CHAPTER 1 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTIONa123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic...Chapter 1 Purpose and Need for Action Draft EIS 1-4 Montana Snowbowl (USDA 1996) approving

Draft EIS 1-1 Montana Snowbowl

CHAPTER 1 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION This chapter describes the current and proposed project area and summarizes the Proposed Action, the Purpose of and Need for the action, the decisions to be made, and the regulatory requirements that govern the Proposed Action and this analysis. 1.1 BACKGROUND The Montana Snowbowl Ski and Summer Resort (MSB) is an alpine ski and summer resort located on both private and federal land approximately 12 miles north of Missoula, Montana. The federal land is administered by the Lolo National Forest (LNF). The existing ski area includes 1,138 acres of federal land administered by and under permit with the LNF and 80 acres of private land (owned by MSB) located at the base area (Figures 1-1 and 1-2). The base area is the location of the lodge and other administrative facilities at which skiers and other MSB users congregate and from which MSB is managed. The MSB currently operates a full winter (five to seven days per week) and limited summer schedule (Friday, Saturday, and Sunday). Existing facilities on LNF land include ski trails, lifts (both surface and chairlifts), small buildings, buried water and power lines, a snowmaking reservoir, hiking trails, mountain bike trails, and a folf (disc golf) course. Facilities on adjacent private land include ski trails, lifts, a rope tow, buildings, buried water and power lines, a snowmaking reservoir, hiking trails, a mountain bike trail, a potable water system, wastewater disposal systems, and parking areas. The proposed expansion area is on LNF land called TV Mountain. TV Mountain is adjacent to and immediately west of the existing permit area. The west side of TV Mountain is the location of the original Snow Park Ski Area, which was the predecessor to the current MSB. Snow Park operated on LNF land during the 1950s and closed in 1960. The ski area was then moved to the Butler Creek drainage and re-opened in 1961 due to the availability of higher elevation terrain, better snow conditions, and greater vertical drop. In addition to the original Snow Park Ski Area, the proposed expansion area includes areas of past timber harvest, existing roads, and utilities. The summit of TV Mountain is a designated communications site (under permit with the LNF) with numerous television, radio, and microwave facilities and would be surrounded by the proposed expansion area. The MSB has operated on the LNF under a Special Use Permit (SUP) since 1961. The MSB currently has a 40-year SUP (to expire in 2044). All of the existing SUP area on LNF land was assigned to Management Area (MA) 8 (ski areas) in the 1986 LNF Land and Resource Management Plan (United States Forest Service [USDA] 1986), referred to hereinafter as the Forest Plan. Approximately 706 acres of the proposed expansion area are currently assigned to MA 16 (timber production), and 399 acres are assigned to MA 25 (timber production within the constraint of achieving a visual quality standard of Partial Retention). Previous National Environmental Policy Act Decisions In 1993, the MSB submitted a Master Development Plan (MDP) to the LNF. The LNF evaluated this plan in an Environmental Assessment (EA) that was finalized in January 1995 (USDA 1995a). The LNF issued a Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact in April 1996

