
Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service

Responsible Official: Jack Isaacs, District Ranger, Soda Springs, Idaho.

Document author and information contact: Glenn Lackey, ID Team Leader, 208-547-4356.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities

on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status,

familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs,

reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program.

(Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative

means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact

USDAs TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination,

write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C.

20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202)720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity

provider and employer.


Table of Contents

Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need………………………………………………….…………...4

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………...4

Project Area, Maps and Photos…………..…………………………………………………4

Existing Condition………………………………………………………………………….8

Purpose and Need…………………………………………………………………………..9

Proposed Action……………………………………………………………………………9

Decision to be Made…………………………………………………………………….….9

Forest Plan Direction…………………………………………………………………….…9

Public Involvement………………………………………………………………………..10

Identification of Issues…………………………………………………………………….10

Resource Areas not carried through the Analysis………………………………..……….10

Chapter 2 - Alternatives………………………………………………………….…………12

Development of the Alternatives………………………………………………………….12

Alternatives Eliminated from Further Study……………………………………………...12

Alternatives Considered in Detail………………………………………………………....12

Identification of the Preferred Alternative………………………………………………...12

Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences………………….13

Key Issues………………………………………………………………………………… 13

Issue 1) - Caribou City Roadless Area………………………………………….…………13

Effects Analysis - Caribou City Inventoried Roadless Area………………………….…...13

Issue 2) - Recommended Wilderness……………………………………………………...15

Effects Analysis - Recommended Wilderness………………………………………….....15

Summary of Effects to Roadless and Rec. Wilderness…......................………………. …17

Issue 3) - Scenery Management……..……………………………………………….…. ..17

Effects Analysis - Scenery...…………………………………………………………… ...19

Summary of Effects to Scenery……………………………………………………….….. 20

Mitigation and Design Features…………………………………………………………...21

Issue 4) - Wildlife and Rare Plants……………………...………………………….……..22

Effects Analysis - Wildlife………………………………………………………………...22

Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination………………………………………………24

Interdisciplinary Team Members

Consultants

Summary of Scoping and Public Involvement

References…………………………………………………………………………..…..….. .25

Appendix A - Map of Recommended Wilderness………………………………………... 26

Appendix B - Map of Proposed Site Boundaries……………………………………...…. .27

Appendix C - Response to Comments………………………………….……….………… 28


Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need

Introduction The Forest Service has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) in compliance with the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant Federal and State laws and regulations. This

Environmental Assessment discloses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts that

would result from the proposed action and alternatives. This EA is prepared according to the format

established by Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500-

1508).

The interdisciplinary team (IDT) used a systematic approach for analyzing the proposal and the

alternatives to it, estimating the environmental effects, and preparing this EA. The planning process

complies with NEPA and the CEQ regulations.

Additional documentation, including more detailed analyses of project area resources, may be found in

the project planning record located at the Caribou-Targhee National Forest, Soda Springs Ranger District,

410 E. Hooper Avenue, Soda Springs, ID 83276. These records are available for public review.

The document is organized into four parts:

Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need Explains the purpose and need for the proposed action and identifies the issues driving the

environmental analysis.

Chapter 2 - Alternatives Describes and compares the project alternatives and summarizes the environmental consequences

by issue.

Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Describes the natural and human environments potentially affected by the proposed action and

alternatives and discloses potential effects.

Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination The list of preparers and references. This EA incorporates documented analyses by

summarization and reference where appropriate.

Project Area, Maps and Photos The project is located within the existing, designated communication site on Lower Black Mountain in

Bonneville County. Legal Description - T. 4 S, R. 45 E, section 1. The designated site is 1 acre in size.

The site is approximately 7 miles southwest of Alpine Junction, Wyoming, and is located on the boundary

between the Soda Springs and Palisades Ranger Districts.

(See maps and photos on pages 5-8)


Red circle is the Black Mountain Communication Site (on Lower Black Mountain).

Shaded area to the west is the Soda Springs RD, and east is the Palisades RD.


Lower Black Mountain - the existing designated electronic communication site.

(green dot) is where Teton Communications proposes to construct a building and tower.


View of Communication Site from the north on ATV Trail #004

Access road (also Trail #004) just south of the Communication Site


The Silver Star building and towers are currently the only structures on the site.

Teton Communications - proposed building and tower location, looking west at Bald Mountain and

Caribou Mountain in the distance. This location is approximately 170 feet below (and west of) Silver Star.

Existing Condition Lower Black Mountain was designated as a Communication Site in the Caribou Forest and Resource

Management Plan (Revised February 2003). The Black Mountain Site was first used for communication

purposes in the 1980s. Management of the Site is guided by the Black Mountain Communications Site

Management Plan (2004). The purpose of the Plan is to document the existing use and to provide

direction and standards for continued use of the site. This plan incorporates current policy and direction.

At this time, Silver Star Communications of Freedom, Wyoming is the only facility on the site providing

communication services. Their facility consists of 1 building and 2 towers (towers are less than 50 feet in

height). This site provides various communication services to users in the Star Valley of Wyoming and

Palisades Reservoir area.

The road (FR286) on the Palisades Ranger District that accesses the site is open to all vehicles as far as

the gate in the northeast corner of Section 7 (in Pat Canyon). The gate is approximately 2.5 miles

southeast of the Communication Site. Beyond this gate the road is actually Trail #004, open to the public


only as an ATV trail. Full-sized vehicles may travel this road/trail for administrative and maintenance

purposes only. This use is restricted to the Forest Service and communication site service providers.

