borax lake chub habitat protection fence environmental assessment

1792 (ORB060) P

Dear Interested Party:

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Burns District Office, has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) OR-08-026-096 and an unsigned Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for The Borax Lake Chub Habitat Protection Fence EA. The EA, unsigned FONSI, and EA maps are enclosed for your review and are also available at http://www.blm.gov/or/districts/burns/plans/index.php.

The enclosed EA analyzes the removal of an abandoned fence surrounding Borax Lake and the construction of a new fence along the east side of Borax Lake Road within the Borax Lake Chub Critical Habitat. Also analyzed is the restriction of vehicle access across 1.75 miles of Borax Marsh Road leading from Borax Lake Road eastward through two privately owned parcels of land surrounding Borax Lake and a hot spring complex north of the lake.

If you have comments on the EA or FONSI, submit them postmarked by or received at the Burns District Office at the address above by March 18, 2010. E-mail comments should be sent to [email protected]. After consideration of your substantive1 comments, a Decision outlining the action to be taken within the scope of the EA will be developed and issued. If you submit comments to this EA or FONSI, you will receive a copy of the Decision. If you do not have comments but wish to receive a copy of the Decision, please submit a written request, otherwise you will not receive a copy. The Decision will also be posted to http://www.blm.gov/or/districts/burns/plans/index.php.

1 Comments are considered substantive if they question the accuracy of information; question the adequacy, methodology or assumptions used; present new information relevant for analysis; present reasonable alternatives other than those analyzed; or cause changes or revisions in one or more of the alternatives. Comments are not considered substantive if the comments are in favor of or against the proposed action or alternative without reasoning that meet the substantive criteria listed above; agree or disagree with BLM policy or resource decisions without justification or supporting data that meet the substantive criteria listed above; do not pertain to the project area; or comments that form vague, open-ended questions.

http://www.blm.gov/or/districts/burns/plans/index.php

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.blm.gov/or/districts/burns/plans/index.php

2

Comments, including the names and addresses of respondents, will be available for public review at the Burns District Office during regular business hours 7:45 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays, and may be published as part of the Decision. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment – including your personal identifying information – may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Anonymous comments will not be considered. All submissions from organizations and businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be available for public inspection in their entirety.

If you need further information or to receive additional copies, please contact Daryl Bingham of the Andrews/Steens Resource Area, Burns District Office, at (541) 573-4558 or visit the Burns District Web site listed above.

Sincerely,

Joan M. Suther Andrews/Steens Resource Area Field Manager

Enclosures

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management Burns District Office

Andrews/Steens Resource Area Finding of No Significant Impact

January 13, 2010 Environmental Assessment

OR-08-026-096

INTRODUCTION

Andrews/Steens Resource Area, Burns District Bureau of Land Management (BLM), has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) to analyze potential effects of constructing facilities to modify public access and enhance public understanding of the Borax Lake Area. The Proposed Action is the result of a collaborative effort between BLM, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), The Nature Conservancy (TNC) (landowner), based on the needs and objectives outlined as criteria for the delisting of the chub in the USFWS Borax Lake Chub Recovery Plan (1987), BLM's Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) Plan for Borax Lake, and ongoing monitoring conducted by various agencies.

The project area is located in Andrews Management Unit (AMU) in the southern portion of Harney County, Oregon, near the town of Fields, approximately 115 miles south of Burns, Oregon (T. 37 S., R. 33 E., Sections 11 and 14). The specific project area is the section of Borax Lake Road within the Borax Lake Chub Critical Habitat Area.

SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

The Proposed Action is the construction of approximately 3,500 feet of post and cable type fence following the east side of Borax Lake Road and removal of 3.9 miles of fence within the Borax Lake ACEC. The new fence would use new steel cable and would utilize rock cribs and posts recovered from the fence removal project. Borax Marsh Road would be closed to unpermitted vehicle traffic from the intersection of Borax Lake Road and Borax Marsh Road to the northern boundary of the critical habitat. The road would remain available for landowner access, administrative, scientific, and special needs purposes. Pedestrian access points and a locking vehicle gate would be installed at the intersection.

The proposed fence would not replace the existing fence that follows southwest corner of the ACEC boundary, rather the fence would augment the protections offered to chub habitat that the ACEC and critical habitat designations provide.

Borax Lake Road near the intersection with Borax Marsh Road would be improved as necessary to provide parking for visitors. Widening would not exceed 12 feet in width beyond the existing roadway. Parking spaces would not be marked.

Interpretive signs including a map would be installed in appropriate locations (to be determined by BLM, USFWS, ODFW, and TNC) near the fenceline describing the cultural, ecological, and geological features of the area.

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

Consideration of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) criteria for significance (40 CFR 1508.27), both with regard to context and intensity of impacts, is described below:

Context

The Proposed Action would have local impacts on affected interests, lands, and resources similar to and within the scope of those described and considered in the AMU/Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement (AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS). There would be no substantial broad societal or regional impacts not previously considered in the PRMP/FEIS.

Intensity

The CEQ's ten considerations for evaluating intensity (severity of effect):

1. Impacts that may be both beneficial and adverse. The EA considered potential beneficial and adverse effects. None of the effects are beyond the range of effects analyzed in the AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS.

ACECs

The Proposed Action would enhance protections already provided for under the ACEC designation by further restricting disturbance within the ACEC boundary. Vehicles and Off-Highway Vehicles (OHVs) are known to depart established trails within the ACEC. Installation of a fence that would limit vehicle use off traditional routes is expected to reduce the amount of disturbance caused by vehicle incursion into previously undisturbed areas.

Noxious Weeds and Invasive Nonnative Plant Species

By reducing the number of vehicles that access the shoreline of Borax Lake, the potential for weed invasion into the ACEC is expected to decrease. Enhancement and accelerated growth of riparian vegetation would increase competition for plant resources, and is likely to reduce extent and vigor of invasive weed infestation within the critical habitat. This may reduce the need for herbicide treatments as vigor and extent of the riparian plant community increases.

2

Migratory Birds

Some disturbance to resident birds could occur in the immediate vicinity of fence-building operations in the 1 to 2-week time period during which construction would be authorized. Nesting and rearing activity is not expected during construction. After initial disturbance of fence-building, the fence would provide additional singing and resting perches for migratory songbirds.

Migratory birds would benefit from the Proposed Action through the reduced disturbance and increased herbaceous and shrub cover for migratory birds resulting from the exclusion of vehicles from the area.

Access into the area would be for administrative purposes and by permit.

While the reduction in vehicle traffic is expected to reduce disturbance, the increase in foot traffic could increase disturbance in areas not previously or frequently disturbed. The risk of nest trampling would increase due to higher numbers of pedestrian traffic as visitors wishing to visit the lake would need to walk rather than drive to the lake shore.

Threatened and Endangered Species or Habitat

Threatened and Endangered Species present in the project are Borax Lake chub.

