Record of Decision 

Calumet Project Area 

Final Environmental Impact Statement 

USDA Forest Service 

Black Hills National Forest 

Mystic Ranger District 

Pennington County, South Dakota 

Background 

The Black Hills National Forest, Mystic Ranger District plans to implement multiple resource 

management actions within the Calumet Project Area. This proposal is guided by the Black Hills 

National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan as amended by the Phase II Amendment, 

and by the Healthy Forests Restoration Act. It is supported by the National Fire Plan, the 10 year 

Comprehensive Strategy Implementation Plan agreed to by the Western Governor’s Association, 

and the President’s Healthy Forest Initiative. 

The project area lies approximately six miles southwest of Rapid City, SD. Sheridan Lake is also 

located within the project area. The project covers approximately 31,772 acres. The project area 

consists of 27,617 acres of National Forest System lands, as well as, 4,155 acres of interspersed 

private lands. 

The purpose of and need for the actions proposed in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) are 

as follows: 

• Moves existing land and resource conditions toward desired conditions as specified in the

Forest Plan. 

• Reduce the threat to ecosystem components, including forest resources, from the existing 

mountain pine beetle epidemic. 

• Help protect local communities and resources from large-scale wildfire by reducing 

hazardous fuels. 

Two alternatives have been considered in detail as documented in the EIS. The action alternative 

(Alternative B) was designed to address the purpose and need, to varying degrees, as guided by 

management direction. The EIS also discloses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental 

impacts resulting from both the action and no action alternatives.

The ongoing mountain pine beetle (MPB) epidemic is of primary concern in the project area. 

This epidemic is killing mature pine trees, resulting in stand replacement on a landscape scale. 

There is widespread local support for actively managing National Forest System lands to reduce 

the likelihood that mountain pine beetle populations will spread from the National Forest on to 

private land and, more generally, to control the extent of the epidemic in the Black Hills. In 

addition, there is both local and national support for active management of National Forest 

System lands to reduce the potential for large-scale wildfires. The Healthy Forests Restoration 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 2 

Act (HFRA) of 2003 represents the culmination of a number of National level policy documents 

and efforts developed to address this issue. Guided by the Forest Plan and the HFRA, the

Calumet Project proposed action was developed to treat vegetation on a broad, landscape scale to 

reduce the threat to ecosystem components from the existing insect epidemic (mountain pine 

beetle) and reduce the potential for large-scale severe wildfire. Ultimately, the intent is to limit 

effects to the environment from MPB and reduce the potential for loss of property or life due to 

large-scale wildfire. 

For the Calumet Project, ample opportunities were provided for public participation. These 

opportunities are described in the following paragraphs. A Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an 

EIS was published in the Federal Register on Monday, October 24, 2011. Comments received 

during the ensuing scoping period were used to define issues, develop alternatives, and analyze 

effects. The Notice of Availability (NOA) for comment on the DEIS was published in the 

Federal Register on Friday, June 15, 2012. Public comments were received on the DEIS through 

July 30, 2012. The Calumet Project Interdisciplinary (ID) Team analyzed the public comments 

and provided agency responses to the comments on the DEIS (see Appendix A of the Final EIS). 

The Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for 

public review was published in the Federal Register on Friday, September 7, 2012. The Calumet 

Project qualifies for expedited NEPA review under the authority of the Healthy Forests 

Restoration Act (HFRA) of 2003 (P.L.108-148). This Record of Decision (ROD) is made in 

accordance with the HFRA pre-decisional objection process pursuant to Forest Service 

Regulations at 36 CFR 218, Subpart A. As such, there was a 30-day objection filing period that

began September 8, 2012, with publication of the legal notice in the Rapid City Journal, Rapid 

City, South Dakota and ended October 9, 2012. Alternative B was identified as the agency’s 

preferred alternative in the FEIS and the cover letter transmitting the FEIS for public review. No 

objections were filed. 

Project Summary 

An overview of the issues and alternatives is presented below to give the reader a better understanding 

of the context of the decision disclosed in this document. A more detailed description of the project 

can be found in Chapters 1 and 2 of the FEIS. 

Issues 

Comments received during the public scoping process were used to help define issues, develop 

alternatives and mitigation measures, and analyze effects. A total of 154 responses were received via 

letters, faxes, public meeting transcripts, personal-delivery, or email during the formal scoping 

process. Through review and analysis of scoping comments and input, the Calumet Project Core ID 

Team identified three (3) key issues related to the proposed activities (see FEIS, Chapter 1, Issues 

section and Chapter 2, Table 2-1). A brief description of the key issues follows. 

1. Mountain Pine Beetle. The ongoing MPB epidemic is of foremost concern in the project area. 

The epidemic is killing mature pine trees, resulting in stand replacement on a landscape scale. The 

majority of the project area includes relatively dense stands of mature pine trees, consisting mostly 

of even size and age trees. This is the preferred food source of MPB. Approximately 57 percent of 

the project area pine stands are rated at high hazard for MPB infestation. A high level of mortality 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 3 

is expected throughout the area as a result of the ongoing epidemic. This would increase fuel loads 

and wildfire hazard, and poses a significant threat to ecosystem components and forest resources. 

According to Schmid et al. (2007), the most important aspect of managing mature ponderosa 

pine stands in the Black Hills National Forest is minimizing MPB-caused mortality. The only 

effective long-term strategy to minimize beetle-cause mortality is controlling stand conditions 

through silvicultural means over large landscape and monitoring areas of beetle buildup (USDA 

Forest Service 2012a). The proposed action includes immediate removal of infested pine trees to 

limit MPB spread locally, and thinning of denser pine stands throughout the landscape to reduce 

their susceptibility to attack both now and into the future. 

Comments and feedback during scoping indicates strong support for management action and a 

sense of urgency in getting these actions completed. This is especially true of those who live in 

or near the area. Some have experienced MPB infestations on their own private property and are 

taking actions to treat these stands. The dilemma they face is that large expanse of infested and 

high hazard National Forest System lands adjacent to or surrounding their property. 

2. Wildfire and Fuels Hazard. The Forest Service, State of South Dakota, local governments, and 

area residents take the need to reduce fuels and the potential for large-scale wildfires very seriously. 

