impacts may occur within acceptable limits as resources are managed to achieve long-term goals and objectives. MPC 4.1c applies to lands where dispersed recreation uses are the primary emphasis. Providing dispersed recreation opportunities in an unroaded landscape is the predominate objective. Both motorized and non-motorized recreation opportunities may be provided. Other resource uses are allowed to the extent that they do not compromise ROS settings. The area has a predominantly natural-appearing environment, with slight evidence of the sights and sounds of people. Species habitat and recreational uses are generally compatible, although recreation uses may be adjusted to protect TEPCS species. MPC 1.2 applies to areas the Forest Service recommends for Wilderness designation. The primary management objective is to maintain wilderness attributes until Congress decides to designate the areas as wilderness or release them to some other form of management. Although these areas do not fall under the authority of the Wilderness Act, they are managed to maintain wilderness attributes where feasible, and to generally allow ecological processes to prevail. Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 5

10 MPC 3.2 applies to areas where the prescription is designed to minimize temporary and short-term risks and avoid long-term risks from management actions to soil/hydrologic conditions and aquatic and terrestrial habitats. The objective of this prescription is to actively restore or maintain conditions for TEPCS fish, wildlife, and botanical species, or 303(d) impaired water bodies through a combination of management activities and natural processes. Management activities used to achieve this objective include watershed restoration, noxious weed treatments, and vegetative treatments that include prescribed fire, wildland fire use, and mechanical. Restoration is focused on those components of the ecosystem that are not functioning properly, or are outside the range of desired conditions, while maintenance helps to preserve those components that are functioning properly. The roads in the Clear Creek travel analysis area are all located in one management allocation (MPC 5.1) and a small number are found on private land. The motorized trails within the Clear Creek travel analysis area are located in MPCs 1.2, 3.2, 4.1c, and 5.1. The Forest Scale Roads Analysis presents a table to demonstrate the relationship between the types and intensity of road management activity appropriate for MPC 5.1. The portion relating to MPC 5.1 is shown in Table 3. Table 3: Management Prescription Category and road management relationship. MPC Road Management Activity Intensity Rationale/Tie to MPC 5.1 New construction low to mod Restoration and Maintenance of Forested Landscapes Reconstruction low to mod Decommission moderate Maintenance moderate MPC emphasis: restore or maintain vegetation within desired conditions to provide a diversity of habitats, reduced risk from disturbance events, and sustainable resource for human use. Roads are needed in support of resource management objectives. Maintenance levels 2 and 3 are emphasized. Management direction for the transportation system is provided in the Forest Plan. In addition to forestwide standard, goals and objectives related to the transportation system, the Forest Plan also includes management direction specific to Management Area 10. The following summarizes the pertinent road and motorized trail management direction within the analysis area. MA 10, MPC 1.2 Recreation Standard (1003): No new motorized or mechanical uses will be allowed, except where these uses must be allowed in response to reserved or outstanding rights, statute or treaty. MA 10, MPC 1.2 Recreation Standard (1004): Existing motorized or mechanical uses are allowed only if they do not lead to long-term adverse changes in wilderness values. MA 10, MPC 5.1 Road Standard (1020): New road and landings shall be located outside of RCAs in the MPC 5.1 portions of the Upper Clear Creek, Grandjean and Tenmile subwatersheds unless it can be demonstrated through the project-level NEPA analysis and related Biological Assessment that: a) For resources that are within their range of desired conditions, any new road or landing in an RCA shall not result in degradation to those resources unless outweighed by demonstrable shortor long-term benefits to those resource conditions; and b) For resources that are in a degraded condition, any new road or landing in an RCA shall not further degrade nor retard attainment of desired resource conditions unless outweighed by demonstrable short- or long-term benefits to those resource conditions; and c) Adverse effects to TEPC species or their habitats are avoided unless outweighed by demonstrable short- or long-term benefits to those TEPC species or their habitats. An exception to this standard is where construction of new roads in RCAs is required to respond to reserved or outstanding rights, statute or treaty, or respond to emergency situations (e.g., wildfires threatening life or property, or search and rescue operations). MA 10, MPC 5.1 Road Guideline (1023): Road construction or reconstruction may occur where needed: Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 6

