Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant...

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service September, 2011

Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact(DN/FONSI)

Stanley Lake Recreation ComplexReconstruction Sawtooth National Recreation Area, Sawtooth National ForestCuster County, Idaho

T11N, R12E,

USDA FOREST SERVICE MISSION STATEMENT

The mission of the USDA Forest Service is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations.

Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact(DN/FONSI)

Stanley Lake Recreation ComplexReconstruction Project

Sawtooth National Recreation Area, Sawtooth National ForestCuster County, Idaho

R12E, Sections 25-29 and 33-34

For Information Sawtooth National

5 North Fork Canyon Road

USDA FOREST SERVICE MISSION STATEMENT

Forest Service is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations.

Finding of No Significant Impact

Stanley Lake Recreation Complex

Sawtooth National Recreation Area, Sawtooth National Forest

For Information Contact: Steve Frost Sawtooth National Recreation Area

5 North Fork Canyon Road Ketchum, ID 83340

(208) 727-5022

Forest Service is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to meet

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic

information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all

programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET

Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice)

or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Decision Notice/FONSI

Stanley Lake Recreation Complex Reconstruction Project, Sawtooth NRA 1

DECISION NOTICE (DN) And

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI) For

Stanley Lake Recreation Complex Reconstruction Project

Sawtooth National Forest Sawtooth National Recreation Area

Custer County, Idaho

The Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Stanley Lake Recreation

Complex Reconstruction Project are presented here. The Decision Notice documents my decision

and rationale. The FONSI presents the reasons why I find this action will not have a significant

effect on the human environment. The Environmental Assessment (EA) completed for the project is

incorporated by reference in this Decision Notice/FONSI. The EA documents the direct, indirect,

and cumulative environmental effects of the proposed action.

This document is organized as follows:

• Background information regarding my decision;

• My decision to select the Proposed Action Alternative;

• The rationale for my decision;

• The alternatives considered;

• A finding of no significant impact;

• Findings required by other laws and regulations;

• The rights to appeal and administrative review;

• Implementation date;

• Contact information; and

• My signature and date, as the responsible official.

Background

The project responds to the goals and objectives outlined in the 2003 Sawtooth Forest Land &

Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) and helps move the project area towards desired

conditions described in that plan. Five areas of need have been identified in the Stanley Lake

Recreation Complex:

1. There is a need to protect and improve wetlands near the Stanley Lake Creek inlet.

2. There is a need to improve safety, accessibility, and usability of area facilities.

3. There is a need to improve transportation safety and reduce conflicts between pedestrian,

bicycle and vehicle traffic.

4. There is a need to manage the dispersed recreation in the Stanley Lake area.

5. There is a need to improve vegetation health, reduce falling tree hazards, and reduce fire

hazard.



The Proposed Action was developed to specifically address these needs. The major components of

the proposed action include:

• Component 1 – Inlet Area Renovation and Restoration

• Component 2 – Developed Campground Renovation (Stanley Lake and Lakeview Campground)

• Component 3 – Trail Management

• Component 4 - Dispersed Camping Management

• Component 5 – Vegetation Management

THE DECISION AND RATIONALE Decision Based on the analysis in the EA, and comments received from the public, it is my decision to select

Alternative 2.

Implementing Alternative 2 will result in the following:

Component 1 –Inlet Area Renovation and Restoration

Stanley Lake Creek Inlet facilities and roads will be relocated.

The Stanley Lake Inlet Campground will be closed, facilities removed, and the currently occupied

wetlands area rehabilitated. Fourteen new campsites and associated facilities will be constructed on

the northeast corner of Stanley Lake in the vicinity of Stanley Lake Campground (see Figure 1).

These new campsites will replace the 14 campsites that will be removed at Stanley Lake Inlet

Campground. Overnight capacity for developed camping will remain the same.

Construction on the new campground is expected to begin sometime after May 2013. Salvage

logging to remove hazard trees and prepare the new campground for construction may occur as

early as 2012. The existing Inlet Campground will not be closed until the new replacement

campground is complete.

A new boat launch will be developed near the existing Stanley Lake Inlet Campground site #1.

