1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED

Transcription

1 1.0 Purpose and Need 1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED 1.1 INTRODUCTION This Environmental Assessment (EA) describes the environmental effects of the USDA Forest Service (USFS) proposal to improve recreation opportunities for the public and manage recreation use within the Brainard Lake Recreation Area (BLRA or Brainard Area). The BLRA is an important and unique recreation resource along Colorado s Front Range. It is a popular area for a wide variety of recreation uses. Populations along the Front Range are increasing and recreation use of the area is increasing as well. Motorized access on the Brainard Lake and Left Hand Lake Reservoir Roads occurs during the summer and fall. Activities during these months include camping, hiking, biking, fishing, viewing scenery, birding and access to the Indian Peaks Wilderness (IPW). During winter and spring, the area is closed to all motorized vehicles, including snowmobiles. Skiing and snowshoeing are the main winter recreation activities. The USFS has developed a long-range management plan with the goals of providing a high quality recreation experience and preserving the natural resources of the area. Included in the management plan is a vision for the area: The BLRA will fulfill its unique juxtaposition as a developed recreation complex and backcountry recreation area adjacent to the Indian Peaks Wilderness, by providing a variety of quality recreation opportunities within the capacity of the area, while protecting natural resources and managing the BLRA to minimize impacts to the Wilderness resource. (BLRA Management Plan, 2005, Section 3) Also incorporated in the management plan is a list of recommended projects (see Appendix A) to meet the goals and fulfill the vision for the BLRA. This environmental analysis includes those projects from the management plan that could be implemented within the next five to ten years. This subset list is in the Proposed Action. It is discussed below in more detail (see Chapter 2 Alternative E). The Forest Service has developed this EA in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1970, Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations, the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) and other applicable federal and state laws and regulations. This EA discloses the direct, indirect and cumulative environmental impacts that would result from the of the Proposed Action and alternatives. The purpose and need for action and key public and agency issues define the scope of this analysis. This analysis is tiered to the 1997 Revision of the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests and Pawnee National Grassland (Forest Plan). A copy of the Forest Plan is available at the Boulder Ranger District or on the Forest website: 1

2 1.0 Purpose and Need 1.2 LOCATION The BLRA is located west of the City of Boulder within Boulder County on the Boulder Ranger District of the Arapaho Roosevelt National Forest. It is located west of the town of Ward and adjacent to the Indian Peaks Wilderness (IPW). The project area is shown on Map 1-1. The project area includes Township (T) 2 North (N), Range (R) 73 West (W), Sections 33, 34, 35 and 36 and T1N, R73W, Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10 and 11. The project area contains approximately 3,531 acres. Approximately 3,143 acres are administered by the National Forest, 40 acres are owned by the State and the remaining 348 acres are privately owned. The Proposed Action and alternatives apply to the National Forest system lands. 2

3 1.0 Purpose and Need Map 1-1: Project Location 3

4 1.0 Purpose and Need 1.3 PROPOSED ACTION The USFS proposes to better manage the increasing visitor use of this popular recreation area. To accomplish this, facilities would either be improved or developed and management regulations would be put in place. The Proposed Action includes: Constructing a new campground located east of the fee station. Relocating and constructing the concessionaire/forest Service administration site. Constructing an all-season parking area (in this document, referred to as the East Parking Area) east of the entrance station. Reconstructing the entrance station is to include a fee booth, information kiosk and winter warming hut. Reconstructing the Left Hand Park Reservoir parking area. Improving facilities at Red Rock Lake for day use. Reconstructing the Pawnee Campground. Reconstructing the Pawnee Picnic Ground and a portion of the Pawnee Campground to accommodate day use parking (in this document, referred to as the West Parking Area). Closing the north side of Brainard Lake to motorized travel. Developing the south side of the road around Brainard Lake for two-way traffic to the various trailheads. Improving boat access at Brainard Lake. Reconstructing Arickaree, Mitchell Creek and Niwot Picnic Grounds. Trails would be improved, reconstructed and new trail connections constructed; three trails (Sourdough, Waldrop and Snowshoe) would be reconstructed or upgraded and designated as a hiker/bike route between the East Parking Area and the West Parking Area. Various regulations would be implemented to protect the natural resources of the area, ensure visitor safety and minimize visitor conflicts. A non-significant Forest Plan amendment would be needed to change the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) classification and boundaries from the existing Forest Plan designation (Appendix F, Map 2-3) to the recommended ROS (Appendix F, Map 2-4). For a detailed description of this Proposed Action, refer to Chapter 2, Alternative E of this document. After a decision is made, the project would be implemented through USFS and grant funding, by Forest Service personnel and through partnerships and volunteer efforts over a multi-year timeframe, until the project is completed. 1.4 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE ACTION The Forest Plan and the Brainard Lake Recreation Area Management Plan (BLRA Management Plan) include a vision for the area, which is further articulated in desired conditions. The current condition of the area does not meet these desired conditions (DC). Therefore, there is a need for action to move the current condition towards the desired condition. Below is a description of the Desired Conditions (in bold and italics) and the current condition in the BLRA. The values of the Brainard Lake Recreation Area and the adjacent Indian Peaks Wilderness (IPW) will be protected and enhanced: The BLRA and the IPW are both popular destinations, each providing a different type of recreation experience. Management actions will improve and enhance the recreation opportunities/experiences available in the BLRA, which are distinct from the experiences available in the 4