11 a) To provide access related to reserved or outstanding rights, or b) To respond to statute or treaty, or c) To achieve restoration and maintenance objectives for vegetation, water quality, aquatic habitat, or terrestrial habitat; or d) To support management actions taken to reduce wildfire risks in wildland-urban interface areas; or e) To meet access and travel management objectives. MA 10, MPC 5.1 Road Guideline (1084): On new permanent or temporary roads built to implement vegetation management activities, public motorized use should be restricted during activity implementation to minimize disturbance to wildlife habitat and associated species of concern. Effective closures should be provided in project design. When activities are completed, temporary roads should be reclaimed or decommissioned and permanent roads should be put into Level 1 maintenance status unless needed to meet transportation management objectives. MA 10, Recreation Resources Objective (1045): Increase recreation opportunities for more diverse trail experiences to meet increasing demand for these experiences. MA 10, Recreation Resources Objective (1053): Maintain current motorized and mechanized travel routes within the recommended wilderness areas. Forest-wide Facilities and Road Goal (FRGO01): Provide and maintain a safe, efficient Forest transportation system that meets resource management and access needs, while mitigating degrading resource effects. Forest-wide Facilities and Roads Objective (FROB01): Analyze road system needs and associated resource effects in accordance with the established agency policy direction for roads analysis. Forest-wide Facilities and Roads Objective (FROB04): During fine-scale analyses, identify opportunities to reduce road-related degrading effects to help achieve other resource objectives. Forest-wide Facilities and Roads Objective (FROB06): Identify roads and facilities that are not needed for land and resource management, and evaluate for disposal or decommissioning. Forest-wide Facilities and Roads Objective (FROB012): During fine-scale analyses in areas where roads and facilities are identified as a potential concern or problem contributing to degradation of water quality, aquatic species or occupied sensitive or Watch plant habitat, evaluate and document where the contributing facilities are and prioritize opportunities to mitigate effects. Forest-wide Facilities and Roads Standard (FRST03): In support of road management decisions, use an interdisciplinary science-based roads analysis process such as Roads Analysis: Informing Decisions About Managing the National Forest Transportation System (USDA FS, 1999 Report FS-643). Forest-wide Facilities and Roads Guideline (FRGU03): Prior to decommissioning roads, opportunities related to those roads for potential development or use as travel routes for ATVs, mountain bikes, or other alternative forms of transportation, should be considered. Forest-wide Facilities and Roads Guideline (FRGU04): Roads that are not desired for public access or tribal uses, and that are no longer needed to manage the Forest or to provide access to inholdings should be considered for decommissioning and returning the lands that they occupy to desired resource management. Forest-wide Facilities and Roads Guideline (FRGU05): Where practical alternatives exist, roads in RCAs that are degrading riparian-dependent resources should be evaluated for obliteration or relocation. Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 7

12 Forest-wide Facilities and Roads Guideline (FRGU06): New roads and landings should be located out of RCAs wherever possible. When new roads or landings must be located in RCAs, they should be developed such that degrading effects to RCAs are mitigated. Forest-wide Facilities and Roads Guideline (FRGU08): Classified roads in intermittent use status should be evaluated for physical closure during periods of non-use and closed as appropriate. Forest-wide Facilities and Roads Guideline (FRGU09): Travel management should be used, as needed, to accomplish the following: a) Provide for the safety and welfare of the users. b) Protect threatened and endangered species and their habitat. c) Protect Forest resources, such as wildlife, soil, vegetation, and water. d) Provide a diversity of recreational experiences and reduce user conflicts. e) Protect road and trail investments. f) Comply with Forest contracts or permits, cooperative agreements, road purchase agreements, easement deeds, or other formal documents of the Government requiring that road use be controlled. g) Coordinate hunting and fishing opportunities with State agencies. Forest-wide Facilities and Roads Guideline (FRGU11): Where opportunities to mitigate facilities and road management practices causing degradation have been identified, consider mitigating through measures such as relocation, closure, and changes in management strategy, alteration, or discontinuance. Forest-wide Recreation Resources Goal (REGO05): Manage motorized and non-motorized travel and travel-related facilities to: a) Provide for public safety, b) Meet resource objectives and access needs, c) Mitigate road and trail damage, and d) Minimize maintenance costs and user conflicts. Forest-wide Recreation Resources Objective (REOB05): Identify and develop motorized use opportunities in locations appropriate for motorized uses through road to trail conversion, development of new trails, and other methods. Forest-wide Recreation Resources Objective (REOB20): During fine-scale analyses in areas where recreational trails are identified as a potential concern or problem contributing to degradation to other resources, evaluate and document the location of the trail degradation and prioritize opportunities to mitigate effects. Forest-wide Recreation Resources Standard (REST02): When new recreation facilities and trails must be located in RCAs, they shall be developed such that degrading effects to RCAs are mitigated. Where reasonable and practical location alternatives exist, new recreation facilities and trails should be located outside of RCAs. Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 8