Purpose and Need The Forest Service has a need to respond to two applications (make a decision to authorize, authorize with

changes, or deny one or both requests) and amend the Black Mountain Communication Site Plan.

A request from Silver Star Communications (the existing lease holder) to extend the height of 1

tower to120 feet.

An application by Teton Communications for a new facility and lease. They would construct a

15 x 27 (400 square feet) building and 140 foot high tower.

Amend the existing Communication Site Management Plan to:

Allow a maximum tower height of 140 feet.

Increase the communication site land area to 7.9 acres (see map, Appendix B).

Proposed Action - Alternative Two

Approve extending a tower at the Silver Star facility to 120 feet in height (the existing

communication site plan allows a maximum tower height of only 50 feet).

Approve a proposal (application) from Teton Communications for a lease to construct a new

facility consisting of 1 building and a 140 foot tower.

Amend the site management plan to allow towers up to 140 feet in height.

Increase the communication site area to 7.9 acres, as shown on the map (Appendix B).

Decision to be Made

Whether to implement all or part of Alternative 2 (the Proposed Action).

The Responsible Official will make decisions based on a consideration of project alternatives, the

effects analysis, information in the project record, and public comments.

Forest Plan Direction Relative to the Project Area

This document is tiered to the Revised Forest Plan (RFP) for the Caribou National Forest (2003). The

Forest Plan standards and guidelines relevant to this project have been referenced and incorporated into

this document. A project consistency analysis was completed for the proposed action and can be found in

the project record.

Management Prescriptions:

Management prescriptions, a set of management practices, are applied to a specific area of land to attain

goals and objectives. They identify the emphasis and focus of multiple-use management activities in a

specific area. However, emphasis, as used in this context, is defined as a focus or a highlight and does not

necessarily mean exclusive use. The project is located in the following Management Prescription Area:

8.1 (b) - Concentrated Development Areas (RFP 4-78) This prescription covers the land area of the communication site itself. This prescription is

defined as; “Generally highly developed areas with much evidence of people, structures, roads,

and often, disturbed ground”.

Goal: Allow concentrated development in small areas for development and infrastructure needs.

3.3 (b) - Semi-Primitive Restoration (RFP 4-23)

This prescription includes the surrounding area to the west of the communication site on the

Caribou National Forest. The emphasis for this prescription is ecological restoration to improve

resource conditions. Management activities can include watershed restoration, prescribed fire,

wild fire for resource benefit, silvicultural practices, invasive species management and other

activities.


5.4 (c) - Elk Summer Range (Targhee NF Revised Forest Plan 1997) This prescription includes the surrounding area to the east on the Targhee National Forest.

The emphasis for this prescription is to provide increased security for elk, and hunting

opportunities with limited access.

Public Involvement

The project proposal first published in the Caribou-Targhee NF Schedule of Proposed Actions

(SOPA) in the third quarter of 2013 (July). This quarterly report describes how interested

members of the public may comment about the project.

On July 1, 2013 a scoping letter describing the proposed project in detail was sent to a mailing list

of groups and individuals to solicit comments. This included the Shoshone-Bannock Tribe. This

comment period ended August 2, 2013.

The proposal is described on the Caribou-Targhee NF website at www.fs.usda.gov along with

direction about how to comment. One comment was received during the initial scoping. It was

a letter from the Lincoln County Commissioners in Wyoming in support of the project.

Identification of Key Issues The relevant issues were identified by the Responsible Official, internal scoping by the Interdisciplinary

Team (IDT) and public concerns. Similar issues were combined into one statement where appropriate.

No public comments or concerns were received that resulted in new issues or an additional alternative.

The following issues were determined to be important and within the scope of the project decision.

1) Caribou City Roadless Area

2) Recommended Wilderness

3) Scenery Management

4) Wildlife and Rare Plants

Resource Areas Not Carried Forward Through The Analysis. Based upon initial discussions, some resource areas were not carried forward through the analysis. These

resource areas were followed up with documentation in the project record. A brief explanation for each is

provided below.

Climate Change (see project record - USDA. 2009, Climate Change Considerations)

With regards to this projects potential impact on climate change, the Proposed Action would involve the

operation of vehicles and heavy equipment during a short construction period, and would contribute to

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. However, given the very small scale of the project, (as opposed to

large scale oil field development, etc.) no meaningful contribution to climate change would be expected.

Currently, a large amount of uncertainty exists with regards to small scale projects and their potential

impacts on climate change. “Because greenhouse gases mix readily into the global pool of greenhouse

gases, it is not currently possible to ascertain the indirect effects of emissions from single or multiple

sources.

Also, because the large majority of Forest Service projects are extremely small in the global atmospheric

CO2 context, it is not presently possible to conduct quantitative analysis of actual climate change effects

based on individual or multiple projects, and “Uncertainty in climate change effects is expected because it

is not possible to meaningfully link individual project actions to quantitative effects on climatic patterns.”

(USDA 2009).

http://www.fs.usda.gov/


Fisheries (see project record - Wildlife, Fisheries, and Rare Plant Specialist Report, ).

No Aquatic Influence zones (AIZ’s) will be impacted and there is no potential for impacts to the Riparian

Condition Indicators (RCI’s) as described in Appendix B of the Revised Forest Plan. No Impact to

Fisheries will occur under the Preferred Alternative.

Historic and Cultural Resources (see project record, SHPO report).