The installation of a fence prohibiting vehicle access to the lakeshore and installation of signs are key elements for the delisting of the Borax Lake chub from the Federal Endangered Species List as outlined in the USFWS's Recovery Plan for the Borax Lake Chub (1987). Both of these actions have been analyzed and are included in the Proposed Action.

Fence construction (Proposed Action) will not occur near Borax Lake. Where the construction would occur during the late summer chub are not expected to be present in Lower Borax Reservoir.

Wetlands, Riparian Zones, Water Quality, and Fisheries

In general, there are no specific riparian or fisheries concerns within the critical habitat, rather vehicle presence increases the risk of degradation and is the reason behind the preparation of this EA. In addition, the action proposed would limit the number of vehicles near the shoreline of Borax Lake reducing soil compaction and enhancing stabilizing vegetative cover thus meeting one of the objectives outlined in the Borax Lake Chub Recovery Plan.

3

Recreation and Visual Resources

The proposed fence would introduce a human-made linear feature into the landscape and would be clearly visible from Borax Lake Road. However, the fence would not dominate the view as seen from the road by the casual observer due to materials used and the design height.

Among the objectives of the Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class II category is to retain the existing character of the landscape. As a result of the Proposed Action, there will be fewer posts located in an area where a fence is more commonplace (on a roadside) and an existing fence would no longer be present; therefore, there would be a net improvement in the visual resource and VRM Class II objectives would continue to be met.

Transportation/Roads

Under the Proposed Action, Borax Marsh Road, the access road leading to Borax Lake from Borax Lake Road, would be closed to regular (unpermitted) traffic. As a result, visitors will be required to walk the remaining 0.4-mile from Borax Lake Road to the lake. While the reduced traffic would reduce vehicle impacts to the area including the narrowing of roads due to reduced use, an increase in pedestrian traffic could result in more trails being created to shorten distances between points of interest.

2. The degree to which the Proposed Action affects public health or safety. The Proposed Action involves the construction of a fence. Whereas this area is known to be used for OHV use, there exists the possibility that OHV operators could be involved in an accident with the fence. Considering the relatively small area associated with the project and the number of existing obstacles and indicators (fences and gates) present, incidents involving OHVs and the fence are not expected.

3. Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to historic or cultural resources, park lands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas. The area is within an ACEC designated to protect Borax Lake chub and 640 acres have been designated as critical habitat for the chub. The Proposed Action would provide protections for Borax Lake chub and its habitat as well as topographic components such as XXX by limiting vehicle access.

4. The degree to which effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly controversial. Controversy in this context means disagreement about the nature of the effects, not expressions of opposition to the Proposed Action or preference among the alternatives. No unique or appreciable scientific controversy has been identified regarding the effects of the Proposed Action or No Action Alternative.

4

5. Degree to which possible effects on the human environment are highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. The analysis has not shown there would be any unique or unknown risks to the human environment nor were any identified in the AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS to which this proposal is tiered.

6. Degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with significant impacts or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration. This project neither establishes a precedent nor represents a decision in principle about future actions.

7. Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts. The environmental analysis did not reveal any cumulative effects beyond those already analyzed in the AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS which encompasses the Borax Lake ACEC. The EA described the current state of the environment (Affected Environment by Resource, Chapter III) which included the effects of past actions. Continued recreation activities including hunting, bird watching, and camping are the only known Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions.

8. Degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures or objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. There are no features within the project area listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.

9. The degree to which the action may adversely affect a threatened or endangered species or its habitat. Borax Lake chub would not be adversely affected by the Proposed Action. The Proposed Action is to protect and enhance topographic components within the area in order to continue maintenance of the water level of Borax Lake necessary for the survival of the endangered Borax Lake chub.

10. Whether an action threatens a violation of Federal, State, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment. The Proposed Action and No Action Alternate do not threaten to violate any law. The Proposed Action is in compliance with the AMU Resource Management Plan/Record of Decision (RMP/ROD), which provides direction for the protection of the environment on public lands.

On the basis of the information contained in the EA and all other information available to me, it is my determination that:

1. The implementation of the Proposed Action or No Action Alternative will not have significant environmental impacts beyond those already addressed in the AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS (August 2004);

2. The Proposed Action and alternatives are in conformance with the AMU RMP/ROD;

3. There would be no adverse societal or regional impacts and no adverse impacts to affected interests; and

5

4. The environmental effects against the tests of significance found at 40 CFR 1508.27 do not constitute a major Federal action having a significant effect on the human environment.

Therefore, an EIS is not necessary and will not be prepared.

Joan M. Suther Date Andrews/Steens Resource Area Field Manager

6

BORAX LAKE CHUB HABITAT PROTECTION

FENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OR-08-026-096

Bureau of Land Management Burns District Office 28910 Hwy 20 West

Hines, Oregon 97738

January XX, 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter I. Purpose of and Need for Action .....................................................................................1

A. Introduction..........................................................................................................................1 B. Purpose of and Need for Action...........................................................................................3 C. Decision Framework ............................................................................................................4 D. Decision Factors...................................................................................................................4 E. Issues Considered but not Analyzed Further .......................................................................5 F. Conformance with Land Use Plans, Laws, Regulations and Policy ....................................5

Chapter II. Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action ................................................................5

A. No Action Alternative..........................................................................................................5 B. Proposed Action ...................................................................................................................6 C. Project Design Features .......................................................................................................6 D. Alternatives Considered but not Analyzed in Detail ...........................................................7

Chapter III. Affected Environmental and Environmental Consequences .......................................7

A. Identification of Affected Resources ...................................................................................7

1. Areas of Critical Environmental Concern................................................................9 2. Noxious Weeds ......................................................................................................10 3. Migratory Birds ......................................................................................................11 4. Threatened or Endangered Species – Fish .............................................................13 5. Wetlands and Riparian Zones ................................................................................14 6. Recreation ..............................................................................................................16

7. Transportation/Roads.............................................................................................17 8. Visual Resources ....................................................................................................18

B. Cumulative Effects Analysis ..............................................................................................19

Chapter IV. Consultation and Coordination .................................................................................20

A. List of Preparers.....................................................................................................20 B. Persons, Groups, and Agencies Consulted ............................................................21

References ................................................................................................................................21

BORAX LAKE CHUB HABITAT PROTECTION FENCE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

OR-08-026-096

CHAPTER I. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION

A. Introduction

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 provides the legislative authority for the management of species listed as threatened or endangered and further provides for the creation and maintenance of areas designated as critical habitat for these species. The ESA also mandates the creation of conservation plans for species determined to be threatened or endangered outlining potential threats to the species and describing physical changes or practices required for the restoration and ultimate delisting of species.

Borax Lake chub (Gila boraxobius), a Federal endangered species, is endemic to Borax Lake, Lower Borax Lake, and the connecting waterways (Map 1). The species has been protected by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) since an emergency listing in 1980 and subsequent formal listing in 1983. In response to the listing of the species, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), in 1983, designated 520 acres of public land surrounding Borax Lake as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC). In 1987, the USFWS designated 640 acres of the area surrounding Borax Lake as critical habitat under the ESA as a part of the Borax Lake Chub Conservation Plan to facilitate species recovery. Two 160-acre inholdings, encompassing the land surrounding Borax Lake and portions of the spring complex north of the lake, have been privately owned since their purchase in 1993 by The Nature Conservancy (TNC). Water rights for the lake were acquired in 1991 by the State of Oregon for the protection of the chub.