Chapter 1 Purpose and Need for Action


Figure 1-1. Montana Snowbowl Vicinity Map



Figure 1-2. Base Area Map



(USDA 1996) approving an increase in the SUP area to the current 1,138 acres and the addition of several lifts, ski trails, a hiking/biking trail, and the expansion of the snowmaking operation. Since the 1996 decision, the MSB has delayed or modified some of the remaining projects approved in that decision based on economic considerations and the requirement by the LNF to complete improvements to Snowbowl Road/Forest Road (FR) 698 (herein identified as simply Snowbowl Road); the LNF stipulated that MSB could implement only projects that enhanced beginner or intermediate skiing until Snowbowl Road was widened. Improvements (i.e., projects) that were approved in the 1996 decision but delayed would be delayed pending the approval of the proposed MSB expansion onto TV Mountain (the Proposed Action in this Environmental Impact Statement [EIS]). Improvements that were modified were subsequently included in the MDP (MSB 2004). Those activities are part of the Proposed Action and are therefore analyzed in this EIS. In summary, if an improvement action was approved in the 1996 LNF authorization but not yet implemented, it is analyzed in this EIS as either a Connected Action or a part of the Proposed Action. 1.2 PROPOSED ACTION The MSB is proposing to expand its alpine ski and summer resort to LNF land on TV Mountain in the general location of where the original Snow Park Ski Area was permitted and operated (Section 1.1). This expansion proposal is summarized in a revised MDP (MSB 2004) that was accepted by the LNF on December 6, 2004. The proposed expansion would increase the existing SUP area by 1,105 acres to 2,243 acres (Figure 1-1). New facilities on LNF land would include ski trails, lifts, buried lines (power, water, and wastewater), a snowmaking reservoir, hiking and mountain bike trails, two wastewater drainfields, a maintenance building, and a lodge. Chapter 2 provides a comprehensive listing of the elements of the Proposed Action and a tabular comparison of project components. A new SUP would be required to implement the Proposed Action. This SUP would authorize additional development, construction, and operation of resort facilities on Forest Service land (in this case, Forest Service land administered by the LNF). The SUP would be granted under the authority of the National Forest Ski Area Permit Act of 1986 (16 United States Code [USC] 497b). This Act authorizes the Forest Service to issue term ski area permits “for the use and occupancy of suitable Nordic and alpine skiing operations and purposes” (Section 3(b)). The Act also states that a permit shall encompass such acreage as the Forest Service “determines sufficient and appropriate to accommodate the permittee’s needs for ski operations and appropriate ancillary facilities” (Section 3(b)). The Proposed Action includes an amendment to the Forest Plan. This amendment would change approximately 706 acres from MA 16 (timber production) and 399 acres from MA 25 (timber production) to MA 8 (ski areas). The total new SUP area would be 2,243 acres with this addition of 1,105 acres of LNF land in the proposed expansion. The current SUP allows MSB to operate on 1,138 acres of LNF land.



The improvements described in the Proposed Action in this analysis would not all be constructed during a single year, but would be constructed over an approximately 11-year timeframe (Appendix A, Implementation Schedule). 1.3 SCOPE OF THIS ANALYSIS The analysis of effects disclosed in this EIS includes any effects occurring from implementing the entire project, including those identified in Section 1.5 of this EIS. Scope is defined in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1508.25 as the range of actions, alternatives, and effects, such as connected and cumulative actions and effects, considered in this EIS. In addition to the Proposed Action, which is described briefly in Section 1.2 and in detail in Chapter 2, Connected Actions and past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions are analyzed in this EIS. Connected Actions. Connected Actions are closely related to the Proposed Action. Actions are connected if they: • Automatically trigger other actions that may require environmental analysis; • Cannot or would not proceed unless other actions are taken previously or simultaneously; • Are independent parts of a larger action and depend on the larger actions for their

justification. The Proposed Action includes activities necessary to fulfill the Purpose and Need (Section 1.4). Connected Actions for this project include (1) all activities on private land that would be completed in conjunction with the proposed expansion described in Chapter 2 of this EIS, and (2) some improvements in the existing SUP area that were approved under a 1996 decision by the LNF but have not yet been implemented (Section 1.1) (USDA 1996). Table 1-1 summarizes the improvements in the existing SUP area that were approved in 1996 (USDA 1996), have not yet been implemented, would be completed if the Proposed Action were approved, and therefore are Connected Actions. Chapter 2 provides a comprehensive list of proposed and planned improvements.

Table 1-1. Improvements Approved in 1996 Analyzed as Connected Actions in this EIS

Planned Improvement Approved in LNF (1996) and a

Connected Action Ski trail capacity (SAOT)1 193 skiers Ski trails: acreage 20 acres Ski trails: number 8 trails Ski trail capacity (SAOT): beginner/intermediate 190 skiers Ski trail acreage: beginner/intermediate 19 acres Tree removal for new ski trails and new lifts only 14 acres Total tree removal 14 acres Maximum water withdrawal rate for snowmaking 115 gpm2