13 Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 9

14 2.3 Existing Transportation System This section of the document describes the existing condition and status of all known roads and motorized trails within the 36,546-acre analysis area. There are approximately 97.4 miles of authorized roads, 9.2 miles of unauthorized roads, 0.4 miles of private road, and 20.0 miles of motorized trails 2 within the analysis area. The authorized transportation system was derived from existing Forest Transportation GIS layers (including INFRA and MVUM), combined with local knowledge. The unauthorized transportation system was derived from a combination of ground surveys and digital imagery. Definitions of authorized and unauthorized roads follow: Authorized roads are roads wholly or partially within or adjacent to National Forest System lands that are determined to be needed for long-term vehicle access. Authorized roads can include state roads, county roads, privately owned roads, National Forest System roads, and other roads authorized by the Forest Service. Unauthorized roads are roads on National Forest System lands that are not managed as part of the forest transportation system, such as unplanned roads, abandoned travelways, and off-road vehicle tracks that have not been designated and managed as trails or roads. Unauthorized roads also include those roads that were once under permit or other authorization and were not decommissioned upon termination of the authorization. Table 4 shows miles and jurisdiction categories of the roads and motorized trails in the analysis area. Figure 3 displays the authorized roads, unauthorized roads, and motorized trails within the analysis area. Table 4: Miles of authorized roads, unauthorized roads, and motorized trails in the Clear Creek watershed. Route Status Ownership Miles Authorized Roads Private 0.4 Forest Service 97.4 Unauthorized Roads Forest Service 9.2 Total Roads 107 Motorized Trails Forest Service 20.0 Total (roads & motorized trails) 127 Road Maintenance is defined as the ongoing upkeep of a road necessary to retain or restore the road to the approved road management objective. Road maintenance is classified in terms of Road Maintenance Levels. Table 5 gives a brief description of the maintenance levels and number of miles by operational maintenance level in the analysis area. Table 6 describes the trail designations. 2 Non-motorized trails (4.3 miles) were not included as they are outside the scope of the analysis. Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 10

