Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Transcription

1 Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3.1 Introduction This chapter evaluates key issues involved in the route alternatives for a snowmobile trail between McFarland Lake and South Fowl Lake. The consequences of each Action alternative are evaluated along with the consequences of doing nothing ( No Action Alternative ) for each issue or resource. Direct and Indirect Effects of Each Route Are Evaluated Each route will have both direct and indirect effects. This chapter summarizes the direct and indirect effects of each alternative route. Direct effects are impacts that may occur at the same time and place as the initial action. Indirect effects are impacts that may (1) follow the initial action, (2) be of a different type or (3) be in a different place from direct impacts. Cumulative Effects Are Also Evaluated The direct and indirect impacts of each alternative can only be completely evaluated within the context of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions in the area, regardless of what agency or person undertakes such further action. The effects of these other actions when combined with the effects of the project are referred to as cumulative effects. While this analysis uses the 2005 EA as a reference, it also considers any new cumulative actions or changed conditions in the area since that time as needed. See Appendix B for a discussion on cumulative actions considered in this effects analysis. A consideration of other actions across the Superior NF was made (in project file), but these were not included in Appendix B due to a lack of relevance for cumulative impacts from the South Fowl Project. Analysis Area May Include Areas Outside the Project Area The analysis area includes the area where direct, indirect and cumulative effects would occur. Depending on the resource in question, in some cases this is the project area or the route locations, but in other cases this includes also other parts of the Superior National Forest (including other ownerships) and the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW) that are near the project area. Interdisciplinary Analysis Method Is Both Quantitative and Qualitative Environmental effects are the consequences of implementing the alternatives on the human environment, which generally means the physical and biological environment under NEPA but Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-1 Chapter 3

2 may include economic and social effects (40 CFR ). An interdisciplinary team examined and analyzed data, personal observations and professional knowledge to estimate the effects of each alternative. The data and level of analysis were commensurate with the importance of the possible impacts (40 CFR ). The effects are quantified where possible and warranted, although qualitative discussions are also included. The key issue analyzed is effects of sound on the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. However, the following issues are also analyzed: Wilderness Character (including sound effects) Recreational Use and Safety Threatened and Endangered Species Regional Forester Sensitive Species Invasive Species Soil Resources, Wetlands and Water Quality Forest Vegetation Off-Highway Vehicles Land Ownership Economic Effects Other Analysis (Air Quality, Heritage, etc) Environmental Justice Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-2 Chapter 3

3 3.2 Wilderness Character Introduction The public raised concerns that proposed snowmobile route near the BWCAW would negatively affect wilderness qualities, the visitor s experience and the ecological integrity of the wilderness. Wilderness qualities (which are used to monitor wilderness character) are defined as Untrammeled wilderness is essentially unhindered and free from modern human control or manipulation. Natural wilderness ecological ecosystems are substantially free from the effects of modern civilization. Undeveloped wilderness is essentially without permanent improvements or modern human occupation. Outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation wilderness provides outstanding opportunities for people to experience solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation, including the values of inspiration and physical and mental challenge. These four qualities are identified in the General Technical Report Monitoring Selected Conditions Related to Wilderness Character: a National Framework (USDA 2005, see also USDA 2008 and 2009 reports) and Section 2(c) of the 1964 Wilderness Act (P.L ). The 1978 BWCAW Act (P.L ) includes additional purposes for this wilderness, but provides no further direction on defining the composition of wilderness character. This section of the EIS will focus on effects to the visitor s experience as well as to the fourth quality - outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation. This includes disclosure of the effects of the route alternatives on sound in the wilderness and the visitor s experience. Effects of the alternatives on sights in the wilderness will also be discussed. Finally, effects of sounds and sights on the opportunities for solitude or primitive recreation will be disclosed. The undeveloped quality of wilderness listed above will not be addressed in this analysis because none of the proposed activities occur within the wilderness or would impact "undeveloped quality of wilderness. The undeveloped quality of wilderness refers to development within the wilderness such as construction of roads, dams or structures (Landres et al 2008 p. 7). The untrammeled quality of wilderness will not be addressed in this analysis because none of the proposed activities would manipulate the wilderness (such as setting prescribed fire in the wilderness). In essence the untrammeled quality monitors actions that intentionally manipulate Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-3 Chapter 3

4 or control ecological systems, whereas the natural quality monitors the intentional or unintentional effects from actions taken inside the wilderness as well as from external forces on these systems (Landres et al 2008, p. 4). The ecological integrity or natural quality of wilderness is addressed in the Threatened and Endangered Species (section 3.4), Sensitive Species (section 3.5), Non-Native Invasive Species (section 3.6), Soils and Wetlands (section 3.7), Forest Vegetation (section 3.8), Off-Highway Vehicles (Section 3.9) and Air Quality (section ) sections of the EIS. A summary of the conclusions of these analyses are included at the end of this section Analysis Methods Outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation directly relates to how snowmobile sound and sights could affect opportunities for solitude provided by and expected in a wilderness setting. Solitude is defined as the quality or state of being alone or remote from society (Webster s Third New College Dictionary, page 2170). The concept of solitude tends to be subjective since different people have different perceptions of what constitutes adequate solitude, and what might intrude upon it. There are no direct criteria established in law, policy or the Superior National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan to determine the impacts sound could have on wilderness. Therefore, analysis methods used by other agencies for sound impacts were considered. In Yellowstone National Park, the Park Service evaluated sound from snowmobiles. The Park Service evaluated four management zones; Developed Area which they equated to an Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) setting of Rural and Urban, Road Corridor which they equated to a ROS setting of Roaded Natural, Transition Zone which was related to both Roaded Natural and Semi-Primitive, Non-Motorized ROS and finally Backcountry which was equated to Primitive ROS. The Winter Use Plan EA completed by the Park Service was considered relevant for the South Fowl EIS for this purpose since the Winter Use Plan EA evaluates snowmobile sounds in a rural and backcountry setting, as does the South Fowl EIS. It should be noted that in Yellowstone, the National Park Service was creating a management plan that would provide guidance to the park managers. The South Fowl EIS is a site specific analysis that does not set management direction but simply compares the effects of alternative methods to implement a project. However, Yellowstone sets a concept of measuring sound levels as they relate to visitor expectations within each of their management zones. This concept provides a method that can be used with the Forest Plan Management Areas. A thorough sound analysis was completed for this project (Appendix D; see also Appendix G). Appendix C-1 describes in detail the methods used in the analysis. The analysis considered four Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-4 Chapter 3

5 factors of sound: 1) type, 2) volume, 3) frequency 1 and 4) duration. This section summarizes the sound analysis. The analysis found that the type and frequency of sound will not vary by any alternative and therefore this section only describes in detail changes in volume and duration. The type and frequency are described under Section Affected Environment and would be the same for all alternatives. See Appendix D, Sound Resource Report, for more information. The results displayed in Appendix D and in Section 3.2 of the FEIS were checked with additional modeling in Appendix G. Two sound indicators are assessed in detail: Indicator 1 Volume and Area of Sound: This indicator assesses the changes in sound volume (or sound level as measured in A-weighted decibels) under each alternative relative to the current condition which includes motorized sounds. Effects of the volume of sound on visitor experience are disclosed relative to visitor expectations outlined in the Forest Plan Wilderness Management Areas. This indicator also assesses the change in area motorized sound can be heard in the wilderness relative to current conditions. Indicator 2 Duration of Sound: This indicator assesses the change in the amount of time (duration) snowmobile sounds from the trail would be audible 2 in the wilderness. The change in duration of snowmobile sound above natural ambient 3 is also assessed Analysis Parameters The analysis area for direct, indirect and cumulative effects is the area affected by current audible snowmobile sound to the point where audible sounds from each side of the project area overlapped. This area includes the entire geographic area within the wilderness where sounds from the trail alternatives might be audible and create impacts and totals 7,400 acres. Note on Figure 3-5 where the audible zone around McFarland Lake begins separating from the audible zone along the border. Snowmobiles can continue to run the border beyond that point meaning the audible zone continues. The analysis area is set where those two audible zones overlap (the area shown in blue on Figure 3-5) which is the area a visitor cannot escape motorized sound. A BWCAW visitor traveling west of this area may find wilderness that is not affected by snowmobile sound (not along the border). This analysis area applies for cumulative effects analysis as well since there would need to be an overlap in the area from sound generated by an 1 In acoustical analysis, the term frequency can refer to the number of sound waves per unit time passing a given point. This may be measured in hertz. In this EIS, frequency generally refers to how often a sound can be heard (i.e. how many times per week is snowmobile noise impacting the wilderness?). However, the term frequency as it is referred to in acoustical analysis is used in a few places within the context of discussing the frequency as measured in hertz, instead of how often snowmobile noise occurs (e.g. Appendices D, and G). 2 Audible means a sound that may be discerned by the human ear. A sound may be audible, but have a lower sound level than that of other sounds in the environment. 3 Natural Ambient means the sound level produced by natural sounds such as wind and does not include humanmade sounds that may be part of the ambient soundscape such as snowmobile or motor vehicle noise. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-5 Chapter 3

6 alternative trail route and another sound source for a cumulative impact to occur and the area in blue in Figure 3-5 covers where this is possible. The analysis timeframe for sound is from 2003 when this trail project was initiated through twenty years in the future since it can be anticipated that snowmobile use will continue to be a use in the area for some time. The analysis is focused on winter use over this timeframe since the trail alternatives create access for snowmobiles in the winter. The alternatives would not create new OHV access in the summer, which would be precluded by effective closures, education and enforcement. In when this project was being initiated and developed, the Tilbury Trail was being closed. Prior to that time, the Tilbury Trail was in use and creating impacts to the wilderness. Since this project has been delayed from a process standpoint, there is a new existing condition, that being where snowmobiles use Arrowhead Road to South Fowl Road, to the trail that leads down into South Fowl Lake. This more recent current condition will be assessed as the No Action alternative since the Tilbury Trail is closed. For the purposes of this analysis, a comparison is made to both time frames so that the reader can fully understand the scope of this project. Table 3-1: Timeline of trail impacts to the BWCAW: Tilbury Trail created impacts to the wilderness from 1960 to 2003; Alternative 1 creates impacts to the wilderness from 2003 to present. Tilbury Trail Alternative Affected Environment The South Fowl Snowmobile Access Project Area sits in the eastern tip of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and near the border with Canada (see Chapter 1, Figure 1-1 and Figure 3-1 below). The setting is generally forested with several lakes, but also has hills that at times have sharp cliff faces. One of the lakes, McFarland, includes a fairly large component of private land, which has led to a community of seasonal homes or cabins around the lake. Most are used as second home meaning the dwelling is not the primary residence of the owner. There are four cabins on South Fowl Lake and eighteen cabins on North Fowl Lake. Summer travel to the cabins is predominantly by ATV to the South Fowl cabins and by motor boat to North Fowl cabins, and those sounds are fairly common. If the cabins are used in the winter, access would be primarily by snowmobile; however the level of winter use is not known. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-6 Chapter 3

7 There are several homes and cabins on McFarland Lake and winter use is very important to the landowners (formal comments received through preparation of the 2005 EA), which is verified through winter ranger observation and personal communication with those landowners. Figure 3-1: Location of Royal River and Royal Lake in relation to McFarland Lake on the west and South Fowl Lake on the east. Royal River Royal Lake Wilderness Character and Use The project area under analysis (shown on Figure 3-1 above) includes a finger of the BWCAW that dips southward and lies between McFarland Lake on west side and North and South Fowl Lakes on the east side. This relative position between the McFarland/Fowl Lakes and the eastern tip of the BWCAW creates a setting where motorized sounds are projected toward the wilderness from several directions (see Figure 3-3). The Superior National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan, 2004) has divided the Forest into Management Areas (MA) which can provide an understanding of Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-7 Chapter 3

8 expectations within the project area. Each Management Area has outlined a Theme, Desired Conditions and has a designation for the Recreational Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) class. In some circumstances, the Management Area and Recreational Opportunity Spectrum designations are the same. ROS designation describes the characteristics of the setting that would affect the recreational experience of the forest user, while Management Area describes the goals, objectives, standards and guidelines from the Forest Plan that apply to that MA. The MA and ROS for the portion of BWCAW located between McFarland Lake and the Fowl Lakes are both designated Semi-Primitive, Non-Motorized and the visitor should expect to encounter others and solitude is not one of the their highest expectations. Some, but not a high degree of challenge, risk and freedom is provided here (Forest Plan, p. 3-45). McFarland, South and North Fowl Lakes are outside of the wilderness and have an MA of General Forest, Longer Rotation with an ROS of roaded natural. Visitors should expect to see natural appearing environment with moderate evidence of the sights and sounds of man. Interactions between users may be moderate to high with evidence of other users prevalent (Forest Plan Glossary-22). These adjacent MAs with differing ROS classes that are separated only by the wilderness boundary, help explain the background sounds that are present in the analysis area and management direction for expectations of recreation experience. Figure 3-2 presents information on average use of the BWCAW entry points. Our data calculates there is an average of 4 persons per entry point permit. Duncan Lake (1,956 overnight permits/year), to the west of the project area, has the highest number of permits. Pine Lake (717 overnight permits/year) is where most of the wilderness users go when they begin their trip near McFarland Lake. Persons entering at John Lake (131 overnight permits/year) can go in two directions, north into John Lake then to East Pike Lake or east into the Royal River. Border Route Trail-East, (13 overnight permits/year, virtually all in the summer) demonstrates the number of hiking groups in this vicinity each year. Those hikers entering the Wilderness will walk away from the project area and therefore would not be affected (the Border Route Trail above the northern route is not in the BWCAW). Of the average 131 overnight permits issued each year to enter the BWCAW at John Lake, 95% are issued during the spring, summer and fall. This pattern of the majority of use occurring in non-winter months is typical of other entry points to the BWACW; however some entry points have a higher appeal for winter use. Winter camping, ice fishing, dog sledding, lake to lake skiing and snowshoeing are typical winter activities in the BWCAW. Duncan Lake entry point is more frequently used for winter camping and day use skiing because it offers a loop and less encounters with motorized use. Pine Lake is used more frequently for ice fishing and other day use. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-8 Chapter 3

9 Recent self - issue permit data for winter use between indicates that a total of 15 permits were issued during that period and most were for day use. Self-issue permit data may not capture all use that occurs, although it provides an indication of use levels in the area. Most if not all of those parties head north into John and East Pike Lakes and little, if any, foot traffic travels the Royal River to South Fowl Lake. Monitoring for the past several winters has discovered no evidence of any humans (ski, snowshoe or dogsled tracks in the area) in the Royal Lake/Royal River area of the wilderness, nor has motorized intrusion by snowmobiles been observed since In the event someone was to snowshoe or ski Royal River and Royal Lake, there are no other trails and virtually no winter fishing opportunities on those two bodies of water. Therefore, it is likely they would continue to South Fowl Lake. In that event snowmobiles would be heard and seen as they rode legally in the South Fowl Lake area. Figure 3-2: Table of average number of summer overnight permits used at entry points for Gunflint and Tofte Districts (Superior National Forest Data). Existing Soundscape This area has several natural features that can affect or reduce the level of sound as it travels. Sound attenuates ( decays ) or there is a reduction in the sound level or volume (decibel level) as the distance from the source increases. The decay rates are affected by factors such as topography (Aylor, unknown date), vegetation, in our case trees (Sumara 2007), and weather Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-9 Chapter 3

