Environmental Assessment -------------------------------------------- Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service Willamette National Forest Detroit Ranger District Marion County, Oregon Responsible Official: Dallas Emch Forest Supervisor Willamette National Forest For Information Contact: Jim Romero – Resource Planner Detroit Ranger District HC73 Box 320 Mill City, OR 97360 503-854-4212 Comments Must Be Received By: June 4, 2003 Submit Written Comments To: Diana Bus Acting District Ranger Detroit Ranger District HC73 Box 320 Mill City, OR 97360 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (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, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Table of Contents Chapter I: Purpose and Need for Action 1. Introduction & Background ......................................................................................I-1 2. Purpose & Need for Action.......................................................................................I-4 a. Existing Condition..........................................................................................I-4 b. Desired Condition ..........................................................................................I-9 c. Statement of Need for Action ..................................................................I-10 3. Proposed Action ..........................................................................................................I-12 4. Public Scoping Process and Consultation with Others .......................................I-13 5. Issues a. Significant Issues Used to Develop Alternatives..................................I-14 6. Other Issues Identified but Determined to be Non-Significant...................I-14 7. Responsible Official and Decision to be Made ....................................................I-18 Chapter II: Alternative Description 1. Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study ....................II-1 2. Alternative 1 – No Action ......................................................................................II-3 3. Alternative 2 – Proposed Action ..........................................................................II-3 Chapter III: Environmental Consequences 1. Environmental Consequences Related to the Issues .......................................III-1 2. Other Beneficial and Adverse Impacts .............................................................III-2 3. Unique Characteristics of the Geographic Area..............................................III-5 4. Effects Likely to be Highly Controversial.........................................................III-5 5. Effects to Districts, Sites, Highways, Structures, or Objects Listed in or Eligible for Listing in the National Register of Historic Places, or Loss or Destruction of Significant Scientific, Cultural, or Historic Resources..................................................................................................III-6 6. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species a. Northern Bald Eagle..........................................................................................III-6 b. Northern Spotted Owl .....................................................................................III-7 c. Canada Lynx.........................................................................................................III-7 d. Other Pacific Northwest Sensitive Species ...............................................III-7 e. Baird’s Shrew & Pacific Shrew .......................................................................III-7 f. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Fisheries Species.....................III-8 g. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plant Species.............................III-8 Page 7. Management Indicator Species ...........................................................................III-9 8. Wildlife Tree Habitat (Snags) – Primary Cavity Excavators ........................III-9 9. Course Woody Material..........................................................................................III-10 10. Migratory Birds .......................................................................................................III-10 11. Survey & Manage Species - Wildlife...................................................................III-10 12. Survey & Manage Species – Plants ......................................................................III-11 13. Noxious Weeds ........................................................................................................III-11 14. Public Health & Safety...........................................................................................III-12 15. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources .........................III-13 16. Environmental Justice ............................................................................................III-13 Chapter IV: List of Preparers References Appendices: A. Response to Public Comments ...............................................................................A-1 B. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan – DRAFT January 2002 Section X - Development Approval Requirements including the Project Phasing and Priority List .........................................................................B-1 C. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan – DRAFT January 2002 Section VII - Development Concepts .................................................................C-1 List of Tables 1.1 Summary of Proposed Actions..............................................................................I-12 2.1 Mitigation Measures Applicable to All Action Alternatives..........................II-15 2.2 Comparison of Alternatives and How Each Addresses the Purpose & Need........................................................................................................II-17 List of Figures 1.1 Vicinity Map ..............................................................................................................I-2 1.2 Detroit Lake State Park – Loops A-E .................................................................I-5 1.3 Detroit Lake State Park – Loops F-H .................................................................I-6 1.4 Tumble Creek Point Site & Mongold Day Use Area – Aerial Photo ..............I-8 2.1 Detroit Lake State Park Campground – Proposed Actions – Loops A-B......II-6 2.2 Detroit Lake State Park Campground – Proposed Actions – Loops C-E ......II-7 2.3 Detroit Lake State Park Campground – Proposed Actions – Loops F-G......II-8 2.4 Detroit Lake State Park Campground – Proposed Actions – Loop H............II-9 2.5 Tumble Creek Point Site – Proposed Actions....................................................II-11 2.6 Mongold Day Use Area – Proposed Actions.......................................................II-13 Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-1 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need May 2003 Chapter I: Purpose and Need for Action Chapter I introduces a proposal to: a) issue a 20-25 year special use permit to the Oregon Department of Parks and Recreation (OPRD) to manage the three Detroit Lake State Park sites, b) approve a master plan for the three sites and c) approve specific projects that would be implemented in the next five years to accomplish master plan objectives. This chapter also discloses the underlying need for these actions, including the existing and desired condition, provides a brief description of the proposed action, and describes the scoping process used to identify concerns and significant issues. 1. Introduction and Background The Detroit Lake State Park includes three sites: Detroit Lake State Park Campground, Tumble Creek Point Site and Mongold Day Use Area. All three sites are located on the north shoreline of Detroit Reservoir, about 50 miles east Salem, Oregon on State Highway 22 (See Figure 1.1). The Detroit Lake State Park is situated on the western slope of the Cascade Mountains on the Detroit Ranger District of the Willamette National Forest. The following is a legal description of the three Detroit Lake State Park sites: • Detroit Lake State Park Campground T10S, R5E, Sections 2, 3 and 10 • Tumble Creek Point Site T10S, R5E, Section 10, NW ¼ • Mongold Day Use Area T10S, R5E, Section 10, SW ¼ OPRD is currently seeking renewal of its special use permit to operate these sites for a 20-25 year time period. According to the Willamette National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) pg. 219, a pre-requisite to issuing a long-term special use permit, to a non-Forest Service entity, is the completion of a “comprehensive and detailed” Master Plan. OPRD has gathered information, solicited input and prepared a Draft Master Plan for the three Detroit Lake State Park sites, which it has submitted to the Forest Service. The Master Plan displays OPRD’s overall strategies for managing these sites and also includes specific projects intended to meet identified objectives in their master plan. A complete copy of the Master Plan is located in the project record (Section R). Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-2 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need May 2003 Figure 1.1 i r .1 The master plan allows managers to see the entire picture, including: 1) how all of the projects fit together, 2) the objectives the projects are intended to accomplish and 3) the relative timing of project implementation. Seeing the big picture, results in better decisions than would occur if the projects were submitted one-at-a-time, in a piecemeal fashion. Once approved, the master plan serves as a basis for agreement between the USDA Forest Service and OPRD. After receiving the request for renewal of the special use permit and the proposed master plan from OPRD, the Forest Service became responsible for taking the master plan through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process to analyze the effects of the proposed management of the three Detroit Lake State Park sites, as well as, the effects of the projects that will be implemented in the next five years. Projects scheduled beyond the five-year time frame will be analyzed in future NEPA documents. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-3 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need May 2003 2. Purpose and Need For Action This section describes the existing and desired conditions at the Detroit Lake State Park sites and explains the need for the project proposal. A need for action is usually triggered when the existing conditions do not meet the desired conditions. Implementing the proposed action would resolve the discrepancies between the existing and desired condition. The underlying purpose for this project is to approve a Master Plan which guides how the three Detroit Lake State Park sites will be managed, issue a 20-25 year special use permit, and provide for site specific actions to implement the Master Plan for the first 5-years. There is a need to provide a safe, healthful, aesthetic, non-urban atmosphere for the pursuit of natural resource-based recreation consistent with resource protection needs and anticipated user demand, as well as, to provide facilities and services where opportunities for meaningful recreation experiences exist. Existing Condition The popular Detroit Lake State Park sites are located on National Forest System lands along the north shore of Detroit Reservoir, the second heaviest used boating lake in Oregon according to a 1999 Oregon State Marine Board Boating Report. Currently the three sites are operated by OPRD under a special use permit from the USDA Forest Service. The original permit for operation of the sites was issued for 30 years in 1955. For the last 15 years, OPRD has been operating the sites under short-term special use permits that must be renewed every five years. The current permit expired in December 2002; however, a 6-month extension has been issued and will expire on June 30, 2003. OPRD has been operating the three Detroit Lake State Park sites under short-term special use permits since 1987. They do not have a current, long-term master plan to direct management of the sites and identify specific development projects designed to guide objectives outlined in the master plan for the sites. Furthermore, it is difficult for a permit holder, such as OPRD, to make major investments and improvements if their permit is for a short time frame and they are not able to fully amortize their costs. Detroit Lake State Park Campground (Figure 1.2 and 1.3) The Detroit Lake State Park Campground was constructed in the 1950’s and ‘60’s. At that time the recreation needs differed from those of today. Fifty years ago campers were seeking camping sites to accommodate passenger cars with small trailers or tents. Amenities such as electrical hook ups and showers were not expected. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-4 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 Today most campers come from an urban environment and not only gather in larger groups, but expect more amenities. Most campers now have large trailers, or RV’s with extra vehicles, and about 3/4 of the campers come with boats in tow. Few camp in tents and most expect amenities such as hot showers, flush toilets and electrical hook ups. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-5 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 Figure 1.2 Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-6 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 Figure 1.3 Changes in today’s camping experience, combined with the campground’s popularity and close proximity to urban population centers, results in overcrowding and all the associated problems that diminish the recreation experience, such as increased traffic, lack of adequate parking spaces, resource impacts to soil such as compaction and trampling of vegetation, excessive noise, conflicts between campers, and so forth. Also, the busy recreation load has stressed the capacity of both the sewer and water systems at the State Park campground. Current stand conditions in the campground include an even-aged stand of mature second growth forest, logged and regenerated approximately 80-years ago. The forested overstory consists of a mix of Douglas-fir, western hemlock, western red cedar, and incense cedar. The forest understory is primarily dwarf Oregon grape, salal, vine maple, sword fern, and Pacific rhododendron. Several class III and IV streams, primarily fed by seasonal rains and snowmelt, run through the campground. Streamside and bank erosion has occurred in some areas as a result of uncontrolled stream crossings, encroaching campsites, and lack of vegetation. Riparian plant communities occur along the lake shore and within major stream channels, with most of the riparian areas dominated by red alder. Due to the nature of the campground, including paved roads, buildings, and heavily impacted campsites, approximately 73% of the campground is considered to be lacking in understory vegetation. Tumble Creek Point Site (Figure 1.4) The Tumble Creek Point Site is an administrative work area for the OPRD, and contains maintenance shops, garages, equipment storage, and a manager’s residence. The demand for recreational facilities, especially day and group use facilities, is extremely high along the shoreline of Detroit Lake. Much of the terrain around the lake is relatively steep, and there are few places suitable for recreational development. The Tumble Creek Point Site is located adjacent to the lake, is relatively flat, and is suitable for recreational development. Therefore, it is considered a prime recreation site even though it is currently being used for administrative purposes only. Mongold Day Use Area (Figure 1.4) Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-7 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 Mongold is a day use area, which does not allow overnight camping, and includes a boat launching facility and areas for picnicking, swimming and fishing. Mongold is an extremely popular site and is the most used boat launching facility on Detroit Lake. The current parking area is not large enough to accommodate the number of vehicles launching boats at the site on a busy summer weekend. Often, the overflow of vehicles with trailers park along the edge of Highway 22, resulting in very unsafe conditions along the busy highway. In addition, there was little consideration given to disabled access to facilities when the site was designed. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-8 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 Figure 1.4 Recently, Detroit Lake has been established by the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife as a year-round fishing location. During the winter months, Detroit Lake is drawn-down to low pool to allow for flood control. The Mongold boat launch currently serves as the only boat launching facility during these times. However, the existing condition of the boat launch, which is essentially the old Highway 22 road grade, does not provide a safe launch site because of the shallow grade and poor surface condition of the old road, and inadequate water depth to launch all types of boats. Current stand conditions in the Mongold area include an even-aged stand of mature second growth forest, logged and regenerated approximately 80-years ago. The forested overstory consists of a mix of Douglas-fir, western hemlock, western red cedar, and incense cedar. The forest understory is primarily dwarf Oregon grape, salal, vine maple, sword fern, and Pacific rhododendron. Several class III and IV streams run through the park and most of the riparian areas are dominated by red alder. Desired Condition Detroit Lake State Park – All Sites The Willamette National Forest Plan describes that for developed recreation sites operated under a special use permit, the primary management goals are “to provide a safe, healthful, aesthetic, non-urban atmosphere for the pursuit of natural-resource based recreation consistent with resource protection needs and anticipated user demand” and “to provide facilities and services according to the terms of individual special use agreements where opportunities for meaningful recreation exist.” The Forest Plan also states that 1) use and occupancy will be regulated to protect natural resources and to ensure safe, enjoyable recreation experiences, 2) future development will be based on user demand patterns and specific site suitability, and 3) improvements will be designed to complement existing area developments and to expand the Forest’s capabilities to accommodate additional use. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-9 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 Further, a desired condition is to have an approved “comprehensive and detailed” master plan displaying OPRD’s overall strategies for managing the Detroit Lake State Park sites for the next 20-25 years. The master plan would include specific projects intended to meet identified highest priority objectives listed for implementation within the first five years. Stand conditions allow for natural light to enter the park through the canopy, and provide for lush understory vegetation in areas not impacted by recreation use. Tumble Creek Point Site USDA Forest Service policy states that recreation special use permits should be issued for recreation uses that serve the public. The Willamette National Forest Management Plan directs local managers to provide for a variety of recreation facilities based on user demand. The Detroit Lake Composite Area Management Guide (1992), as called for by the Willamette National Forest Land & Resource Management Plan, made the recommendation to relocate administrative functions, such as the State Park’s maintenance yard, away from the edge of the reservoir to provide additional recreation opportunities on the edge of the reservoir. Mongold Day Use Area The desired condition for the Mongold Day Use Area is essentially the same as the desired condition for the Detroit Lake State Park Campground. The design of the site and facilities control overcrowding and provide for an aesthetic atmosphere for users to enjoy and protects natural resources. Facilities at the site allow for year-round use while providing a safe and healthful place for recreation users. Statement of Need for Action Based on the differences between the existing and desired condition, the responsible official has determined a need for: • The USDA Forest Service to issue a long-term special use permit for the operation of the three Detroit Lake State Park sites. The permit is needed to allow OPRD’s long-term presence and operation of the sites so they can amortize significant financial investments needed for identified rehabilitation and facility development projects. • Approval of a Master Plan outlining strategies for managing the three Detroit Lake State Park sites, as well as, defining specific projects intended to meet objectives in the master plan. The plan will serve as the basis for agreement about the methods of management at the sites between the USDA Forest Service and OPRD. • Improving maintenance and rehabilitation of park facilities and infrastructure, increasing staffing levels, providing necessary on-site storage and staff facilities, upgrading electrical systems, improving facilities and rehabilitating hard-to-manage areas. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-10 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 • Regulating occupancy and use through campground design measures to protect and enhance the outstanding natural, cultural and scenic resources. There is also a need for improving and enhancing the facilities and infrastructure to accommodate the current user expectations, and provide a safe and healthful atmosphere. • Providing for current recreational needs by providing more day use activities on the lake, responding to public demand for better RV camping amenity levels, providing group overnight and day use opportunities, providing more overnight moorage and extra vehicle parking at the campground, and providing for desired amenities. • Improving park access, including new orientation and working to improve highway safety, enhancing the safety of access points by improving site visibility and signage, coordinating with the USDA Forest Service regarding access points for vehicles and pedestrians, and providing for emergency evacuation of the campground. • Using prime recreation sites around the reservoir, such as the Tumble Creek Point Site, as a recreation area instead of an administrative use site. This would allow the area to better serve the public and to respond to user demands. • Improving facilities to provide access for persons with disabilities and provide enjoyment for all abilities. • Establishing a safe, low-water boat launching facility for year-round use. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-11 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 • Meeting the demand of the public for increased use at the Mongold Day-Use area. 3. Proposed Action Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-12 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 Table 1.1 – Summary of Proposed Actions (A complete description, including maps and operational standards, of the following actions is included in the DRAFT Master Plan (January 2002) located in Section R of the Project Record.) 1. Issue a 20-25 year special use permit for the management of Detroit Lake State Park Campground, Tumble Creek Point Site, and Mongold Day Use Area. 2. Approve the DRAFT Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan in concept. 3. Approve the following proposed actions at each site for the next five years. The master plan strategies are described in detail in Appendix C for each of the three Detroit Lake State Park sites: Detroit Lake State Park • Develop a Sewer Facility Plan and Water Feasibility Study • Complete highway improvements to the entrance of the park. • Construct a lakefront trail • In camp loops A-E, overhaul the loop including vegetation enhancement projects, construction of cabins and a group site, construction of a new restroom, and rehabilitation of existing restroom facilities. • General rehabilitation throughout the park including campsite removal to provide overflow parking to accommodate extra vehicles and boat trailers. • Construct new facilities for campground administration Tumble Creek Point Site • Relocate the manager’s residence and administrative shops to a location other than the three OPRD sites. • Convert the Tumble Creek Point Site to a Overnight Group Use Area Mongold Day Use Area • Construct a low water boat ramp, including vault toilet to serve users. • Improve Mongold entrance, specifically booth and turnaround • Design and construct Mongold Day Use area retaining wall in the parking area. • Design and construct new portion of Mongold Day Use area. 4. Public Scoping Process and Consultation with Others Public Involvement The DRAFT Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan was first introduced in Summer 2000 by the Oregon Parks & Recreation Department and presented in several public meetings for public comment. Meetings were held in Detroit, Oregon and Portland, Oregon in April 2001 to present the draft plan and accept public comment. A Steering Committee was developed by OPRD following public comment to finalize the DRAFT Master Plan. Once all comments were incorporated, the final DRAFT Master Plan was submitted to the USDA Forest Service for renewal of the Special Use Permit and review through the NEPA process. Public involvement in the NEPA planning process for the Detroit Lake State Park sites was accomplished through the aforementioned public meetings and through mailings. The project first appeared in the Spring Quarter, May 2002 edition of the Willamette National Forest planning newsletter, FOREST FOCUS. This newsletter is sent quarterly to about 125 addresses. In addition, a copy of the proposal was sent to a mailing list of 74 individuals, organizations, and agencies, who have expressed an interest in the Detroit Lake area. Forest Service specialists were contacted to provide agency concerns and potential issues with the proposed action. A list of comments received and how issues were tracked through the analysis is discussed in Appendix C and Part 6 of this chapter. Information about the Detroit Lake State Park proposal, including a copy of the DRAFT Master Plan, is available on the Willamette National Forest web site at .http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/willamette/manage/nepa/current_detroit.html The project record containing the complete analysis for the Detroit Lake State Park EA is available for public review at the Detroit Ranger District office during regular business hours at 44125 N. Santiam Hwy., Detroit, Oregon, 97342. For additional information about the project record, or to make appointments to review the record, please contact Jim Romero, Resource Planning Forester, at the Detroit Ranger District, HC73 Box 320, Mill City, OR 97360 or call (503) 854-4212. Consultation with Others The State Park DRAFT Master Plan proposal was discussed with representatives of the Grand Ronde Tribes at the annual program of work consultation meeting in May 2002. Representatives of the Warm Springs and Siletz Tribes as well as the Grand Ronde Tribes each received a copy of the public scoping notice. No comments were received from any of the tribal groups. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-13 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 A biological evaluation was completed on the project and found that this project is not expected to have any adverse effects to Threatened or Endangered wildlife species, including fish and aquatic species (Whitmore 2002 and Somes 2002). Therefore, no formal consultation is required with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFW). Furthermore, no formal consultation has occurred with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) due to the lack of Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive fisheries species above Detroit and Big Cliff Dams. Finally, there is no Essential Fish Habitat that exists above Detroit Dam on the North Santiam River as described in the Magnuson-Stevens Act (1976). Per the 1995 Programmatic Agreement between the Advisory Council for Historic Properties (ACHP), the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and the USDA Forest Service, Region 6, consultation is not required for this project because survey results determine that the project will have no effect on cultural resources (Kelly 2002). A copy of the heritage resource report has been forwarded to SHPO for documentation purposes. 5. Issues A proposed action, developed to meet the need for action, may cause effects which conflict with various public uses or other resources managed by the Forest Service. These conflicts, called issues, are typically found during the initial public scoping period. Issues are used to 1) generate alternatives to the proposed action; 2) generate mitigation measures that are listed in Chapter II; and 3) help focus the effect analysis for implementing any of the alternatives considered, which are analyzed in Chapter III. Significant Issues Used to Develop Alternatives None of the issues related to the proposed action that were raised by the public or Forest Service personnel were deemed significant by the Responsible Official; therefore no additional action alternatives were developed from the proposed action. 