5 1.0 Purpose and Need adjacent Wilderness (protecting both of their own intrinsic values). Opportunities for visitors to enjoy the high peaks, lakes and outstanding scenery year-round are emphasized, while providing a range of opportunities from developed recreation to a more primitive backcountry experience. Vehicle access into the area is based on available parking capacity and the area is managed within that capacity. Current recreation use during the summer months is concentrated largely at Brainard Lake and west into the IPW, with relatively little use occurring in the eastern portion of the BLRA. The Wilderness trails receive heavy use and parking at the trailheads often exceeds capacity. Vehicle congestion is common, parking in undesignated areas is a problem and a stream of vehicles and pedestrians sharing the road to the trailheads creates an unsafe situation. There is a need to protect and enhance the values of the Wilderness, while providing improved recreation opportunities at Brainard Lake and to the east. Many visitors looking for a short, easy hike near a lake with views of the high peaks use the Wilderness trails, because the opportunities elsewhere in the BLRA do not provide the experience they are seeking. Visitors to the area will experience an environment where the sights and sounds of nature predominate: The undeveloped character of the area away from roads and trails will be maintained and all trails will be managed for non-motorized use. The area will be managed to protect its outstanding scenery and all constructed facilities will be designed to blend in with the natural setting. Vehicles are allowed to access the area, but do not dominate the landscape. Undesignated spur roads, social trails and the impacts of unmanaged/overused campsites (a proliferation of campfire rings, damage to live trees for firewood, trash, evidence of human waste, loss of ground vegetation and soil compaction) are obvious along the Left Hand Park Reservoir Road and near Red Rock/Sourdough TH and do not meet the desired conditions for the area. The sound of target shooting in the BLRA is a nuisance to many visitors who come to the area seeking a more peaceful recreation experience with nature. The current signs and facilities in the BLRA do not meet the Forest Service Built Environment Image Guide (BEIG) and generally do not blend well with the natural setting. The current regulations are inadequate to meet the desired conditions (ensuring the sights and sounds of nature predominate). Vehicles frequently dominate the landscape on high use days in the vicinity of Brainard Lake and west to the Wilderness trailheads. Visitor safety is emphasized: Separate roads and trails will be provided for vehicles and pedestrians, respectively. Roads and trails will be safe, efficient and the minimum necessary to serve the needs of visitors. Forest Service management through signing, on-site facilities, field presence and sufficient law enforcement will add to the visitors information and security needs. Currently, traffic congestion during high-use periods creates unsafe conditions, both between vehicles and between pedestrians and vehicles sharing the road. Emergency vehicles encounter delays in response time due to this congestion. Signing in the area lacks clear, effective information about safety, regulations and interpretation. Winter recreation facilities will meet visitor s needs: Winter parking facilities will meet average peak demand on busy, winter weekends (approximately 200 vehicles). Restrooms (vault toilets) will be provided. An information kiosk/warming hut will provide visitors necessary information as well as a place to warm up on a cold winter day. Currently, parking and traffic congestion is a problem at the Red Rock/Sourdough trailhead during the winter months. Parking capacity is exceeded on most weekends, creating a very congested and unsafe situation between vehicles and between vehicles and pedestrians (skiers/snowshoers) sharing the road. Emergency vehicle response is delayed because of the congestion. There are no restroom facilities, which is a sanitation/resource concern given the large number of visitors. Current signing is not centrally located to entice winter users to stop and read the information. 5

