Web viewWe have previously conducted two scoping periods (beginning October 11, 2011 and July 11, 2014) to inform the public of proposed activities in the Big

United StatesDepartment ofAgriculture

ForestService

MonongahelaNational Forest

2499 North Fork HighwayPetersburg, WV 26847304-257-4488

File Code: 2400, 2500, 2600, 1950Date: February 11, 2015

30-Day Notice & Comment PeriodBig Mountain

Dear Friends and Neighbors of the Monongahela National Forest:

The Cheat-Potomac Ranger District of the Monongahela National Forest is announcing the start of a 30-day notice and comment period, in accordance with 36 CFR 218, for the Big Mountain project.

Please take a few minutes to review the following information and provide any input you might have about proposed activities (contact information is on pages 14-16).

I. Summary of Past Progress and Public InputWe have previously conducted two scoping periods (beginning October 11, 2011 and July 11, 2014) to inform the public of proposed activities in the Big Mountain area, and to ask for comments. Scoping led to the identification of additional potential projects in the area that would contribute to a more integrated proposal, improving the conditions of numerous resources throughout the watershed. Based on public and internal comments, the Proposed Action (Alternative 2) has been refined by adding projects for watershed improvement, such as wildlife habitat enhancement projects, and stream and riparian habitat projects, such as road decommissioning and stream enhancements for aquatic species. Relevant comments that you provide will also be used to guide the analysis, including identification of issues and development of alternatives, design features, mitigation measures, and monitoring.

II. LocationThe Big Mountain project area is located primarily in the North Fork South Branch Potomac watershed in Pendleton County, West Virginia (see Figure 1, Big Mountain vicinity map). This area is south of Spruce Knob, and north of the Virginia state line. Within the project area, which is approximately 24,721 acres, 20,650 acres (84 percent) is National Forest System (NFS) land, and 4,071 acres (16 percent) is private land or other ownership. The Big Mountain NFS area includes three management prescription (MP) areas identified in the Monongahela National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan, 2006, as updated in 2011):

MP 3.0 – Vegetation Diversity (15,027 acres or 73 percent); MP 4.1 – Spruce and Spruce-Hardwood Ecosystem Management (3,178 acres or 15

percent), and MP 8.1 – Spruce Knob-Seneca Rocks National Recreation Area (2,445 acres or 12

percent).

Page 1 of xvi

Big Mountain Notification of 30-Day Notice & Comment Period

Figure 1. Big Mountain Vicinity Map

Page 2 of 16


III. Purpose and Need for the ProposalThe Monongahela National Forest is proposing to take action in the Big Mountain project area to help move existing conditions toward desired conditions for the project area as described in the Forest Plan. Table 1 describes the needs in the left column, and the purpose for taking action in the right column.

Table 1. Purpose and need for taking action in the Big Mountain project area

Needs PurposeForest Health

Most forest stands in the project area are greater than 80 years old. There is an overall lack of younger stands in this area, resulting in a poor age class distribution. Deer browsing, fire suppression, and past harvesting have resulted in development of undesirable, interfering understory and midstory birch, beech, and maple, and a lack of oak seedlings. Stands that were previously clearcut have regenerated to dense stands, which results in competition that inhibits the growth and survival of desirable species.

American chestnut, once a dominant species of this area, and important to wildlife, has been largely eliminated from the area due to chestnut blight.

Several non-native invasive plant species occur in the project area and have the potential to spread.

Regenerate stands greater than 80 years old. Reduce undesirable, interfering understories and midstories by using herbicides and prescribed fire to kill birch, beech, and maple. Reduce the density of old clearcut stands to improve the growth and survival of desirable species.

Establish out-plantings of disease-resistant American chestnut in the area.

Treat non-native invasive plants in parts of the project area where management activities have the potential to facilitate their spread.

Timber Production

There is a diverse need for timber products in this area. Timber is needed for private wood processing facilities in the area and for various projects on the National Forest.