10 conditions like wind, temperature and humidity (Bonn 1988). Figure 3-1 above provides a 3- D view of the general area showing the topography. Areas of water or non-forested wetlands would affect sound decay generally only by the air. Areas of land that are generally forested would reduce the impacts of sound. The hills including cliff faces could either increase or decrease the level of sound depending on where the sound originated and what hills were in the line of travel for the sound. Types of sounds heard within the BWCAW The four seasons bring differing ambient or background sounds. This analysis focuses on those that are present in the winter when snowmobiles are in operation. These currently occurring sounds are expected to continue into the future under any of the alternatives. The existing soundscape includes natural sounds and human-generated sounds. Natural sound sources in the winter include wind, flowing water in some areas of the Royal River, and a few animal sounds such as bird calls. Sound generated by motors is also present. Discussions with anglers (ice fishing) on South Fowl Lake indicate that sounds coming from the McFarland Lake area, as well as sounds from the north into Canada can be common throughout the day. The existing soundscape was also identified through field visits and measurements by Forest Service personnel (see Appendix C-2). Sounds from around McFarland Lake often have several types of motorized sound including snowplows, trucks, motor graders and snowmobiles. Motorized sounds coming from South and North Fowl Lakes is generally limited to snowmobile sounds in winter (however in the summer motorboats would be the source of sound). Snowmobiles are commonly used to travel into the Fowl lakes for recreational ice fishing. Snowmobiling McFarland Lake and South and North Fowl Lakes and beyond to Moose and other border lakes is legal and common (Forest Service 2006). Of the various sounds heard on the test route, motor graders, trucks, and snowmobiles all generate sound between 90 and 110 dba (EPA, 1974) depending on the rpms of the engine 4. Regardless of the operating speeds, those pieces of equipment were audible on Royal Lake (see Appendix C-2). Snowmobiles were heard on Royal Lake when they were operating at 15 to 40 miles per hour on Little John and North Fowl, but it is expected that recreationists operate their sleds at higher speeds on the bigger lakes (McFarland and the Fowls). Figure 3-3 displays the locations around the project area that are known sources of motorized sounds. There is evidence from the photos in Appendix C-3 that snowmobiles often operate near the shoreline; however snowmobiles can run nearly anywhere on the lakes. These routes will be referred to as Motorized Travel Routes or simply travel routes. 4 Various research show slightly differing decibel ratings for motor vehicles but all are in the same general range. Where the decibel ratings are significantly different, that is due to the distance from the source that measurements are taken. For the purposes of this report, the EPA information was used for consistency. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-10 Chapter 3

11 Figure 3-3: Potential source locations of motorized sound audible into the BWCAW. Appendix C-3 contains photo points of winter use on these source locations. Frequency of snowmobile sound in the BWCAW. The numbers of snowmobiles traveling from McFarland Lake to the Fowl Lakes is estimated to be 25 to 30 sleds for three days per week (Friday, Saturday and Sunday). This is based on field observations and discussions with users. This analysis used the higher estimate of 30 sleds to ensure adequate disclosure of potential impact from the trails. The snowmobile season varies depending on annual snow conditions. This analysis used December through March as the season of use, resulting in an estimated 1,440 sleds per season. Total snowmobile use (numbers of sleds) is not expected to change regardless of alternative. Currently the predominant trail users are local residents and cabin owners who are snowmobiling to and from lakes in the area (such as McFarland and South Fowl) to ice fish. The trail does not connect to any other snowmobile trails in Cook County nor is it near area resorts or tourism centers and therefore trail use is not likely to be affected by increases or decreases of recreational snowmobiling in Cook County. Although the action alternatives would provide a safer route, this is not expected to change the amount of snowmobile use to South Fowl Lake. The amount of snowmobile use in this area or on any of the alternative trail routes would be more dependent on snow conditions, ice conditions and how successful fishing is. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-11 Chapter 3

12 The Forest Plan FEIS at p indicates that the Superior National Forest may see additional requests for snowmobiling opportunities, and such requests have been made across the Forest (Forest Recreation staff, personal communication). However those requests are not related to these trail alternatives and there is no difference expected between alternatives. Volume of sound in the BWCAW (Ambient Sound Levels) A Larson-Davis 831 sound level meter was used to collect data over five days (continuous 24 hour collection) in March 2011 near Royal Lake in the BWCAW. This occurred before snowmelt and after the winter fishing season and was considered to identify natural ambient conditions. The median daytime sound level over the five days was 34 dba. Please see Appendix G for data from the monitoring done with the Larson-Davis. The natural ambient dba is assumed to be 34 dba for this analysis based on the data collection by the Larson Davis. There is also motorized sound that is a part of the existing soundscape. Measurements indicated that snowmobile sound from existing travel routes immediately adjacent to the wilderness are dba just inside the wilderness boundary. See Figure 3-3 for locations of existing snowmobile sound projected into the wilderness. Environmental Consequences Direct and Indirect Effects to Wilderness from Sound Indicator 1: Volume and Area of sound. Area of Sound Figure 3-4 displays the sound test points (from Appendix C-2) with a yellow arrow drawn from the snowmobile location as it was being operated on Little John Lake to the point it was barely audible at the entrance of Royal Lake. This distance used the human ear for detection and GPS for distance measurement, and accounts for the topography and forest between the source and the detection point. The distance for the yellow arrow is the audible distance which was measured at approximately 2,030 meters or 6,650 feet. According to the models in Appendix C-4, the calculated decibel level at that distance should be around 22 dba 5 (a whisper is considered 20 dba MPCA, 1999). Site conditions of topography and vegetation, plus competing background sounds reduced the audibility of the test snowmobile. The 2,030 meter figure was used since this reflects actual project area conditions of topography and forest cover. When operating on flat, open surfaces, snowmobile sound would be audible for a greater distance. 5 Consultation with the Park Service Soundscapes Program suggests a rule of thumb that a sound may be audible 8 dba below the full spectrum ambient dba level (see project file). 22 dba is 12 dba below the estimated natural ambient level of 34 dba, rendering this distance a reasonably conservative estimate for audibility. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-12 Chapter 3

13 Figure 3-4: Distance that a snowmobile could be heard (audible distance) (from Appendix C-2 Sound Test). Yellow arrow indicates distance of higher speed snowmobile traveling on a lake, which measured in a straight line, was 2,030 meters. Red arrow indicates distance of slower speed snowmobile projected from Alternative 2 route, which measured 1,340 meters. Both distances were determined by the human ear in the sound test. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-13 Chapter 3

14 For the purposes of this analysis, the distance measured between the source on Little John and the detection location was used as the distance a source could be heard if a person were in the Wilderness, either on typical travel routes or if they found their way into the forest. The travel routes displayed in Figure 3-3 were used as the source of motorized sounds, and the 2,030 meter distance was used originating from the travel routes in determining the area that motorized sound is audible in the project area. This is the zone of audibility from sounds emitted under the existing condition and is displayed in Figure 3-5. As can be seen, this zone covers the entire Royal River and Lake area. The area of this audible zone that is within the BWCAW was also used as the analysis area to estimate effects to the wilderness. Figure 3-5: Zone of audibility: Existing Condition Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-14 Chapter 3

15 Alternative 1 No Action As described earlier, Figure 3-4 displays the sound test points with yellow and red arrows that show audible distances measured in the field under set conditions. The distance measured for the yellow arrow was approximately 2,030 meters or 6,650 feet and illustrates the distance sound of snowmobiles would be heard using Alternative 1 trail route. This distance was used to determine the area of audibility of snowmobile sounds from Alternative 1. Figure 3-6 shows the area of audibility. Under No Action Alternative, snowmobile sounds emanating from trail use would continue to be heard in the wilderness. Alternative 2 The red arrow on Figure 3-4 shows the distance, 1,340 meters, that the recorded snowmobile sound (102 dba, measured at one foot) broadcast from the proposed Alternative 2 route was audible. (This distance is less than Alternative 1 because snowmobiles on Alternative 2 trail would be traveling at a lower speed, emitting lower decibel levels.) Beyond 1,340 meters, the sound of a snowmobile operated at trail speed could not be heard. Since the sound was projected from the point closest to the wilderness boundary and where the tree cover was at its least density, plus there was very little tree cover between the site of projection and the receptor site, - therefore was considered to represent the greatest impact from Alternative 2. These parameters were measured under differing temperature from 2009 to 2010 but the actual distance was measured to be the same regardless of temperature (Appendix C-2). The area of audibility for Alternative 2, the action alternative closest to the wilderness, is shown in Figure 3-6. This area is entirely within the area where audible snowmobile sound occurs under the existing condition. In other words, the area of wilderness where trail sounds from Alternative 2 could be heard, would also have sounds from other snowmoible use in surrounding areas such as South Fowl Lake. Alternatives 3 and 4 When considering the audible distance of snowmobiles, Alternatives 3 and 4 would be nearly the same as Alternative 1 No Action which was measured at approximately 2,030 meters or 6,650 feet. This is due to the fact that the route locations are the similar for No Action, Alternatives 3 and 4. Figure 3-6 shows that the area of audible snowmobile sound does not change from the current condition regardless of alternative. There would be no difference in the area of wilderness where a snowmobile could be heard under any of the alternatives. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-15 Chapter 3

16 Figure 3-6: Zone of audibility. This color indicates the zone of audible sounds from existing/ongoing sources. These areas show the zone of audible sound that would be heard from the different alternatives. Area of Impact Above Natural Ambient The purpose of this section is to determine the distance it would take for the sound level to reduce to the ambient level of 34 dba. Motorized sound is both audible and measurable above the natural 6 sound and therefore often is a part of the background. Sound Points 1 and 10 in Figure 3-4 measured levels of 55 dba from snowmobiles operating on Little John and North Fowl Lakes respectively. 6 Natural sound conditions are when people with normal hearing can perceive nothing but the sounds produced by the natural and cultural components (National Park Service, 1999) Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-16 Chapter 3

17 Existing Condition and Alternative 1 No Action As mentioned earlier the decibel level of a snowmobile operated at recreational speeds on the lakes including McFarland, North and South Fowl and Little John could be as high as 110 dba, however a more conservative 105 dba was used in the formulas to develop Figure 3-7. This lower number was used to reduce the zone of impact under the existing condition which then allowed for a greater contrast between sounds present under the existing condition and sounds generated by the alternatives. The effect that trees have on the distance sound will travel before decaying to ambient is roughly half the distance of that where sound travels only through air. This distance through vegetation was calculated using basic sound decay models as adjusted by related research findings for vegetation effects on noise travel. If extrapolated, the distance the snowmobile sound would travel through trees, until it was reduced to ambient, would be approximately 270 meters. Through open air, sound would travel 540 meters to reach natural ambient levels (based on the model in Appendix C-4). A summary of the calculations is included in Appendix C-5. The area of wilderness (accounting for trees) where the sound of a snowmobile could be heard above the natural ambient decibel levels is 763 acres and is shown in Figure 3-7 below. Figure 3-7: Zone of decay to ambient under existing conditions and Alternative 1: The shaded areas show where the sound of a snowmobile could be measured above the natural ambient decibel levels. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-17 Chapter 3

18 Further analysis through SPreAD-GIS was completed to assess the current impacts of snowmobile sound on the wilderness. Three simulations were completed under differing weather conditions; calm winds, southerly winds and westerly (the most common wind direction) winds with the excess noise calculated for each. Results ranged from 665 acres for southerly winds to 962 acres for calm conditions (Appendix G). These results support using the 763 acre figure to complete the assessment of impact of sound levels above natural ambient. Since the Tilbury Trail was the snowmobile route to the Fowl Lakes for about 25 years since the BWCAW was established, this analysis included calculation of the area of impact above natural ambient for the Tilbury Trail. The area of wilderness where the sound of a snowmobile running on the Tilbury Trail could have been heard above the natural ambient decibel levels was 951 acres. Figure 3-8 displays the area within the BWCAW that prior to 2003 was affected by sound levels above natural ambient. Figure 3-8: Zone for decay to ambient from the former Tilbury Trail. For purposes of comparison, this map shows the effects from the former trail that has been closed as a part of the project. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-18 Chapter 3

19 Alternative 2 The sound test measured decibel levels at several points and noted the test points where the sound projected from the proposed Alternative 2 trail were measurable on the EXTECH HD600 decibel meter (see Appendix C-2). The location where the sound was broadcast from was the point where the proposed trail would be closest to the wilderness boundary and where the vegetation would provide the least reducing impact on the sound. This test determined that point number 5 (see Figure 3-9 below) was the furthest from the source that the sound broadcasted could be measured above ambient and it was measured at 45 dba on the first test and 43 dba on the second test. This 400 meters (1310 feet) was the distance it would take sound from a snowmobile driven at 10 mph speeds along Alternative 2 route to decay to the ambient level. Calculating the decay rate (for the projected sound using the formula in Appendix C-4) results in a distance much less than was measured. Main (2009) presents information on the differing effects of weather (temperature, relative humidity, inversions, wind direction and speed, etc.) that can alter sound travel, all of which explain why measured results are different than that calculated by the model. The cliff face likely also accounted for a portion of the difference. The measured value collected on site, rather than the calculated value from the model in Appendix C-4, was used to determine the area of the wilderness affected by sound louder than the natural ambient dba level. The area of wilderness that would be above natural ambient level is 799 acres, or 36 acres more than what currently exists (No Action). Figure 3-10 displays the area within the BWCAW that would be affected by sound levels above natural ambient. Further analysis was completed using SPreAD-GIS to determine the excess noise propagated by use of Alternative 2. Nine individual model runs were completed under various weather conditions to determine which conditions would provide the greatest impact from Alternative 2. Southerly winds were projected to impact 26 acres more than what currently exists (Appendix G), therefore the greater impact of 36 acres estimated by the sound test described in FEIS Appendices C and D was used to assess the impacts from Alternative 2. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-19 Chapter 3

20 Figure 3-9: Distance that a snowmobile could be heard above the ambient level (from Appendix C-2). Yellow arrow indicates a distance of 400 meters (using GPS verified by GIS technology). This measurement was determined using a combination of the decibel meter for db and a GPS unit for distance. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-20 Chapter 3