1 skiers at one time 2 gallons per minute



Other Connected Actions include new facilities/improvements planned on adjacent private land: • Expanded parking (30 more spaces, or 75 more SAOT, created by moving the existing

maintenance building) • Continuous shuttle service on busy days • Buried utility lines (power, water, and wastewater) • Services building that would house bathrooms, ticket sales, and food sales • Construction of a flow monitor on Butler Creek, maintenance of 30 gpm in Butler Creek at

the flow monitor during snowmaking, and monitoring and annual reporting to the LNF. For this analysis, the actual end result and effect of the Proposed Action cannot be accurately disclosed without including the additive improvements that would be implemented as Connected Actions (Table 1-1). Therefore, in this EIS the existing improvements are defined as all improvements that have already been constructed/completed in the existing SUP area. The components specific to the Proposed Action are discussed, but the cumulative totals related to the Proposed Action plus Connected Actions in the proposed new SUP area (and/or private land) are also identified. Past actions. Past actions include those known management actions (regardless of land ownership) that could potentially have similar effects as identified as resulting from the Proposed Action and No Action alternatives. Past actions include the Snow Park Ski Area located on LNF land on the west side of TV Mountain, the construction of the existing MSB resort on LNF land and private land, and an SUP area expansion and improvements approved in 1996 by the LNF (USDA 1996). Other past actions are the 2003 closure of the Marshall Mountain Ski Area, timber harvest, and related road construction. Present actions. Present actions include road maintenance and communications site operation on TV Mountain. Other present actions are vegetative and restoration treatments conducted within and adjacent to the LNF land by the Forest Service and private landowners. Reasonably foreseeable actions. Reasonably foreseeable actions include road maintenance and vegetative or restoration treatments (such as weed control) anticipated to occur inside of and adjacent to the proposed expansion area during the next 11 years. The Grant Creek Fuel Reduction Project was approved by the LNF in a 2007 Decision Notice (USDA 2007a). Although this project has already been approved, there are no implementation plans at this time or in the future (Paulsen 2010 personal communication). That project is therefore not included in the scope of this analysis. 1.4 PURPOSE AND NEED The Purpose of and Need for this project is based on the goal of the Forest Plan (USDA 1986) to provide recreation opportunities including developed and year-round recreation. These opportunities include: • Providing additional ski terrain • Providing additional beginner and intermediate ski terrain • Enhancing summer use and balancing summer and winter use. These opportunities are discussed below and in Sections 3.10 and 4.10 of this EIS.



Forest Plan Standard 6 states in part:

The LNF will provide for a wide spectrum of Forest-related dispersed recreation and range of skill levels available to Forest visitors including the elderly and handicapped. The program will provide for use of the Forest on a year-round basis in areas that will minimize conflicts between user groups and other Forest resources.

Forest Plan Standard 7 states in part:

Emphasis will be placed on increasing the use of existing sites by making them usable by a wide segment of society….The private sector and other agencies will be encouraged to provide for increased public needs on National Forest System land and on lands adjacent to the Forest. If and when development proposals are received for expansion of existing or construction of new ski areas, they will be evaluated according to the normal procedures for determining ski area feasibility.

The Proposed Action would increase outdoor recreation opportunities for both dispersed recreation (e.g., hiking and mountain biking) and developed recreation (e.g., skiing, snowboarding, folf, and lift-supported mountain biking). It would also increase skier recreation opportunities for beginner and intermediate skill levels. The Proposed Action would increase year-round use in an area already used for hiking, mountain biking, folf, and winter sports. It would expand the use of an existing developed winter recreation site by making more beginner and intermediate terrain available. The Proposed Action would allow the private sector to increase recreation opportunities on public and adjacent private land. Note that this EIS uses the term “skier” to refer to both skiers and snowboarders. Snowboarders are a significant part of the population using MSB and other ski areas. Snowboarders also represent a significant portion of the growth in alpine recreation in the past two decades. The Purpose of and Need for the Proposed Action is intended to increase year-round recreation opportunities on the LNF while maintaining or improving resource values. The specific actions for meeting this need are: • Providing additional ski terrain to meet current and future demand due to increased

population; • Providing additional beginner and intermediate terrain to create a terrain mix that offers a

wider range of skier opportunities and better matches the skill mix of the current and future skier population;

• Enhancing summer use and balancing winter and summer uses by increasing hiking and biking opportunities and by improving support facilities.

1.4.1 Providing Additional Ski Terrain Providing additional ski terrain at MSB for all skill levels would help achieve the LNF standard of providing developed recreation opportunities at existing sites. The current ski trails cannot accommodate increasing demand from all ski levels. The 1996 approval of improvements to MSB by the LNF (USDA 1996) did not substantially help to meet this standard because many of the 1996 improvements have not yet been implemented.