Boat launch will consist of two lanes with handling docks on both sides. From slightly above the

maximum lake level down, the ramp will be constructed of pre cast concrete planks. Above the

concrete ramp, the boat prep area will be paved, while the boat trailer/tow vehicle parking area will

be native material. Associated facilities will also be reconstructed, including a restroom and

parking area for 15-20 vehicles and trailers. Following this construction, the road accessing the

existing sandbar boat ramp will be removed and rehabilitated. This includes removal of fill

material and establishment of native vegetation. An accessible fishing dock (±10’x30’) is also

proposed and will be located between the relocated boat ramp and the Stanley Lake Creek inlet.

A day use picnic area will be developed adjacent to the new boat launch location, near the current

location of Stanley Lake Inlet Campground sites 2-4. Day use facilities will include picnic tables,

grills and a restroom. Campsites will become walk-in day use sites. Existing roadway now



accessing campsites will be narrowed down to a 48” trail to access the picnic sites. Roadway not

needed for trail use will be removed and rehabilitated.

Throughout the developed complex, new and renovated facilities will remain at Development Scale

Three – Moderate Site Modification. Characteristics of this level of development include:

• Facilities about equal for protection of natural site and comfort of users.

• Contemporary/rustic design of improvements is usually based on use of native materials.

Inconspicuous vehicular traffic controls usually provided.

• Roads may be hard surfaced and trails formalized.

• Development density about 3 family units per acre.

• Primary access may be over high standard roads.

• Interpretive services informal if offered, but generally direct.

Figure 1 -- Changes to the Stanley Lake Developed Recreation Complex



Component 2 – Developed Campgrounds

The aging facilities at the Inlet Campground will be removed. The campground and support

facilities will be replaced in the northeast area of the lake, east of the existing Lakeview

Campground.

The new facilities will meet current environmental and accessibility standards. Hand pump wells

will be upgraded to fully accessible models with access paths and with the proper concrete pad and

casing height to minimize the risks of drinking water contamination.

Campsite perimeters will be defined and include tent pads and updated site furniture. Restroom

facilities will be upgraded to fully accessible concrete toilets. The campground manager will be

moved from Stanley Lake Campground site #8 to site #1, including the relocation of the septic

holding tank. This move will open up an additional lake view campsite for public use.

Component 3 – Trail Management

Trail #640

Trailhead parking for Trail #640 will be reconfigured to fully utilize its entire existing footprint.

The surface will remain native. Plans include a replacement unloading ramp for stock that will be

relocated closer to the new trailhead.

Trail #640 will be rerouted from the trailhead to head directly west until joining the existing

alignment approximately ¾ miles up the Stanley Lake Creek drainage (Figure 1). This new

configuration is intended to reduce user conflicts by separating users of Trail 640, including

motorized and equestrian users, from the pedestrian day use trails at the lakefront.

A portion of the existing 640 route alongside Stanley Lake Creek will be retained and absorbed into

the new Shoreline Trail (see description below).

Shoreline Trail

A new 48 inch, multi-user trail (foot, wheelchair, bicycle) will be constructed using native material

along the north shore of Stanley Lake connecting the developed campgrounds with the new day use

area, accessible fishing dock, sandbar beach, and Stanley Lake creek. The trail will terminate

upstream from the sandbar, at a point established along Stanley Lake Creek (Figure 1).

The trail will be located to minimize impacts to shoreline and wetland habitats, limiting the need for

boardwalks or bridges. Where feasible, the trail will utilize previously established routes rather than

creating areas of new disturbance. In the area of Inlet Campground, at least two portions of the new

trail will utilize segments of existing road. The road width will be narrowed to a 48” trail, and the

remaining roadway will be removed and rehabilitated. Cross drainage will be provided as needed.

An elevated boardwalk will span the wetland inlet area that currently separates the existing boat

launch area from the Inlet Campground.



The trail forks to provide a choice of access to the lake, or a short, scenic hike along Stanley Lake

Creek. Access to the sandbar beach and fishing dock will be facilitated with a newly constructed

accessible boardwalk. The route alongside Stanley Lake Creek will again utilize existing travel

routes, removing and rehabilitating all portions not needed for a trail. Limited improvements such

as benches or picnic tables may be provided. The trail will terminate ¼ mile upstream. Beyond this

point, the existing Trail #640 will be closed to the intersection with the new trail route (see Figure

1). Imported tread fill material will be removed, and the area rehabilitated with native vegetation

and woody debris.