21 Figure 3-10: Zone for decay to ambient for proposed Alternative 2. Similar to the existing condition, the shaded areas show where the sound of a snowmobile would be above the ambient decibel levels. Alternatives 3 and 4 The area of wilderness that would be above natural ambient level is 763 acres. When compared to the No Action Alternative, Alternatives 3 and 4 would have no increase. Figure 3-11 displays the area within the BWCAW that would be affected by sound levels above natural ambient. In essence this is the same area as affected by the No Action Alternative since the routes that are in use now would affect the same areas of wilderness as Alternatives 3 and 4. SPreAD-GIS model runs for No Action were also used to validate this information for Alternatives 3 and 4. See the results provided in the section on Existing Condition or No Action above. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-21 Chapter 3

22 Figure 3-11: Zone of decay to ambient for Alternatives 3 and 4. The shaded areas show where the sound of a snowmobile could be measured above the natural ambient decibel levels (shown only within the wilderness). Summary on Area of Impact Above Natural Ambient Table 3-2 displays the amount of area (acres) that snowmobile sound could be heard at decibel levels above natural ambient for each of the routes under analysis. Those areas are displayed in Figures 3-7, 3-8, 3-10 and 3-11 with the corresponding acreages shown in Table 3-2 (second column). The Tilbury Trail which was in use from prior to the establishment of the BWCAW until 2003 had the greatest impact to the BWCAW. Alternative 2 would expose 36 more acres (0.5 percent of the project area) to sound levels above ambient than would No Action or Alternatives 3-4. Table 3-2: Impacts to Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness from Sound Levels above Ambient. Alternative Acres of Wilderness 1 Impacted Percent of Wilderness 1 Impacted Tilbury Trail (Past Condition) % Alternative 1 (Current Condition/No Action) % Alternative % Alternative 3 or % 1 Acres of wilderness in project area is 7,430. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-22 Chapter 3

23 Change in Decibel Levels in the BWCAW Above Ambient Alternatives 1, 3 and 4 These alternatives use the same or similar travel corridors so there would be no change in sound level under these alternatives compared to the current condition. Alternative 2 During January 2009 measurements when conditions were calm, but temperatures were near zero Fahrenheit, the ExTech HD 600 measured a 1 dba change from ambient caused by sound emitted from the proposed trail. When a 6 mph wind was blowing from the source to the receptor on Royal Lake, there was a 5 dba increase. For tests in 2010 when temperatures were about 32 degrees Fahrenheit, the increase was 2 dba. SPreAD-GIS model runs for Alternative 2 all indicated lower impacts than was measured by use of the ExTech HD 600 sound level meter, therefore the results from the ExTech measurements were used for this analysis. Indicator 2: Duration of sound Alternative 1 No Action This study focuses on the time or duration a snowmobile would be ridden on each of the potential routes between McFarland Lake and South Fowl. Analysts did not measure the duration of all snowmobile sound or the various background sounds. Snowmobiles currently ride on McFarland and the Fowl Lakes and the duration of snowmobile operation are considered the same for all alternatives and therefore are not included in the calculations. At present, a snowmobile has to travel from McFarland to South Fowl Lake along a set of roads and trails. Snowmobile sound would not be audible in the wilderness for the entire time the sled is operated on that route, so only the portions of that route where the sound could be heard on Royal Lake was measured for that parameter. The length of time for audible sound was 12.1 minutes of time for one sled to make the trip. This results in 11% of the week having audible snowmobile sounds from the existing McFarland to South Fowl route (see Appendix C-5 for calculations). Assuming two sleds per group the exposure would be 12.2 minutes per trip and would be 5.5% of the week, including nights and weekends (see Table 3-3 for comparison of routes). In the past when the Tilbury Trail was in use, the duration of snowmobile sound that was audible would have been very similar to Alternative 2 at 13.2 minutes per sled. The distance a sled would be operated and the sound would be above natural ambient would have been 7.9 minutes per single sled or 8 minutes per group of two. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-23 Chapter 3

24 Alternative 2 Snowmobiles operated on the Alternative 2 route would be audible within the wilderness for the entire length of the trail. The duration for audible sound was calculated for the length of the entire trail at the speed of 10 mph for a time of 13.2 minutes per sled or 13.3 minutes for groups of two. For Alternative 2 it was assumed that a snowmobile would travel at 10 mph and the distance the sled would travel where the sound, as perceived on Royal Lake would be above natural ambient was measured to be approximately 2,000 feet (Appendix C-2, Sound Test, March, 2010). This is variable since the trail would run parallel to the wilderness border and these distances are measured from a point where the sled would be close enough to create a decibel level above ambient level on Royal Lake. Since the measurement of 2,000 feet was measured in the field, it takes into account all of the variables that affect sound attenuation such as vegetation and topography. An assessment of the distance a sled would travel along Alternative 2 where the sound levels would be above natural ambient was also determined through SPreAD-GIS. Each of those model estimates were less than 2,000 feet which would reduce the duration of sound above natural ambient. Since the 2,000 foot measurement came from on the ground tests and since it estimates a greater impact, that measurement is used to calculate the duration of sound levels above natural ambient. Assuming 2,000 feet of distance traveled that would have sound levels above ambient; the time one sled would be perceived above ambient would be 2.3 minutes. The number of snowmobiles traveling the route on one day might be as high as 30 sleds, which means the duration of sound above ambient (assuming the snowmobiles traveled as single sleds and not in groups) would be 69 minutes (1.2 hours) per day (30 sleds times 2.3 minutes per sled). The 30 sleds would use the route an average of three days a week, making the weekly total 3.6 hours. If the sleds were grouped in twos (data for visitor monitoring in the area suggests that sleds are most often grouped in two or more, however there is not enough data to suggest an average number of sleds per group, therefore an assumption is made of two sleds per group), the duration of impact would be half or 36 minutes (0.6 hours) during one day. Alternatives 3 and 4 Alternatives 3 and 4 have differing lengths of trail at their beginning points as the trails depart from McFarland Lake, however the length of trail where snowmobile sound may be audible would be the same. Therefore these two alternatives are considered as having the same impacts from sound duration impact. The audible distance measured with the sound test was applied from the point where snowmobiles would travel away from McFarland Lake, up the new section Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-24 Chapter 3

25 of trail to the point where it would intersect the Arrowhead Trail and then to the trail from South Fowl Road coming down the hill toward South Fowl Lake. Average speeds were applied to snowmobile use of the roads and trail to determine the length of time snowmobile sound would be audible within the wilderness. The calculated time for one sled would be 12.1 minutes and for groups of two sleds would be 12.2 minutes. The duration that snowmobile sound would above ambient would be the same as No Action. In other words, Alternatives 3 and 4 would not add any time above ambient levels. Table 3-3 shows a comparison of the duration of sound under each alternative. Table 3-3: Comparisons of Duration (length of time) Sound would be Audible or Above Ambient Levels as would be heard from Royal Lake. Alternative 1 No Action Duration Snowmobile Sound would be audible Time in minutes Total Hour per week 1 Percent of Week Single Sled 12.1 min/sled % Two sleds/group /group % Alternative 2 3 Single Sled 13.2 min/sled % Two Sled/group /group % Alternative 3, 4 Single Sled 12.1 min/sled % Tilbury Trail (Past Condition) Alternative 1 (Current Condition/No Action) Two sleds/group /group % Duration sound would be above Natural Ambient Time in minutes Total Hour per week Percent of Week Single Sled 7.9 min/sled % Two Sled/group % Single or Two Sled No increase No increase No increase Alternative 2 Single Sled 2.3 min/sled % Two Sleds/group /group % Alternative 3 or 4 Single or Two Sled No increase No increase No increase 1 Hours per week was calculated by: min/sled x 30 sleds x 3 days/wk divided by 60 min/hour 2 Assumes the snowmobiles are 6 seconds apart in travel. 3 Duration would be same for Tilbury Trail Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-25 Chapter 3

26 3.2.7 Cumulative Effects to Wilderness from Sound As discussed in the Affected Environment section, there is motorized sound present in the analysis area under all alternatives. Ongoing snowmobile use, along with snowplows and trucks, are the primary sources of sound that might produce a cumulative impact to the BWCAW or the homeowners. This existing soundscape accounts for ongoing sound sources that might overlap in time and space with sound from snowmobiles on each trail alternative. The effects of the existing soundscape were considered and disclosed in the direct and indirect effects section above, and serves to disclose cumulative impacts that might result from snowmobile sound from the alternatives when added to the existing soundscape. The existing soundscape creates motorized sound that is audible in that portion of the BWCAW as shown in Figure 3-5. Also as shown in Figure 3-6, there would not be an incremental change in the area of audibility when effects from the trail alternatives are added in. The area that sound above ambient levels may be heard when Alternative 2 is added to the existing soundscape is shown in Figure The area that sound above ambient levels may be heard for Alternatives 3 and 4 does not differ from No Action. In addition to the existing soundscape, several specific projects in the area were considered for cumulative impacts (see Appendix B). The Travel Management Project does not alter routes available for snowmobiles, and does not designate or decommission routes that would alter the area in which ambient motorized noise might be heard or sound above the ambient level might be heard in the BWCAW. This is because route changes from the Travel Management Project are not located close to the portion of the wilderness in the analysis area. In regards to timber harvest that may be proposed by the State of Minnesota within the next 10 years, any timber harvest projects that would be audible in the wilderness would be short in duration and likely to occur during weekdays, instead of weekends when most snowmobiles would be operating on the alternative trail routes. The timber harvest is located too far from the wilderness to be likely to generate sound levels above natural ambient (2005 EA p. 52). There would be a minimal overlap of sound in time and space between the timber harvest and the snowmobile routes. Minimal cumulative impacts to the wilderness soundscape are anticipated from timber harvest in the area. The Grand Portage-Grand Marais snowmobile trail connector project is located further south than any of the alternative routes, and sound from snowmobiles running on this route would decay to below ambient levels, and very likely below audible levels, before reaching the BWCAW. Thus, minor or no cumulative impacts to sound in the wilderness would occur from the connector trail. In summary, specific projects considered would add minimal cumulative effects due to the distance from the wilderness (e.g. the Grand Portage to Grand Marais snowmobile route) or Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-26 Chapter 3

27 timing (timber harvest would be temporary and generally happen during weekdays, not weekends) Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects to Scenery Snowmobiles May Be Seen from the Wilderness In addition to generating noise, snowmobiles and the trail itself could have a visual impact, because of the potential visibility of the trail as well as the potential that the snowmobilers themselves could be seen by visitors to the BWCAW in the area. Photo 3-1: Taken from Royal Lake in 2005 illustrates a view from Royal Lake in the BWCAW looking south towards the Alternative 2 route (on the ridge). Of the action alternatives, the Proposed Action (Alternative 2) is closest to the wilderness and may affect the wilderness visitor. This route traverses the upper third of a 380 foot high northfacing ridge. The base of this ridge is within the Royal Lake area, and much of the Royal River is within 2,000 feet of the top of this ridge. A small portion of the proposed North Route could be visible from the wilderness as depicted in the photo from the east shore of Royal Lake. See Photo 3-1 above. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-27 Chapter 3

28 At the same time, Photo 3-2 illustrates a view from the ridge with an understory of conifers that may screen snowmobiles from the view of wilderness users. Photo 3-2: Eye level photo of Royal Lake from proposed route for Alternative 2. In the area of the proposed action, there has been considerable natural mortality of tree species, particularly in the bench area between the upper and lower cliffs. As a result, these trees have been replaced with brush species, primarily mountain maple. Hand planting of native species (identified by the District Silviculturists as appropriate for the native ecosystem) would reestablish these species. At the design speed (average safe speed for the trail) of 15 miles per hour for Alternative 2, it would take a snowmobile roughly eight minutes to travel the 2.2 miles through the northern route. At that pace, the time a snowmobile might be visible would be about 15 seconds. Alternatives 1, 3 and 4 do not include trail adjacent to the BWCAW to the same degree as Alternative 2 and snowmobiles would not be visible from within the BWCAW on these trail alternatives. There are no known actions adjacent to or inside the wilderness in the project area that would produce cumulative effects to sights in the wilderness. There would be no cumulative effects to sights in the wilderness under any alternative. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-28 Chapter 3

29 3.2.9 Conclusions Relating to Opportunities for Solitude Quality of Wilderness As outlined in section Affected Environment, the Management Area for this portion of wilderness is Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized (SPNM). From the Forest Plan the characteristics for SPNM are outlined as: Desired Future (5) Social Conditions: Moderate to low opportunities for isolation and solitude Frequency of encountering others in the area: Moderate (Forest Plan, Table BWC-1 Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) Standards 3-66, 67) The Semi-primitive Non-motorized Wilderness MA is generally located along the main wilderness travel routes, where a visitor can expect to encounter others and solitude is not one of their highest expectations. Some, but not a high degree of challenge, risk and freedom is provided here. (Forest Plan, Page 3-45). The Royal River area currently offers opportunities for solitude in the winter, but the opportunities are tempered by sound from motors. Along with sound from vehicles and other machinery, sounds from snowmobiles are present and audible in the area of Wilderness adjacent to the project area. There are few visitors along the Royal River and they would occasionally hear sound from vehicles along Arrowhead Trail and snowmobilers on South Fowl Lake and other motorized area adjacent to the wilderness. These sounds would occur daily but not constantly. Although some visitors are likely to feel that their sense of solitude was negatively affected by the sound while others would not be, the assumption is that louder, longer or more frequent sound would in general reduce the opportunities for solitude. However, an area does not have to be completely free of any motorized sound at all times to be able to offer opportunities for solitude. The sound analysis presented in this section considered four characteristics of sound: 1) type, 2) frequency, 3) duration and 4) volume. Table 3-4 summarizes those four sound characteristics as well as visual impacts for each of the trail alternatives. There is no difference between the alternatives in the types of sound or frequency of sound heard from the trail. The sound that would be audible in the wilderness from the use of snowmobiles on any alternative route is not new. Since 1978 when the BWCAW was created, snowmobile sounds could be heard in this portion of the wilderness from the Tilbury Trail. When the Tilbury Trail was closed in 2003, snowmobile sounds from the current route on the west end by McFarland Lake and the east end on the unnamed trail could still be heard in this part of the wilderness. The amount of snowmobile use of the trail is expected to be the same under all alternatives. The amount of time (duration) snowmobile sound from trail use could be heard in the wilderness is slightly greater for Alternative 2 than Alternative 1, 3 or 4. Sound would be heard for Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-29 Chapter 3