Harvest commercial timber and provide timber for other projects on National Forest System lands (e.g., large woody debris for instream restoration projects). Provide a sustained yield of timber to the local and regional economy in accordance with goals and objectives in the Forest Plan.

Page 3 of 16


Needs PurposeWildlife Habitat

Openings, savannahs, and brushy habitat used by wildlife cover a lower percentage of the project area than desired, and the existing openings tend to become forested if not maintained.

Standing available water is lacking and poorly distributed across the project area.

Quality habitat is lacking in this area for Regional Forester Sensitive Species (RFSS), such as northern long-eared bat, little brown bat, tri-colored bat, eastern small-footed bat, rock vole, Allegheny woodrat, timber rattlesnake, and eastern spotted skunk.

Increase and maintain openings, savannahs, and brushy habitat used by wildlife.

Establish additional small standing water sources in areas identified as currently lacking this resource. This is especially important for resident bat species.

Habitat improvements for various RFSS, such as northern long-eared bat, little brown bat, tri-colored bat, eastern small-footed bat, and timber rattlesnake can be accomplished in conjunction with timber or road activities when equipment is on site.

Improve Watershed, Aquatic, and Soil Conditions

Road features within the analysis area are contributing to modified hydrologic function, amplified rates of soil erosion and stream sedimentation, impaired soil health, fragmented aquatic habitats, decreased floodplain function, and reduced quality of the aquatic ecosystem.

Lack of large wood in streams and floodplain areas has resulted in a lack of diverse habitat composition, high quality pools, and complex structural cover necessary to support a healthy aquatic ecosystem.

Improve conditions and maintenance of Forest system roads being affected by this proposed action as necessary to provide proper drainage, run-off management, erosion control, and aquatic passage at stream crossings.

Identify and decommission road features (system and non-system) that are unnecessary, poorly located, or otherwise improperly maintained and contributing to degraded watershed conditions.

Add large wood to stream and floodplain areas where it is deficient to revitalize natural stream and floodplain processes to develop and maintain quality habitat conditions that benefit aquatic and riparian dependent communities.

IV. Proposed Action and AlternativesWe are proposing an integrated resource management plan to help meet desired future conditions as described in the Forest Plan. Projects are designed to improve watershed conditions, improve oak regeneration, stand structure, and age diversity, increase mast for wildlife, and enhance wildlife and aquatic habitats for a number of species in the Big Mountain project area over the next ten years. The Proposed Action includes: commercial timber harvest and road work; noncommercial timber and wildlife stand improvement; prescribed fire for restoration of oak-hickory ecosystems and reduction of potential wildfire severity; aquatic passage restoration; watershed restoration by placing large woody debris into streams; road decommissioning; construction of vernal wetlands, savannahs, and wildlife openings; and non-native invasive species (NNIS) control.

Page 4 of 16


IV.A. Alternative 1: No ActionAlternative 1 is the “No Action” Alternative. This alternative serves as a baseline and is compared with action alternatives. This alternative provides the decision-maker with a clearer basis for a reasoned choice among the other alternatives studied in detail.

Under the No Action Alternative, no new management activities would be implemented to help meet the purpose and need for action described above. No timber would be harvested. Other current management activities and policies would continue. For example, the following activities would continue to be implemented in the project area: routine mowing of wildlife openings; routine road maintenance activities (e.g., grading and shaping the road prism, cleaning ditch lines and culverts); and routine trail maintenance (e.g., clearing brush, blazing, re-establishing adequate drainage). Existing road use policies would remain in effect. Stream conditions would continue to deteriorate, thereby affecting brook trout habitat and populations. Existing dispersed recreational sites, trails, trailheads, and parking areas would continue to be used. Recreational activities (e.g., hunting, camping, sight-seeing, hiking, fishing, mountain biking) and the gathering of miscellaneous forest products (e.g., firewood, ginseng) would continue.