15 Table 5: Authorized road miles by operational maintenance level in the Clear Creek watershed. Maintenance Definition Level Closed: Assigned to intermittent service roads during the time they are closed to vehicular traffic (including administrative use). Roads are physically closed with a 1 berm or rocks. Basic custodial maintenance is performed to keep damage to adjacent resources to an acceptable level and to perpetuate the road to facilitate future management activities. Open: Assigned to roads open for the public. These roads may be open yearlong or have a seasonal use period and are shown on the MVUM. OR Open- Administrative Use Only: Assigned to roads open for administrative or 2 permitted uses only. Access is restricted by a gate. These roads are not open to the public and are not shown on the MVUM. Miles Passenger car traffic is not a consideration and roads are maintained for high clearance vehicles. Open: Assigned to roads open and maintained for travel by a prudent driver in a 3 standard passenger car. User comfort and convenience are not considered 23 priorities. 4 Open: Assigned to roads that provide a moderate degree of user comfort and convenience at moderate speeds. Some roads may be paved and/or dust-abated. 0 5 Open: Assigned to roads that provide a high degree of user comfort and convenience. These roads are normally paved. 0 Total NFS Road Miles 97 Table 6: Summary of NFS motorized trail system a and season of use within the Analysis Area. Type of Trail and Season of Use Miles b Motorcycles (allowed yearlong) 11.6 Motorcycles (allowed yearlong) and other motorized vehicles <50 wide (allowed 4/16-9/30) 8.4 Total Motorized Trail Miles 20.0 a Does not include the Logging Gulch area roads that are currently being managed as a seasonal trail open for motor vehicles <50 wide from July 1 through September 30. These existing routes (10.1 miles) are tracked as roads to avoid double-counting. See Table 7 for additional information. b Mileage includes trail immediately adjacent to the analysis area. Trails 159 and 144 pass in and out of the analysis area numerous times and entire segments were included for assessment purposes (1.5 Scope of Analysis). The Forest Service obtained public road easements on NFS road 582 in the early 1950s from private landowners. This road segment is located at the south end of the analysis area near the junction with Highway 21. No cost-share roads occur within the analysis area. Table 7 shows the current management status and operational maintenance level of the Forest Service authorized roads and motorized trails in the analysis area. Management status 3 is described as open, open with a seasonal designation, open for administrative use only, or closed. The specific dates of seasonal use and the types of vehicles allowed are included. Unless noted otherwise, roads are open to full-size vehicles. 3 Management Status: Open = road open to the public yearlong; Open with Seasonal Designation = road open to the public seasonally; Open Administrative Use Only = road open only for administrative or permitted use and not for public use; or Closed = road physically closed to all motorized vehicles including administrative use. Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 11

16 Table 7: Existing lengths, operational maintenance levels, and management status of National Forest System authorized roads and motorized trails in the Clear Creek watershed. Road # Length Maintenance (miles) Level Management Status 502A Open 502A Closed Open -- Seasonal Designation (Open-Snowmelt to 12/14) Closed 514A Closed 514B Closed Open Closed Closed Open 545A Open 545AA Closed 545B Closed 545C Open -- Seasonal Designation (Open-7/01 through 09/30) 545D Closed 545DA Closed 545E Closed 545G Closed 545H Closed 545I Closed 545J Closed 545K Closed 545KA Closed 545KB Closed 545L Closed 545M Closed Open 546A Closed 546B Closed 546C Closed 546D Closed 546E Closed Open 550A Closed Open 552A Closed Closed -- Currently used as motorized trail (#650 on MVUM), Restricted to Motor Vehicles < 50" in width with Seasonal Designation (Open-7/1 through 9/30) Open Open Closed -- Currently used as motorized trail (#654 on MVUM), Restricted to Motor 1 562B 0.82 Vehicles < 50" in width with Seasonal Designation (Open-7/1 through 9/30) Closed -- Currently used as motorized trail (#651/652 in part on MVUM), Restricted to 1 562C 0.71 Motor Vehicles < 50" in width with Seasonal Designation (Open-7/1 through 9/30) Closed -- Currently used as motorized trail (#651 in part on MVUM), Restricted to Motor 1 562D 0.13 Vehicles < 50" in width with Seasonal Designation (Open-7/1 through 9/30)) 562E Closed Closed -- Currently used as motorized trail (#656 on MVUM), Restricted to Motor 1 562K 0.18 Vehicles < 50" in width with Seasonal Designation (Open-7/1 through 9/30)) Open -- Seasonal Designation (Open-Snowmelt through 12/14) 582A Open 582B Open -- Seasonal Designation (Open- 7/01 through 09/30) 582C Closed 582D Closed 582E Open 582F Open 582F Closed Open 592B Closed 592D Closed X502A Closed Trail # Length Maintenance Management Status Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 12