Large wildfires (fires greater than 300 acres) burned about 147,900 acres during the period from 1900 

to 1980 in the Black Hills. Since 1980, a dramatic increase in acreage burned has occurred. Recent 

wildfires, including but not limited to the Dakota Fire, Jasper, Roger’s Shack, Elk Mountain II, Battle 

Creek, Grizzly Gulch, Red Point, Ricco, Cement, East Ridge and Alabaugh Fires have burned over 

296,000 acres. These intense fires covered large areas, moving as far as eleven miles in one day and 

as fast as five miles in three hours. Area fires have significantly impacted natural resources, public 

and private lands, threatened the safety of and injured firefighters, and resulted in civilian death. 

The Pennington County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) designates most of the project 

area as wildland-urban interface. It includes the ‘at-risk’-community of Rockerville, 4,155 acres of 

private lands, subdivisions, businesses, and a major recreational complex within the project area. The 

project area is rated as a fire regime condition class of 3 (FRCC3). This means it has been 

significantly altered from the historical range and there is a high risk of significantly altering or losing 

key components of the forest ecosystem. Currently, 50 percent of the project has a high to very high 

fire hazard rating. This hazard is associated with the potential for large-scale wildfires. The ongoing 

MPB epidemic is augmenting the wildfire hazard by adding large amounts of dead fuels to the mix. 

The proposed action includes removing MPB infested trees, thinning stands with moderate and high 

wildfire hazard, constructing fuel breaks, removing activity fuels from the forest floor, retaining and 

restoring hardwoods and meadows/grasslands, and prescribed burning. Many of the stands with 

moderate/high/very high wildfire hazard also have a high MPB hazard. The proposed action 

recognizes that wildfire in this setting cannot be eliminated. But by deliberately managing vegetation 

and fuels, reduced potential for large and severe wildfires can be realized.

Comments and feedback during scoping indicate that there is broad public support for fuel hazard 

reduction using mechanical means. There was support for using prescribed fire as a tool for reducing 

fuels and slash. Concerns regarding prescribed fire include the protection of private property and 

burning in areas that have not been mechanically treated. 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 4 

3. Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Diversity. The Forest Plan provides desired future conditions 

for the four management areas involved – MA 3.7, MA 5.1, MA 5.4, and MA 8.2. Included in the 

desired future conditions for all MA’s is to have a mosaic of vegetation, with openings and diverse 

sizes and ages of tree stands, and a diversity of plant and animal species. Both large-scale MPB and 

wildfire are major threats to achieving these desired conditions within the Calumet Project Area. 

The proposed action seeks to achieve vegetation and wildlife diversity for this area. Removal of 

MPB infested trees and thinning dense stands would reduce the amount of MPB-caused mortality 

and maintain mature pine trees within the stands; mechanical thinning, activity fuel removal, and 

prescribed burning would limit the potential for wildfire that could impact large areas of the 

forested ecosystem. Removal of encroaching conifers within and adjacent to hardwoods and 

meadows/grasslands would contribute to maintaining these habitats. Removing overstory trees in 

areas with advanced regeneration provides for younger structural stages that are important for 

many species. 

Most respondents commented on their support to limit the spread of MPB and reduce wildfire 

hazard. A few respondents commented directly on vegetation. Generally, the emphasis of these 

comments was to treat additional acres utilizing a variety of even and uneven age management 

prescriptions. Comments also suggested no new, or less road construction, and the obliteration of 

roads at the end of project implementation. 

Alternatives Considered 

Two alternatives were considered in detail in the FEIS. These are briefly discussed below. A more 

detailed comparison of all the alternatives can be found in Chapter 2 of the FEIS. 

Alternative A (No Action) – The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the study of 

the no action alternative, and to use it as a basis for comparing the effects of the proposed action and 

other alternatives. This alternative assumes no implementation of any elements of the proposed 

action. However, such things as ongoing fire suppression efforts, noxious weed treatments, and 

recurring road maintenance on Forest roads would continue as directed by the Forest Plan. 

The no action alternative represents no attempt to actively respond to the purpose and need for 

action. For example, there would be no effort to modify existing vegetation or related fuels 

conditions in the project area. The effort to reduce the widespread MPB epidemic and associated 

fuel loads would not be implemented. 

Alternative B (Proposed Action) – Alternative B is the modified proposed action and was developed 

in response to the purpose and need. Alternative B is designed to treat the vegetation to reduce the 

potential for mountain pine beetle (MPB) infestations. It also provides for landscape level and some 

private property boundary fuel breaks, thereby lowering the potential for large-scale wildfires. 

Alternative B proposes to expand hardwoods and reduce pine encroachment in historic meadows, 

thereby expanding natural fuel breaks and increasing biodiversity within the Calumet Project Area. 

Vegetative management in this alternative is characterized by a number of specific treatments. 

There would be commercial timber harvest and non-commercial thinning (estimated 19,304 acres), 

which opens up forest stands with the objective of reducing the potential for MPB infestations and 

large-scale wildfire. Sanitation harvest to remove infested trees may be conducted in areas near or 

adjacent to identified stands in order to limit the expansion of MPB populations. Most harvest would 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 5 

be conducted using whole tree logging methods in order to reduce after-harvest fuel loading. Natural 

fuel breaks such as meadows and hardwoods would be treated to expand and enhance their ability to 

moderate wildfire and provide for wildlife habitat. Prescribed burning (approximately 15,990 acres) 

to reduce fuels and enhance natural fuel breaks is planned in this alternative. 

Decision 

This Record of Decision documents my decision and rationale with respect to the Calumet Project 

alternatives as presented in the Calumet Project Area FEIS. The Calumet Project purpose and need 

provides the focus and scope for the proposed action and alternatives as they relate to Forest and 

national level policy and direction (FEIS, Chapter 1). Given this purpose and need, I have 

reviewed the proposed action (Alternative B), the issues identified during the public scoping 

period, the alternatives, and the environmental consequences of implementing the proposed action 

and alternatives disclosed in the FEIS. Furthermore, I have carefully considered public comments 

received on the Draft EIS. These comments were invaluable to me in weighing management 

options. Public feedback, the analysis disclosed in the FEIS, information contained in the project 

record, and management direction and policy considerations contributed collectively to 

determining the selected action. Based on this review, I have decided to implement Alternative 

B as the Selected Action. 