Commercial use of the lake can be dated back as far as 1898 with the extraction of mineral salts for the manufacture of borax. The operation closed in 1907 and only a few traces of the activity remain, most notably two evaporation tanks that lie to the west of the lake. Following the closing of the mine, the area was used for agricultural purposes (grazing and cultivating forage crops) due in part to the availability of water supplied by the lake. Some structures, including a headgate used to control water release from the reservoir southwest of the lake, remain visible. In 1993, the area was purchased by TNC, and permanently closed to grazing, and water diversion ceased following Oregon State's acquisition of the water right. The ACEC lies within Tule Springs grazing allotment and is also a part of Coyote Lake-Alvord-Tule Springs Herd Management Area for Federally protected wild horses; the ACEC is now essentially an exclosure within these areas.

Borax Lake is an 11-acre, spring-fed, natural lake located in the northern end of Pueblo Valley approximately 6 miles northeast of the town of Fields, Oregon, in southern Harney County. The lake is geothermally active and perched approximately 30 feet above the valley floor in a caldera made up of sediments (sinter) deposited by the spring that feeds the lake. The spring complex, including Borax Lake, is a part of a north-south fault line extending through Sections 11 and 14, T. 37 S., R. 33 E. The region surrounding the lake is predominantly flat, and slopes slightly southward with the high point in elevation being 4,081 feet along the edge of the lake. There is no perennial flow of overland water into the area. The lake is situated between Tule Springs Rim to the east and Steens Mountain fault scarp to the west. The entire area is within the Andrews Management Unit (AMU) of the Burns District, BLM.

The aquatic habitat within the ACEC is comprised of a complex of hot springs, pools, wetlands, and the human-made Lower Borax Reservoir all fed primarily from the overflow from Borax Lake and approximately 50 springs within the protected area. The surrounding wetlands are perennial with overflow draining toward the reservoir to the south of the lake and north and northeast of the lake, but lose their water into the ground within one-quarter mile of the lake. Each of these drainages supports a riparian community and chub have been observed in these outflows.

The bottom of Borax Lake is generally flat with a muddy bottom with mineral pedestals scattered throughout the northeast quadrant of the lake. The southwest quadrant is thick flocculent from the lake bottom to within about 1-foot of the surface. The regions between these quadrants are a mixture of the two environments. Overall, the depth of the lake averages 2 to 3 feet with the exception of the thermal vent, which has been estimated to be about 100 feet deep. Water temperatures of approximately 240 °F have been measured in the vent. Temperatures across the remainder of the lake range from 60 to 100 °F on the surface, varying seasonally and generally decreasing with distance from the vent.

The nature and geography of the lakes and wetlands makes the area an important resting spot for many migratory bird species. Borax Lake rarely freezes due to the high temperature and chemical composition of the hot spring, and the lower reservoir remains unfrozen well into the winter months, making the area a valuable year-round resource. The quality of this habitat is dependent on the lake remaining full and being allowed to overflow into the wetlands and lower lake.

The Proposed Action is to install a fence following Borax Lake Road within the boundary of the Borax Lake ACEC. The installation of this fence would eliminate regular motorized traffic from accessing the shore of Borax Lake, Lower Borax Lake Reservoir, the spring complex north of the lake, and the associated wetlands. A parking area would be created and interpretive signs would be installed to describe the historical, cultural, and ecological features of the area. The signs would be designed to fit the aesthetics of the area and placement would be at or near the proposed entry points.

2

B. Purpose of and Need for Action

The USFWS listed the Borax Lake chub primarily due to the limited amount and fragile nature of available habitat. Specifically, vehicle passage and human activity near Borax Lake were identified as being the activities that pose the greatest potential risk to the endangered chub and surrounding habitat (USFWS 1987). The purpose of the Proposed Action is to modify public access and enhance public understanding of the Borax Lake Area.

Borax Lake and surrounding springs are perched on a fragile crust formed by mineral and sediment (sinter) deposited by the springs. This crust is easily compacted which could result in channel formation which is visible on portions of Borax Marsh Road between the proposed gate and the lake. Increased erosion or loss of stabilizing vegetation could potentially breach the lakeshore reducing Borax Lake to a level making it untenable for the chub. Further, because the lake is elevated above the valley floor and receives no surface runoff, the wetlands and riparian area are dependent on Borax Lake remaining full with the outflow continually draining toward the vegetated areas. Therefore, the need is to protect and enhance these topographic components in order to continue maintenance of the water level of Borax Lake necessary for the survival of the endangered Borax Lake chub.

The lake has a long history of visitor access for its cultural, historical, and ecological value. Birdwatchers frequent the area to observe species, and many regional colleges and universities use the ecosystem as an educational site. Most recently, the lake has become increasingly known as a destination hot spring and camping area. Historically, visitors have rarely departed from established roads and trails, but any increase in visitors or a change in traditional accessibility could result in creation of new vehicle and foot routes as well as newly established camping sites. Vehicle traffic has been identified as a contributor to soil compaction and vegetation loss, as well as the most likely cause for a potential breach in the lake. Off-Highway Vehicles (OHVs) and vehicle tracks have been observed throughout the wetland areas and along the shore of the lower reservoir.

The AMU Resource Management Plan (AMU RMP) includes management direction for Borax Lake. Page RMP-37 states, "Permanent protection of Borax Lake chub critical habitat will be pursued through establishment of a Conservation Agreement or other cooperative agreement among the BLM, TNC, USFWS, ODFW, or other private landowners to manage and protect the area for the conservation or recovery of the species, including closing the area to livestock grazing, off-road travel, and limiting or closing vehicle access." In addition, three key elements were stated in the Borax Lake Chub Recovery Plan required for the delisting of the species: management of recreation and visitor use, provision of information and interpretation to the public, and restrictions on vehicle access near Borax Lake. In October 2007, a meeting was held in the Burns District Office between the involved agencies and the landowner (TNC). The outcome of this collaborative process was BLM would prepare appropriate National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents to analyze construction of a fence that meets objectives outlined in the Borax Lake Chub Recovery Plan and the AMU/RMP.

3

Additional Goals and Objectives

Maintain, restore, or improve riparian/wetland vegetation communities relative to ecological status, site potential and capability, or site-specific management objectives, and Transportation Plans (Vegetation, AMU RMP p. 24-25).

Conserve Special Status animal species and the ecosystems on which they depend (Special Status Species (SSS), AMU RMP p. 34-38).

Maintain, restore, or improve [fish and wildlife] habitat (Fish and Wildlife, AMU RMP p. 33).

Manage OHV and mechanized vehicle use in conformance to protect resource values (Transportation and Roads, AMU RMP p. 65).

Provide developed and undeveloped recreation opportunities, while protecting resources, to manage the increasing demand for resource dependent recreation activities (Recreation, AMU RMP p. 67).

Provide interpretive opportunities to visitors describing the ecologic, geologic, and anthropogenic history of the area (Cultural, AMU RMP p. 40).

Ensure the maintenance of water levels, flow, water temperatures, and other water quality parameters in Borax Lake within ranges deemed normal (Borax Lake Chub Habitat Management Plan p. 8).

C. Decision Framework

The Andrews/Steens Resource Area Field Manager is the responsible official who would decide which alternative analyzed in this document best meets the purpose and need for action based on interdisciplinary analysis presented in this Environmental Assessment (EA). Any decision will specify construction and materials specifications of the Proposed Action, and measures project design features intended to mitigate any environmental effects.

D. Decision Factors

Decision factors are additional questions or statements used by the decision maker to choose between alternatives that best meet project goals and resource objectives. These factors do not include satisfying legal mandates, which must occur under all alternatives. Rather, decision factors assess, for example, the comparative cost, applicability, or adaptability of the alternatives considered. The following decision factors will be relied upon by the Authorized Officer in selecting a course of action from the range of alternatives fully analyzed that best achieves the goals and objectives of the project:

Does the Proposed Action balance the need to protect relevant resources with the public's traditional access to Borax Lake's natural and cultural resources?

Does the Proposed Action meet Americans with Disability Act requirements providing access to visitors of special needs?

Does the action promote cost effectiveness?

4

E. Issues Considered but not Analyzed Further

The BLM's 1980 wilderness inventory decision found wilderness character not present on BLM-administered lands within the project area. In September 2002, BLM received information for a citizen proposed Wilderness Study Area (WSA), Alvord Lake Roadless Area, indicating that they had found wilderness character present. A BLM Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) completed the evaluation of the unit based on information from past wilderness characteristics inventories, current resource conditions and materials submitted by the citizen group. On August 3, 2003, the team found that the unit did not contain wilderness character. This finding was incorporated into the AMU RMP/Record of Decision (August 2005) and, therefore, will not be analyzed further.

F. Conformance with Land Use Plans, Laws, Regulations and Policy

The Proposed Action has been designed to conform to the following documents which provide the authority, framework, and guidance for the management of public lands within the Burns District:

National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347)1970 Endangered Species Act (1973) Federal Noxious Weed Act (U.S. Congress, Public Law 93-629) 1974 Federal Land Policy and Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1701) 1976 Public Rangelands Improvement Act (43 U.S.C. 1901) 1978 Recovery Plan for the Borax Lake Chub (USFWS 1987) Borax Lake Chub Habitat Management Plan (BLM 1987) Burns District Weed Management Plan EA (1998) Andrews Management Unit Resource Management Plan/Record of Decision (August

2005)

CHAPTER II. ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION

A. No Action Alternative

Under the No Action Alternative, a new fence would not be constructed, the road would not be widened, road closures and fence removal would not occur, and interpretive signs and gates would not be installed. Vehicle access would continue up to and around Borax Lake and toward the spring complex to the north. Road maintenance would continue as necessary.

5

B. Proposed Action

The Proposed Action is the removal of a 22,000-foot (3.9 miles) abandoned fence that predates the designation of the ACEC (BLM) and Borax Lake Chub Critical Habitat (USFWS) and the construction of approximately 3,500 feet of post and cable style fence following the east side of Borax Lake Road. The new fence would reutilize posts removed from the abandoned fence and ⅜-diameter cable. The posts are well weathered and blend well with the landscape making them not only an aesthetically suitable material, but would also reduce the cost of materials and transport.

Borax Marsh Road (1.75 miles) would be closed to unpermitted (other than landowner, administrative, or issued permit) vehicle traffic at the intersection of Borax Lake Road and Borax Marsh Road. Permits would be considered for persons with special needs such as handicapped visitors, agencies other than BLM conducting studies as well as approved academic research and studies. Pedestrian access points and a locking vehicle gate would be installed. The proposed fence would not replace the existing fence along the southwest corner of the ACEC boundary; rather the fence would augment protection provided by the existing fence. Work would be accomplished using hand and portable power tools for fence removal and construction. Trucks and trailers would be used to move material for construction. OHVs and trailers would be used to transport materials out of the ACEC during the fence removal phase of the project.

Borax Lake Road near the access point would be widened as necessary to provide parking for visitors although it is not expected the number of visitors at any given time would exceed the roadside parking capabilities the intersection currently provides. Widening would not exceed 12 feet in width beyond the existing roadway. The parking area, being incorporated into the road would not likely require materials to be imported and maintenance would occur along with regular road maintenance or as necessary based on use. Parking spaces would not be marked.

Interpretive signs describing the cultural, ecological, and geological features of the area would be installed in locations to be agreed upon by project collaborators (ODFW, TNC, USFWS, and BLM). Sign height would not exceed 4 feet and the location, in general, would be within feet of, or incorporated into, the proposed fence structure.

C. Project Design Features

The fences would be constructed to BLM specifications. The basic design would be a post and cable style fence using ⅜-diameter cable and posts (described in the Proposed Action) spaced at approximately 20 feet. Post height would be approximately 3.5 feet. Cable spacing would be 16 inches of separation from the top cable set approximately 6 inches from the top of the posts. Rock cribs would be used at corners and where there is a need for increased structural support to carry the diagonal load of the wire rope.

Construction would occur in the late summer or early fall to minimize impacts of working on moist soils and to avoid adverse effects on nesting birds.

6

If evidence is found of anything possibly of cultural importance, construction would be stopped until the District Archaeologist inspects the site and authorizes work to resume.

No blading, grading, or scalping of the fenceline would be allowed. Prior to final inspection, all construction trash and excess debris would be removed

from the public lands and disposed of at a site approved by the BLM Contracting Officer.

If any new populations of noxious weeds are found during the site-specific clearances for the project, they will be treated using the best available methods prior to instigating the project in conformance with the Burns District Weed Program Management EA/Decision Record OR-020-98-05.

The risk of noxious weed introduction would be minimized by ensuring all equipment (including all machinery, 4-wheelers, and pickup trucks) used for fence construction is cleaned prior to entry to the site, minimizing disturbance activities, and completing follow-up monitoring, for at least 3 years, to ensure no new noxious weed establishment.

Parking area (road widening) would be constructed to the same standard as existing road.

Signs would be designed and constructed to Department of the Interior standards and would set at a height of 3 to 4 feet above the ground such that they would not be readily visible.

All work would be conducted by BLM staff or contractors.

D. Alternatives Considered but not Analyzed in Detail

No other alternatives were considered.

CHAPTER III. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

A. Identification of Affected Resources

An IDT has reviewed and identified issues and resources affected by the Proposed Action or the No Action Alternative. The following table summarizes the results of that review. Affected resources are in bold.

Resources/Issues Status If Not Affected, why?

If Affected, Reference Applicable EA Section

Air Quality (Clean Air Act) Not

Affected Dust produced from construction activity would be unmeasurable.

American Indian Traditional Practices

Not Present

On September 30, 2007, the Borax Lake fenceline was surveyed. No archaeological resources would be impacted by the fence project.

ACECs Affected See Section III, B., 1.

Cultural Resources Not

Affected

On September 30, 2007, the Borax Lake fenceline was surveyed. No archaeological resources would be impacted by the fence project.

7


If Affected, Reference Applicable EA Section

Environmental Justice (Executive Order 12898)

Not Affected

The Proposed Action is not expected to have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations and low-income populations as such populations do not exist within the project area.

Flood Plains (Executive Order 13112)

Not Present

The Proposed Action does not involve occupancy and modification of flood plains, and would not increase the risk of flood loss.

Hazardous or Solid Waste Not

Present Noxious Weeds (Executive Order 13112)

Affected See Section III, B., 2.

Paleontological Resources Not

Present

Prime or Unique Farmlands Not

Present Migratory Birds (Executive Order 13186)

Affected See Section III, B., 3.

Wildlife/ Threatened or Endangered (T/E) Species or Habitat

Fish Affected See Section III, B., 4.

Wildlife Not

Present

No Federal T/E fauna species are known or suspected to occur in the project area.

Plants Not

Present No Federal T/E plant species are known or suspected to occur in the project area.

Wildlife/BLM SSS and Habitat

Fish Not

Present

Borax Lake chub are the only fish species present in the project area. Resource concerns are addressed in the Threatened and Endangered species section of this EA. No fish-bearing streams are in the project area, and no SSS fish species are found in Borax Lake.

Wildlife Not

Affected

Nesting population of western snowy plover (Charandrius alexandrinus) are known to nest in the area of Borax Lake. Most nesting/brood rearing in this area occurs approximately 0.5-mile northeast of Borax Lake and at least 1-mile from the proposed fenceline. Timing of project construction after snowy plover nesting season would reduce disturbance to none. pygmy rabbit – Not Present. There are no historical sightings

within the Borax Lake Area. The project area does not contain the following combination of habitat features which would make it suitable pygmy rabbit habitat: No seeding or recent fire; > 23% big sagebrush cover; > 40-inch deep soil with sandy loam or loamy sand surface texture; < 40-inch deep soil with loamy subsoil, and; historical plant community had big sagebrush and basin wildrye (Bartels 2003).

Plants Not

Present

Botanical surveys at six sites were conducted from 2004 to 2006. No BLM Special Status plant species were detected, or are any suspected to occur based on known habitat associations.

Water Quality (Surface and Ground)

Not Affected

There are no perennial streams in the ACEC. Borax Lake is fed from a geothermal hot spring; water quality is dependent on subsurface elements.

Wetlands/Riparian Zones (Executive Order 11990)

Affected See Section III, B.,5.

Wild and Scenic Rivers Not

Present

8


If Affected, Reference Applicable EA Section Wilderness/WSAs Not

Present

Grazing Management Not

Present The Borax Lake ACEC is closed to grazing. Fences and gates are monitored annually for structural integrity and defects immediately repaired.

Recreation Affected See Section III, B., 6. Transportation/Roads Affected See Section III, B., 7.

Vegetation Not

Affected Visual Resources Affected See Section III, B., 8.

Social and Economic Values

Not Affected

There would be no measurable effects to social and economic values associated with the Proposed Action. See Visual Resources and Recreation.

Soils and Biological Soil Crusts (BSCs)

Not Affected

The crustal nature of the area is primarily chemical in nature as opposed to biological. The soil horizons would remain virtually unchanged by fence installation.

Wildlife Not

Affected

The ACEC lies within a bighorn sheep migration corridor. Bighorn sheep currently negotiate the existing barbed wire fence to be removed, and should have no problems negotiating the new fence which is less restrictive to wildlife movement due to the lower height of the fence and fewer wires (two proposed versus four currently). The cable used would not be as tightly strung as the existing barbed wire fence.

1. Areas of Critical Environmental Concern

Current discussion and analysis of potential effects to the ACEC are tiered to the AMU/Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement (AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS) (August 2004), and relevant information contained in the following sections is incorporated by reference: Section 3.21 p. 3-67.

Affected Environment

The Borax Lake ACEC is a 520-acre area designated in 1983 for the protection of the Borax Lake chub and its habitat.

Environmental Consequences

No Action

Under the No Action Alternative the ACEC would remain unchanged.

9

Proposed Action

Under the Proposed Action, the fenceline defining the ACEC would not be changed. The fence described under the Proposed Action would be constructed in addition to the existing fence and consequently would enhance ecological protections provided by the ACEC designation by further limiting disturbance.

2. Noxious Weeds

Current discussion and analysis of potential effects to noxious weeds are tiered to the AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS (August 2004), and relevant information contained in the following sections is incorporated by reference: Sections 3.5.5, p. 3-17 and 4.5.6, p. 4-60.


The Federal Noxious Weed Act of 1974, as amended, provides for the control and management of noxious weeds defined as "a plant which is of foreign origin, is new to, or is not widely prevalent in the United States, and can directly or indirectly injure crops, other useful plants, livestock, or the fish and wildlife resources of the United States or the public health" (U.S. Congress, Public Law 93-629).

Noxious weeds have the ability to outcompete native vegetation and can change ecosystem conditions and processes. Forage values, plant species diversity, and soil stability decrease when noxious weeds become established (USDA 1999). Currently, there are no known noxious weed populations within the Borax Lake ACEC.

The amount of vehicle traffic at Borax Lake is increasing (BLM 2003). Vehicle traffic increases the potential for the introduction of noxious weeds. Nearly two-thirds of the Borax Lake shoreline is accessible to vehicular traffic and other roadways lead to the hot springs to the north of the lake. While OHV traffic is not authorized off existing trails, there are no physical limitations (other than the lake and wetlands) preventing intrusion into areas not designated for vehicular traffic, putting the lake shore at risk for noxious weed invasion. Historically, there has been a small population of Tamarisk (Tamarisk ramosissima) approximately 2 miles north of the ACEC as well as a population of Perennial pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium) approximately 2.5 miles to the south. These sites are currently weed free but are monitored on a regular basis to prevent reestablishment. To the west of the ACEC, East Steens Road has a variety of noxious weed species growing alongside the road. All weed sites are monitored and treated on an annual basis.

10


No Action Alternative

Vehicle undercarriages serve as collection points for seeds and are commonly associated with the importation of noxious weeds. Under the No Action Alternative, vehicle access would continue up to and around Borax Lake. The potential for introduction of noxious weeds would remain.

Proposed Action

Under the Proposed Action, vehicle access within the critical habitat would be limited to Borax Lake Road. Traffic across Borax Marsh Road would be restricted to administrative access and permitted visitors reducing the likelihood of establishment of noxious weed populations on the road near the lake and wetlands.

Along the shoreline, enhancement and accelerated growth of riparian vegetation would increase competition for plant resources, and is likely to reduce introductions of new weeds and the extent and vigor of existing invasive weed infestations. This may reduce the need for herbicide treatments as vigor and extent of the riparian plant community increases.

3. Migratory Birds

Current discussion and analysis of potential effects to migratory birds are tiered to the AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS (August 2004), and relevant information contained in the following sections is incorporated by reference: Sections 3.6.2.5, 3.6.2.6 p. 3-22 and 4.7.2.2, p. 4-99.


More than 50 species of birds have been observed in the Borax Lake marshlands and adjacent desert scrub areas. One species is a species of special concern; Western snowy plover. (Charandrius alexandrinus).

Riparian areas in western North America have been categorized as centers of avian diversity (Miller 2007), and are considered to be priority habitats for landbird conservation efforts within the Columbia Plateau Bird Conservation Region (Altman 2001). The climate in the southern Alvord Basin and northern Pueblo Valley offers few opportunities for the formation and maintenance of suitable open water resting spots for migratory birds. During the winter, Borax Lake does not freeze over and the decrease in evaporation allows the reservoir and wetlands to saturate and fill making the area an important year-round water source for birds.

11

For most riparian-associated bird species, presence or absence is dependent on the complexity and density of vegetation at the site, especially in the shrub and herbaceous layers (Dobkin 1994). In a fully functioning perennial wetland, migratory bird nest distribution tends to extend throughout the wetland area; however, in wetlands that have lost their water source, nesting patterns moved inward toward the water source. Increased concentration of nests, combined with reduced cover has been shown to increase predation on nesting migratory birds.

Vehicle traffic has been identified as a contributor to soil compaction and vegetation loss, as well as the most likely cause for a breach in the lake. Vehicle use in the Borax Lake ACEC is increasing. OHV and vehicle tracks have been observed throughout the wetland areas and along the shore of the lower reservoir. These areas comprise a large portion of the nesting and rearing habitat, and for several months of the year expose eggs and juvenile birds to the potential for being crushed or displaced by vehicles.


No Action

Under the No Action Alternative vehicles would continue to transit nearby and park in close proximity to Borax Lake. Disturbance to migratory birds would continue and soil compaction along with the resulting vegetation loss would continue to limit the potential of the site for migratory bird species as cover and nesting habitat.

Proposed Action

The Proposed Action would reduce vehicular traffic allowing native riparian vegetation to improve in both density and vigor, thus increasing the available quality aquatic and vegetative habitat for birds within the area. While the Proposed Action would likely reduce disturbance to nesting migratory birds by reducing vehicle noise and ground vibration, human presence on foot trails (and creation of new trails) could increase throughout the avian nesting and rearing habitat potentially resulting in increased mortality of juvenile migratory birds.

The proposed fence would follow an existing road that is not wetland or heavily vegetated where limited nesting opportunities for bird species exist. There would be few, if any, direct impacts to migratory bird nesting/resting habitat. To minimize indirect effects, project design features require fence construction to occur during late summer and fall. Egg laying would have been completed by the beginning of construction, which would limit disturbance to ground and shrub-nesting birds. After construction, fences would provide additional singing and resting perches for migratory songbirds.

12

4. Threatened or Endangered Species - Fish

Current discussion and analysis of potential effects to fish are tiered to the AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS (August 2004), and relevant information contained in the following sections is incorporated by reference: Section 3.6.1 p. 3-18, 3.7.3.3 p. 3-33.


Borax Lake chub have been described as a dwarf species of Alvord chub (Gila alvordensis) believed to have been geographically isolated during the Pliocene era. Adults average in size between 1 to 1.5 inches however, some fish have been observed as large as 4 inches (Scheerer and Jacobs 2007). The average lifespan of chub is believed to be about 1-year, but a few individuals have been recorded at age 10, most of the older fish were females (Scoppettone et al. 1995). The chub are endemic to Borax Lake and are the only fish species known to inhabit the lake having adapted to the high temperatures and high alkalinity (7.4pH) of the water. The critical thermal temperature of the Borax Lake chub is approximately 91 °F (Williams and Bond 1983).

The water temperature of Borax Lake varies seasonally and by distance to the vent where input temperatures are in excess of 100°F. Outward from the vent near the lake margins, water temperature cools to approximately 75-85 °F. The lake bottom is approximately 2 to 3 feet deep and predominantly flat with mineral pedestals in the northeast quadrant of the lake. The bottom tapers slightly from the northeast margins of the lake toward the vent that supplies water to the lake. Chub use of the habitat appears to focus in the north and eastern shores where the mineral pedestals are present and appears to fluctuate with respect to water temperature with the population migrating seasonally toward the cooler more shallow margins of the lake during the summer months (Scoppettone 1995). Juveniles are prominent during May-June and are generally found in shallow coves and along margins of Borax Lake and are rarely seen in the deeper, warmer portions of the lake (USFWS 1987). The fish are known to transit into pools and wetlands formed from the outflow of Borax Lake.

Population estimations have been performed intermittently since 1986 involving several agencies and differing methodologies. Early data show abundance as high as 34,000 and as low as 8,000 fish. However, later studies performed by Williams and McDonald (2003) and ODFW (2005-2009) indicate the population of chub is stable at approximately 11,000 fish. In addition, the ODFW data are comparable to previously collected and assessed data (Scheerer and Jacobs 2006) further substantiating chub abundance is stable.

13


No Action

Under the No Action Alternative, vehicles would continue to have access to the lakeside and remain a threat to the stability of the shore and associated vegetation. The threat of a breach of the lake shore would remain. The reduction in the volume of habitat of the chub could allow the hot spring inputs to increase the average temperature of the lake. Simultaneously, available chub habitat would be reduced forcing the chub toward the remaining water near the vent where the fish would likely succumb because of high temperatures and overcrowding.

Proposed Action

The installation of a fence prohibiting vehicle access to the lake shore and installation of signs are key elements for the delisting of the Borax Lake chub from the Federal Endangered Species List as outlined in the USFWS's Recovery Plan for the Borax Lake Chub (1987).

The Proposed Action would limit the number of vehicles accessing the banks of the lake to administrative, scientific, educational, and handicapped use. This would limit compaction and soil degradation identified as a threat to bank stability and potential catastrophic loss of water from Borax Lake, as well as reduce potential for vehicular fluid contamination of the soil and surface water.

Construction of the fence is not expected to have any adverse effects on Borax Lake chub. The nearest point of the proposed fence is a minimum of 700 feet from the nearest point of Borax Lake and further, where the lake is topographically elevated above the project area. There exists no threat of construction debris or sediment entering the lake.

Lower Borax Reservoir is downslope from the proposed fence; therefore, the Proposed Action is not expected to result in ground disturbance sufficient to have any measurable impacts to the reservoir. The timing of the construction (late summer) is planned such that the water level in the reservoir is expected to be at its lowest point and chub are not expected to be present beyond those areas where surface water is considered perennial.

5. Wetlands and Riparian Zones

Current discussion and analysis of potential effects to wetlands and riparian zones are tiered to the AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS (August 2004), and relevant information contained in the following sections is incorporated by reference: Sections 3.5.1, p. 3-11 and 4.5.2, p. 4-31.

14


Overall health of wetland and riparian vegetation is directly tied to the level and output of Borax Lake. Water availability is a limiting factor across the entire Alvord Basin region making the constant and regulated flow from Borax Lake an important component in maintenance of the riparian area within the ACEC. Riparian habitat consists of vegetative communities near the lakeshore and wet meadows on the southwest and northeast edges of the lake.

The riparian community existing along the lake shore is comprised primarily of Hairgrass dropseed (Sporobolous airoides), western centaury (Centaurium exaltatum), alkali birds beak (Cordylanthus canescens), and Great basin wildrye (Elymus cineseus). The wetland areas are dominated by rush communities including Olney's bulrush (Scirpus olney), beaked spikerush (Elocharis rostellata), and squared bulrush (Scirpus nevadensis). The riparian plant communities exist in narrow bands reflecting differences in soil chemistry and available water in which they grow. Overall, plant communities appear diverse, but each species is dependent on specific conditions, as evidenced by the banding of the communities.

Woody riparian species are not present.

Data collected during the period when the lake was used for irrigation show Lower Borax Reservoir and connecting wetlands have completely dried during the warmer months when the lake level had been reduced by as little as 1-foot. These wetland areas provide habitat for macroinvertebrate species as vascular plants required for many macroinvertebrate species are nonexistent in the lake and minimal at the margins (USFWS 1987). Borax Lake chub are opportunistic feeders utilizing macro invertebrates as a part of their diet. Wetlands that have dried for as few as 10 days can kill the majority of present macro-invertebrate species (Stanley et al. 1994), thus any reduction of quality breeding habitat for macroinvertebrate species would limit the feeding opportunities for chub.



Under the No Action Alternative, riparian and wetland community conditions would likely remain static.

Proposed Action

Under the Proposed Action, no unauthorized vehicles would be permitted near the lake or reservoir, and only permitted parties would be allowed vehicle access near the riparian area. Pedestrian access would remain unrestricted.

15

Historically, most campers observed at the lake set up camp near their vehicles. With this option no longer being available, there is a greater potential for degradation of riparian communities as recreationists migrate by foot into new sections of critical habitat in search of seclusion.

6. Recreation

Current discussion and analysis of potential effects to recreation management are tiered to the AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS (August 2004), and relevant information contained in the following sections is incorporated by reference: Section 3.20.1 p. 3-64.


Borax Lake has a long history of recreational use. Cultural, historic, and ecological values have made Borax Lake a destination for many recreationists. The diverse forms of recreation occurring in the ACEC include the use of the area in its entirety. Historically, parking and camping have occurred on the west to north edge of the lake where the ground is relatively flat and dry. Trails surround the lake and can be found leading to adjacent pools and wetlands.

Borax Lake is also becoming increasingly known as a recreational hot spring. Several online recreational Websites describe Borax Lake as being a destination type hot spring, some erroneously describing the site as being publicly owned.


No Action

Under the No Action Alternative, recreationists would continue to have vehicular access on and around the ACEC.

Proposed Action

The Proposed Action would limit vehicular traffic into the ACEC beyond the proposed fence. Pedestrian traffic would continue to be permitted to and around the lake. Gear and equipment would have to be hand carried from the proposed entry point. This may lead to the creation of new trails within the area to facilitate passage to the visitors' desired destination. Further, the inconvenience of having to hand carry articles in and out of the ACEC might increase the amount of litter left behind by visitors. Interpretative signage may be used to better define acceptable pedestrian routes and may enhance a visitors experience through a better understanding of the uniqueness and character of the area.

16

Vehicle restrictions may facilitate a change in activities in the region or the same activities in new areas, an example being the creation of camping spots closer to the parking area or in areas not used previously.

7. Transportation/Roads


Borax Marsh Road connects Borax Lake with Borax Lake Road over a distance of approximately 1,925 feet. The road continues across TNC-owned land and again crosses another 1,509 feet of BLM-administered land. The road is unimproved and unmaintained. There is a northern outlet beyond the spring area but generally the road serves only to allow vehicles in and out of Borax Lake.

Borax Lake Road originates off Powerline Road from the south and the Fields-Denio Road from the west; these roads are open to the public. Powerline Road and Borax Lake Road are identified within the AMU RMP as nonpaved improved roads. Typically, these roads are passable by high clearance vehicles and are maintained as needed. Seasonal closure or other restrictions may be needed to meet resource objectives or because of snow levels or other wet weather conditions. Grading is conducted as necessary to correct drainage problems.



There would be no change to the current situation. The public would have continued access to and around the critical habitat area. Road maintenance would continue on an as-needed basis.

Proposed Action

Under the Proposed Action, a gate would be installed and locked at the intersection of Borax Lake Road and Borax Marsh Road thus closing access to the lake to unpermitted traffic. A pedestrian gate would be installed adjacent to the vehicle gate. Maintenance on Borax Marsh Road would be performed only on an as-needed basis to allow administrative, landowner, and permitted traffic and for public safety and resource protection.

Borax Lake Road would continue to follow its existing path leading to and away from the access road, and a portion of the road near the access point would be widened to facilitate visitor parking.

17

8. Visual Resources

Current discussion and analysis of potential effects to visual resources are tiered to the AMU/CMPA PRMP/FEIS (August 2004), and relevant information contained in the following sections is incorporated by reference: Sections 3.11, p. 3-38 and 4.11, p. 4-149.


The proposed project is in a Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class II category. The objective of this category is to retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of change to the characteristic landscape should be low. Management activities may be seen but should not attract the attention of the casual observer. Any changes must repeat the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture found in the predominant natural features of the characteristic landscape.



No changes to visual resources would occur.

Proposed Action

The proposed fence would follow an existing road (a common placement for fencing in the region) and would not seem out of place in the regional environment. Wooden posts reused from a 3.9-mile existing (abandoned) fence have taken on a color that blends with the existing terrain and would not be a dominate feature on the landscape. Among the objectives of the VRM Class II category is to retain the existing character of the landscape. As a result of the Proposed Action, there will be fewer posts located in the critical habitat; therefore, there would be a net improvement in the visual resource and VRM Class II objectives would continue to be met.

The cable used for the project would be ⅜-diameter steel. Initially the cable would be shiny, but due to the corrosive nature of the soils in the area the shine could be expected to shift to an oxidized gray within 1 to 2 years. In time the cable would become brown due to rust. The cable would be expected to blend into the surrounding area in a manner consistent with other features commonly found in the area.

Rock cribs would be installed as necessary; however, their use would be minimal. Materials would be similar in color to the local geological features. Wire used in crib construction could be expected to oxidize, becoming less visible within 2 years.