6 1.0 Purpose and Need Natural resources (soil, water, biological resources) will be protected while providing for the recreation needs of the public: Natural resources will be protected by concentrating visitor use to designated roads and trails, closing and rehabilitating non-designated roads and trails and establishing management regulations regarding dispersed camping, vehicle access, parking, etc. Currently, visitors are creating undesignated trails through wetlands which impact plants, soil structure and water quality. Left Hand Park Reservoir, Red Rock Lake, sections of the Colorado Mountain Club (CMC) Ski Trail and areas around Brainard Lake, have a network of confusing, undesignated, social trails also impacting these resources. Visitors accessing dispersed campsites along Left Hand Park Reservoir Road are creating and/or expanding undesignated campsites and spur roads with their vehicles. In addition, four-wheel drive vehicles and all terrain vehicles (ATV) are expanding the spur roads and causing resource damage. Proliferation of dispersed campsites near Red Rock/Sourdough Trailhead is causing resource impacts such as excessive campfire rings, damage to live trees for firewood, trash, evidence of human waste, loss of ground vegetation and soil compaction. The purpose/objectives of this project are to: Protect natural resources in the area while providing a quality recreation experience and enhancing visitor safety by: Reducing vehicle congestion at trailheads, parking areas and along the road. Improving winter recreation facilities. Concentrating visitor use on designated trails and eliminating social trails (user created nondesignated trails). Making sign improvements (i.e., directional, interpretive, educational, regulatory) to provide visitors the needed information about the area. Minimizing impacts of dispersed camping and user-created roads and trails. Implementing management regulations to minimize conflicts and protect resources. Making improvements to the trail system. Protect the values of the IPW by: Improving developed recreation opportunities (campgrounds/picnic areas/parking areas) in the BLRA away from the Wilderness. Providing improved trail opportunities throughout the BLRA. Implementing management regulations to protect Wilderness resources. 1.5 EXISTING DIRECTION This section describes pertinent direction of laws and regulations, the Forest Plan and BLRA Management Plan. No project the Forest Service proposes can be outside of laws and regulations. The Proposed Action responds to the standards, goals and guidelines outlined in the Forest Plan and helps move the project area towards desired conditions described in the Forest Plan. Direction including all goals, objectives, standards and guidelines listed in the Forest Plan must be followed. If the project does not follow Forest Plan direction, then an amendment to the Forest Plan for that particular direction would be needed. This is the case for this project (see Chapter 2, Proposed Action). Forest Plan The Forest Service uses two types of decision-making processes: programmatic and project level. The Forest Plan is a programmatic planning document and a project-level analysis, such as this EA, is used to 6

7 1.0 Purpose and Need decide how to best implement the Forest Plan. The Brainard Lake Recreation Area EA is a project-level analysis. The scope is confined to addressing relevant issues and possible environmental consequences of implementing this project. The decision on this project is intended to comply with the guiding direction of the programmatic decision, the Forest Plan. It does not attempt to reconsider decisions made at the programmatic level. The Forest Plan embodies the provisions of the National Forest Management Act of 1976, its implementing regulations and other guiding documents. The Forest Plan sets forth in detail the direction for managing the land and resources of the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests and Pawnee National Grasslands. Where appropriate, this EA also tiers to the Forest Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement (USFS 1997b). In addition to providing forest-wide direction, the Forest Plan provides Geographic Area direction. The Brainard Lake Recreation Area boundary is the same as the Brainard Geographic Area. The Forest Plan provides goals and desired conditions, standards and guidelines and a travel management strategy for the Brainard Geographic Area (Forest Plan, pages 59 to 61). The goals and desired conditions are summarized in the Purpose and Need section of this EA. The Forest Plan also provides management area (MA) direction. The majority of Brainard Lake Recreation Area falls into MA 8.21, Developed Recreational Complexes (Forest Plan, pages ). MA 8.21 areas are managed to provide for a variety of recreational opportunities in highly developed, multi-site recreational complexes. The remaining area of Brainard Lake Recreation Area (BLRA) is managed as MA 1.3, Backcountry Recreation (Forest Plan, pages ). These areas are managed to provide non-motorized recreational opportunities in a natural appearing landscape. The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) is a system for planning and managing recreational resources that categorizes recreation opportunities into seven classes. (See Appendix B, Glossary, for a description of these seven classes). The BLRA includes two of these classes, Rural and Semi-primitive non-motorized. (Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Map as part of the Forest Plan maps). The Proposed Action includes a Forest Plan Amendment to change the classifications and their boundaries. For additional information, refer to this EA, Chapter 2, Proposed Action and Chapter 3, Issue 1: Quality Recreational Opportunities. Brainard Lake Recreation Area Management Plan The Management Plan provides a context, vision, goals, objectives and a core plan for management of the BLRA. The management plan lists by priority, infrastructure improvement or development projects including parking areas, campgrounds, picnic grounds, roads and trails (see Appendix A). This EA uses that list to develop the Proposed Action. Laws Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA) Requires federal agencies to ensure that actions authorized, funded, or carried out by them are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of Proposed, Threatened, or Endangered (PTE) species, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of their critical habitat. National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (NHPA) This law established policy regarding historic preservation and provided for the establishment of the National Register of Historic Places. 7