The new multi-user trail will focus existing lakeshore travel, and enable removal and rehabilitation

of multiple user-developed footpaths down to and along the lakeshore. The expansive network of

footpaths from the campsites (and the Overlook day use area), can be consolidated into fewer

downhill feeder paths at more appropriate and durable locations. Where needed, logworm or rail

fencing may also be utilized in combination to encourage use of preferred paths. Accommodating

the trail may require modification of some existing campsites.

Campground Paths

Preferred campsite-to-campsite paths will also be identified, and the redundant paths encumbered,

limiting the total number of social paths between campsites and facilities.

Component 4 - Dispersed Camping Management

Dispersed camping within the Stanley Lake watershed will occur at designated sites only and

provide limited amenities. Overall capacity and opportunities for dispersed camping will remain

approximately the same following site designation.

The Stanley Lake Designated Dispersed Camping Program includes:

a) Selecting and establishing dispersed campsites that are consistent with management

direction within the Forest Plan. A partial list of considerations in site selection includes:

• No new sites allowed within 150 feet of lakeshores.

• Designated dispersed sites will be consistent with Riparian Conservation Area

objectives.

• Sites will not be designated within 150 feet of lynx denning habitat.

• Sites should be adequately screened from primary roads.

Existing sites that are not selected and designated will be closed and rehabilitated.

b) An information board available to explain changes in management, and provide orientation

and safety information.

c) Each unique campsite will be designated. This is typically done via a post with camping

symbology.

d) Each designated dispersed site will have a metal fire ring. Campfires will be allowed in the

metal fire rings only. Combustible material removed from 10 feet around, and 20 feet

overhead, of the fire ring.

e) Hazard trees within 100 feet of the designated site will be managed. Down trees can be

removed if coarse woody debris exceeds 5 tons per acre.



f) Pockets of heavy fuel (jackpots) may be removed or redistributed within 150 feet of

campsite.

g) A restroom could be constructed, as needed, but no other site improvements (i.e. tables,

hardened tent pads) will be provided.

h) Road access will remain at a Level 2, minimal maintenance level.

i) Sites will receive regular patrol and monitoring.

j) Designated sites can be moved or closed by the Forest Service to address management

issues.

Component 5 – Vegetation Management The project seeks to improve the aesthetics of the landscape, the health and vigor of trees and

groundcover, minimize erosion, and reduce hazards from falling trees and excessive fuel loading.

Several actions specific to these objectives include revegetation, erosion control, tree hazard and

fuel reduction. These actions will require long-term implementation and monitoring through the

next decade. This section summarizes the actions listed in the Stanley Lake Vegetation

Management Plan. The Vegetation Management Plan includes additional details to facilitate

implementation throughout the next decade, and is a part of the project record.

The Stanley Lake vegetation management needs vary by zones within the drainage. The developed

recreation sites, the wetland restoration sites, the dispersed campsites, and the roads corridor have

proposed actions listed separately. Some of the actions that are included in the vegetation plan are

previously listed under project components 1-4. The remaining proposed actions are listed below, by

zone.

a. Developed Sites Includes Stanley Lake and Lakeview Campgrounds, day-use areas, and all other developed sites

in the lakefront complex. Portions of the developed recreation sites have lost all woody debris,

litter, duff, and protective vegetative groundcover. Recovering these sites will require a long term

effort.

Within this heavily used area, sites immediately adjacent (i.e. 10 feet around, and 20 feet

overhead) to ignition sources (parking, campsites, grills, etc.) are identified as fuel reduction

zones. These currently bare areas will not be re-vegetated. The boundaries between areas to

revegetate, and the areas to keep clear of combustibles will be better defined following the

delineation of campsites.

• Limit groundcover clearing to the fuel reduction zone.

• Outside of fuel reduction zones, re-vegetate tree, shrub and groundcover through a mix of

planting, seeding, and natural regeneration.

• Tools for revegetation may include site preparation, mechanical tree spade transplants, shovel

planting, direct seeding, thinning, watering, or other.

• Retain and/or replace woody debris outside of the fuel reduction zones. Woody debris may

come from felled hazard trees in the area, or other nearby project activities.

• Eliminate firewood gathering within campgrounds and day use areas until woody debris is

replaced and revegetation is well established.