The Selected Action (Alternative B) was described in the cover letter that accompanied the FEIS. 

Features of the Selected Action are described below and are displayed in Maps 2 through 4 of this ROD. 

My decision incorporates the design criteria, mitigation measures, and monitoring recommendations 

included in Appendix B of the Calumet Project FEIS. These design criteria and mitigation measures 

were identified by Interdisciplinary Team members during project development as resource protection 

measures required by law, policy, or regulation or as measures needed to ensure consistency with 

Forest Plan direction. Monitoring activities were identified to track implementation and efficacy of 

design criteria and mitigation measures. 

Vegetation Treatments 

Vegetation treatments in the Selected Action include commercial timber harvest and noncommercial thinning aimed at thinning the forest at the landscape scale. Most non-commercial 

thinning overlaps commercial treatment acres. This broad forest thinning serves to reduce MPB 

habitat, reduce fuel loads, increase tree growth, and create landscape-scale fuel breaks to reduce the 

potential for large-scale high intensity wildfire. Most commercial thinning would be conducted using 

whole tree harvest methods or methods achieving a similar result in order to reduce fuel loading. The 

Selected Action also allows for cable logging treatment, as well. Fuel reduction methods will also be 

included in non-commercial treatments, as needed. Sanitation harvest to remove infested pine trees 

and reduce stand densities may be conducted in areas near or adjacent to identified stands in order to 

limit the expansion of MPB populations. 

Scattered overstory removals are also planned in the Selected Action. This treatment provides a 

break in the forest canopy that can further reduce potential for fire spread, creates early seral stage 

habitat and a mosaic across the landscape, and helps meet Forest Plan structural stage objectives. 

Conifer removal (retention and restoration) will be conducted from within and surrounding

hardwood stands, and pine trees that have encroached into historic meadows will be removed. 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 6 

Removing pine from these areas improves their capability to function as natural fuel breaks and 

provides habitat diversity over the long-term. Environmental and economic criteria will be applied 

during layout to ensure that a mix of pine/hardwood habitat remain in places. 

Prescribed broadcast burning to reduce fuels and enhance natural fuel breaks is included in the 

Selected Action. This burning is intended to limit fuel loads, lessen wildfire hazards, re-establish 

fire and its natural role in the environment, and contribute to habitat diversity. Treatments along 

roadways will help improve access (ingress/egress) for private landowners and emergency 

personnel in the event of a wildfire. 

Road Work 

Road work that supports vegetation treatments is included in the Selected Action. This includes 5 

miles of road construction, reconstruction of 27 miles of existing road, and 79 miles of road 

maintenance (see Map 4 of this ROD). Most road construction authorized in my decision is 

associated with cable units. A more detailed discussion of road work and road management 

activities is presented in the FEIS. 

Selected Action Summary Tables 

Table 1 below lists the activities included in the Selected Action for the Calumet Project. These 

activities are displayed in Maps 2 through 4 of this ROD. The figures provided are approximate. 

Table 1: Activities Associated with the Selected Action for Calumet Project Area 

TREATMENT Selected Action 

Commercial Harvest Treatments (Acres)* 

Commercial Thinning 9,195 

Removal Cuts 686 

Hardwood Retention 1,254 

Hardwood Restoration 1,054 

Meadows/Grasslands Retention 1,162 

Meadows/Grasslands Restoration 131 

Cable Logging 735 

Fuel Break Thinning (adjacent to private property) 375 

Fuel Break Thinning (along primary roads) 381 

Non Commercial Treatments (Acres) 

Non Commercial Thinning 4,331 

Prescribed Burning (Acres) 15,990 

Total Area Available for Treatment (Acres) 19,304 

Harvest Volume 

Sawtimber (MBF) 43,650 

Sawtimber (CCF) 87,300 

Products (CCF) 5,870 

Road Work (Miles) 

New Construction 5 

Reconstruction 27 

Maintenance 79 

 *Non-commercial thinning may be done in conjunction with commercial treatments. 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 7 

Table 2 below provides a comparative display of the effects of the Selected Action and alternatives 

considered relative to the key issues.

Table 2: Calumet Project Area Alternative Effects Relative to Identified Key Issues 

1. Mountain Pine Beetle Existing 

Condition* Alt A 

Selected 

Action 

(Alt B) 

MPB Hazard Rating** – Low (acres) 10,516 21,225 21,242 

MPB Hazard Rating** – High (acres) 14,045 3,336 2,114 

2. Wildfire and Fuels Hazard Existing 

Condition* Alt A 

Selected 

Action 

(Alt B) 

Fire Hazard Rating (Very High/High) 13,957 13,957 3,382 

Total Mechanical Treatments (acres) 0 14,597 

Roadside Treatments (acres) 0 381 

Shaded Fuel Breaks (acres) 0 375 

Prescribed Broadcast Burning (acres) 0 15,990 

3. Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Diversity Alt A 

Selected 

Action 

(Alt B) 

Hardwood Retention (acres) 0 1,254 

Hardwood Restoration (acres) 0 1,054 

Meadows/Grasslands Retention/Restoration (acres) 0 1,293 

Projected Habitat Structural Stages for the Project MA 5.1 and 5.4 in acres: 

Structural 

Stage 

Existing Condition* Alternative A Selected Action 

(Alternative B) 

MA 5.1 MA 5.4 MA 5.1 MA 5.4 MA 5.1 MA 5.4 

1 221 591 221 591 221 524 

2 18 186 645 4,547 605 1,888 

3A 154 875 1,816 3,305 1,289 5,195 

3B 245 1,689 95 559 88 637 

3C 138 547 0 0 0 0 

4A 1,119 4,421 1,280 5,719 1,936 6,632 

4B 2,262 5,486 722 2,140 376 771 

4C 622 2,841 0 0 31 95 

5 0 225 0 0 0 185 

*Existing Condition column represents current conditions. Alt A column represents projected conditions 3-5 years in 

the future due to MPB-caused mortality (USDA Forest Service 2012a). The Alt B column represents conditions 3-5 

years in the future due to mechanical treatments and MPB-caused mortality. 