8 1.0 Purpose and Need 1.6 DECISIONS TO BE MADE Given the purpose and need, the deciding official reviews the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternatives in order to make the following determinations: The proposed recreation development/management projects comply with applicable standards and guidelines found in the Forest Plan and all laws governing Forest Service actions. Sufficient site-specific environmental analysis has been completed. The proposed projects benefit the public overall. With these assurances, the deciding officer must decide: Whether or not to accept the Proposed Action or the No Action Alternative. What, if any, additional actions should be required to better manage natural resources and recreational opportunities in the project area. 1.7 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Scoping for the Brainard Lake Recreation Area Development/Management Plan and EA project was conducted during November and December The public meetings were advertised in a press release dated November 2, 2003 that was sent to the Daily Camera, Nederland Mountain Ear, Denver Post, Associated Press, United Press, Colorado Daily and Longmont Times. A scoping letter and Opportunities for the Future document describing the Brainard Lake Recreation Area planning project were mailed to interested and affected parties on November 13, The scoping letter contained the following information: 1) introduction, background and location of the proposed project; 2) the purpose and need for the proposed project; 3) potential planning components; 4) comment form; and 5) public involvement opportunities. Three open houses were held to explain the project and solicit comments from the public. The meetings took place on November 13 and December 11, 2003 at the Boulder Ranger District office and on November 19, 2003 at Nederland High School. Comments were requested on the proposed project for a 30-day period ending January 8, However, comments are accepted at any point during the analysis process until a decision is made. In addition, on October 9, 2004 the Forest Service hosted a site visit to the Brainard Area to share information and answer questions from the public about the project. Approximately thirty people attended the field visit. On October 29, 2004, an Environmental Assessment, titled Brainard Lake Recreation Area Development/Management Plan, was mailed to a mailing list of 105 individuals and organizations. In addition to direct mailing, the EA was available on the Internet, at the Boulder Ranger District office and at local public libraries. Sixty-four comment letters were received from individuals, groups, private companies, Boulder County and the Town of Ward. On November 10, 2004, another open house meeting for the public was held at the Boulder District office to provide additional information and answer questions about the proposed project and EA. Because there was confusion concerning the closure of the official comment period and because new concerns were raised, it was determined to rework the EA sent out in October. A modified Proposed Action was developed. The reworked Proposed Action was substantially different from the October EA s 8

9 1.0 Purpose and Need Proposed Action (Alternative B) and the two other action alternatives (C and D). This substantive difference from what the public had seen before necessitated that the public have an opportunity for review of this modified Proposed Action with a thirty-day official comment period. In addition, a flyer announcing the Brainard Lake EA, the management planning process and describing how to become involved was posted at the main Brainard Lake Area Winter Trailhead in February Beginning in July 2005, handouts were provided to the public at the BLRA Entrance station soliciting comments about the future of the area. Previous comment periods (public meetings, field trips, scoping letters) and the 30-day comment period starting in October 2004 are considered to be comments for scoping. The only official 30-day comment period to give standing for appeal of the decision based on this EA will begin the day after publication of legal notice in the Boulder Daily Camera in August, COMMENT SUMMARY Ninety letters were received during initial scoping. Comments were reviewed and categorized into three areas: 1) issues to be addressed in the EA analysis, 2) comments beyond the scope of the project and 3) issues eliminated from detailed study because of known minimal or no effects, or effective mitigation. These issues were discussed in the October EA. Sixty-four letters were received during the comment period after the October EA was made available to the public. New issues were raised in these letters. Below is a summary of some of the concerns. Some people commented concerning the sensitivity of the Red Rock Lake area. Some did not want a trail encircling the Lake fearing ecological damage and interference with wildlife accessing the Lake. Some felt too much development (picnic ground, campground, a trail and a parking area) was proposed near the Lake, which would adversely affect wildlife. The Proposed Action in this EA no longer includes a campground at this location and the trail would not circle the Lake. Many people expressed concern about the shuttle system and the lack of a detailed plan on how it would work and concerns about various users being inconvienced by the timing (e.g., hunters, people coming off the Wilderness trails too late to catch the last shuttle, etc.) and concern that the shuttle may increase the number of visitors to the Wilderness Area. The Forest Service determined that the shuttle system was not ripe for decision--not enough details could be incorporated into shuttle operations to meaningfully discuss its impacts. The shuttle system proposal has been dropped from this EA s Proposed Action. It still remains in the BLRA Management Plan and may be looked at in the future if increasing visitor use necessitates that it be analyzed. The Town of Ward expressed concern about the new developments on the east end of the BLRA and the potential impact to their drinking water supply that originates just east of the BLRA. The Forest Service was sensitive to the concern for Ward s water quality and modified the October EA Proposed Action by locating all development (parking area, administrative site and campground) west of the ridge at the east end of the BLRA, north of the main road. The campground now proposed is approximately half the size of the original proposal and would only be built if other new campsites along the Peak-to-Peak Scenic Byway (Colorado Highway 72) were not built. Currently, there are discussions underway to expand a campground along the Peak-to-Peak Byway north of the BLRA. 9