30 approximately 11.8% of the week (19.8 hours) under Alternative 2 versus 11.0% of the week (18.2 hours) under Alternatives 1, 3 or 4. Under Alternatives 1, 3 or 4 snowmobilers would use the unnamed trail to access South Fowl Lake and this trail is on the north side of the cliff/ridge facing the wilderness just like Alternative 2. Both Alternatives project sound into the wilderness however, Alternative 2 is closer to the wilderness and would therefore have a greater duration of sound that is above natural ambient level. The volume of sound above natural ambient levels from the trail heard in the wilderness would be slightly louder (1-5dBA) and for approximately 2.2% of a week (3.6 hours). Table 3-4: Change in sounds and sights in the BWCAW from trail use of South Fowl Trail Alternatives Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Type of sound Snowmobiles Snowmobiles Snowmobiles Snowmobiles Frequency of sound 90 sleds/ week 90 sleds/ week 90 sleds/ week 90 sleds/ week Duration of sound audible hours/ week 19.8 hours/ week 18.2 hours/ week 18.2 hours/ week Duration of sound 0 hours/week 3.6 hours/ week 0 hours/ week 0 hours/ week above natural ambient 1 Volume of sound above 0 dba 1-5dBA 0 dba 0 dba natural ambient 2 Snowmobile use of trail visible in the wilderness No Possibly visible in background, for about 200 feet or 15 seconds per snowmobile 1 Assuming single sled use 2 Incremental Sound Level above Natural Ambient in BWCAW No No The change in volume and duration of sound was put into the context of opportunities for solitude. Every day there is 24 hours to experience solitude or over the course of a week, there is 168 hours. Motorized sounds would decrease those opportunities. As described before, the Royal River area of the wilderness currently is affected by sound from snowmobiles on Little John Lake, South Fowl Lake, vehicles on the Arrowhead Trail, etc. Since this sound would be the same regardless of alternative selected, it is not displayed in Figure Figure 3-12 displays the amount of time in a given week during the winter that the opportunities for solitude in the Royal River area of the BWCAW would be affected by trail use under each of the alternatives. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-30 Chapter 3

31 Alternative Figure 3-12: Duration of Trail Sounds Audible in the Wilderness by Alternative. The amount of time trail sounds would be audible in the wilderness under each alternative is very similar Hours per week BWCAW would be impacted by trail sound Hours per week BWCAW would NOT be impacted by trail sound Hours per Week Under all alternatives, motorized sounds from trail use would only be heard in the winter months when snowmobile use would occur. The remaining months of the year, the trail would not have any impact on the opportunities for solitude within the BWCAW. This would be true under all alternatives. Additionally, the amount of impact in each winter month is similar for all alternatives, with Alternative 2 impacting slightly more. See Figure Although there is the potential for illegal motorized use of Alternative 2 trail, this is not likely (see section 3.9 for more analysis of Off Highway Vehicle use) and therefore the sound impact is not likely. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-31 Chapter 3

32 Hours Figure 3-13: Hours per Month Snowmobile Sound from Trail Use would Impact Opportunities for Solitude in BWCAW in South Fowl Project Area Total hours per month available to experience solitude No Action: Hours snowmobile sound from trail use would be audible in BWCAW Alternative 2: Hours snowmobile sound from trail use would be audible in BWCAW Alternative Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Alternative 4 Month Alternative 1 No Action The opportunities for solitude would remain the same as they currently are. Visitors in the BWCAW near McFarland Lake and South and North Fowl Lakes then continuing along the U.S./Canada border would hear snowmobile sound along with other motorized sounds. Visitors within the shaded areas of Figure 3-6 would hear sound above the natural ambient level. These sounds would occur daily but not constantly; affording large stretches of time without motorized sound. However, a person seeking total solitude or total escape from motorized sounds would not find that place along the Royal River and the closer they were to McFarland, South Fowl or North Fowl lakes where snowmobile use occurs, it is likely they would experience a greater impact to solitude. The percentage of time a snowmobile riding on the trail is heard in the wilderness would be a small, as shown in Figure In addition, sound from snowmobiles would only be heard in the winter season, approximately four months of the year. In the other eight months of the year, the opportunities for solitude would be unaffected by the sounds from the snowmobile trail. Alternative 2 The frequency (number) of snowmobiles using the trail would be the same under Alternative 2 as for Alternative 1 No Action. Further, snowmobile sounds from adjacent areas outside the Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-32 Chapter 3

33 wilderness are audible within the wilderness above the natural ambient sound levels as outlined in Figure 3-6. Therefore, Alternative 2 would be the same as Alternative 1 No Action for type or frequency of sound. The difference between this alternative and No Action would be related to the volume and area of sound and duration of sound. Figure 3-8 show 36 more acres around Royal Lake where sound would be above natural ambient levels. Further, if a wilderness visitor was camping on Royal Lake, on a weekend, they may experience a higher level impact to solitude by snowmobile use of Alternative 2. Measurements of the dba change above ambient caused by sound emitted from the Alterative 2 trail ranged from a 1 to 5 dba increase depending on the weather conditions (described earlier in this section). MPCA (1999) reports that generally a 3 dba change is the threshold for perceiving a change in sound and that a 5 dba change is clearly noticeable. Therefore, at times sound from snowmobiles on the trail would be noticeable to BWCAW visitors or in the foreground of the soundscape and at other times, the sound from trail use would be less noticeable or in the middle ground. Sounds from snowmobiles in the surrounding area such as South Fowl Lake would be in the background of the soundscape. Alternative 2 audible sound duration of trail use would be about 19.8 hours per week (single sled), an increase of 0.8% of the week above No Action. The duration of sound above natural ambient (relative to No Action) is a 2.2% increase for the most conservative case of single sled travel. Given a more probable case of paired sled travel, the increase was 1.1%. Within the Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized Management Area (the BWCAW in the project area) where solitude is not a high expectation (Forest Plan, Page 3-45), an increase in volume of 3-5 dba or less and an increase in duration of sound of 1-2% would be a minor impact on opportunity for solitude. Alternative 2 would have a slightly greater impact on sights visible from the wilderness than the other Alternatives due to the visibility of the trail and snowmobiles from the wilderness. This impact would be minor due to the short time a snowmobile would be visible and the short distance the trail would be visible. Alternatives 3 and 4 These alternatives use the same or similar travel corridors as Alternative 1 No Action so there would be no change in sound volume or area and resulting effects to opportunity for solitude under these alternatives. Similarly, the duration for audible time and duration of time above natural ambient would be the same under Alternative 3 or Alternative 4 as Alternative 1 No Action. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-33 Chapter 3

34 The percentage of time a snowmobile riding on the trail is heard in the wilderness would be a small, as shown in Figure In addition, sound from snowmobiles would only be heard in the winter season, approximately four months of the year. In the other eight months of the year, the opportunities for solitude would be unaffected by the sounds from the snowmobile trail. Alternative 3 or Alternative 4 would have no impact on sights in the wilderness. Conclusion on Effects to Opportunities for Solitude The sound analysis and Figures 3-12 and 3-13 shows that opportunities for solitude are substantially unchanged by alternative. This is indicative for a number of reasons. First, the current and anticipated snowmobile use to South Fowl Lake is low and would not change by alternative, making the frequency and duration of sound low for all alternatives. It is estimated about 30 sleds would use the trail on a given weekend day or a total of about 1,440 sleds per season. This is in contrast to high use snowmobile trails on the Gunflint District such as the North Shore State Trail which, between , had an estimated use of 9,00-10,000 sleds (North Shore State Trail Extension Proposed Environmental Assessment, November 1996, page 19). Second, the South Fowl Snowmobile Trail would only have motorized use in the winter, about four months out of the year. During the other eight months of the year, the opportunities for solitude would be the same as currently exists (see Figure 3-13). This is in contrast to roads or trails near the wilderness where the motorized use is year round such as County Road 12 (Gunflint Trail) a major county road that is within one mile of the BWCAW in numerous locations and one hundred feet at its closest point. Third, the small increase in volume and duration under Alternative 2 is added to an area of the wilderness where motorized sound is currently heard. Under all alternatives visitors in the BWCAW near the project area would hear snowmobile sound along with other motorized sounds. Visitors within the shaded areas of Figure 3-6 would hear audible motorized sound. These sounds would occur, but not constantly; affording large stretches of time without motorized sound even under Alternative 2 (see figure 3-12). Under all alternatives a person seeking total solitude or total escape from motorized sounds would not find that place along the Royal River/Royal Lake and the closer they were to McFarland, South Fowl or North Fowl lakes where snowmobile use occurs, it is likely they would experience a greater impact to solitude. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-34 Chapter 3

35 Conclusions Relating to Natural Quality of Wilderness Character Potential effects to the natural quality of wilderness character is described in more detail in the Threatened and Endangered Species (section 3.4), Sensitive Species (section 3.5), Non-Native Invasive Species (section 3.6), Soils, Wetlands and Water Quality (section 3.7), Forest Vegetation (section 3.8), Off Highway Vehicles (section 3.9) and Air Quality (section ) sections of the EIS. The analysis in the BE and summarized in section 3.4 indicates that the alternatives may affect but are not likely to adversely affect wolf and lynx and their critical habitats. This is would be true both outside the BWCAW in the project area and within the BWCAW. Population viability determinations for Regional Forester s Sensitive Species are made at the scale of the entire Superior National Forest. This larger landscape does consider habitats for species in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. The effects of the project are taken into account in making viability determinations. The analysis in section 3.5 indicates that none of the alternatives would be likely to result in a loss of viability or trend toward federal listing. This is case for both wildlife located in the project area and species that use habitat in the BWCAW. There would be minimal or no effects from any of the alternatives from spreading NNIS into the BWCAW that would affect the natural aspect of wilderness character. Alternatives 1, 3 and 4 do not provide additional potential for illegal access by ATVs since the routes are not located near the BWCAW. While Alternative 2 is located close to the BWCAW, steep topography and closure precludes the likelihood of this route creating the potential for illegal ATV access. The same is the case for snowmobiles, and in any case the likelihood of NNIS spread by snowmobiles is low. None of the alternatives would have a measurable effect on water quality in the BWCAW and the natural aspect of wilderness character. Alternatives 1, 3 and 4 are not located adjacent to the BWCAW and do not provide additional access for illegal OHV entry that might affect soils or water quality in the BWCAW. While Alternative 2 is close to the BWCAW boundary, steep topography and closure precludes the likelihood of illegal OHV entry from this route and therefore no ATV impacts to soils and water quality are expected. The distance (0.09 miles) between the Alternative 2 trail and Royal Lake would serve as a substantial filter strip that would reduce the effects of any soil erosion. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-35 Chapter 3

36 There would be no trail construction in the BWCAW or close enough to the BWCAW to change the vegetation composition in the BWCAW. In addition, there is little potential for illegal intrusion by OHVs from the route locations of Alternatives 1, 3 and 4, and the effective route closure and steep topography precluding access from the Alternative 2 route. Therefore, there would be minimal or no effects to vegetation in the BWCAW and the natural aspect of wilderness character affecting vegetation in any of the alternatives. Under all alternatives, levels of pollutants would fall within the ranges currently experienced. Previous analysis by the Superior National Forest indicated that the combined emissions of all snowmobile, OHV and logging equipment in the four northeastern counties of Minnesota contributes about 0.005% of the degradation to visibility in the Class I Airshed in the BWCAW (November 2009 Travel Management Project Supplemental EA, project file). None of the alternatives would contribute to degradation of visibility in the Class I Airshed or to the degradation of the natural aspect of wilderness character. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-36 Chapter 3

37 3.3 Recreational Use and Safety Introduction This section compares the alternatives for the hazards to safety that would occur. This helps compare how well each alternative meets the Purpose and Need (Section 1.3) Analysis Methods One aspect of the safety of the various alternatives can be measured as the miles of snowmobile trail that shares roadway with cars and trucks. Cook County last approved the use of Arrowhead Trail for snowmobiles in April Although legal, this dual use situation is inherently dangerous on busy roadways such as the Arrowhead Trail. Warning signs are posted along the Arrowhead Trail warning motorists to watch for snowmobiles along the road. The Minnesota Department of Transportation keeps accident histories for accidents that are reported. While there were no reported collisions between motor vehicles and snowmobiles in this area over the last five years, snowmobilers expressed their concern about near misses between snowmobiles and vehicles along the Arrowhead Trail. Near misses do not appear in accident history data. The Forest Service is therefore using dual use miles as a safety indicator because the greater the distance, the greater the potential for accidents. A second relative safety indicator is the amount by which the steep-slope hazard in Section 11 may be reduced by each alternative. This would also reduce potential for an accident. A third indicator is the number of intersections between each alternative and the Border Route Trail, which is a hiking trail. Snowmobiles are not allowed on the Border Route Trail, but at places where snowmobiles cross the trail there is a greater potential for snowmobiles to illegally use the trail Analysis Parameters The analysis area for this issue comprises the existing and proposed routes connecting South Fowl and McFarland Lakes. The analysis timeframe is 20 years because the proposed routes would be in place for a considerable period of time Affected Environment A dangerously steep and narrow slope occurs on the eastern portion of the current route on the unnamed road between South Fowl Road and South Fowl Lake. On this section it is difficult to see other snowmobiles approaching, and the trail is not wide enough for two-way snowmobile traffic (it is about 5 feet wide). In returning from South Fowl Lake, snowmobilers must first stop at a point on the trail and turn off their engines to listen for oncoming snowmobiles. Then they must accelerate up the hill quickly, hoping that no one is coming the other way. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-37 Chapter 3

38 On other portions of the trail, snowmobiles share the roadway with cars and trucks, and this dual use is unsafe. The Forest Service, Minnesota DNR, and Cook County are concerned about the current dual use situation on Arrowhead Trail (Cook County Road 16). Currently this situation is legal, but the Cook County Board of Commissioners would prefer to separate the two uses. There is some concern that dual use may continue on the Arrowhead Trail, no matter which alternative is chosen. However, this would be minimized or eliminated if an action alternative is selected and may be implemented since Cook County has indicated interest in closing the Arrowhead Trail to dual use in this case (personal communication, Cook County Board). Potential dual use could also occur when South Fowl Road or Stump River Road is used for timber harvest access on State property. Logging operations are limited, however, and the risk of snowmobiles colliding with motor vehicles is much greater on the busier, higher speed Arrowhead Trail. Environmental Consequences Direct and Indirect Effects Table 3-5 below summarizes the safety issue presented by each alternative. Table 3-5: Safety Situation Comparison Dual Use of Arrowhead Trail (miles) Potential Dual Use of South Fowl Road Alternative 1 No Action Alternative 2 North Route Alternative 3 South Route Alternative 4 Arrowhead Trail Route Yes No Yes Yes Potential Dual Use of Stump River Road No No Yes No Section 11 Slope Unimproved (used) Unimproved (not used) Improved (used) Improved (used) Border Route Trail Intersections Alternative 1 Would Not Address Any Safety Concerns Alternative 1, the No Action Alternative, would continue the status quo of dual use of the Arrowhead Trail, and potential dual use on the State s South Fowl Road and the dangerous hill on the unnamed trail to South Fowl Lake. See Section of a description of these problems. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-38 Chapter 3