**The MPB Hazard Rating refers to the potential for loss within a stand if an infestation occurs and not the probability 

of an infestation. 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 8 

Rationale for Selected Action

I have decided to select Alternative B as the Selected Action because it best meets the purpose 

and need for action and responds to the issues raised and public comments received. A key issue 

that factored into my decision-making was how well the Selected Alternative reduced insect 

hazard and fire hazard ratings within the project area. A more detailed discussion of my rationale 

for selecting Alternative B follows. 

Purpose and Need 

As stated in the FEIS, the primary management emphasis in the Calumet Project Area is to: 

• Moves existing land and resource conditions toward desired conditions as specified in the

Forest Plan. 

• Reduce the threat to ecosystem components, including forest resources, from the existing 

mountain pine beetle epidemic. 

• Help protect local communities and resources from large-scale wildfire by reducing 

hazardous fuels. 

There is a need to maintain or improve forest health and vigor on a landscape scale. Doing so will 

result in a healthy forest that is less susceptible to insects and diseases, and can better withstand 

events such as wildfire, wind, snow, drought, or other weather related impacts. 

There is a need to appreciably slow or halt the ongoing development and spread of mountain pine 

beetle in the project area. The implications of continued spread of this epidemic include: increased 

tree mortality across the landscape, further accumulation of hazardous fuels and increased potential 

for severe large-scale wildfires threatening forest resources and values of the wildland-urban 

interface (WUI) within the area and beyond, major changes in the scenery, alteration of wildlife 

habitat, and impacts to soil and water resources. Surveys indicate that the expansion of MPB is 

continuing unabated within the project area. The recent MPB flight appears to be significant, and 

increased mortality of mature pine trees is expected. Some areas are expected to see the near total 

elimination of mature pine trees due to MPB. 

Associated with the need to address the MPB epidemic is the need to reduce the potential for severe 

large-scale wildfire. This can be accomplished by implementing a variety of vegetation management 

treatments to thin and reinvigorate pine stands, reduce forest fuels, and facilitate effective wildfire 

suppression/protection in the project area, much of which is wildland-urban interface. 

In association with the focus on improving forest health in the project area, (e.g., stemming the 

advance of MPB and reducing fuels/fire hazard) there is an opportunity to address other Forest 

Plan objectives. These include maintaining or improving wildlife/plant habitat, providing forest 

products to local industry, and providing for other resource amenities and uses. The project area is 

comprised of a variety of Management Areas, each of which has a unique focus. 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 9 

Table 3: Management Areas within the Calumet Project Area 

MANAGEMENT AREA ACRES NFS %

3.7 - Late Successional Forest Landscape 780 2.8% 

5.1 - Resource Production Emphasis 5,621 20.4% 

5.4 - Big Game Winter Range Emphasis 18,259 66.1% 

8.2 - Developed Recreation Complexes 2,686 9.7% 

Total NFS 27,617 100.00% 

Private 4,155 

Total Gross 31,772 

The Selected Action is consistent with the management direction for these Management Areas. 

The Selected Action (Alternative B) responds well to the purpose and need. It takes a landscape 

approach to insect and disease and fire hazard reduction; thins pine trees and removes biomass; 

maintains and expands hardwoods and meadows; and includes prescribed burning to reduce fuels. 

Most importantly, the Selected Action focuses on those areas currently infested with MPB and 

reduces hazardous fuels in areas near private land. 

Management Direction 

I find that the silvicultural treatments and prescribed fire actions included in the Selected Action 

(Alternative B) provide a direct, proactive approach in helping to achieve the desired conditions 

described in Forest Plan Goal 10 and the associated objectives (BHNF LRMP, pg. I-35). Goal 10 

directs land managers to establish and maintain a mosaic of vegetation conditions to reduce occurrences 

of catastrophic fire, insect and disease events, and facilitate insect and disease management and 

firefighting capability. Moving toward achievement of Goal 10 was a key component in development 

of the purpose and need for action in the Calumet Project. Furthermore, the Forest Plan contains many 

goals and objectives that cannot be met in areas affected by large-scale insect infestations and wildfire. 

It is clear that Forest Plan goals and objectives related to soil, air, watershed, cave resources, wildlife 

habitat, scenic resources, and recreational opportunities can be negatively affected by such events. By 

managing vegetation to reduce the likelihood of insect infestation and wildfire, the Selected Action will 

create conditions that support a wide range of Forest Plan goals and objectives. 

The National Fire Plan with its associated strategies and agreements directs Federal agencies to reduce 

fuels and fire hazards within the wildland-urban interface, adjacent to at-risk-communities, and in 

other areas on public lands. The Black Hills in general and the Calumet Project Area in particular are 

located within a fire-adapted ponderosa pine ecosystem. Fire suppression and some management 

practices over the past century have changed vegetation patterns and created high fire hazard 

conditions within the project area. 

The Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 provides planning tools and statutory emphasis to 

reduce insect infestations and hazardous fuels. The Calumet Project is an authorized hazardous 

fuel reduction project under Section 102 (a) (4) of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003. 

The area qualifies under section 102 (a) (4) because there is an existing mountain pine beetle 

epidemic occurring within the project area which poses a significant risk to resource values on 

National Forest System and private lands. HFRA provides procedural tools to hasten processes 

focused on addressing the existence of insect or disease on public and adjacent private lands and 

reducing the probability and occurrence of severe wildfire in fire adapted ecosystems, especially 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 10 

near at-risk-communities (ARC) and in the wildland-urban interface (WUI). Moreover, it is 

appropriate that proposed actions be designed in consideration of the fuels hazard reduction 

management recommendations and guidelines provided by the Pennington County Community 

Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). Alternative B responds well to insect and disease and fire 

hazard reduction goals set forth in this law, as well as other National direction. 

Issues 

There were three key issues identified as a result of internal and external scoping for the Calumet 

Project, as presented earlier in this ROD and on pages 24 through 27 of the FEIS. These issues 

relate to mountain pine beetle, wildfire and fuels hazard, and vegetation and wildlife habitat 

diversity. The Selected Action (Alternative B) responds well to each of these issues. 