Historic and archeological sites have been inventoried and none would be disturbed with this project.

Hydrology (see project record, Hydrology Specialist Report, Laprevote).

James Laprevote (Hydrologist Report, 11/20/2013). “There are no streams, wetlands or culinary supply

wells in the area and therefore no potential for hydrologic extraordinary circumstances.” “Effects of the

Proposed Action: As long as it follows standard BMPs, Forest and other legal direction, the project

would have no measurable impact on hydrology or riparian resources.”

Noxious Weeds (see project record, Comm. Site Management Plan, Page 17(B)).

All authorized communication site users will be responsible for prevention and control of noxious

weeds, and will provide preventive measures and annual control as required by the Forest Service.

Public Access There will be no changes to the road and trail access under either alternative.

Recreation - Developed and Dispersed (also see project record, Specialist Report on Recreation,

Roadless and Wilderness, Lackey).

There are no developed recreation sites on or near Black Mountain.

Dispersed recreation: The primary activities in the project area include hunting, off highway

vehicle riding and horseback riding.

The project will not change any recreational opportunities.

Trails Management

The project will not create or eliminate trail opportunities.

ATV Trail #004 will not be changed.

Road Management/Transportation No new road construction will occur; therefore a roads analysis is not needed.

Soil Resources (see project record, email by Soil Scientist, 10/30/2013).

Kara Green, Soil Scientist; “The proposed modification and new construction at the Black Mountain

Communication Site is on a stable ridge and the companies will utilize existing roads to access the site.

The proposals will meet all Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines related to the soil resource. The

proposal was reviewed in the field on 5-22-2013.”

Timber Management For Management Prescription 8.1 (b); “These lands are removed from the suitable timber base (Standard

1 (RFP 4-79)). No timber will be cut in either alternative.

Tribal Treaty Rights No aspect of this project would lessen or result in the loss of Tribal treaty rights. Rights of access,

hunting, and gathering are preserved.


Chapter 2 - Alternatives This chapter describes the alternatives that the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) analyzed in detail.

Alternative One - No Action

Alternative Two - The Proposed Action

Development of the Alternatives The No Action Alternative is required by regulation and provides a baseline for analysis. The Proposed

Action was defined by the Responsible Official after considering preliminary issues, public and internal

scoping. No additional alternatives were suggested from internal or public comments.

Alternatives Eliminated from Further Study In 2011 Teton Communications submitted an application to construct a new electronic communication

site on Black Mountain two miles north of the existing comm. site. This proposal was investigated in

detail during 2011 and 2012 by the staff at the Soda Springs Ranger District and the Caribou-Targhee NF

Supervisors Office in Idaho Falls. The proposal was dropped because an access road would need to be

constructed partially inside the recommended wilderness (Management Prescription 1.3e).

Rather than authorizing a new lease and facility for Teton Communications, the Forest Service could

request Teton Communications rent space in Silver Star’s existing facility. However, considering the

predicted demand for electronic communication services, and the tower loading Teton Communications

already has planned, there may not be sufficient capacity. It is desirable to allow for future expansion

through this environmental analysis and the proposed communication site plan amendments. Public

comments did not propose other alternatives to accomplish the project objectives.

Alternatives Considered in Detail

Alternative 1 – No Action This alternative provides a baseline against which impacts of the Proposed Action can be measured and

compared. Under this alternative, none of the specific management activities proposed in this document

would occur. Under this alternative:

The maximum tower height would remain at 50 feet as described in the existing communication

site plan; “The maximum permissible tower height (antenna included) will not exceed 50 feet

without specific authorization in the NEPA decision document.” (Comm. Site Plan, ).

The communication site area would remain at 1acre.

No new facility and lease would be authorized.

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action This alternative would:

Approve extending a tower at the current Silver Star facility to 120 feet in height.

Approve a proposal (application) from Teton Communications for a lease to construct a new

facility (15 x 27’ building and 140 foot tower). This facility would serve federal, state and local

government agencies as well as public wireless companies. This includes radio coverage in the

backcountry for emergency services and law enforcement.

Amend the current Communications Site Plan to allow towers up to 140 feet in height.

Amend the current Site Plan to increase the designated area of the site to 7.9 acres.

Identification of the Preferred Alternative Alternative 2, the Proposed Action, is the Responsible Officials preferred alternative.


Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences This chapter describes the existing conditions of the environment on and adjacent to the Black Mountain

Communication Site (project area), and discloses the effects on the environment that may occur with each

alternative. The direct, indirect, temporary, short term, long term and cumulative effects are discussed by

resource area. The discussions presented here are summaries of the complete analysis. Supporting

information is contained in the project planning record located at the Soda Springs Ranger District office.

Key Issues 1) Caribou City Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA)

2) Recommended Wilderness

3) Scenery Management

4) Wildlife and Rare Plants

Issue 1 - Caribou City Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA) Existing Conditions

The communication site (and project area) is not included in the Caribou City Roadless Area, but is

located within an excluded land area. Areas may be excluded because they already contain human

development and/or previous disturbance. This excluded area on Black Mountain contains a road,

motorized trail, old erosion control terraces and the electronic communications site. However, potential

effects to the adjacent Caribou City Roadless Area were considered and evaluated.

The majority of the IRA is located to the west of the Black Mountain ridgeline on the Soda Springs

District. A portion of this IRA is also located east of Black Mountain on the Palisades Ranger District.