39 Alternative 2 Reduces Safety Concerns on Arrowhead Trail and Other Areas Alternative 2 substantially reduces the potential for collisions between snowmobiles and motor vehicles on the Arrowhead Trail, while providing a more direct connection between McFarland and South Fowl Lakes. The proposed action provides direct access from McFarland Lake and crosses the Arrowhead Trail, reducing the dual use. Alternative 2 departs from the standard 12 foot tread/16 foot clearing standard using an 8 foot tread/ 10 foot clearing strategy. This more narrow width would be safe and would allow for two snowmobiles to pass by each other because the winding route is expected to slow traffic to a safe speed (10 to 15 mph). Slower speeds reduce the chance of accidents. The Arrowhead Trail could be used to loop back to McFarland Lake. However, this is not expected to occur often. As stated earlier, the main users of the trail are and would be anglers going to ice fish. Their main objective is to get to a fishing spot versus recreational snowmobiling. Simply having an option for a snowmobile loop by riding on a plowed road would not entice more snowmobilers to use the route. In addition, the Cook County Board of Commissioners has indicated interest in closing the section of Arrowhead Trail from the South Fowl Road to McFarland Lake to snowmobiles if an action alternative route is built (personal communication with County Board). Closing the Arrowhead Trail would disrupt the loop opportunity. As with Alternative 1, the South Fowl Road and the unnamed trail would continue receiving OHV traffic, which would continue to be a legal snow-free access to South Fowl Lake. This traffic over federal property in Section 12 would constitute an approved OHV access trail and would be included on the Superior National Forest trail inventory. Alternative 2 reduces intersections with the Border Route Trail compared to the existing condition from two to one. Alternative 3 Avoids Some Dual Use Conflicts and Corrects the Steep Slope Alternative 3, the South Route, does not run parallel to the Arrowhead Trail corridor except for a short section approximately 0.22 mile north of the junction with South Fowl Lake Road. This eliminates most of the proximity to other motor vehicles on the Arrowhead Trail. Stump River and South Fowl Roads, however, have the potential for dual use during State logging operations (Border Lakes Analysis Report). The hazardous slope in Section 11 would be widened enough so that snowmobile traffic in each direction could safely go up and down hill at the same time. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-39 Chapter 3

40 Alternative 4 Would Use New Parallel Trail, Not Roadway Itself Alternative 4 runs along the side of the Arrowhead Trail for over 2 miles. The presumption is that, if a trail is within the right of way for Arrowhead Trail, snowmobile riders would use the trail and not the drive surface of the county road. Like Alternative 3, the trail would follow South Fowl Road, which has the potential for dual use during State logging operations (Border Lakes Analysis Report). The hazardous slope in Section 11 would be improved as described above, for Alternative Cumulative Effects There are no other snowmobile trails or hiking trails planned in the immediate project area near South Fowl and McFarland Lakes besides the existing trails. The potential for cumulative effects from a loop would be greatly reduced or eliminated with the selection of an action alternative if the Cook County Board closes the Arrowhead trail to dual use in this case which they have indicated interest in (Cook County Board, personal communication). Use as a loop is unlikely in any case (see Section 3.3.5). Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-40 Chapter 3

41 3.4 Threatened and Endangered Species Introduction A Biological Evaluation (BE) analyzing effects to threatened and endangered species was written in 2005 to accompany the EA for this project (Appendix E). At that time, the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), gray wolf (Canis lupus) and Canada lynx (Lynx Canadensis) were listed on the federal Threatened Species list for this area. In July 2007, the Bald Eagle was removed from the federal list. It is now considered a sensitive species in the Superior National Forest. An Update to the BE was written in 2010 (Appendix F) and considers any changed circumstances since 2005 and updates effects to lynx, wolf, their critical habitats, and Regional Forester Sensitive Species. This section summarizes the findings of the BE and the Update Analysis Methods See the 2005 BE and the 2010 Update to the BE for analysis methods. In general, lynx and wolf are evaluated using criteria identified in the Forest Plan. For example, the potential for harassment and shooting of wolves from trails and roads is evaluated, while compacted snow routes and road density is evaluated for lynx. These analyses inform the viability findings made for lynx, wolf, and their critical habitats Analysis Parameters The Superior National Forest evaluates effects to lynx against management criteria identified in the Forest Plan (pp to 2-31), including areas called Lynx Analysis Units (LAU). The project area lies in the northeast corner of LAU 42. The analysis area for direct, indirect and cumulative effects for lynx and wolf and their critical habitats is LAU 42 and seven sections of state land to the east of LAU 42 (where human influence is most likely) to provide a more balanced assessment. LAU s are used for both lynx and wolf because at about 40,000 acres the size is a good approximation of wolf pack territories, and vegetation changes and trail densities would have similar effects to both lynx and wolf. (For more on the LAU s see Programmatic Biological Opinion for SNF Plan, p. 16, and BE, pp ) Effects to lynx and wolf that use habitat in the nearby area of the BWCAW is also considered Affected Environment The only species in the project area on the federal Threatened list at this time are the gray wolf and the Canada lynx. Critical habitat for lynx and gray wolf are present in the project area. There are no federally listed plant species in the project area, although there are a number of sensitive plant species of concern. See Section 3.5 for effects to Regional Forester Sensitive Species, including plants. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-41 Chapter 3

42 3.4.5 Direct and Indirect Effects-Gray Wolf Direct Impact on Denning Behavior Avoided by Construction Timing Trail construction would have no direct effect on the gray wolf because it would take place outside of denning season. No Alternative Would Increase Vehicle Road Density The wolf recovery plan calls for higher standard roads (Objective Maintenance Level 3 and above) to be maintained at a density less than one mile per square mile to help minimize human/wolf conflict. Since no roadways for motor vehicles are part of this project, the current density of roads suited to passenger vehicles (0.25 miles per square mile) would remain unchanged in all alternatives. Increase in Shooting of Wolves from Snowmobiles Is Unlikely Concerns include vehicles running into wolves and the possibility of wolves being chased, trapped or shot. These possible occurrences would be year-round. While all of the alternatives may provide the potential for increased wolf shooting and chasing, the shooting of wolves is unlikely. Snowmobile riders would generally rather stay on a groomed or compact surface, and wolves can readily move off these trails. A snowmobile rider could chase wolves in a few large open areas off the trails, but these are generally not continuous and are only temporary openings. It would be rare for a snowmobile rider to carry a firearm. A more likely use would be with ATV s by hunters, resulting in some risk of wolf shooting. This would be mitigated through closures of trails in the summer. The Superior NF allows cross-country travel with snowmobiles. However, most snowmobile use occurs on groomed or designated routes. There is little advantage to traveling off the designated route. No matter which alternative is chosen, these trails would continue to channel snowmobile travel, mostly in currently used corridors. Snowmobile and ATV traffic on any of the alternatives is not likely to affect wolf behavior, including denning, because denning would probably not occur near the new trail segments of Alternatives 2 and 3. Because of topography and vegetation, wolves would probably avoid the forested areas between the cliffs and the Royal River. Likewise, it is not likely that denning behavior would be affected near the new segments of Alternative 3. These potential changes in trail location and use, and probable wolf responses, would likely have no bearing on the wolf population and general movement in the area. In general, as long as trail density limits are maintained, wolves are not repelled by roads and trails but use them for travel (Mech, personal communication). Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-42 Chapter 3

43 3.4.6 Cumulative Effects-Gray Wolf Temporary Timber Roads Not Likely To Contribute to Wolf Shooting or Harassment The Minnesota DNR will likely continue to sell the timber on its property in the analysis area. The timber access roads needed to facilitate these timber sales could provide more corridors for snowmobile and ATV riders to use. Assuming ATV use on the Arrowhead Trail (Cook County Road 16) continues, all the alternative trails could link with these timber access roads in all seasons. Lake ice would link all these corridors in the winter making a connection between the South Fowl Lake end of Alternative 2 and the other corridors. Some snowmobile riders could consider these temporary roads good to explore. Therefore, as with the proposed snowmobile trail, this activity could also lead to a small increased use of access roads by both snowmobiles and ATV s, with the possibility of an increased number of wolves being hunted and shot. However, this potential effect can be reduced or eliminated if the state managers effectively close these temporary timber access roads when not in use. Grand Portage Snowmobile Trail is Outside LAU 42 The BE discusses the potential for a snowmobile trail linking the Grand Portage Reservation with the Gunflint Trail. That trail has just been established; the Ranger, Dennis Neitzke, signed the Decision Memo on March 6, The Fish and Wildlife Service concurred with our finding of may affect; not likely to adversely affect for that project. Except for 1.2 miles of overgrown road on state land being reopened, that trail follows existing roads. The selected Grand Portage snowmobile trail is about four miles from the South Fowl Project area, and is outside of LAU 42 and the analysis area. Travel Management Project Reduces Road Density in the Area The Travel Management Project, when it may be implemented, would designate or decommission unclassified roads, identify roads used for motor vehicles of all kinds, and identify which roads would remain open for Off-Highway Vehicles (OHV s) and which roads would be closed to these vehicles. The Travel Management Project decision would decommission 1.2 miles of road in LAU 42. Cumulatively these closures would not change the road density for this LAU (see Table 3-6 below). These changes are small in scale compared to the LAU. Low standard roads are being decommissioned but this could reduce the potential for harassment or killing of wolves. Wolf and Wolf Critical Habitat Determination: Not Likely to Adversely Affect Most of the routes in Alternatives 1, 3, and 4 follow existing roads and trails. Alternative 2 and a portion of Alternative 3 create new travel corridors, but the trails themselves are not likely to affect wolves. Mitigation would have trails constructed before and after denning season. All alternatives will affect but are not likely to adversely affect wolves and wolf critical habitat in the Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-43 Chapter 3

44 area. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was consulted on these findings and concurred (see Appendix A, Letter 20) Direct and Indirect Effects-Canada Lynx Canada Lynx Potentially Affected by Animal Competitors and Increased Human Contact Trail construction itself would have no direct effect on the lynx because it would take place outside of denning season (March to mid-july). Other potential adverse effects include: 1) increased human access and population pressure could result in direct threats from collision, shooting, trapping, and chasing and 2) compacted snow could potentially increase access to lynx competitors. The main lynx competitor is the bobcat. Coyotes are also a competitor but are not likely in the project area (Forest Plan Biological Assessment 2004). Both are more aggressive hunters than lynx and could out-compete lynx if there is an increase in compacted trails. Effects from increased human access are possible year-round because the lynx is a year-round resident of the Superior National Forest and because human activities are year-round. Collisions between Motorized Vehicles and Canada Lynx Are Unlikely The snowmobile trail would increase human presence along the trail route, thereby potentially increasing risk to the Canada lynx. Overall human presence in the project area would not vary by alternative. The new trail mileage constructed in Alternative 2 (2.22 mi.), Alternative 3 (1.32 mi.), and Alternative 4 (0.4 mi.) would help decrease compacted snow from snowmobiles compared to the Tilbury Trail situation; however, they could increase the potential for summer ATV use in the analysis area. Summer ATV use would be mitigated by closures, education and enforcement. The SNF allows cross-country travel with snowmobiles. However, most snowmobile riders use groomed or designated routes. Some snowmobile riders will ride off the trail in open areas, but most riders stay on compacted snow routes. Lynxes are likely to choose denning sites away from these corridors. Also, while closures are anticipated to be effective based on cooperation and education from user groups, enforcement and physical closure, it is still possible ATV users may violate the gates proposed for each of these new trails. Even if these violations are relatively frequent, it is unlikely that the use would result in more collisions between ATV s and lynxes. Information gathered from anecdotal and applied research (Minnesota Canada Lynx Project) has shown that lynxes are aware of roads and trails, but do not avoid them or the vehicles using them. The lynx may exist close to these routes without undue stress, but it would be very unlikely for an ATV to strike any lynx on a trail. The Forest Service has the option of closing a trail and restoring the area if closures are not effective. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-44 Chapter 3

45 Implementing the limit on snow-compacting roads and trails per square mile on federal land in the Analysis Area should minimize any collisions, as well as the potential for bobcat and coyote incursion. As stated in the Forest Plan, managers should consider opportunities to maintain the snow compacting road and trail mileage in each LAU at less than two miles per square mile. All the alternatives would decrease this ratio compared to what it was when the 2.4-mile illegal Tilbury Trail along the Royal River was being used. By adding the new segments of trail proposed by each alternative along with the Tilbury Trail closure to the existing base, the resulting figure would show a net decrease from the current mileage. Table 3-6 shows the net change in snow compacting routes, taking into account construction under each alternative and closing the Tilbury Trail. The 2.2 mile Alternative 2, for example, would decrease the mileage by 0.2 miles compared to the 2.4 miles of illegal Tilbury Trail; but this difference is too slight to change the overall ratio of miles per square mile in the Lynx Analysis Unit. As shown in Table 3-7 below, none of the alternatives even when added to cumulative actions in the area would approach the 2.0 mile/sq. mile density limit. Table 3-6: Net Change in Snow Compacted Routes Activity Alternative 1 No Action Alternative 2 North Route Alternative 3 South Route Alternative 4 Arrowhead Trail Route Miles of new corridor opened Miles of new trail in existing travel corridor Total miles of new construction (clearing and/or dozing). Miles of corridor closed (Tilbury Trail) Net Change in Corridor 0.2 Miles Closed 1.4 Miles Closed 2.0 Miles Closed 1 Arrowhead Trail, Stump River Road, South Fowl Lake Road, Un-named Trail for South Lake Road to South Lake. 2 The Tilbury Trail has been closed since 2003, but for purposes of considering impacts to Lynx, this is included in the consideration for net change in snow compacted routes as discussed on pp for the Opinion for the Case lzaak Walton League of America, Inc. et al. v. Kimbell, 516 F. Supp. 2d 982 (D. Minn. 2007) Cumulative Effects-Canada Lynx Grand Portage Snowmobile Trail is Outside LAU 42 The BE discusses the potential for a snowmobile trail linking the Grand Portage Reservation with the Gunflint Trail. That trail has just been established; the Ranger, Dennis Neitzke, signed Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-45 Chapter 3