1. Mountain Pine Beetle. The ongoing MPB epidemic is of foremost concern in the project area. 

This epidemic is killing a large number of pine trees, including mature pine trees, resulting in 

mortality on a landscape scale. Stand conditions in large parts of this area remain conducive to 

sustaining high levels of beetle-caused mortality and allowing the outbreak to expand further (e.g., 

57 percent of the acres of ponderosa pine within the project area is rated as a high hazard for MPB). 

Based on survey information and observations, MPB appear to be continuing unabated. According to 

Schmid et al. (2007), the most important aspect of managing mature ponderosa pine stands in the 

Black Hills National Forest is minimizing MPB-caused mortality. The only effective long-term 

strategy to minimize beetle-cause mortality is controlling stand conditions through silvicultural 

means over large landscapes and monitoring areas of beetle buildup (USDA Forest Service 2012a). 

The Selected Action authorizes removal of infested pine trees to limit the spread of MPB. It also 

authorizes thinning of dense pine stands across the landscape to reduce the susceptibility of these 

stands to MPB attack both now and into the future. The Selected Action would reduce the 

acreage of pine stands that are at a high hazard of infestation from 57 percent to 9 percent. 

Protection provided by project activities would extend over time, and insect hazard ratings would 

remain low overall for the next couple of decades. 

2. Wildfire and Fuels Hazard. Fifty percent of the project area is currently rated as having a 

high/very high wildfire hazard rating. This hazard level would be maintained if no action is taken to 

modify or treat the fuels. The end result could be high intensity wildfire within the project area that 

could eliminate a large portion of the existing forest cover. A large, intense wildfire could cause 

significant negative effects to the ecosystem, area infrastructure, public and private lands, and could 

threaten the lives of residents and firefighters. The Selected Action includes removing MPB infested 

trees, thinning stands with high and very high wildfire hazard, constructing fuel breaks, removing 

activity fuels from the forest floor, retaining and restoring hardwoods and meadows, and prescribed 

burning. These treatments will help reduce the potential for a severe wildfire by moving the forest 

closer to a Condition Class 1 or 2 (i.e., conditions more closely approaching the historical range of 

variability). The Selected Action would reduce the acreage of pine stands that are identified as 

having a high/very high fire hazard rating from 50 percent to just 14 percent. 

The Selected Action includes the use of prescribed fire. Prescribed fire can be an effective tool to 

reduce fuels and contribute to vegetative diversity. I support the use of prescribed fire to help attain 

fuels hazard reduction objectives when conducted at a safe, judicious level using the checks and 

balances of the site specific prescribed burn planning process. Project analysis demonstrates that 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 11 

silvicultural thinning combined with pruning and reducing fuel loads with prescribed fire has the 

best effect on reducing fire hazard by treating the entire fuels profile across the landscape. 

3. Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Diversity. The Selected Action seeks to achieve vegetation and 

wildlife habitat diversity for this area. Removal of MPB infested trees and thinning dense stands will 

reduce the amount of MPB-caused mortality and maintain mature pine trees within the stands. 

Mechanical thinning, activity fuel removal, and prescribed burning will limit the potential for 

wildfire that could impact large areas of the forested ecosystem. Removal of encroaching conifers 

within and adjacent to hardwoods and meadows will contribute to maintaining these habitats, and 

removing overstory trees in areas with advanced regeneration will create forested stands with 

younger structural stages that are important for many species. 

The Selected Action will retain and restore hardwoods (mostly aspen and birch) by removing 

conifers from within and around the edges of many hardwood stands. This will give aspen and birch 

an opportunity to expand in size and will limit the amount of pine encroachment in these areas. The 

Selected Action will also remove pine from meadows where pine trees have encroached. These 

actions will benefit wildlife species associated with important hardwood and meadow communities. 

Conifers will be removed from identified hardwood stands and meadows/grasslands. Environmental 

and economic criteria will be applied during layout to ensure that a mix of pine/hardwood habitat 

remains in places. 

Effects to management indicator species, species designated as sensitive, and species of local concern 

have been considered. I have reviewed information disclosed in the FEIS and elsewhere in the project 

record concerning fish, wildlife, and plant species in making my decision. Changes to pine structural 

stages associated with the Selected Action are minor, relative to Forest-wide objectives for vegetation 

and wildlife habitat diversity. 

Public Response to Scoping/DEIS 

Numerous local residents and area users have expressed a desire to see an aggressive approach to 

reducing the likelihood of mountain pine beetle infestation and reducing fuels and the associated 

wildfire hazards. This is also true of local governments, volunteer fire departments, and State 

agencies. I share the concerns expressed by these individuals and organizations, which include 

protecting human life and property, conserving the natural environment, and maintaining the 

economic well being of the area. These concerns were made clear during the public scoping 

process, as evidenced at the public scoping meeting in Rapid City at the Mystic Ranger District 

office and in the comments received on the DEIS. These comments were a very important 

consideration in my decision to implement Alternative B. 

Some comments included concerns that removing trees would negatively affect flora, fauna, and 

water supplies. Other comments expressed the opposite view, indicating that limiting the amount of 

treatments would jeopardize wildlife habitat by allowing the spread of MPB-caused mortality and 

associated wildfire hazards. The Selected Action attempts to balance long-term habitat diversity 

needs by treating some stands to reduce the potential for MPB mortality and fuel hazards. 

One comment recommended using less or no new roads, and the obliteration of roads at the end of 

the project instead of just closing them, while meeting the overall objective of using harvest and 

prescribed burning to treat the landscape. Nearly all of the new roads are associated with cable 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 12 

logging on steeper ground within the project area (4.8 miles of the 5 miles of new roads proposed for 

cable logging on approximately 735 acres). Cable roads tend to be more expensive to construct 

because they access steeper terrain. Current economics are not favorable for cable logging due to the 

depressed value of wood products; cable logging is unlikely to occur unless a substantial change in 

market prices occurs. Cable logging was included in the Selected Action (Alternative B) as a 

possibility in case market conditions change. 

Several comments expressed concern about prescribed burning. This included concerns about 

controlling prescribed fire, utilizing fire only after harvest/thinning of stands in areas where 

mechanical thinning can be accomplished, and limiting the amount of tree mortality from prescribed 

fire. Controlling both the area and effects related to prescribed burning is a major consideration in 

both planning and implementing prescribed fire operations. Due care is taken to ensure that burns 

stay within prescribed boundaries, and that tree mortalities also remain within the fire prescription. 