6. Other Issues Identified but Determined to be Non-Significant The following is a list of issues that were identified during scoping for this project. As a result of public and interdisciplinary team input, the following issues were considered not significant by the responsible official and are eliminated from detailed study. Provided is a brief statement of why the issues are not considered significant and were not used to develop alternatives to the proposed actions. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-14 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 A. Soil Compaction and Damage to Understory Vegetation: Concerns were raised by some members of the Forest Service Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) regarding whether the DRAFT Master plan takes into consideration measures to immediately address soil compaction and how the availability of sunlight affects understory vegetation establishment and tree health within the Detroit Lake State Park Campground. Currently, low light conditions - resulting from a dense tree canopy, and soil compaction - from heavy recreation use, have limited vegetation development in the campground. Correcting one of these factors alone, however, will not promote vegetation establishment and a healthy forest stand. Improving light conditions, which can be accomplished by thinning trees to a lower density, and taking actions to reduce soil compaction are both necessary for the establishment of new understory vegetation. Thinning trees is also needed since the current stand density is at a level that will soon result in increasing mortality, poor growth and loss of live crowns on the remaining trees. Response of the stand to thinning will occur much sooner if the stand is not allowed to continue at the current density. Response: This issue was not considered a significant issue because the DRAFT Master Plan does include measures to address soil compaction and damage to vegetation by several methods, although it is not specific on a timeline for accomplishing these activities (DRAFT Master Plan, page 92-94). The proposed activities to reduce soil compaction and improve understory vegetation include: 1) Reduce campground density throughout the campground 2) Define campsites to prevent soil compaction and promote growth of the understory 3) Define use areas and restrict access through restored vegetation areas using split rail fencing. 4) Place anchored picnic tables and fire pits in campsites so that they cannot be relocated by campsite occupants, 5) Construct tent pads to concentrate use within the site. Size accordingly, with an average size of 15' x 15'. 6) Develop extra vehicle parking areas – Parking is only allowed on paved areas. This includes motor vehicles, trailers or boat trailers. Campground rules against parking off paved areas will be enforced. Parking spurs will be better defined with structures such as posts or rocks that discourage off pavement conflicts. 7) Replant disturbed areas with native vegetation. 8) Thin trees according to an agreed upon forest management plan – see the proposed action in Chapter II for additional details. 9) If use areas are determined to be compacted, consider rotor-tilling areas to loosen soils. 10) Construct paved pathways to confine use or encourage use. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-15 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 These proposed activities will be incorporated into the final design specifications to be implemented in the first five years. B. Water Quality: Comments were received from S. Hobet from the City of Salem Public Works during the scoping period. The City was encouraged about plans to provide “a safe, healthful and aesthetic atmosphere for the public.” They stated that new campsites help accommodate growing demand and new restrooms help alleviate the issue of sanitation. They were, however, concerned that the master plan did not assess the possible negative impacts that improvements may have on water quality and management decisions should take into account the City’s concerns regarding water quality. They also offered to help, as needed, with a joint monitoring effort and/or an educational component. Response: This was not considered a significant issue because improvements proposed in the DRAFT Master Plan are designed to prevent impacts to water quality. Rehabilitation of the campground and riparian areas will reduce current impacts and restore hydrologic conditions in these areas. Further, by applying Best Management Practices and following Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines during construction and implementation, water quality is not expected to be impacted. The DRAFT State Park Master Plan proposes a feasibility study for a new water and sewage treatment facility. The feasibility study will evaluate increased use and potential impacts on water quality. However, because it would be difficult to analyze the effects of a water and sewage treatment facility before reviewing the design, it is recommended that the construction portion not be included in this analysis and that a complete analysis be conducted following the feasibility report. This EA will not analyze the site specific effects of a new water and sewer system. C. Water Rights: A comment was sent to OPRD from B. Fujii of the State Water Resource Department and forwarded to the Forest Service during the scoping period. Concern was expressed about whether proposed water system expansions were consistent with Forest Service water rights. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-16 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 Response: This is not considered a significant issue because the Special Use Authorization to be issued following the NEPA analysis requires that the permittee comply with all necessary Federal, State, and Local permits, laws, and regulations. OPRD will have to review their existing water rights and comply with these laws under the new permit. D. Piety Island Improvements: Comments were received from C. Alexander during the scoping period for the project. Various improvements to Piety Island were suggested such as paved trails, clearcutting an area on top of the island to view Mt. Jefferson with telescopes, adding picnic tables and a floating dock, etc. Response: This is not considered a significant issue because Piety Island is not one of the Detroit Lake State Park sites operated under special use permit by the OPRD. Management of Piety Island is outside the scope of this project. E. Improvement of Boating Facilities on Detroit Lake Comments were received from P. Donheffner from the Oregon State Marine Board during the scoping period for the project. Concern was expressed that the low-water boat ramp at Mongold be moved through the required environmental assessment and Forest Plan amendment processes “expeditiously.” It was added that other enhancements for boaters and boating be candidates for “priority designation.” Response: The low-water boat ramp at Mongold is currently listed in the DRAFT Master Plan as a Priority 1 project along with other Health and Safety proposals for implementation within the first five years, subject to available funding and construction phasing opportunities. Therefore, this issue is not considered significant because implementation and timing of the project is irrelevant to the decision to be made. This will be the responsibility of the OPRD during the implementation phase of the project. A forest plan amendment is not required for the construction of the low-water boat ramp. Expansion of the Mongold Day Use Area will require the expansion of the special use permit boundary, however, this area is located on U.S. Army Corp. of Engineer (ACOE) lands and is not subject to requirements of the National Forest Management Act (NFMA). ACOE and Oregon State Marine Board personnel were directly involved in the planning and preparation of the DRAFT Master Plan being reviewed, including the proposal for the low-water boat ramp project. F. Long-term Special Use Permit and Project Priorities Comments were received from M. W. Foote during the scoping period for the project. Support was given for the master plan and the issuance of a 20-25 year special use permit. Concern was expressed that the Mongold and Tumble sites be first on the priority list. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-17 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 Response: This concern is very close to what is already described in the proposed action. Approval of a Master Plan and issuance of a 20-25 year special use permit are being analyzed in this EA. Implementation of specific projects is dependent on priorities for 1) Health & Safety, 2) Protection of Resource Values, and 3) Visitor Needs, as well as the availability of funding and construction phasing opportunities. A list of the priority projects for the first five years is located in Appendix B. The Mongold and Tumble Creek projects are included in the projects listed for the first five years for the Master Plan. This issue is not considered significant because timing and priority listing of projects is irrelevant to the decision to be made. 7. Responsible Official and Decisions to be Made The responsible official for this project is the Forest Supervisor for the Willamette National Forest. The Forest Supervisor will decide whether or not to 1) approve a 20-25 year special use permit for the Detroit Lake State Park sites, 2) approve a Master Plan for the three Detroit Lake State Park sites, and 3) to approve site specific actions to be implemented in the first five years to accomplish the objectives of the Master Plan. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Environmental Assessment Page I-18 Chapter 1 – Purpose & Need for Action May 2003 Chapter II: Alternative Description The agency is directed to include in this chapter 1) all reasonable alternatives, and for those eliminated from detailed study, a brief discussion of the reasons for their having been eliminated, 2) a substantial discussion of the alternatives considered in detail, including the proposed action, 3) a description of the no action alternative, and 4) appropriate mitigation measures not already included in the proposed action or alternatives (Table 2.1). Based on the information and analysis presented in the Environmental Consequences section (Chapter III), this chapter also presents the environmental impacts of the proposal and the alternatives in comparative form to provide a clear basis for choice among the options by the decision maker and the public (See Table 2.2 at the end of this chapter). 1. Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study The following alternatives were derived from issues identified during the scoping period. However, none of the issues raised by the public or Forest Service personnel were deemed significant by the Responsible Official; therefore these alternatives were eliminated from detailed study. A. Revocation of Permit Effective July 1, 2003, the special use permit issued to OPRD for the operation of the Detroit Lake State Park sites would be terminated. No new permit would be issued and OPRD would be required to close the three sites. Rehabilitation of the three sites would be required including the following actions: o Removal of all facilities and improvements; o Removal of all roads and parking areas; o Plant native grasses, shrubs, and trees in open areas such as parking lots & roads; o Restrict access from Highway 22 to all three sites with the installation of guard rails or similar structures. This alternative was not considered in detail for the following reasons: 1. This alternative would not meet several aspects of the purpose & need described in Chapter I. 2. OPRD would incur significant costs to remove existing facilities and rehabilitate the site to general forest. 3. The area would be lost as an established prime recreation facility located along the shoreline of Detroit Reservoir. 4. The area would receive uncontrolled use and resulting resource damage by dispersed campers and day users. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-1 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 5. A large number of recreation users would be displaced to other recreation sites around Detroit Lake, potentially causing significant resource damage from over-use. 6. Sanitation would be a problem due to the lack of facilities. 7. Uncontrolled, unsafe access from Highway 22 would present a safety hazard to users. The area may attract ATV use due to the flat nature of the area and easy access from Highway 22. 8. There is potential for significant economic impacts to recreation & tourism in the communities of Detroit and Idanha. 9. There would be the potential for future costs to the USDA Forest Service to develop the area as a recreation area or campground as the need increases. B. Full Riparian Reserve Protection Within the three sites, there are several class III and IV streams (see existing condition, page I-4 through I-7). In order to attain Late Successional Characteristics and meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives, these streams would need to have full riparian buffers as described in the Northwest Forest Plan (1994). This alternative would require that all improvements, excluding roads and approved trail crossings, would need to be removed within the riparian reserves for each of the three sites. At the Detroit Lake State Park Campground and Mongold Day Use Area, riparian buffers for the Class III and IV streams are 172 feet for either side of the channel, for a total of 344 feet. At the Tumble Creek Point Site, Tumble Creek is a Class II stream and requires a 344 foot buffer from either side for a total of 688 feet. Because Tumble Creek Point Site is located entirely west of Tumble Creek, all facilities, including roads & parking areas would need to be removed within 344 feet of Tumble Creek. Following removal of the facilities, the riparian reserves would need to be revegetated with native vegetation and channels restored to minimize erosion. This alternative was not considered in detail for the following reasons: 1. This alternative would allow the State Park sites to still exist, however, size and recreational opportunities within each site would be substantially reduced. 2. The existing visitor center, entrance booth, boat ramps, and some campsites within the campground would need to be removed and relocated. 3. Overall campground capacity is reduced by approximately 50%; Loop G & H lose approximately 1/3rd of their existing capacity. 4. Main access to the campground would need to be relocated. 5. Tumble Creek Point Site is reduced by approximately 1/3rd of the usable area. 6. Mongold Day Use Area is reduced by approximately 50% of the proposed day use area. 7. Viability may change. Economic, Use, Administration 8. Recreation users would be displaced to other locations – possibly impacting existing Forest Service Recreation Sites. 