46 the Decision Memo on March 6, The Fish and Wildlife Service concurred with our finding of May affect; not likely to adversely affect for that project. Except for 1.2 miles of overgrown road on state land being reopened, that trail follows existing roads. The selected Grand Portage snowmobile trail is about four miles from the South Fowl Project area, and is outside of LAU 42. This trail does not need further assessment, nor does it change the current South Fowl Project finding of not likely to adversely affect. Vegetation Management by the State As summarized above regarding wolf population effects, the Minnesota DNR will likely continue to sell timber on its property in the analysis area. This activity could lead to 1) increased use of access roads by both snowmobiles and ATV s, 2) the possibility of the lynx being hunted and shot, and 3) the possibility that compacted snow would favor the bobcat and increase competition with the lynx. However, this potential effect can be reduced or eliminated if the state managers effectively close these temporary timber access roads when not in use. Monitoring done for management on state and other ownerships indicates this generally occurs (MN DNR 2008). The Travel Management Project Reduces Road Density The Travel Management Project designated or decommissioned unclassified roads, identified roads used for motor vehicles of all kinds, and identified which roads would remain open for Off-Highway Vehicles (OHV s) and which roads would be closed to these vehicles. The Travel Management decision would decommission 1.2 miles of road in LAU 42. Decommissioning (subtracting) 1.2 miles of road, adding 2.2 miles of trail (Preferred Alternative 2), and the decommissioned 2.4 miles of the Tilbury trail would result in a road and trail density of 1.20 ( = 1.4 mile net decrease). Alternatives 3 and 4 have lower cumulative densities due to opening less corridor than Alternative 2. This calculation illustrates that these changes are small in scale compared to the LAU. If anything, the Travel Management decision could very slightly benefit any lynxes in LAU 42 because it decommissions some scattered road segments and concentrates road/trail mileage. Table 3-7 displays the cumulative road and trail density per alternative. Table 3-7: Cumulative Road and Trail Density per Alternative (miles/sq. mile of road and snow compacting trail). Alternative Density (miles/sq. mile) Alternative 1 No Action (without Tilbury Trail Closure) 1.20 Alternative 2 North Route (with Tilbury Trail Closure) 1.20 Alternative 3 South Route (with Tilbury Trail Closure) 1.17 Alternative 4 Arrowhead Trail Route (with Tilbury Trail Closure) 1.16 Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-46 Chapter 3

47 Determination: All Alternatives May Affect but Not Likely to Adversely Affect Lynx or Lynx Critical Habitat. The Forest Service has determined that all of the alternatives may affect but are not likely to adversely affect lynxes or lynx critical habitat. The details of this Determination are provided in the 2005 BE (Appendix E) and the 2010 BE Update (Appendix F). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was consulted on these findings and concurred (see Appendix A, Letter 20) Effects to Lynx and Wolf in the BWCAW The Forest Plan recognizes the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW) as important refugia habitat for lynx. Refugia are large, continuous areas encompassing the full array of seasonal habits, and where natural ecological processes predominate. Wilderness management goals and objectives complement those of refugia. The BWCAW Management Plan states that wildlife habitat composition will be the result of natural ecological processes such as fire, wind, insects, disease, and plant community succession. Recent lynx research for Northeastern Minnesota by Moen, et.al. (2007) shows that not only do lynxes migrate to Northeast Minnesota from Canada, but many Superior National Forest lynxes migrate to Canada and may return. All of the forested area in and out of the BWCAW assures connectivity for long distance migration and daily travel. All alternatives would maintain the existing, suitable habitat in the project area. Any lynx would be able to move in and through the project area to Canada and back, and between Lynx Analysis Units and the Boundary Water Canoe Area Wilderness surrounding the project area. The condition of key habitat indictors, which are - habitat for prey (snowshoe hare and red squirrel), denning habitat, and connective habitat, would not change in the BWCAW as a result of any of the alternatives. In addition, the low road and trail density of the project area (ranging from 1.16 to 1.20 miles/sq. mile in the alternatives) does not threaten lynx. All of the alternatives would use existing road or trail corridors or be in close proximity to existing corridors. The analysis in the BE and summarized in the preceding section indicates that the alternatives may affect but are not likely to adversely affect wolf and lynx and their critical habitats. This is would be true both outside the BWCAW in the project area and within the BWCAW. Therefore there would be no substantial effects to the natural aspect of wilderness character due to effects to lynx and wolf. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-47 Chapter 3

48 3.5 Regional Forester Sensitive Species Introduction Regional Forester Sensitive Species (RFSS) are identified for management strategies and conservation measures to prevent a sensitive species from being federally listed as threatened or endangered (FSM ). See Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2670 Supplement R9 RO The current Superior National Forest sensitive species list is available at The list is also available at the Gunflint Ranger District Office. This section summarizes the Biological Evaluation and Update to the BE (Appendices E and F) and discloses direct, indirect and cumulative effects on RFSS from the project alternatives Analysis Methods See the 2005 BE and 2010 Update to the BE for analysis methods used for each particular species. Impacts are generally localized to the area of the trail alternatives. Effects from trail construction, the spread of invasive weeds, OHV use and climbing on cliffs are factors that are evaluated for sensitive species including bald eagle and several sensitive plants Analysis Parameters See the 2005 BE and 2010 Update to the BE for the analysis area and timeframe particular to each species. The analysis area for direct and indirect effects is generally the trail corridors and the area within 100 meters of the trail corridors, while cumulative effects considers other activities that may facilitate the spread of invasive weeds such as timber harvest by the State Affected Environment Bald Eagles are in the Project Area Bald eagles exist in the northeast corner of the project area from South Fowl Lake to Little John Lake and north of the cliff features. Eagles typically use this type of riparian habitat in the SNF. Nest trees occur in this area and at least one breeding territory. Sensitive Plant Species: Unusual Soil Formation Gives Rise to Rare Habitat The project area is part of the Shallow Rove Slate Landtype Association. The formation covers the very northern part of Cook County; however most of the formation is contained within the southern region of the Thunder Bay District of Ontario. The sedentary and diabase rock here is associated with calcareous, slightly more basic, nutrientrich soil than that typical of the Canadian Shield (Schwartz and Thiel, 1976). Relatively rich soils, particularly in the Royal River drainage, along with steep, moist, north-facing cliffs, and contrasting areas of shallow, dry soils near deeper, moister soils provide the base for a unique assemblage of plants (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 2003). Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-48 Chapter 3

49 In the United States, the Rove Slate complex is about 81,800 acres within the proclamation boundary of the Superior National Forest. Of those, just over 51,800 (63%) are contained in the Vento Unit of the BWCAW. There are a number of geologic features (see Photo 3-3) that are similar to the Royal Lake cliffs. Gerdes (2001) has determined that talus slope, rock outcrop and moist cliff are abundant in the Rove Slate complex (Table 2, p. 17). There are about 75 peaks or ridges with steep to vertical slopes. Of those, 60 (80%) are in the Vento Unit of the BWCAW. The Royal Lake cliffs are about 1.4 miles long. There are about 68.8 miles of this feature of which 48.5 (70%) are within the Vento Unit (GIS and map analysis of Rove Slate complex, project file). Photo 3-3: Mount Ari, an example of geological features analyzed for this project. The Forest Service has evaluated data on sensitive or potentially sensitive plant species from three sources: The Forest Service survey completed for the original BE in 2005 The Minnesota DNR Natural Heritage Information Database The recent Minnesota County Biological Survey completed in 2009 Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-49 Chapter 3

50 The 2005 Biological Evaluation (Appendix E) includes 85 species currently listed as sensitive on the Superior National Forest. However, only thirty-nine of these species are known to occur in the project area or possibly occur there. The list has 12 animals (including the two federally listed species above), 22 vascular plants, and 5 lichens. Six of the 22 vascular plants (27%) are disjuncts or at the extreme edge of their range, where disjuncts are plants that occur in small populations separated from the main range of a species, usually by hundreds or thousands of miles. These six plants are maidenhair spleenwort (Asplenium trichomanes), short sedge (Carex rossi), large-leaved sandwort (Moehringia macrophylla), sticky locoweed (Oxytropis borealis viscida), encrusted saxifrage (Saxifraga paniculata neogaea), and smooth woodsia (Woodsia glabella). Twenty-one species known to occur or potentially occur in the project area are on both the state and Forest lists. Along with the gray wolf and bald eagle, they include two animals, fourteen vascular plants, and three lichens. At the time the original BE was written, one plant Canada yew (Taxus canadensis), which is listed on the Superior Forest Sensitive Species List, and a state listed plant, blunt-fruited sweet cicely (Osmorhiza depauperata) were found near the proposed route for Alternative 2. Recent MCBS Data Identified Additional State Species of Concern In 2009 Minnesota County Biological Survey botanists conducted more surveys in the area. The searchers checked the locations of the above plants and discovered several more important plants at this cliff site. They found four more state-listed species: a very small fern (Botrichium michiganense) which is also listed for the SNF, a sedge (Carex supina), purple reedgrass (Calamagrostis purpurascens), and a fern (Woodsia scopulina). They found two other species: a loco weed (Oxytropis viscida) which had not been collected in the state for decades, and Prosartes trachycarpa which is a new discovery for the state. Blunt-fruited sweet cicely (Osmorhiza depauperata), state listed as Species of Concern, was among the plants noted along this route. The MCBS botanists found two other plants which have not yet been keyed to species: Huperzia spp., and Arabis spp. Huperzia appalachiana is currently state and Forest listed, and Arabis hoboellii var. retrofracta is currently state listed. One other species, soapberry (Sheperdia canadensis), is apparently rare but not listed. Two other carex species were found for which no status has been determined Carex ovales and Carex tonsa. MCBS Finds Peregrine Falcons and Black-Throated Blue Warblers During the 2009 survey the County Biological Survey reported a peregrine falcon at the South Fowl cliff site and black-throated blue warblers in the forests near the project site, both of which Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-50 Chapter 3

51 are listed as sensitive on the SNF list. The survey also noted heather vole (Phenacomys intermedius) in the area. Environmental Consequences Direct and Indirect Effects Alternatives 1, 3, and 4 Would Not Adversely Affect Eagles in the Area Alternatives 1, 3, 4 are not likely to affect the bald eagle. Human activity on these trails would be well away from likely nesting areas. Most snowmobile and ATV use occurs before and after the most sensitive part of the breeding season. Eagles are more likely to begin courtship after mid-march when snowmobile conditions in the area are deteriorating. While overall human use is not expected to vary by alternative, there would be a shift in the location of trail corridor compared to the existing condition if an action alternative is selected. Trail use could have an effect during the nesting season (mid-march to mid-july), when some of the more wary birds could be sensitive to human activities within a quarter mile of the nest. Alternative 2 May Affect Eagles in the Area but is Not Likely to Affect Them Adversely Alternative 2 proposes a trail about a third of a mile from the location of the last used nest and is close to potential nesting sites. As with the other alternatives, late season snowmobile use may coincide with courtship, but diminishes quickly after the beginning of March. Direct and Indirect Effects on Animal Species Would Mainly Be in the Trail Tread and Trail Corridor The Biological Evaluation concluded that none of the project Alternatives would lead to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability for either the black-throated blue warbler or the peregrine falcon. For peregrine falcon, however, the BE noted the potential negative effects of rock climbers under Alternative 2. Disturbing nesting peregrines, especially early in the breeding and incubating period, can cause nest abandonment. Alternative 2 would be closed to motorized use during the snow-free season, thus minimizing any new summer use of the area. However, it is noted that even if illegal OHV use occurred on the Alternative 2 route, OHV riders are generally not inclined to participate in rock climbing. Non-motorized recreationalists hiking on the Border Route trail may be more inclined to participate in rock climbing, and none of the alternatives would change use of the Border Route trail. In any case, climbing is not known to occur in this area and is not a climbing destination (SNF Recreation Staff, personal communication). The cliff faces are very dynamic and prone to crumbling which results in unstable footing. In general the features are much too unstable for recreational climbing (Gerdes, 2001). If climbing becomes an issue due to the Border Route Trail, the climbing activity could be prohibited. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-51 Chapter 3

52 Three of the birds (including the goshawk) are raptors, and trail construction could affect them at distances up to about 600 meters. (This figure is an assumption made based on professional knowledge of the SNF biologist and not based on research in the area.) Trail construction could destroy a nest or cause a breeding pair to abandon their territory or nest. Direct effects to sensitive birds are possible from March through mid-august. However, direct effects to sensitive birds are not likely because none of the trails would be constructed between March and August. Direct and Indirect Effects to Plants Potential direct effects to sensitive plants include being torn out or buried while moving the soil, or shaping the trail with mechanized equipment. Indirect effects on plants are also possible, but difficult to assess quantitatively because of many factors. The effects accompanying the creation of new forest edge could, for example, 1) change plants exposure to sunlight, 2) dry out soil and duff, and 3) change plant composition and structure. Effective trail closures to ATV would help prevent mechanical damage from ATV use which could create ecological disturbances that would lead to the introduction of noxious plants. These changes can destroy habitat for sensitive species, but also create it for other species. Direct effects to sensitive plants are possible with Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 where new trail is constructed. Although Alternatives 2 and 3 impacts are somewhat similar, Alternative 2 may carry with it somewhat more impact potential, but effective mitigation on OHV access (and climbing, if needed) would reduce this impact. The differences result from where these alternatives occur on the landscape. Virtually all the known sensitive species in the area occur on the upper faces of the cliffs between McFarland and South Fowl Lakes, on the north side of these cliffs, or in the Royal River drainage. Most of the rare plants in the vicinity of the Alternative 2 route occur about 200 feet up the cliff face above the bench where the trail would be located, and no plants were found on the trail corridor itself during sensitive plant surveys by MCBS and others. Canada yew has been discovered in wooded areas near the base of the cliff, and older records describe sensitive plants lower on the rocks. Alternative 2 would affect at most 2.7 (.003%) acres and at most one mile of feature (1.4%) of the Rove Slate complex as described in the Affected Environment section. The other alternatives would not affect the Rove Slate complex. Cumulatively no other motorized routes from Gunflint Lake to South Fowl, (road or trail) exists that is located next to, or affects, any of the steep slope features. The habitat Alternative 3 would cross is unlikely to include sensitive species. Alternative 3, on the other hand, could affect more species south of the cliffs in the proposed new corridor areas and along Cook County Highway 16. Most of these plant species (12 of 17) have not actually Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-52 Chapter 3

53 been collected in the area, but are possible. Alternative 4 includes the same plants as Alternative 3 but fewer of them (See BE analysis matrix). The BE and Update to the BE discusses these concerns and found that with effective mitigation to reduce impacts from trail construction and snow-free season use of the trail, the proposed alternatives may impact individuals but are not likely to cause a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability Cumulative Effects Cumulative Effects of Project and Other Activity Not Likely to Affect Eagles or Habitat. Eagles have a history of successfully nesting in the area while snowmobiling has occurred regularly on the Tilbury Trail. That trail is as close to or closer to potential nesting structures than is being proposed in Alternative 2, so effects would likely be slight. The alternatives would have no direct effect on the bald eagle because no construction would take place during the nesting season. No other reasonably foreseeable projects in the area are expected that would change this evaluation. ATV Use Could Compound Potential Risk on Alternatives Routes There are no reasonably foreseeable future projects in the analysis area that may compound impacts on sensitive plant species along the proposed route alternatives. However, regarding existing land uses, existing nearby trail use and the related soil and plant disturbance is the primary concern for all these species. Whichever snowmobile trail is designated, ATV riders may (legally or illegally) potentially use it in snow-free seasons. ATV use compounds the risk for many of these sensitive species. Restricting ATV use where it is not legal would minimize or avoid this potential impact. Impacts would need to be monitored (such as invasive species, summarized in the next section). See Chapter 4 for the monitoring plan associated with this project. Travel Management Project Would Decommission Roads in the Area There would be a small benefit to most sensitive wildlife species in the area through decommissioning 1.2 miles of low standard road. Conclusion: Alternatives Would Not Lead to Federal Listing The finding of the BE and the Update to the BE was that the proposed alternatives might impact individuals but are not likely to cause a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability. This would apply to sensitive plants in the area with the application of effective mitigation measures. The measures discussed are 1) closing the trail during snow-free seasons, 2) limiting access to the cliff area to only the current Border Route Trail, a hiking trail along the crest of the promontory which forms the cliffs, and 3) barring rock climbing on the cliffs if needed. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-53 Chapter 3

