Fishlake National Forest ORV EIS

Natural Heritage Emphasis Alternative^[1]

• Key Assumptions of the Natural Heritage Emphasis Alternative
• ORV routes and uses are indistinguishable from roads in terms of the nature of their impacts on natural ecosystems and cultural resources:^[2]
• Fragmentation, penetration of key wildlife habitat
• Trampling, fragmentation of declining or rare native plant populations
• Disturbance and displacement of wildlife
• Compaction of soils
• Erosion of soils
• Sedimentation of streams
• Disruption of aquatic habitat
• Introduction, establishment, and spread of invasive, exotic species (incl. whirling disease as well as invasive plants)
• Destruction of streambank, streambed integrity
• Enhanced access to areas where illegal driving and development of more user-created routes is difficult or impossible to prevent
• Enhanced access to wildlife harassment
• Direct impacts to and enhanced access to vandalism of cultural resources
• Noise, pollution
• High impact-area per user/day
• Roadless areas are key strongholds of native wildlife and habitat.
• ORV routes and uses are land-disturbing activities cumulative with livestock grazing, tree-cutting, and oil, gas, and mining activities.
• The cumulative effects of roads, routes, ORV use and other Forest uses on native, sensitive, and declining species and the health of their habitat are poorly understood.
• Roadless areas provide some degree of precaution in the face of insufficient understanding or monitoring of subtle but significant impacts on native wildlife and habitat.
• Costs of effectively managing and controlling ORV use are high
• Route maintenance costs
• Installation and maintenance of signs
• Installation and maintenance of effective barriers to closed routes
• Obliteration of newly-created user routes
• Mitigation costs
• Restoration of habitat damaged by illegal ORV use
• Monitoring for impacts of routes/ORV use
• Enforcement

• Key Goal: Protection of Fishlake NF's Natural Heritage
• Off-road vehicle routes are designated using specific criteria in accordance withExecutive Orders 11644 and 11989, including, but not limited to:
• avoid habitat of threatened, endangered, sensitive and declining plant and wildlife species habitat
• minimize soil erosion and water quality degradation
• maintain and protect wildlife movement corridors
• protect wildlife migration routes, denning, calving and fawning grounds
• avoid wildlife harassment or significant disruption of wildlife habitat
• prevent invasive species introduction, establishment, and spread
• minimize fragmentation of ecosystems
• protect meadows, wetlands, riparian areas, and streams
• avoid cultural resources (both Native American and pioneer)
• minimize conflicts (including noise and pollution) between off-road vehicle use and other existing or proposed uses on the Forest or neighboring public lands
• protect roadless and wilderness areas
• avoid redundancy
• be amenable to enforcement

• Routes to be closed to ORV travel (Round 1)
• All classified and unclassified routes proposed for closure by the Fishlake NF
• All unclassified (and selected classified) routes in:
• The updated Fishlake NF undeveloped area inventory.
• Critical mule deer winter areas
• Three SW ReGAP vegetation types
• Rocky Mountain Alpine-Montane Wet Meadow
• Rocky Mountain Subalpine Mesic Meadow
• Rocky Mountain Dry Tundra
• Within 150 feet of perennial streams, wetlands
• Major mule deer fawning areas^[3]
• Additional selected routes in UFN/UEC inventoried roadless areas
• Routes that serve no discernable purpose or destination.
• Routes that were installed for a project-specific purpose and were not decommissioned in compliance with NFMA or applicable contracts
• Routes that are already bermed, re-vegetated, and/or show little or no signs of construction, maintenance, or use.
• All cross-country "play" areas^[4]
• ORV routes contributing to more than 15 per cent of total bare ground (i.e., from all vehicle, recreation, and livestock use) per 200 feet of perennial stream bed.^[5]