• Identify preferred paths to minimize the extent of foot traffic impacts.



• Manage hazard trees within 70 feet from facilities. Downed trees should be used on site to

meet coarse woody debris objectives, as nurse logs, erosion barriers, etc.

b. Wetland, Streamside. and Lakeshore Areas

• The road and recreation facilities in the wetlands near the inlet of Stanley Lake Creek are

planned for removal as part of the reconstruction project. Both the constructed facilities and

the fill they were built over will be removed. Wetland areas that have been only indirectly

affected by the developments will generally be expected to rapidly re-vegetate naturally. The

remaining areas may receive treatment for soil compaction, and be replanted with native seed

and transplants.

• Lakeshores that lie immediately adjacent to recreation developments will be managed to

maintain native vegetation.

• Fallen or felled trees will be retained and managed on site in shoreline and streamside areas

(RCAs). Preferred paths will be identified and redundant paths encumbered. Use of the

Shoreline Trail will be directed and facilitated for shoreline travel.

• In areas where no naturally durable and sustainable lakeshore access trail exists, steps or other

hardened paths may be constructed.

• Where water’s edge plant communities have been lost, restorative plantings and protective

actions may be initiated.

c. Dispersed Campsites

• Protection and rehabilitation of degraded former dispersed sites adjacent to Stanley Lake and

Stanley Lake Creek is ongoing and involves establishing foot paths, encumbering off road

vehicle traffic, erosion control, and revegetation.

• Maintain a minimum of 5 tons per acre of coarse woody debris between designated dispersed

campsites.

• Manage hazard trees 100 feet from designated campsites. Trees may be removed offsite unless

needed to meet 5 tons per acre coarse woody debris objectives.

• Vehicle-tree hazards will be removed from Forest Roads to allow minimal clearance

appropriate for the road maintenance level, and provide adequate ingress/egress and

turnarounds during a fire emergency.

• Areas of excessive fuel loading (down material) within 150 feet of campsites can be treated by

burning, mechanical removal, or redistribution. The Sawtooth National Recreation Area

(NRA) Fuels/Fire staff will determine conditions that constitute a fuel hazard due to volume

or arrangement.

• Fires restricted to fire ring, combustible vegetation cleared 10 feet from fire ring and 20 feet

above.

d. Road Corridors Road corridors for this project are defined as a tree height distance from the outer edge of a

Forest System road. Seventy feet is the average height of area trees. The vegetation management

priority for road corridors is protection of the roadway, driver safety, and ensuring adequate

ingress/egress for the popular recreation complex. There are no alternate driving routes in or out

of the area; the system road corridors will be managed as defensible space, where the vegetation



is modified and maintained to slow the rate and intensity of an advancing wildfire. Priorities for

this zone will modify vegetation and woody debris objectives used elsewhere in this plan.

• System road corridors in the Stanley Lake area continue to receive the same routine

maintenance of roadside vegetation as the rest of the Forest.

• Where the road corridor is within 300 feet of developed campgrounds, the direction for “Developed

Sites” will prevail, to protect screening between road and campground.

• Other than within Riparian Conservation Areas (RCAs), no minimum coarse woody debris

guideline is established for the corridor.

• Within RCA’s, trees or snags that are felled will be left unless determined by an aquatic

specialist not to be necessary for achieving soil, water, riparian, and aquatic desired

conditions.

• Manage hazard trees 70 feet (or tree height) from edge of system road. These may be

mechanically removed offsite unless within an RCA.

• Areas of excessive fuel loading (down material) within 150 feet of the roadside can be treated

by burning, mechanical removal, or redistribution. The Sawtooth NRA Fuels/Fire staff will

determine conditions that constitute a fuel hazard due to volume or arrangement.

• Future ground disturbance and costs will be minimized by periodic thinning of dense thickets

of lodgepole pine seedling/saplings in the road corridor (within 70 feet of the road). Initial

thinning in sapling sized trees (4 inches diameter or less) will help form wind firm trees along

the roadway corridor. Subsequent thinning in lodgepole larger than 4 inches should not reduce

the total crown area by more than 25%, in any single thinning.

Mitigation The project includes numerous measures specifically incorporated to preserve and protect area

resources. Chapter 2 of the EA includes a listing of mitigation to protect visitors, water quality,

riparian resources, terrestrial and aquatic species, and vegetation. These measures are included

throughout project planning, construction, and follow-up monitoring.