The same Roadless Area Management theme applies to both. This Roadless Area is the second largest in

the Caribou portion of the Caribou-Targhee National Forest at approximately 93,300 acres. 81,500 acres

are managed under the Caribou Forest Plan and 11,800 acres are managed under the Targhee Forest Plan.

The Forest Service is currently under the direction of the August 2008 Idaho Roadless Rule.

Roadless Area Management Theme

The theme for the adjacent Caribou City IRA is Backcountry/ Restoration. This theme is characterized

by “Some road construction, timber harvesting and mining is allowed within the IRA” (RFP, Appen. B).

Recreational Opportunity Spectrum (ROS)

The ROS designation for the area surrounding the project is Roaded - Modified. The emphasis for this

designation is, “The area is characterized by predominantly natural appearing environments with

moderate evidences of the sights and sounds of man.” (ROS Guide, Page 7) and mandates a “.5 mile

buffer on all roads in maintenance classes 1 and 2 “primitive”)” (RFP, Appendix B-9).

Effects Analysis

Alternative 1 (No Action) Management of the communication site will continue under the current Black Mountain Management

Plan. This Plan authorizes certain lease activities, including improvements and modifications to facilities.

Direct and Indirect Effects

Under this alternative there would be no changes to the existing condition on the communication site.

The maximum tower height would remain at 50 feet.

The designated communication site area would remain at 1 acre.

No new facilities (lease for Teton Communications) would be authorized at this time.

As a result there would be no additional direct or indirect effects to the adjacent IRA.


Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects consider past, present and future actions and activities. In this analysis the greater

emphasis is placed upon the existing conditions and foreseeable activities within the Analysis Area.

The future (foreseeable activities) is a projection over the next 15 years. Under this alternative there

would be no changes to the existing condition on the communication site (see direct and indirect effects).

As a result there would be no cumulative effects to the adjacent Roadless Area.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Under this alternative:

A tower at the Silver Star facility would be extended to 120 feet in height.

A new facility would be permitted under lease (1 building and a 140 foot tower).

The Black Mountain Communication Site Management Plan would be amended to allow towers

up to 140 feet and increase the size of the designated site area to 7.9 acres.


The adjacent Caribou City IRA includes one of the largest non-motorized land areas on the Soda

Springs District. This central non-motorized area lies to the west of Squaw Creek (2 air miles

west of Black Mountain), north of Highway 34 and east of Caribou Mountain. The primary ROS

categories of recreation there are primitive and semi-primitive, non-motorized. This area is

popular with backcountry recreationists during July, August and September. The communication

site is not within this area. Therefore these values will not be directly affected (also refer to Issue

3, Scenery Management, Effects).

Within the project area on the communication site:

There would be no new road construction connected with this project.

Ground disturbance from construction under the proposed action would be less than 0.1 acres.

Mitigation includes topsoil replacement, reseeding with natural vegetation and weed monitoring.

There are no streams or wetlands nearby.

There are no effects to wildlife or rare plants (Green, Devon and Lehman, Rose, 2014, Wildlife,

Fisheries and Rare Plant Specialist Report).

Reference landscapes for research study or interpretation. The project would not change or affect

the reference landscape values of the adjacent IRA.

The small project area will have no impact on the Roadless Areas physical natural resources.

As a result there would be no direct or indirect effects to the adjacent IRA.

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative effects consider past, present and future actions and activities. In this analysis the greater

emphasis is placed upon the existing conditions and foreseeable activities within the Analysis Area. The

future (foreseeable activities) is a projection over the next 15 years. Given the minimal disturbance to the

project area and planned mitigation measures for scenic integrity, there would be no cumulative effects

to the adjacent IRA as a result of the proposed action.

Irretrievable and Irreversible Commitment of Resources

Neither alternative would result in irretrievable or irreversible impacts to natural resources within the

project area or to the adjacent Roadless Area.


Issue 2 - Recommended Wilderness (RW) Existing Conditions

The project area is not within any wilderness or recommended wilderness area (map, Appendix A).

The Recommended Wilderness (RW) Management Prescription area 1.3 (e), 28,900 acres, lies to the

northwest of the communication site within the Caribou City Roadless Area. “Recommended Wilderness

will be managed to retain its wilderness character until Congress takes action on the recommendation.

Activities which do not preclude consideration for wilderness may be present.” (RFP 4-16). The nearest

boundary of the RW is 1 mile to the north of the communication site along the ridgeline of Black

Mountain. (Refer to Issue 3, Scenery Management). The communication site already exists on the

landscape. The current facilities include 1 building and 2 towers with antennas and microwave dishes.

Recreational Opportunity Spectrum (ROS)

The ROS designations for the recommended wilderness are primitive and semi-primitive, non-motorized.

The majority of the primitive designation is greater than 4 air miles west of the site. The Semi-primitive,

non-motorized designation is characterized by “high, but not extremely high, probability of experiencing

isolation from the sights and sounds of humans.”(ROS Guide, page 7). From this area the communication

site would be viewed as middle ground (1/2 to 4 air miles from the observer) or background (4 miles or

greater away), (Scenery Management Report, D. Tiller, 2014).

Effects Analysis

Alternative 1 (No Action) Management of the communication site will continue under the current Black Mountain Management

Plan. This Plan authorizes certain lease activities, including improvements and modifications to facilities.






There would be no additional direct or indirect effects to the recommended wilderness.