IV.B. Alternative 2 - Proposed ActionThe sections below summarize the activities in Alternative 2, the Proposed Action.

IV.B.1. Commercial Timber HarvestTable 2 lists the commercial timber harvest units and their approximate size in acres. Table 3 summarizes the proposed commercial timber harvest and related herbicide activities. Figure 2 shows the locations of proposed commercial timber harvest units.

The Proposed Action includes regeneration of selected stands 80 years old or older to create early successional habitat, regenerate a diversity of shade-intolerant mast-producing species, and provide timber products.

Selected stands 80 years old or older would be regenerated to provide timber products, create early successional habitat, and perpetuate a diversity of mast-producing species. Regeneration methods include commercial clearcut with reserves, using ground-based methods, and herbicide treatments. An estimated 1,174 acres in 42 units are proposed for these treatments. This would provide approximately 11.7 million board feet (MMBF) of timber.

All units would be pre-treated with herbicides to control beech, striped maple, fern, etc. Herbicides would reduce the numbers and density of shade-tolerant species that would inhibit regeneration and growth of shade-intolerant species desirable for wildlife. This would allow shade-intolerant species to compete successfully and to establish desirable shade-intolerant regeneration before harvest. The herbicides proposed for use include: sulfometuron-methyl; imazapyr; glyphosate; and triclopyr. Methods of herbicide application would include: cut surface; backpack foliar spray; and basal spray. Herbicide

Page 5 of 16


application would follow all Forest Plan direction (including Desired Conditions, Standards, Guidelines, and Goals), National Core Best Management Practices (Forest Service Handbook 2509.19), West Virginia Best Management Practices of Conservation Practice Standards, and other applicable direction.

After harvesting, if monitoring shows interfering vegetation is still a problem in the unit, then herbicides may be used for control. Currently, nine units are proposed for post-harvest herbicide treatment.

Site preparation, using hand tools, chainsaws, and targeted herbicide applications would be conducted to ensure regeneration.

Existing landings (estimated 26) would be used where practical; new landings (estimated 20) would be created where needed. After use, landings would be ripped if needed to eliminate compaction. They would be seeded with a wildlife mix of native or non-native non-invasive species for temporary wildlife openings. The landings would not be maintained.

Table 2. Proposed commercial timber harvest for hardwood regeneration, by unit with estimated acres

Unit # Acres Unit # Acres1 20.2 24 35.52 38.7 25 30.34 27.0 26 39.95 38.8 29 32.36 39.0 30 36.79 14.5 32 35.9

10 35.6 33 9.511 39.6 34 25.612 35.6 35 29.113 39.8 36 10.514 17.1 37 5.415 28.2 38 39.016 22.5 43 39.817 25.4 44 8.618 39.8 45 16.019 39.9 46 24.420 39.2 47 38.821 36.3 48 17.122 31.9 49 16.823 38.2 50 34.914 17.1 37 5.4

Total 1,173.7

Page 6 of 16


Table 3. Summary of proposed commercial timber harvest and herbicide treatment for hardwood regeneration

Treatment Alternative 1 Alternative 2Commercial clearcut with reserves, conventional method: # of units / total acres

0 / 0 42 units / 1,174 acres

Pre-harvest herbicide treatment in commercial units: # of units / total acres

0 / 0 42 units / 1,174 acres

Post-harvest herbicide treatment in commercial units: # of units / total acres

0 / 0 9 units / 185 acres

Harvest volume 0 MMBF 11.7 MMBF

Conventional existing ground-based landings @ 0.5 acres each: # of landings / total acres

0 landings / 0 acres 26 landings / 13 acres

Conventional new ground-based landings @ 0.5 acres each: # of landings / total acres

0 landings / 0 acres 20 landings / 10 acres

IV.B.2. Noncommercial Timber and Wildlife Stand Improvement (TSI)Table 4 lists the noncommercial timber and wildlife stand improvement (TSI) units and their approximate size in acres. Table 5 summarizes the proposed noncommercial timber and wildlife stand improvement activities. Figure 2 shows the locations of proposed noncommercial timber and wildlife stand improvement (TSI) units.