Rationale for the Decision My conclusion is based on a review of the project record, which includes a thorough analysis of

relevant scientific information. Careful examination of applicable laws, regulations, policy, and the

Sawtooth Forest Plan have all informed my decision. I have also considered the numerous

comments, supportive and otherwise, submitted regarding the proposal.

I believe Alternative 2 best meets the original purpose and need for action, adequately addresses

key issues, and is responsive to public comment:

1. Meeting the Purpose and Need for Action Several measures were selected to gauge the alternatives’ effectiveness in meeting the purpose and

need for action. The measures are presented, by Alternative, in the following table:



Table 1. Alternative Comparison by Effectiveness Measures

Purpose &

Need

Element

Measure Alternative 1 – No

Action

Alternative 2 –

Proposed Action Alternative 3

Improve

wetlands

near the

Stanley Lake

inlet.

Wetland Acres Occupied

or altered by facilities or

recreation use:

• Occupied by Development

• Functionally Altered1

• Diminished2

2.6 Acs. Occupied

1.1 Acs. Altered

9 Acs. Diminished

1.3 Acs. Occupied

0 Ac. Altered

2 Acs. Diminished

1.7 Acs. Occupied

0 Ac. Altered

1 Ac. Diminished

TOTALS = 12.7 Acs. -- Alt. 1 3.3 Acs. -- Alt. 2 2.7 Acs. -- Alt. 3

1altered includes areas where habitat conversion is apparent.

2

diminished includes areas not functioning at potential due to altered hydrologic regimes, etc.,

see Fish, Stream and Riparian Resources, Chapter 3 for more explanation.

Improve

safety,

accessibility,

and usability

of area

facilities.

Drinking water

contamination risk High Low Low

Hand pumps and restrooms

are accessible No Yes Yes

Potential days of

developed campsite use 4,634 days 4,914 days 4,914 days

Accessible paths present No Yes Yes

Accessible fishing

platform present No Yes Yes

Reduce

conflicts

between

pedestrian,

bicycle and

vehicle

traffic.

Separation of vehicle

roadway from other

recreation users

No Yes

Yes, but a segment of

Trail 640 will mix

pedestrians with horse

and motorbike.

Parking managed to reduce

conflicts between cars,

boat trailers, recreational

vehicles and trailhead users

No Yes Yes

Boat launching is not co-

located with sandbar beach

activities

No Yes Yes



Purpose &

Need

Element

Measure Alternative 1 –

No Action

Alternative 2 –

Proposed Action Alternative 3

Manage the

dispersed

recreation

campsites in

the Stanley

Lake area.

Campsites are designated

for users No Yes Yes

Fires are restricted to fire

rings No Yes Yes

Campsites are not allowed

within 150 feet of

lakeshore

Yes, but difficult

to enforce. Yes Yes

Enforceable provisions in

place to restrict use to

designated campsites

No Yes Yes

Improve

vegetation

health in the

recreation

complex.

Reduce

falling tree

hazards and

excess fuel

loading.

Groundcover and

vegetative screening

between campsites, along

lakeshore, and in

remaining areas needing

rehabilitation is re-

established within 10 years

Without planting

and establishing

footpaths,

groundcover and

vegetation will not

be adequately

reestablished

within the next 10

years.

Groundcover and

vegetation will be

adequately

reestablished

within the next 10

years.

Groundcover and

vegetation will be

adequately

reestablished within

the next 10 years.

Hazard trees managed and

excess fuel removed where

appropriate

Hazard trees will

be managed.

Excess fuel

removal along

road corridors

restricted to

burning. (no

mechanical

removal)

Hazard trees will

be managed.

Excess fuel

removed via

burning or

mechanical means.

Hazard trees will be

managed. Excess fuel

removed via burning or

mechanical means.

2. Key Issues Through review of the feedback received regarding the proposal, key issues considered central to

the analysis were identified. Indicators were then selected to assist in evaluating the impact of the

project with regard to the two identified issues. The tables below summarize the issues and their

indicators, and are followed with a brief explanation of how I’ve used this information in my

decision-making.



Issue 1 -- Renovations will exceed an appropriate development level.