Prescribed burning would generally be conducted in areas after they have been mechanically thinned, 

or in areas too steep to conduct thinning operations. Considerations for achieving safe burns with 

limited tree mortality, after first mechanically thinning, are included in the Selected Action. The 

Forest Service plans to work with adjacent land owners to address any specific concerns that they 

may have prior to burning. 

Reasons for Not Selecting Other Alternatives 

This section describes my rationale for not selecting other alternatives presented in the Calumet 

Project FEIS. 

Alternative A 

I did not select Alternative A (the No Action Alternative) because it did not meet the purpose and 

need for action which is primarily intended to reduce insect hazard and fire hazard within the 

Calumet Project Area. The situation in the project area demands immediate action. Mountain pine 

beetles are currently at epidemic levels throughout portions of the project area and have been 

rapidly expanding. This epidemic is killing mature pine trees, resulting in stand replacement on a 

landscape scale. This will significantly affect wildlife and plant habitat. It is adding to fuel loads 

and increasing wildfire hazards in an area that already has a high wildfire hazard rating. 

I am unwilling to delay management action (No Action) because of the potential effects to life, 

property, and natural resources resulting from the MPB epidemic and increased wildfire hazard. 

Alternative A does not meet Forest Plan direction and does not respond to the National Fire Plan 

and associated policy and agreements. 

Public Involvement

During project development and the analysis period, an extensive collaboration effort was made 

to involve, interact with and cooperate with individuals and groups interested in the Calumet 

Project. Part of this effort included public scoping as discussed below. 

The project was listed on the Forest Service’s Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA) in 

September 2011. The SOPA contains a list of Forest Service proposed actions that will soon 

begin or are undergoing environmental analysis and documentation. It provides information so 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 13 

the public can become aware of and indicate interest in specific proposals (located on-line at 

www.fs.fed.us/sopa). 

Scoping is the process of obtaining public comments about proposed federal actions to determine the 

breadth of issues to be addressed. Comments on the proposed action, potential concerns, and 

opportunities for managing the Calumet Project Area were solicited from members of the public, 

American Indian Tribes, other public agencies, adjacent property owners, organizations, and Forest 

Service specialists. On October 17, 2011, a scoping letter was mailed to approximately 542 interested 

parties, including adjacent landowners. This letter included a description of the project area, an overview 

of the NEPA process, a general explanation of the actions proposed, and an invitation to comment. 

The Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS was published in the Federal Register on Monday, 

October 24, 2011. This provided official notification that the public comment period for the Calumet 

Project Area would last for 30-days concluding November 23, 2011. During the scoping period, the 

Forest Service received considerable public response supporting the proposal and rationale for action. 

In addition to providing project information in a scoping letter, a public meeting was held at the 

Mystic Ranger District Office in Rapid City, SD on Thursday, November 03, 2011. At the meeting, 

key members of the Interdisciplinary Team presented the project proposal to the public. The team 

answered questions and solicited concerns and issues from those present. Members of the 

Whispering Pines Volunteer Fire Department attended the public meeting and participated in 

discussion with ID Team members. A concerted effort was made to engage in consultation regarding 

the project with Tribal contacts known to have interest in management of the National Forest. 

A Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Calumet Project Area Draft Environmental Statement 

(DEIS) was published in the Federal Register on June 15, 2012. This initiated the official public 45-

day comment period on the DEIS. This comment period ended July 30, 2012. During the DEIS 

comment period, 16 individuals, groups, or agencies submitted comment letters. Public input

received during this time period was evaluated using a content analysis process. Approximately 45 

comments were identified and responded to by the Calumet Interdisciplinary Team. These comments 

and associated responses are located in Appendix A of the Calumet Project FEIS. None of the 

comments received regarding the DEIS indicated a need to conduct further analysis. The FEIS 

contained additional discussion and factual or clarifying information. 

A Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Calumet Project Area Final Environmental Statement (FEIS) 

was published in the Federal Register on September 7, 2012 Also, a legal notice was published in 

the Rapid City Journal on September 8, 2012. This legal notice initiated the official 30-day objection 

filing period on the FEIS (pursuant to 36 CFR Part 218, Subpart A). The objection filing period 

ended October 9, 2012. 

The Environmentally Preferred Alternative(s) 

Disclosure of one or more environmentally preferable alternatives is required [Section 101 NEPA; 

40 CFR 1505.2(b)]. The environmentally preferable alternative is not necessarily the alternative 

that will be implemented and it does not have to meet the underlying need for the project. It does, 

however, have to cause the least damage to the biological and physical environment and best 

protect, preserve, and enhance historical, cultural, and natural resources. 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 14 

In the case of the Calumet Project, I have determined that there could be two environmentally 

preferred alternatives depending on which perspective one takes. From a short-term, nondisturbance perspective (less than 5 years), the No Action Alternative (Alternative A) meets 

many of the criteria for being environmentally preferred. In the short-term, Alternative A has the 

lowest risk of contributing to additional soil erosion, maintains the highest number of snags for 

wildlife, provides the most habitat for sensitive species, and has the least risk of damaging 

cultural resources or potentially affecting water quality. However, Alternative A presents 

significant, long-term negative effects from the ongoing MPB infestation and the potential for 

large-scale wildfire. These impacts have a high potential to occur if no management action is 

taken. From a long-term perspective, Alternative B is considered the environmentally preferred 

alternative. Although, as disclosed in the FEIS, activities do generate some short-term 

disturbance related to vegetation management impacts to soil, air, water, scenic, heritage, and 

other resources, it nevertheless reduces significant long-term environmental risks. 

Design Criteria and Mitigation Measures 

Design criteria are measures identified during project development as being instrumental in 

ensuring that the Forest Service meets the direction contained in laws, policies, and regulations 

regarding management of National Forest System lands. These measures are intended to reduce 

impacts to a variety of resources. The analysis of impacts to resources conducted by 

Interdisciplinary Team members and presented in the DEIS and FEIS assume that design criteria 

will be implemented. Mitigation measures are additional measures proposed to further reduce 

impacts to resources. As mentioned earlier in this ROD, my decision incorporates the design 

criteria and mitigation measures included in Appendix B of the Calumet FEIS. I find that these 

measures are appropriate. The design criteria and mitigation measures identified in Appendix B of 

the Calumet FEIS will be applied to on-the-ground project design, layout, and implementation 

including project contracts and/or permits. 