The Proposed Action includes noncommercial timber stand improvement (TSI) activities over an estimated 1,535 acres in 82 units.

o An estimated 330 acres in 21 units are proposed for mechanical treatment. Stands less than 21 years old would be mechanically treated.

o An estimated 1,205 acres in 61 units are proposed for herbicide treatment. Stands over 21 years old would be treated with herbicide. The herbicide proposed for use is triclopyr, using the cut surface application method.

American chestnut would be planted in parts of 9 units over approximately 45 acres, as seedlings that are resistant to chestnut blight become available. Areas proposed for planting include timber harvest Units: 9; 16; 25; 32; 33; 36; 37; 47; and 48.

Table 5. Proposed TSI for timber and wildlife stand improvement, by compartment and stand, with treatment and approximate acres

Stand Treatment Acres Stan

d Treatment Acres

59 Chemical 0.45 35 Chemical 14.6416 Chemical 94.57 40 Chemical 7.9820 Chemical 35.06 41 Chemical 10.1032 Chemical 24.14 44 Chemical 24.3833 Chemical 21.62 47 Chemical 4.2234 Mechanical 7.68 54 Chemical 27.90

Page 7 of 16


Stand Treatment Acres Stan

d Treatment Acres

35 Chemical 22.94 58 Mechanical 8.4536 Chemical 15.82 61 Chemical 19.8137 Chemical 24.55 62 Chemical 18.5238 Chemical 24.08 63 Chemical 16.072 Chemical 14.79 5 Chemical 31.613 Chemical 9.32 10 Chemical 16.115 Chemical 11.68 20 Chemical 11.386 Chemical 20.00 23 Chemical 20.617 Chemical 31.80 27 Chemical 59.2722 Chemical 9.84 28 Chemical 45.4823 Mechanical 21.62 32 Chemical 8.5424 Mechanical 11.50 43 Chemical 8.2325 Mechanical 23.69 45 Mechanical 13.1926 Mechanical 28.50 46 Mechanical 14.6827 Mechanical 21.22 51 Chemical 32.5535 Mechanical 21.94 55 Mechanical 12.0536 Mechanical 24.78 60 Mechanical 9.0237 Mechanical 15.82 64 Mechanical 17.1435 Chemical 64.08 14 Chemical 18.0551 Mechanical 19.89 17 Chemical 20.8652 Chemical 52.71 18 Chemical 10.6256 Chemical 4.13 54 Chemical 15.4960 Chemical 9.70 57 Chemical 16.3562 Chemical 12.54 58 Chemical 25.6267 Chemical 3.14 59 Chemical 7.4581 Mechanical 9.20 60 Chemical 8.8282 Mechanical 11.20 4 Chemical 9.6783 Mechanical 11.84 7 Chemical 7.0787 Mechanical 17.96 10 Chemical 13.9416 Chemical 5.19 15 Chemical 25.6737 Mechanical 8.36 26 Chemical 19.0918 Chemical 22.20 31 Chemical 15.5122 Chemical 35.61 33 Chemical 5.8725 Chemical 6.77 34 Chemical 14.5726 Chemical 14.09 35 Chemical 2.17

Total 1,535

Page 8 of 16


Table 5. Summary of proposed noncommercial timber and wildlife stand improvement

Activity UnitsTSI – mechanical 21 units; 330 acres.

TSI – herbicide 61 units; 1,205 acres.

Planting – American chestnut Parts of 9 units; 45 acres.

IV.B.3. Prescribed Fire for Restoration of Oak-Hickory Ecosystems and Reduction of Potential Wildfire Severity

Table 6 lists the prescribed burn blocks and their approximate size in acres. Table 7 summarizes the proposed prescribed fire activities. Figure 3 shows the locations of proposed prescribed fire burn blocks and fire lines.