Key Issue #1

Indicators

Alternative 1

No Action

Alternative 2

Proposed Action

Alternative 3

Indicator: Recreation Site

Development

Level

Site development will

remain at the assigned

Level 3 – Moderate Site

Modification.




Modification.




Modification.

Indicator: Consistency with

Designated

Recreation

Opportunity

Spectrum

Site will maintain

consistency with

Roaded Natural

Recreation Opportunity

Spectrum guidelines.

Site will maintain

consistency with Roaded

Natural Recreation

Opportunity Spectrum

guidelines.

Site will largely

maintain consistency

with Roaded Natural

Recreation Opportunity

Spectrum guidelines.

Some risk of excess

social encounters where

Trail 640 and Shoreline

Trail overlap.

All alternatives were determined to maintain the existing development level. Reconstructing

elements of the complex will not excessively modify the development. (See EA, Chapter 3 for a

detailed discussion) Although Alternative 3 is consistent with Roaded Natural guidelines, it

channeled more users onto the same trail segments than is desirable for limiting total social

encounters. My selection of Alternative 2 over Alternative 3 is driven partly by the selected

alternative doing a better job of dispersing trail users, and reducing social encounters.

Implementation of the many components of this decision will require additional engineering design.

I will ensure continued care and oversight is exercised during this work to maintain consistency

with these indicators. It will be important in this environment to not over-design the new features.

The maps of improvements associated with this proposal are conceptual. Final plans can and should

adjust the conceptual design to best accommodate ground conditions. I expect particular care

exercised in the final layout of the Shoreline Trail, to avoid creating new areas of conflict between

users of the new trail, and existing campsites.

Issue 2 -- Relocating the Inlet Campsites will diminish waterfront camping opportunities.

Key Issue #2

Indicator

Alternative 1

No Action

Alternative 2

Proposed Action

Alternative 3

Indicator: Number of

campsites within

200 feet of water

(creek or lake).

23 waterfront campsites

available


available


available



The replacement campground has been relocated to be closer to the lakeshore than the original

proposal. Even so, over half of the waterfront campsites will be replaced with sites further than 200

feet from water. There will be a loss of waterfront camping opportunities. This is the trade-off for

locating improvements out of wetlands. I’m appreciative of the magnitude of this impact (further

discussed below), and confident the decision reflects a balanced concern for both wetland

restoration, and visitor recreation experiences.

3. Public Comment The proposed project has been continually listed in the quarterly Sawtooth National Forest

Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) since July 2007. The SOPA provides the public a list of

proposals that are undergoing environmental analysis and is posted at the Forest Service website.

In the summer of 2008, district employees posted a map and document with the proposed changes

on sign boards throughout the recreation complex. The map and document were posted again in the

Stanley Lake area during the summer of 2009.

The formal 30-day notice and comment period (Notice of Proposed Action) occurred from October

1 through October 30, 2009. Legal notification of the comment period was published in the Challis

Messenger (the newspaper of record) on October 1, 2009, with a courtesy publication in the Idaho

Mountain Express on September 30, 2009. A letter and map were sent on September 30, 2009 to

the project’s list of interested parties. A news release was sent electronically on October 1 to media

outlets. Individually addressed letters to tribes with an interest in area projects were sent October 1,

2009. The news release and map were posted outside of the Stanley community center.

Information on the proposal was also placed on the Sawtooth National Forest public web page on

October 1, 2009 under the Projects & Plans section (in addition to the SOPA posting). This project

has generated a high level of interest from the public. The Forest Service received over 60

comments regarding the proposal.

In addition, numerous agencies have been contacted and consulted during the planning process,

including Custer County Commissioners and their appointed resource advisory groups.

Though comments were mixed, many respondents did not want to see the Inlet Campground

removed, the boat launch moved, and expressed reservations regarding other elements of the

proposed action. Users who are happy with the current experience are concerned Forest Service

improvements would lead to over-development of the area. We have responded to several of the

more common concerns received by altering the original proposal. The proposed action would not

enlarge the overnight capacity at the campgrounds, not increase user density, and not eliminate

dispersed camping. Concerns remain concerning the appropriate level of development for the

complex, and the loss of Inlet Campground opportunities. Appendix A of the EA summarizes

comments received and the Forest Service’s response to those comments. Additionally, I want to

specifically address some of the comments here in order to better explain my decision.