Monitoring 

The monitoring activities described in Appendix B of the Calumet Project FEIS will be implemented 

as appropriate. Activities and their effects, including effectiveness of design criteria and any needed 

mitigation measures, will be monitored during and following project completion. This decision 

makes no changes to the referenced monitoring activities. 

Legal Requirements, Regulation, and Policy 

Another aspect of the process for selecting an alternative is ensuring that the Selected Action 

complies with all legal requirements, regulations, and policies. The Selected Action meets the 

following legal requirements. 

Federal Laws

The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended: All surveyed and inventoried 

cultural sites considered eligible or potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places 

will be buffered and avoided during resource management activities. New sites discovered during 

operations will be protected. Any identified Traditional Cultural Properties and sacred areas will 

be protected. The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) has been consulted concerning the 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 15 

proposed activities in the Calumet Project Area. The SHPO concurred with my determination of 

“No Historic Properties Affected” in a letter dated September 11, 2012. 

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 1969: NEPA establishes the format and 

content requirements of environmental analysis and documentation. The process of preparing the 

Calumet Project Area EIS and ROD was completed in accordance with NEPA. 

The Endangered Species Act (ESA), 1973: The project decision is in compliance with ESA. There 

are no threatened, endangered, or proposed species within the Calumet Project Area. Therefore, no 

consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service was required. The bald eagle was recently delisted under ESA. Potential effects to bald eagles and other sensitive species, along with 

documentation regarding species covered under ESA, were included in a biological 

assessment/biological evaluation and summarized in Appendix D of the FEIS. 

The Clean Water Act, 1982: The Selected Action will meet and conform to the Clean Water Act as 

amended in 1982. This act establishes a non-degradation policy for all federally proposed projects. 

The Selected Action is not likely to degrade water quality below standards set by the State of South 

Dakota. This will be accomplished through planning, application, and monitoring of South Dakota 

Best Management Practices and other mitigations measures and design criteria of project activities. 

The Clean Air Act Amendments, 1977: The Selected Action will be implemented to meet the 

National Ambient Air Quality standards through avoidance of practices that degrade air quality 

below health and visibility standards. 

The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) 1976, which amends the Forest and Rangeland 

Renewable Resources Act (RPA) of 1974: All alternatives were developed to be in full 

compliance and consistent with NFMA as summarized below. 

Consistency with the Land and Resource Management Plan

The 1997 Black Hills National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) supported 

by its Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), is the Forest programmatic document required 

by the rules implementing the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Act of 1974 (RPA), as 

amended by the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA). The Forest Plan was amended 

by the Phase II Forest Plan Amendment Record of Decision made in October 2005, and became 

effective March 2, 2006. This amendment provides revised and new goals, objectives, standards and 

guidelines focused on protecting communities, property, and forest values by reducing severe insect 

and fire hazards; conserving plant and animal species and habitats for the long-term supported by the 

best available science; designating research natural areas. 

The NFMA law (16 U.S.C. 1604(i)) requires me to ensure that permits, contracts, cooperative 

agreements, and other activities carried out on the Black Hills National Forest are consistent with 

the Forest Plan. Accordingly, I have reviewed the components of my decision against Forest Plan 

direction, and find they are consistent in that: 

• Planned activities will contribute to Forest Plan goals and objectives (FEIS, Chapter 1). 

• I have reviewed the BHNF FY2009 Monitoring and Evaluation Report and Region 2 MIS 

guidance for projects. The effects of planned activities on management indicator species 

are consistent with the Forest Plan. 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 16 

• Planned activities are consistent with management area direction. 

• Planned activities comply with Forest Plan standards. 

Consistency with the National Forest Management Act 

The 1982 and 2000 planning rules are no longer in effect. Pursuant to the 2012 planning rule 

(77FR21162), project decisions must be consistent with the Forest Plan (36 CFR 219.17(c)). 

Consistency with Forest Plan: The scope of analysis for a Forest Plan’s management indicator 

species is determined by the Forest Plan’s management direction, specifically, its standards and 

guidelines (Chapter II) and monitoring direction (Chapter IV). The Black Hills National Forest Land 

and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), as amended, contains no obligation to conduct 

project-specific monitoring or surveying for MIS (Phase II ROD, pg. 8, 20; Forest Plan as Amended, 

pg. I-11, Objective 238). The Forest Plan establishes monitoring and evaluation requirements that do 

not require population monitoring for MIS, but rather employ habitat capability relationships (Phase 

II ROD, pg. 20; Forest Plan as Amended, pg. I-11, Objective 238). Effects of the proposed project to 

species designated as MIS by the Forest Plan have been considered. Due to the scale of the proposed 

project in relation to habitats available across the Forest, Forest-wide habitat trends for MIS species 

will be consistent with or moves toward Objective 238. Project effects on MIS are discussed in the 

FEIS beginning on page 187. The project is consistent with, or moves toward accomplishing 

Objectives 201 (aspen); 238 a, b, and c (various MIS); and 239 (spruce). Similarly, project effects on 

Species of Local Concern (SOLC) are discussed in the FEIS beginning on page 197. The project is 

consistent with, or moves toward accomplishing Objectives 213 (riparian habitat) and 221 (SOLC). 

Extensive literature citations were reviewed and considered by resource specialists in preparation 

of the EIS as evidenced by the literature cited sections in the specialist reports. In addition, the 

record shows that all literature cited by the public during the comment period has been reviewed 

and considered by resource specialists on the Calumet Project ID Team. 

Resource Management Requirements: The NFMA directs the Secretary of Agriculture to establish 

certain resource management guidelines included in the agency directives system. I find that the 

activities in this project decision comply with the NFMA law and corresponding guidance in the 

directives system, as follows: 

• Irreversible resource damage will not occur. The project will not cause irreversible resource 

damage, such as to soil productivity or watershed condition (see FEIS, Chapter 3). 