10 1.0 Purpose and Need Some expressed a desire that in the summer, the Red Rock/Sourdough Trailhead Parking Area remain outside of the BLRA fee structure to provide a non-fee alternative for visitors and as an incentive to consider alternative quality hiking opportunities in the BLRA but outside the IPW. There were also suggestions to include the Left Hand Park Reservoir Road into the BLRA fee structure so that retained fees could be directed to necessary projects, operations and maintenance in the Left Hand Reservoir area as well. In addition, the Forest Service evaluated its conceptual design for the proposed reconstruction of the entrance station and concluded that it needed to be located prior to the Left Hand Park Reservoir Road junction, thereby making it logistically essential to include the entire Left Hand Park Reservoir Area into the whole of the BLRA and under its fee structure. The Forest Service Proposed Action includes the Left Hand Park Reservoir Area into the BLRA fee structure and excludes the summer use of the Red Rock/Sourdough Trailhead Parking Area from the BLRA fee structure boundary. People recognized that two-way traffic across Brainard Lake dam/bridge would be a potential traffic bottleneck. The Forest Service recognized the problem and in it s letter accompanying the October 2004 EA mentioned a new possible alternative of closing the road on the north side of Brainard Lake and using the south side of the Lake for two-way traffic, as suggested in a public comment. This is now part of the proposed alternative (Alternative E) in this 2005 EA. Many other comments, questions and clarifications were raised. Some were outside the scope of this analysis. Others are addressed in Chapter 3 of this EA under environmental consequences. 1.9 ISSUES The following are the issues identified during the public and internal scoping efforts and during the first 30-day comment period (which is treated as another scoping period) applicable to this proposed planning project. Not all comments received during the scoping efforts were relevant to the analysis. For example, comments expressing general support or lack thereof for a component of the project did not result in an issue. The issues have been separated into two groups: Key issues and Issues Dismissed from Detailed Analysis. 1. Key Issues. Key issues are used to develop and analyze the alternatives (see Chapters 2 and 3 of this document). They involve potential effects to resources that might not be addressed by existing laws, Forest Plan standards and guidelines, policies, or mitigation measures. 2. Issues Dismissed from Detailed Analysis. These issues are not given detailed analysis because the potential effects do not vary between alternatives and/or the effects are not expected to be significant, can be mitigated, or are not within the scope of this document. 10

11 1.0 Purpose and Need The following are the issues and questions raised during public and internal scoping efforts applicable to this proposed project: Key Issues Quality Recreational Opportunities - The BLRA is a popular destination for a variety of recreation activities year round: camping, hiking, fishing, viewing scenery, cross-country skiing, snowshoeing and access to the adjacent Indian Peaks Wilderness. Recreation use is expected to increase due to the increasing population along the northern Front Range (Denver, Boulder, Fort Collins, etc.). Providing quality recreation opportunities for visitors to the area is a challenge. What types of recreation activities are appropriate for the area? How can vehicle access be managed to ensure vehicles do not dominate the landscape in the vicinity of Brainard Lake during the summer and at the closure gate in winter? What is the effect of eliminating dispersed camping from most areas in the BLRA? Would improved interpretation/education/direction signing enhance the visitor s experience? Are additional regulations needed to minimize conflicts between different recreation uses and to protect resources? Visitor Safety - Vehicle congestion during the peak season creates unsafe situations between vehicles and between pedestrians and vehicles sharing the road. Emergency response time can be delayed due to traffic congestion and inadequate parking and turn-around areas. Forest Service/law enforcement presence is not at the desired level to readily enforce regulations and provide visitor assistance. Signing could be improved to assist with this as well. Would additional Forest Service and law enforcement presence enhance the visitor safety? Would improved signing enhance visitor safety? How can the roads and trails be designed and managed to lessen congestion and conflicts? Indian Peaks Wilderness - The Wilderness borders the BLRA to the west. Most people visiting the BLRA also hike into the Wilderness and many enter the area specifically to visit the Wilderness. The Wilderness receives heavy use and parking at the trailheads often exceeds capacity. There is a need to protect the Wilderness from overuse while maintaining reasonable access. Would improving the recreation opportunities outside the Wilderness (at Brainard Lake, at the entrance area and throughout the BLRA) reduce some of the visitor pressure occurring in the Wilderness? Resource Protection (soil, water, biological) - Visitors are creating/expanding social roads, trails and dispersed campsites, both in the BLRA and the Wilderness, which adversely impact vegetation, soils, wetlands and water quality. Some of the current recreation use is within the watershed of nearby communities who depend on high quality water for their domestic needs. These communities are concerned that recreation activities and/or new development of recreation facilities have the potential to affect the quality of their water. There are concerns about protection of wildlife and plant species. Much of the BLRA is within Canada lynx (federally threatened species) habitat. Elk use and migrate through the area in the summer. Moonwort plants (several tiny, rare species) occur at this elevation. Concerns have also been raised about impacts to wildlife at Duck Lake east if the BLRA. How can recreation impacts be minimized to protect wildlife/plants? Would closing social roads and trails protect natural resources? Would eliminating dispersed camping within the BLRA south of the South St. Vrain Creek during the summer protect natural resources? How can the watershed of the nearby communities be protected? 11