Prescribed burning would be conducted to help maintain and restore oak and to maintain or enhance fire-adapted ecosystems. Prescribed burning would help promote oak regeneration and increase mast for wildlife, while reducing the potential severity of wildfires.

Low to moderate intensity prescribed burning is proposed over approximately 3,321 acres in 9 burn blocks, which range in size from 25 to 976 acres.

Fire lines help contain the fire to the desired locations. Existing roads and natural features would be used as fire lines where practical. An estimated 6.0 miles of fire line would be built by dozer, with 1.3 miles built by hand.

Burning would take place primarily during the dormant season for plants – spring and/or fall. Burning during the growing season is rare, but could be conducted if the conditions for burning are right. Depending on results from the previous burn, the nine units would be burned every three to seven years, until the desired understory conditions are re-established. Maintenance after that would likely consist of burning every seven to twenty years.

Table 6. Proposed burn blocksBurn Block # Acres

1 5573 2574 1705 8336 3147 1598 976

9 + 10 55Total 3,321

Page 9 of 16


Table 7. Summary of proposed prescribed fire activities related to restoration of oak-hickory ecosystems and potential wildfire severity

Activity UnitsBurn blocks 9 burn blocks; 3,321 acres; size range 25 – 976 acres.

Fire line – dozer – new 5.95 miles.

Fire line - hand 1.28 miles.

IV.B.4. Road Activities Related to Timber HarvestTable 8 summarizes the proposed road activities related to timber harvest. Figure 2 shows the locations of proposed road work related to timber harvest.

An estimated 53 miles of existing system roads and non-system routes that already exist on the landscape would be maintained by blading, cleaning ditches and culverts, brushing, and/or adding stone to the road surface to implement some activities in the Proposed Action. Portions of some of these roads need improvement to provide for safety and to prevent and reduce erosion. Using existing roads – both for skidding and hauling timber – allows the amount of new ground disturbance to be minimized.

Where practical, skid roads that remain from previous harvest operations would be re-used to yard timber out of the harvest units. Where units on Figure 2 do not show access roads, timber would be skidded out of the units overland, or on existing skid roads. Approximately 41 miles of skid roads would be used to harvest timber. Of this, approximately 43 percent are existing skid roads, while 57 percent would be new skid roads.

Non-system roads and routes that will likely be needed in the future would be added to the Monongahela National Forest administrative system, or decommissioned in a manner that provide appropriate drainage and revegetation, while reducing sedimentation (see Section IV.B.5 on page 11).

No changes would be made to existing access direction (e.g., closed, open, open seasonally, Class Q) as a result of any decisions resulting from this document, except for road decommissioning (see Section IV.B.5 on page 11).

Public Safety. Standard provisions would be included in all timber sale or other work contracts to protect the safety of others. Signs would be placed along roads to inform individuals of increased traffic resulting from timber sale operations and other treatments. Temporary closure orders would be issued to prevent public access to: units and areas being harvested or treated; roads being constructed, reconstructed, maintained, or decommissioned; roads, trails, and other areas that helicopters are flying over; and areas where the safety of individuals or property may be impacted by project activities (e.g., dispersed camping sites). Closure and signing activities would be site-specific and time-specific to the project activities taking place.

Page 10 of 16


TAP: Transportation Analysis Process. A travel analysis of the road system specific to the Big Mountain project area is being completed in conjunction with the Big Mountain EA. The boundary for this travel analysis will match the Big Mountain project area boundary. The Big Mountain Interdisciplinary (ID) Team conducted the analysis using Geographical Information System (GIS) data and field data. The team developed management concerns related to road management and has recommended the preferred minimum transportation system in the Proposed Action. This process reviewed all roads known in the analysis area including classified (existing forest system roads), temporary, and unclassified roads.