9. There is potential for significant economic impacts to recreation & tourism in the communities of Detroit and Idanha. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-2 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 10. Displaced use may create additional highway problems 2. Alternative 1 – No Action: The No Action alternative proposes no change to the existing management of the Detroit Lake State Park sites. OPRD would continue to operate the three sites under a special use permit, which will be evaluated for renewal at five-year intervals. Proposed projects designed to meet the objectives identified in the DRAFT Master Plan would not be implemented at this time, but could be proposed and evaluated individually, as the need arises. This alternative serves as a baseline from which to understand the changes associated with the action alternatives. A description of the existing conditions within the three Detroit Lake State Park sites is discussed in Chapter I and the adverse effects described therein would continue to occur. Additional information on existing conditions is also available in the DRAFT Master Plan. Existing condition of the watershed can be found in the Detroit Tributaries Watershed Analysis, completed in November 1997. 3. Alternative 2 – The Proposed Action Alternative 2 is the proposed action as introduced from Chapter I. The specific details of the proposed action are described here and included as Alternative 2. Note: The conceptual designs for each project display approximate location of facilities. Following a decision, a final design will be prepared by OPRD that shows specific pro ect details for the selected action including location of facilities and construction details. Although the location of facilities may vary slightly from the conceptual design, the types of facil ties would not change. All design concepts will comply with Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), Oregon State Marine Board, and USDA Forest Service guidelines. j i Projects identified in BOLD text are subject to approval by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) as these projects are located on COE managed lands. Summary of Actions: a. Issue a 20-25 year special-use permit for the management of Detroit Lake State Park Campground, Tumble Creek Point Site, and Mongold Day Use Area. b. Approve the DRAFT Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan which guides management activities at each of the three Detroit Lake State Park sites. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-3 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 c. Approve the prioritized list of projects designed to accomplish master plan objectives in each of the three sites as outlined below. Specific design and operational standards for each specific project is described in the DRAFT Master Plan for the Detroit Lake State Park (January 2002). Project implementation will be scheduled according to the priorities identified in the DRAFT Master Plan, Section X (Appendix B of this EA), which are based on 1) Health & Safety, 2) Protection of Resource Values, and 3) Visitor Needs, in that order, as well as the availability of OPRD funding and construction phasing opportunities. Design concepts for each site are described in detail, including maps, in the DRAFT Master Plan, Section VIII – Development Concepts, (Appendix C of this EA). The following summary of specific activities includes a concept reference number from the Master Plan (i.e. 1A, 2C, etc.) to the tables located in Appendix C. Proposed Action - Detroit Lake State Park (Figures 2.1 to 2.4) 1) Develop a Sewer Facility Plan and Water Feasibility Study 2) Complete highway improvements to the entrance of the park (6D) • Redesign inside and outside of the registration booth • Enhance campground entrance by improving site visibility, install campground sign, and improved lighting. • Provide turning separator at highway access 3) Construct a lakefront trail (12D & 4E) • Maximum 6-foot wide surface constructed of asphalt or other durable surface. • Design would be visually subordinate to minimize visual impacts from the lake. Vegetative screening and location shall be considered. • Designed for use by persons with disabilities. Prevent or eliminate architectural barriers that limit use or enjoyment of recreation attractions. 4) In camp loops "A" through "E" overhaul the loop including new cabins and a group camp, construction of a new restroom, and rehabilitation of existing restroom facilities. All improvements would be visually subordinate to minimize visual impacts from the lake. Facility lighting would be hooded to minimize glare and protect night sky viewing opportunities. (1D-4D, 5D, 7D-9D, 13D-16D) • Construct a group camp including 8 camper cabins, centralized restroom and shower building, 5 campsites, group meeting hall (10D), and a central parking area. (1D) • Provide access at each end of the campground for emergency vehicles. Gates and break-away vegetation will be used. (2D) • Replace existing restroom with new restroom building in Loops "A" through "E". (3D) • Enhance existing campsites throughout Loops "B" through "E" by lengthening undersized RV sites. (5D) Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-4 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 • Construct two new buildings to serve as administrative buildings. One would be a crew building to include lockers and computer terminals for Rangers – maximum size = 1800 square feet (sq. ft.). The second would be a storage building for small vehicles (golf carts), facilities maintenance, and supply storage – maximum size = 1500 sq. ft. (7D) • Replace two existing restrooms (C & D) with one new restroom & shower building. (8D) • Expand the existing swim area including adding new floats or piers as swimming platforms and provide for ADA access into the water. (9D) • Construct moorage docks to provide moorage for up to 40 boats. (13D) • Provide a recycling and garbage collection station within Loops "A" through "E". (14D) • Construct an Administrative Use Only boat dock. (15D) • Expand and remodel the existing Visitor Center to include a multipurpose room, restrooms and additional storage – not to exceed 1200 sq. ft. in size. (16D) 5) In camp loops "A" through "E" overhaul the loop including vegetation enhancement projects. These projects shall comply with the recommended management practices and natural resource guidelines identified in the DRAFT Master Plan on pages 92-94, and the Timber Stand Characteristics and Recommendations Report, February 2001. These include: o Selective Thinning – Thin trees in the campground from an existing basal area of approximately 245 sq. ft. per acre to 180 sq. ft. per acre. Trees would be thinned from below removing the smallest diameter trees and retaining the dominant and co-dominant trees. This results in the removal of approximately 43 trees per acre or approximately 30% of the trees in the campground. o Reducing Campground Density – removes 58 campsites from Loops A through E and 34 campsites from Loops F through H. o Restricting Access – eliminates non-designated trails, parking areas, and campsites. o Planting native understory vegetation o Hazard tree removal o Retention of organic material o Seasonal Closures o Understory vegetation improvements – see the list previously discussed under Issue #6a, page I-15. 6) General rehabilitation throughout the park including campsite removal for additional overflow parking areas – extra vehicles and boat trailers. (4D & 14E) Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-5 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 • Removes campsites in the campground to provide for parking areas to accommodate extra vehicles or boat trailers. Existing campsites are reduced from 318 to 220 sites or approximately 31% less, and primarily removes those undesirable sites located along Highway 22. Parking areas would be designed to minimize removal of significant trees and would not be visually apparent from the highway. Disallows extra vehicle parking in campsites. Maximum number of vehicles in Loop "A" through "E" is 103 and 125 sites in Loops "F" through "H". Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-6 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 Figure 2.1 Proposed Actions Detroit Lake State Park Campground Loops “A & B” 1D. Group Camp with Cabins (8 Camper cabins, 1 Meeting Hall, 1 restroom Facility, 5 Campsites, 16 Parking Spaces 3D New Restroom 2D. Emergency Access Group Meeting Hall Restroom Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-7 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 F P D C igure 2.2 roposed Actions etroit Lake State Park ampground Loops “C-E” Figure 2.2 Proposed Actions Detroit Lake State Park Campground L ops “C - E” 6D. Enhance Park Entrance 7D. Proposed Admin Area • 4D. Extra Vehicle Parking Areas 8D. New Restroom 3D. New Restroom 5D. Enhance Campsites in loops “B”, “E” 10D. Proposed Group Meeting Hall 14D. Recycling Center Station 9D. Expand 15D. Proposed Admin. Dock and Fishing Pier 13D. Proposed Overnight Moorage 16D. Visitor Center Expansion / Remodel 11D. Transient Boat Tie-up 12D. Proposed Lake Front Trail • Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-8 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 Figure 2.3 Proposed Actions Detroit Lake State Park Campground Loops “F & G” 1e. Pedestrian Underpass Location 2e. Pedestrian Bridge 3e. Camp Talk Area with Storage 4e. Lakefront Trail 5e. Playground Improvements 6e. Group Meeting Hall 7e. Replace Fishing Dock 8e. Enlarge Swimming Area Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-9 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 Figure 2.4 Proposed Actions Detroit Lake State Park Campground Loop “H” 9e. Improve Launch Lanes & Extend 10e. Moorage Improvements 14e. Extra Vehicle Parking Areas 12e. Railing and Guard Rail 13e. Emergency Access 11e. Recycling Center and Wood Sites Proposed Action - Tumble Creek Point Site (Figure 2.5) 1) Relocate the manager’s residence and administrative shops to a location other than the three OPRD sites. 2) Convert the Tumble Creek Point Site to a Overnight Group Use Area. (1C – 6C) • Create Group Cabin Loop. Construct up to eight 1-story deluxe cabins (500 sq. ft. each) with amenities such as bathroom/shower, sink, microwave, and deck. (1C) • Construct group meeting hall. One story structure (1200 sq. ft.) with plumbing and electrical. May include fireplace. (2C) • Improve highway access. Improve site distance by removing portion of guard rail and trimming brush. Modify existing entrance. (3C) • Construct one Host Site with full hook-ups. (4C) • Construct up to 8 boat moorage slips and boat ramp. (5C) • Provide administrative area for employee and boat trailer parking. (6C) Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-10 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-11 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 Figure 2.5 Proposed Actions Tumble Creek Point Site 5c. Proposed Boat Moorage & Ramp 6c. Marine Administrative Use Area 2c. Proposed New Group Meeting Hall 1c. Proposed New Group Cabin Loop 3c. Proposed New Highway Access 4c. Proposed Host Site Proposed Action - Mongold Day Use Area (Figure 2.6) 1) Construct a low water boat ramp, including vault toilet to serve users. (This will require an expansion of the existing special use permit boundary). (1A) • To be located approximately 2,000 ft. west of the current location. • Access would be through the proposed new addition to the Mongold Day Use Area (see 7A – 12A) • Construct vault toilet near the entrance to the low water boat ramp to serve users. (2A) 2) Improve Mongold entrance at the west end, specifically the registration booth and turnaround area. • Improve entrance signs. (3A) • Removes several parking spaces to move the entrance booth further east to allow for increased queuing space. (3A) • Construct trailer turn-around area. Extends the existing parking lot to allow trucks and trailers can safely turn around (minimum 35 ft. radius). (4A) 3) Design and construct the new portion of Mongold Day Use area. • Construct a ADA accessible fishing pier. (5A) • Construct two group-use shelters, one on the east and one on the west end of the new area. Structures would be one-story (max. size 1200 sq. ft.), partially enclosed with a fireplace. (6A & 11A) • Construct two day-use parking areas to serve the new day use area. Maximum number of slots = 76 car spaces. (7A) • Construct new restroom facility to serve day use area. (8A) • Construct swim area located between existing boat ramp and new low water boat ramp. Area would include grassy beach and dive platforms. (9A) • Construct day-use sites in the new area. Includes picnic tables and terraced trails with views of the lake. (10A) Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-12 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 • Construct a small restroom building near the existing boat ramp to serve day use & boat ramp visitors. (12A) Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-13 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 Figure 2.6 Proposed Actions Mongold Day Use Area 1a. Proposed Low Water Boat Ramp 5a. Proposed Fishing Dock 4a. Construct Trailer Turn-Around Area 3a. Enhance Entrance 2a. Proposed Vault Toilet 9a. Proposed Swim Area 8a. Proposed Restroom 7a. Proposed Day-Use Parking Areas 6a. Proposed Group Day-Use Shelter 12a. Proposed Boat Launch Restroom 11a. Proposed Group Day-Use Shelter 10a. Proposed Day-Use Area Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-15 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 Table 2.1: Mitigation Measures Common to Action Alternatives The following mitigation measures address Forest Plan Standards & Guidelines as well as adverse effects on resources identified in the issue statements in Chapter 1. These mitigation measures apply to all action alternatives, unless otherwise indicated. Mitigation measures will apply to all three OPRD locations. Resource Objective How Water Quality • Minimize impacts to riparian areas within the State Park recreation sites. • Implement Best Management Practices (BMP’s) during construction activities as developed for specific projects as implemented. Riparian Reserves • Insure protection of riparian reserves • To maintain and enhance ACSO values within an administrative site. • Maintain ACSOs for future development within the Detroit Lake State Park sites. • Adopt the direction found within RM-2 (NW Forest Plan, Riparian Management S & G’s) to retard or prevent loss of species found within the riparian reserve. Where adjustment measures such as education, use limitations, traffic control devices, increased maintenance, relocation of facilities, and/or specific site closures are not effective, eliminate the practice or occupancy. • Aggressively pursue the reduction in soil compaction within the park by education, use limitations, traffic control devices, increased maintenance, relocation of facilities, and/or specific site closures. • Before any new sites are developed, restoration of existing sites should be completed. • In developing proposals for future development adopt the direction found within RM-1; “New recreational facilities within Riparian Reserves, including trails and dispersed sites, should be designed to not prevent meeting Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. Construction of these facilities should not prevent future attainment of these objectives.” • Minimize compaction heavy use recreation sites. • Implement Best Management Practices (BMP’s) during construction activities as developed for specific projects as implemented. • Anchor tables and fire rings and use campsite design features to limit campsite expansion. • Scarify or rotor-till heavily compacted areas. Soils • Ensure successful mitigation during project activities • Monitor soil & vegetation conditions following treatment. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-16 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 Table 2.1: Mitigation Measures Common to Action Alternatives - Continued Resource Objective How • Prevent the spread of noxious weeds on disturbed soils. • Use weed-free rock sources for any additional gravel needed for temporary road construction and reconstruction. • Use only certified weed-free seed and straw for erosion seeding. • Prior to beginning activities, locate and control noxious weeds to avoid spreading seeds to other areas. Noxious Weeds • Ensure successful mitigation during project activities • Monitor and treat infestations following construction activities. • Determine the presence and protection of Survey & Manage Species • Prior to tree removal activities, conduct surveys and climb trees with nest like structures to determine occupancy by red tree voles. Wildlife • Increase forage for migratory birds • Plant native fruit bearing shrubs and trees throughout the State Park sites. Heritage Resources • Protection of cultural resources • If cultural resources are encountered during the course of the project, earth-disturbing activities in the vicinity would be suspended and the District Archaeologist notified to evaluate the discovery and recommend subsequent courses of action. Scenic Resources • Protect visual quality as observed from critical views • New facilities are screened and are subordinate in appearance from the lake or highway. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-17 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 Table 2.2: Comparison of Alternative and How Each Addresses the Purpose & Need Purpose & Need Alternative 1 No Action Alternative 2 Proposed Action OPRD to obtain a long-term special use permit from the USDA Forest Service to operate the three Detroit Lake State Park sites. The permit is needed to ensure the agency’s long- term presence in the operation of the sites so they can amortize out significant financial investments needed for identified rehabilitation and facility projects. • A long term permit would not be issued. OPRD would be allowed to continue operations under 5-year permits. • Long term economic investments and facility improvements would be delayed as projects are submitted individually. • A 20-25 year permit would be issued allowing OPRD to make long term economic investments and improvements. Approval of a Master Plan outlining OPRD’s strategies for managing the three Detroit Lake State Park sites, as well as, defining specific projects intended to meet objectives in the master plan. The plan will serve as a basis for agreement about the management of the sites between the OPRD and the USDA Forest Service. • Master Plan would not be approved. • No long term agreement of site development or management of the area would be prepared and agreed upon. • Master Plan would be approved and implemented including all Master Plan concepts and proposals for the first five years of the permit. Regulating occupancy and use through campground design measures to protect and enhance the outstanding natural, cultural and scenic resources. There is also a need for improving and enhancing the facilities and infrastructure to accommodate the current user expectations, and provide a safe and healthful atmosphere. • No change to current conditions. Crowded conditions would continue to exist. Uncontrolled access and disturbance in natural areas would continue. Improvements to accommodate user expectations and provide for safety would not be completed. • Specific projects identified in the DRAFT Master Plan would be implemented to improve conditions in the State Park and protect natural resources, enhance aesthetics and provide for public safety. • New construction at Mongold and restructuring portions of Detroit Lake State Park Campground will reduce overcrowding and enhance public safety. Table 2.2: Comparison of Alternative and How Each Addresses the Purpose & Need (Continued) Purpose & Need Alternative 1 No Action Alternative 2 Proposed Action Providing for current recreational needs by providing more day use activities on the lake, responding to public demand for better RV camping amenity levels, providing group overnight and day use opportunities, providing more overnight moorage and extra vehicle parking at the campground, and providing for desired amenities. No change to current conditions. Public demand for new recreation activities and opportunities would not be completed. Group use sites would not be constructed. Projects would be implemented to construct new facilities and redesign the current area to improve the infrastructure of the State Park. Redesign of Tumble Creek Point Site increases Group and Day Use facilities on Detroit Lake. To convert the Tumble Creek Point Site to a developed recreation site better serving the public and to respond to user demands. No change to current condition. Tumble Creek Point Site would remain as the Administrative area for the OPRD sites. Tumble Creek Point Site would be converted to a Group-Use Recreation Site increasing recreation opportunities around Detroit Lake. Improving park access, orientation and working to improve highway safety, enhancing the safety of access points by improving site visibility and signage, coordinating with the USDA Forest Service regarding access points for vehicles and pedestrians, and providing for emergency evacuation in the campground. No change to current conditions. Safety for State Park visitors would continue to be jeopardized with limited access to and from the park. Parking and highway access would continue to be a problem. Modifications include improving entrance design at all three sites; this includes lighting, signs and improved access. Emergency access is added at the Detroit Lake State Park Campground. Improving facilities to provide access for persons with disabilities and provide enjoyment for all abilities. No change to current conditions. Opportunities for persons with disabilities would be limited to existing facilities. All design changes and new construction will include accommodations for people with disabilities as required under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Expand the facilities at the Mongold day use area to meet an increased demand and allow for year-round boat launching, including the construction of a low-water boat ramp. Does not provide for a public safety and an effective year- round boat launching facility for all types of boats. • Allows for year-round boat launching to accommodate larger boats • Increases the carrying capacity of the site including new parking areas, restrooms, trails, picnic areas, and beach/swim area. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page II-18 Chapter 2 – Alternatives May 2003 Chapter III: Environmental Consequences This chapter will describe the environmental impacts of the alternatives. The descriptions are no longer than is necessary to understand the direct, indirect and cumulative effects of the alternatives. The environmental consequences form the scientific and analytical basis for the comparison of the alternatives. 1. Environmental Consequences Related to the Issues Soil Compaction & Disturbance to Vegetation Existing Condition Currently, both light conditions, resulting from a dense tree canopy, and soil compaction, from heavy recreation use, have limited understory vegetation development at Detroit Lake State Park Campground. Correcting one of these factors alone will not promote understory vegetation establishment and a healthy tree stand. Direct & Indirect Effects – Alternative 1 Implementation of Alternative 1 would allow operations to continue and does not include provisions for managing the dense stands where the three State Park sites are located. If thinning and soil treatments are not completed, the following effects would occur: • The mortality of trees in the stand would increase and growth would decline without thinning. The percent of live crown per tree in the stand would be reduced over time if thinning is delayed. • The amount of available light reaching the forest floor would remain at low levels and additional understory vegetation would not develop. • Soil compaction would affect long-term stand health and limit development of additional understory vegetation. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-1 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 • If the current stand is not thinned, trees that are identified as hazards (dead or dying trees) will be removed in small quantities that are more expensive to cut and remove, and of lower quality than live, though suppressed, trees. Direct and Indirect Effects - Alternative 2 Alternative 2 would implement the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan as submitted by OPRD and would implement recommendations made by the Forest Service to improve stand health, increase understory vegetation and reduce soil compaction sometime within the first five years of the permit. Improving light conditions, which can be accomplished by thinning trees to a lower density, and reducing soil compaction are both necessary for establishment of new understory vegetation. Thinning trees is also needed since the current stand density is at a level that will soon result in increasing mortality, poor growth and loss of live crowns. Response of the stand to thinning will occur much sooner if the stand is not allowed to continue at the current density. Alternative 2 would: • Reduce the mortality of trees in the stand and increase growth by thinning. The percent of live crown in the stand will be maintained for a longer period after thinning. • The amount of available light reaching the forest floor will increase and additional understory vegetation will develop. • Reduce the amount of soil compaction and limit activities which are currently causing the compaction. • Increase potential revenue to the Federal Government by removing a larger quantity of trees in fewer operations and by removing trees before they are dead. 2. Other Beneficial and Adverse Impacts Fuels & Air Quality None of the activities proposed in any of the alternatives is expected to generate significant amounts of slash, therefore no effects to the existing fuel loading or air quality from burning is expected for this project. Non-Listed Resident Fisheries Species Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-2 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 Fish present in Detroit Reservoir include hatchery and possibly resident rainbow trout, kokanee salmon, and landlocked spring chinook salmon. None of the alternatives proposed for the project will have any direct, indirect or cumulative impacts to fish present in Detroit Reservoir. (Somes, 2002) Recreation and Scenic Resources Alternative 1: The existing condition of the State Park sites would not meet the current or future need to provide a safe, healthful, aesthetic, environment for the pursuit of natural-resource based recreation consistent with resource protection needs and user demand. Overcrowding, congestion, and lack of facilities such as an inadequate number of RV spaces, overflow parking spaces, group area facilities, diminished quality amenities, attractions, and sewer and water capacity – which currently are not designed to accommodate current and future park users, would continue to negatively affect visitor’s recreation experiences. Poorly located and congested vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle access to and within the site would continue to pose hazardous situations. Alternative 2: Alternative 2 would improve the park environment and provide adequate, updated facilities to meet the public’s need for quality day-use, overnight and group use recreation. Implementation of actions over the course of the 5-year period would improve safe access to and within the sites, provide adequate infrastructure to accommodate the number of recreationists that visit the parks, and the types of facilities demanded by the public. Further, the Master Plan improves the health of vegetation and decreases soil compaction caused by recreation activities. Implementing an action plan to improve the health and vigor of the forest over the course of the permit period would enhance and sustain the scenic quality of the natural park setting over the long term. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-3 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 Implementation of the master plan would also increase and help meet the demand for day- use opportunities and parking, which is in short supply around the reservoir. Although the number of camping sites would decrease, the quality of campsites, addition of group sites and cabins, and the higher amenities provided would better align with the demand of overnight visitors to the lake. Campsites are expected to receive higher annual occupancy rates and higher numbers of occupants per site as a result of this shift, and net change in the number of visitors could be relatively minimal. Some visitors may be turned away during peak use weekends and holidays, and displaced to other campgrounds or dispersed campsites. However, visitors to the State Park typically plan their trip in advance and reserve campsites, and if sites are booked may opt to not come to Detroit Lake and go elsewhere, or plan their trip for another date that isn't booked. Encouraging use during these other non-peak times is beneficial to the local economy. (Pavoni, 2003) Riparian Reserves The Detroit Lake State Park sites are currently being managed as a developed recreation administrative site under special use permit and not as general forest. The Park is bounded by Detroit reservoir (south), and Highway 22 including the Detroit Ranger Stations administrative site (north), which limits options for fully attaining ACSOs within the park. Management of the full width of the riparian reserves within the three sites, after so many years as designated administrative sites, is not what the Northwest Forest Plan calls for with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives, nor should it be. The ACSOs were established to maintain connective corridors and to provide for multiple resource objectives at the watershed scale in areas not already designated as administrative sites or dedicated for structures, roads, etc. (Halemeier, 2002) Alternative 1 Riparian reserves will continue to be degraded. Restoration activities would not be scheduled to remove existing activities in the riparian reserves and restore heavily impacted areas. Alternative 2 In order to insure that we are complying with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives (ACSOs), mitigation measures for the riparian areas are included as part of the proposed action. Following the mitigations outlined in Chapter 2, resource values associated to the riparian areas would be maintained. When looking at the 6th field and 5th field watershed as a whole, ACSOs and Northwest Forest Plan objectives would be met. Furthermore, the riparian values of the three sites can be maintained into the future as new projects are not planned within riparian reserves and measures are taken to rehabilitate existing damage along the streams. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-4 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 In terms of connectivity, the juxtaposition of the park in relation to other features on the landscape restricts resource damage. Resource damage to surrounding areas is also reduced by having the public concentrated in one area. Furthermore, the Detroit Ranger Districts Administrative site and Highway 22 interrupt connectivity of streams in this area. Connectivity within the watershed is accomplished when looking at the size of the watershed (137,920 acres) and the size of the project (104 acres total) or 0.075% of the watershed. Therefore, this project is not expected to have significant effects on the riparian reserve values within the State Park or prohibit the attainment of ACSOs on a watershed scale. (Halemeier, 2003) Water Quality, Wetlands, and Floodplains For all alternatives this project will comply with the requirements of the Clean Water Act and other water quality guidelines outlined in the Forest Plan. There are no 303d listed streams, designated wetlands, or floodplains within the project area. With the implementation of Best Management Practices in Alternatives 2, there are no expected direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to water quality in the area (Halemeier, 2003). Utilizing Best Management Practices would result in no adverse impacts to downstream beneficial water users. 3. Unique Characteristics of the Geographic Area Wild and Scenic Rivers The project area is not located within a designated or eligible Wild and Scenic River corridor so there would be no effect to rivers listed on the National Wild and Scenic River System. Prime Farmlands, Range Land, or Forest Lands Department of Agriculture Land Use Policy (DR 9500-3), as discussed in FSH 1909.15-93- 1, 65.21 Exhibit 01, states that “Continued conversion of the Nation’s farmlands, forest lands, and rangelands may impair the ability of the United States to produce sufficient food, fiber, and wood to meet the domestic needs and the demands of export markets.” The Department’s responsibility is to assure that the United States retains a farm, range, and forest land base sufficient to produce adequate supplies at reasonable production costs of high quality food, fiber and wood. Detroit Lake State Park has no farm land or range land and therefore would have no effect on these resources. Detroit Lake State Park, Mongold Day Use Area and the Tumble Creek Administrative Use Site are managed by a Special Use Permit under the guidelines of the Willamette National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended, in which no programmed harvest shall be scheduled (Management Area 12b: Developed Recreation – Special Use Sites). Vegetation removal is limited to the protection of area values, forest health, public health and safety, and preparation of the site for rehabilitation or future development. There would be no effect to the forest land base with implementation of any of the alternatives; however the no action alternative places continued health of the forested site in jeopardy. 4. Effects Likely to be Highly Controversial Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-5 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 No specific actions for this project have been considered highly controversial or involve unique or unknown risks. 5. Effects to Districts, Sites, Highways, Structures, or Objects Listed in or Eligible for Listing in the National Register of Historic Places, or Loss or Destruction of Significant Scientific, Cultural, or Historic Resources: Heritage/Cultural Resources Alternative 1 and 2: For both Alternatives, no direct, indirect of cumulative effects are expected. Within the project area, there are no districts, historic or pre-historic sites, highways, structures, or objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register. As a result, this project would have no effect on heritage resources. Field surveys were completed in December 2000 and January 2001 in compliance with 35 CFR 800, the National Historic Preservation Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, Executive Order 11593, and the 1995 Programmatic Agreement between ACHP, Oregon SHPO and the USDA Forest Service, Region 6. (Kelly, 2002) 6. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species A Biological Evaluation was completed for Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive wildlife species on October 29, 2002. A complete copy of the Biological Evaluation is located in Section G of the Project File. (Whitmore, 2002) Northern Bald Eagle – Threatened a. Existing Condition The project is located within the Detroit Reservoir bald eagle management area. A bald eagle habitat reserve for nesting habitat is located approximately 0.13 miles from the Tumble Creek administration site, 0.25 miles north of the Mongold Day Use area and 0.35 miles west of Detroit Lake State Park Campground. Foraging habitat is located adjacent to the three state park areas at Detroit Reservoir. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-6 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 All action alternatives will not adversely affect bald eagles or their habitat. The three project areas are in an area utilized by bald eagles for foraging activities. Trees used for perching while bald eagles are foraging may be removed by site development; however, loss of these trees is not expected to reduce foraging in the area as an abundance of alternative perch trees are available nearby. Northern Spotted Owl – Threatened b. c. d. e. Existing Condition Spotted owls have not been detected in the project area. Foraging and nesting habitat do not occur in the project area. The forested areas of the three sites are considered dispersal habitat for northern spotted owls. Dispersal habitat is the dominant forest type in this area. Atypical foraging habitat occurs within 0.13 miles of the Mongold Day Use area, 0.45 miles of the Tumble Creek Point Site site, and 0.65 miles of the Detroit Lake State Park Campground. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects The proposed project will not adversely affect spotted owls or their habitat. Dispersal habitat will be removed in an area where dispersal habitat is the dominant habitat type. The proposed project will not affect spotted owl nesting, roosting and foraging habitat. Canada Lynx – Threatened Potential habitat for Canada Lynx is not present in the project area; therefore the proposed project will not impact Canada Lynx or its habitat. Other Pacific Northwest Region 6 - Sensitive Species Potential habitat for the following species is not being affected, or is not present in the project area; therefore, no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects will occur for these species: Horned grebes; buffleheads; harlequin ducks; black swifts; Canada Lynx; pacific fringe-tailed bat; wolverines; pacific fisher; Northwestern Pond turtle; cascade torrent salamander; foothill yellow-legged frog; and Oregon Spotted frog. Baird’s Shrew & Pacific Shrew – Region 6 Sensitive Existing Condition Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-7 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 Riparian habitat does exist within the proposed project area. Habitat is of very low quality due to compaction and heavy summer use. Forested riparian areas will be impacted by construction activities but only in areas that have already been impacted by past construction and heavy recreation use. Non-developed riparian areas will be revegetated as part of the proposed campground improvements. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects: The proposed project may impact the Baird’s Shrew and Pacific Shrew or their habitat. There is potential for habitat removal and disturbance of individuals if they are present in the project area. However, impacts are not expected to jeopardize the species’ or move them toward federal listing as a threatened or endangered species. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Fisheries Species f. g. There are no fish or aquatic insect species in the project area that are listed under the Endangered Species Act or are on the Regional Foresters Sensitive Species list. There is no Essential Fish Habitat that exists above Detroit Dam on the North Santiam River as described in the Magnuson-Stevens Act (1976). Due to the lack of any threatened, endangered or sensitive fish species being present it is not necessary to do a Biological Evaluation or a Biological Assessment for this project. (Somes, 2002) Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plant Species A Biological Evaluation was completed for Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive plant species on August 29, 2002. A complete copy of the Biological Evaluation is located in Section H of the Project File. (Roantree, 2002) Existing Condition The Oregon Natural Heritage Program (ONHP) was contacted in January 2001, regarding historical known sites of sensitive plant species on or surrounding Detroit Lake State Park sites. There are no recorded sites in the ONHP database. Surveys conducted during December 2000 and January 2001 detected possible habitat for Cypripedium montanum (mountain lady’s-slipper) and Cimicifuga elata (tall bugbane), however, no sightings of these species have been recorded in the area. Many surveys of the surrounding areas have been completed during Forest Service and Detroit Lake State Park project planning. Therefore, in the pre-field review for the Biological Evaluation, no potential habitat was identified. Additional survey for R-6 sensitive plants and noxious weeds was conducted on August 28, 2002. No evidence of sensitive plant occurrence or habitat was found during this survey. Direct, Indirect, Cumulative Effects Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-8 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 Based on these surveys and database review, direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts to R-6 sensitive species are not anticipated as a result of the implementation of any of the alternatives. 7. Management Indicator Species This section only discloses the effects on pileated woodpeckers, pine marten, and big game. Effects on the bald eagle, northern spotted owl, and peregrine falcon were discussed in the previous section on T, E, and S species. Effects on primary cavity excavators are included in the next section on snags. (Whitmore, 2002) Pileated Woodpecker & Pine Marten a. b. Pileated woodpeckers and pine marten will not be adversely affected by this project as habitat areas for these species are not located in the project area. Big Game Existing Condition The project is in winter range within Tumble Creek and French Creek Management Emphasis Areas (MEA’s). Current values for forage are the most limiting factor in attaining desired habitat effectiveness values. The winter range in the Tumble and French MEA’s are mostly cover. Forage is of low quality and exists mainly within the powerline corridors. The Detroit Lake State Park is currently fenced which excludes big game from this area. The Tumble Creek administration site has year round employee use and occupied residences which discourage big game use. Mongold State Park has potential to be used by foraging big game. Current big game populations are low with only deer being seen in this area. Alternative 1 There would be no direct effects from Alternative 1 because there would be no changes to the existing condition. Alternative 2 Some areas may be converted from cover to non-habitat. There are not enough animals to utilize the existing forage to levels that would limit populations. The project areas are not in heavily used winter range due to highway proximity and human use of the area. 8. Wildlife Tree Habitat (Snags) – Primary Cavity Excavators Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-9 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 Because snags are generally removed within the State Park campground and the Mongold day-use area to provide for public safety, habitat for primary cavity excavators is not maintained in the project area. 9. Course Woody Material Course woody material within the Detroit Lake State Park facilities and Mongold Day Use Area are generally used daily by visitors for campfires. Because the area is used as a recreation facility, course woody materials do not accumulate. 10. Migratory Birds Migratory birds may be disturbed and nests unintentionally destroyed during proposed activities. Each type of migratory bird specializes in a habitat niche and are widely distributed across the district during the summer nesting season. Altering habitat may favor one species and not favor another with the overall effect being insignificant. Generally forested habitats will contain warblers, swallows, swifts and other migratory species. Riparian areas with alder and maple may contain the same species as the forest with higher densities of riparian specialized species of warblers, flycatchers, etc. This project area already provides small areas of open habitat that may be used by sparrows and other open area specializing species. Overall the projects identified in Alternative 2 will not provide a significant habitat change from existing conditions. The species mix is expected to remain the same with minor variation in where open habitat specialized birds are located. Increasing the amount of native fruit bearing shrubs and trees will provide a beneficial affect from the project for migratory birds. 11. Survey & Manage Species - Wildlife (See Wildlife Report, Project File Section G) (Whitmore, 2002) Canada Lynx and Great Gray Owls The project area is not within habitat for these species; therefore no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects will occur for these species. Amphibians Ranges of all amphibians listed as survey and manage species do not extend into the Detroit Ranger District. Therefore no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects will occur for these species. Red Tree Vole Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-10 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 Potential habitat occurs in the project area. Ground surveys for red tree voles were conducted in Detroit Lake State Park in 2002 and no voles or nesting structures were discovered during the survey process; therefore no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects will occur for these species. Mollusks Surveys completed in Fall 2002 did not locate survey and manage mollusk species; therefore there will be no direct, indirect or cumulative effects to listed survey & manage mollusk species. 12. Survey & Manage Species - Plants Existing Condition The pre-field review for survey and manage category A & C (pre-disturbance survey) species indicates that no suitable habitat (except for Cypripedium montanum, see Sensitive Plants above) was identified for these species within the Detroit Lake State Park sites. This area consists of stands that are relatively young and in a mostly disturbed state, which reduces the probability of existing habitat for many of these species. However, the project area was surveyed for survey and manage species during VI survey in December 2000 and January 2001 (Botany Effects Report, Project File Section H). Four specimens of one survey and manage fungal species (lab verified) were found during the course of the survey: Otidea cf.onotica. This species was listed under the 1994 Record of Decision of the Northwest Forest Plan as a protection buffer species. This listing has been changed under the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Amendment to the Survey & Manage, Protection Buffer, and other Mitigation Measures (2000) and its Record of Decision (Jan. 2001), to a category F species, which changes its protection status from protected to unprotected due to the large number of sites found since the signing of the 1994 Record of Decision. Direct, Indirect, Cumulative Effects Due to pre-field review conclusions and the negative results from survey, impacts to survey and manage category A & C species are not anticipated with implementation of any of the alternatives. Implementation of Alternative 2 has the potential to improve habitat conditions and increase the probability of survey and manage fungi, lichen, and bryophyte recruitment. The draft Master Plan represented by Alternative 2 lists as a goal to increase the health of stand crowns, and to reduce the lack of healthy understory from 73% to 50% of the property area. 13. Noxious Weeds Existing Condition Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-11 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 A noxious weed survey, list, and report were included with the Vegetation Inventory conducted December 2000 and January 2001 (Botany Effects Report, Project File Section H). The most important noxious weed sites were of spotted knapweed, Himalayan blackberry, evergreen blackberry, Scot’s broom and reed canary grass. In addition, many other naturalized and occasional weeds were identified in the area. Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects In the DRAFT Master Plan (Alternative 2), under Natural Resource Management Guidelines for Detroit Lake State Park (pg. 94), it states: “Review the current noxious weed situation at the park based upon vegetation mapping and field research. Complete and implement an Integrated Pest Management Plan (IMP) for the property. Work with the USFS on how to implement the plan”. Implementation of this alternative and the proposed IMP could assist with larger efforts conducted by partners (ODOT, City of Detroit, USDA-FS, Oregon Department of Agriculture, Marion County) to control noxious weeds in the area. The Highway 22 corridor is a major dispersal pathway and provides disturbed habitat for many noxious weed populations and is a seed source for further invasion. If implemented, Alternative 2 proposes to scarify impacted soil areas and either allow for natural reseeding or planting of native vegetation. It is important that these areas are monitored for re-vegetation success, and if noxious weeds do invade, that they are immediately eradicated. Without a long term plan to guide activities, Alternative 1 would likely allow for the existing disturbance to continue and would lack the systematic approach needed for site rehabilitation and weed eradication. 14. Public Health & Safety Alternative 1 The No Action alternative does not allow for improvements to highway access at the three sites from Highway 22. Existing design would remain the same resulting in congested traffic during peak use periods. At the Mongold Day Use Area, traffic would continue to park along Highway 22 causing a risk to drivers and pedestrians walking to the site. Alternative 1 does not replace the existing low water boat ramp resulting in unsafe launching conditions during times of low water. In addition, within the Detroit Lake State Park Campground, the limited number of overflow parking sites would continue resulting in damage to vegetation and creating heavily congested areas around existing campsites. In addition to a high demand for parking and traffic controls, heavy use in the existing park has also put stress on the existing water and sewer system. Under the no action alternative, no improvements would be made to these systems which are in need of significant upgrades to handle the increased demand for recreation use at the three sites and expected future expansion of the area. Alternative 2 Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-12 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 The proposed action includes specific projects designed to increase safety at highway access points at all three sites. Decreasing the number of campsites at the campground allows for additional overflow parking to be created reducing congestion at campsites. A new trail constructed through the campground provides a safe alternative for hikers as opposed to walking on interior roads. Converting the Tumble Creek Point Site to a overnight group use facility allows for additional group use and reduces the impacts at other over-used sites around the lake. Further, the expansion of the Mongold Day Use Area nearly doubles the parking capacity for the sites and significantly reduces the congestion and traffic flow problems along Highway 22. A new day use area and beach access separates boaters from swimmers. In this alternative, the existing low water boat access is replaced resulting in a safe launching site during times of low water. This alternative also includes priority projects for the Detroit Lake State Park sites such as the development of sewer and water system feasibility study, followed by the construction of treatment facilities for each system. Finally, the approval of the Management Plan allows for the continued improvement of the three sites to increase public safety. 15. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources No irreversible and/or irretrievable use of the soils or geologic resources is anticipated beyond that which has been previously identified in the Willamette National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended by the Northwest Forest Plan of 1994. All action alternatives impact the soil resource in approximately a similar manner. Irretrievable commitments of resources occur as a result of land management activities. Under multiple-use management some irretrievable commitments of resources are unavoidable and acceptable at developed recreation sites. 16. Environmental Justice Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page III-13 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences May 2003 The Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan project area is located adjacent to the Cities of Detroit and Idanha, Oregon. These communities are not considered to be minority or low income communities, however, low income families do reside in both cities. According to information from the Oregon Economic and Community Development Department (OECDD, 2000) both cities area considered to be within a distressed area. For the City of Detroit, approximately 44% of the population is considered to be in Low to Moderate Income range: whereas for the City of Idanha, approximately 66% of the population is in this range. Both of these Cities have experienced a significant decline in timber-based jobs over the past decade contributing to the factors that determine a distressed community. Implementation of either alternative 1 or 2 indirectly creates job opportunities or money spent in the communities that are diversifying their tourism economy, although Alternative 2 does so to a greater degree with improved facilities and the expansion of Tumble Creek Point Site and Mongold Day Use Area. All alternatives fall within compliance with Executive Order 12989 “Federal Action to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations . CHAPTER IV – List of Preparers The following are the members of the interdisciplinary team (IDT) responsible for conducting the environmental assessment for the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan. Jim Romero – Team Leader / Planner • B.S. Forest Management • 15 years experience Forest Service Anita Leach – Writer/Editor – 1st stage Contracted to complete public scoping, Issues, and Alternative Development Dani Rosetti – Recreation Planner • B.S. Forest Resources & Recreation Management • 14 years experience Forest Service Dave Halemeier - Hydrologist • B.S. Resource Planning and Interpretation • M.S. Natural Resources, Watershed Management • 29 years experience Forest Service Mike Roantree – Botanist • B.S. Botany • M.A. Biology • 17 years experience Forest Service Rodney Stewart - Public Services & Planning Assistant • Licensed Professional Engineer • B.S. Forest Engineering • M.S. Forest Engineering • 23 years experience Forest Service Doug Shank – Geologist • B.S. Geology • M.S. Geology • 25 years experience Forest Service Wayne Somes – Fish Biologist • B.S. Fisheries • 26 years experience Forest Service Kelly Esterbrook – Fuels Planner, Assistant Fire Management Officer • Technical Fire Management • 25 years experience Forest Service Cara Kelly – Archaeologist • B.S. Anthropology • M.A.I.S. Anthropology • 14 years experience Forest Service Daryl Whitmore – Wildlife Biologist • A.S. Forest Industries Technology • B.S. Natural Resource Management Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page IV-1 Chapter 4 – List of Preparers May 2003 • 15 years experience Forest Service References The following documents were incorporated by reference within the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment and are available by request: Bacheller, Noel. January 9, 2001. Vegetation Inventory of Detroit Lake State Park. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section O). Esterbrook, Kelly. August 29, 2002. Fire/Fuels Effects for Detroit Lake State Park. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section M). Halemeier, Dave. August 30, 2002. Hydrology Review – Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section K). Halemeier, Dave. April 28, 2003. Addendum to Hydrology Review – Detroit State Park Master Plan. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section K). Kelly, Cara M. August 27, 2002. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Heritage Resource Attachment. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section J). Leach, David K, and Douglas C. Shank. August 28, 2002. Vegetation and Soils Effects – Detroit Lake State Park Environmental Assessment. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section O). Leach, David K. February 2001. Timber Stand Characteristics and Recommendations. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section O). Oregon Parks and Recreation Department. January 2002. DRAFT Master Plan, Detroit Lake State Park. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section R). Pavoni, Dani. August 29, 2002. Recreation and Scenery Report. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment, Section N). Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page 1 of 2 References May 2003 Roantree, Michael. August 29, 2002. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan, Biological Evaluation – Sensitive Plants. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project file, Section H). Roantree, Michael. August 29, 2002. Botany Effec s. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project file, Section H). t t t Shank, Douglas. May 29, 2001. Detroit Lake State Park Soils Report. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section O). Somes, Wayne. August 29, 2002. State Park Master Plan, Fisheries Report. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section I). USDA Forest Service. 1988. Final EIS for Managing Competing and Unwanted Vegetation and Media ed Agreement (1989). PNW Region 6 USDA Forest Service. 1992. Detroit Lake Composite Area Management Guide. Region 6, Willamette National Forest, Detroit Ranger District, Mill City, Oregon. USDA Forest Service. 1994. Willamette National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) as amended by the Record of Decision and Standards and Guidelines for Management of Habitat for Late Successional Species and Old Growth Dependent Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl. Willamette National Forest, Eugene, Oregon. USDA Forest Service. November 1997. Detroit Tributaries Watershed Analysis. Region 6, Willamette National Forest, Detroit Ranger District, Mill City, Oregon. USDA Forest Service. 1999. Willamette National Forest Integrated Weed Management Environmental Assessment. Willamette National Forest, Eugene, Oregon. USDA Forest Service. 1999. Willamette National Forest Integrated Weed Management Plan. Willamette National Forest, Eugene, Oregon. Whitmore, Daryl. October 29, 2002. Biological Evaluation for Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project file, Section G). Whitmore, Daryl. October 29, 2002. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan, Effec s of Implementation of Wildlife Species. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section G). Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page 2 of 2 References May 2003 References The following documents were incorporated by reference within the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment and are available by request: Bacheller, Noel. January 9, 2001. Vegetation Inventory of Detroit Lake State Park. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section O). Esterbrook, Kelly. August 29, 2002. Fire/Fuels Effects for Detroit Lake State Park. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section M). Halemeier, Dave. August 30, 2002. Hydrology Review – Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section K). Halemeier, Dave. April 28, 2003. Addendum to Hydrology Review – Detroit State Park Master Plan. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section K). Kelly, Cara M. August 27, 2002. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan - Heritage Resource Attachment. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section J). Leach, David K, and Douglas C. Shank. August 28, 2002. Vegetation and Soils Effects – Detroit Lake State Park Environmental Assessment. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section O). Leach, David K. February 2001. Timber Stand Characteristics and Recommendations. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section O). Oregon Parks and Recreation Department. January 2002. DRAFT Master Plan, Detroit Lake State Park. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section R). Pavoni, Dani. August 29, 2002. Recreation and Scenery Report. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment, Section N). Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page 1 of 2 References May 2003 Roantree, Michael. August 29, 2002. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan, Biological Evaluation – Sensitive Plants. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project file, Section H). Roantree, Michael. August 29, 2002. Botany Effec s. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project file, Section H). t t t Shank, Douglas. May 29, 2001. Detroit Lake State Park Soils Report. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section O). Somes, Wayne. August 29, 2002. State Park Master Plan, Fisheries Report. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section I). USDA Forest Service. 1988. Final EIS for Managing Competing and Unwanted Vegetation and Media ed Agreement (1989). PNW Region 6 USDA Forest Service. 1992. Detroit Lake Composite Area Management Guide. Region 6, Willamette National Forest, Detroit Ranger District, Mill City, Oregon. USDA Forest Service. 1994. Willamette National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) as amended by the Record of Decision and Standards and Guidelines for Management of Habitat for Late Successional Species and Old Growth Dependent Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl. Willamette National Forest, Eugene, Oregon. USDA Forest Service. November 1997. Detroit Tributaries Watershed Analysis. Region 6, Willamette National Forest, Detroit Ranger District, Mill City, Oregon. USDA Forest Service. 1999. Willamette National Forest Integrated Weed Management Environmental Assessment. Willamette National Forest, Eugene, Oregon. USDA Forest Service. 1999. Willamette National Forest Integrated Weed Management Plan. Willamette National Forest, Eugene, Oregon. Whitmore, Daryl. October 29, 2002. Biological Evaluation for Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project file, Section G). Whitmore, Daryl. October 29, 2002. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan, Effec s of Implementation of Wildlife Species. On file at the Detroit Ranger District in the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Project File, Section G). Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page 2 of 2 References May 2003 Appendices Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment A: Response to Public Comments B: Detroit State Park Master Plan – DRAFT January 2002 – Section X. Development Approval Requirements including the Project Phasing and Priority List C: Detroit State Park Master Plan – DRAFT January 2002 – Section VIII. Development Concepts. APPENDIX A Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Response to Public Comments Public Involvement Process The Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan was first introduced in Summer 2000 by the Oregon Parks & Recreation Department (OPRD) and presented in several public meetings for public comment. Meetings were held in Detroit, OR and Portland, OR in April 2001 to present the Draft plan and accept public comment. A Steering Committee was developed in April 2001 to finalize the DRAFT Master Plan. Once all comments were incorporated, the final DRAFT Master Plan was submitted to the USDA Forest Service for renewal of the Special Use Permit and review through the NEPA process. Public involvement in the NEPA planning process for the Detroit Lake State Park properties was accomplished through the aforementioned public meetings and through mailings. The project first appeared in the Spring Quarter, May 2002 edition of the Willamette National Forest planning newsletter, FOREST FOCUS. This newsletter is sent quarterly to about 125 addresses. In addition, a copy of the proposal was sent to a mailing list of 74 individuals, organizations, and agencies, who have expressed an interest in the Detroit Lake area. Forest Service specialists were contacted to provide agency concerns and potential issues with the proposed action. A list of comments received and how issues were tracked through the analysis is discussed in the following sections of this document. A public scoping notice, describing the purpose and need and proposed action, was mailed on June 1, 2002 to 74 individuals and groups that have expressed an interest in current projects on the Detroit Ranger District. The USDA Forest Service received seven comment letters during the public scoping period and written comments concerning the project are included in Section D of the Project Record. Substantive comments from each letter were added to the tables on the following pages according to resource concern. References have been made to the Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan EA and Appendices where appropriate. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page A-1 Appendix A - Response to Pubic Comments May 2003 Issue / Concern: Support for the Project Commenter Comment Response M. William Foote I really like the whole master plan. I believe the 1st item to be covered must be a 20 or more years special use permit. I would like to see the Mongold and Tumble Creek sites to be first on the list. Thank you for your support. Priorities for implementing specific projects are identified in the Master Plan and are dependent on OPRD funding and project implementation scheduling. Paul Donheffner – Oregon State Marine Board Overall, we support the Proposed Actions as listed. In particular, we are pleased to see the low water boat ramp project is proposed for the first five years. We urge the Forest Service to expeditiously complete the NEPA process and allow this vital project to be accomplished as soon as possible. Thank you for your support. Priorities for implementing specific projects are identified in the Master Plan and are dependent on OPRD funding and project implementation scheduling. Issue / Concern: Outside the Scope of this Analysis Commenter Comment Response Clint Alexander It seems to me the USFS in conjunction with OR State Parks would consider making Piety Island a showcase spot rather than just something to view. A spot where the public could enjoy a network of paved trails, an acre or two cleared on top with telescopes for viewing Mt. Jeff, more picnic tables, possibly a floating dock north side of the island. This is not considered a significant issue because Piety Island is not one of the Detroit Lake State Park sites operated under special use permit by the OPRD. Management of Piety Island is outside the scope of this project. Piety Island is managed by the Forest Service and currently includes a boat-in campground with picnic tables, fire rings, and a short trail system. Several thinning projects have occurred in the last 5 years on the island. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page A-2 Appendix A - Response to Pubic Comments May 2003 Issue / Concern: Water Quality Commenter Comment Response Sophia Hobet- City of Salem, Public Works Department Maintaining and enhancing the quality of the North Santiam Rives is a high priority for the City. New campsites would help accommodate ever growing public use and constructing new restrooms will help alleviate the issue with sanitation. Upon review of the Master Plan, City staff noticed that potential impacts on water quality due to these improvements were not assessed. We are concerned that he possible negative affects on water quality are not being examined thoroughly. The City would like to see water quality addressed as an important aspect of the master plan. Water Quality is addressed in the EA, Chapter 3. The Master Plan has several projects proposed to be implemented in the first five years that will specifically address water quality. These include a development and construction of a new water treatment and sewage system for the three sites. In addition, Best Management Practices will be implemented during all construction of new facilities and remodeling of existing facilities. Restoration projects are planned for the riparian reserve areas within the three sites to protect these values. Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page A-3 Appendix A - Response to Pubic Comments May 2003 Appendix B Detroit State Park Master Plan – DRAFT January 2002 – Section X. Development Approval Requirements including the Project Phasing and Priority List The following information is an excerpt from the DRAFT Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan (Section X, Page 103- 105, January 2002): USFS Special Use Permit and NEPA Process Detroit Lake Sate Park is located on National Forest Land managed by the US Forest Service. Oregon Parks and Recreation Department operates the Detroit Lake State Park through a Special Use permit with the US Forest Service. This permit is soon to expire. This master plan was required by the USFS as a prerequisite to renewing this permit. The master plan is intended as a basis for initial agreement on improvement to the park over the next 20-25 year, as well as on particular resource management requirements and responsibilities. After a draft master plan is developed and the OPRD commission has approved recommended edits, the USFS will complete the NEPA process as part of the special use permit application for projects to be implemented in the upcoming 5-6 year timeframe. Project Phasing The following list represents a logical phasing of master planned projects. The list considers the construction schedules and necessary coordination with partnership projects such as City of Detroit and Idanha’s sewer improvement project. The identified Forest Service priority rankings are also taken into account. This phasing list will be updated on a biannual basis by OPRD. At that time, the list will be reevaluated against other agency priorities and assessed for permitting feasibility prior to further funding allocation. Phase I • Sewer and Water Feasibility Study (Priority 1, health and safety) • General rehab throughout the park including campsites removal for additional overflow parking areas (M & O funds) (Concepts 4D and 14E) • Low water ramp (Priority 1 – Health and Safety) (Concept 1A) Phase II • Design and construct sewer and water system (Priority 1 – health and safety) • A-E loop overhaul including vegetation enhancement projects, cabins and group camp, new restroom facilities (Priority 2 – Resource Values) Concepts 1D-9D, 12D-16D) • Identify funding and purchase of managers residence. • Lake Front Trail (Priority 1 – health and safety) (Concept 12D & 4E) • Mongold entrance improvements – booth and turnaround (Priority 1 – health and safety) • Mongold Day Use (existing) Area design and construct retaining wall in parking area (Priority 3 – visitor need (Concepts 3A & 4A) Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page B-1 Appendix B – OPRD Project Phasing and Priority Schedule May 2003 • Proposed campground admin area (Priority 3 – visitor need) (Concept 7D) • Highway improvements (Priority 1 – health and safety) Phase III • Visitor Center expansion / remodel (Priority 3 – visitor need) (Concept 16D) • Entrance booth improvements (Priority 3 – visitor need) (Concept 6D) • Shop relocation – Tumble Creek Projects (Priority 1 – health and safety) (Concepts 1C- 6C) • Overnight moorage improvements (Priority 3 – visitor need) (Concept 13D) • G – boat ramp improvements (Priority 3 – visitor need) (Concept 9E) • Underpass construction in cooperation with Forest Service Gateway Development (Concept 1E) • Campground – Group meeting Hall in G-Loop ((Priority 3 – visitor need) (Concept 6E) Phase IV • Design and construct new Mongold Day Use Area (Priority 3 – visitor need) (Concept 3A-12A) Project Priority Scheduling Implementation is dependent upon priority as well as funding availability and construction phasing opportunities. Priority 1 – Health and Safety • Sewer facility Plan and Water Feasibility Study • Design and construct sewer and water system • Mongold entrance improvements – booth and turnaround (Concept 3A) • Highway improvements (Concepts 3C and 6D) • Campground Lake Front Trail (Concepts 12D and 4E) • Low water ramp (Concept 1A) Priority 2 – Resource Values • Camp Loops A-E loop overhaul including vegetation enhancement projects, cabins and group camp, new and rehabbed restroom facilitates (Concepts 1D-9D, 12D-16D) • General rehab throughout the park including campsites removal for additional overflow parking areas (M & O funds) (Concepts 4D & 14E) • Identify funding and purchase of manager’s residence • Shop relocation – Tumble Creek Projects (Concepts 1C-6C) • Proposed campground admin area (Concept 7D) • Mongold Day Use (existing) Area design and construct retaining wall in parking area (Concepts 3A & 4A) Priority 3– Visitor Need • Design and construct new Mongold Day Use Area (Concept 3A-12A) Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page B-2 Appendix B – OPRD Project Phasing and Priority Schedule May 2003 Appendix C Detroit State Park Master Plan – DRAFT January 2002 – Section VII. Development Concepts The following information is an excerpt from the DRAFT Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan. (Section D, Page 57-88, January 2002): Insert pages from DRAFT Master Plan Detroit Lake State Park Master Plan Environmental Assessment Page C-1 Appendix C – OPRD Project Phasing and Priority Schedule May 2003