Missoula County represents the population closest to MSB and provides most of its ski clientele. Between 1990 and 2006, the population of Missoula County grew from 79,080 to 104,095, an increase of nearly 32 percent. During this same period, per capita income in inflation-adjusted terms for Missoula County residents increased by approximately 33 percent (U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis [BEA] 2007) (Section 3.12). These increases in population and per capita personal income in Missoula County could translate into greater skier demand. Three-year rolling averages of total skier visits to MSB are shown in Figure 1-3. Using three-year rolling averages removes some of the year-to-year variability caused by weather and offers a clearer picture of the overall trend in skier use. Similar figures are also shown for nearby Marshall Mountain Ski Area (rolling average is shown, but the Marshall Mountain Ski Area closed in 2003).

Figure 1-3. Three-year Periods for Annual Averages

The three-year average of skier visits to MSB for 1989 through 1991 was 43,667 total visits; the same average for 2002 through 2004 was 66,333, an increase of more than 50 percent. Several years of low snowpack included in the period 2004 through 2009 reduced the ending three-year average of skier visits to 61,350. In summary, these figures suggest that increases in population and per capita income, coupled with the closing of the Marshall Mountain Ski Area in 2003, are translating into increased MSB usage by area skiers, and this demand is anticipated to grow. The MSB currently has 52 ski trails, including 3 trails constructed in 2008 and 2 trails constructed in 2009. Eight additional ski trails were approved in 1996 (USDA 1996) and are included in this analysis as Connected Actions. The Proposed Action would add another 20 ski trails, for a cumulative total of 80 ski trails, and increase the acreage of ski trails to 441 acres (currently 255 acres). These new ski trails would increase the cumulative total capacity of ski trails to 3,066 SAOT (currently 1,500 SAOT).

-

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

'89-

'91

'90-

'92

'91-

'93

'92-

'94

'93-

'95

'94-

'96

'95-

'97

'96-

'98

'97-

'99

'98-

'00

'99-

'01

'00-

'02

'01-

'03

'02-

'04

'03-

'05

'04-

'06

'05-

'07

'06-

'08

'07-

'09

Skie

r V

isit

atio

n

Three-Year Period

Three-year Rolling Average Visitation

Snowbowl

Marshall



If the Proposed Action were approved, the lift capacity would increase from 1,408 to 2,345 SAOT. The ski trail capacity is higher than the lift capacity for two reasons: (1) the ski industry desires less crowded ski trails for skier safety, and (2) increasing the beginner/intermediate ski trails without closing the existing advanced/expert trails would cumulatively add to the ski trail capacity at MSB. 1.4.2 Providing Additional Beginner and Intermediate Ski Terrain Providing additional beginner and intermediate ski terrain at MSB would help meet the LNF standard of providing developed recreation opportunities at existing sites that are usable by a wide segment of society with a range of skill levels. It would also help meet the standard to minimize conflicts between user groups. The current ski terrain at MSB does not provide sufficient beginner/intermediate capacity for its users, and it creates skill level conflicts and skier congestion. The MSB has historically been regarded as a ski area for more advanced skiers. The existing terrain predominantly consists of advanced and expert trails (Table 1-2). This forces skiers of all skill levels to use the same terrain, which results in conflicts. The 2004 MDP identifies one of the primary objectives of the proposed expansion as increasing the amount of beginner and intermediate terrain. This increase in beginner and intermediate terrain would better reflect the actual skill mix of the skier population. In conjunction with Connected Actions (Table 1-1), the Proposed Action would increase the acreage of beginner/intermediate ski trails by 144 acres (from 105 acres), for a total of 249 acres. These new ski trails would increase the capacity of beginner/intermediate ski trails to 2,490 SAOT (from 1,050 SAOT).

Table 1-2. Comparison of Existing, Proposed and Planned* Ski Trail Classifications

Ability Level

Existing Trails

(Acres)

Proposed and

Planned Trails

(Acres)

Existing Trails SAOT

Proposed and

Planned Trails SAOT

Potential Cumulative Total Trails

SAOT

Existing %

Total SAOT

Potential Cumulative

% Total SAOT

Beginner/ Intermediate 105 144 1,050 1,440 2,490 70 81

Advanced/ Expert 150 42 450 126 576 30 19

Total 255 186 1,500 1,566 3,066 100 100

* Planned indicates Connected Actions approved in 1996.

Source: MSB (2004) and information provided by MSB general manager and owner. 1.4.3 Enhancing Summer Use and Balancing Summer and Winter Use Providing additional summer use opportunities at MSB would help achieve the LNF standard of providing developed recreation at existing sites and on a year-round basis. Summer operations have become essential to ski area economics and provide a wide range of additional recreational opportunities for Forest users. Mountain biking, hiking, folf, nature viewing, recreational berry picking, and weddings have increased at MSB in recent decades. Additional opportunities for these activities and facilities to support them are needed at MSB. Under the Proposed Action, approximately 1 mile of new mountain biking trail would be constructed on TV Mountain, and an additional 2 miles of new ski trails and existing roads would be designated for biking. Other existing roads in the proposed expansion area would also be



available for biking or hiking as demand increased. Improved facilities such as buildings, wastewater systems, and maintenance buildings would support these summer uses in addition to winter uses. 1.5 DECISIONS TO BE MADE This EIS documents the site-specific effects of the Proposed Action and the No Action alternative. It is not a general management plan, nor is it a programmatic analysis of a broad agency action. No further decisions would need to be made under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) before the selected alternative could be implemented. Pursuant to the 1996 Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act (Section 701(j), Title VII, Division I), all lands within the boundaries of permitted ski areas are automatically withdrawn from mineral entry. The following decisions will be made by the Deciding Officer, the LNF Supervisor: • Whether to allow the expansion of MSB to TV Mountain • Whether to amend the 1986 Forest Plan • Whether to modify the existing proposal • What mitigation to require. 1.6 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS Regulatory requirements are defined by the laws, regulations, policies, and other factors that apply to potential actions. Federal and state laws, the Forest Plan, and Forest Service policies provide important guidance under which projects are designed and evaluated. The standards specific to each resource are described in the introductions for each resource in Chapter 3. National Environmental Policy Act The proposed project is subject to an environmental review process dictated by NEPA. In the EIS analysis, the federal agency (LNF) assesses whether a proposed major federal action is likely to significantly affect the quality of the human environment. The agency also analyzes the effects of alternatives to the Proposed Action, including a No Action alternative. National Forest Management Act The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) of 1976 requires the Forest Service to prepare Forest Plans and regulations to guide development in National Forests. The Forest Service Land and Resource Management Plans provide strategic direction for management of a National Forest developed through agency and public involvement. Land and resource management direction consists of goals, objectives, and management requirements (standards and guidelines). Goals and objectives provide broad, overall direction regarding the types and amounts of goods and services the National Forests provide and focus on achieving ecosystem health and ecological integrity. Management requirements set minimum standards that must be met or exceeded while achieving the goals and objectives. Administrative requirements also establish broad multiple-use management direction and generally apply to all areas of the National Forests. Standards are actions that must be followed or are required limits to activities in order to achieve objectives. Site-specific deviations from standards must be analyzed and documented in management plan amendments.



The 1986 Forest Plan identifies Forest-wide goals in Section II-A and Forest-wide standards in Section II-E. The Forest Plan also designates MAs across the Forest with individual goals and standards for each as discussed in Section III of the Forest Plan. The regulatory requirements discussed in Chapter 3 of this EIS for each resource are limited to those that would be directly affected by the Proposed Action. These regulatory requirements were identified by comparing all components of the Proposed Action with all Forest-wide and MA-specific goals and standards. Additional regulatory requirements were identified based on other laws, regulations, and policies that affect activities on LNF land. The Proposed Action includes the change of approximately 706 acres from MA 16 (timber production) and 399 acres from MA 25 (timber production within the constraint of achieving a visual quality standard of Partial Retention), for a total of 1,105 acres to MA 8 (ski areas). Figure 1-4 shows current MA designations in the MSB area. Goals and standards for MA 16 and MA 25 are identified in Chapter 3, but all evaluations of effects are based on the goals and standards of the proposed redesignation to MA 8.



Figure 1-4. Lolo Forest Management Areas

Documents

CHAPTER 1 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTIONa123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic...Chapter 1 Purpose and Need for Action Draft EIS 1-4 Montana Snowbowl (USDA 1996) approving