Table 8. Summary of proposed road activities related to timber harvest

Activity UnitsRoad maintenance on existing Forest Service system roads and non-system routes to implement the Proposed Action

53 miles.

Skid roads to be developed and used – new 24 miles; 57 %

Skid roads to be used – already existing 18 miles; 43 %

IV.B.5. Aquatic Habitat Restoration: Passage Restoration, Large Woody Debris (LWD), and Road Decommissioning

Table 9 summarizes the proposed aquatic habitat restoration activities. Figure 4 shows the locations of proposed road decommissioning, and Figure 5 shows the locations of aquatic passage restoration, wetland sites, wildlife openings, and savannahs.

The Proposed Action includes restoring aquatic passage at 12 crossings, where existing stream/road crossings impair or prevent aquatic organism passage. Activities could include structure maintenance, repair, replacement, or removal. Site-specific analysis would determine what work is needed at each site.

Aquatic habitat in streams throughout the project area would be improved by delivering large wood (LWD) to stream channels. This would be accomplished by directionally felling nearby trees into the channel, or transporting and placing large wood into the channel.

o On average, one tree per 100 feet of channel, or 53 trees per mile could be put into a stream. Tree selection for felling generally would avoid all trees with exfoliating bark, snags and obvious den trees, healthy hemlock, other species with over-riding issues, and trees that would contribute to streambank instability, or otherwise open up the canopy and impact stream shade too much.

o Any or all streams within the project area could potentially receive large wood additions since most of these streams are moderately to severely deficient in the LWD habitat component. Streams may include, but are not limited to, all or portions of: Big Run; Elk Run; Collar Hollow; Back

Page 11 of 16


Run; Sawmill Branch; Cold Springs Run; Little Low Place; Owl Knob Hollow; Vance Run; and Sam’s Run.

Approximately 4.4 miles of stream in 29 reaches have been identified for riparian planting. Planting appropriate species in riparian areas would help provide stream shade and cover to help maintain cool temperatures, and provide sources of insects as food for fish and wildlife.

Approximately 127 miles of Forest System roads and skid roads that are contributing to degraded watershed conditions are proposed for decommissioning. In this context, degraded watershed conditions generally refers to conditions of accelerated water runoff, soil erosion, and/or stream sedimentation that are outside of the expected range of conditions and contributing to loss of soil productivity and soil quality, impaired water quality, or reduced quality of the aquatic habitat. Road decommissioning encompasses a range of activities that could include actions as simple as administratively removing a road from the database where no on-the-ground work is needed, placing a permanent structure to close a road, or full-scale road obliteration and re-contouring to the approximate contour of the landscape. Decommissioning activities would be based on the site-specific conditions of each road. Some roads that would be needed in the Proposed Action for other activities, such as timber harvest or prescribed burning, would be decommissioned after they are no longer needed.

Table 9. Summary of proposed aquatic habitat restoration activities

Activity UnitsFix aquatic passage at road/stream crossings Replace 7 crossings

Remove 1 crossing Maintain 4 crossings

Add large wood into streams Cover: 16,394 ft; 3.11 miles Light: 67,149 ft; 12.72 miles Light or Heavy: 26,657 ft; 5.05 miles Heavy: 71,919 ft; 13.62 miles

Plant riparian areas 29 reaches: 23,389 ft; 4.39 miles

Decommission roads for watershed restoration 127 miles

IV.B.6. Wildlife Habitat Improvements: Vernal Wetlands, Savannahs, Wildlife Openings, and Non-native Invasive Species (NNIS) Control

Table 10 summarizes the proposed wildlife habitat improvement projects. Figure 5 shows the proposed locations for vernal wetlands, savannahs, and wildlife openings.

Locations for 42 vernal wetlands have been identified. These wetlands would be created to provide water for wildlife in areas that lack standing water. If additional suitable locations are identified and funding provided, additional vernal wetlands may be constructed. These seasonal water sources would be used primarily by amphibians and bats. These vernal wetlands would be checked within 5 years to see what, if any, maintenance is needed on them.