12 1.0 Purpose and Need Issues Dismissed from Detailed Analysis These issues are not given detailed analysis because the potential effects do not vary between alternatives and/or the effects are not expected to be significant, can be mitigated either through project design or mitigation measures, are governed by law, or are not within the scope of the Proposed Actions. These issues include: Fees, Permits and Concessionaire: Comments concerning the fees collected at Brainard Lake Recreation Area are not part of the scope of this project and will be reviewed under a separate evaluation by the Forest Service. Comments received in this planning process about fees will be considered in the upcoming evaluation. Gate Closure: Comments concerning the timing of the closure of the gate at the recreation area are not part of the scope of this analysis. This issue will be evaluated and addressed by the Forest Service as part of ongoing management of Brainard Lake Recreation Area. The Forest Service will provide information regarding seasonal gate openings and closings at the BLRA entrance station, the Forest Service office in Boulder and with postings on-site at the BLRA. Wildfire Occurrence: A concern raised by the public and the nearby town of Ward was the need to take management actions to minimize potential wildfire hazards. These potential wildfire hazards will be addressed in a future hazardous fuels reduction planning process, but is outside the scope of this project. Shuttle Service: There was concern from the public that the possibility of introducing a shuttle service to address safety and access issues, might deny them full access into the area, be inconvenient and leave hikers returning late stranded at the trailheads. This is a complex issue, which needs further study and monitoring data of recreation use. It was dropped from the Proposed Action and is dismissed from further analysis in this EA but will be carried forth as a future project, if warranted, in the BLRA Management Plan. Socio-Economic Analysis: This EA analyzes two alternatives, the No Action and the Proposed Action. The three action alternatives (B, C, D) described in the October EA included a Socio- Economic Analysis but were eliminated from further analysis. The reason for not analyzing these alternatives is located on page 29 of this document. Alternative A and E described in this current EA do not include a Socio-Economic Analysis. This is because there are negligible socioeconomic impacts between the No Action and the Proposed Action of this EA. The level of visitation to the BLRA will not change substantially between the alternatives. The concessionaire and the Forest Service would receive the same benefits from entry fees and local businesses would continue to be patronized at the same level for either alternative. Since there are no measurable differences between these two alternatives, this issue was dismissed from further analysis. Air Quality: Air quality within the project analysis area is within National Ambient Air Quality Standards and not located within an EPA-designated non-attainment area for PM 10 or ozone. Air quality issues under all alternatives were considered but dismissed from further analysis since emissions from the project area should be negligible and well below emission standards and not pose a threat to Class 1 or 2 areas, wildlife, vegetation or human health Rangeland Resources: There are no grazing allotments in the Brainard Lake Recreation Area. Therefore, there would be no effects to rangeland resources so this issue was dismissed from further analysis. 12

13 1.0 Purpose and Need Cultural Resources: There are archaeological sites, which have been determined to be eligible for the national Register of Historic Places in consultation with the Colorado State Historic Preservation Office (COSHPO). Heritage resource specialists based this determination on a literature review of the proposed project and a Class III cultural resources inventory in the project area. Forest Service archaeologists documented a determination no historic properties affected for this project. COSHPO has concurred (6/25/04) that this project would have no effect on historic properties. For these reasons and with the adoption of the following mitigation measures, cultural resources can be dismissed from further analysis. o If prehistoric or historic materials are found during the course of project, work in that area would cease until the District Ranger has been notified. Work in the area of the cultural resource may not resume until a professional archaeologist has evaluated the cultural materials and potential effects. The discovery would be protected until the party undertaking the work is notified in writing to proceed by the authorized officer. o If so requested by the COSHPO or an Indian Tribe, the Forest Service would conduct additional consultation for the identification of properties of traditional cultural and religious significance to Indian Tribes or other interested parties. Mitigations may be required if areas or sites are determined to be of importance to an Indian Tribe CONSULTATION NEEDED FOR THIS ANALYSIS The following consultation is required in addition to a USFS Finding of No Significant Impact and Decision Notice before the Proposed Action may proceed: Table 1-1 Consultation Needed With Other Agencies Consultation SHPO Clearance on Heritage Resources Consultation on Threatened and Endangered Species with USFWS Discussion concerning developing trail around Left Hand Park Reservoir Agency/Company Colorado State Historical Preservation Office US Fish and Wildlife Service Left Hand Park Reservoir Ditch Company 13

14

15 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 2.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter describes and compares a range of reasonable alternatives considered for the Brainard Lake Recreation Area Project. It includes a description and map (Appendix F) of each alternative considered. Applicable project specific design criteria, mitigation and monitoring measures are described for each alternative. Also included in this chapter are alternatives considered, but eliminated from further analysis. 2.2 ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS The Forest Service identified a purpose and need for improving management and facilities in the BLRA in 2003 and began scoping for public comments and concerns in November Four alternatives were identified for detailed study in the EA released in October 2004: Alternative A No Action Alternative B Proposed Action Alternative C Maximum Action Alternative D Minimum Action Public comments on the October 2004 EA raised additional issues and concerns not previously considered. The responsible official, District Ranger Christine Walsh, determined it was best to reanalyze the Proposed Action and the alternatives in light of these comments. This led to development of a modification of the Proposed Action and elimination of the other action alternatives (including the Proposed Action) from the October 2004 EA. Refer to Section 2.6 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study of this chapter for an explanation to eliminate these three alternatives from analysis in this 2005 EA. The no action alternative from the October 2004 EA was used in this analysis as required by law. Following completion of all scoping (including the October 2004 comment period) and issue analysis, the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) of resource specialists met to discuss the array of relevant issues and to develop alternatives. An alternative was considered reasonable if it was feasible and would achieve the purpose and need of the project. Alternatives considered but eliminated from further analysis included those that were beyond the scope of the project, failed to meet the purpose and need, did not sufficiently address the relevant issues, were poorly defined, or were unlikely to be implemented. 2.3 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL Two alternatives have been studied for this analysis. Alternative A - No Action, is depicted in Map 2-1 (Appendix F) and represents the current condition of the project and the likely conditions if no management changes were made at the Brainard Lake Recreation Area. Alternative E - The Proposed Action responds to the Brainard Lake Recreation Area projected visitor use over the next 20 years (refer to Map 2-2 in Appendix F). These alternatives focus only on the National Forest System Lands within the BLRA as shown in their maps. 15

16 Alternative A: No Action (Appendix F, Map 2-1) This alternative represents the existing condition of the project area and was used as a baseline against which to compare Alternative E the Proposed Action. It is recognized that under this alternative, ongoing routine maintenance and some project work to address safety issues will continue in the BLRA, however to fully comply with the law and simplify comparison with the Proposed Action (Alternative E) this ongoing maintenance and limited project work is not included in the No Action description. This alternative complies with 40 CFR (d), which requires that a no action alternative be included in the analysis. However, this alternative is not consistent with direction in the Forest Plan. The existing trail system would remain unchanged. No new campgrounds would be constructed nor would Pawnee Campground be reconstructed. The entrance area would not be changed and entrance to the fee area would not include Left Hand Park Reservoir Road. Summer vehicle congestion would continue with people seeking parking near the Wilderness trailheads and around Brainard Lake. No winter parking lot would be constructed and traffic/parking congestion near Red Rock Sourdough Trailhead and near the winter closure gate would continue. Dispersed camping along the Left Hand Park Reservoir Road and at the Reservoir and near the Red Rock/Sourdough Trailhead would continue. No restrooms would be installed at areas where concentrated recreation use occurs and sanitation problems would continue. No trail improvements, connections or designations for type of use (skiing, mountain biking, horse use) would occur. No trail closures would occur to protect the trails during the snowmelt period. No additional regulations would be established to manage the recreation in the area. Alternative E: Proposed Action (Appendix F, Map 2-2) The USFS proposes to better manage the increasing use and improve the quality of recreation opportunities in the Brainard Lake Recreation Area. To accomplish this: facilities and trails would be improved or developed; unnecessary roads and trails would be closed and re-vegetated; various Forest Service regulations would be implemented to protect the natural resources in the area, ensure visitor safety and minimize visitor conflicts; and informational and educational signing would be installed to enhance the visitor s experience. This alternative responds to public comments and to the desired conditions and objectives described in the Purpose and Need in Chapter 1 of this document as well as the BLRA Management Plan (August 2005). This alternative is also consistent with the Forest Plan. The following lists the specific actions that would occur. The elements are described as if a visitor were entering the project area from the east and traveling west towards the Indian Peaks Wilderness. Facility Improvement/Development (from east to west) Construct parking area, for year-round use, near the Red Rock/Sourdough Trailhead to meet average peak (winter) demand of approximately vehicles. Parking area would be located outside of the BLRA fee area, immediately east of the entrance station. This development would include a vault toilet and a designated area to unload horses. For the purposes of this document this parking area will be identified as the East Parking Area. Construct entrance station. This would include adjacent short-term parking for approximately seven vehicles, information/fee booth, vault toilet and kiosk/warming hut. Construct site, developed campground near the entrance station (north side of the Brainard Lake road and east of the Sourdough trail). Campground may include cars/pick-up trucks, campers, RVs and walk-in campsites. Vault toilets and water would be provided. (Note: This 16