We received a substantial number of requests to make no changes at Stanley Lake.

There is no better evidence of how passionately people care for Stanley Lake than the ardent wish,

expressed by many, to keep Stanley Lake just as it is. The purpose of the project is not to alter the



current recreation experience, but to protect and improve the environment that experience takes

place within. We have designed the proposed project to maintain, as much as possible, the current

recreation experience in this special setting. That being said, implementation of the project will

bring change to the area. I believe the change will not alter the rustic character of Stanley Lake, but

assist in its protection, over the long term.

We received many comments adamant in opposition to relocating the Inlet area campsites

and boat launch.

50 years ago, the Inlet Campground facilities were built in a wetlands area that was problematic

from the start. These became very popular sites but have long been a high-water flooding issue for

maintenance, as well as exerting considerable negative influence on area wetlands through fill and

alteration. I am also aware that these sites are perhaps the most popular campsites along the lake.

Campsites reside at nearly lake level, with easy access to the nearby shoreline and creek. Users are

fond of tying up their watercraft directly in front of their site. The orientation and lake breezes keep

the inlet area cool throughout the summer days. I’m also aware that the natural sandbar boat ramp

has immense appeal in its simple functionality. The inlet area offers not just a lakeview, but a

comprehensive lake experience.

My decision to replace these amenities elsewhere along the lake is made with full recognition of

how difficult this change will be for campers that deeply value their inlet camping experience.

Although the proposal maintains trail access through the area, camping will be eliminated at Inlet

and replaced east of Stanley Lake campground. This will maintain the same number of overnight

camping opportunities, but in a different setting, with a different experience. I understand the

impact this decision will have on many devoted inlet users.

Finally, I hope as the wetlands recover following rehabilitation, that former Inlet campers will

appreciate the long-term benefits of relocating facilities out of the wetland.

4. Summary of Decision Rationale In reaching my decision, I considered the action alternatives, as well as the alternative of taking no

action. The purpose and need described for the project accurately reflects the gap between current

and desired conditions in the area. Alternative 2 best meets the multiple needs prompting this

project. Implementing the proposed action will provide multiple benefits to forest resources, and

visitors. The design of the proposed action maximizes these benefits and minimizes undesirable

impacts. As such, I’m choosing to implement Alternative 2 as described and analyzed in the EA,

without modification.



FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

I have reviewed the environmental effects described in the EA and evaluated whether the Selected

Alternative constitutes a significant effect on the quality of the human environment or whether the

environmental impacts will be significant based on their context and intensity as defined by the

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), using the criteria in the implementing regulations (40

CFR 1508.27).

I have determined that the implementation of the Selected Alternative will not result in any

anticipated effects that exceed the level at which a significant effect on the human, biological, or

physical environment, in terms of context or intensity, would occur. The effects are not highly

uncertain and do not involve unique and unknown risks. The action will not, in relation with other

actions, cause cumulatively significant impacts. This determination is based on the environmental

assessment process completed for this project and was made considering the following factors:

Context

The setting of this project is in a localized area with implications for only the immediate area. The

affected Stanley Lake area will have construction activities during late summer and fall, over a one-

to-two year period. The public utilizing these areas will be affected during project construction. The

short-or-long-term effects from this project are restricted to a local area and have no widespread

importance.

1. Environmental Impacts

This project has no known significant irreversible resource commitments or irretrievable losses of

timber production, recreation opportunities, wildlife habitats, or soil productivity. The

environmental assessment provides sufficient information to determine that this project would not

have any significant adverse impacts (EA, Chapter 3). Both beneficial and adverse effects have

been taken into consideration when making this determination of no significance.

2. Public Health and Safety

The project activities will comply with all state and federal regulations protecting public health and

safety. Public health and safety will improve as a result of implementing Alternative 2 (EA, Chapter

3). Improving public health and safety is one of the project objectives.

3. Unique Characteristics of the Area

The selected alternative will not create significant effects on unique characteristics of the Sawtooth

National Recreation Area such as historic or cultural resources, parklands, prime farmlands,

wetlands, floodplains, wild and scenic rivers, wilderness areas or ecologically critical areas. No loss

of significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources is foreseen. Implementation of Alternative 2

will not negatively affect the Sawtooth Wilderness areas. Project effects to area wetlands and

floodplains were determined to be limited in both extent and duration. The proposed activities are in

conformance with the Wild & Scenic River Act and will not impact the eligibility of area river

segments for Wild & Scenic River status. (EA, Chapter 3)



4. Controversy

All comments were considered in refinement of the project, and are documented in the project

record. The comments and environmental analysis did not identify any substantiated scientific

controversy over the effects as described.