17 Road # Length Maintenance (miles) Level in Miles Interval #018- Long Cr 2.07 Irregular #144- Kirkham MP a Annual 25.4 #144- Kirkham MP a Annual Open Motorcycles Yearlong #159- Miller 3.17 a Annual Mtn # Logging (10.06) Irregular Gulch a Includes trail immediately adjacent to the analysis area. See Figure 3. Management Status Open Motorcycles Yearlong. Open Seasonally (4/15 9/30) other motor vehicles 50 wide or less. Open Motorcycles Yearlong. Open Seasonally (4/15 9/30) other motor vehicles 50 wide or less. Open Motorcycles Yearlong. Open Seasonally (4/15 9/30) other motor vehicles 50 wide or less. See NFS roads 562, 562B, 562C, 562D, 562K, and unauthorized roads UA51 and UA52. These roads are shown on the MVUM as a motorized trail, Open Seasonally to vehicles 50 or less with a seasonal designation (open 7/1 through 9/30). Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 13

18 Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 14

19 2.4 Public and Administrative Needs Administrative needs: The primary needs for land management activities include access for fire suppression, fuels treatments, vegetation management, trail maintenance, campground and dispersed campsite maintenance, recreational residences, fisheries/wildlife/watershed resource monitoring, and access to special use permit water systems. The majority (58%) of the watershed is managed for restoration and maintenance of forested landscapes. Thirty-three percent of the watershed is designated as inventoried roadless area or is within recommended wilderness. Public needs: The primary needs for public access include recreational pursuits and access to the Long Creek Summer Homes. The watershed is a popular recreation area during the spring, summer, and fall. Clear Creek road (582) is also a primary access route to developed and non-developed recreational areas outside the analysis area. During the winter, Forest System Road 582 is groomed for snowmobiles. The groomed route continues beyond the analysis area and connects with other groomed trails in Bear Valley. Summer recreation includes camping, fishing, sightseeing, ATV and motorcycle riding, hiking, picnicking, berry-picking and firewood gathering. The area is also popular during hunting seasons for deer, elk, cougar, bear, and wolf. 2.5 Existing Travel Management Decisions In 2003, a forest-scale roads analysis was completed as part of the interdisciplinary analysis supporting revision of the Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National Forest Plans. The forest-scale roads analysis focused on maintenance level 3, 4, and 5 roads and determined these roads are needed as part of the minimum transportation system, providing the backbone of the transportation network. For the Clear Creek watershed, there are no maintenance level 4 or 5 roads and 23.5 miles of maintenance level 3 roads. The maintenance level 3 roads include National Forest System Roads 582 (Clear Creek), 582A (Park Creek Campground), 510 (Whitehawk), and 515 (Red Mountain). The forest-scale roads analysis recognized that the determination of a minimum transportation system would need to be supplemented during watershed and project scale analysis with additional local roads (level 1 and 2) that are needed for management of the forest. The forest-scale roads analysis established a framework for further analysis that would consider associated values and risks for individual roads during project and watershed scale analysis. The intent of the framework is to provide guidance for differentiating between those roads that will potentially remain and those roads that may be removed or changed for local roads and assist in establishing road management priorities. In 2007, the Lowman Ranger District issued its first Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM), following direction in the 2005 Travel Management Rule (36 CFR Part 212). The Lowman District MVUM displays designated roads, trails and areas that are open to public motor vehicle use. The MVUM is updated annually, as needed, because of new decisions affecting travel management, to rectify mapping errors, and/or to clarify direction. 2.6 Available Resources to Maintain and Operate the Transportation System During the past five years, federally appropriated funds for the operation, maintenance and capital improvement of roads of the Boise National Forest average approximately $1,932,000 per year and varied considerably from a low of $1,754,000 in Fiscal Year 2009 to a high of $2,133,000 in Fiscal Year Funding sources for these activities included two budget line items: Capital Improvement and Maintenance of Roads (CMRD) and Legacy Roads and Trails (CMLG). The values disclosed above do not include the appropriations received in Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010 from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Acts of In addition to Federal appropriations, partnerships contribute to the maintenance of some of the National Forest Road System. The National Forest Roads and Trails Act of 1964 authorizes cooperative construction and maintenance of road systems, which includes Forest Road Agreements with public Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 15

20 road authorities and Costs Share Agreements with private owners of large tracts of land intermingled with National Forest System Lands. Also, the purchasers of Government timber sales and other products are typically required to maintain and /or reconstruct roads to a satisfactory condition commensurate with their particular use. These partnership contributions are estimated to be approximately five percent of the total appropriations in a given year. Given the existing miles of road needing to be maintained annually and the average level of funding, current and projected budgets only allow completion of roughly 30 percent of the required road maintenance. Therefore, the Forest is actively seeking options to reduce annual road maintenance costs through reduction of existing road mileage, reduction in road maintenance levels, or by increasing or augmenting the road maintenance budget. The failure to fully fund road maintenance results in incremental loss of roadway infrastructure (e.g. surfacing, drainage, structure) further increasing future annual and deferred maintenance costs, or most commonly, not fully maintaining the road to its assigned road maintenance level. The Operational Maintenance Level (i.e. Level 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5) of a particular road greatly influences the type of annual maintenance and therefore the cost of that maintenance. Table 8 discloses the existing estimated Forest-wide average annual maintenance costs per mile by Operational Maintenance Level based on January 2011 cost data. Table 8: Forest-wide annual road maintenance costs a by Operational Maintenance Level. Operational Existing Miles b Annual Cost Annual Maintenance Maintenance Level per Mile Cost 1 1,597 $65 $103, ,592 $1,400 $3,628, $5,100 $2,555, $13,400 $187, $17,400 $0 Totals 4,704 Miles $6,475,305 a Costs based on January 2011 data. Miles based on August 2013 data. Relative to the 36,546-acre analysis area and the existing transportation system, the estimated total annual maintenance costs for roads are currently about $171,505 (Table 9). Table 9: Annual road maintenance costs by Operational Maintenance Level in the Clear Creek watershed. Maintenance Level Total Miles within Clear Creek watershed Annual Maintenance Cost (per mile) Total Annual Maintenance Cost 1 37 $65 $2, $1,400 $51, $5,100 $117,300 Totals 97 miles $171,505 Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 16

21 3.0 Step 3 Issue Identification 3.1 Issues Identified The following key transportation system issues have been identified in the Clear Creek travel analysis area: 1. Some roads are not needed for management and are in poor locations. Roads can be decommissioned or closed and stabilized to improve watershed conditions and reduce sediments to adjacent streams. 2. Two open road segments are potentially hazardous due to deteriorating road conditions (NFSR #515- Red Mountain) or near-miss traffic flow (sharp corner at MP 6 on NFSR # 582). 3. Culverts on Big Spruce Creek, Long Creek, and Horse Creek are barriers to fish passage. 4. Road and motorized trail densities are high (>1.7 mi/mi 2 ) and are impacting habitat for some species. Roads that are not needed to meet specific resource needs (low value) could be decommissioned to reduce impacts to wildlife. 5. Surfacing or drainage features on some roads is inadequate. 6. Some closed roads have erosion concerns, including washed out road sections. 7. Open roads have deferred maintenance needs, specifically brushing for operator sight distance. 8. Access is needed to special use permits and mining claims. 9. Erosion and water quality concerns exist at the 545 ford of Clear Creek. Additionally, Clear Creek is occupied and designated critical habitat for ESA-listed bull trout at the ford location. Treatments to reduce disturbance to bull trout should be considered. 10. Some roads/segments in the Logging Gulch Area (#562/spurs) need to be removed from the road system and converted to a seasonal motorized trail, consistent with on-the-ground management of the route. 11. Specific sections of the Kirkham Ridge motorized trail are eroding and need to be re-routed. 12. Access is needed for fire protection and to access water sources. 13. Unauthorized roads that access designated dispersed campsites, recreation residences (Long Creek Summer Home Area), or administrative sites (Graney Creek water system) need to be added to the NF road system. 3.2 Public Involvement A draft version of this Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report was presented and discussed with the Boise Forest Coalition in 2011 as part of a collaborative process for the Clear Creek Integrated Project. The Boise Forest Coalition was formed in September 2010 to bring together diverse interests in forest management. The citizen-led Coalition represents several public and organizational interests and has an open membership. Interests and organizations represented by the Boise Forest Coalition include Trout Unlimited, The Blue Ribbon Coalition, Idaho Conservation League, The Wilderness Society, Boise Cascade Corporation, Southwest Idaho Mountain Bike Association, Woody Biomass Utilization, County Commissioners, Long Creek Summer Homeowners Association, Society of American Foresters, and others. The Coalition provided valuable input on the ford on the 545 road and the culverts and dispersed camping areas in the Big Spruce Creek area. Final recommendations in this document are a result of the collaborative effort with the Coalition. Subsequently, the Proposed Action for the Clear Creek Integrated Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 17