17 Roads campground may not be constructed and/or the number of campsites may be reduced if other developed campsites are provided along the Peak-to-Peak Scenic Byway (Colorado Highway 72). For the purposes of this document, this campground will be identified as the East Campground. Relocate administrative site from current location (north side of Brainard Lake) to the BLRA entrance area. This site would be designed to accommodate four to six large RV s and a building (approximately 800-1,000 square feet) for Forest Service personnel and/or other site managers. Water would be provided. Grey water and sewage would be contained to meet Colorado State water quality standards and prevent impacts to local drinking water supply. The old administrative site on the north side of Brainard Lake would be closed and revegetated. Reconstruct existing parking area at Left Hand Park Reservoir for approximately 15 vehicles with compost/solar toilet (surface to remain native material/gravel). Design and construct parking area to prevent motorized travel west, onto the dam. Reconstruct Red Rock Lake Area to provide approximately eight picnic sites, designated parking for approximately vehicles and construct an accessible trail adjacent a portion of the lake to provide access to picnic sites, scenic overlook, restroom facilities and connection to the Snowshoe Trail. Existing vault toilet would be retained. Reconstruct the Pawnee Picnic parking area and a portion of the Pawnee Campground for day-use parking to accommodate vehicles. Existing vault toilet would be retained and additional vault toilets would be provided. For the purposes of this document this parking area will be identified as the West Parking Area. Reconstruct Pawnee Campground for campsites (cars, pick-up trucks, campers, RVs and walk-in tent campsites). Vault toilets and water would be provided. Reconstruct the boat launch site near the bridge/dam at Brainard Lake. Only short-term parking for boat drop-off parking would be allowed. Parking for full day would be provided at the West Parking Area. Reconstruct Arickaree and Mitchell Creek Picnic Areas for walk-in day use. Close and revegetate vehicle-parking areas to blend into the natural setting. Reconstruct the Niwot Picnic Area for approximately 8-12 sites and designated parking for approximately vehicles. Note: reconstruction /construction of campground/parking as depicted on Map 2.2 are approximate locations. Acreage would not change substantially. Project design may cause adjustments on the ground. Designate the road on the south and west side of Brainard Lake for two-way vehicle traffic to provide access to the Niwot Picnic Area and the Wilderness trailheads. Close the road on the north side of Brainard Lake to vehicle traffic beginning at the bridge/dam and continuing west to the junction of the two-way road. The asphalt would be removed and replaced with a more natural appearing surface for pedestrian/bicycle use. Emergency/administrative vehicle access would be maintained. Close and rehabilitate non-designated roads in the Brainard Lake Recreation Area. 17

18 Trails (east to west in sequence) Construct a new section of the Waldrop Trail to connect with the Sourdough Trail for hiking and mountain biking and reconstruct the Waldrop Trail for hiking and mountain biking. Relocate South St. Vrain and Waldrop Trails outside of the IPW boundary to provide mountain bike opportunities. Construct trail connections between the East Parking Area, the Brainard Lake Snowshoe Trail and proposed Red Rock Lake Trail for all-season use. Construct connections and utilize existing trails between the East Parking Area and West Parking Area to provide a designated hiker/biker route. Construct a trail around Left Hand Park Reservoir for hiking only. (This action would be taken if agreement can be reached between the Forest Service and private owner of the reservoir.) Construct an accessible trail adjacent to a portion of Red Rock Lake that provides access to picnic sites, scenic overlook, restroom facilities and connects to the Snowshoe Trail. Reconstruct Little Raven Trail for both hiking and mountain biking. Construct an accessible trail around Brainard Lake, including amenities such as fishing piers, benches and interpretive signs, which connect to the West Parking Area and other trails in the vicinity (Brainard Lake Cutoff, Niwot Cutoff and Mitchell Lake). Close and rehabilitate non-designated trails (social trails). Management / Regulations The following actions (if applicable) would be implemented through a Forest Service Closure Order (36 CFR ) and enforced by Forest Service personnel. Orders are issued to close or restrict use of the described area. Additionally, signing would be put in place to inform and educate the public about these new regulations. Note: For the purpose of these regulations Winter Season is defined as November 15 through April 30. Non-winter Season is defined as May 1 through November 14. General: Vehicle access would be prohibited on the north side of Brainard Lake beginning at the bridge/dam and continuing west to the junction of the two-way road. (Exceptions for emergency/administrative vehicles). Parking would be allowed in designated sites only. Designate Left Hand Park Reservoir Road and Reservoir for day-use only. 18

19 The use of generators in campgrounds would be restricted to the standard quiet hours for the campground. The use of firearms of any kind (including paintball, pellet and bb guns) would be prohibited, except for hunting during legal hunting season. Horses would continue to be restricted to the Sourdough Trail only. Dogs: Winter Season: Dogs would be prohibited on all roads and trails except the following: Brainard Lake Road, Left Hand Park Reservoir Road and Sourdough Trail. Dogs would still be required to be under voice control. Non-Winter Season: Dogs must be on a hand held leash at all times. Trails: All trails within the BLRA would be managed for non-motorized use only. Biking would be prohibited except on designated roads and trails. The following roads would be open to bicycles: Brainard Lake and Left Hand Park Reservoir Roads. The following trails would be open to bicycles: Sourdough, South St. Vrain, Waldrop, Brainard Lake Cutoff, Little Raven, Little Raven Extension and Snowshoe Trails (north side of Brainard Lake Road and east of Brainard Lake only). Seasonal trail closures would be implemented in the BLRA and the adjacent IPW when necessary, to prevent damage to the trails and surrounding vegetation. A pedestrian/bicycle route would be designated between the Entrance Area and Brainard Lake using the existing trail system (Sourdough, Waldrop, Snowshoe Trails). Winter Season: The CMC and Little Raven Trails would be designated for skier use only. Non-Winter Season: The following trails would have a non-winter season closure west of Red Rock Lake to prevent resource damage: CMC, CMC Cutoff, Brainard Lake Snowshoe (west of Red Rock Lake to the Brainard Lake Road junction). 19