18

Signs installed would be set at a height not to exceed the height of the fence and placement would likely be lower. Sign color would be consistent with the landscape and is not expected to stand out as an identifiable feature beyond 15 to 20 feet.

There would be some ground and vegetation disturbance associated with the fence construction phase of the Proposed Action. This disturbance would consist of slight trampling or OHV tracks along a 3,500-foot strip not expected to exceed 10 feet in width. Vegetation removal is not expected to be necessary with the exception of vegetation where a post would be located. The ground disturbance associated with construction would become less evident within a few months as wind and rain restore the natural texture to the ground following construction activities. Areas to be widened for parking already exist as wide areas in the road and further widening would likely not be apparent. Blading, grading, or scalping of the fenceline would not be permitted. Any vegetative disturbance is expected to be unnoticeable within 1 to 2 years.

B. Cumulative Effects Analysis

As the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), in guidance issued on June 24, 2005, points out, the "environmental analysis required under NEPA is forward-looking," and review of past actions is required only "to the extent this review informs agency decision-making regarding the Proposed Action." Use of information on the effects on past action may be useful in two ways according to the CEQ guidance. One is for consideration of the Proposed Action's cumulative effects, and secondly as a basis for identifying the Proposed Action's effects.

The CEQ stated in this guidance that "[g]enerally, agencies can conduct an adequate cumulative effects analysis by focusing on the current aggregate effects of past actions without delving into the historical details of individual past actions." This is because a description of the current state of the environment inherently includes the effects of past actions. The CEQ guidance specifies that the "CEQ regulations do not require the consideration of the individual effects of all past actions to determine the present effects of past actions." Our information on the current environmental condition is more comprehensive and more accurate for establishing a useful starting point for a cumulative effects analysis, than attempting to establish such a starting point by adding up the described effects of individual past actions to some environmental baseline condition in the past that, unlike current conditions, can no longer be verified by direct examination.

The second area in which the CEQ guidance states that information on past actions may be useful is in "illuminating or predicting the direct and indirect effects of a Proposed Action." The usefulness of such information is limited by the fact that it is anecdotal only, and extrapolation of data from such singular experiences is not generally accepted as a reliable predictor of effects.

19

However, "experience with and information about past direct and indirect effects of individual past actions" have been found useful in "illuminating or predicting the direct and indirect effects" of the Proposed Action in the following instances: the basis for predicting the effects of the Proposed Action and its alternatives is based on the general accumulated experience of the resource professionals in the agency with similar actions.

The environmental consequences discussion described all expected effects including direct, indirect and cumulative on resources from enacting the proposed alternatives. Direct and indirect effects plus past actions become part of the cumulative effects analysis; therefore, use of these words may not appear. The EA described the current state of the environment (Affected Environment by Resource, Chapter III) which included the effects of past actions. In addition, the Introduction Section of this EA, specifically the Purpose of and Need for Action, identifies past actions creating the current situation.

Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions (RFFA), also relevant to cumulative effects, include those Federal and non-Federal activities not yet undertaken, but sufficiently likely to occur, that a Responsible Official of ordinary prudence would take such activities into account in reaching a decision. These Federal and non-Federal activities that must be taken into account in the analysis of cumulative impact include, but are not limited to, activities for which there are existing decisions, funding, or proposals identified by the bureau. These RFFAs must fall within the geographic scope and timeframe of the analysis being prepared. Continued recreation activities including hunting, bird watching, and camping are the only known RFFAs.

CHAPTER IV. CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

A. List of Preparers

Daryl Bingham, Natural Resource Specialist (Project Lead, Primary Author) (Fisheries, Riparian, and Water Quality) Louis Clayburn, Range Management Specialist Stephen Dowlan, Natural Resource Specialist (ACEC, Vegetation, BSCs , SS-Flora) Michelle Franulovich, Recreation and Visual Resource Management Eric Haakenson, Outdoor Recreation Planner (Wilderness) Rhonda Karges, District Planning and Environmental Coordinator (Social and Economics) Doug Linn, Botanist (Vegetation, Soils, BSCs, SS-Flora) Caryn Meinicke, Weed Specialist Jana Mort, Range Management Specialist Matt Obradovich, Wildlife Biologist (SSS-Animals, Migratory Birds, Wildlife) Scott Thomas, District Archaeologist

20

B. Persons, Groups, and Agencies Consulted

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon Natural Desert Association The Nature Conservancy U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

References

Altman, B. (2001): Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in the Columbia Plateau of Eastern Oregon and Washington, Version 1.0. Prepared for Oregon-Washington Partners in Flight.

BLM (2003): Borax Lake Visitor Study. Unpublished Data. Hines, Oregon.

BLM (2009): GIS Map: Borax Lake Chub Habitat Protection Fence.

BLM (2009): GIS Map: Borax Lake Chub Habitat Protection Fence.

Dobkin, D.S. (1994): Community composition and habitat affinities of riparian birds on the Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge, 1991-1993. Final report submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1, Office of Migratory Birds, Portland, OR.

Miller, J.R. et al. (2003): Effects of Human Settlement on Bird Communities in Lowland Riparian Areas of Colorado. Ecological Applications. Pp 1041-1059. Ecological Society of America, Washington D.C. 2007.

Scheerer, P.D.; Jacobs, S.E. (2006): Borax Lake Chub Investigations. Fish Research Project E-2-40 and supplement, Annual Progress Report, Corvallis. 16 p.

Scheerer, P.D.; Jacobs, S.E. (2007): Borax Lake Chub Investigations. Fish Research Project E-2-41 Annual Progress Report, Corvallis. 13 p.

Scoppettone, G.G.; Rissler, P.H.; Nielsen, B.; Grader, M. (1995): Life history and habitat use of Borax Lake chub (Gila boraxobius Williams and Bond) with some information on the Borax Lake ecosystem. U.S. Geological Survey, Northwest Biological Science Center, Reno, Nevada.

Stanley, E.H.; Buschman, D.L.; Boulton, A.J.; Grimm, N.B.; Fisher, S.G. (1994): Invertebrate resistance and resilience to intermittency in a desert stream. American Midland Naturalist 131, 288-300.

U.S. Congress. (1974): Federal Noxious Weed Act, Public Law 93-629. (7 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.; 88 Stat. 2148). January 3, 1975.

21

USDA Forest Service. (1999): Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness- Noxious Weed Treatments Environmental Impact Statement. Intermountain and Northern Regions. Bitterroot, Nez Perce, Payette, and Salmon-Challis National Forests.

USFWS (1987): Recovery Plan for the Borax Lake Chub, Gila Boraxobius. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 57 pp. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/060619.pdf

Williams, J.E.; Bond, C.A. (1983): Status and Life History Notes on the Native Fishes of the Alvord Basin, Oregon and Nevada.

Williams, J.E.; MacDonald, C.A. (2003): A review of the conservation status of the Borax Lake chub, an endangered species. A final report to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland Oregon. Submitted by: Southern Oregon University, Ashland, Oregon.

22

http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/060619.pdf

borax lake chub habitat protection fence environmental assessment

Documents