5. Uncertainty

The effects analysis in the EA show the effects are not highly uncertain, and do not involve unique

or unknown risks. Road and recreation facility relocation is a routine Forest Service activity. The

activity is well known and effects are understood.

6. Precedent

I find the implementation of the selected alternative does not establish a precedent for future actions

with significant effects. These actions do not represent a decision in principle about a future

consideration.

7. Cumulative Effects

The Selected Alternative was evaluated in the context of other past, present, and reasonably

foreseeable actions. When considering other activities within the area affected, the cumulative

effects of implementing the selected alternative are anticipated to be minor. This action does not

result in cumulatively significant effects.

8. Properties on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places

The Selected Alternative will have no adverse effect on districts, sites, highways, structures, or

objects listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic places. The State Historic

Preservation Office concurred with these findings. (Project Record)

9. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species

Based upon the analysis documented in the Biological Assessment and Biological Evaluations

(Project Record), no known threatened or endangered species, or their habitats, are likely to be

adversely affected by this decision. Consultation occurred with both the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries and the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and they

have concurred with Forest Service determinations.

10. Environmental Law Compliance

The action will not violate Federal, State or local laws or requirements for the protection of the

environment.

Findings Required by Other Laws and Regulations

2003 Sawtooth National Forest Land Management Plan This decision is consistent with the 2003 Sawtooth National Forest Land Management Plan. The

project was designed in conformance with the plan, and to implement plan objectives. The EA

contains references back to specific Forest Plan objectives that are relevant to the project.



Public Law 92-400 The Sawtooth NRA is directed by law to consider the impacts of agency actions on several key

values that were intrinsic to the creation of the Recreation Area. Guidelines for evaluating impacts

to each key area are contained in the Forest Plan, Appendix I. This evaluation was conducted and is

documented in the Stanley Lake Project Record. I agree with the findings that the selected

alternative will not substantially impair key Sawtooth NRA values, and is in compliance with

Public Law 92-400.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (Executive Order 13186) - This Order requires federal agencies to

avoid or minimize adverse impacts on migratory bird resources, and ensure that environmental

analyses of federal actions required by the National Environmental Policy Act evaluate the effects

of actions and agency plans on migratory birds. The project impacts were evaluated in a 2011

wildlife report included in the Stanley Lake Project Record. The decision was found to be in

compliance with direction to protect migratory birds.

Clean Water Act This purpose of this act is to restore and maintain the integrity of waters. The

Forest Service complies with this Act through the use of Best Management Practices. This decision

incorporates Best Management Practices to ensure protection of soil and water resources. The

proposed Federal action includes the authorization and issuance of any permits required under

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act by the US Army Corp of Engineers, a cooperating agency.

Wetlands Executive Order 11990 – This order requires the Forest Service to take action to

minimize destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands and to preserve and enhance the natural and

beneficial values of wetlands. In compliance with this order, Forest Service direction requires that

an analysis be completed to determine whether adverse impacts would results. Based on the

analysis contained within the project record, implementing Alternative 2 complies with EO 11990

by maintaining and restoring wetland conditions.

Floodplains Executive Order 11988 – This order requires the Forest Service to provide leadership

and to take action to (1) minimize adverse impacts associated with occupancy and modification of

floodplains and reduce risks of flood loss, (2) minimize impacts of floods on human safety, health,

and welfare, and (3) restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values served by floodplains.

The selected alternative complies with EO 11998 by maintaining and substantially improving

floodplain integrity.

Environmental Justice -- The selected alternative will not disproportionately impact any minority

or low income population in the immediate area or surrounding counties, nor will implementation

negatively impact Americans with disabilities. These effects are expected to be similar for all

human populations regardless of nationality, gender, race, or income level. None of the alternatives

entails any known inequitable distribution of social or environmental consequences to a particular

group or segment of society. Creating fully accessible recreation opportunities is an objective of the

project.

Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant...

Documents

Transcript of Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant...