Environmental Assessment

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES CHAPTER 3
Implementation of proposed vegetation and fuel reduction treatments within the EFR boundaries would
be expected to result in no directly measurable change in OHV use or use patterns under either alternative
because such use is already restricted to designated routes (roads and trails). Removal of vegetation or
other natural forest debris that currently limits or prevents off-route travel would be expected to result in
at least some increase unauthorized use such as traveling off designated routes. This risk would be
minimized by implementing the mitigation measures that retain existing vegetation and forest debris or
replace vegetation and/or debris with suitable native materials upon completion of management activities.
Opine Outside of EFR OHV Area
Alternative 1: There would be no change to the existing use or use patterns within the EVR OHV area.
Alternatives 2 and 3: Outside of the EFR area, there are no designated routes (roads or trails), facilities,
structures, or infrastructure specifically dedicated to OHV activities. Therefore, vegetation management
and fuel reduction treatments proposed under Alternatives 2 and 3 would have no direct or indirect these
types of improvements or infrastructure.
Closures imposed during periods of management activities would likely eliminate motorized use in areas
beyond the closure and could potentially trap or otherwise isolate users and not allow them legal access to
legal roads. This could be reasonably expected to result in an increase in unauthorized use, particularly
cross-country travel or riding on undesignated roads or trails, during periods of closure.
The closure and decommissioning of system roads outside of the EFR system would impact motorized
use and activity in this area. All the roads proposed for closure and decommissioning under both
Alternatives 2 and 3 are maintenance level 2 roads. The identified road segments are, in general, short,
dead-end segments that provide no through access or are connectors that are duplicated by other roads
providing access to the same area. Non-street legal OHVs are expected to feel the brunt of these closures
and decommissioning because these are the classes of road that is open to this group of OHVs outside of
shared use roads. There are currently no shared use roads identified in this portion of the planning area
and none are proposed under either action alternative.
A December 1 st through March 31 st seasonal closure of roads and motorized trails in the MA-7 land
allocation would be implemented under Alternative 3, but not Alternative 2. The expected impacts on
OHV use would be similar to that described under the EFR OHV area discussion under both alternatives.
Implementation of vegetation and fuel treatments in the area outside of the EFR OHV area would be
expected to result in an increase in OHV use. Burning or mowing dense brush fields that currently limit
or prevent OHV use has the potential of opening new areas to such use. Of particular concern would be
the development of new hill climbs that increase the amount of exposed soils and subsequent erosion.
The risk and potential is also reduced under both alternatives through the implementation of the
mitigation measures.
Socio-Economic
Alternative 1: There would be no change to the existing use of the project area.
Alternatives 2 and 3: There is no available information that indicates the level of OHV use in this
portion of the planning area so it is impossible to determine how many users would be affected by the
area closure. The presence of non-designated roads and trails coupled with communications between
riders and the District OHV specialists suggests that this portion of the planning area is used and that
those users would be displaced to other areas that lack restrictions. Although some users would likely
move to designated areas such as EFR, others would be expected to move to areas further to the south
3-76