54 The analysis indicates that Alternative 1 has the least risk to sensitive species. Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would cross near areas with known populations in the area near South Fowl Lake. Figure 3-14, below, compares the number of determinations by category for each alternative. A total of thirty-six sensitive species were assessed for impacts leaving out the federally listed wolf and lynx. See Section 3.4 for impacts to wolf and lynx. Figure 3-14: Sensitive Species in Alternative Route Areas. 36 Total Species in Area 32 species not impacted Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 species impacted, but no loss of viability likely to result in loss of viability or trend toward federal listing Effects to Wildlife and Sensitive Species in the BWCAW Population viability determinations for Regional Forester s Sensitive Species are made at the scale of the entire Superior National Forest. This larger landscape does consider habitats for species in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. The effects of the project are taken into account in making viability determinations. The analysis above indicates that none of the alternatives would be likely to result in a loss of viability or trend toward federal listing. This is case for both wildlife located in the project area and species that use habitat in the BWCAW. Therefore there would not be a major effect to the natural aspect of wilderness character due to effects to sensitive species or wildlife. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-54 Chapter 3

55 3.6 Invasive Species Introduction There is concern about the spread of and effects of invasive species that may occur from the trail alternatives. This section discloses the effects of non-native invasive species (NNIS) under each alternative Analysis Methods Roads and trails provide a favorable seedbed, and disturbances along these corridors induce latent seed in the soil to germinate. Animals, especially humans, inadvertently transport noxious weed seeds into and along these roads and trails. Therefore, miles of new trail constructed can provide an indicator for the potential for NNIS spread. While snowmobile travel is far less likely to spread NNIS than OHV or motor vehicle travel, the possibility exists that NNIS could be transported through illegal OHV use on snowmobile trail. Mitigation measures to reduce potential effects are also discussed Analysis Parameters The analysis area for direct and indirect effects includes the alternative routes and areas of the Forest adjacent to those routes (including the relevant portion of the BWCAW). This is because NNIS spread is most likely to occur on and adjacent to travel routes as a result of trail construction of the alternatives. The analysis area for cumulative effects includes the entire project area to include potential spread from other actions such as timber harvest on State land. The time period for direct and indirect effects is a ten year period from the time project activities begin, because no effects of project activities will occur until implementation, and because weed spread occurs rapidly, so if weeds were going to colonize a trail alternative analyzed in this document, the weed spread will have taken place within 10 years. The time period for cumulative effects is 20 years, looking back 10 years at past actions and 10 years forward Affected Environment Invasive Plants Can Change Ecosystem Function and Threaten Plant Diversity Invasive plants are aggressive, non-native plants that out-compete or destroy native plants or the habitat that supports them. Noxious weeds can also damage soil and water, affect endangered species, and change ecosystem function. They are generally a threat to natural plant diversity and have damaged well over a hundred million acres in the United States; they infest over three million acres annually; and they invade about 5,000 acres per day on federal land (Westbrooks, 1998). The loss of local native plants is to be expected as non-natives move into an area. The most sensitive location in this project area would be on the cliffs and north of the cliffs between McFarland and South Fowl Lakes. As discussed under Section 3.5 Regional Forester Sensitive Species, this area forms habitat supporting rare plants. Changes brought on by noxious weeds in Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-55 Chapter 3

56 moisture, light, soil chemistry, and space could reduce the potential area for and occurrence of some of the sensitive plants. Invasive Plants Could to Be Carried into the Area under All Alternatives Disturbing the soil and opening the canopy could provide a seed bed for invasive plants (Ferguson 2003). A forest inventory of noxious weed locations last year found two invasive weeds, tansy and bull thistle, in the parking lot for the Little John Lake canoe landing; and tansy on CC 16 near the intersection of SFR 328. Two other more destructive weeds were discovered earlier. During the last couple of years, purple loosestrife plants were pulled from the Little John Lake canoe landing, and leafy spurge has been pulled from a campsite on the west end of McFarland Lake (Gerdes, pers. com.). Noxious weed species possible in the area include the species mentioned above, as well as hawkweed, spotted knapweed, Canada thistle, plumeless thistle, St. John s wort, bird s foot trefoil, and sweet clover. Superior National Forest system roads and trails, like elsewhere, provide a favorable seedbed, and disturbances along these corridors induce latent seed in the soil to germinate. Animals, especially humans, inadvertently transport noxious weed seeds into and along these roads and trails. Alien invasive plants are likely to be transported into and possibly around the analysis area in all alternatives, because ATV use will likely continue on CC 16 and South Fowl Road 328 no matter the alternative chosen. Road vehicles are driven into the area on CC 16 from outside the area on a constant basis. Disturbed Soil Can Help Noxious Weeds Become Established Noxious weeds occur in the analysis area as they do in many other areas. Disturbed soil can encourage noxious weeds to become established. Hawkweed (Hieracium, spp.), spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), St. John s-wort (Hypericum perforatum), bird s foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), tansy (Tanacetum vulgare), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula), and sweet clover (Melilotus spp.) are noxious weeds in the area and could become established on the trails. Humans disperse seeds that attach to clothing and mechanical equipment. Seeds are spread more easily during the snow-free seasons when both plants and humans are active. Alternative 1 and over 90 percent of the route for Alternative 4 have and may continue to have many of these weeds. They are on well-traveled roads where seed deposition and transfer will continue. Gypsy Moth and Earthworms Other noxious pests such as gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar) and various species of earthworms are transported much like plants. Gypsy moths can cause substantial forest damage. The Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-56 Chapter 3

57 caterpillars defoliate forests on a large scale. Alien worms are known to alter the surface soil and plant populations and communities (Gundale 2005). The 2009 report from the Minnesota Department of Agriculture indicates that gypsy moths have already dispersed to northeastern Minnesota in larger numbers than expected. South Fowl Lake has been fished for many decades by anglers who could transport worms as bait. The soil around the lake has not been tested for worms. Educating the public to address the effects of releasing worms or gypsy moth spread is not within the scope of this project. Environmental Consequences Direct and Indirect Effects Alternatives that Create New Trail Would Encourage Invasive Plant Species Alternative 1 would have the least effect because ATV use would continue on currently used roads. Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 create new trail (see comparison tables in Chapter 2), and soil disturbed during construction would encourage invasive species. The entrances to these trails are to be gated in the snow-free season to minimize potential ATV use, which could rut and expose soil, leading to erosion, noxious weed germination, and the spread of weed seeds. Under these alternatives, however, invasive species are more likely to occur along the trails and not spread significantly into surrounding forest (Ferguson 2003), although some weeds would be capable of advancing well beyond the trail edges, depending on the species and on the type of dominant trees and shrubs. Weeds found during trail monitoring could be pulled or sprayed with herbicide. Disturbances and Introduction of Noxious Weeds Can Be Mitigated in Alternative 2 Of the new trails, Alternative 2 could potentially introduce the most weeds into a sensitive area. This is because about half the trail length of 2.2 miles is through in an area known for its diverse array of sensitive plants (See Biological Evaluation, Appendices E and F). Changing microhabitats and encouraging more aggressive, non-native plants, could reduce the viability of some of sensitive plants. Effective trail closure would mitigate additional potential effects from spread of non-native plants by ATVs. Most of the known sensitive plant locations are about 200 feet above the Alternative 2 route, making the spread of invasive plants to these cliff wall habitats unlikely via ATV travel itself. Canada yew has been discovered in wooded areas near the base of the cliff, and older records describe sensitive plants lower on the rocks. It is possible climbers could also seek out the nearby cliffs. However, this is considered unlikely since climbers have never been observed at the cliffs, and none have ever been known to climb these cliffs or consider these cliffs as a climbing destination (SNF Recreation Staff, personal communication). The cliffs are considered poor for climbing opportunities (Gerdes 2001 p. 19). Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-57 Chapter 3

58 In any case, the existing Border Route hiking trail passes close to the cliffs and has not facilitated climbing activity in the area. If this did occur, the snowmobile trail and the Border Route Trail would receive more summer disturbance than anticipated, which could lead to possible water erosion and invasion by noxious weeds. To mitigate these potential threats, Alternative 2 is to be a narrow trail in the most sensitive section, and is to be constructed with minimal use of heavy equipment. Alternative 2 would impact approximately 0.04 acres (100 feet of trail) where the soil will be disturbed (this area is located west of the sensitive cliff area, see Figure 2-1). A 200 foot section of trail would be within the sensitive cliff area. With effective trail closure during snow free seasons, the chances would be low for human caused disturbance and nonnative species transport and introductions. As described above, ATV trespass can result in the spread of invasive plants. While much less likely, there is a small risk that snowmobile use can spread invasive plants. In general, snowmobiles operate in snowy conditions when there is little bare ground and invasives are dormant, snow covered, and have already dispersed their seed; these conditions reduce the risk of spread of invasive plants. However, snowmobile operation in patches of invasive plants in reduced snow conditions could spread invasive plants. Invasive plant spread from snowmobiles would be much less than from ATVs or motor vehicles. Monitoring of the Alternative 2 route and treatment of any new invasive plant occurrences found along the route would limit the impacts of NNIS spread from snowmobiles. Under Alternative 3, Risk is Weeds, not Alien Worms Alternative 3 would construct one mile of new trail. By joining with an existing timber road and widening a short distance of Cook County Highway 16, it would disturb soil 2.6 acres on another 1.6 miles of road or trail. At the standard 16-foot width it would have the longest new tread, possibly enabling invasive species to become established. Nearly 2,000 feet of new trail (0.75 acres) would be constructed within section 11 of the sensitive cliff area. With effective closures during snow-free seasons, noxious weeds are more likely to become established by natural dispersion and latent seeds than from human seed transport. Alien worms are least likely to be introduced (if they have not been already) in most of the new trail because it is least likely of all the alternatives to be used to reach a fishing access. Alternative 4 Would Be Most Affected by Invasive Species Alternative 4 would create 0.4 miles of new trail corridor as the trail ascends from McFarland Lake. This route also increases the width of possible seed bed along the Arrowhead Trail disturbing 4.5 acres of soil. However, most of this new disturbance is adjacent to the Arrowhead Trail and is not a new corridor. This new tread is to be seeded with a cover mix, but invasive Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-58 Chapter 3

59 weeds already on site could become mixed with the cover. Ongoing transport of seed from inside and outside the analysis area is likely to affect the tread of this possible trail more than the other alternatives because it parallels a well traveled road. Nearly 2,000 feet of new trail (0.75 acres) would be constructed within section 11 of the sensitive cliff area, the same as Alternative Cumulative Effects Timber Sales Would Also Expand Potential for Invasive Species The State plans to harvest timber in the area on a recurring basis. Each time an access road is built into harvest areas it expands the potential for non-natives to expand their range of occurrence. Heavy equipment carries seed from place to place (Ferguson 2003), and new timber sale roads would become likely sites for noxious weeds to become established. The greater the reservoir of plants the easier it would be for those plants to spread. ATV activity on all these corridors would help facilitate seed transport. The amount of new trail constructed can be taken as a proxy for the possibility of introducing invasive species. Timber sales increase this possibility, and invasive species are likely to be carried into the project area under all action alternatives. New construction, however, would be conducted according to design features outlined in Chapter 2, and invasive plants are likely to stay along travel corridors. Travel Management Project Would Decommission Roads in the Area This decommissioning of 1.2 miles of road would reduce the potential for the spread of NNIS. However, cumulative effects related to the project are unlikely since the decommissioned routes do not add to or cut off travel corridors associated with each alternative for the South Fowl project Effects to the BWCAW There would be minimal or no effects from any of the alternatives from spreading NNIS into the BWCAW that would affect the natural aspect of wilderness character. Alternatives 1, 3 and 4 do not provide additional potential for illegal access by ATVs since the routes are not located near the BWCAW. While Alternative 2 is located close to the BWCAW, steep topography, dense vegetation and closure precludes the likelihood of this route creating the potential for illegal ATV access. The same is the case for snowmobiles, and in any case the likelihood of NNIS spread by snowmobiles is low. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-59 Chapter 3

60 3.7 Soil Resources, Wetlands and Water Quality Introduction Both agency and public respondents expressed concern over potential soil damage through trail construction and use. This section discloses impacts to soils and wetlands from each alternative Analysis Methods The acreage and type of soil impacted by each alternative is evaluated to determine potential impacts to soils. See Section for a description of soil types in the analysis area. In addition, potential impacts to wetlands are evaluated for each alternative for construction and use of the trail alternatives Analysis Parameters The Analysis Area for soils and wetlands is limited to the associated route alternatives and lands within 100 feet of those routes. This is because impacts from trail construction and use by snowmobiles would be limited to the routes themselves and areas immediately adjacent. Possible effects from illegal OHV use may affect a larger area; see Section 3.9 for effects from potential illegal OHV use. Potential effects to water quality considered the area of the routes and the nearby area of the BWCAW. The analysis timeframe is 20 years because the trails are anticipated to be an enduring feature on the landscape Affected Environment Soil Impacts Differentiated by Ecological Land Type Impacts to soils on federal land are differentiated by ecological land type (ELT). This classification system classifies and maps ecological units based on climate, topography, soils, water, and potential natural communities. Within this hierarchical system, mapping units range from provinces that are thousands of square miles in size, to land type associations that are broad geographic areas, to ecological land types that are more site-specific. Alternative trail routes encompass 1 to 5 different ELTs. The dominant ELTs that occur in the alternative routes are ELTs 14 and 16, although some of the wetter soil types are present and must be addressed. (See Cleland et al., National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units in Ecosystem Management, 1997) Table 38a displays which ELTs are present for each alternative. Table 3-8b provides the identity and brief description of the ELTs located within the analysis area. More detailed information concerning analysis area ELTs can be found in the project file and the Northern Minnesota ecological classification system information guide (USDA Forest Service, 1995). As Table 3-8b shows, the direct effects to soils from vehicle traffic are compaction, rutting and erosion. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-60 Chapter 3