22 Project (November 2011) was a result of collaboration with the Coalition and included recommendations from this document applicable to the project area. Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 18

23 4.0 Step 4 Assessing Benefits, Problems and Risks This section examines the primary uses and environmental effects of the transportation system within the Clear Creek Watershed. This section analyzes the risks and benefits associated with the current transportation system including all roads and motorized trails. Risk /cost indicators (Table 10) and value /benefit indicators (Tables 11 and 12) were evaluated for each route within the Clear Creek travel analysis area. These criteria were adapted from the Forest Scale Roads Analysis Report, June 2003 for the Boise, Payette, and Sawtooth National Forests and also include some criteria specific to the Clear Creek Watershed. Appendix A displays individual route ratings for various categories of risk and values. These assigned ratings were based on criteria found in the Tables 10, 11, and 12. These ratings are utilized to make recommendations (Step 5) for whether routes should be kept on the transportation system, improved, or decommissioned. Table 10: Route risk/cost indicators and ratings. (Table continues on next page.) Item No. Indicator Description Road Risk/Cost Rating 1 Safety a Heavy traffic, numerous accidents, poor geometry H b Moderate traffic, some accidents, fair geometry M c Light traffic, few accidents, good geometry L 2 Watershed and Aquatic Indicators a Aquatic Conservation Strategy Priority Subwatershed H b Active, High Restoration Priority Subwatershed H c Passive, High Restoration Priority Subwatershed H d Active, Moderate Restoration Priority Subwatershed M e Passive, Moderate Restoration Priority Subwatershed M f Active, Low Restoration Priority Subwatershed L g Passive, Low Restoration Priority Subwatershed L 3 Terrestrial Wildlife: Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Restoration Strategy Class a b c d e f Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Restoration Strategy classification Active, High or Passive, High and high road and motorized trail density (>1.7 mi./sq. mile) Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Restoration Strategy classification Active, Moderate or Passive, Moderate and high road and motorized trail density (>1.7 mi./sq. mile) Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Restoration Strategy classification Active, Low or Passive, Low and high road and motorized trail density (>1.7 mi./sq. mile) Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Restoration Strategy classification Active, High or Passive, High and moderate road and motorized trail density (0.7 to 1.7 mi./sq. mile) Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Restoration Strategy classification Active, Moderate or Passive, Moderate and moderate road and motorized density (0.7 to 1.7 mi./sq. mile) Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Restoration Strategy classification Active, High or Passive, High and low road and motorized trail density (<0.7 mi./sq. mile) H H H M M L Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 19

24 Item No. g Indicator Description Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Restoration Strategy classification Active, Moderate or Passive, Moderate and low road and motorized trail density (<0.7 mi./sq. mile) Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Restoration Strategy classification Active, Low or h Passive, Low and moderate road and motorized trail density (0.7 to 1.7 mi./sq. mile), or low road and motorized trail density (<0.7 mi./sq. mile) 4 Noxious Weeds Road / trail within an area of known presence (>10% of road/ trail length shows a presence) Road / trail within areas of known susceptibility (>10% of road/ trail length within b susceptible) 5 Maintenance Road Risk/Cost Rating a Road is maintained more than once per use season. (cost) M b Road is maintained once or less per use season. (cost) L 6 Roads within an Inventoried Roadless Area M 7 Road/trail within Landslide Prone Area a Road/ trail is outside of RCA and has High LSP L b < 20% of road/trail is within RCA and has High LSP M c > 20% of road /trail is within RCA and has High LSP H 8 Road/trail within RCA a Road/trail is outside of RCA L b < 20% of road/trail is within RCA M c > 20% of road/trail is within RCA H 9 Number of Road/Trail with Stream Crossings a No Stream Crossing L b < 1/ mile M c > 1/ mile H Table 11: Road value/benefit indicators and ratings. Indicator No. Description Value Rating 1 Provides access to recreation facilities (developed sites or trailheads) H 2 Provides access to administrative sites H 3 Provides access to private inholdings, communities, or represents a legal right-ofway H 4 Provides access to special-use sites/developments or capital investment improvements H 5 Provides needed access to restoration/maintenance needs (MPC 5.1), within priority PVGs (1-3). H 6 Provides access to established dispersed recreation sites M 7 Provides needed access for fuels management or fire protection activities in urban interface areas H 8 Provides access for general use such as hunting, general dispersed recreation, driving for pleasure, gathering forest products, etc. L 9 Provides access to active mineral or energy production sites H 10 Road has a current cost/share maintenance agreement H L L H H Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 20