Page 12 of 16


Three new savannahs, ranging in size from 25 to 34 acres, would be created for a total of 89 acres. Savannahs would be maintained by mowing and/or prescribed burning. Savannahs would provide additional habitat for species that use early successional habitat.

Five existing wildlife opening would be enlarged. Seven existing landings would be converted into maintained wildlife openings. Four new wildlife openings would be created. Wildlife openings would be maintained by mowing and/or prescribed burning to improve and maintain open and brushy habitat for wildlife species.

Non-native invasive species (NNIS) management would focus on preventing the spread of existing NNIS species and the introduction of new NNIS species from other areas. Standard design features to prevent or minimize the spread and introduction of NNIS would be incorporated into the project activities.

NNIS control would take place wherever project activities have the potential to introduce or spread infestations. Several high priority NNIS plant species are known to occur in the project area, including Japanese stiltgrass, garlic mustard, Morrow’s honeysuckle, crown vetch, and Japanese barberry.

o Pre-management control would be applied to 22 known infestations that cover 13.1 acres. Other undiscovered infestations may exist, particularly along roads that would be used for management access. Control would be applied to these infestations as needed. Such control activities could be applied on up to 27 miles of system and non-system roads in the project area.

o Should project activities facilitate the spread of infestations into activity areas, additional control efforts may be needed.

Table 10. Summary of proposed wildlife habitat improvement activities

Activity UnitsVernal wetlands created

Locations have been identified for 42 wetlands, each about 25’ x 25’ More may be constructed if suitable locations and funding are found

Savannahs - new created and maintained

3 new savannahs for a total of 89 acres

Wildlife openings – existing, enlarged, and new

5 existing openings (approximately 2.2 acres) would be enlarged to a total of approximately 5.7 acres

7 existing landings (approximately 4.0 acres) would be converted into maintained wildlife openings

4 new wildlife openings would be created for a total of 2.9 acres

NNIS control Prevention and control where needed Currently, 22 known infestations over 13.1 acres have been identified Monitoring will identify any additional locations for treatment

Page 13 of 16


IV.B.7. StewardshipWe plan to incorporate the stewardship process in this project. Stewardship is a collaborative process to more fully involve the public in planning and implementing projects. In the planning stage, it involves working with the public to get ideas for projects – in this case, in the Big Mountain area. In essence, stewardship consists of opportunities to exchange goods (e.g., timber products) for services (e.g., implementing habitat improvement projects, maintaining trails).

IV.B.8. Adaptive ManagementThe Proposed Action includes the use of adaptive management, which provides flexibility allowing the Forest Service to adjust management activities to ensure the desired results are obtained. Adaptive management is designed to provide sufficient flexibility to adapt management to changing circumstances. If monitoring indicates that desired conditions are not being achieved, management would be modified. An example of a situation that could call for adaptive management adjustments is the availability of funding for specific projects. For example, if funding became available to construct vernal pools, additional sites that fit the guidelines developed for vernal wetland construction may be identified that are not displayed in the EA. Alternatively, if additional surveys identify heritage resources or protected plants at the site where a vernal wetland is planned, the wetland would be relocated or cancelled.

IV.B.9. Design Features, Mitigation Measures, and Monitoring Applicable to Alternative 2

All alternatives have been designed to meet applicable state and federal laws and regulations, Forest Service policy and directives, and Forest Plan standards and guidelines. Design features and mitigation measures commonly used with these types of activities would be used to help reduce, prevent, or eliminate potential negative impacts and to help meet Forest Plan direction. Design features and mitigation measures give additional detail on how to implement Forest Plan direction, especially when Forest Plan direction is general, or a specific method of implementation is recommended to ensure the desired results. Monitoring is designed to show if projects are implemented as planned, and to see if we get the results we expect. If monitoring shows we do not get the results we expect, additional work may need to be done to help obtain the results we expect, or to help reach the desired future conditions.

V. Public Involvement Opportunities & Eligibility To ObjectThe designated 30-day comment period for this project is being initiated with this letter and with the publication of a legal notice in The Grant County Press.

Part of the public participation process has changed in the past year and a half. In the past, project decisions were subject to appeal under 36 CFR 215 after the decision was signed. As of March 27, 2013, projects are subject to 36 CFR 218. Under 36 CFR 218, there is an objection period prior to the decision being made. This objection process applies to this proposed project.

Page 14 of 16


The 218 rule, in its entirety, is available upon request or online: http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/applit/includes/20130327_218FinalRuleFedReg.pdf

Individuals and organizations wishing to be eligible to object must meet the information requirements of 36 CFR 218 Subparts A and B. It is the responsibility of persons providing comments to submit them by the close of the comment period. Only individuals or entities who submit timely and specific written comments (as defined by 36 CFR 218.2) about this proposed project during the public comment periods established by the Responsible Official (including both scoping periods and this 30-day comment period) will be eligible to file an objection under 36 CFR 218. Comments received more than 30 days after publication of the legal notice for this 30-day comment period are welcome and will be considered to the extent time allows, but will not provide the commenter with eligibility to object.

Your comments will be used to help identify relevant issues and opportunities, and may be used to develop additional actions or alternatives to those proposed in this letter. They will help guide the environmental analysis and documentation. Please be as specific as possible when responding. If you provide or refer to data or research results, please identify why the information is pertinent to this project and provide a copy of the information.

Written, facsimile, hand-delivered, and electronic comments concerning this action will be accepted for 30 calendar days following the publication of the legal notice in The Grant County Press, the newspaper of record for this project, published in Petersburg, WV. The publication date in this newspaper of record is the exclusive means for calculating the comment period for this analysis. Those wishing to comment should not rely upon dates or timeframe information provided by any other source.

Written comments must be submitted to:

Kristine VollmerCheat-Potomac Ranger DistrictMonongahela National Forest2499 North Fork HighwayPetersburg, West Virginia 26847

The office business hours for those submitting hand-delivered comments are 8:00 am through 4:30 pm Monday through Friday, excluding holidays.

By phone at 304-257-4488, ext. 24By fax at 304-257-2482

Electronically at [email protected]. Electronically sent messages may be submitted by e-mail in word (.doc), rich text format (.rtf), text (.txt), and hypertext markup language (.html). Please include the project name in the subject line of the e-mail. For objection eligibility, each individual or representative from each entity submitting timely and specific written comments regarding the proposed project must either sign the comments or verify identity upon request.

Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposed action, and will be available for public inspection.

Page 15 of 16

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/applit/includes/20130327_218FinalRuleFedReg.pdf


If you do not wish to comment at this time, but would like to continue receiving information about this project, please let us know. Also let us know what format you prefer for receiving information: hard copy; e-mail; or CD.

We expect to complete the Environmental Assessment (EA), Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), and draft Decision Notice (DN) in May, 2015. When they are available and the objection period begins, a formal public notice will be given in the form of a legal notice, which will be published in The Grant County Press. Individuals or organizations who previously provided comments on this project or indicated that they would like additional information on this project will be notified.

It is the responsibility of interested parties to respond to this notice within the established time period. No means of communication is perfect. If a document is not available or delivered at the expected time, please contact Kristine by one of the methods above to ascertain the document’s availability, and if necessary, to arrange an alternate delivery method.

VI. Signature

I look forward to your participation in the management of the Monongahela National Forest.

Sincerely,

/s/ M. Troy Waskey 2-11-15 M.TROY WASKEY DateResponsible OfficialCheat-Potomac District RangerMonongahela National Forest

USDA Nondiscrimination Statement

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 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.

Page 16 of 16

Documents

Web viewWe have previously conducted two scoping periods (beginning October 11, 2011 and July 11, 2014) to inform the public of proposed activities in the Big