Cumulative Effects Cumulative effects consider past, present and future actions and activities. In this analysis the greater




Because there are no additional direct or indirect effects, there would be no cumulative effects to

the recommended wilderness.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Potential effects to the Recommended Wilderness (RW) prescription area were considered and evaluated.







The Recommended Wilderness (RW) includes one of the largest non-motorized land areas on the

Soda Springs District. This central non-motorized area lies to the west of Squaw Creek (2 air

miles west of Black Mountain), north of Highway 34 and east of Caribou Mountain.


This area is popular with backcountry recreationists during July, August and September. The

communication site is not within this core area, therefore these values will not be directly affected

(also refer to Issue 3, Scenery Management, Effects).

The proposed action will not affect the recommended wilderness boundary location, or the size,

shape and access to the area.

The ability to manage the recommended wilderness will not be affected by this project.

Long term, natural ecological processes within, or adjacent to the RW will not be altered.

Outstanding opportunities for solitude within the RW would not be affected.

Opportunities for primitive recreation within the RW would not be affected.

Primitive and Semi-Primitive Classes of Recreation

The RW includes one of the largest non-motorized land areas on the Soda Springs District. This

area is popular with recreationists during July, August and September. The proposed project is

not within this core non-motorized area. Therefore these values will not be affected.

The small project area will have no impact on the RW physical, natural resources.

Human development and activity:

The Black Mountain Communication Site already exists on the landscape and is visible from some

locations within the recommended wilderness area.

Other human development and activity is currently visible from the recommended

wilderness. Development in the Star Valley of Wyoming is clearly visible from the

eastern boundary of the RW. This boundary lies along the high ridgeline of Black

Mountain for approximately 2 miles. Visible development includes Palisades Reservoir,

the community of Alpine Junction, Highway 89, businesses and residences.

The northern boundary of the RW follows Forest Road #087 (McCoy Creek) for over 5

miles. Motor vehicle use and dispersed camping with RVs is popular along this main

artery between Highway 89 (Wyoming) and Grays Lake (Idaho).

Landscape character and integrity. The scenic quality of the area is already affected to some

extent by the existing electronic communications site (refer to Issue 3 - Scenic Management).

During the construction of facilities there could be temporary effects to the RW from noise.

Depending upon nearby terrain features, visitors within the RW (within Section 36) may

experience noise effects. However, the nearest RW boundary is 1 mile away. Noise would be

distant, intermittent and short term, only during the few weeks of construction. There will be no

long term noise effects from the site.

The RWs eligibility for future wilderness designation will not be changed by the proposed action.

Under the proposed action, visibility of the new building and taller towers would be mitigated by

following the Black Mountain Management Plan and/or devising a particular paint scheme. The project

would meet the Forest Plan visual quality objectives (VQO) of Partial Retention. There would be no

direct or indirect effects to the Recommended Wilderness area.

Cumulative Effects


emphasis is placed upon the existing conditions and foreseeable activities within the analysis area.

The future (foreseeable activities) is a projection over the next 15 years. Given the minimal area of

disturbance to the project area under this alternative, and planned mitigation measures, there would be

no cumulative effects as a result of this proposed action.



project area or to the recommended wilderness.


Summary of Effects to Roadless and Recommended Wilderness

Evaluating effects - The Wilderness Qualities and Roadless Area Characteristics worksheets were

completed and can be found in the project planning record.

The Black Mountain Communication Site already exists on the landscape. The existing Silver

Star facility consists of 1 building and 2 towers (the towers are less than 50 feet). The results of

implementing the Proposed Action would be 1 additional building and 2 towers higher than the

current 50 feet allowed in the Black Mountain Communication Site Plan.

Human development and activity is currently visible from the Recommended Wilderness.

Implementing the Proposed Action:

There will be no direct, indirect or cumulative effects on the natural resources of the Caribou City

Roadless Area, including the Recommended Wilderness prescription.

There would be no Irretrievable and Irreversible commitment of natural resources.

Scenic Integrity may be affected by the Proposed Action (see Issue 3 - Scenery Management). With the appropriate mitigation measures (to address scenic values), there would be no adverse

cumulative effects to the project area or to the surrounding prescription areas.

Issue 3 - Scenery Management Scenic Quality

Scenic quality is a fundamental element of recreation experiences. Viewing scenery is a popular

recreation activity nationwide. Public acceptance of forest management practices is heavily based upon

the visual appearance of the forest.

Caribou National Forest (Revised Forest Plan, 2003)

The Forest Plan uses the VMS to analyze alternatives and develop management direction for scenic

resources. This forest-wide direction is in the form of visual quality objectives (VQO) mapping and some

specific management area direction for visual resources

.

Visual Quality Objectives to Scenic Indicators Objectives

The VMS used visual quality objectives as the measurable guideline for the management of scenery.

These objectives describe the degrees of acceptable alteration of the natural landscape. The degree of

alteration is measured in terms of visual contrast with the surrounding natural landscape. There are five

possible objectives: Preservation; Retention; Partial Retention; Modification; and Maximum

Modification. The visual quality objectives are roughly equivalent to the scenic management system

scenic integrity levels as follows: preservation = very high; retention = high; partial retention = moderate;

modification = low; and maximum modification = very low (shown in the following table).


View of Black Mountain and the communication site from Highway 89 in Star Valley, Wyoming

(approximately 5 air miles due east of the site).

Affected Environment and Existing Conditions The analysis area for this discussion is the surrounding viewing points up to 4 miles from the Black

Mountain Communication Site. Views from Star Valley and Palisades Reservoir are also considered.

The visibility analysis was determined through site visits and using the concern level data from past

planning processes. The Black Mountain Communication Site is visible as background (4 miles or more

from the observer) when viewed from some backcountry trails and portions of the Caribou City

Recommended Wilderness Area. At lower elevations mountainous terrain often blocks a view of the site.

The structures (communication site) are located along a prominent ridgeline and are “highlighted” when

viewing Black Mountain from the west looking east. The existing ridgeline does not have tree stands to

obscure or screen facilities. On sunny days with no atmospheric haze the buildings and tower are visible

but do not dominate the surrounding landscape due to their small scale coupled with the fact that they are

viewed as background or extreme background.

Approximately 1 mile north of the site, the Recommended Wilderness (RW) boundary connects

with the Black Mountain ridgeline. At this point the communication site is not visible due to a

ridge to the south. Following the RW boundary west for two miles towards Squaw Creek, the

view of the site is usually blocked by terrain features.

North along the RW boundary (and Black Mountain ridgeline) the site is visible from some

locations and obstructed by terrain at others.

Due to mountainous terrain, the site is not visible from the north along Forest Road 087 (McCoy

Creek) or from the west side of Palisades Reservoir.

To the south of Black Mountain there is only one access road, Jackknife Creek FSR#136.

The site is visible from the Jackknife Creek trailhead at the end of this road (4 air miles away).

The site is visible from some locations on Bald Mountain to the west (the higher elevations on

Bald Mountain are 4 air miles from the site).

The management prescription for the project area (communication site) is 8.1(b) Concentrated

Development Area; “Management prescription categories 5 (timber emphasis) and 8

(concentrated use areas, including phosphate mining) are likely to change or alter the scenery of

forest landscapes” (RFP FEIS, 4-9).


Recreation Settings

Prescribed recreation settings (ROS classes as identified in the Forest Plan) for the surrounding

landscapes are Roaded-Modified, Primitive and Semi-Primitive non-motorized. “In most viewing

conditions the existing facilities within the communication site meet the plan objective VQO/SIO of

Partial Retention/Moderate. The valued scenery "appears slightly altered”. Noticeable disturbances are

minor and visually subordinate to the valued scenery” (Scenery Management Specialist Report, Debrah

Tiller, 01/20/2014).

Black Mountain Management Plan Direction (page 18, Visual Quality).

“The Caribou-Targhee Forest Plan has established a Visual Quality Objective (VQO) of Partial

Retention to be met at Black Mountain as seen from all surrounding areas in the middle ground and

background views. This means the constructed features and any associated landscape modifications

may be discernable but must not be visually dominant.”

“In order to minimize visual impacts to the surrounding area, plans and applications for building and

tower modifications/reconstruction or new construction must include assurances that the VQO of

Partial Retention will be met. To meet partial retention careful consideration must be given to

building and tower height, shape, siting, use of land form and existing vegetation for visual

screening, configuration, line, exterior color, and texture of facilities, and the overall concept of

efficient land use through building consolidation and shared use of towers.”

Visual Quality Objectives (VQO) in the Forest Plan

The designation for the project area is Partial Retention (VQO)/Moderate (SIO).

Partial Retention allows management activities that remain visually subordinate to the characteristic

landscape. Activities may repeat form, line, color and texture common to the characteristic landscape, but

changes in their qualities of size, amount, intensity, direction, pattern etc. remain visually subordinate to

the characteristic landscape. Activities may also introduce form, line, color or textures that are found

infrequently or not at all in the characteristic landscape, but they should remain subordinate to the visual

strength of the characteristic landscape. (RFP FEIS 3-25).

Effects Analysis

Alternative 1 (No Action) Direct and Indirect Effects

The communication site already exists on the landscape. Management of the communication site will

continue under the current Black Mountain Management Plan. This Plan authorizes certain lease

activities, including improvements and modifications to facilities. Under this alternative there would be

no changes to the existing condition on the communication site.




Alternative 1 retains the existing facilities at the Black Mountain Communication Site. This alternative

meets the prescribed VQO of Partial Retention as mapped in the RFP. This alternative also meets the

corresponding SIO of Moderate. There would be no additional direct or indirect effects to the project

area or to adjacent prescription areas.

Cumulative Effects





Because there are no additional direct or indirect effects, there would be no cumulative effects to

surrounding area.


Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Effects to scenery from the surrounding area, including the Recommended Wilderness prescription area,

were considered and evaluated.







The new building would not be visible from the east in Star Valley, Wyoming because of

the west-facing slope of the communication site.

The new building would not be readily evident when seen from the boundary of the Caribou City

Recommended Wilderness area. The building is one level and would be below the skyline.

The additional building would not be readily evident when viewed from surrounding trails and

forest areas due to its low profile (one level) and the average distance it would be viewed. It

would not be readily evident when seen from the boundary of the Caribou City Recommended

Wilderness (RW) area. The building would not be visible from the east of Black Mountain (Star

Valley, WY) due to the slope of the communication site.

Communication towers with various hardware attached that are over twice the height of the

existing tower will most likely be readily evident to viewers when seen from some locations

along the recommended wilderness boundary. The existing ridgeline does not have tree stands to

obscure or screen facilities. On sunny days with no atmospheric haze the towers will be readily

visible and have the potential to dominate the surrounding landscape due to their height and the

“outline” effect of the ridgeline/horizon. They could adversely affect the recreation settings of

Semi-primitive motorized and Semi-primitive non-motorized.

Cumulative Effects



The future (foreseeable activities) is a projection over the next 15 years. Allowing a new lease and

taller towers under the preferred alternative will provide increased capacity for electronic

communication services. This may reduce the need for additional structures in the foreseeable

future. Any future proposals for communication facilities would require the appropriate level of

environmental analysis (NEPA). For Alternative 2 (the Proposed Action), with appropriate

mitigation measures, there would be no adverse cumulative effects to the project area or to the

surrounding prescription areas.



project area or to the adjacent management prescriptions.


Summary of Effects to Scenery Alternative 1 (No Action)


As a result, there are no additional direct, indirect or cumulative effects to the project area or

surrounding prescription areas.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)


The only potential effect identified in the preferred alternative is to scenic integrity. Higher towers could adversely affect the recreation settings of Primitive and Semi-primitive non-

motorized. However, with the appropriate mitigation measures, the proposed action would meet

the visual quality objective of Partial Retention.

Cumulative Effects

In implementing the proposed action, with appropriate mitigation measures, the communication

site would meet the visual quality objectives of Partial Retention. Allowing a new lease and taller

towers now, under the preferred alternative, will provide increased capacity for electronic

communication services. This may reduce the need for more structures on Black Mountain, or

additional communication sites to be developed in other locations in the foreseeable future.

Mitigation and Design Features The Black Mountain Communication Site Management Plan would be adhered to for the construction of

new facilities or modification of existing facilities. The plan guides all existing and future

communication uses to avoid or minimize adverse impacts. It also ensures that the visual quality

objective of Partial Retention is met as per the Forest Service Visual Management System (VMS).

Scenic Integrity Color Treatment on Structures

Creative and adaptive finish and color treatment has the potential to bring the proposed towers into

compliance with the Visual Quality Objectives (VQO) of Partial Retention and Scenic Integrity

Objectives of Moderate (SIO) (Scenery Management Specialist Report, D. Tiller). Color and finish

treatments could reduce the potential of the towers to dominate the landscape when viewed from the

surrounding viewing points (up to 4 miles from the communication site). This would apply to most

weather and viewing conditions as seen from the sensitive viewing points of the Caribou City

Recommended Wilderness prescription area.

If all facilities received a non-glare finish, visibility of the towers and buildings on clear, sunny days

would be reduced. Color treatment could also reduce evidence of the facilities when viewed as

background. The proposed facilities may be visible from communities in Star Valley, WY in clear

weather conditions with no haze. This is a viewing distance in excess of five miles and the facilities,

including the higher towers would not be readily evident to casual viewers. If the towers were treated to

help obscure their outline on the ridgeline of Black Mountain, they would be less evident to all viewers

and meet the intent of Partial Retention VQO and Moderate SIO.

Recommendation

To reduce sun glare from structures, treat the towers with a flat paint finish. A suggested color treatment

for both towers is to paint them with modeled, warm earth-tones of grey, green and tan in irregular

patterns with the bottom of towers being more intense color and fading as they go up (a treatment called

“hombre” but with mixed irregular shades of grey/tan/brown). This treatment will help to diminish

appearance, but it still would be readily apparent to some visitors in some weather conditions.

Painting facilities any shade of blue in an attempt to diminish their visibility would not meet VQOs in

most weather conditions, with the exception of dense fog.


Issue 4 - Wildlife and Rare Plants The “Wildlife, Fisheries and Rare Plants Specialist Report” prepared by Devon Green (Zone Wildlife

Biologist) contains detailed discussions about each species of concern for this project (see pages 2-11 of

the report located in the project record).

Following is a summary of the report:

Analysis Area and Methods

The analysis area for impacts to wildlife, fisheries and rare plants is the area proposed for disturbance

under the preferred alternative. The proposed project impacts a very small area (less than 0.2 acre of new

disturbance) immediately adjacent to an existing communication facility and within the associated

Prescription Area 8.1 (Concentrated Development). No direct or indirect effects to wildlife or rare plants

are expected to occur outside of the areas proposed for disturbance. For the purposes of this wildlife

analysis “analysis area” and “project area” are used synonymously.

Effects Analysis - Wildlife The “Wildlife, Fisheries and Rare Plants Specialist Report” prepared by Devon Green (Zone Wildlife

Biologist) contains an “Effects Summary Table” for Sensitive Species (see pages 11-13 of the report

located in the project record).

The following narratives summarize the effects to Forest Service Sensitive Species and other special

status species that may be impacted by the two alternatives.

Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative)

Direct and Indirect and Cumulative Effects - Construction of a new site and modifications to the current

site would not occur. Existing conditions for wildlife occurring within and adjacent to the analysis area

would continue current trends. There would not be any direct, indirect or cumulative effects to any

species.

Alternative 2 (Preferred Alternative)

In general, given the small area of disturbance (less than 0.2 acres) immediately adjacent to an existing

communication site and within the previously designated 8.1 prescription area the only potential impacts

to wildlife species occurring in the area would be temporary displacement during construction activities.

The preferred alternative will not impact ESA listed species and there will be no impact to Forest Service

Sensitive species. The analysis in the wildlife specialist report assumes both requests (as described in

section 1.6) are authorized in full. If portions of the proposal are denied, the impacts would be

incrementally less (i.e. there would be somewhat less potential for displacement due to less construction

activities occurring).

Migratory Birds

Given the small area of disturbance, minimal if any impacts to migratory birds are expected. The potential

construction site consists primarily of rock and bare ground with sparse low growing vegetation, and

nesting in the area is not expected. (See photo of proposed building and tower location in Chapter 1).

With regards to the potential for bird strikes, following existing site plan direction and USFWS

guidelines, the towers will be co-located at an existing site, towers will be less than 199’ tall, the towers

will not be lit, and guy wires will not be allowed. All of these stipulations fully minimize the potential for

impacts to migratory birds (reference the wildlife, fish and rare plant report for additional information).

Mule Deer and Elk

The analysis area functions as summer/fall habitat for mule deer and elk. There is no designated winter

range within or adjacent to the analysis area. Given that no roads or trails will be constructed, and that

there will be no changes in the management of existing roads and trails, there will be no changes to the


current Open Motorized Route Density (OMRD). The small area of disturbance would not measurably

reduce forage availability for mule deer or elk. Similar to other species, impacts to deer and elk would be

limited to temporary displacement or disturbance during construction activities. Elk and Deer

vulnerability during the hunting season would not change. Elk and deer populations will maintain current

trends under Alternative 2.

Cumulative Effects

Given the minimal area of disturbance associated with the alternatives, and that no impacts to any species

are expected, no cumulative effects would be expected to occur from the implementation of Alternative 2.


Neither alternative would result in Irretrievable or Irreversible impacts to wildlife or rare plants. This

extremely small area of potential impact will have no impact on any special status wildlife, fish, or rare

plant species.


Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination

Interdisciplinary Team Members

Core Team Members:

Glenn Lackey: Recreation Specialist, ID Team Leader, EA document (author).

Debrah Tiller: Natural Resource Specialist, Recreation.

Devon Green: Wildlife Biologist.

Consultants:

Ali Abusaidi: Forest Archeologist.

Kara Green: Soil Scientist.

James Laprevote: Hydrologist.

Summary of Scoping and Public Involvement

• The project proposal was first published in the Caribou-Targhee NF Schedule of Proposed Actions

(SOPA) in the third quarter of 2013 (July). This quarterly report describes how interested members of the

public may comment about the project.

• On July 1, 2013 a scoping letter describing the proposed project in detail was sent to a mailing list of

groups and individuals to solicit comments. This included the Shoshone-Bannock Tribe. This comment

period ended August 2, 2013.

Federal, State and Local Agencies

The following agencies have or will be consulted, primarily through scoping. - US Fish and Wildlife Service

- Idaho Fish and Game

- Lincoln County Wyoming Planning and Development

- Shoshone-Bannock tribes

- Senator Mike Crapo

- Office of US Senator James E. Risch

- Board of Lincoln County Commissioners (Wyoming)

- Idaho Dept. of Environmental Quality

- Idaho Dept. of Lands

- Bonneville County Commissioners (Idaho)

- Caribou County Commissioners (Idaho)

- US EPA, Region 10


References

General

USDA-Forest Service(FS). 2003. Revised Forest Plan for the Caribou National Forest. Caribou-Targhee National

Forest, February 2003. on file at Soda Springs Ranger District and available online at:

http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/ctnf/landmanagement/planning/?cid=STELPRDB5116356

USDA-Forest Service(FS). 1997. Revised Forest Plan for the Targhee National Forest. Caribou-Targhee National

Forest, April, 1997 pp 111-152-111-155. on file at Soda Springs Ranger District and available online at:


USDA. 2009. Climate Change Considerations in Project Level NEPA Analysis. January 13, 2009 http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nepa/climate_change/includes/cc_nepa_guidance.pdf

USDA-Forest Service, 2004, Black Mountain Communications Site Management Plan, Soda Springs Ranger

District.

Tony Hafla, President, Teton Communications Inc., 2013. Form SF-299, Application for Transportation and Utility

Systems.

Wilderness and Roadless Areas

USDA-FS. 2008. Idaho Roadless Area Final EIS, Roadless Area Conservation.


Lackey, Glenn, 2014, WORKSHEET 1, Wilderness Qualities or Attributes, USDA Forest Service. Caribou National

Forest. Soda Springs Ranger District. Soda Springs, ID.

Lackey, Glenn, 2014, WORKSHEET 2, Roadless Area Characteristics, USDA Forest Service. Caribou National

Forest. Soda Springs Ranger District. Soda Springs, ID.

Lackey, Glenn, 2014, Recreation Specialist Report, USDA Forest Service. Caribou National Forest. Soda Springs

Ranger District, Soda Springs, ID.

Wildlife and Rare Plants

Green, Devon. Lehman, Rose. 2014. Wildlife, Fisheries and Rare Plant Specialist Report, USDA Forest Service.

Caribou National Forest. Soda Springs Ranger District. Soda Springs, ID.


http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nepa/climate_change/includes/cc_nepa_guidance.pdf



Appendix A -Recommended Wilderness

Recommended Wilderness Prescription (area with hatch lines)


Appendix B - Proposed Site Map


Appendix C - Response to Comments

During the initial scoping period of July, 2013, one comment was received.

A letter from the Board of Lincoln County Commissioners in Wyoming (July 23, 2013).

“Lincoln County supports the efforts of the Caribou/Targhee National Forest to ensure adequate

coverage to support radio and cellular signal coverage, including emergency services, to parts of Lincoln

County.”

“Lincoln County supports the decision to authorize both requests and we thank you for the opportunity to

comment.” (Paul C. Jenkins, Chairman).

black mountain communication site...

Documents