25 Indicator No. Description Value Rating 11 The road is a recognized arterial or collector road H Table 12: Trail value/benefit indicators and ratings. Indicator No. Description Value Rating 1 Provides access to recreation facilities (developed sites or trailheads) H 4 Provides access to special-use sites/developments or capital investment improvements H 6 Provides access to established dispersed recreation sites H 8 Provides access for general use such as hunting, general dispersed recreation, driving for pleasure, gathering forest products, etc. L Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 21

26 5.0 Step 5 Describing Opportunities and Setting Priorities 5.1 Opportunities Using the ratings described in Step 4, combined with the IDT s on-the-ground knowledge of the routes and conditions in the Clear Creek watershed, recommendations to close (change to ML 1), convert, decommission, or open routes were determined for each route and are detailed in Appendix A. From the ratings and recommendations, the following opportunities to improve the transportation system were identified: 1. Improve connectivity to suitable habitat by removing or repairing 3 culvert barriers on Big Spruce Creek 4 : a) Close (ML 1) NFS road 552 before the double creek crossing on Big Spruce Creek by removing the two culverts and installing a berm or rock barrier to prevent motorized vehicle travel across the streams. b) Replace the NFS road 582 culvert at Big Spruce Creek to allow aquatic organism passage. 2. Reduce sediment inputs from roads to streams to improve stream habitat conditions for resident fish by improving drainage on the following road segments: 582 road along Upper Clear Creek 552 road along Big Spruce Creek 582 road along Horse Creek 546 road along Fruitcake Creek 545 road along Long Creek 582B (Fawn Creek) 545 road ford on Clear Creek 3. Repair potentially hazardous road segments, specifically on a washout on the Red Mountain road (515) and the sharp corner at MP6 on the Clear Creek road (582). 4. Re-route specific sections of the Kirkham Ridge Trail (#144) to a ridge location to reduce erosion and help ensure good trail conditions in the long term. This opportunity applies to the Kirkham Ridge Trail from approximately MP 19.5 to MP 21.5 and includes segments of the trail within and immediately adjacent to the Clear Creek watershed and travel analysis area. 5. Change management of 16.0 miles of road from open seasonally snowmelt-12/15 to open seasonally 4/16 through 12/14. Specific dates, versus snowmelt, are needed for the MVUM. The 4/16 through 12/14 closure matches the period of time (12/15-4/15) when 582 road is groomed for snowmobiles. The seasonal designation date change would apply to Change management of 34.4miles of road that are spurs off NFS road 582 from open to open seasonally (4/16 through 12/14) to match the groomed snowmobile restrictions (see #5 above). Roads included in this group are 502A, 510, 515, 545, 545A, 545D, 545DA, 546, 552, 562, 582A, and 582E. 4 The February 2012 Draft TAP opportunities included 2 culvert replacements on Horse Creek. These were removed from the opportunity list following additional fieldwork. A natural barrier (waterfall-type, cascade) exists a short distance upstream of the culverts, limiting the additional habitat that would be gained through culvert replacement. Clear Creek Travel Analysis Report- September 2013 Page 22