61 Table 3-8a: Ecological Land Types Located Along Alternative Trail Routes Alternative ELT 1 ELT 6 ELT 14 ELT 16 Alternative 1 No Action X Alternative 2 North Route X X X Alternative 3 Southern Route X X X Alternative 4 Arrowhead Trail Route X X Table 3-8b: Ecological Land Type descriptions and potential effects ELT Description Potential Effects Lowland, moist loamy soils with plant communities that are transitional between uplands and lowlands. Somewhat poorly drained soils are susceptible to rutting and compaction when saturated. Classified as riparian. Water movement is primarily subsurface. Most mechanical operations are limited to frozen soil condition or during dry periods. Trees are susceptible to wind throw. Trails require design features to solve water related problems Lowland, acidic to neutral organic soils composed of decaying woody plants and forbs with plant communities adapted to permanently wet soils. Soils are susceptible to rutting and compaction due to continuous saturated conditions. Classified as riparian. Permeability rate is slow and ponding is common. Most mechanical operations are limited to frozen soil conditions. Trails require design features to solve problems associated with the permanently saturated deep organic material. Upland, moderately well-drained, sandy loam to silt loam soils with a subsurface layer of dense soil that retains water for longer periods of time in some locations, and plant communities that have relatively high requirements for nutrients & moisture. Subsurface layer of dense soil will retain water long enough to create temporarily saturated soil in wet conditions and be more susceptible to rutting & compaction. Construction activities are limited to the normal dry period or when soil is frozen. Soils are suited for intensive recreation activities. Trail tread would compact easily and tend to be muddy and slippery during wet periods, and could become drainways for surface runoff. Plant communities will respond vigorously to day-lighting. Rutting can lead to water channeling and erosion. Compacted soils resist revegetation. Use in non-frozen conditions would result in rutting, standing water, and vehicles sinking into soils. Rutting can lead to water channeling and erosion. Compacted soils resist revegetation. 16 Upland, well-drained sandy loam or loam soils, 20 to 40 inches deep over bedrock. Plant communities have adapted to dry conditions and shallow soils depths to bedrock. Soils susceptible to nutrient loss due to the thinner surface organic layer and shallow soil depth. Trails should be constructed on contour where slopes exceed 18%. Windthrown trees are common. Soils can support dispersed recreation facilities. There is limited on-site borrow for trail construction. Day lighting will increase the density of shrubs and forbs. Nutrient loss could lead to difficulties in revegetation. Use in dry periods could result in soil loss through wind and water erosion. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-61 Chapter 3

62 3.7.5 Direct and Indirect Effects Acreage of Soil Disturbance Varies Slightly by Alternative The general width of the proposed trails is 16 feet for Alternatives 3 and 4. Although this would not be the actual width of the running surface, the trail would be cleared and shaped with a blade, and therefore 16 feet is used to calculate the affected acreage during construction. For Alternative 2, the width would be only 10 feet wide on the bench and blading/soil disturbance would not occur in this area. There would only be cutting of vegetation to clear the Alternative 2 trail on the bench and neither skidders nor bulldozers would be used on the bench. About 100 feet of the westerly portion of Alternative 2 would be built with a bulldozer (see Figure 2-1). Figure 3-15 displays the acreage affected. As shown, some areas in existing trail or road corridors will be shaped with a blade, but this would not be considered new construction. Figure 3-15: Acres of Soil Disturbance for Trail Alternatives Acres Total Soil Disturbance Soil Disturbance - New Construction 0 Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Chapter 2 details construction features and mitigation measures that would mitigate soils impacts under action alternatives. Alternative 1 Subject to Rutting and Compaction under Wet Conditions The only non-roaded, federal land involved in Alternative 1 is the existing access between state property and The Nature Conservancy property in Section 12. Located on ELT 14 and the bottom of a slope, the soil is considered suitable for intensive recreation activities. However, Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-62 Chapter 3

63 ELT 14 is susceptible to rutting and compaction during wet conditions. The soil is most durable in dry or frozen conditions. Observations of the existing trail where it descends the steep hill in Section 11 (Photo 3-4) show that some erosion is taking place. Given the number of years the trail has been in place, the erosion appears to be continual at a low rate. Rocks in the soil within the trail act to preserve the soil from serious erosion. At the same time, however, those rocks make travel very rough. This eroding section of trail is on state property and should be repaired whether or not it is part of this project. Repair would include water channeling or drainage devices, and a possible switchback. Alternative 2 Would Use Water Channeling Alternative 2, the North Route, includes ELT 14 with exposed talus and shallow soil over talus. The location on the side hill of the north-facing ridge would direct runoff across the trail tread, necessitating water-channeling features. Construction techniques will be more limited in Alternative 2. A blade would be used on the west ascent to the bench. Once the trail reaches the bench there will only be chain saw work and no dozer blading would be used. Stumps from primarily brush species will be flush cut (cut very close to the ground) to create the corridor. No soil disturbance would occur on the bench. The trail would be set back over 400 feet from the shoreline of Royal Lake. This would provide an undisturbed filter strip between the trail and the lake, assuring the trail would not be a source of sediment to the lake. Minnesota Forest Resource Council Guidelines suggest up to a 150 foot filter strip, depending on steepness of slope. Filter strips provide a zone of infiltration that protects surface water by 1) allowing vegetation to remain essentially undisturbed and 2) allowing the forest floor to trap sediment from adjacent land areas. Based upon recent Forest Plan monitoring information collected by the Superior National Forest ( ) and the Minnesota Forest Resource Council (MN DNR 2008), there is evidence that MFRC Voluntary Site Level Forest Management Guidelines, Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines, project area design features and mitigation measures have been successfully implemented to help protect water quality and watershed health. Furthermore, there is evidence that these mitigation measures are effective at reducing impacts to water quality and watershed health. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-63 Chapter 3

64 Photo 3-4: View of the steep hill in Section 11. After decades of use, erosion is nominal. The eastern third of the trail runs down off the bench into ELTs 1 and 6, and includes the riparian area near South Fowl Lake. These soils are poorly drained or saturated and require trail design features to solve water-related problems. Vegetation would be flush cut along the trail surface and heavy equipment would not be used in this section. Forest Service staff has used this technique for the construction of temporary roads and experience has shown that this technique would result in negligible effects to soil. Using snowmobiles when the ground is frozen would be compatible and would not cause rutting or compaction. Were vehicles to run over the wet soils when the ground is not frozen, however, it would result in rutting and compaction. Motorized use during the summer would be effectively excluded by legally and physically closing the trail. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-64 Chapter 3

65 Alternative 2 crosses roughly 100 feet of lowland cedar on State land as the route descends from the bench. Alternative 4 crosses a similar stretch near McFarland Lake. Snowmobile trails are not uncommon in wetland areas and extensive observations by Forest staff have shown that there are effects to the vegetation upon which the trail is located but, minimal if any, indirect effects to surrounding vegetation and normal water flows are maintained. Alternative 3 Would Not Be Affected When the Ground Is Frozen Alternative 3, the South Route, crosses a mixture of lowland (ELT 6) and well-drained upland soils including ELT 18 that has a shallow soil layer above bedrock. Trail construction is not normally allowed on ELT 18 because it would affect soil productivity (Forest Plan Table G-WS- 8, Page 2-16). ELT 6 portions would require design features to mitigate problems caused by the saturated organic material. Using snowmobiles when the ground is frozen would be compatible and would not cause compaction, rutting or erosion. With the exception of the ELT 18 portion, however, the route is susceptible to rutting and compaction if used when the ground is not frozen, especially the lowland areas. Without proper design features, using vehicles in the summer would affect the soil in all but the driest conditions. Upland types (ELT 14 & 16) are suited to recreational uses. Motorized use during the summer would be reduced by legally and physically closing the trail. The portion from McFarland Lake to the Stump River Road would be new construction, which would by design compact the soil. Winter only use would not cause erosion or rutting. Summer use of the new segment would likely cause some rutting in wet weather and some erosion, although the expected soil movement is minimal. Motorized use during the summer would be reduced by legally and physically closing the trail. The southern half of the trail would be on Stump River Road, a former timber-sale access road that may only need shaping in places. Snowmobile use would not raise water quality issues for the Stump River since use on existing routes such as the Stump River Road creates minimal soil or water quality impacts. Part of Alternative 3 Would Require Drainage to Prevent Possible Erosion The portion of the route following South Fowl Lake Road to the trail down the steep hill would have impacts from trail rerouting. South Fowl Lake Road has been compacted for vehicle travel and no further impacts are anticipated. As stated above, erosion control measures would be used to promote soil stability on the segment that goes down the steep hill in Section 11 (ELT 14). Switchbacks, as an option, would move water off the trail, thereby reducing the potential for erosion. The trail would be compacted by design, and vehicle traffic would prevent vegetation from growing back. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-65 Chapter 3

66 The soil is most durable in dry or frozen conditions. Rocks in the soil within the trail clearing would continue to provide support and preserve the soil from erosion. In this alternative, those rocks should stay below the surface and not obstruct the trail as they do currently. Alternative 4 Would Need to Control Water Runoff Alternative 4 is located on well-drained upland soil types, ELTs 14 and 16. Both are suited to recreation uses, but would require design features to control water runoff problems. Road shoulders along the Arrowhead road would be compacted. The topography is not extreme, however, and erosion control techniques should be effective. There would be impacts when the ground is not frozen, since the road would be designed for vehicle traffic in the summer. As in Alternatives 1 and 3, impacts to that portion of the route on the South Fowl Lake Road are not anticipated since it is compacted for heavier vehicle traffic. Alternative 4 crosses a stretch of lowland cedar near McFarland Lake. Snowmobile trails are not uncommon in wetland areas and extensive observations by Forest staff have shown that there are effects to the vegetation upon which the trail is located but, minimal if any, indirect effects to surrounding vegetation and normal water flows are maintained Cumulative Effects Overall, Erosion and Soil Movement Would Be Minimal No reasonably foreseeable proposals exist in the area besides what is described in Appendix B. For the purposes of this analysis, the Forest Service assessed overall cumulative effects on soil due to existing trails, the proposed project, and these other planned trails with the eight square miles where roads and trails could be affected by the proposal itself. The primary effects to soils from the trails are compaction, rutting, and erosion. Both rutting and compaction have very local, almost micro, site impacts and are generally measured at the stand level. They may also include impacts to nearby vegetation. Rutting and compaction could lead to erosion that moves soil and causes other effects in a broader area, dependant on how far the soil might move. Observations of existing roads and driveways in the project area indicate that soil movement is normal for a gravel road. Winter use of any alternative would not add to the existing condition. Summer use of the South Fowl Lake Road and trail would add minor amounts of erosion, the volume almost too small to measure. The total cumulative impacted areas, however, for each alternative added to the existing and planned trails in the area range from between 0.57% to 0.62% of the total eight-square mile analysis area (see Table 3-9). Therefore, the cumulative effects on soils from any of the alternatives is minor. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-66 Chapter 3

67 Travel Management Project Would Decommission Roads in the Area This decommissioning would reduce compacted routes by 1.2 miles and allow this land to revegetate and achieve productivity on about 2.3 acres. Table 3-9: Cumulative Compacted Acres. Location Miles Acres Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Arrowhead Road North Route So. Fowl Road & Trail South Route Timber Sales * McFarland Spur Homes, Parking, campgrounds, etc. ** Total Acres compacted Percent of the Cumulative Area 0.57% 0.57 % 0.61% 0.62% *Acreages for timber sales are estimated from timber sale data provided by the State and use the same calculations for acres compacted per acre treatment as has been calculated for National Forest timber sales. **Estimates were calculated for homes, driveways, access drives and spurs for campgrounds and public areas plus parking areas and the MN DNR helispot. There would not be a loss of wetlands, nor a substantial change to wetlands and hydrologic function for any of the alternatives due to the design features and mitigation measures discussed above and in Chapter Effects to Water Quality in the BWCAW All of the alternatives would have no measurable effect on water quality in the BWCAW and the natural aspect of wilderness character. Alternatives 1, 3 and 4 are not located adjacent to the BWCAW and do not provide additional access for illegal OHV entry that might affect soils or water quality in the BWCAW. While Alternative 2 is close to the BWCAW boundary, closure to OHV, steep topography and dense vegetation precludes the likelihood of illegal OHV entry from this route and therefore no ATV impacts to soils and water quality are expected. Construction of Alternative 2 would have negligible effect due to design features and mitigation measures outlined in Chapter 2 of this EIS. The distance (0.09 miles) between the Alternative 2 trail and Royal Lake would serve as a substantial filter strip that would reduce the effects of any soil erosion. Since no effects to water quality are expected, including no sedimentation, there would be no effects to the fisheries resource as well. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-67 Chapter 3

68 3.8 Forest Vegetation Introduction The proposed project raises concerns about possible impacts to old growth forest, fragmentation, riparian corridors, native plant communities, and non-native invasive species. (See the discussion of sensitive species in Section 3.5 and non-native invasive species in Section 3.6.) Analysis Methods Effects to forest cover may be estimated by the acreage of land cleared for the trail under each alternative. The type of vegetation located on the trail paths is also discussed Analysis Parameters The major impacts are limited to the areas directly located along proposed snowmobile route alternatives. Therefore, the analysis area used to assess impacts on forest vegetation for the various route alternatives is the general project area along the routes between South Fowl and McFarland Lakes. Potential effects to vegetation in nearby areas of the BWCAW are also considered. The analysis timeframe is 20 years since the proposed trail routes are likely to be an enduring feature of the landscape. Photo 3-5: Dense mountain maple brush growing along the route for Alternative 2 above Royal Lake due to natural mortality of aspen and paper birch. Most of the trail construction would be through brush and small trees. Mature tree cutting would be avoided where practical along the route. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-68 Chapter 3

69 3.8.4 Affected Environment Topography Limits Vegetation Management and Placement of Trails The project area is within the Mesic Aspen/Birch/Spruce-Fir and Mesic White/Red Pine Landscape Ecosystems, as described in the Forest Plan. Some of the area is younger forest resulting from recent timber harvests, and much of it is older forest in an area characterized by rock outcroppings and varied topography with steep slopes. This situation limits the area where vegetation management can occur and where trails may be placed. Older Stands of Trees Are in Decline The older stands have reached a state of decline (Photo 3-6) where many of the trees are falling over or breaking off part way up the trunk. Most of the balsam fir has died or is dying due to old age or the Spruce budworm. Aspen trees are primarily affected by fungi that enter the tree through dead branches or other wounds, and then spread through the affected portion causing rot and breakage at the weakened area. The birch in the area are also dying or breaking apart due to old age or disease. Fairly healthy longer-lived species (maple, cedar, white pine, etc.) are also present as scattered forest types or individual trees within the other stands. Clearing fallen trees would be on ongoing maintenance activity on the trails. Photo 3-6: An example of natural mortality in forested stands above the ridge line, near the Border Route Trail. Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-69 Chapter 3