• Routes to be added back in for designation as an ORV route, after eliminating them via criteria Round 1 (Round 2)
• Major arterial routes
• Routes that facilitate a developed destination
• Routes accessing private land or active mining claims (access for landowner use only; single user routes would be closed to the public and a special use permit issued for appropriate use.)
• Routes facilitating power lines, dams, etc. (access for maintenance only)
• Main Paiute ORV Route, parts of the Great Western Trail, and specific side-routes
• Arterial routes facilitating power lines, dams, etc.
• Routes that serve no purpose other than maintenance of water developments (for wildlife, livestock or culinary use), power lines, ground return telephone lines, electronic facilities, gravel pits, gauging stations, sno-tel sites and other administrative uses shall be open to permitee or agency access only. (gated OML level 1 administrative closure)
• All routes proposed for seasonal closure by the Fishlake NF deemed "open" by this alternative will be subject to the same seasonal closures indicated by the FS.

• Key Conditions of ORV Routes and Uses
• Provisional designation ORV routes are only provisionally designated , with future use and/or open designation conditional upon:
• adequate Forest enforcement
• monitoring sufficient to track reasonably likely adverse impacts
• use of the route as intended
• lack of illegal route-creation or cross-country use off the designated route
• lack of unanticipated potential adverse impacts to
• species of concern and/or native habitat
• other uses of the Forest.
• lack of facilitated harm, e.g., to riparian areas by dispersed camping associated with a designated ORV route; or damage to historic or other cultural resources accessed primarily by ORVs.
• lack of unanticipated adverse impacts or user conflicts identified during more comprehensive, cumulative analysis in the upcoming Forest Plan
• Declining species Where evidence indicates ORV use may be conflicting with reproduction, nesting, or rearing of native plant or wildlife species of concern, including native species whose populations and/or habitat are declining, benefit of doubt (precaution) will be given to the native species rather than seasonal or yearlong continued use of the route.
• Registration legible at 150 feet All ORVs display registration numbers that are legible from 150 feet.
• Citizen monitoring The Forest will create a format and criteria for citizens to submit reports of damage that will facilitate their monitoring of illegal routes and cross country travel, and damage to Forest values such as meadows, riparian zones, and erodible slopes.

• Closure of Routes
• Those closed segments of roads and routes that are visible from points along nearby open roads and routes will be obliterated.
• In areas where re-vegetating is viable, native vegetation will be planted in the roadbed of obliterated route segments. In areas where re-vegetating is likely to fail or invite invasive species, vertical coarse woody debris ("vertical mulching") will be used to obscure the closed roads and routes.
• If obliteration, selective re-vegetation, and/or vertical mulching are not possible, closed roads and routes will be physically blocked at the entrance and wherever they intersect open roads, routes, and non-motorized trails. Where regular administrative access is not needed, vertical mulching or other natural closure methods will be given preference over locked gates

1 This title does not imply that the Fishlake NF's Preferred Alternative ignores natural heritage. The title indicates the type of route designation criteria the alternative emphasizes, i.e., the Forest's native ecosystem and species. In other words, the point is not to "restrict ORV access," but to take precaution with regard to native ecosystems and species that have been diminished on the Forest and which are currently subject to cumulative impacts from ORVs, other motorized vehicles, roads, livestock grazing, fire suppression, logging, and oil, gas, and mining activities. An alternative title might be "Native Ecosystem Emphasis" Alternative.

2 Sometimes a road may provide more impact than an ORV route. e.g., in terms of slope failure or sedimentation. Sometimes an ORV route may provide more impact than a road, e.g., in terms of penetration of key wildlife habitat.

3 Presumably the Fishlake NF knows the location of major fawning areas of mule deer. The UDWR does not map these and we have thus been unable to screen proposed designated routes for their presence in mule deer fawning areas.

4 Cross-country ORV "play" areas are inappropriate on National Forest lands, as they represent an irretrievable sacrifice of natural resources and validate a perspective that National Forest land is open for destruction by individual recreationists.

5 Presumably the Fishlake NF knows the condition of its perennial stream riparian areas in order to effect a cumulative analysis of compromised streambanks and insure that ORV route designation does not exceed this threshold of 15 feet bare bank per 200 feet of perennial streams.