• Adequate restocking is assured. 

• No clearcutting is proposed. 

• No timber harvesting will occur on lands not suited for timber production. No harvest 

will occur for timber production purposes on lands classified as unsuitable for timber 

harvest (see Silviculture Report located in project file). 

• No created openings will be larger than 40 acres. 

• Culmination of Mean Annual Increment (CMAI) requirements are met. 

Administrative Review

The analysis for this project was completed under authority of the Healthy Forests Restoration 

Act of 2003. Section 105 of the Act specifies that a ‘Special Administrative Review Process’ be 
Calumet Project Area Record of Decision Page 17 

established for authorized projects and that a pre-decisional review be utilized. This predecisional review process is contained in 36 CFR 218. 

The Calumet Project Area FEIS and preferred alternative were made available to the public in 

September 2012. A legal notice for the FEIS was published in the Rapid City Journal on 

September 8, 2012. In this notice, the public was notified that decision(s) based on the FEIS for 

the Calumet Project Area would be made following the pre-decisional objection process, 

pursuant to Forest Service regulations at 36 CFR 218. No objections were filed. 

Implementation 

Implementation of activities under the selected action will occur based on this Record of Decision. 

Acreages and locations are approximate and may vary during implementation depending on site 

specific conditions. Once this decision is signed, implementation of the Calumet Project Area 

Selected Action can begin immediately pursuant to regulations at 36 CFR 218.12. 

Contact Person 

For additional information concerning this decision contact Lou Conroy, Calumet ID Team Leader; 

Jessica Eggers, Assistant NEPA Planner; Ruth Esperance, District Ranger at (605) 343-1567, or Ed 

Fischer, Environmental Coordinator at (605)673-9200, Black Hills National Forest, 1019 North 5th

Street, Custer, SD 57730. 

/s/Ruth Esperance /s/Ruth Esperance October 22, 2012 October 22, 2012 October 22, 2012 

__________________________________________ __________________ 

RUTH ESPERANCE Date 

District Ranger 

Mystic Ranger District 

Black Hills National Forest 

USDA Forest Service 

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 individuals 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 

USDA's 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, DC 20250-9410, 

or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 
US Highway 16

SD Highway 44

Interstate 90

US 16A

US Highway 385

US Highway 385

Deerfield Road

US Highway 16

Rapid City

Hill City

Custer

Map 1 - Calumet Project Area

Vicinity Map

Rochford

1 inch equals 5.5

®

miles map by R. Rick

Sheridan Lake

Legend

Project Area

Sheridan Lake

Main Roads

Rochford Road

Keystone
Sheridan Lake Road

Boulder Hill Road

US Highway 16

Horse Creek Road

US Highway 385

To

Lead/Deadwood

To

Rapid City

To

Rapid City

To

Hill City

1 inch = 1.2 mile

®

s map by R. Rick

US Highway 16

Legend

Project Area

Main Roads

Private Property

Sheridan Lake

Treatments

Commercial Thin

Removal Cut

Cable Treatment

Hardwood Treatment

Meadow Treatment

Non-Commercial Thin

Fuel Breaks

US Highway 16A

Calumet Road

To Keystone

Map 2 - Calumet Project Area

Alternative B Treatments
Sheridan Lake Road

Boulder Hill Road

US Highway 16

Horse Creek Road

US Highway 385

To

Lead/Deadwood

To

Rapid City

To

Rapid City

To

Hill City

1 inch = 1.2 mile

®

s map by R. Rick

US Highway 16

Legend

Project Area

Main Roads

Private Property

Sheridan Lake

Prescribed Fire

US Highway 16A

Calumet Road

To Keystone

Map 3 - Calumet Project Area

Alternative B Prescribed Fire
US-16

US-385

433

485

369

369.1B

243

358

392

243

160.2

405

257

650

244

551

243.2B

73

8

669

514

366.3

438

605

370

676

162

776

358.1B

673

381

790

257.1A

366.3A

392.2C

160.2B

358.1F

434

514.1B

674.1A

518

243.2F

440

674.1C

520

676.1A

368

392.2F

366.3C

514.1E

669.1A

243.2D

776.1A

243.2A

674.1D

358.1C

381.1A

551.1C

485.1A

366.3B

243.2E

243.2J

531.1A

358.1E

605.1G

160.2E

243.1B

439

480

551.1A

438.1A

243.2C

358.1H

243.1E

369.1A

650.1A

738.1C

243.2I

605.1A

788

673.1A

514

738

243

669

358.1F

358.1F

669

520

674

243

738

221

520.1A

368

738.1C

434

551

790

257

674.1A

358.1B

390

531.1B

531.1D

514.1C

433 1. D

405.1A

392.2D

551.1B

676.1A

358.1F

244.1B

358.1H

358.1E

518.1A

358.1D

160.2B

433.1A

669

381

390

243.2F

257.1A

243.2I

788

257

358.1H

243.2G

514.1D 404

531

257.1C

U100

U159

U200138

U107

u8

U260083

U250020

U106

U190151

U200130

U270010

U200115

Map 4

Calumet Project Area

Alternative B

Transportation System

Legend

TM PLAN ROD

Travel Management ROD

Road Open to All Vehicles (11 Miles)

Road Open to All Vehicles Seasonal (0.4 Miles)

Road Open to Highway Legal (38 Miles)

Road Open to Highway Legal Seasonal (13 Miles)

Trail Open Vehicle <62 inch, SD (3.4 Miles)

Trail Open Vehicle <62 inch, SD Seasonal (0 Miles)

Trail Open to All (1.5 Miles)

Trail Open to All Seasonal (1.3 Miles)

Trail Open to Motorcycle Only (4.0 Miles)

Trail Open to Motorcycle Only Seasonal (1.3 Miles)

Legend

Calumet Roads

Alt B Road Work

STATE HIGHWAY

COUNTY, PARISH, BOROUGH

Maintenance (79 Miles)

Reconstruction (27 Miles)

Construction (5 Miles)

No Entry (10 Miles)

Temporary (15 Miles)

®

0 0.5 1 2

Miles

1:85,000

Legend

OWNER

Private Property

Calumet Boundary

Calumet half-mile Buffer